MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST P16-0394
PROJECT NAME: Monarch Buena Vista
PROJECT LOCATION: 751-753 East Vista Way (easterly side of the street, between Civic Center Drive to the south and Townsite Drive to the north, adjacent to Buena Vista Creek) at 33º 12’ 27.0” N, - 117º 14’ 3.6” W
APN(S): 176-300-54 & -55
PROJECT APPLICANT: Monarch Buena Vista, LLC 7727 Herschel Avenue La Jolla, CA 92037 Contact: Sarah Kruer Jager (858) 551-4390
LEAD AGENCY: City of Vista Community Development Department Planning Division 200 Civic Center Drive Vista, California 92084-6275 Contact: John Conley, Director (760) 643-5388
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: September 1, 2017 to October 2, 2017
This Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Initial Study (IS) have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.). It is available for the public review period shown above.
Comments regarding this MND/IS must be made in writing and addressed to Mr. John Hamilton, Environmental Planner, Planning Division, 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, California 92084-6275, or sent by e-mail to [email protected]. Comments should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the potential impacts on the environment that may result from the proposed project, and the ways in which any significant effects are avoided or mitigated. All comments must be received in the Planning Division office no later than 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the public review period noted above.
This page left intentionally blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS Topic Page Chapter 1 - Introduction ...... 1-1 Overview ...... 1-1 Authority ...... 1-1 Scope ...... 1-1 Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description ...... 2-1 Project Overview ...... 2-1 Historic Uses of the Project Site ...... 2-1 Previous Proposed Project ...... 2-2 Environmental Setting ...... 2-3 Surrounding Land Uses ...... 2-5 Proposed Project Description ...... 2-6 Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist ...... 3-1 Project Information ...... 3-1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...... 3-2 Environmental Determination ...... 3-2 Evaluation Of Environmental Impacts ...... 3-3 I. Aesthetics ...... 3-4 II. Agriculture Resources ...... 3-8 III. Air Quality ...... 3-9 IV. Biological Resources ...... 3-18 V. Cultural Resources ...... 3-27 VI. Geology and Soils ...... 3-33 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 3-37 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 3-53 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 3-57 X. Land Use and Planning ...... 3-68 XI. Mineral Resources ...... 3-79 XII. Noise ...... 3-80 XIII. Population and Housing ...... 3-93 XIV. Public Services ...... 3-94 XV. Recreation ...... 3-97 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...... 3-99 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ...... 3-109 XVIII. Mandatory Finding of Significance ...... 3-115 Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers ...... 4-1
Attachments A. Figures 1-11 B. MMRP
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
This page left intentionally blank.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Overview As part of the permitting process under the City of Vista’s (City) Planning Division, the Monarch Buena Vista Project (or “proposed project”), which seeks approval of a Site Development Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Condominium Housing Permit, is required to undergo an environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (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 Initial Study (IS) to determine whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is needed. The City’s Planning Division is the lead agency for the proposed project under CEQA, and it has prepared this MND/IS to evaluate the potential environmental consequences associated with the development of the Monarch Buena Vista Project and the City-owned and operated flood control detention basin. Authority The preparation of this MND/IS is governed by two principal sets of documents: the CEQA Statute (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 MND/IS is guided by certain sections of the State CEQA Guidelines; Section 15063 describes the requirements for initial studies, and Sections 15070–15075 describes the process for the preparation of an MND. Where appropriate and supportive to an understanding of the issues, reference will be made to either the CEQA statute or State CEQA Guidelines. This MND/IS 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 MND/IS evaluates the proposed project’s effects on the following resource topics:
• aesthetics • land use planning • agricultural resources • mineral resources • air quality • noise • biological resources • population and housing • cultural resources • public services • geology and soils • recreation • greenhouse gas emissions • transportation/traffic • hazards and hazardous materials • utilities and service systems • hydrology and water quality • mandatory findings of significance
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 1-1 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 1 - Introduction
This page left intentionally blank.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 1-2 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Chapter 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Overview The proposed project involves the construction of two primary components on a 13.42-acre site situated along Buena Vista Creek: a private 179-unit residential development located on 7.98 acres; and a 2.35-acre City-owned and operated flood control detention basin within 5.44 acres of the site (see Figure 1, City Location Map, and Figure 2, Aerial of Project Area, in Attachment A). Approval of the residential development would be through a Site Development Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Condominium Housing Permit. If discretionary approval is granted, the applicant would finalize purchase of the 7.98-acre portion slated for residential use.
The 5.44-acre portion of the 13.42-acre site is slated to remain in City ownership. This portion would include the above-noted 2.35-acre City-owned and operated flood control detention basin (see Figure 3, Aerial of Existing Project Site and Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A). Although this detention basin would be completed under a schedule independent from the construction of the residential development, there are shared needs for access across Buena Vista Creek, as well as a coincident location of some of the infrastructure between the two projects (i.e., the basin outlet crosses through the area of the proposed residential development access) and for grading coordination. As a result, the detention basin is included in the evaluation within this environmental document. Additional details regarding the relationship between these two project components can be found below in the Proposed Project Description section of this chapter.
The project site is located less than 0.50 mile from the historic downtown of the city to the southwest. It is generally located along the easterly side of Buena Vista Creek, between Civic Center Drive to the south and Vale Terrace Drive to the north (see Figure 2, Aerial of Project Area, in Attachment A). The property was the site of the former Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park. The now vacant site is currently owned by the City’s Community Development Commission. As shown on Figure 2, Aerial of Project Area in Attachment A, the 13.42-acre property is located behind Vista Fire Station No. 6 and the retail/commercial establishments that front along East Vista Way. A 1,725-foot reach of Buena Vista Creek forms the northern and western boundaries of the property (see Figure 3, Aerial of Existing Project Site, in Attachment A). The project site is comprised of two contiguous parcels (APN 176-300-540 and APN 176-300-550), both of which have a General Plan 2030 Update (GP 2030) (2011) land use designation of Mixed Use. The site is also located within the Civic Center District of the Downtown Vista Specific Plan (DVSP) (2015). The DVSP identifies the majority of the site as Mixed Use, which allows for multi-family residential use up to 40 du/acre. The proposed residential density is 22.43 du/acre. The northerly portion of the property is shown in the DVSP as Open Space, and is the area where the future flood control detention basin and related improvements are proposed. Historic Uses of the Project Site According to research undertaken for the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (Phase 1 ESA) (Geocon, 2017), the project site was previously occupied by the Sycamore Creek Mobile Home
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-1 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Park. The proposed on-site improvements consisted of 115 mobile home spaces, corrugated metal sheds, and three one-story wood-framed buildings that included a clubhouse, a mobile home park main office, and a City maintenance building. Hardscape consisted of asphalt/concrete-paved driveways, parking areas, walkways, and mobile home pads. Landscaping included trees, shrubs, flowers, and grass. Prior to the establishment of the mobile home park, the site had two buildings in the northwestern portion in the late 1920s. According to the Phase 1 ESA (2017), the site was used for agricultural purposes and was improved in the 1950s with an additional building that was located in the northwestern portion of the property. The Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park occupied the site dating back to the early 1950s. The mobile home park was closed by the City (the owner of the property since 1990) in 2003.
According to the Cultural Resources Survey (Cultural Report) (Helix, 2016), the project area once was part of the Rancho Buena Vista. Rancho Buena Vista was primarily used for grazing cattle and horses. Settlement of the area by white settlers began around 1890, and a post office, store, and station were established in the town of Vista. Intensive agriculture in the area began in 1926, when water from Lake Henshaw became available. Groves are shown in the vicinity of the project and on the project site itself on aerial photographs from 1928 (County of San Diego tax factor aerial photographs) and 1938 (NETR Online, 2016).1
As further noted in the Cultural Report (Helix, 2016), Native Americans occupied the area that contains the subject property prior to the beginning of the historic period in the San Diego area in 1769. The Late Prehistoric period is represented by the San Luis Rey complex in northern San Diego County. This complex is the archaeological manifestation of the Shoshonean predecessors of the ethnohistoric Luiseño tribe. According research contained in the Cultural Report (Helix, 2016), 20 cultural resources have been recorded within a one mile search radius of the property, including several in the immediate vicinity of the project site (CA-SDI-643, CA-SDI-648, CA-SDI-649 and CA-SDI-647). A few of these are mapped a short distance east of the project site; another is located south of the project area. Of the 20 resources recorded within the search radius of the project site, 14 were recorded by Wallace during his study of the Buena Vista Creek watershed (Wallace 1960). All of these were noted as campsites, including one that has pictographs; bedrock milling features were found at several of the sites. Previous Proposed Project SYCAMORE CREEK ESTATES SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT - 2006 A Final EIR (SCH No. 2005021136) was published on March 19, 2007 for the Sycamore Creek Estates Specific Plan project, which was planned for the same property. This document included the Draft EIR originally published in January 30, 2006, with revisions included via responses to comments. This proposed project sought approval of a General Plan Amendment, a Specific Plan to designate the site Specific Plan Area (SPA); a Zone Change to change the zoning to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI); a Site Development Plan, and a Tentative Subdivision Map. The proposed development consisted of a master-planned residential community with 59 single-family detached homes, landscaping, 3.5 acres of open space, and associated infrastructure improvements. The project also included preservation and enhancement of the on-site portion of Buena Vista Creek, and construction of a public trail that would have connected Wildwood Park to the southwest with the existing trail system to the north of the property. Grading on the project side of
1 A more detailed discussion of Rancho Buena Vista can be found in the Cultural Report (Helix, 2016).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-2 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Buena Vista Creek was designed to protect the creek, and was to include appropriate landscape treatments. A number of the mature western sycamore, black cottonwood, coast live oak, and willow trees along the creek were to be preserved. The enhanced creek area was to remain as open space maintained by a homeowner’s association, with an easement granted for public access to the trail. However, this project was never constructed. Pertinent sections of the Sycamore Creek Estates Specific Plan Final EIR, March 19, 2007 are incorporated by reference into this MND/IS document. The Final EIR for this previous project is on file and available for review at the City’s Planning Division office at 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, California. Existing Environmental Setting CITY OF VISTA Vista is a largely built-out, predominantly low-density residential community located seven miles inland from the Pacific Ocean in northern San Diego County. Clusters of urbanized higher density developments are scattered throughout its central portion, generally along major roads. The city is located in 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).
Pleasant views are found from various points throughout the city with some higher elevations offering captivating vistas of the Pacific Ocean to the west. In addition to the pleasing topography of the mountains and hills, Vista is lushly vegetated from the low-level creek beds to the steep slopes of the foothills, which also contributes to the overall beauty of the community. The city also has two major creeks that flow through its boundaries, Buena Vista Creek (which runs through the project site as noted above), and Agua Hedionda Creek.
PROJECT SITE As previously noted above, the 13.42-acre site is currently vacant; however, it still retains physical remnants of the former Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park such as original landscape plantings, concrete slabs, roadways, and other infrastructure. Vehicular access to the site was previously provided via a driveway through an extension of the property fronting onto East Vista Way, which connected to a paved bridge (now fenced) into the site. This bridge is currently used only for pedestrian access into the site, and for occasional access for a maintenance vehicle. The site suffers from some vandalism, graffiti, and minor dumping. The project site is currently being used as an interim part of the Buena Vista Creek trail, providing a linkage between Vista Conservancy- owned trail upstream of the site and the City’s Wildwood Park located downstream to the site, both of which support established public trail segments oriented along Buena Vista Creek.
According to the Update Geotechnical Review (Geotech Review) prepared for the proposed project (Geocon, 2016), the topography of the site ranges in elevation from 344 feet above mean sea level (MSL) at the southwestern portion of the property to 405 feet above MSL at the northeastern portion of the property. Because the project site is located along Buena Vista Creek, it is lower in elevation than the surrounding parcels. As such, views from the property are somewhat limited, and include the hillside to the east and surrounding commercial land uses to the north, west and south.
Hydrologically, the site is situated in the Vista Hydrologic Subarea (904.22) within the Buena Vista Creek Hydrologic Area (904.20) of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit (904.0). According to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) prepared for the project (Hunsaker & Associates, July
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-3 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description 2017), the existing project site moderately slopes from the northeast towards the southwest with about 50 feet of elevation change in total.
As noted above, the property was the site of the former Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park. The development included several paved parking areas and roadways, and a graded embankment on the east side of the site. Currently, runoff from the graded embankment flows in a westerly direction through the project site, ultimately discharging into Buena Vista Creek through a grated inlet. Because the property has been previously developed, the entire 13.42-acre project site is currently about 42 percent pervious.2 In addition, as noted on the Flood Plain Map in Figure 5, Details - Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A, the majority of the existing boundaries of the 100‐year floodplain (green line) are shown outside of the banks of the creek, creating adverse flooding conditions. As discussed in the Floodplain Study prepared by Tory R. Walker Engineering in August 2016 (TRWE, 2016), the current FEMA FIRM (flood insurance rate map) for the project area identifies two flood zones in and adjacent to Buena Vista Creek. A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) designated as a Zone AE and a Zone X on the (FIRM) 06076C0778F map, dated May 16, 2012. Further, as noted in the Cultural Report (Helix, 2016), the portion of Buena Vista Creek located on the project site’s western boundary appeared heavily disturbed by riprap, modern trash, and several areas of the creek exhibited erosion. The Biological Impact Analysis Report (Merkel, 2016) also described the Buena Vista Creek channel as deeply incised. Additional information and analysis regarding drainage and water quality can be found in Chapter 3, Section IX – Hydrology and Water Quality in this document.
According to the Geotech Review (Geocon, 2016), the site is located on the northeastern portion of the coastal plan and is composed of alluvial soils overlying granitic rock. It is possible that prior marine sedimentary rocks were deposited in the area, which have been subsequently eroded away to expose the granitic rock. Geomorphically, the project site is located within the drainage channel of Buena Vista Creek that flows southwest, and was likely formed during the Pleistocene epoch. Groundwater was found at approximately five to ten feet below ground surface during the on-site test borings. Three surficial soil types exist on-site; undocumented fill, topsoil and alluvium, and one formational unit consisting of Cretaceous-aged San Marcos Gabbro granitic rock. Additional geotechnical information and analysis can be found in Chapter 3, Section VI – Geology and Soils of this document.
East Vista Way is located to the west and north of the site, and is currently a four-lane roadway (two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes) divided by a two-way left turn striped median. It has a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (MPH). On-street parking is permitted on both sides of the roadway, and sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street. There are currently Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes) marked on both sides of the roadway. East Vista Way is classified as a Six- Lane Urban Major Arterial in the City’s Circulation Element (CE) of GP 2030 (2011). Further information and analysis regarding traffic and transportation issues can be found in Chapter 3, Section XVI - Transportation/Traffic of this document.
All required public utilities are available on-site, including sewer (City of Vista’s sewer system), potable water (Vista Irrigation District [VID]), storm water, etc., having previously served the former Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park.
2 Pervious surface was derived from Sycamore Creek Estates Specific Plan EIR (2007), in the Biological Resources section, page 4.2-1 where it was stated that 7.81 acres of “cement pads and paved surfaces” was considered disturbed/developed land. Pervious land = 5.61 acres (13.42 - 7.81) or 42 percent of total acreage.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-4 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description According to the Biological Impact Analysis Report (Biological Report), Merkel & Associates, 2016 prepared for the project, six vegetation types were identified within the project study area: emergent wetland, southern willow scrub, exotic riparian woodland, Diegan coastal sage scrub, non-native vegetation, and urban/developed land. The site also contains scattered remnant ornamental landscape trees (e.g., ornamental pine trees (Pinus species), shamel ash, holm oak (Quercus ilex), Brazilian pepper tree, and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta). As stated in the Biological Report (Merkel, 2016), there are jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional waters present on the property. Two jurisdictional wetlands (i.e., emergent wetland, southern willow scrub) and one non-wetland resource (i.e., exotic riparian woodland) were identified on-site. No special-status floral species were identified within the project site study area during the biological surveys. However, two special-status faunal species were identified within the project study area during the biological surveys: Cooper’s hawk (CNDDB Special Animal, CDFW Watch List species, and MHCP Covered Species); and Nuttall’s woodpecker (CNDDB Special Animal). In addition, one active raptor nest (red-shouldered hawk [Buteo lineatus]) was observed in the large eucalyptus tree at the northern end of the site along the creek. Further details regarding existing vegetation and wildlife, and potentially significant impacts to them can be found in Chapter 3, Section IV – Biological Resources in this document. Surrounding Land Uses The current surrounding adjacent land uses include:
• East - Single-family homes, multi-family homes, and a church. • South - Rancho Buena Vista Adobe, office and commercial uses • West - Wildwood Park, Fire Station No. 6, commercial and office uses along the East Vista Way corridor • North - Commercial and office uses, Buena Vista Creek and a portion of the Buena Vista Trail. There is a range of housing within the surrounding area including single-family homes and multi- family complexes. North County Transit District’s (NCTD) BREEZE Bus Line operates service Route #306 along East Vista Way, which connects to the Vista Transit Center and Melrose Drive SPRINTER stations. Buena Vista Creek is directly adjacent to the project site as previously noted above. The closest city park, Wildwood Park, is located adjacent to the southern end of the project site, along East Vista Way at the intersection with Civic Center Drive. The closest public school is the Vista Magnet Middle School of Technology, Science, and Math, which is located approximately 700 feet to the southwest at 151 Civic Center Drive. The closest Vista fire station is Fire Station No. 6 located immediately west of the site at 651 East Vista Way. The San Diego County Sheriff’s Department office in Vista Village is located approximately 1.3 miles to the southwest at 30 Main Street. The closest airport to the project site is the McClellan-Palomar Airport, which is located approximately 6.5 miles to the south-southwest in Carlsbad.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-5 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Proposed Project Description The proposed project includes two independent components within the 13.42-acre project site that share related design and grading elements; a 179 unit residential development and a flood control detention basin. Both components are described in further detail below, and are evaluated within this MND/IS.
SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT The applicant for the residential development seeks approval from the City of a Site Development Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Condominium Housing Permit for a multi-family residential development consisting of 179 units in 14 buildings, with a clubhouse, fitness center, pool complex and parking within approximately 7.98 acres of the existing 13.42-acre site. The proposed residential area would be developed in compliance with the Mixed-Use designation of the property in both the GP 2030 (2011) and DVSP (2015), which allows residential uses up to 40 du/ac. The proposed residential density is 22.43 du/acre. Additional improvements to be completed by the applicant on the adjacent City-owned lands include riparian restoration/enhancement activities and trail construction along Buena Vista Creek; shared parking lot improvements; and construction of an access road into the residential development from Townsite Drive, using a double culvert road crossing over Buena Vista Creek. Both the applicant and the City would seek the required permits for the creek improvements (e.g., 404, 401, and 1602).
The required discretionary approvals for the residential development are described below:
• Site Development Plan: Per Chapter 18.64 of the Vista Development Code, a Site Development Plan is required for all development containing 3 or more dwelling units to ensure compliance with City development requirements, design guidelines and other standards and criteria. • Tentative Subdivision Map: Per Chapter 17.12 of the Vista Development Code, a Tentative Subdivision Map is required for the development of the apartments; • Condominium Housing Permit: Per Chapter 18.60 of the Vista Development Code, this permit is required to be filed and processed with the Tentative Subdivision Map.
SUMMARY OF DETENTION BASIN DEVELOPMENT The City proposes to construct and operate an off-line flood control detention basin in the uplands east of Buena Vista Creek, within the northern portion of the project site. The basin is planned to reduce peak flow conditions along Buena Vista Creek to reduce channel erosion and flooding in the historic downtown area during a 100-year storm event, as reflected on FEMA flood hazard area mapping. The detention basin components of the project consist of the following: 1) excavation of the basin within upland areas of the former mobile home park; 2) construction of a hydraulic control structure at Townsite Drive (using box culverts) within Buena Vista Creek to backup and convey peak flows into the flood control detention basin through a lowered spillway; 3) construction of a lowered spillway at the top of the creek bank to convey spillover flows from the creek to the basin, and; 4) construction of a basin drain to release water from the detention basin at a controlled rate to reduce the peak discharge rate into the creek.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-6 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PROJECT COMPONENTS Townsite Drive currently ends in a cul-de-sac at Buena Vista Creek, and is proposed as the new permanent access for the residential development. Within this same general location, the City’s flood control detention basin requires construction and maintenance access. The proposed Townsite Drive crossing has been designed as a double box culvert to meet both the hydraulic control requirements for the flood control detention basin, and support a two-lane roadway crossing for primary access to the residential development and permanent maintenance access to the basin. At the time of completion of the detention basin, a flow restriction plate would be added to the top of the box culverts to “tune” the box to the desired discharge rates for the basin weir, capacity, and discharge pipe configurations.
The residential and flood basin projects provide independent utility. The off-line flood control detention basin would benefit land located downstream in the City’s historic downtown area. The off-line flood water detention basin is not required for development of the residential development, which could be developed as proposed even if the off-line flood water detention basin does not proceed. Both projects provide separate aspects of enhanced storm water/flood management, and erosion stabilization benefits to downstream environments, as well as providing improved overall ecological functions.
While the two activities are independent, they both have shared needs for access across Buena Vista Creek. In addition, there is a coincident location of some of the infrastructure between the two projects (i.e., the basin outlet crosses through the area of the proposed residential development access) and for grading coordination. As such, there is a desirability of constructing some of the elements of the two projects at the same time and within the same footprint. This would minimize impact scale and duration while also avoiding future demolition of new roadway and utility improvements to complete subsequent basin improvements.
The summary below indicates each of the various project components and notes ownership responsibilities following construction:
Private Ownership and Improvements • Residential Development, community center, pool, tot lot.
City Ownership of Improvements as part of Residential Development • Buena Vista Creek widening/enhancement and trail south of Townsite Drive; • Access and Culvert Crossing; and • Parking Lot – Shared.
City Ownership and Improvements not directly related to or needed for the Residential Development • Flood Detention Basin; • Weir and Spillway; • Flood Wall; and • Buena Vista Creek Trail north of Townsite Drive.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-7 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DESIGN DETAILS Site Plan As shown in Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A, the planned 179 multi- family units would be located within 14 three-story buildings. Five buildings would be located adjacent to the western creek boundary, two buildings would be sited along the southern boundary, and seven buildings would be situated in the central portion of the site. The living areas of the units would be oriented toward the natural open space of Buena Vista Creek, landscaped courtyards, or the pool/recreation area. The garage sides of the buildings would be located adjacent to drive courts or the loop street. The site design provides pedestrian walkways throughout the property to link all the buildings with the central recreation complex, as well as additional recreation amenities for residents in other parts of the site. Trash and recycling enclosures would be distributed throughout the site.
As mentioned above, the residential development portion of the site is comprised of 7.98 acres, or 347,609 square feet (sq. ft.). According to the Site Development Plan (4/2017), the proposed buildings would cover 91,432 sq. ft., or approximately 26.3 percent of the site area. Parking, and common driveways would cover 102,117 sq. ft. or around 29.4 percent of the site, and landscaping (including slopes, outdoor recreation areas and other planted areas within the residential area) would consist of 154,060 sq. ft. or roughly 44.3 percent of the residential development portion of the project site.
Vehicular Access All primary vehicular access to the proposed units would be from the existing cul-de-sac of Townsite Drive at the northern portion of the site (see Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A). This would be a new, culverted crossing of the creek, designed to also accommodate hydrologic flow control for the City’s flood detention basin improvements. Signalized access would be provided at the existing intersection of East Vista Way/Townsite Drive. Within the residential site the main access road would have a gated entry with a turnaround located prior to the gate. Past the gate, the entrance to the site would be anchored by the buildings within the central recreation complex.
A private internal drive would provide looped vehicular access throughout the residential development. An emergency-only access would be provided at the southern end of the site, gated and restricted to use only by fire/emergency vehicles. This emergency access would connect through the existing adjacent Rancho Buena Vista Adobe and commercial properties on the northeast corner of Civic Center Drive/Alta Vista Drive. The existing access road gate on the commercial property would be widened, and a new gate would be installed within the project site.
Parking - On-site parking includes a total of 350 spaces which meets the DVSP (2015) requirements for 305 resident spaces and 45 guest spaces. This includes 179 garage spaces that would be provided “tucked under” the units. An additional 146 open/guest spaces would be provided within the main residential site (two handicapped), and 25 open/guest spaces (including one handicapped space) within the off-site 0.27-acre East Vista Way parking lot, which served as the original access driveway from East Vista Way south of the Townsite Drive (see Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A). The off-site parking lot would also have shared daytime use as trail access parking. The existing bridge at the original site access would be retained as a pedestrian bridge.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-8 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Architectural Design The architectural design of all the buildings (i.e., residential, exercise, clubhouse, etc.) is a California style that is influenced by historic Spanish buildings with the use of stucco walls, mission barrel style tile roofing and wood trellis elements. The architectural style and detailing were selected to be compatible with the design elements of nearby commercial and residential buildings. The architecture would feature articulated walls, exposed wood elements and stepped facades to maintain proper scale with its surroundings. The buildings would also include arched openings, window mullions, trellis canopies, recessed openings, and stucco wall patterns with varied warm tone colors (see Figures 7, 8, and 9, Examples of Proposed Building Elevations, and Figure 10, Building Character Sketches in Attachment A).
The rooflines of the buildings would be comprised of a combination of gable, sloping and hip roofs, with concrete mission barrel tiles. Flat-roofed equipment wells would be inset to shield the roof-mounted heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) condenser units from public view. All garage doors would be pre-finished metal that would be complementary to the building’s colors. The exterior of the common area buildings including the clubhouse, fitness and maintenance buildings, would also be finished with similar architectural details on the façades and roofs as noted above for the condominium buildings (see Figures 7, 8, and 9, Examples of Proposed Building Elevations, and Figure 10, Building Character Sketches in Attachment A).
Unit Types - The residential development utilizes three different building types with 9, 14 or 17 units per building. There would be four different unit types that would range in size from 732 to 1,343 SF, with one, two or three bedrooms. Each unit would have private open space consisting of a patio for first floor units, and balconies for units above the ground floor, for a total of 10,527 SF which exceeds the minimum requirements. Housing affordable to lower income households would be provided based on a minimum of six percent of the total units, and proportional to the overall mix of unit types. Based on the proposed design and the minimum provision of 11 affordable units, there would be affordability restrictions placed on four one-bedroom units, six two-bedroom units and one three-bedroom unit within the project. The design, development standards and parking provisions would be consistent for all of the units within the project. The proposed unit mix is shown in Table 2-1, below.
TABLE 2-1 UNIT MIX Type of Dwelling Units Percent of Total Number of Units One Bedroom Units 33% 59 Two Bedroom Units 60% 108 Three Bedroom Units 7% 12 Total 100% 179
Source: Rodriguez Associates Architects and Planners, Inc., 2017
Landscape Architectural Design The overall landscape theme for the site of the residential development was chosen to be compatible with, and reflective of, the creek area, and the city’s requirements for drought-tolerant and water efficient plant materials. The selected palette includes a Santa Barbara theme that complements the architecture using a combination of succulents, California native/naturalized,
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-9 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description plants, and moderate water use tropical plant materials indicative of the wide ranging Southern California palette. Landscaped areas would cover approximately 44 percent of the 7.98 acres portion of the site slated for residential use. These areas would include the common recreation areas, the landscaped areas between and around buildings, and the slopes and entry areas.
Plant selection is required to comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance per the 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 grass area which would require high water use. The irrigation system is also designed to meet all of the applicable requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) for the proposed project and the Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) is detailed in Table 2-2, below. As shown in this table, the total ETWU for the proposed landscape plan would be 1,949,720 gallons per year, some 395,385 gallons per year less than the MAWA.
Central Recreation Complex - As previously stated, the entrance to the residential development would be anchored by the central recreation complex, which would be approximately 1.45 acres in size. As the center of community activities for the proposed development, the recreation complex includes two main buildings: a clubhouse and an exercise/pool building, as well as other outdoor recreational amenities (see Figure 6a, Conceptual Landscape Plan, Figure 6b, Enlargement of Pool Area and Tot-Lot, and Figure 6c, Enlargement of Other Proposed Recreation Facilities, in Attachment A). The architectural design of the exterior of all buildings in this area would complement the exterior design of the residential buildings (See Figures 7, 8, and 9, Examples of Proposed Building Elevations, and Figure 10, Building Character Sketches, in Attachment A), including a small maintenance structure located near the tot lot. The 4,548 square foot (SF) clubhouse would provide space for management offices, lounge, game room, internet café, and community kitchen and dining area. The nearby 1,886 SF exercise building would be a state-of- the-art facility with a wide range of equipment, classes and training opportunities. This building would also contain space for pool equipment storage and restrooms.
The proposed outdoor recreation areas within the recreation complex would include a community pool and spa with cabanas and seating, tot lot, BBQ picnic area, fire pit with seating, bocce ball court, a BBQ counter with seating, turf area, a dog park and dog wash area, and plots for community gardens. The pool and spa area would be encircled with glass fencing and gates.
Other Recreation Areas - Other proposed recreational amenities outside of the central recreation complex would include a BBQ Picnic Area within the southeastern portion of the site, a community gathering node and a natural style playground both adjacent to a proposed walkway along the western side of the site (see Figure 6c, Enlargements of Other Proposed Recreation Facilities, in Attachment A).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-10 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description
TABLE 2-2 ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE (ETWU) WORKSHEET The project’s Estimated Total Water Use is calculated using the following formula: PF x HA ETWU = Estimated total water use per year (gallons per year) ETWU = (ETo)(0.62) + SLA ETo = Evapotranspiration rate (inches per year) IE PF = Plant Factor from WUCOLS (see Definitions) HA = Hydrozone Area (square feet): Define hydrozones by water use: very low, low, moderate and high SLA = Special Landscape Area (square feet): Edible plants, irrigated with recycled water, & turf used for active play 0.62 = Conversion Factor (to gallons per square foot) IE = Irrigation Efficiency (minimum 0.71) Hydrozone Number (1 - 5 with SLA Zone Below – use as many Line tables as necessary to complete all hydrozones) 1 2 3 4 5 SLA Evapotranspiration Rate (ETo)* 1 51.1 51.1 for Vista area Conversion Factor - .62 2 0.62 (Line 1 x Line 2) 3 31.682 Plant Factor (PF)** (0.1 - 0.8) 4 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.03 0.6 Hydrozone Area (HA) - in square feet 5 47,514 65,194 8,495 375 13,004 0.0 (Line 4 x Line 5) 6 14,254 19,558 5,097 375 7,802 Irrigation Efficiency (IE)*** 7 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.75 0.75 (Line 6 ÷ Line 7) 8 17,598 24,146 6,293 500 10,403 TOTAL all Line 8s + SLA) 9 61,540 Line 3 x Line 9 Estimated Total Water Use - ETWU 10 1,949, 720 (gallons per year) Total shall not exceed MAWA below ** PF - Plant Factor (Water Use) – from ***IE – Irrigation Efficiency *ETo= Evapotranspiration rate WUCOLS Spray = 0.55 = 51.1 for Vista, CA Select based on type of plants in MP Rotators = 0.75 Average calculated from hydrozone: Rotor = 0.70 values in State Model Water 0.1 = VLW - Very Low Water Use Plants Bubbler = 0.75 Efficiency Landscape 0.3 = LW - Low Water Use Plants Drip & Micro-spray = 0.81 Ordinance (MWELO) - 0.6 = MW - Moderate Water Use Plants A different IE may be used if supported by documentation Appendix A 1.0 = HW - High Water Use Plants subject to approval by the City Planner
MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER USE (MAWA) calculation (ETAF Evapotranspiration adjustment factor: (51.1) (0.62) (ETAF x _134,582_) + (1-ETAF) x 0) = MAWA Total Landscape Area Total SLA 2,345,105
Source: GMP Inc., 2017
Buena Vista Creek Improvements The proposed residential development includes riparian native habitat restoration and enhancement work to expand the Buena Vista Creek riparian corridor and creek capacity. This restoration will be within a 2.82-acre portion of the 5.44 acres being retained in City ownership. Improvements include widening and restoring the deeply incised Buena Vista Creek channel, the creation of an expanded riparian corridor, and a floodplain bench adjacent to the proposed residential development to be located in the upland areas. The widened creek corridor would provide increased flood flow capacity in the creek that would further reduce channel erosion, while providing an opportunity to restore riparian and buffer habitat compatible with flood control functions.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-11 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description The project would also include the construction of a public walking trail along the creek from Townsite Drive to Wildwood Park. The proposed creek habitat restoration effort provides an expanded riparian buffer to the creek from the public trail and residential development. The proposed habitat restoration would result in a 50-foot average buffer from existing riparian habitat along the creek on-site with an allowance for the creek trail to be located within the outer portion of the buffer. Large, native trees are very limited along the creek in the northern and central portions of the creek and include two coast live oaks, one black cottonwood and one western sycamore. These trees would be retained in the creek restoration effort by careful excavation around the trees and associated roots monitored by the restoration biologist and/or arborist. In addition, the retained trees on the creek banks would be protected from erosion by the placement of native river rock around the trees where applicable. Storm drain runoff from the development would first be infiltrated through water quality hydro-modification underground tanks, then it would be discharged into the creek via energy dissipation structures designed within the expanded creek area.
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN DETAILS The flood control detention basin would be excavated in the upland areas east of Buena Vista Creek, with the basin including a gently sloping bottom surface and 2:1 sloped sides. The design is based on directing peak flood flows into the basin through a spillway during a 25-year or greater flood event. Flows less than this would pass unimpeded downstream in the creek. Any water that enters the basin would drain back to the creek through an outlet pipe from the basin’s southwest corner, extending to an outlet with energy dissipation into Buena Vista Creek just downstream of the existing vertical drop structure associated with the existing site access. Additional detail regarding each of these components follows.
Basin Inlet Hydraulic Control - In order to back flow and spill the peak flows into the basin, a hydraulic control structure in the creek is required, which will be located at the box culvert. This structure is designed to begin backing water up immediately upstream of the proposed culvert at an approximately 25-year event flow (Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan). Flows less than this would pass unimpeded through the boxes. At the top of the inlet to the box culvert, a steel plate or concrete lip will be used to set the overall aperture of the box. The double box culvert (12 by 10 feet) would require an aperture 12 by 5.5 feet in size. In addition to the aperture control, the crossing would need to have a solid cut off wall extending approximately two feet above grade on the upstream side of the crossing. As designed, this wall along with the aperture would force peak flows to pool, back up, and spill over into the flood water basin during a 25-year or greater flood event.
The aperture beneath the crossing must be maintained at a fixed size in order for the flood control functions to be met. However, the Resource Agencies (i.e., ACOE, CDFW) expressed a desire for a soft bottom beneath the crossing to allow for and foster wildlife movement along the creek. In order to accommodate both the soft bottom and fixed aperture, the design of the box includes an upstream lower cut-off wall extending above the box floor, and a box floor that will be set below final channel grade (See Figure 11, Enlargement – Proposed Flood Control Detention Basin, in Attachment A). The box culvert floor would be prefilled with large native river boulders that will aid in trapping and maintaining sediment through the box, such that the bottom of the creek in the box provides a mosaic of dry ground and perennial creek under all low flow conditions.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-12 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Spillway - The detention basin would include a rectangular spillway approximately 50 feet in length, and two to three feet in depth along the portion of the creek north of the hydraulic control structure at the crossing. This spillway would allow for water to flow into the detention basin as water rises in the adjacent creek, and would thus detain a portion of the peak storm within the adjacent basin. Trail improvements from north of Townsite Drive that would connect with the existing Vista Conservancy trail off-site would be designed and constructed in conjunction with the spillway installation.
Basin Outlet Control - The detention basin would temporarily detain up to 17 acre-feet of water that would drain back to the creek through a 24-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). This RCP would have an outlet pipe flow rate of approximately 42 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the basin’s southwest corner, extending to the outlet with energy dissipation into Buena Vista Creek to avoid any potential for erosion in the creek. At this location, the RCP would daylight just downstream of the existing vertical drop structure associated with the present site access, after crossing beneath the access road and utility infrastructure that would be developed for the residential development. As an element of the creek enhancement work, native rounded granitic boulders (presently found along Buena Vista Creek) would be placed below the existing drop structure to create a more natural ramping riffle environment, which would allow improved wildlife movement along the creek corridor where the approximately six-foot existing drop structure presently serves as a barrier. The proposed natural stone ramp from the existing bridge drop/weir would enhance wildlife movement. The energy dissipation from the 24-inch RCP would be integrated into the boulder ramp.
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION It is currently anticipated that the residential component of the project would begin in advance of, or concurrently with, the detention basin construction.
Residential Site Development Overall, the residential development is anticipated to be constructed in one progressive phase that would take approximately 24 months to complete. Grading and site improvements are estimated to take two to four months, and building construction is estimated at 18 to 20 months. While construction activities typically overlap (e.g., precise grading and landscaping, etc.), the general stages of expected site and building development have been identified and are discussed below. In addition, as part of the Conditions of Project Approval, the Owner and/or Contractor would be required to prepare and implement a Construction Traffic Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer to avoid significant construction-related impacts to nearby streets and intersections, especially during peak hour times.
All earthwork is planned to be completed in one phase, but activities may be phased in order to avoid/minimize work during the rainy season on the riparian bank above the creek. While there is no work within the creek bed that is associated with the residential development, there is work on the creek margins to remove non-native trees, widen the creek to create a riparian bench, and restore native riparian vegetation. The creek widening related work is estimated to take 6 months and will be active between April and November in order to avoid work through the rainy season, with a pre-cutting of trees to stump level prior to January 1 to avoid construction conflicts with potential actively nesting birds and/or raptors. Of the six months of work on the creek widening, approximately four months would be needed for the construction of culvert and rock ramp placement at the bridge crossing, and two months for the creek widening and restoration. This
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-13 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description work would be done concurrently with the grading activity for the project, subject to rainy season limitations.
Overall construction stages are anticipated to consist of:
• Site Preparation, including clearing of existing vegetation, and demolition of remaining paving and foundations; • Site Grading and Utilities Installation; • Finish Grading, Foundation Development, and Plumbing; • Finish Site Work and Paving; • Building Construction; • Architectural Coatings Application; and • Landscape Installation.
Site Preparation - The initial stage of site development would include clearing of existing vegetation where demolition of the existing remaining paving within the property, as well as such items as existing trees and shrubs, curbs, parking lot paving, etc. Demolition would also involve the cutting, capping, and removal of certain sections of existing utility lines such as sewer, electrical, water, etc. that would be in the way of building construction. Asphalt paving and removed concrete is anticipated to be transported to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), such as the Palomar MRF in Carlsbad, to be recycled or disposed of in a landfill.
Site Grading and Utilities - The next stage of site development would include re-grading the site, and the installation of wet and dry utilities. A large portion of the property is currently located within the floodplain of Buena Vista Creek, including the areas formerly occupied by the mobile home park. For this new residential development, the development site area would be graded to increase capacity of the creek and raise the property above the floodplain elevation. The fill for the residential development would be sourced from excavating the area that is planned for the future detention basin improvements in the north end of the project site (approximately 41,700 cubic yards (CY)), as well as from widening the easterly creek banks through the property in order to provide for the trail and creek enhancements (approximately 42,500 CY). The material cut from these areas would be used as fill to create the building pads (balanced cut/fill total of approximately 84,200 CY). The site’s overall grading and drainage plan is designed so that water is discharged toward the creek through outlets that utilize natural rock dissipation materials in keeping with the enhancement design goals. The work in the basin area would include excavation and installation of the outlet drain, so that any water entering the graded area flows out to a dissipation structure at the creek. In addition, the slopes would be planted for erosion control. The basin will be functional for flood control detention following construction of the spillway and aperture control improvements, which would direct storm flows into the basin (described further in detention basin section below).
The grading design uses vertical, standard masonry retaining walls in several areas on-site that would vary between 2.0 and 7.5 feet in height. One wall runs along the eastern edge at the toe of the manufactured slope, adjacent to parking spaces along the access drive, and varies in height from 2.0 feet up to a maximum of 6.5 feet in one section and 7.5 feet in another section. The majority of this wall is below 5.0 feet in height. This wall will not be visible from any off-site public areas. For internal views, and given its proximity to the on-site parking, the wall is proposed to be planted with vines to provide visual screening and softening. Along the western creek edge there
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-14 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description would be three sections of standard walls in order to accommodate the public walking trail width within the creek, and achieve slope gradients for accessibility. Most range from 2.0 to 3.0 feet in height, with the tallest point of one wall at 6.0 feet. The ten-foot wide trail will be located within a 12-foot level graded area, allowing for vine planting at the base of retaining walls to provide visual screening and softening.
Potable water service would be provided by Vista Irrigation District, with two points of connection proposed in East Vista Way. A privately maintained water loop is proposed between the residential development entry, through the site and connecting on East Vista Way through the fire station site after extending over the existing pedestrian bridge. Sewer service would be provided by the City of Vista’s sewer system, with a connection to the existing system south on the adjacent Rancho Buena Vista Adobe property. Franchise utility service will extend to the site via the proposed extension of Townsite Drive and/or existing bridge.
Stormwater runoff from the site would be collected in curb inlets and distributed to underground storage facilities (also called infiltration vaults) east of the creek. A pretreatment device is required to reduce the influent sediment load, and avoid oversizing of underground infiltration storage facilities. These storage facilities would be constructed over existing soil that was tested, and they can provide infiltration for water quality treatment, which is the preferred treatment in the current water quality permit. Storage would provide the necessary contact area to achieve a drawdown of the required treatment volume within 36 hours, and would include storage and flow control measures to meet hydromodification management requirements prior to discharge into the creek. Flood attenuation would be achieved in these storage facilities to avoid increasing peak runoff rates into the creek. Discharge points into the creek would be through energy dissipation structures incorporated into the design of the expanded creek area, which would be excavated from the upland portion of the site.
Site Improvements and Amenities - Proposed site improvements and amenities in the next stage of construction would include the installation of surface (uncovered) parking areas; hardscape; the central recreation complex and other outdoor recreation areas; walkways; perimeter walls and fences; and exterior lighting. Hardscaping on-site would utilize permeable pavers, decomposed granite, concrete bands, pedestrian paving, and concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls. The proposed central recreation complex and other outdoor recreation areas are described in the Residential Development Design Details section above. Walkways would provide pedestrian connections between the buildings and common outdoor recreation areas.
Perimeter walls and fences would all be a maximum of six-feet tall. They would consist of a combination of slump block walls with pilasters, tubular steel fences, and glass walls at the pool area. Pedestrian and vehicular access gates would also consist of six-foot tubular steel fencing. Trail fencing at Buena Vista Creek would consist of four-foot high 3-rail lodge-pole fencing, for consistency with other segments of this trail.
Details of the exterior lighting plan have not been finalized as of the date of this document. However, in general it is anticipated that pole-mounted LED (light-emitting diode) area lights would be placed at strategic locations throughout the parking areas and loop road; pedestrian style LED lights would be placed along the walkways and in the central recreation complex; wall-mounted LED lights would be mounted on the buildings at key areas (doors, garages, etc.); and LED up- lights would be installed on the entry monument at the project entrance. Final light locations,
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-15 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description wattages, styles, colors and finishes would be provided on a final electrical photometric plan submitted with the final grading and site plans prior to obtaining a Grading Permit. As a Condition of Project Approval they are also required to meet all of the applicable requirements in Section 18.58.260 - Outdoor Lighting Facilities and/or Fixture in the City’s Development Code.
Residential Building Development The proposed buildings, as described above in the architectural design section above, 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). The buildings would also be fully protected by a fire sprinkler system that conforms to applicable standards of the National Fire Protection Association edition in effect at the time building plans are submitted for permitting. The buildings would also conform to all applicable requirements of the current CBC standards for disabled accessibility.
Buena Vista Creek Improvements - As previously discussed, the proposed residential development includes several elements of creek restoration and enhancement, such as widening the creek’s flowage area, revegetating the corridor with native and non-invasive plants, constructing a public pedestrian trail along the creek and converting the existing vehicular bridge south of Townsite Drive to a pedestrian-only bridge. These changes would improve storm water management and produce a high-quality creek habitat as well as provide pedestrian connections consistent with the DVSP development goals. The landscape design for the adjacent creek banks includes removing invasive species and revegetating the area to create a native riparian corridor that will serve as a buffer habitat. Construction of the new trail segment would include a 10–foot wide path, with landscape screening on the slope above the trail and a post and rail fence to separate it from the creek, as used elsewhere along the creek trail to which this path will connect. This proposed trail would create an attractive pedestrian amenity that will enhance public access along the creek, within the urban core of the City, providing the connectivity and linear park development goals laid out in the DVSP (2015).
DETENTION BASIN CONSTRUCTION Construction of the flood detention basin is anticipated to take approximately six to eight months, and there may be overlap with the residential construction and between stages. In-creek activities may be phased if necessary to avoid/minimize work during the rainy season. If not already completed by the residential development, the creek-related work is estimated to take four months for the construction of culvert and rock ramp placement at the bridge crossing. This work would be active between April and November in order to avoid work through the rainy season, except that vegetation within the work footprint could be cut to stump and removed from the creek prior to January 1 in order to avoid potential nesting habitat and active bird/raptor nests in the construction area. If the residential project proceeds concurrently or in advance of the detention basin, the first three stages are planned to be completed with the residential site preparation and grading.
Overall construction stages for the flood detention basin would consist of:
• Site Preparation, including clearing of existing vegetation and demolition of remaining paving and foundations; (one month) • Basin excavation and installation of outlet pipe, including creek outlet; (one month)
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-16 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description • Construct hydraulic control structure (box culverts) in the creek with maintenance access, except restrictor plate (two months) • Construct spillway along the northern portion of the creek and associated finish grading of basin configuration (one-two months) • Install restrictor plate portion of hydraulic control structure and flood wall upstream of hydraulic control structure (one-two months)
Site Preparation – If not previously completed during the residential project, the initial stage would include demolition of the existing paving within the area of the detention basin work, as well as such items as existing trees and shrubs, curbs, parking lot paving, and existing underground utility lines such as sewer and water lines that would be in the way of construction. Asphalt paving and removed concrete is anticipated to be transported to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), such as the Palomar MRF in Carlsbad, to be recycled or disposed of in a landfill.
Grading – Basin Excavation and Outlet Installation - If not previously completed during the residential project, the next stage would include excavation of the basin area. The excavated material (approximately 41,700 CY) would be used at the residential development site as discussed above. An outlet from the basin consisting of a 24-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) will be extended from the basin’s southwest corner and extending to outlet with a headwall and energy dissipation into Buena Vista Creek. The RCP would daylight just downstream of the vertical drop structure below the existing bridge. Rounded river rock/boulders would be placed below the drop structure to create a more natural ramping riffle environment allowing improved wildlife movement. The energy dissipation from the 24-inch RCP would be integrated into the boulder ramp to avoid the need for a separate dissipation feature.
Construct Hydraulic Control Structure and Maintenance Access - A 12-foot by 10-foot double box culvert would be installed as a creek crossing to support the maintenance access road (to also be used for access to the residential development). The hydraulic control structure will be the upstream end of the box culvert. At the top of the upstream inlet of the box, a steel plate or concrete lip will be used to adjust the overall aperture of the box, while providing for future changes in aperture setting as may be needed. In addition to the aperture control, the crossing would have a solid cut off wall extending approximately two feet above grade on the upstream side of the crossing to prevent bridge overtopping when the flows are backed up in a large storm. The aperture beneath the crossing must be maintained at a fixed size in order for the flood control functions to be met. In order to accommodate both a soft bottom beneath the crossing to allow for and foster wildlife movement along the creek and the fixed aperture, the design of the box includes an upstream lower cut-off wall extending above the box floor and a box floor that will be set below final channel grade. The box culvert floor will be prefilled with large native river boulders that will aid in trapping and maintaining sediment through the box, while providing a dry connection along the creek through the box under non-storm flow conditions.
Construct Spillway and Final Basin Configuration - A spillway approximately 50 feet in length, two to three feet in depth would be constructed along the basin slope north of the crossing, in conjunction with the weir to direct flood flows from the creek. The spillway would be a depressed portion of the berm separating the basin from the creek. The spillway would be armored on the slopes by rock. Trail improvements from north of Townsite Drive to connect with the existing Vista Conservancy trail off-site will be designed and constructed across this area in conjunction with the spillway installation.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-17 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Install Restrictor Plate and Floodwall – The final components of the basin construction will be to install the restrictor plate portion of hydraulic control structure to direct greater than 25-year flood flows into the basin, and a solid cut-off wall extending approximately two feet above grade on the upstream side of the crossing.
ADDITIONAL APPROVALS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION The proposed project would be required to obtain the following additional approvals for construction from the City: Landscape Construction Plan, Grading Permit, Right-of-Way Permit, Building Permit, and Certificate of Occupancy. Other public agency approvals are cited on page 3-1.
TRIBAL CONSULTATION California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, and consultation was initiated.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 2-18 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Chapter 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Project Information Project Title: Monarch Buena Vista Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Vista Community Development Department Planning Division 200 Civic Center Drive Vista, CA 92084-6275 Contact Person and Phone Number: John Conley, Community Development Director (760) 643-5388 Project Location: 751-753 East Vista Way (easterly side of the street, between Civic Center Drive to the south and Townsite Drive to the north, adjacent to Buena Vista Creek) Project Applicant: Monarch Buena Vista, LLC, 7727 Herschel Avenue La Jolla, CA 92037 Contact: Sarah Kruer Jager (858) 551-4390 General Plan Designation: Existing and Proposed: Mixed Use (MU) and Open Space (OS)
Zoning Designation: Existing and Proposed: Specific Plan (MU and OS, Downtown Vista Specific Plan, Civic Center District) Description of Project: See Chapter 2, Project Description. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See Chapter 2, Project Description. Other Public Agency Approvals: Submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the RWQCB and preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activities Permit and 401 Water Quality Certification; United States Army Corps of Engineers, Section 404 permit; California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Section 1602 Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement; and, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Letter of Map Revision.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-1 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Based upon the initial evaluation presented in the following Initial Study Checklist, it is concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts. Environmental Determination
Therefore, 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.
08/31/2017 John Hamilton, Environmental Planner Date
The signature below signifies that the applicant has read and accepts the mitigation measures detailed in the final Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Applicant or Owner Date
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-2 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study 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 IS is to:
1. Provide the Lead Agency (the City of Vista) with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (ND); 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 ND; 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. e. Facilitating environmental assessment early in the design of a project. f. Providing documentation of the factual basis for the finding in an ND that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment. g. Eliminating unnecessary EIRs. h. Determining 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 any way. • 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.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-3 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant I. Aesthetics Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a source of substantial light or glare, which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
DISCUSSION a - b. NO IMPACT. Scenic Vistas - The proposed project would not adversely affect existing views of scenic vistas. A scenic vista is the view of an area that is visually or aesthetically pleasing. A scenic vista is generally defined as the view of an area that is visually or aesthetically pleasing. The City’s GP 2030 Program EIR (PEIR) (2011) identifies two main scenic view sheds that have been identified within the city and its SOI based on general viewing areas: (1) the San Marcos Mountains to the east and northeast of the city, and (2) canyons in the southwestern portions of the city. The closest viewshed to the project site are the San Marcos Mountains to the east-northeast.
The 13.42-acre site of the proposed project is located along the eastern side of East Vista Way, along the Buena Vista Creek between Civic Center Drive and Vale Terrace Drive. The site is surrounded by developed areas that consist of roadways and commercial/retail development to the west, north, and south and residential development to the east. The site is setback from East Vista Drive and is also obscured from view due to the site being located at an elevation that is lower than the surrounding roadway and buildings along East Vista Way. The site is also partially screened from view due to the presence of trees located on the site of the former mobile home park and within the riparian corridor along the Buena Vista Creek. As shown on Figure 4.1-2 of the City’s GP 2030 PEIR (2011), the project site is not located within or immediately adjacent to the San Marcos Mountains viewshed. Although distant views of these mountains can be seen northeasterly and then easterly along sections of Foothill Drive, from East Vista Way south of the Foothill Drive intersection these views are blocked by the topography, landscape, and adjacent residential developments.
Therefore, the development of the proposed three story buildings on the project site would not adversely affect any scenic viewsheds of the San Marcos Mountains. The maximum height of the tallest residential building (Type III) would be approximately 37.35 feet, and as shown in Figures 8 and 9, Example of Proposed Building Elevations in Attachment A, the roofline would still be below the ground level elevations of the bluff top residences to the east which are at an elevation of approximately 400 feet AMSL. As a result, no significant impacts would arise from project development.
Scenic Resources/Historic Buildings – The City’s GP 2030 (2011) has identified Buena Vista Creek and the nearby Rancho Buena Vista adobe as important scenic resources in the City. The
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-4 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist proposed project would enhance Buena Vista Creek through the removal of non-native plant species, including some mature trees, and will retain and preserve existing mature native trees located along Buena Vista Creek. In addition, the proposed project would improve hydrologic conditions along the Buena Vista Creek through enhancements to conveyance and capacity.
The proposed project would also not substantially damage scenic resources or historic buildings within a State scenic highway. The 13.42-acre project site is located in an area with both commercial and residential land uses and is within the urban core of the City near the intersection of East Vista Way and Civic Center Drive in the northeast portion of the city. The site is not located along a State scenic highway. As a result, significant impacts to scenic resources or historic buildings within a State highway would not occur. c - d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Visual Character - The proposed project would alter, but would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or surroundings, or create a substantial source of light or glare. The visual character of the existing, disturbed 13.42-acre site of the former mobile home park is characterized by a large, generally flat pad that is paved with remnant trees and other landscaping on-site. The site is set back from East Vista Way and is also obscured from view due to the site being located at an elevation that is somewhat lower than the surrounding roadway and buildings along East Vista Way. The site is also partially screened from view due to the presence of trees located on site and within the riparian corridor along the Buena Vista Creek. The visual character of the surrounding area is of a developed, urbanized area that consists of both newer and older commercial/retail land uses and residential land uses, including single-family and multi-family homes and Wildwood Park.
The applicant seeks approval of applications for a Tentative Subdivision Map, Condominium Housing Permit, and a Site Development Plan for the development and construction of 179 residential units within 14 three-story buildings on the 13.42-acre property. As noted in the Project Description in Chapter 2 of this document, the overall design of the proposed project would be comprised of a large, relatively flat to gently sloping site with buildings spread across it. The site will continue to be partially obscured from view due to the generally lower elevation of the site when compared to land uses surrounding it as well as the presence of mature trees and planned additional vegetation on-site and within the creek corridor.
The architecture is a California style that is influenced by historic Spanish buildings with the use of stucco walls, mission barrel style tile roofing and wood trellis elements. The architectural style and detailing are intended to be compatible with the design elements of nearby commercial and residential buildings. The architecture will feature articulated walls, exposed wood elements and stepped facades to maintain proper scale with its surroundings. The buildings also feature arched openings, window mullions, trellis canopies, recessed openings and stucco wall patterns with varied warm tone colors.
The rooflines of the buildings would be comprised of a combination of gable, sloping and hip roofs, with concrete mission barrel tiles. Flat-roofed equipment wells are inset to shield the roof- mounted heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) condenser units from public view. All garage doors would be pre-finished metal that would be complementary to the building’s colors. The exterior of the common area buildings including the clubhouse, fitness and maintenance
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-5 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist buildings, would also be finished with similar architectural details on the façades and roofs as noted above for the condominium buildings.
The overall landscape theme for the site is intended to be compatible with and reflective of the Buena Vista Creek area, the City’s requirements for drought-tolerant and water efficient plant materials. The selected palette includes a Santa Barbara theme that complements the architecture using a combination of succulents, California native/naturalized, and moderate water use tropical plant materials indicative of the wide ranging Southern California palette. Landscaped areas would cover approximately 44% of the residential lot area, including the common recreation areas, landscaped area between and around buildings, and the slopes and entry areas.
The overall landscaping of the project would consist of a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs and groundcovers that would (among other aspects) provide a coordinated project image and accentuate the character of the project, conserve water through use of low water use plants, and minimize the visual impact of grading and contour a natural looking site (see Figure 6a, Conceptual Landscape Plan, in Attachment A). Only native plant species would be used within the expanded and enhanced creek corridor. Within the residential development and parking areas, a variety of native and non-native trees (evergreen and deciduous) would be planted on-site as accent trees. Native and non-native shrubs would be planted on site as well. Vines would be used for retaining walls and for screening and accents. Native and non-native groundcovers and shrubs would be used on slopes and in other landscaped areas scattered throughout the site. Artificial turf would be used on-site as well as decomposed granite within the tot lot area. The 2.35-acre flood control detention basin would be temporarily hydroseeded with a mixture of native and non-invasive species until the detention basin is completed and permanent landscape material is installed.
In summary, the proposed development would be architecturally and aesthetically compatible with nearby land uses, and with the incorporation of setbacks, building heights, and landscaping would enhance the existing visual character of the area. Therefore, given the visual character of the existing site, development of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the visual character of the site and its surroundings, and in some ways, could enhance the visual quality of the property.
Light/Glare - The project site is disturbed and currently vacant, and there is no current source of lighting or glare emanating from the project site. However, it is surrounded by sources of nighttime lighting, including street lights along East Vista Way, illumination from vehicle headlights, parking lot and building façade lighting from the nearby commercial and retail uses, and exterior residential lighting to the east.
Glare can emanate from many different sources, some of which include direct sunlight, sunlight reflecting from cars or buildings, and bright outdoor lighting. Glare in the project vicinity is generally generated by reflective material from buildings (e.g., large windows, siding, etc.) and to a lesser extent vehicle windows reflecting sunlight. However, there are no known substantial buildings, structures or large parking areas near the project site that presently generate substantial glare. Sensitive receptors relative to lighting and glare include residents, motorists, and pedestrians.
As stated in the Project Description in Chapter 2, the exterior of the proposed buildings would be finished in a palette of whites, neutral and earth-toned colors. As shown in Figures 7-10 in
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-6 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Attachment A, the majority of the exterior of the proposed residential structures would consist of stucco, cement tile, and concrete, which are not reflective surfaces. In addition, non-reflective glass would be used for windows, and the installation of outdoor lighting would be required to meet the requirements in Section 18.58.260 - Outdoor Lighting Facilities and/or Fixture of the City’s Development Code, which would reduce the potential to generate glare from new lighting fixtures. Furthermore, the proposed project does not include large parking areas that could generate substantial sources of glare from windshields. The project would also incorporate a substantial amount of landscaping, such that any source of glare would not occur. As a result, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of glare and impacts would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-7 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to 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
Williamson 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 Resources
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
land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use?
DISCUSSION
a - e. NO IMPACT. The 13.42-acre project site is located to the east of East Vista Drive in the urbanized core of the city, which includes a mixture of commercial and residential land uses. Based on farmland maps prepared by the California Department of Conservation, the property is not located in an area designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (California Department of Conservation, 2004). Further, the site is not located in an area designated as forest land or timberland, and it is not currently under active agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract. As a result, project development would not convert any farmland to non- agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use, or conflict with existing agricultural or timberland zoning or Williamson Act contracts; therefore, significant impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-8 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant III. Air Quality Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors?) d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
The discussion below is based on the analysis contained within the Air Quality Assessment for Monarch Buena Vista Project, (AQ Report) (Scientific Resources Associated [SRA], November 3, 2016) prepared for the proposed project. This report is on file and available for review with the City’s Planning Division. Additional information related to air quality regulatory setting, climate and meteorology, and detailed emissions data is found within the AQ Report.
DISCUSSION a. NO IMPACT. A significant air quality impact may occur if a project conflicts with or obstructs the implementation of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS), or applicable portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Both of these air quality plans contain strategies for the region to attain and maintain the ambient air quality standards. Regional population, housing, and employment forecast assumptions identified by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) forms the basis of the land use and transportation control portions of the RAQS. SANDAG’s forecast assumptions are based on the general plans of San Diego County and the 18 cities in the region. In general, projects that are consistent with existing general plan documents, which are used to develop air emissions budgets for the purpose of air quality planning and attainment demonstrations, would be consistent with the San Diego Air Basin’s (SDAB) air quality plans, including the San Diego RAQS and the SIP. Furthermore, provided a project proposes the same or less development as accounted for in a general plan document, and provided the project is in compliance with applicable Rules and Regulations adopted by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) through their air quality planning process, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the RAQS or SIP.
The proposed project would consist of the construction and operation of 179 multi-family residential units and associated improvements within 7.98 acres within the 13.42-acre property in Vista. The site is currently designated as Mixed Use in the GP 2030 (2011), and the applicant is not seeking any changes to this designation. The Mixed Use designation allows densities of up to 40 dwelling units per gross acre. The density of the proposed project would result in 22.43 dwelling units per acre. As a result, the proposed project would not exceed the Mixed Use
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-9 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist designation criteria of the GP 2030 (2011), and the proposed project would be in compliance with the applicable Rules and Regulations adopted by the SDAPCD. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the RAQS or SIP. The proposed project would have no impact on applicable air quality plans. b - e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project would be constructed in one progressive phase estimated to take approximately 20 to 24 months to complete. Grading and site improvements are estimated to take approximately two to four months to complete, with building construction, paving and utilities estimated to take an additional 18-20 months. Construction of the creek widening and restoration and construction of the culvert and rock ramp placement is estimated to take approximately six months to complete and would be done concurrently with residential construction. Grading of the site, including the detention basin, would include an estimated cut/fill quantity of 84,200 CY, which would be balanced on-site; as a result no import/export of material would be required. This incorporates the grading associated with the detention basin. Existing conditions as well as the applicable air quality significance criteria and project impacts are summarized below.
EXISTING CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY LEVELS The climate of the SDAB is dominated by a semi-permanent high pressure cell located over the Pacific Ocean. This cell influences the direction of prevailing winds (westerly to northwesterly) and maintains clear skies for much of the year. The high pressure cell also creates two types of temperature inversions that may act to degrade local air quality.
Meteorological trends within Vista area generally mild with daytime highs typically ranging between 68 degrees Fahrenheit (F) in the winter to approximately 83 degrees F in the summer, with August typically the hottest month. Median temperatures range from approximately 56 degrees F in the winter to approximately 73 degrees F in the summer. The average humidity is approximately 63 percent in the winter and about 74 percent in the summer.3 Vista usually receives approximately 13.24 inches of rain per year with February typically the wettest month.4
As noted in the AQ Report (SRA, 2016), the SDAPCD operates a network of ambient air monitoring stations throughout San Diego County. The purpose of the monitoring stations is to measure ambient concentrations of the pollutants and determine whether the ambient air quality meets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The closest ambient monitoring station to the project site is the East Valley Parkway monitoring station in Escondido, which measures ozone, particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and Carbon Monoxide (CO). The federal 8-hour ozone standard was exceeded five times in 2014 at the Escondido monitoring station and was not exceeded in 2013 or 2015. The Escondido monitoring station recorded exceedances of the federal PM2.5 standard during the period from 2013 through 2015, however the standard is not defined by a single exceedance and the SDAB remains in attainment for the federal PM2.5 standard. The Escondido monitoring station also measured exceedances of the State O3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards during the period from 2013 to 2015. The SDAB is designated as nonattainment for the federal ozone standard and the state ozone, PM10 and PM2.5
3 http://www.city-data.com/city/Vista-California.html. 4 http://www.weather.com /weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USCA1205.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-10 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist standard. All other pollutants are designated as unclassified/attainment for federal and state standards.
CRITERIA POLLUTANT STANDARDS Pursuant to the California Health & Safety Code (Division 26, Part 3, Chapter 1, Section 40002), the jurisdiction for regulation of air emissions from non-mobile sources within San Diego County has been delegated to 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 (AQIA). For CEQA purposes, these screening criteria can be used as numeric methods to demonstrate that a project’s total emissions would not result in a significant impact to air quality. Since SDAPCD does not have AQIA thresholds for emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), the use of the threshold for VOCs from the City of San Diego’s Significance Thresholds (City of San Diego 2011) is appropriate. It should be noted that the City of Vista recommends the use of the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) PM10 thresholds of 150 pounds per day. The screening thresholds are included in Table AQ-1 below.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-11 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE AQ-1 SCREENING-LEVEL CRITERIA FOR AIR QUALITY IMPACTS Pollutant Total Emissions Construction Emissions Lbs. Per Day
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) 100
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)1 55 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 250 Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) 250 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)2 137 Operational Emissions Lbs. Per Hour Lb. Per Day Tons Per Year
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) --- 100 15
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)1 --- 55 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)2 --- 137 15 1 PM2.5 is not currently regulated under SDAPCD Rule 20.2. PM2.5 thresholds are based on SCAQMD significance thresholds of 55 lbs. /day for construction and operation, and 10 tons/year for operation. 2 VOCs are not regulated under SDAPCD Rule 20.2. VOC thresholds are based on City of San Diego’s Significance Determination Thresholds. Source: SRA, 2016
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY As discussed in the AQ Report (SRA, 2016), the criteria levels listed in Table AQ-1 are screening- level thresholds that can be used to evaluate whether project-related emissions could cause a significant impact on air quality. Emissions below the screening-level thresholds would not cause a significant impact on air quality. In the event that emissions exceed these thresholds, modeling would be required to demonstrate that the project’s total air quality impacts result in ground-level concentrations that are below the NAAQS and CAAQS, including appropriate background levels. For nonattainment pollutants (Ozone, with ozone precursors NOx and VOCs, and PM10), if emissions exceed the thresholds shown in Table AQ-1, the proposed project could have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in these pollutants, and thus could have a significant impact on the ambient air quality.
In addition to impacts from criteria pollutants, project impacts may include emissions of pollutants identified by the state and federal government as toxic air contaminants (TACs) or Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). In San Diego County, APCD Regulation XII establishes acceptable risk levels and emission control requirements for new and modified facilities that may emit additional TACs.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-12 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Under Rule 1210, emissions of TACs that result in a cancer risk of 10 in 1 million or less and a health hazard index of one or less would not be required to notify the public of potential health risks. If a project has the potential to result in emissions of any TAC or HAP which result in a cancer risk of greater than 10 in 1 million, the project would be deemed to have a potentially significant impact.
With regard to evaluating whether a project would have a significant impact on sensitive receptors, air quality regulators typically define sensitive receptors as schools (Preschool-12th Grade), hospitals, resident care facilities, or day-care centers, or other facilities that may house individuals with health conditions that would be adversely impacted by changes in air quality. Any project which has the potential to directly impact a sensitive receptor located within 1 mile and results in a health risk greater than 10 in 1 million would be deemed to have a potentially significant impact.
APCD Rule 51 (Public Nuisance) also prohibits emission of any material which causes nuisance to a considerable number of persons or endangers the comfort, health or safety of any person. A project that proposes a use which would produce objectionable odors would be deemed to have a significant odor impact if it would affect a considerable number of off-site receptors.
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION IMPACTS Potential impacts associated with construction of the proposed project were evaluated in the AQ Report (SRA, 2016). It was assumed that construction would commence in the summer 2017 and be complete in the spring 2019. Construction phases would consist of grading/excavation for creek widening/restoration, culvert crossing construction, grading for residential construction, building construction, underground improvements and retention basin construction, paving, architectural coating and landscaping. Emissions from construction of the proposed project were estimated through the use of the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2016.3.1 (CalEEMod) (SCAQMD 2016). It was also assumed that standard fugitive dust control measures would be implemented, including watering of active sites three times daily.
For the purpose of estimating emissions from the application of architectural coatings, it was assumed that water-based coatings that would be compliant with SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1 VOC limitations would be used for both exterior and interior surfaces. Rule 67.0.1 was effective on January 1, 2016, and requires flat architectural coatings to meet a VOC limit of 50 grams/liter, and non-flat coatings to meet a VOC limit of 100 grams/liter. For the purpose of the analysis, this assumption was included in CalEEMod by assuming that the architectural coating emissions would meet a VOC limit of 50 grams/liter for interior coatings and 100 grams/liter for exterior coatings.
Table AQ-2 provides a summary of the expected emission estimates for construction of the proposed project, assuming standard measures are implemented to reduce emissions, as calculated with CalEEMod.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-13 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE AQ-2 EXPECTED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS (Pounds per day)
Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Creek Restoration Grading - Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.07 0.01 Off-road Diesel 2.40 26.03 15.89 0.03 1.21 1.11 Worker Travel 0.06 0.05 0.50 0.001 0.11 0.03 TOTAL 2.46 26.08 16.39 0.031 1.39 1.15 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Construct Culvert Crossing Grading – Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.04 0.004 Off-road Diesel 2.40 2.40 2.40 0.03 2.40 2.40 Worker Trips 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.001 0.06 0.06 TOTAL 2.46 26.08 16.39 0.031 1.36 1.14 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Grading Grading – Fugitive Dust 2.38 1.29 Off-road Diesel 10.40 121.16 67.38 0.12 5.21 4.82 Worker Trips 0.14 0.10 1.16 0.003 0.25 0.07 TOTAL 10.54 121.26 68.54 0.12 7.84 6.18 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Building Construction Off-road Diesel 2.54 19.67 15.72 0.02 1.48 1.40 Vendor Trips 0.11 2.68 0.74 0.005 0.15 0.06 Worker Trips 0.61 0.45 4.98 0.01 1.07 0.29 TOTAL 3.26 22.80 21.44 0.04 2.60 1.75 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Underground Improvements and Detention Basin Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.03 0.003 Off-road Diesel 3.43 35.18 23.85 0.05 1.73 1.59 Worker Trips 0.09 0.06 0.68 0.002 0.17 0.04 TOTAL 3.52 35.24 24.53 0.052 1.93 1.63 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Paving Asphalt Offgassing 0.00 - - - - - Off-road Diesel 4.21 47.52 26.95 0.06 1.99 1.83 Worker Trips 0.12 0.09 0.96 0.003 0.23 0.06 TOTAL 4.33 47.61 27.91 0.063 2.22 1.89
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-14 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Architectural Coatings Application Coatings Offgassing 9.21 - - - - - Off-road Diesel 0.27 1.84 1.84 0.003 0.13 0.13 Worker Trips 0.10 0.07 0.80 0.002 0.22 0.06 TOTAL 9.58 1.91 2.64 0.005 0.35 0.19 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Landscaping Fugitive Dust - - - - 0.12 0.01 Off-road Diesel 2.72 27.01 17.66 0.04 1.35 1.24 Worker Trips 0.08 0.05 0.62 0.002 0.17 0.04 TOTAL 2.80 27.06 18.28 0.042 1.64 1.29 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Maximum Daily Emissions Maximum Daily 2017 Emissions 13.89 144.14 89.97 0.16 10.54 7.92 Maximum Daily 2018 Emissions 12.16 125.10 80.98 0.16 9.49 6.95 Maximum Daily 2019 Emissions 16.14 62.93 48.97 0.10 4.60 3.20 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No NOTE: CalEEMod calculates the maximum daily emissions based on simultaneous construction activity. Thus, the maximum emissions reported for each individual phase in this table are not summed to provide the maximum daily emissions reported by CalEEMod. CalEEMod outputs are provided in Appendix A of the AQ Report. Source: SRA 2016
As shown in Table AQ-2, emissions associated with construction are below the significance thresholds for all construction phases and pollutants. Construction of the proposed project would be short-term and temporary. Therefore, the emissions associated with proposed project construction would be less than significant.
OPERATION EMISSION IMPACTS According to the AQ Report (SRA, 2016), the main operational impacts associated with the proposed project would be impacts associated with traffic. Minor impacts would be associated with energy use and landscaping. To address whether the proposed project would result in emissions that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or proposed air quality violation, the operational emissions associated with the proposed project were compared with the significance thresholds.
CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions associated with proposed project operations. Trip generation rates from the Traffic Impact Analysis (ITC 2016) were used in the CalEEMod. CalEEMod contains emission factors from the EMFAC2014 model, which is the latest version of the Caltrans emission factor model for on-road traffic. Project-related traffic was assumed to be comprised of a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the CalEEMod Model default outputs for traffic. This assumption includes light duty autos and light duty trucks (i.e., small trucks, SUVs, and
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-15 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist vans) as well as medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that may be traveling to the facility to make deliveries. Emissions associated with area sources (energy use and landscaping activities) were also estimated using the default assumptions in CalEEMod. The estimated operational emissions calculations are shown in Table AQ-3, below.
TABLE AQ-3 EXPECTED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Summer, lbs/day Area Sources 4.66 0.17 14.71 0.001 0.08 0.08 Energy Use 0.08 0.65 0.28 0.004 0.05 0.05 Vehicular Emissions 1.98 7.89 21.95 0.07 5.86 1.61 TOTAL 6.69 8.71 36.94 0.08 6.00 1.75 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Winter, lbs/day Area Sources 4.66 0.17 14.71 0.001 0.08 0.08 Energy Use 0.08 0.65 0.28 0.004 0.05 0.05 Vehicular Emissions 1.90 8.12 21.75 0.07 5.86 1.61 TOTAL 6.64 8.93 36.74 0.07 6.00 1.75 Significance Criteria 137 250 550 250 100 100 Significant? No No No No No No Annual, tons/year Area Sources 0.81 0.02 1.32 0.0001 0.007 0.007 Energy Use 0.01 0.12 0.05 0.001 0.01 0.01 Vehicular Emissions 0.34 1.48 3.91 0.01 1.04 0.29 TOTAL 1.16 1.62 5.28 0.01 1.06 0.30 Significance Criteria 15 40 100 40 15 10 Significant? No No No No No No Source: SRA 2016
As shown above in Table AQ-3, based on the estimates of the emissions associated with proposed project operations, the emissions are below the significance criteria for all pollutants. Therefore, the emissions associated with proposed project operations would be less than significant.
CUMULATIVE EMISSION LEVELS As discussed in the AQ Report (SRA, 2016), a project could result in a cumulatively significant impact if it would generate emissions that constitute a cumulatively considerable net increase of PM10 or exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors, oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The project site is in an area that is largely developed, and emissions from existing projects are part of the air quality background.
No specific projects were identified in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project that would be likely to be constructed simultaneously with the proposed project. Furthermore, the impacts associated with the proposed project are below the significance thresholds. Therefore, cumulative emissions associated with the proposed project would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-16 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist CO HOT SPOTS Projects involving traffic impacts may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO “hot spots.” According to Caltrans guidance (University of California Davis 1998), CO “hot spots” have the possibility of forming at intersections with a level of service (LOS) of E or F. Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis (ITC 2016), the proposed project would not generate substantial traffic that would result in a degradation to LOS to E or F at study area intersections. Impacts related to CO hot spots would be less than significant.
TACS Construction and operations would result in minor emissions of TACs from construction equipment and motor vehicles. The proposed project is a residential development and is not a major source of TACs. The amounts of TACs that would be generated from construction equipment and motor vehicles is negligible. Therefore, air quality impacts related to TACs would be less than significant.
OBJECTIONABLE ODORS During construction, diesel equipment operating at the site may generate some nuisance odors; however, due to the distance of sensitive receptors to the project site and the temporary nature of construction, odors associated with project construction would not be significant.
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. The proposed project is a residential project without any sources of objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of persons. Therefore, odor impacts would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-17 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant IV. Biological Resources Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 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? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community
Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
The discussion below is based on the Biological Impact Analysis Report (Biological Report), prepared by Merkel & Associates, August 29, 2016 (Merkel, 2016) for the project site. The report is on file and available for review in the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION a, b & c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION. HABITATS/VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES The 13.42-acre site of the proposed project is located east of East Vista Way, adjacent to the east side of Buena Vista Creek, south of Vale Terrace Drive and north of Civic Center Drive in the urban core of the City. The subject property currently is vacant of development, but it has been previously used as a mobile home park and is therefore substantially disturbed. The site contains both native and non-native vegetation. As stated in the Biological Report (Merkel, 2016), biological field surveys of the subject site were completed.
No special status floral species, including any federally and/or state listed species, occur or are expected to occur on-site and thus no special status floral species would be impacted by the proposed project.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-18 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Two special status fauna species were identified on-site: Cooper’s hawk and Nuttall’s woodpecker. No other special status fauna species are expected to occur on-site and thus no other special status fauna species would be potentially impacted by the proposed project. The proposed project would ultimately result in an expansion of native riparian habitat along Buena Vista Creek with an average 50-foot riparian buffer that would include native riparian and transitional riparian species. The proposed expanded riparian habitat would provide additional suitable nesting and foraging habitat for Cooper’s hawk and Nuttall’s woodpecker, as well as for other riparian avian species.
Although the proposed riparian habitat restoration and enhancement would benefit these species after the restoration has been implemented, potential temporary direct impacts to Cooper’s hawk and Nuttall’s woodpecker that may nest on-site could occur from the project related construction activities during the breeding season. The potential direct impact to these two species would be considered significant under CEQA. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BR-1 and BR-2, noted below, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
EXISTING VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND SENSITIVE HABITATS Based on a site visit conducted by Merkel & Associates in 2016, the proposed project would result mostly in impacts to urban/developed lands and non-native vegetation associated with the proposed residential development. Proposed project impacts along Buena Vista Creek would consist predominately of temporary impacts to southern willow scrub and exotic riparian woodland associated with the creek riparian restoration and enhancement effort. Temporary impacts to southern willow scrub and exotic riparian woodland would occur along the eastern slope of Buena Vista Creek. In particular, impacts to southern willow scrub habitat would be minimized but would generally consist of trimming branches and/or impacting a small amount of habitat that occurs along the slope that would be pulled back to widen the creek for the habitat restoration effort. The willows within the southern willow scrub are rooted within the creek and along the edge of the perennial creek flow. These areas of perennial flow and the immediate areas along the adjacent slope where the willows are rooted would be avoided and are not proposed to be impacted. The proposed impacts to exotic riparian woodland would be similar to those described above for southern willow scrub except that all non-native species would be removed prior to the slope being pulled back and the creek widened in preparation of the proposed native riparian restoration. There are a few mature native trees within the exotic riparian woodland that are proposed to remain. Grading activities around these native trees would be supervised by a certified arborist to ensure that each of these trees and associated root systems are not adversely affected by the proposed activities. Proposed temporary impacts to southern willow scrub and exotic riparian woodland would result in a wider native riparian corridor and higher quality habitat overall. In addition, a small amount (<0.01 acre) of revegetated Diegan coastal sage scrub would be impacted by grading for the future flood detention basin (near top of basin slope). The finished basin would include Diegan coastal sage scrub species as part of the slope planting in association with the detention basin.
The proposed permanent impacts to habitat within Buena Vista Creek are related to the proposed box culvert/aperture at the new Townsite Drive crossing, basin spillway, natural stone ramp at existing bridge weir, and storm drain outlet dissipation. All of these proposed permanent impacts within the creek would impact exotic riparian woodland only.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-19 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist As noted above, no special-status plant species were observed within or adjacent to the grading limit during the biological survey.
The approximate acreages of each on-site vegetation community anticipated to be affected by the proposed project are provided in Table BR-1.
TABLE BR-1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED VEGETATION IMPACTS & MITIGATION On-site Impacts Proposed Existing Off-site Proposed (acres) Mitigation Vegetation Type On-site Impacts Mitigation Requirement (acres) (acres) Ratio Perm. Temp. (acres) Emergent Wetland <0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 n/a 0.00 Southern Willow Scrub 0.23 0.00 0.14 0.00 1:1 0.00 Exotic Riparian Woodland 1.35 0.15 0.40 0.00 1:1 0.151 Revegetated Diegan 0.12 0.00 <0.01 0.00 None2 0.00 Coastal Sage Scrub Non-native Vegetation 3.42 2.87 0.09 0.02 None 0.00 Urban/Developed Land 8.01 7.90 0.00 0.02 None 0.00
Total: 13.13 10.93 0.62 0.04 - - 1 The proposed mitigation requirement refers to compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts only, not temporary impacts. The proposed temporary impacts to riparian habitats would be offset by the proposed Buena Vista Creek habitat restoration and enhancement effort. 2 Due to the minimal amount of impact to this revegetated lower quality habitat, no mitigation is proposed.
Source: Merkel, 2016.
The proposed permanent impacts to exotic riparian woodland (a riparian habitat type although dominated by non-native species) located within Buena Vista Creek would be considered significant under CEQA primarily since the proposed activities/uses within the creek (i.e., culvert box, natural stone ramp, stormwater outfall dissipaters) would result in permanent loss of riparian habitat in these discrete areas of impact. These permanent proposed project impacts to exotic riparian woodland would be significant under CEQA and would require mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a level below significance. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Bio 3-6 as provided below would reduce this impact to a level less than significant.
The proposed temporary impacts to southern willow scrub and exotic riparian woodland located within Buena Vista Creek associated with the creek habitat restoration and enhancement work would be fully offset by the greater functions of the restored/enhanced creek associated with the expansion of the riparian corridor and creek capacity (discussed further in the Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waterways section below). Therefore, these temporary impacts to southern willow scrub and exotic riparian woodland would not be considered significant under CEQA and thus would not require mitigation.
Due to the minimal size and temporary nature of the proposed impact to the revegetated Diegan coastal sage scrub that is of a lower quality and is not expected to support sensitive species, this impact would not result in a substantial adverse effect on the Diegan coastal sage scrub on-site and in the vicinity. Therefore, this impact would not be considered significant under CEQA and
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-20 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist would not require mitigation. Further, of note planting of the slopes in the basin area will include Diegan coastal sage scrub species in association with the future flood detention basin. Project on- site and off-site impacts (i.e., secondary emergency access) to non-native vegetation and urban/developed areas would not be significant under CEQA since these habitats/areas do not support special status species on-site, and regionally, are not considered to have high conservation value requiring mitigation.
According to the Biological Report (Merkel, 2016), the subject property contains jurisdictional waters on the project site as described below.
EXISTING SENSITIVE HABITATS Vegetation communities (or habitats) are generally considered "sensitive" if; (a) they are recognized by the Wildlife Agencies as being generally depleted; (b) they are considered rare within the region by local experts; (c) if they are known to support sensitive wildlife or plant species, and/or; (d) they are known to serve as important wildlife corridors or habitat linkages. These sensitive habitats are typically depleted throughout their known ranges, or are highly localized and/or fragmented.
The Southern Willow Scrub and Riparian habitats on the subject property are considered sensitive biological resources. As such, any measurable habitat impact would require project-specific mitigation as shown above in Table BR-1.
JURISDICTIONS WETLANDS AND WATERWAYS The permanent project impacts (0.033 acre) to federal and state regulated non-wetland waters of the U.S./streambed resources are relatively small and are primarily related to the construction of the hydraulic control structure (i.e., aperture within double box culvert) and associated Townsite Drive crossing of the creek. Permanent impacts (0.101 acre) to state regulated only non-wetland resources (i.e., exotic riparian woodland, CDFW adjacent riparian) are also predominantly associated with the proposed hydraulic control structure/culvert/crossing. The construction of the 24-inch drain outlet from the flood basin located in the uplands would result in permanent but not adverse effects as energy dissipation for this outlet is to be integrated into the natural rock ramp to enhance wildlife movement across the existing weir/drop and as such it would not require any separate armoring to be placed in the creek. The proposed residential development associated storm drain outlets/dissipation would be constructed in state regulated only non-wetland resources (0.007 acre of impact) and would be connected to the creek within the restoration and enhancement areas where the creek would be widened.
The total temporary project impacts (0.535 acre) to state regulated non-wetland resources would occur from creek restoration and enhancement work. The proposed project would completely avoid impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. The creek jurisdictional resources impacted by the proposed project work are summarized in Table BR-2.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-21 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE BR-2 SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES ON THE PROJECT SITE Federal & State Jurisdiction State Jurisdiction (CF&GC Impact Source Duration (CWA 404 & CF&GC 1602) 1602) Wetland Non - Wetland Wetland Non - Wetland Townsite Drive Culvert/Aperture Permanent 0.000 0.025 0.000 0.101 Flood Basin Spillway Permanent 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 Natural Stone Ramp Permanent 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.004 Storm Drain Outlet-Dissipation Permanent 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 Creek Restoration and Enhancement Temporary 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.535
Total (acreage): -- 0.000 0.033 0.000 0.651
Permanent impacts to federal and state regulated non-wetland resources (0.149 acre [rounded up to 0.15 acre] of exotic riparian woodland) would be significant under CEQA and would require mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a level below significance. The Guajome Creek Wetland Mitigation Site has sufficient area to provide the proposed project mitigation requirement to conserve 0.15-acre native riparian woodland in perpetuity. Therefore, mitigation would occur within that site, and implementation of Mitigation Measures BR-1 to 4 would reduce this to a less than significant.
The Guajome Creek Wetland Mitigation Site is located within the larger Guajome Creek Preserve property (APN #159-090-56) in the northwestern portion of the City of Vista, west of North Santa Fe Avenue, north of Loma Alta Creek, and south of Rancho Guajome Adobe County Park. The Guajome Creek Preserve is owned by the City of Vista and a restrictive covenant for habitat conservation purposes is being recorded for the site.
Within the Guajome Creek Preserve, an area of 0.52-acre of riparian woodland was enhanced and conserved, and is available to compensate for impacts associated with the City’s stormwater system. This 0.52 acre of riparian woodland supports southern willow scrub habitat consisting primarily of willow species including arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), Goodding’s black willow (Salix gooddingii), and narrow-leaved willow (Salix exigua), along with Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), and western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) to a lesser extent. There is a Guajome Creek Preserve Habitat Management Plan (HMP) that outlines the mechanisms for preserve conservation and protection measures, implementation of Preserve management, and identifies funding mechanisms for the required activities, including the Wetland Mitigation Site.
The proposed project includes riparian native habitat restoration and enhancement work that would result in temporary impacts to non-wetland resources (0.535 acre) from short-term construction disturbance, which would be fully offset by the greater functions of the restored/enhanced creek associated with the expansion of the riparian corridor and creek capacity. This temporary direct impact would not be considered significant under CEQA since it would not result in an adverse effect to sensitive biological resources; however, measures are included to ensure that the restoration is completed to the level necessary to fully offset the original impacts.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-22 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Therefore, the on-site creek restoration includes the following elements:
• Expansion of flow capacity by development of a flood bench on the east side of creek; • Restoration, enhancement, and establishment effort within an approximately 1.5 acre area to include native riparian vegetation including canopy trees of cottonwoods and sycamores as well as willow and understory vegetation along the expanded riparian bench and slope as quantified and summarized in Table BR-4; • An overall average 50-foot riparian habitat buffer along Buena Vista Creek where a wetland/riparian buffer had not previously existed; • Maintenance and monitoring of the on-site riparian restoration corridor in accordance with a 5-year establishment maintenance and monitoring program; and Completion of a CRAM assessment prior to project initiation and following the 5-year establishment period in order to verify functional lift has occurred within the restoration and enhancement area. • The project creek restoration areas will be retained in City-owned open space, no restrictive conservation easement or long-term stewardship program is proposed over the on-site creek areas.
TABLE BR-3 PROPOSED CREEK RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT IMPACTS AND NET HABITAT GAIN Existing Habitat within Temporary Impact to Net Gain of Native Existing Habitat Habitat Restoration Area Existing Riparian Habitat Riparian Habitat in (excluding trail) (acre) (acre) Existing Uplands (acre) Emergent Wetland 0.000 0.000 0.000 Southern Willow Scrub 0.135 0.135 0.000 Exotic Riparian Woodland 0.400 0.400 0.000 Urban/Developed Lands 1.026 0.000 1.026
Total (acreage): 1.561 0.535 1.026
In addition, due to the existing condition of the incised eroded slopes along the creek, the proposed creek widening and restoration activities along these slopes may temporarily increase the erosion potential during construction. This potential temporary direct impact would be considered significant under CEQA and will require mitigation to reduce the impact to below a level of significance. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BR-2, BR-3 and BR-8 would reduce this impact to a level less than significant.
INDIRECT AND/OR TEMPORARY IMPACTS Indirect impacts to the adjacent creek riparian habitat from the proposed residential development such as competition/predation of native wildlife from domestic animals, increase in noise, drainage, human disturbance, and/or night lighting may occur; however, the proposed project includes features such as underground water quality infiltration tanks to treat the proposed development stormwater runoff prior to discharging into Buena Vista Creek on-site, a riparian habitat buffer to the creek, and fencing along the creek side of the public trail as well as the residential development boundary to minimize such potential impacts. Further, the proposed project site currently experiences substantial edge effects due to the extent of surrounding development; therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in indirect impacts.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-23 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist The proposed project includes a native habitat restoration effort along the creek within a project site that is currently dominated by non-native and/or ornamental plant species. Despite the proposed habitat restoration effort, creek widening construction and disturbance/clearing of exotic vegetation in preparation of the revegetation effort could result in temporary conditions suitable for non-native, weedy species that may invade or increase within and downstream of the project site. This potential indirect impact would be considered significant under CEQA and will require mitigation to reduce the impact to below a level of significance. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BR-5 will reduce this impact to a level less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES BR-1 To avoid potential significant impacts to Cooper’s hawk, vegetation clearing, grubbing, and/or grading within potential nesting habitat on-site (i.e., exotic riparian woodland, nonnative vegetation, southern willow scrub-mature trees only) for this species should be conducted outside the breeding season. If work is conducted during the breeding season, then a pre-construction survey for Cooper’s hawk nests should be conducted to determine the exact location of a Cooper’s hawk nesting site. If a Cooper’s hawk nesting site is identified within the study area, then an appropriate avoidance area (e.g., 300-foot radius buffer) from the Cooper’s hawk nest site should be established and monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure normal Cooper’s hawk nest chronology for the subject nest site throughout the project construction activity period.
BR-2 To avoid potential significant impacts to Nuttall’s woodpecker, vegetation clearing, grubbing, and/or grading within potential nesting habitat on-site (i.e., exotic riparian woodland, non-native vegetation, southern willow scrub-mature trees only) for this species should be conducted outside the breeding season. If work is conducted during the breeding season, then a pre-construction survey for nesting Nuttall’s woodpecker within a tree cavity should be conducted to determine the exact location of a Nuttall’s woodpecker nesting site. If a Nuttall’s woodpecker nesting site is identified within the study area, then an appropriate avoidance area from the Nuttall’s woodpecker nest site should be established and monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure normal Nuttall’s woodpecker nest chronology for the subject nest site throughout the project construction activity period.
BR-3 The proposed project mitigation for permanent direct impacts to 0.15 acre of exotic riparian woodland (i.e., ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFW regulated nonwetland waters/streambed) would consist of the preservation/conservation of 0.15-acre native riparian habitat (i.e., federal and state regulated non-wetland resources) within the Guajome Creek Wetland Mitigation Site associated with the City of Vista’s Storm Water Conveyance System Maintenance Program. The allocation of 0.15-acre for mitigation shall be documented by the HMP Administrator (the City of Vista Director of Planning and Engineering) in accordance with the HMP, prior to issuance of a grading permit.
BR-4 To avoid any inadvertent impacts to sensitive biological and/or jurisdictional resources, construction employees shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the proposed footprint and designated staging areas and routes of travel. The construction area(s) shall be the minimal area necessary to complete the project and shall be specified in the construction plans. Construction limits shall be fenced with orange snow screen. Exclusion fencing shall be maintained until the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-24 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist completion of all construction activities. All employees shall be instructed that their activities are restricted to the construction areas.
BR-5 To avoid any inadvertent impacts to sensitive biological and/or jurisdictional resources, a qualified biologist shall monitor construction activities throughout the duration of the project vegetation clearing and brushing activities to ensure that all practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and any target species of concern outside the project footprint. The project biologist shall be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to confer with staff from the City of Vista to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat protection measures.
BR-6 Any habitat destroyed that is not in the identified project footprint shall be disclosed immediately to the City of Vista, applicable wetland regulatory agencies, and/or Wildlife Agencies.
BR-7 The proposed native habitat restoration and enhancement planting installation effort identified along the eastern side of Buena Vista Creek shall be initiated within 60 days of construction and creek widening/restoration grading along the creek, or just prior to the rainy season within the same calendar year of the impacts (in case the timing of the completion of project construction occurs within or near the summer months when planting should be not installed) to ensure that non-native invasive species do not invade and/or expand on-site and/or in the project vicinity including downstream due to the proposed project activities.
BR-8 Implementation of standard construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as straw wattles and silt fencing will be installed where applicable but in particular along the impact footprint along the creek slope prior to construction. Similarly, these BMPs would be maintained or replaced during construction as needed and post-construction in preparation of the habitat restoration effort within temporary impact areas to avoid inadvertent impacts (e.g., erosion, runoff, sedimentation) to adjacent sensitive habitats/resources.
BR-9 If construction cannot avoid the avian and raptor breeding season (generally defined as February 1 through September 15), a pre-construction survey for active raptor and migratory bird nests protected under MBTA and/or CDFG Code should be conducted prior to the start of construction. The results of the survey should be submitted to the City of Vista in the form of a written report, and should include the date(s) of the survey, the name(s) of the investigator(s), the total field time of the survey efforts, a description of the survey area(s), and if any active nests were found. If an active bird nest were found, then all construction activities undertaken for the project shall comply with the regulatory requirements of the federal MTBA and CDFG Codes Sections 3503 and 3513. d, e & f. NO IMPACT. HABITAT LINKAGES AND WILDLIFE CORRIDORS The project site is surrounded by urban development and is subject to heavy human use/disturbance from the public. Nonetheless, the on-site reach of Buena Vista Creek may provide a highly constrained local connection for urban tolerant wildlife species and particularly avian species. Project development would not create artificial wildlife corridors or interfere with
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-25 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist connectivity to off-site habitat but rather the project would widen and improve the riparian corridor for potential local wildlife movement and would result in an average of 50-foot riparian buffer from the proposed residential development. The proposed project, particularly the creek habitat restoration effort would improve access to potential foraging or breeding habitat, or water sources necessary for the successful reproduction of resident wildlife species.
LOCAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, AND ADOPTED PLANS The project site does not contain any biological resources that are protected by local policies. Consequently, implementation of the proposed development would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and no impacts would occur with the development of the proposed project.
The City is no longer an active participant of the NCCP Act and section 10(a) of the federal ESA. Similarly, the City is not actively developing a MHCP Subarea Plan and is not a NCCP participant and therefore, the MHCP is not applicable to the proposed Monarch Buena Vista project. The proposed project mitigation measures are consistent with local municipal applicable policies, ordinances, and adopted plans addressing biological resources and resource conservation.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-26 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant V. Cultural Resources Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code §21074? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
The discussion below is based on the Cultural Resources Survey (Cultural Report) prepared for the proposed project by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. October 3, 2016 (Helix, 2016). This report is on file and available for review in the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION a - d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. The Cultural Report (Helix, 2016) details the methods and results of the cultural resources survey, which included a records search, Sacred Lands File search, Native American outreach, a review of historic maps and aerial photographs, and a field survey that included a Native American Monitor.
Study Methods - A records search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) was conducted on September 7, 2016 for a project located approximately 1000 feet away from the Monarch Buena Vista project. Information from this records search was used in conjunction with in-house information from past cultural resources studies in the immediate vicinity. The records search covered a one-mile radius around the project area and included archaeological and historical resources, locations and citations for previous cultural resources studies, as well as a review of the state Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) historic properties directory.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on September 14, 2016 for a Sacred Lands File search and list of Native American contacts for the project area. Letters were sent to the recommended tribal contacts on September 22, 2016.
Historic maps and aerial photographs were reviewed to assess the potential for historic archaeological resources. Maps included the 1893 and 1901 USGS 15-minute Escondido quadrangles and the 1948 and 1949 USGS 7.5-minute San Marcos quadrangles. Historic aerial photographs were reviewed at historicaerials.com (NETR Online 2016).
A Helix archaeologist and a Luiseño Native American monitor from Saving Sacred Sites (San Luis Rey Band) conducted a field survey of the project area on September 13, 2016 using 10-meter parallel transects. Ground visibility was obscured by concrete and asphalt building pads, as well as construction debris; the mobile homes have been removed and the buildings that once stood on the property have been demolished. Outside the concrete and asphalt pads, the ground surface was not easily visible due to leaf duff, pine needles, wood chips, and vegetation such as
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-27 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist forbs and grasses. The archaeologist and Native American monitor also inspected bedrock milling features associated with CA-SDI-649, which are located just outside the boundary of the project area.
Previous Archaeological Research - Twenty cultural resources have been recorded within the one- mile search radius, including several in the immediate vicinity of the project site. CA-SDI-643, CA- SDI-648, and CA-SDI-649 were recorded just outside of the project site, and CA-SDI-647 was recorded just south of the project site. Of the 20 resources recorded within a mile of the project site, 14 were recorded by Wallace during his study of the Buena Vista Creek watershed (Wallace 1960). All of these were noted as campsites, including one that has pictographs; bedrock milling features were found at several of the sites. CA-SDI-647 includes the Rancho Buena Vista Adobe. CA-SDI-649 and CA-SDI-655 both contain midden deposits, and have been identified as significant cultural resources, both archaeologically and culturally. The six sites recorded since Wallace’s study include the former location of the Delpy house, a reservoir associated with the Delpy house, scattered historic material found during monitoring of construction of the Vista Civic Center, Wildwood Park, and two pre-contact sites found in proximity to CA-SDI-655 and probably associated with it.
IMPACTS ON HISTORIC RESOURCES As stated in Chapter 2 of this document under the section titled “Historic Uses of the Project Site,” the project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, but it was formerly occupied by a mobile home park. However, there are no longer any standing structures; all buildings were removed or demolished in the past.
According to the Cultural Report (Helix, 2016), historic properties (i.e., resources eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places) have not been identified within the project site boundaries. The Rancho Buena Vista Adobe is not a designated historic site/resource on the state or federal historic registers. Further, given the distance of the emergency access road to the Adobe buildings, no significant adverse impacts would arise from the proposed emergency access driveway construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any adverse effects on historic properties. As noted below, there is a potential for encountering cultural resources in a subsurface context. Such resources, if present, might constitute historic properties, in which case there would be an effect to historic properties, which would be mitigated through the measures presented below.
IMPACTS ON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES The project site is adjacent to Buena Vista Creek, an area that is rich in archeological resources and, potentially, tribal cultural resources. No archaeological or tribal cultural resources (including sacred sites) have been identified within the project area itself, based on records search data, a field survey by ASM Affiliates in 2005, a Sacred Lands File search conducted through a request to the Native American Heritage Commission in September 2016, and the above-noted September 13, 2016 field survey.
No structures remain standing on the property, but concrete and asphalt foundations are present; two of the concrete pads have been demolished, and the fragmented concrete remains in place. Building materials such as bricks (none observed bore maker’s marks), concrete and asphalt chunks, asbestos pipe, and terracotta shingles litter the upper terrace area, located along the eastern border of the project area. Building materials were also present in the lower portion of the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-28 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist property but to a lesser degree. Ground visibility throughout the project area was poor to fair; outside the concrete and asphalt pads the ground surface was not easily visible due to leaf duff, pine needles, wood chips, and vegetation such as forbs and grasses. Visibility ranged from 0 to 5 percent to 0 to 25 percent outside of the concrete and asphalt areas. No cultural material was observed during the survey.
The portion of Buena Vista Creek located on the project site’s western boundary appeared heavily disturbed by riprap, modern trash, and homeless encampments. Several areas of the creek exhibited erosion; vegetation, oak duff, and debris obscured much of the ground surface within the creek. Several milling features associated with CA-SDI-649 were relocated when that site was developed for residential uses. These features have been placed on either side of the walking path (installed by the Vista Conservancy in cooperation with the San Luis Rey Band) as an interpretive display on Luiseño culture. These features are located outside of the project’s northern boundary.
No archaeological or tribal resources have been identified within the project site; therefore, no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated. However, the ground surface is obscured by concrete and asphalt foundations and pads. Although the project site has been subject to a great deal of disturbance from past uses, most notably a mobile home park, there is a potential for cultural material to be present in the fill soils and in a subsurface context, particularly given the number of cultural resources sites recorded in the vicinity of the project. Significant cultural resources have been identified in proximity to the project site, despite years of residential use (e.g., CASDI- 649).
AVOIDANCE AND/OR MITIGATION Given the potential for unknown subsurface archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources, avoidance and/or mitigation would be required during construction of the proposed project. If avoidance cannot be achieved, implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 to CR-7, below, would reduce potentially significant impacts to known and unknown historic, archaeological and tribal cultural resources to less than significant levels.
MITIGATION MEASURES CUL-1 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 full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure (including bridge abutments and the City’s Flood Control Detention Basin); grading or any other ground disturbing or altering activities, including the placement of any imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be absent of any and all cultural resources); the riparian restoration/enhancement activities and trail construction along Buena Vista Creek; and related road improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of infrastructure, and the realignments and/or expansions to East Vista Way or the southern emergency access improvements as shown on Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, Attachment A in this MND. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-29 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist • 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 TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors to present the archaeological monitoring program. • The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. The Applicant, or Owner, and/or Grading Contractor shall notify the Director of Community Development, preferably through e-mail, of the start and end of all ground-disturbing activities. • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA 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 TCA Native American Monitor, in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA 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 San Luis Rey Band shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.
CUL-2 Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and subject to approval of terms by the City, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement with the San Luis Rey Band, a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) tribe. A copy of the agreement shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the San Luis Rey Band for the protection and treatment of, including but not limited to, Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through a monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, off-site infrastructure installation, grading, and all other ground disturbing activities. CUL-3 Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and in order for potentially significant unknown archaeological artifact deposits and/or cultural resources to be readily detected during mitigation monitoring, a written Controlled Grade Procedure shall be prepared by a
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-30 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, the San Luis Rey Band, and the Applicant or Owner, subject to the approval of City representatives. The Controlled Grade Procedure shall establish requirements for any ground disturbing work (e.g., excavations, grading, etc.) within the northern portion of the project site that is designated as the Future Flood Control Basin (see Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A). The Controlled Grade Procedure shall include, but not be limited to, appropriate operating pace, increments of removal, weight and other characteristics of the earth disturbing equipment. A copy of the procedures shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit.
CUL-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, the Research Design and Data Recovery Program) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American Monitor’s notes and comments, to the City’s Director of Community Development for review and approval. CUL-5 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.
CUL-6 Recovered cultural material of historic significance shall be curated with accompanying catalog, photographs, and reports to a San Diego curation facility that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79. Recovered cultural material of tribal cultural significance shall be repatriated as stipulated in the pre-excavation agreement as described in CR-2.
IMPACTS ON HUMAN REMAINS The project site does not lie near any known cemeteries. It is possible, though, that construction activities could unearth previously unknown vestiges, particularly given the cultural sensitivity of the area. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-7 would ensure that human remains were treated with dignity and as specified by law, which would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
CR-7 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 TCA 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 TCA 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
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-31 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist would make a determination 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 the TCA Native American Monitor.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-32 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant VI. Geology and Soils Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Expose people or structures to 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 known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub 42. 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? 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 risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geological feature?
The discussion below is based on the analyses contained within the Update Geotechnical Report (Geotech Report) prepared by Geocon, September 12, 2016. This report is on file and available for review in the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION
a1. NO IMPACT. The purpose of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (1972) is to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting by preventing the construction of buildings used for human occupancy over an area with known faults. Unlike damage from ground shaking, which can occur at great distances from the fault, impacts from fault rupture are limited to the immediate area of the fault zone where the fault breaks along the grounds surface. As discussed in the Geotech Review (Geocon, 2016), the project site does not contain, nor is it adjacent to, an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone Area. Therefore, impacts from fault rupture would not be expected to occur within the project area, and no impacts are anticipated to arise with project development.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-33 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist a2 - a4. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project area, like most of southern California, could be subject to such seismic events as strong ground shaking and seismically-induced settlement such as liquefaction, which could potentially expose people and/or structures to substantially adverse effects. According to the Geotech Report, the site is located on the northeastern portion of the coastal plan and is composed of alluvial soils overlying granitic rock. Geomorphically, the project site is located within the drainage channel of Buena Vista Creek that flows southwest and was likely formed during the Pleistocene. Three surficial soil types were encountered on-site by Geocon consisting of undocumented fill, topsoil and alluvium, and one formational unit consisting of the San Marcos Gabbro granitic rock. The ground motion characteristics of any future earthquakes in the region would depend on the characteristics of the generating fault, the distance to the epicenter, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the site-specific geologic conditions. Major faults in the region could be a source of a strong seismic-related movement at the project site. According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016), although the site is located within southern California, a seismically active region, no active faults are known to transect the site. The nearest active faults are the Newport- Inglewood (approximately 12 miles northwest) Rose Canyon Fault Zone (approximately 12 miles southwest, offshore) and the Elsinore Fault Zone (approximately 16 miles northeast). Other active faults in the region include the Coronado Bank Fault Zone and the Palos Verdes Connected Fault.
Liquefaction and Landslides - According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016), the site is underlain by granitic (or crystalline) bedrock. The site is adjacent to the Buena Vista Creek and groundwater was encountered in all of the exploratory borings and in a majority of the trenches located along the western portion of the property at elevations ranging from approximately 340 to 358 feet above MSL. Groundwater will be an important consideration during the development of the site. It is not uncommon for seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed due to irrigation practices. Seepage is dependent on seasonal precipitation, irrigation, and land use, among other factors, and varies as a result. Proper surface drainage will be critical to future performance of the project.
The site is not located within a state-designated liquefaction hazard zone, and the County of San Diego Hazard Mitigation Plan (2010) does not map the site as having zones of liquefiable layers. According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016), the current standard of practice, as outlined in the Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California requires liquefaction analysis to a depth of 50 feet below the lowest portion of the proposed structures. The Geotech Report notes that the site was explored to a maximum depth of approximately 29 feet; however, granitic rock was encountered before the boring termination depths. Due to the extremely high density of the bedrock on-site, the site is not considered liquefiable. Based on the examination of aerial photographs conducted as part of the preparation of the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016) and review of published geologic maps for the site vicinity, landslides are not present at the property or at a location that could impact the subject site. Further, given the gentle slopes on-site and the massive crystalline bedrock units on-site are not prone to landslides.
Seismic Shaking - Because of the potential of seismic events to impact structures in Vista in particular and southern California in general, the proposed buildings are required to be constructed in compliance with the seismic safety standards set forth in the California Building
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-34 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Code (CBC) in effect at the time grading and building permits are obtained.5 In general, 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 of strong ground shaking. In addition, as required under the City’s Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 17.56), recommendations in a geotechnical report prepared for the project must be followed during site preparation and grading activities. The Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016) contains such geotechnical recommendations based on the current grading and site plans and CBC requirements, and would be revised per any updated grading plans.
The City’s Building Department would also review the building plans through building plan checks, issuance of a building permit, and inspection of the building during construction, which would ensure that all required CBC seismic safety measures are incorporated into the building. Compliance with the CBC; the geotechnical recommendations of and updated geotechnical report; the Building Department’s review process, permit application, and inspections would result in less than significant impacts; consequently, no mitigation measures are required. b - d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. A large portion of the property is currently located within the floodplain of Buena Vista Creek, including the areas formerly occupied by the mobile home park. For this new residential development, the development site area will be graded to increase capacity of the creek and raise the property above floodplain elevation. The fill for the residential development will be sourced from excavation in the area that is planned for the future detention basin improvements on the north end of the project site (approximately 41,700 CY), as well as from excavation from widening the easterly creek banks through the property in order to provide for the trail and creek enhancements (approximately 42,500 CY). The material cut from these areas will be used as fill to create the building pad (balanced cut/fill total of approximately 84,200 CY). The site’s overall grading and drainage plan is designed so that water is discharged toward the creek through outlets that utilize natural rock dissipation materials in keeping with the enhancement design goals. The work in the basin area will include excavation and installation of the outlet drain, so that any water entering the graded area flows out to a dissipation structure at the creek. The slopes will be planted for erosion control. The basin will not function for flood control detention until the City constructs the spillway and aperture control improvements to direct storm flows into the basin
Construction of the project would not increase the potential for on-site or off-site soil erosion, landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, collapse, or shrinking and swelling (due to soil expansion) to occur. As described above, the project site is underlain by massive hard to extremely hard dense Cretaceous-age bedrock. This rock material does not tend to become unstable; and is not prone to landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. In addition, bedrock is not considered expansive, and would not create a substantial risk to life or property.6
Before construction begins, the contractor is required to prepare a SWPPP, and implement standard erosion control measures and storm water construction BMPs (through the grading permit process) that would minimize potentially significant impacts from soil erosion during
5 The CBC incorporates relevant sections of the Uniform Building Code of the International Conference of Building Officials. 6 As defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-35 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist construction. In addition (as noted above), as required under the City’s Grading Ordinance and in the Conditions of Project Approval for the proposed project, the recommendations in an updated geotechnical report must be followed during site preparation and grading activities. Further, the proposed residential structures are required to be constructed in compliance with the seismic safety standards set forth in the CBC. Therefore, potential impacts from soil erosion, seismic instability, or soil structure would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. e. NO IMPACT. The proposed project would tie into existing sewers, avoiding the need to use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. As a result, significant impacts would not occur with project development. 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 including the project site, usually do not contain fossils. According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016), the subsurface conditions of the site consist of artificial fill, topsoil, alluvium, and Cretaceous-age granitic bedrock.
According to Section 4.5.2.3 of the GP 2030 PEIR (2011), Cretaceous-aged granitic bedrock does not have any paleontological resource potential. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly destroy unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features, and the potential for encountering undiscovered paleontological resources would be very low during construction activities at the project site. As a result, construction of the project would be expected to produce less than significant impacts to paleontological resources.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-36 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The discussion below is based on the findings contained within the Greenhouse Gas Analysis for the Monarch Buena Vista Project (GHG Report) (Scientific Resources Associated [SRA], January 19, 2017) prepared for the proposed project. This report is on file and available for review with the City’s Planning Division.
DISCUSSION a - b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. BACKGROUND Global Climate Change (GCC) refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth as a whole, including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation and storms. GCC may result from natural factors, natural processes, and/or human activities that change the composition of the atmosphere and alter the surface and features of land. Historical records indicate that global climate changes have occurred in the past due to natural phenomena (such as during previous ice ages). Some data indicate that the current global conditions differ from past climate changes in rate and magnitude.
Global temperatures are moderated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases, including water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), which are known as greenhouse gases (GHGs). These gases allow solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth’s atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth’s atmosphere, much like a greenhouse. Without these natural GHGs, the Earth’s temperature would be about 61 degrees Fahrenheit cooler (California EPA 2006). Emissions from human activities, such as electricity production and vehicle use, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere. For example, data from ice cores indicate that CO2 concentrations remained steady prior to the current period for approximately 10,000 years; however, concentrations of CO2 have increased in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution.
GCC and GHGs have been at the center of a widely contested political, economic, and scientific debate. Although the conceptual existence of GCC is generally accepted, the extent to which GHGs generally and anthropogenic-induced GHGs (mainly CO2, CH4 and N2O) contribute to it remains a source of debate. The State of California has been at the forefront of developing solutions to address GCC.
Each GHG has a different potential for trapping heat in the atmosphere, called global warming potential (GWP). GWP for a gas is a measure of the total energy that a gas absorbs over a particular period of time (usually 100 years), compared to CO2. CO2 is the primary GHG emitted through human activities and is typically used as a baseline in the analysis and reporting of GHGs.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-37 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
GHG emissions are typically reported in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) units. When dealing with an array of emissions, the gases are converted to their carbon dioxide equivalents for comparison purposes. The global warming potential for CH4 and N2O is 28 and 265, respectively.7
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The GHG Report (SRA, 2017) identifies a number of international, national, State, and local requirements, regulations, and standards regarding GHG emissions. However, the section below focuses on AB 32, EO B-30-15, SB 32, and the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) (2013). Please see the GHG Report (SRA, 2017) for additional information on the above-mentioned regulations.
State of California The following subsections describe regulations and standards that have been adopted by the State of California to address GCC issues.
AB 32 - Among a number of bills passed to support Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, AB 32 required that, by January 1, 2008, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) determine what the statewide GHG emissions level was in 1990, and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit that is equivalent to that level, to be achieved by 2020. The CARB adopted its AB 32 Scoping Plan in December 2008 (CARB, 2008), which provided estimates of the 1990 GHG emissions level and identified sectors for the reduction of GHG emissions. The CARB estimated that the 1990 GHG emissions level was 427 million metric tons net CO2e. The CARB estimates that a reduction of 173 MMT net CO2e emissions below business-as-usual would be required by 2020 to meet the 1990 levels. This amounts to roughly a 28.35 percent reduction from projected business-as-usual levels in 2020. In 2011, the CARB developed a Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan Supplement) (CARB, 2011). The Supplement updated the emissions inventory based on current projections for “business as usual” (BAU) emissions to 506.8 million metric tons of CO2e. The updated projection included adopted measures (Pavley 1 Fuel Efficiency Standards, 20 percent Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement, etc.), and estimated that an additional 16 percent reduction below the estimated BAU levels would be necessary to return to 1990 levels by 2020.
In 2014, the CARB published its First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB, 2014). This update indicates that the State is on target to meet the goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 level by 2020. The First Update tracks progress in achieving the goals of AB 32, and lays out a new set of actions that will move the State further along the path to achieving the 2050 goal of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. While the First Update discusses setting a mid-term target, the plan does not yet set a quantifiable target toward meeting the 2050 goal.
EO B-30-15 – Executive Order B-30-15 was enacted by the Governor on April 29, 2015. Executive Order B-30-15 establishes an interim GHG emission reduction goal for the state of California to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. This Executive Order directs all state agencies with jurisdiction over GHG-emitting sources to implement measures designed to achieve the new interim 2030 goal, as well as the pre-existing, long-term 2050 goal identified in Executive Order S-3-05 to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050. The Executive Order directs ARB to update its Scoping Plan to address the 2030 goal. It is anticipated that ARB will develop statewide inventory projection data for 2030 and
7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, February 14, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-38 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist commence efforts to identify reduction strategies capable of securing emission reductions that allow for achievement of the new interim goal for 2030.
Senate Bill 32 - Senate Bill 32 was enacted by the California Legislature on September 8, 2016 to require the ARB to approve a statewide GHG emissions limit to reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. The bill codified the target identified in Executive Order B-30-15 and authorizes the ARB to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions and ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.
Local Regulations and Standards City of Vista CAP - The City adopted its CAP (2013) to reduce GHG emissions in Vista in order to comply with AB 32. The CAP provided an estimate of BAU emissions by the year 2020, and a projection of the amount of reductions needed to meet the City’s requirement to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels. The CAP (2013) estimated that a reduction of 27,187 metric tons of CO2e would be required. The CAP also adopts climate action measures designed to provide the necessary reductions to meet the 2020 target. The measures that would apply to development projects include energy efficiency measures, transportation and land use measures designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled, and solid waste reduction measures.
THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE AND METHODOLOGY Threshold of Significance According to the California Natural Resources Agency (July 2009), “due to the global nature of GHG emissions and their potential effects, GHG emissions will typically be addressed in a cumulative impacts analysis.” Significance criteria were developed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project would have a significant impact if it would:
• Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The California Resources Agency adopted an Amendment to the State CEQA Guidelines to assist lead agencies in determining the significance of impact from GHG emissions. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4, CEQA Guidelines for Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions, states the following:
a. The 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: 1. Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate provided it supports
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-39 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist its decision with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use; and/or 2. Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards. b. A lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment: 1. The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; 2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; 3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project.
Pursuant to Section 15064.4(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined in the context of this particular project that there are no cumulatively considerable impacts to GHG where there is substantial evidence that this project is making a “fair share contribution”8 to reducing GHG Emissions in a manner that assists in making substantial progress toward meeting 2020 and post-2020 GHG emissions targets either quantitatively or qualitatively.
With regards to whether the proposed project is making a fair share contribution, and therefore substantial progress, towards meeting 2020 GHG emissions targets set forth in the City’s CAP, if the total project GHG emissions in its first fully operational year divided by the total number of residents and employees (i.e., service persons) is less than the 3.30 metric tons of CO2e9, then the project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. The threshold is based on the 2020 GHG emission target of 464,983 metric tons of CO2e divided by the City’s estimated residential population plus commercial and industrial employment for 2020.
With regards to whether the proposed project is making a fair share contribution, and therefore substantial progress, towards meeting post-2020 GHG emissions targets set forth in Executive Order S-3-05, consistent with CARB’s First Update to the Scoping Plan, 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 the emissions of greenhouse gas emissions, it would not result in a significant impact.
8 A project’s contribution is less than cumulatively considerable if the project is required to implement...“its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(a)(3), emphasis added). Measures to mitigate a project’s GHG impacts broadly include “reductions in emissions resulting from a project though implementation of project features, project design, or other measures.” and that such measures must have an “essential nexus” and be “roughly proportionate” to the project (State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4 (a)(4),(c)(2); emphasis added). 9 City’s Interim Policy of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Significance Thresholds (April 6, 2016).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-40 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Methodology As discussed in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), GHG emissions associated with the proposed project were estimated for six categories of emissions: (1) construction; (2) area sources; (3) energy use, including electricity and natural gas usage; (4) water consumption, use, and treatment; (5) solid waste management, and (6) vehicles. The complete emissions inventory is included in the Appendix of the GHG Report (SRA, 2017).
EXISTING CONDITIONS The site of the proposed project historically operated as a mobile home park but is currently vacant. It has historically been a source of GHG emissions from vehicles, energy use, area sources, water consumption and solid waste but for the purposes of this analysis, existing GHG emissions are assumed to be zero.
CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS As stated in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), construction GHG emissions include emissions from heavy construction equipment, truck traffic, and worker trips. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, which is the newest land use emissions model developed by the SCAQMD (SCAQMD 2016), for completed and proposed construction. CalEEMod contains emission factors from the OFFROAD model for heavy construction equipment and from the EMFAC2014 model for on-road vehicles. Table GHG-1 identifies the construction-related emissions associated with construction of the proposed project.
TABLE GHG-1 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS
CO2e Emissions Phase Metric tons
Construction 1,296
Source: SRA 2017
Per guidance from the SCAQMD (SCAQMD 2008), construction emissions are amortized over a 30-year period to account for the contribution of construction emissions over the lifetime of the project. Amortizing the emissions from construction of the proposed project over a 30-year period would result in an annual contribution of approximately 43 metric tons of CO2e. These emissions are added to operational emissions to account for the contribution of construction to GHG emissions for the lifetime of the proposed project.
OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS As discussed in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), the proposed project would consist of the construction and operation of 179 multi-family residential units and associated improvements. For the proposed project, the relevant emissions would include direct emissions from mobile source emissions and indirect emissions from electricity use and other sources. The service population of the proposed project is based on CalEEMod defaults (2.86 persons per unit x 179 units = 512 residents). Emissions were estimated using the methodologies described below.
Area Sources - CalEEMod assumes that area source emissions associated with residential projects would include minor use of landscaping equipment. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that no fireplaces would be constructed with the proposed project.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-41 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Energy Use - CalEEMod assumes a baseline of 2013 Title 24 standards. The baseline energy use provides a conservative estimate of current energy requirements relative to future energy requirements. The Title 24 standards have been updated in 2016, and the California Energy Commission estimates that the increased energy efficiency would reduce use in residential dwellings by 28m percent, and in non-residential buildings by five percent (California Energy Commission 2015). Title 24 energy use in the residences was therefore reduced by 28 percent to account for the implementation of Title 24 as of 2016 standards. Energy use from appliances was calculated assuming that the proposed project would use Energy Star appliances.
Water Use - Water usage was estimated based on CalEEMod. The GHG emissions associated with water usage, conveyance, treatment, and wastewater disposal are included within CalEEMod calculations. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that the proposed project would be equipped with low-flow fixtures and with irrigation systems that are water-efficient.
Solid Waste Management - The disposal of solid waste produces GHG emissions from anaerobic decomposition in landfills, incineration, transportation of waste, and disposal. Solid waste generation rates were estimated from CalEEMod, and GHG emissions from solid waste management were estimated using the model, assuming landfilling of solid waste with flaring. It was assumed that the proposed project would meet the statewide goal of 75 percent solid waste diversion by 2020.
Vehicles Emissions - Based on CalEEMod, the proposed project would generate 2,732,337 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) annually under business as usual conditions. Emissions were calculated based on CalEEMod, which is based on the EMFAC2014 emission factors.
Operational GHG Emissions Summary for 2020 Targets The results of the inventory for operational emissions, as shown in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), are presented in Table GHG-2, below. These include GHG emissions associated with buildings (natural gas, purchased electricity), water consumption (energy embodied in potable water), solid waste management (including transport and landfill gas generation), and vehicles. Table GHG-2 summarizes projected emissions using the methodologies noted above.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-42 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE GHG-2 ESTIMATED OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS Annual Emissions (Metric tons/year) Emission Source CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Emissions Area Sources 2 0.0021 0.000 2 Electricity Use 185 0.0074 0.0018 186 Natural Gas Use 110 0.0021 0.0020 111 Water Use 50 0.3059 0.0076 61 Solid Waste Management 4 0.2470 0.0000 11 Vehicle Emissions 1,147 0.0635 0.0000 1,149 Amortized Construction Emissions 43 0.0000 0.0000 43 Total 1,541 0.6280 0.0114 1,562 Global Warming Potential Factor 1 28 265
CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,541 18 3 1,562
TOTAL CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,562 Service Population 512 Residents
Metric Tons CO2e Per Service Population 3.05 Significance Criteria 3.30 Significant? No Source: SRA 2017
As shown in Table GHG-2, the emissions from the proposed project, considering GHG reduction measures when divided by the service population, would be 3.05 metric tons of CO2e per service population. This level is below the City of Vista’s applicable calculated efficiency level of 3.30 metric tons of CO2e per service population. In addition, the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s CAP is shown in Table GHG-3, below. Accordingly, the proposed project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-43 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE GHG-3 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH CITY OF VISTA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CAP Measure for Reducing Proposed Project Consistency GHG Emissions The proposed project would be constructed to applicable CalGREEN and Title 24 building energy efficiency standards, which exceed the standards for existing buildings. The CalGREEN building standards code have been adopted as Part 11 of Title 24. CalGREEN includes site development, energy efficiency, water efficiency, Measure E-1: Energy material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality Efficiency Building Standards measures that are designed to reduce energy use and environment impacts. As Title 24 efficiency standards reach a point where they are twice as effective as existing buildings, new construction at the proposed project after that date would be subject to the increased efficiency standards. Accordingly, the proposed project would not interfere with increasing energy efficiency for existing buildings.
The proposed project will increase the community’s awareness, understanding, Measure E-3: Smart Meters and use of real-time energy consumption data and pricing available through SDG&E’s Smart Meter program.
Measure E-4: Small-Scale The proposed project would not obstruct the use of small-scale renewable energy Renewable Energy installations such as solar photovoltaic panels. Installations
Measure E-5: Tree Planting The proposed project would include tree planting in its landscaping design that and Urban Forests would be consistent with the City’s policy.
Measure S-1: Expanded The proposed project would include recycling to meet the statewide goal set forth Recycling in AB 341 to divert solid waste by 75% by 2020.
Measure S-2: Construction The proposed project will meet the City’s requirement of diverting a minimum of and Demolition Debris 50% of the total construction and demolition debris generated via reuse or Diversion recycling.
Measure T-1: Bicycle and The proposed project’s proximity to transit and a mix of uses would encourage Pedestrian Travel pedestrian access to transit, commercial, and employment uses in the area.
Measure T-2: Transit Travel The proposed project is located within 0.5 miles of a SPRINTER station.
The proposed project contributes to a compact, efficient, and environmental sensitive pattern of development that provides people with additional travel, Measure T-4: Smart Growth housing, and employment opportunities by focusing growth away from rural areas. The project is an infill project located within a mix of uses with access to transit.
Source: SRA 2017
Operational GHG Emissions Summary for Post-2020 Targets As discussed in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), with regards to whether the proposed project is making a fair share contribution and therefore substantial progress towards meeting post-2020 GHG emissions targets set forth in Executive Order S-3-05, consistent with CARB’s First Update to the Scoping Plan, the City has determined that a fair share is provided if the proposed project does not interfere with the state’s implementation of GHG reduction programs identified for residential and commercial development. The project would be consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gas emissions, as discussed below.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-44 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist CARB 2016 Scoping Plan Concept Paper - CARB identified analysis to support its conclusions that the state is on a trajectory to meet the 2030 and 2050 GHG emission targets. In the CARB’s Scoping Plan Concept Paper (CARB 2016), the CARB identified programs designed to reduce GHG emissions and meet the state’s 2030 target of reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels. Table GHG-4, below, presents a summary of the proposed measures, and a discussion of the project’s consistency with these measures.
TABLE GHG-4 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH CARB 2016 SCOPING PLAN CONCEPT PAPER
State Program for Reducing GHG Emissions Monarch Buena Vista Project Consistency
The project would purchase electricity from San Diego Gas and Electric, which is responsible for meeting the SB 350 – 50% Renewable Portfolio Standard by 2030 state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. The project would therefore not interfere with implementation of this program. The project would be constructed to applicable Title 24 building energy efficiency standards, which exceed the standards for existing buildings. As Title 24 efficiency standards reach a point where they are twice as Doubling of energy efficiency for existing buildings effective as existing buildings, new construction at the project after that date would be subject to the increased efficiency standards. Accordingly, the project would not interfere with increasing energy efficiency for existing buildings. Project-related vehicles would purchase fuels from Increase in Low Carbon Fuel Standard to > 10% by local suppliers that would comply with the LCFS. The 2030 project would not interfere with implementation of the increased LCFS. As zero-emission vehicles become more available consumers will buy them, so some portion of project- 1.5 million zero-emission and plug-in hybrid electric related vehicles would include zero-emission and plug- vehicles by 2025 in vehicles. The project would not interfere with increasing market penetration of zero-emissions and plug-in hybrid vehicles into the fleet. Project-related medium- and heavy-vehicles would be Medium- and Heavy-Duty GHG Phase 2 regulations subject to Phase 2 regulations. The project would not interfere with implementation of this program. Advanced Clean Transit – up to 20 percent of new This measure is not directly applicable to the project; urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 will be zero- the fleet of urban buses serving the project area would emission buses, ramping up to 100% of new sales by be required to comply with this measure. 2030. Last Mile Delivery – Phase-in of zero-emission trucks This measure is not directly applicable to the project; for class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks starting in 2020. delivery vehicles serving the project would be required Zero emission vehicles comprise 2.5 percent of new to comply with this measure as the state program is Class 3-7 in local fleets starting in 2020 increasing to implemented. 10 percent by 2025 and remaining steady to 2030. Implementation of currently proposed Short Lived This measure is not directly applicable to the project. Climate Pollutant Strategy with 40% reduction in The project would not interfere with implementation of methane and hydrofluorocarbon emissions by 2030 this program. and 50% reduction in black carbon emissions by 2030
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-45 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
State Program for Reducing GHG Emissions Monarch Buena Vista Project Consistency
The project increases the mix of uses in the area. The Increased stringency of SB 375 Sustainable project will therefore be consistent with SB 375 Communities Strategy – 2035 targets Sustainable Communities Strategy requirements. Draft California Sustainable Freight Action Plan to deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment This measure is not directly applicable to the project; capable of aero emission operation and maximize near- freight vehicles serving the project would be required to zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered comply with this measure. by renewable energy by 2030 The project is not subject to the California Cap-and- Cap-and-Trade Program with 4 percent annual cap Trade program. The project would not interfere with decline implementation of this program. The project is not subject to the Natural and Working Natural and Working Lands – designed to preserve Lands. The project would not interfere with natural lands and encourage infill development implementation of this program. Source: SRA 2017
In addition, the analysis in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017) includes an evaluation of other state programs that may be adopted to reduce GHG emissions. A report prepared in November 2013, Estimating Policy-Driven Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trajectories in California: The California Greenhouse Gas Inventory Spreadsheet (GHGIS) Model (Greenblatt, 2013), identifies additional programs, but most of them are not applicable to the project. Table GHG-5 summarizes the project’s consistency (ie. non-interference) with these state programs.
TABLE GHG-5
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH POTENTIAL POST-2020 PROGRAMS Potential Post-2020 Program for Reducing GHG Emissions Monarch Buena Vista Project Consistency Fuels Project-related vehicles would purchase fuels from • AB 2076 and AB 1007: 26% petroleum displacement (via local suppliers that would meet the requirements of biofuels) by 2022, and 30% by 2030 (applied to both gasoline state fuel specifications as the state program is and diesel) implemented. The project would not interfere with implementation of this program. HDV Sector Project-related medium- and heavy-vehicles would be • MHD and HHD vehicle hybridization: 0.5 MtCO2e reduction in subject to statewide efficiency measures targeted at 2020 achieved with 1.3% increase in fuel efficiency of these vehicle classes. conventional engines (rather than introducing hybrid market Phase-out of older vehicles and phase-in of new shares) vehicles that meet the state’s requirements for • System-wide HDV efficiency: 3.5 MtCO2e reduction in 2020 hybridization would result in lower GHG emissions achieved with 9.5% decrease in VMT across all vehicle classes from the fleet. The project would not interfere with implementation of this program. Other Transportation Sector The project is not part of the high-speed rail system. • High-speed rail: 1 MtCO2e reduction in 2020 achieved by 75% The project would not interfere with implementation of increase in rail energy use (as electricity) with simultaneous 18% this program. decrease in in- state aviation energy use Stationary Sector The project would meet Title 24 building energy • Baseline energy use: Used IEPR base case plus Navigant PGT net efficiency standards in effect at the time of energy mid-market savings from 2015-2024 (Swamy, 2013), with construction, which will be completed prior to 2020. If extrapolations to 2050 the project is constructed under the 2013 Title 24 • AB 758/Energy efficiency strategic plan (CPUC, 2008): energy efficiency standards, then it will not interfere • Residential new construction: 23% more efficient than 2010 with the state's implementation of the CPUC's energy baseline in 2011, 40% in 2015, 53% in 2020 (applied to both efficiency strategic plan because the 2013 Title 24 electricity and NG) energy efficiency standard because is at least 40 • Residential retrofits: 20% more efficient than 2010 baseline in percent more efficient that the 2008 Title 24 energy
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-46 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
Potential Post-2020 Program for Reducing GHG Emissions Monarch Buena Vista Project Consistency 2015, 40% in 2020 (applied to both electricity and NG) efficiency standards applicable during the 2010 • Commercial new construction: 60% more efficient than 2010 baseline used in the CPUC energy efficiency strategic baseline in 2020 (applied to both electricity and NG; used plan (CPUC 2011). If the project is constructed using averages of 2020 and 2030 values in 2025: 36% for electricity, 2016 Title 24 energy efficiency standards that go in 37% for NG) effect in 2017, then it will also not interfere with • Commercial retrofits: No improvement over baseline state's implementation of the of the CPUC's energy • Zero Net Energy (ZNE): Sum of electricity and NG primary energy efficiency strategic plan because the 2016 Title 24 consumed by buildings is offset by distributed solar PV: energy efficiency standard is at least 40 percent more • Residential new construction: 100% of buildings are ZNE by 2020 efficient that the 2008 Title 24 energy efficiency • Residential retrofits: No ZNE buildings standards applicable during the 2010 baseline used in the CPUC energy efficiency strategic plan (CPUC • Commercial new construction: 100% of buildings are ZNE by 2011). The project would not be subject to CPUC 2030 energy efficiency strategic plan targets for new • Commercial retrofits: 50% of buildings are ZNE by 2030 residential construction in 2020 because the project (continued trend to 100% of buildings in 2050) will be constructed before 2020. Electricity Sector The project would purchase electricity from San Diego • Imports: ramped down to 0% by 2025; otherwise fossil generation Gas and Electric, which is responsible for meeting the goes negative before 2020. state’s electricity requirements for reducing GHGs. The • CHP: AB 32 Scoping Plan for CHP (increase by 30,000 GWh in project would therefore not interfere with 2020; total capacity of 15.1 GW) and Governor’s CHP goal (6.5 implementation of this program. GW new CHP by 2030; total capacity of 15.3 GW): Because capacity factor of CHP was revised significantly downward in Scenario 1, there was now enough electricity demand remaining after other generation types were accounted for meet these goals. Note had to reduce CHP capacity slightly to 15.1 GW by 2040 to prevent remaining fossil generation from falling below zero. • 12 GW of renewable distributed generation by 2020 (25,000 GWh), all in form of PV. This counted toward ZNE goals, which only overtook this total in 2030. • 8 GW of new utility-scale renewables by 2020: Part of meeting RPS target • Local targets for renewables >33%: Increased state RPS target from 33% to 37% to simulate meeting these commitments • 1,325 MW energy storage by 2020 (investor-owned utility target): Scaled up to 1,900 MW to represent statewide target (IOUs are ~70% of state electricity generation), achieved by building storage equal to 0.55% of gross demand assuming an arbitrary 10% capacity factor (~1,600 GWh/yr). • Nuclear: Diablo Canyon relicensed through 2045, then offline • CCS: One 300 MW IGCC/CCS coal plant online in 2020 (based on HECA plant in Bakersfield, CA). Methodology for implementing this in model was changed, so capacity could now be specified precisely in target years. • Natural gas: After storage balance of load-following generation (~3.5%) was supplied by SC NG, and remaining fossil generation was supplied by CC NG: ~16% in 2010, tapering to almost zero by 2020, then varying up to 7% through 2050. Water The state 20 by 20 program is an initiative to reduce • 20 by 20: 20% water reduction in residential and commercial statewide per capita reduction in urban water demand sectors by 2020 by 20 percent from a 2005 baseline by the year 2020. • Water use efficiency, recycling, pumping and treatment efficiency, According to the 20x20 Water Conservation Plan and urban runoff re-use: additional 3.9 MtCO2e achieved through (February 2010) the state is working to reduce per 2020 water use savings of 32.5% relative to baseline in capita urban water consumption from 192 GPCD to residential and commercial sectors 154 GPCD by the year 2020. See: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/hot_topics/20 x2020/docs/questions_answers.pdf and http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/hot_topics/20 x2020/docs/20x2020plan.pdf Among the measures the plan uses to achieve these
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-47 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
Potential Post-2020 Program for Reducing GHG Emissions Monarch Buena Vista Project Consistency reduction is enactment of building standards for more water efficiency plumbing fixtures. The project would install low-flow plumbing fixtures and would reduce water consumption in compliance with Title 24 Part 11. In addition the plan proposed to enact a model water efficiency landscape ordinance which local governments could adopt and implement. The City of Vista adopted the model water efficiency landscape ordinance and the project is required to comply with it by law. Accordingly, the project does not interfere with the state's ability to implement its 20x20 Water Conservation Plan. In addition, through water use efficiency, recycling, pumping, and treatment efficiency, and urban runoff re-use, the state plans to achieve GHG reductions through a water use savings of 32.5% relative to baseline in residential and commercial sectors as calculated by the California Energy Commission based on 2008 Title 24 requirements (California Energy Commission 2005). The project does not interfere with the state's ability to achieve this efficiency reduction because it will meet Title 24 building energy efficiency standards in effect at the time of construction, which will be completed prior to 2020. Waste The project would implement a Waste Management • AB 341: 75% waste diversion in 2020 reduced direct and indirect Plan in accordance with Vista Municipal Code 13.17, emissions by 4.5 MtCO2e (consistent with expected 20-30 except that Permittee’s Waste Management Plan shall MtCO2e reduction in 2020, where 80% of emissions are outside indicate that at least 60 percent of all solid waste of California) generated by the project will be diverted. • Zero net emissions by 2035: Achieved by forcing biogenic The project is not a landfill project. Therefore, it would component of landfills to 100% not interfere with state implementation of the landfill biogenic program. HGWP Gases The project does not utilize HGWP gases. The project • HFC phase-out: 50% of HFCs eliminated by 2035, 100% by 2050 would utilize energy-efficiency appliances that would • Foam recovery and destruction, fire suppressants, and residential meet the state requirements for reducing HFC usage. refrigerator retirement: estimated 0.5 MtCO2e reduction in 2020, The project would therefore be consistent with these implemented by reducing HFC usage 2.5% in 2020 programs. • Additional reductions in mobile sources, leak tests, refrigerant recovery and federal ban: reduction unknown; assume additional 0.5 MtCO2e in 2020, implemented by reducing HFC usage an additional 2.5% in 2020 (so total reduction of 5%) Cap-and-Trade The project is not part of the California Cap-and-Trade • Local reductions beyond state/federal activities: For 90 cities program. The project would not interfere with reviewed (Cal Poly study), 44% of actions in CAPs were implementation of this program. incremental to state and federal rules, accounting for 8.2 MtCO2e reductions in 2020. Because activities are so diffuse throughout economy, we chose to represent these reductions via emission offset in the Cap and Trade sector. Source: SRA 2017
Horizon Years 2030 and 2050 - As described in the GHG Report (SRA, 2017), and noted in the regulatory framework sub-section above, Executive Order B-30-15 established a statewide emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, which has been implemented by SB 32. This measure was identified to keep the State on a trajectory needed to meet the 2050 goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 pursuant to Executive Order S-3-05. According to most recent 2020 forecast presented in CARB’s
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-48 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Updated Scoping Plan and the adopted target for 2020 (i.e., 1990 statewide GHG levels), the state must achieve a reduction of at least 15.3 percent to reach the 2020 target.
Further analyses were conducted to provide information on future GHG emissions in the years 2030 and 2050. Tables GHG-6 and 7 present estimated emissions for 2030 and 2050 for the Proposed Project. Because there is no information on increases in energy efficiency regulations through Title 24, nor any information on additional plans and programs that may be implemented pursuant to SB 32, Tables GHG-6 and 7 take into account the following additional GHG measures beyond the 2020 analysis: • Additional penetration of Advanced Clean Cars regulations and increased percentage of electric and low-emission vehicles in the fleet • Implementation of the 50 percent Renewable Portfolio Standard • Full implementation of AB 341 to achieve a target of 75% solid waste diversion
Tables GHG-6 and 7 present the estimated GHG emissions for 2030 and 2050 with these measures in place. Because there is no efficiency metric recommended by the City beyond 2020, no calculation of the efficiency of the project has been made.
TABLE GHG-6 SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED 2030 OPERATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 2030 Annual Emissions (Metric tons/year) Emission Source CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Emissions Area Sources 2 0.0021 0.0000 2 Electricity Use 142 0.0056 0.0011 142 Natural Gas Use 110 0.0021 0.0020 111 Water Use 39 0.3055 0.0075 50 Solid Waste Management 4 0.2470 0.0000 11 Vehicle Emissions 855 0.0418 0.0000 856 Amortized Construction Emissions 43 0.0000 0.0000 43 Total 1,195 0.6041 0.0111 1,215 Global Warming Potential Factor 1 28 265 CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,195 17 3 1,215 TOTAL CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,215
Source: SRA 2017
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-49 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE GHG-7 SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED 2050 OPERATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 2050 Annual Emissions (Metric tons/year) Emission Source CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Emissions Area Sources 2 0.0021 0.0000 2 Electricity Use 142 0.0056 0.0011 142 Natural Gas Use 110 0.0021 0.0020 111 Water Use 39 0.3055 0.0075 50 Solid Waste Management 4 0.2470 0.0000 11 Vehicle Emissions 798 0.0375 0.0000 799 Amortized Construction Emissions 43 0.0000 0.0000 43 Total 1,138 0.5998 0.0111 1,158 Global Warming Potential Factor 1 28 265 CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,138 17 3 1,158 TOTAL CO2 Equivalent Emissions 1,138 Source: SRA 2017
These emissions would be reduced further than shown in Tables GHG-6 and 7 due to implementation of additional GHG reduction measures and technological advancements that cannot be quantified with reasonable certainty at this time. The tables show that the project’s emissions would continue to decrease due to reasonably foreseeable reductions in vehicular emissions attributable to existing regulatory standards. Although it is likely that the state of California will increase the targets for the Renewable Portfolio Standard beyond 2020, and that Title 24 standards will be increasingly energy efficient, no other reductions beyond existing regulatory programs were assumed; as such, the future inventory estimates are conservative.
CARB has expressed optimism with regard to both the 2030 and 2050 goals. It states in the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan that “California is on track to meet the near-term 2020 greenhouse gas limit and is well positioned to maintain and continue reductions beyond 2020 as required by AB 32.” (see First Update to Scoping Plan, p. ES2.) With regard to the 2050 target for reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels, the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan states:
“This level of reduction is achievable in California. In fact, if California realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals (such as 12,000 megawatts [MW] of renewable distributed generation by 2020, net zero energy homes after 2020, existing building retrofits under AB 758, and others) it could reduce emissions by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed in the developed world and to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additional measures, including locally driven measures and those necessary to meet federal air quality standards in 2032, could lead to even greater emission reductions” (First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan dated May 2014, p. 34).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-50 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist In other words, CARB believes the State is on a trajectory to meet the 2020, 2030 and 2050 GHG reduction targets set forth in AB 32, Executive Order B-30-15 and Executive Order S-3-05.
The proposed project does not interfere with implementation of any of the above-described GHG reduction goals for 2030 or 2050. Moreover, the proposed project will not interfere with the state’s implementation of building retrofits to further energy efficiency for existing buildings under AB 758. AB 758, the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency in Existing Buildings Law, tasked the California Energy Commission (“CEC”) with developing and implementing a comprehensive program to increase energy efficiency in existing residential and nonresidential buildings that “fall significantly below the current standards in Title 24.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 25943(a)(1).) Approximately 50 percent of existing residential and nonresidential buildings in California were constructed before California Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect in 1978. (CEC, Existing Buildings Energy Efficiency Action Plan (March 10, 2015) (hereafter Draft AB 758 Plan), Ch. 1, p. 5 [also noting that existing buildings represent 20 percent of all GHG emissions].) Other buildings constructed after 1978 also fall below current Title 24 standards and present significant opportunities for energy efficiency improvements. (Id.) Pursuant to AB 758, the CEC is in the process of developing an Existing Building Energy Efficiency Action Plan that identifies strategies to implement energy efficient renovations for such existing commercial, residential and publicly owned buildings.
Strategies include making information about a building’s energy efficiency more readily available, educating the public about the cost benefit of energy upgrades, making attractive financing more readily available, educating the public and contractors about available energy upgrades and code compliance requirements, and educating a work force capable of implementing energy upgrades. (Id. at Ch. 4, pp. 91-102.) The Proposed Project will be constructed in compliance with current Title 24 standards and therefore will not interfere with CEC or other initiatives implemented to increase energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions associated with existing buildings that do not adhere to Title 24 standards.
In addition, mobile emissions would continue to decrease over time due to continual vehicle fleet turnover, improvements in engine technology (increases in engine efficiency and fuel-efficient vehicles), and increasingly stringent mobile emissions standards as represented by regulations such as the Advanced Clean Car Program, Pavley regulations, Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the Truck and Bus Regulation “which requires heavy duty vehicles to be retrofit with diesel particulate filters or replaced with trucks having 2007 or 2010 standard engines” (CARB 2015). It is reasonable to assume that additional regulations developed to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions similar to the aforementioned regulations would be implemented in the future in response to new regulations developed to meet 2030 and 2050 target reduction goals, as well as an expansion of alternative transportation systems.
Regulations and initiatives as developed and implemented by CARB and other statewide agencies pursuant to the Scoping Plan and Executive Order B-30-15 and SB 32 related to energy, water supply and solid waste will reduce emissions in the future, but the full extent of such reductions cannot be fully quantified or estimated at this time. GHG-related technological advancements in these sectors will also continue to build upon those currently employed state-wide and through local initiatives, and would become increasingly more stringent and efficient over time. Regulations and standards pertaining to these sectors include but are not limited to Title 24 building standards, the state’s renewable energy portfolio standard, water conservation
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-51 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist measures, solid waste diversion rates and other statewide initiatives as identified in CARB’s Scoping Plan.
Additionally, as described previously, the Proposed Project applicant would not actively interfere with any future City-mandated, state-mandated, or federally-mandated retrofit obligations enacted or promulgated to legally require residential development City-wide, state-wide, or nation-wide to assist in meeting state-adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, including that established under Executive Order S-3-05 or Executive Order B-30-15.
CONCLUSIONS Emissions of GHGs were quantified for both construction and operation of the Monarch Buena Vista Project. The project’s emissions are below the City of Vista’s efficiency metric threshold of 3.30 metric tons of CO2e per service population. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
The project would be consistent with applicable state and City of Vista requirements for the reduction of GHG emissions, including the City’s CAP. Accordingly, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable global climate change impact before or after 2020, and impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-52 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 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, substances, 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 public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? f. For a Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
The discussion below is based upon information provided in the following reports: the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) prepared by Geocon Inc. March 10, 2017 (Geocon, 2016). The report is on file and available for review in the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION a. NO IMPACT. The project proposes development of 179 multi-family units in 14 buildings and a 2.35-acre flood control detention basin on a 13.42-acre site. Construction equipment that would be used to build the proposed project has the potential to release oils, greases, solvents, and other finishing materials through accidental spills. Spill or upset of these materials could have the potential to impact surrounding land uses; however, federal, State, and local controls have been enacted to reduce the effects of such potential hazardous materials spills. The VFD enforces City, State, and federal hazardous materials regulations for the City. City regulations include securing of hazardous materials containers to prevent spills, and spill containment and mitigation. In addition, the State Fire Marshal enforces oil and gas pipeline safety regulations, and the federal
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-53 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist government enforces hazardous materials transport pursuant to its interstate commerce regulation authority. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory as standard permitting conditions, and would minimize the potential for the accidental release or upset of hazardous materials, thus ensuring public safety. In addition, typically, residential uses do not generate, store, dispose of, or transport quantities of hazardous substances. Occupancy of the project would not expose on-site users or the surrounding community to any health hazards from hazardous materials, and no impacts would occur. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. As noted above, occupancy of the proposed project would not result in the generation, storage, disposal, or transportation of hazardous materials. However, according to the Phase I ESA (Geocon, 2017), the eastern portion of the Site was planted with orchards from as early as 1939 to 1953, which would suggest that pesticides may have been used and, as a result, persistent pesticides may be present in soil on the Site. This is considered a potential recognized environmental concern (REC) for the Site and would be considered a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-1 would require that a Phase II analysis be conducted to evaluate the potential for the presence of contaminated soils on-site.
In addition, according to the Phase I ESA (Geocon, 2017), it is unknown if lead-abatement was performed on the previous on-site structures prior to their demolition and removal. The presence of lead in the soils on-site would be a potential recognized environmental concern (REC) for the Site and would be considered a potentially significant impact requiring mitigation. HM-1 is included to address this potentially significant impact.
MITIGATION MEASURE HM-1 A Phase II ESA shall be conducted prior to the initiation of grading on-site to determine if residual pesticides are present in soil on the Site. The Phase II shall include soil sampling and analysis near the former permanent structures to determine if deteriorated lead from paint sources potentially impacted soil at the Site. All recommendations of the Phase II shall be implemented prior to the initiation of grading activities on-site to the satisfaction of the City.
As noted above, due to the historic agricultural use of the project site, undocumented and undetectable hazards may be buried and discovered during project grading. Often undocumented drums or fuel tanks are buried on farms and are undetectable during site reconnaissance during the Phase I survey. Should any unknown resources be discovered on-site, potentially significant impacts may occur; therefore, Mitigation Measure HM-2 is provided to reduce these impacts to less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURE HM-2 During grading operations, observations shall be made during any future ground disturbing activities for areas of possible contamination such as, but not limited to: the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, waste drums or tanks, or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, disposal shall occur in accordance with City, County of San Diego, and State and federal regulations.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-54 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist c - d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As noted above in section a), residential uses and flood control facilities typically do not generate, store, dispose of, or transport quantities of hazardous substances. The Vista Magnet Middle School is located southwest of the site at the southwest corner of the intersection of Civic Center Drive and East Vista Way and is therefore within 0.25 mile of the project site. As noted above in section a), typically, residential uses typically do not generate, store, dispose of, or transport quantities of hazardous substances. Although not anticipated, any hazardous materials found on- site during project grading and construction would be removed and properly disposed of per Mitigation Measures HM-1 and HM-2. As a result, no significant impacts to the Vista Magnet Middle School would occur. Once constructed, the project also does not propose uses that would emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous substances; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Consequently, project development would not create any significant impacts to the school.
As indicated in the Phase I ESA (Geocon, 2017), the proposed project site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 6596205. However, within the standard 1/8-mile radius search, a total of thirteen sites were located within the project vicinity.
Of the thirteen properties located within 1/8 mile (¼ mile for LUST facilities) of the Site, three of the properties are listed on the LUST database. According to the Phase I ESA (Geocon, 2017), these facilities are unlikely to have caused an REC at the Site. Additional information is available in the Phase I ESA on file with the City.
Therefore, these sites are not expected to have impacted the environmental conditions at the project site (Geocon, 2017), and a less than significant impact would occur. e - h. NO IMPACT. The nearest airport is the McClellan-Palomar Airport which is located about 6.5 miles to the southwest of the project site in the City of Carlsbad (the Oceanside Municipal Airport is located approximately seven miles west of the site). The property is not located within the Airport Influence Area of the airport (McClellan-Palomar Airport - Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, January 25, 2010). It is also sufficiently distanced from it so that it would not affect the safe operation of the airport, and the project would not be affected by noise created through airport operations. Consequently, construction of the project would not create significant impacts.
There are no private airstrips located within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the development of the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
The City is a participant in the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for San Diego County, which identifies risks by natural and human-made disasters and ways to minimize the damage from those disasters. The proposed project would provide residential uses that would be permitted and approved in compliance with existing safety regulations, such as the California Building Code and Uniform Fire Code to ensure that it would not conflict with implementation of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-55 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Short-term construction traffic impacts are anticipated from vehicles involved in hauling and/or delivering materials to and from the site (e.g., soil exports, demolition material, etc.), which could interfere with emergency response plans or evacuation plans. However, as part of the Conditions of Project Approval, the applicant or contractor would be required to prepare and implement a Construction Traffic Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer to avoid significant construction-related impacts to nearby streets and intersections, especially during peak hour times. As a result, interference with emergency response or evacuation plans would be avoided. See Section XVI, Transportation/Traffic for additional information.
Operation of the proposed project would also not result in a physical interference with an emergency response evacuation. Direct access to the project site would be provided from East Vista Way via Townsite Drive. The project also proposes construction of an emergency only access at the southern end of the project site, from a parking lot off of Alta Vista Drive. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in significant impacts related to interfere with emergency response plans or evacuation plans.
The project site is located within an Urban Un-zoned Fire Hazard Area based on Vista’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, as prepared by the California Department of Forest and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program. The Urban Un-zoned Fire Hazard Area represents a very low threat from wildland fires because it is not located within the wildland/urban interface fire area. Therefore, no significant impacts from wildfires would occur with development of the site.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-56 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant IX. Hydrology and Water Quality Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including but not limited to increasing pollutant discharges to receiving waters? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
The discussion below is based on the Floodplain Study prepared by Tory R. Walker Engineering in August 2016 (TRWE, 2016), Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) prepared by Hunsaker & Associates in March 2017, and a Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (Hydrology Study) prepared by Hunsaker & Associates in April 2017 for the proposed project. These reports are on file and available for review at the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project involves the construction of two primary components on a 13.42-acre site situated along Buena Vista Creek that is located less than 0.50 mile from the city’s historic
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-57 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist downtown: a private 179-unit residential development located on 7.98 acres; and a 2.35-acre City-owned and operated flood control detention basin within 5.44 acres of the site. Hydrologically, the site is situated in the Vista Hydrologic Subarea (904.22), within the Buena Vista Creek Hydrologic Area (904.20) of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit (904.0).
The vacant project site was formerly developed as a mobile home park, and it still retains physical remnants of this former use such as original landscape plantings, concrete slabs, roadways, and other infrastructure. The site also includes a graded embankment on the east side of the property, and the adjacent Buena Vista Creek flows along the entire western property boundary. Runoff from the graded embankment flows in a westerly direction, through the site, ultimately discharging to Buena Vista Creek through a grated inlet. Runoff from existing off-site developed/commercial areas, such as Townsite Drive, lots north of the Creek, and the Adobe property also discharge into the creek through existing storm drains.
The surface and groundwater receiving waters located closest to and downstream of the project site include Buena Vista Creek, Buena Vista Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. The designated beneficial uses of Buena Vista Creek include AGR (Agricultural Supply), IND (Industrial Service Supply), REC1 (Contact Recreation), REC2 (Non-Contact Recreation), WARM (Warm Freshwater Habitat), and WILD (Wildlife Habitat). The designated beneficial uses of Buena Vista Lagoon are REC1, REC2, BIOL (Preservation of Biological Habitats), EST (Estuarine Habitat), WILD (Wildlife Habitat), RARE (Rare Species Habitat), and MAR (Marine Habitat). Buena Vista Creek is 303(d) listed for Selenium and Sediment Toxicity. Buena Vista Lagoon is 303(d) listed for Indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, and Sedimentation/Siltation (per the approved 2008-2010 303(d) List.)
POLLUTANTS AND CONDITIONS OF CONCERN According to the SWQMP (Hunsaker, 2017), the pollutants of concern that could be generated by the development of the proposed residential project would include sediments, nutrients, heavy metals, organic compounds, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides. Due to the fact that the project would drain to receiving water bodies on the 303(d) list identified above, those anticipated pollutants are also of concern. They include Manganese, Selenium, Sulfates, and Total Dissolved Solids, Indicator Bacteria, and Sedimentation/Siltation. The conditions of concern would include the potential effects of a change to a priority project site’s hydrologic regime on downstream channels and habitat integrity. This can include impacts such as flooding, erosion, and scour.
POTENTIAL WATER QUALITY IMPACTS To address potential water quality impacts due to project development, BMPs would be implemented during construction and post-construction activities. Typical construction BMPs are noted in the following section below. Selected post-construction BMPs from the City’s BMP Design Manual (updated June 2016), would be applied to reduce pollutants to maximum levels (see Table HWQ-1 for BMPs incorporated into the project’s design).
Construction Activities Construction of the proposed project would require grading and excavation of soils, which would loosen sediment, and then have the potential to mix with surface water runoff and degrade water quality. Additionally, construction would require the use of heavy equipment and construction- related chemicals, such as concrete, cement, asphalt, fuels, oils, antifreeze, transmission fluid, grease, solvents and paints. These potentially harmful materials could be accidentally spilled or
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-58 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist improperly disposed of during construction and, if mixed with surface water runoff, could wash into and pollute waters.
Short-term erosion impacts during the construction phase of the project would be prevented through implementation of an erosion control plan. A Grading and Erosion Control Plan is required in accordance with the City’s Grading Ordinance (Development Code Chapter 17.56) and the most recent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit), and must be submitted for plan check and approval by the City Engineer, as well as the Planning Division, prior to final approval of the project. The erosion control plan would include construction BMPs such as:
• Silt Fence, Fiber Rolls, or Gravel Bag • Street Sweeping and Vacuuming • Storm Drain Inlet Protection • Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit • Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance, Cleaning, and Fueling • Hydroseeding • Material Delivery and Storage • Stockpile Management • Spill Prevention and Control • Solid Waste Management • Concrete Waste Management
In addition, a Notice of Intent filed with the SWRCB, and preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (or SWPPP) would also be required before project construction commences.
Adherence to the existing requirements and implementation of the appropriate BMPs per the permitting process would ensure that potential water quality degradation associated with construction activities would be minimized, and impacts would be less than significant.
Post-Construction Activities In accordance with the City’s Stormwater Standards Manual (2015) as detailed in the updated City of Vista BMP Design Manual & Appendices (2016), all new and significant redevelopment projects that fall into one of 11 categories would be considered “priority” projects. Priority projects are required to incorporate post-construction (or permanent) Low Impact Development (LID) site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs, and Hydromodification measures into the project’s design. The proposed project meets several of the 11 “priority project” categories: new development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces; a project that creates 5,000 square feet of new paved surface; a development project that creates 2,500 or more square feet of impervious surfaces and discharges directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (e.g., Buena Vista Creek); and a development project that results in the disturbance of one acre or more of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction (Hunsaker, 2017). As a result, the proposed project is classified as a priority project. The Conditions of Project Approval for the project would also require compliance with all applicable post-construction BMPs selected from the City’s BMP Design Manual & Appendices, and this information is required to be
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-59 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist shown on Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans submitted for plan check and approval by the City Engineer.
Types of Post-Construction BMPs LID site design BMPs are intended to minimize impervious surfaces and promote infiltration and evaporation of runoff before it can leave the location of origination by mimicking the natural hydrologic function of the site. Integrated Management Practices (IMPs) facilities are used in conjunction with LID BMPs as they provide small-scale treatment, retention, and/or detention that are integrated into site layout, landscaping and drainage design. Source control BMPs are intended to minimize, to the maximum extent practicable, the introduction of pollutants and conditions of concern that may result in significant impacts generated from site runoff to off-site drain systems. Treatment control BMPs are intended to treat storm water runoff before it discharges off-site. According to the City’s Stormwater Standards Manual (2015), specific localized treatment control BMPs are more effective at reducing or minimizing pollutants of concern than other types of BMPs. Each type of BMP that would be implemented is shown in Table HWQ-1, below.
Prior to designing LID and/or treatment control BMPs into the proposed project, five Drainage Management Areas (DMA) were defined, categorized and tabulated for the entire site, as discussed in the SWQMP (Hunsaker, 2017). DMA-1 and DMA-2 include the majority of the developed project area east of the creek. The Treatment Control BMP chosen for the project is an infiltration vault that would be constructed in DMA-1 and 2 for water quality treatment and hydromodification purposes. The infiltration vaults were sized using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Storm Water Management Model 5.1 (SWMM) to meet the current Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP) requirements from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB). Pretreatment for DMA-1 and 2 would be achieved through the use of GISB (grate inlet) filters installed in the private street inlets. In addition, hydromodification control for the areas that do not drain to the on-site infiltration vaults would be achieved using Tree Wells sized to capture the first 1.5-inch of storm water runoff, as advised by the County of San Diego Watershed Protection Program. Self-retaining areas designed to retain the first 1.5-inch of runoff has been determined to meet hydromodification requirements. Additional information about the storm drain system for the proposed project can be found in the SWQMP (Hunsaker, 2017).
TABLE HWQ- 1 TYPES OF BMPS INCORPORATED INTO PROJECT DESIGN TYPE OF BMP DESCRIPTION OF BMP Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation: Embankment areas along the eastern side of the project will be conserved as much as possible Minimize Impervious Area: Impervious area minimized as much as possible to still be able to accommodate the multi-family residential area. Minimize Soil Compaction: Soil compaction will be minimized in landscaped areas as to not LID Site Design interfere with the current soil type and keep infiltration rates high. Impervious Area Dispersion: Downspouts will discharge into landscape areas for dispersion. Roof and impervious areas that will be conveyed through the street will utilize curb cuts and conveyed to into pervious landscaped area. Runoff Collection: Vaults to collect runoff from site
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-60 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
TYPE OF BMP DESCRIPTION OF BMP Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species: Landscaping will implement native or drought tolerant plants as determined by a landscape architect. Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4: Smart irrigation systems will be implemented Storm Drain Stenciling: All inlets/catch basins would be stenciled with the words “No Dumping – Drains to Creek,” or equivalent message. Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal: Runoff from downspouts/roofs will be directed away from any storage areas. Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal: Outdoor work area is an enclosed space Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal: Trash storage areas will be covered Need for future indoor & structural pest control: Buildings would be designed to avoid openings that would encourage entry of pests. Landscape/outdoor pesticide use: Final landscape plans would accomplish all the following: Design landscaping to minimize irrigation and runoff, to promote surface infiltration where appropriate, and to minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to storm Source Control water pollution. Where landscaped areas can retain or detain storm water, specify plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions. Consider using pest-resistant plants, especially adjacent to hardscape. To ensure successful establishment, select plants appropriate to site soils, slopes, climate, sun, wind, rain, land use, air movement, ecological consistency, and plant interactions Vehicle and equipment cleaning: The CC&Rs would include restrictions on car washing at the site, as needed. The HOA would be responsible for enforcing this requirement. Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance: The CC&Rs would prohibit repair and maintenance activities in areas exposed to precipitation and storm flows. The HOA will be responsible for enforcing this requirement. Roofing, gutters and trim: The architectural design would avoid roofing, gutters, and trim made of copper or other unprotected metals that may leach into runoff. Plazas, sidewalks and parking lots: Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris from pressure washing would be collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning agent or degreaser would be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer and not discharged to a storm drain. Infiltration Vaults: The proposed project would include two infiltration vaults to treat water quality and for hydromodification purposes before conveying it to the storm drain system. Site will be graded for the pads and slope towards existing Buena Vista Creek. Drainage areas will be altered but peak flows resulting from the site will be reduced due to the infiltration vaults utilized for Treatment both flow control and peak flow purposes. Control Tree wells: Tree wells will be used on-site. Hydromodification control for the areas that do not drain to the on-site infiltration vaults has been achieved using Tree Wells sized to capture the first 1.5” of storm water runoff as advised by the county of San Diego Watershed Protection Program. Self-retaining areas designed to retain the first 1.5” of runoff has been determined to meet hydromodification requirements. Source: SWQMP, Hunsaker 2017
With implementation of the post-construction BMPs that would be required by the City’s BMP Design Manual (2016), and checked during the permitting and approval process of the proposed project, potential pollutants would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible. Development of the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-61 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist requirements, including but not limited to increasing pollutant discharges to receiving waters, and impacts would be less than significant. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016), groundwater was encountered in all of the exploratory borings and in a majority of the trenches located along the western portion of the property at depths ranging from five to 20 feet below ground surface. In addition, Buena Vista Creek flows along the western boundary of the site, and a portion of the creek would undergo enhancement work to expand the riparian corridor and creek capacity (see Proposed Project Description in Chapter 2 for more information) and would be modified as part of the proposed project.
The bottom of the proposed 2.35-acre detention basin would be excavated below the current groundwater table. According to the Geotech Report (Geocon, 2016) the portion of the slope that would be about three feet above the groundwater elevation in the vicinity of the detention basin would consist of properly compacted fill. Alluvium would be exposed at the lower portion of the slope, below the fill and at the bottom of the basin. Erosion control would be installed at the base of the slope to prevent piping of the existing materials into the basin and would consist of riprap rock overlying filter fabric that is strong enough to prevent puncture.
On-site water quality protection measures have been incorporated into the project as described in the previous discussion, above. Runoff would be treated prior to discharge into the adjacent creek. Tree wells would also be used on-site to allow capture and filter storm water flows, which would then be directed to the creek. While some of the storm water anticipated to be generated on-site may percolate into the groundwater beneath the site due to its shallowness in the project vicinity, significant impacts to groundwater resources are not anticipated with development of the project.
Vista Irrigation District, which would supply potable water to the proposed project, utilizes water supplies from the Warner Basin aquifer to supplement its local surface water supply, which is Lake Henshaw. Vista Irrigation District’s operational procedure is to use its surface water supply when available and conserve its groundwater for dry years when run-off is minimal and surface supplies are reduced. In dry years, groundwater is pumped from wells into Lake Henshaw and then utilized from the lake as needed. In wet years, surface water supply is used and groundwater pumping operations cease, which allows the basin to recharge. The groundwater basin acts as a water bank, allowing deposits in wet years and withdrawals in dry years (UWMP 2015).
It is estimated that the Warner Basin has approximately 150,000 acre-feet of usable water storage (UWMP 2015). The Vista Irrigation District has historically averaged approximately 7,728 acre-feet per year of groundwater usage and anticipates utilizing the same amount annually through 2040. Based on the 175 gallons per day per capita average identified in the 2015 UWMP, the proposed project would generate an increased demand for water of approximately 102,059 gallons of water per day, which equates to 114.32-acre feet per year. This is approximately one percent of the entire amount of groundwater used by the City annually; however, it is anticipated that only a portion of the water supply needed for the proposed project would come from groundwater supplies. As described previously, groundwater is only utilized in dry years and is recharged in wet years. Due to the limited increase in water demand that would be generated by the proposed project and the limited amount that would be obtained from the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-62 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist groundwater basin, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level, and impacts would be less than significant. c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. In addition to the 179 residential units, the proposed project includes development of a flood control detention basin, and enhancement of Buena Vista Creek to expand the riparian corridor and creek capacity. The enhancements to the creek would include widening and restoring the deeply incised Buena Vista Creek channel, the creation of an expanded riparian corridor, and a floodplain bench adjacent to the proposed residential development to be located in the upland areas. The widened creek corridor would provide increased flood flow capacity in the creek that would further reduce channel erosion. The enhancement work would also provide a more natural stream and riparian habitat, with a reduction in flows, erosion and sediment load downstream. Bridge construction and reconstruction, and work in the creek area would require permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The proposed detention basin would benefit land located downstream in the City’s downtown area, and is not required to develop the residential project.
Construction of the proposed project would require grading and excavation of soils, which would loosen sediment and could result in erosion or siltation. However, construction of the proposed project requires City approval of a grading and erosion control plan per the City’s Grading Ordinance (Development Code Chapter 17.56) and the State General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities (NPDES No. CAS000002), which requires preparation of a SWPPP by a Qualified SWPPP Developer. The grading and erosion control plan and SWPPP are required for plan check and approval by the Land Development Engineer, as well as the Planning Division, prior to provision of permits for the project, and would include construction BMPs to reduce erosion or siltation. Typical BMPs for erosion or siltation, include: use of silt fencing, fiber rolls, gravel bags, stabilized construction driveway, and stockpile management.
Under the proposed (post-development) condition, storm water runoff from the site would drain to five discharge points into the existing creek along the western edge of the property. A portion of runoff from an off-site tributary area to the east would be collected in concrete brow ditches that would be directed into a bypass storm drain system, and then routed to the creek independent of on-site runoff from developed areas. Another, smaller, portion would be routed into the 2.35- acre flood control detention basin. Also, runoff from a majority of the 7.98 acre area proposed for residential development would be collected within the private street inlets, and directed to one of two infiltration vaults that would provide water quality treatment prior to discharge into the creek. In addition to the infiltration vaults, the use of tree wells in landscaped areas is also designed to help reduce the velocity and amount of storm water runoff for hydromodification purposes.
Adherence to the existing requirements and implementation of the required BMPs per the permitting process would ensure that erosion and siltation associated with construction activities on or off-site would be minimized, resulting in impacts that would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-63 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the Floodplain Study (TRWE, 2016), the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) revising the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the project area identifies two flood zones in and adjacent to Buena Vista Creek. A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) designated as a Zone AE and a Zone X on the (FIRM) 06076C0778F, dated May 16, 2012. FEMA floodplain Zone AE and Zone X correspond to the 100-year and 500-year frequency storm events, respectively.
As described in the sections above, Buena Vista Creek flows along the western boundary of the project site. The enhancements to the creek would include widening and restoring the deeply incised Buena Vista Creek channel, the creation of an expanded riparian corridor, and a floodplain bench adjacent to the proposed residential development to be located in the upland areas. The widened creek corridor would provide increased flood flow capacity in the creek that would further reduce channel erosion. The enhancement work would also provide a more natural stream and riparian habitat, with a reduction in flows, erosion and sediment load downstream. Bridge construction and reconstruction, and work in the creek area would require permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The proposed detention basin would benefit land located downstream in the City’s downtown area, a portion of which is within a 100-year flood zone; however, the basin is not required to develop the residential project.
Hydraulic modeling for Buena Vista Creek was performed using HEC-RAS for both the existing and proposed conditions, to provide a comparison for the impacts anticipated with the project development. The modeling was done to confirm that no significant increases in velocity or water surface elevation would occur as a result of the proposed project. (Floodplain Study, TRWE, 2016). A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been processed through FEMA, to establish the basis for the FIRM change, and was issued on July 1, 2017. The FIRM map change will ultimately be accomplished through a LOMR, after the project is constructed and as-built drawings are available.
The proposed condition model is based on grading of a bench within portions of the creek, and incorporates the proposed grading for the project site along Buena Vista Creek including, street cross sections and ultimate pad elevations. Grading activities for the project would include elevating building pads above the 100-year base flow elevation. The project proposes to incorporate a trail along the creek to be above the 10-year flow elevation line. These proposed features will enhance the creek and increase conveyance capacity. An access crossing over a double box culvert linking Townsite Drive to the proposed development was included in the proposed conditions model.
Further, under the proposed (developed) condition, impervious surface coverage was estimated to increase to approximately 47 percent of the site. However, the City requires 100-year runoff from a project to be no greater than the existing (pre-development) condition, which was calculated at 42.0 cfs. In order to meet this requirement, the project includes installation of two infiltration vaults, which would meet both water quality treatment and hydromodification requirements, thereby reducing the 100-year runoff to 38.6 cfs. As a result, the hydrologic design of the proposed project basin would control the velocity and amount of runoff, ensuring that runoff does not exceed pre-development conditions (Hunsaker, 2017). Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, and impacts would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-64 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed above, the City requires the proposed (or post-development) condition 100-year runoff from the project be no greater than the existing (or pre-developed) condition 100-year runoff. As stated in the Hydro Report (Hunsaker, 2017), in order to meet this requirement, the project proposes to install infiltration vaults within the downstream end of the proposed storm drain system, which would meet both water quality treatment and hydromodification requirements. As a result, the hydrologic design of the proposed project basin would control the velocity and amount of runoff, ensuring that the runoff would be reduced to 38.6 cfs, which would not exceed pre-development conditions (Hunsaker, 2017). The infiltration vaults were sized using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Storm Water Management Model 5.1 (SWMM) to meet the current Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP) requirements from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB). Pretreatment for DMA-1 and 2 would be achieved through the use of GISB (grate inlet) filters installed in the private street inlets. In addition, hydromodification control for the areas that do not drain to the on-site infiltration vaults would be achieved using Tree Wells sized to capture the first 1.5-inch of storm water runoff, as advised by the County of San Diego Watershed Protection Program.
With implementation of the construction and post-construction BMPs that would be required by the City’s BMP Design Manual (2016), and checked during the permitting and approval process of the proposed project, potential pollutants would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible. Therefore, impacts related to the capacity of storm water drainage systems and generation of polluted runoff would be less than significant. f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Construction of the proposed project is not expected to pose any additional threats to water quality not already identified above. The project would be required to have an approved grading and erosion control plan (per Development Code Chapter 17.56) and approval of a SWPPP, which would include construction BMPs to minimize the potential for construction related sources of pollution, which would be implemented during construction to protect water quality. In addition, the proposed project would be required to implement post-construction source control BMPs to minimize the introduction of pollutants, and treatment control BMPs to treat runoff before it discharges off-site. With implementation of construction BMPs and post-construction treatment control BMPs, which that would be required by the City during the project permitting and approval process, potential pollutants would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and implementation of the proposed project would not substantially degrade water quality, and impacts would be less than significant. g & h LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the Floodplain Study (TRWE, 2016), the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) revising the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the project area identifies two flood zones in and adjacent to Buena Vista Creek. A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) designated as a Zone AE and a Zone X on the (FIRM) 06076C0778F, dated May 16, 2012. FEMA floodplain Zone AE and Zone X correspond to the 100-year and 500-year frequency storm events, respectively.
Hydraulic modeling for Buena Vista Creek was performed using HEC-RAS for both the existing and proposed conditions, to provide a comparison for the impacts anticipated with the project development. The modeling was done to confirm that no significant increases in velocity or water
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-65 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist surface elevation would occur as a result of the proposed project. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been processed through FEMA, to establish the basis for the FIRM change, and was issued on July 1, 2017. The FIRM map change will ultimately be accomplished through a LOMR, after the project is constructed and as built drawings are available.
The proposed condition model is based on grading of a bench within portions of the creek, and incorporates the proposed grading for the project site along Buena Vista Creek including, street cross sections and ultimate pad elevations. Grading activities for the project will include elevating building pads above the 100-year base flow elevation. The project proposes to incorporate a trail along the creek to be above the 10-year flow elevation line. These proposed features will enhance the creek and increase conveyance capacity. An access crossing over a double box culvert linking Townsite Drive to the proposed development was included in the proposed conditions model.
As noted above, the proposed project will modify the Buena Vista Creek channel and create a 2.35-acre detention basin. Both of these project elements will result in reduced downstream flooding potential, improved conveyance and will result in changes to the floodplain that must be formalized through FEMA FIRM map amendment process. The Floodplain Study (TRWS, 2016) prepared for the proposed project provides the basis for revised floodplain mapping.
Thus, the proposed project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on the FEMA FIRM or other flood hazard delineation map, and significant impacts would not occur.
In addition to the 179 residential units, the proposed project includes a flood control basin and Buena Vista Creek enhancements which include a trail along the creek, a new double box culvert access crossing at Townsite Drive, and widened natural riparian corridor through the project reach. Each of these components is intended to provide a more natural stream and riparian habitat, with a reduction in flows, erosion and sediment load downstream.
According to the Floodplain Study (TRWE, 2016), as proposed the project provides valuable enhancements for the City of Vista in continuing development of the public trail system. In addition, the development would not result in on-site adverse flooding conditions, as the 100-year floodplain would be contained within the proposed creek banks.
As described in the response above, due to the design of specific elements of the proposed project, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the placement of structures within a flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant. i. NO IMPACT. The project site is not located in an area that could be inundated by flooding as a result of failure of a levee or dam. As described above, the project includes creek enhancements that would improve conveyance and a 2.35-acre flood control detention basin that would reduce flooding risks downstream. In addition, the proposed residences would be constructed on building pads that are elevated above the 100-year base flow elevation. Therefore, the proposed residences would be located at an elevation that is not at risk of flooding from a 100-year storm event.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-66 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist j. NO IMPACT. The project site is not at risk for seiche or tsunami from area lakes or the Pacific Ocean. The closest body of water is Lake Calavera, which is downstream from the City and any seiche related to Lake Calavera would not impact the project site (City 2011). In addition, the City is approximately seven miles from the Pacific Ocean with on-site building pad elevations that would be approximately 360 feet AMSL. As a result, the project site is not at risk for tsunami inundation, and impacts would not occur.
In addition, the project site does not have the potential to produce mudflows due to the relatively flat and moderately sloped topography of the site and surrounding area. The City’s Development Code Section 16.48 requires that developments within or near slopes apply slope stabilization measures, which include (but are not limited to): hydroseeding and use of erosion control blankets, silt fencing, fiber rolls, and gravel bags. As a result, impacts related to mudflows would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-67 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant X. Land Use and Planning Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the Comprehensive Plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
DISCUSSION a. NO IMPACT. As shown in Figure 2 in Attachment A, the 13.42-acre previously developed and now vacant site of the proposed project is essentially an urban infill project that is surrounded by existing development on all sides, and is bounded by roadways on the west and north sides. There are commercial developments located across the street to the north, northwest, and west. Vista Magnet Middle School is located to the southwest, and single- and multi-family residences are located east and south of the site.
The applicant for the proposed project seeks approval of applications for a Tentative Subdivision Map, Condominium Housing Permit, and Site Development Plan for the development and construction of 179 residential units (and associated improvements), plus creek improvements and detention basin on the existing and vacant 13.42-acre project site. Given the surrounding land uses, the proposed residential project would be characterized as “infill” development. The project would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community since the subject property is near similar multi-family residential.
The site has a General Plan designation of Mixed Use, and is located within the Civic Center District of the DVSP (2015). The development of the 179 units would be guided by the DVSP (2015), which identifies the majority of the site as Mixed Use which allows for multi-family residential use up to 40 du/acre. The proposed residential density is 22.43 du/acre.
The DVSP (2015), which establishes land uses, residential density, development and design standards, and essential infrastructure facilities. In addition, as shown in Table LU-1, the proposed project would be consistent with many of the policies in the Land Use and Community Identity Element in the GP 2030 (2011), such as “ensure that multiple-family residential development is sited and designed to enhance the residential character of Vista... and minimizes impacts on adjacent residential development that is of a lower density” (Policy 2.1).
Development of the proposed improvements would not create any new land use barriers, preclude the development of surrounding parcels or otherwise divide or disrupt the physical arrangement of the surrounding community since the project is considered an urban infill development. Overall, the proposed project would result in a residential development that would be consistent with the established community. As a result, significant impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-68 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As described above, the proposed project is consistent with the existing Downtown Vista Specific Plan which allows the development of 179 residential units and associated infrastructure, site improvements and amenities, and landscaping on the site.
The City’s GP 2030 (2011) identifies the project area as within the Buena Vista Creek and Downtown Vista Opportunity Areas (OA-1 and OA-2, respectively). The project site is also located within a SANDAG Smart Growth Area.
As described in the Land Use and Community Identity Element (LUCI) of GP 2030, the vision for OA-1 is to connect parks, neighborhoods, and commercial areas through a system of trails and walkways that include enhancement of Buena Vista Creek. The Buena Vista Creek includes the creek channel and the adjacent natural tree canopy that lines the creek corridor throughout the city. It traverses numerous land use designations, SANDAG Smart Growth Areas, and other OAs. Although the headwaters of the creek originate in the hills east of the City, the focus of OA-1 is the portion extending from Brengle Terrace Park to the western City boundary. The creek currently flows through natural areas, underground pipes, box culverts, and human-made channels, but has been largely ignored in the development of fronting properties. Recent improvements to the creek corridor include a flood control detention basin adjacent to Brengle Terrace Park, Creekwalk Park in the Vista Village shopping center, and trails that have been developed between Wildwood Park and Brengle Terrace Park. As a waterway running through the heart of the City’s downtown area, it provides a valuable asset as well as ample opportunities for enhancement.
OA-1, in concert with improvements identified in the Circulation Element, provides an opportunity to develop an integrated system of trails and walking paths along the creek corridor that provide improved pedestrian access and take advantage of its natural setting. The creek corridor’s location relative to the downtown area also allows for new connections through OA-2 (Downtown Vista). Enhancement of the creek corridor in these areas includes the potential for removal or modification of concrete structures, bioengineering improvements, water quality and flood control projects, and environmental mitigation opportunities. Trail and access improvements, coupled with creek corridor enhancement projects, will capitalize on the natural beauty of the creek corridor and create a unique resource for adjacent neighborhoods and the larger community.
The proposed project is consistent with the OA-1 designation because it would provide public enhancements Buena Vista Creek Corridor that would complement the existing community uses connecting the public trail system to commercial retail, residential, parks and schools. In addition, the project location provides for both efficient local and regional travel, utilizing existing roadway infrastructure. Specific policies include:
• LUCI Policy OA-1.3: Modify the channelized portions of Buena Vista Creek to allow for pedestrian access, flood control, and environmental enhancements where feasible. Consider removal of channelized sections where feasible. • LUCI Policy OA-1.4: Orient new development or redevelopment projects toward the creek where feasible and address the creek as an integral part of development projects to capitalize on its resources.
The Downtown Vista OA (OA-2) is implemented by the DVSP (2015). The downtown is a key area upon which Vista will continue to focus its revitalization efforts. Fostering physical and social
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-69 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist connections, strengthening community identity, promoting sustainability, and implementing smart growth development concepts are all guiding principles of the DVSP (2015).
Downtown Vista also functions as the City’s key circulation connector, both within the City and to the region, through its proximity to SR-78 and the location of two North County Transit District (NCTD) SPRINTER stations within its border, and as the place where many of the City’s major roadways, existing and proposed trails and bikeways, and bus routes converge. This provides an enhanced opportunity to promote better coordination between land use and mobility alternatives.
O A-2 (shown on Figure LUCI-8) includes three SANDAG Smart Growth areas including a portion of the project site. These existing and proposed SANDAG designations, as well as Vista’s commitment to implement the principles of smart growth, makes the downtown a location of regional significance and positions it to pursue grants and other funds to support pedestrian- and transportation-related infrastructure improvements and planning activities that better coordinate transportation and planning in the San Diego region. Specific Policies include:
• LUCI Policy OA-2.1: Implement the Downtown Vista Specific Plan. • LUCI Policy OA-2.2: Protect and enhance the character of the historic Downtown core area by limiting building heights, requiring pedestrian-friendly design, and limiting surface parking requirements for new or expanded land uses.
The proposed project’s consistency with the GP 2030 (2011), Zoning Code, and other land use plans and policies is discussed below.
GENERAL PLAN Land Use and Community Identity Element (LUCI) The existing project site is currently designated primarily as Mixed Use (MU), with Open Space (OS) designated along Buena Vista Creek in the GP 2030 (2011). The MU designation permits densities between of up to 40.0 dwelling units per gross acre. The proposed project would provide 179 units on the 13.42-acre site, which would result in 22.43 units per acre and would not exceed the General Plan Land Use designation criteria.
As shown in Figure 2, the site is surrounded by existing development on all sides and is bounded by roadways on the west and north sides. There are commercial developments located nearby the site to the west, north and south. Single-family developments are located east of the site.
As designed, the proposed project would also be consistent with the following policies under the LUCI Element, as noted in Table LU-1, below.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-70 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE LU-1 CONSISTENCY WITH POLICIES IN THE LUCI ELEMENT OF THE GP 2030 Consistent LUCI Policies Project Description (Y/N)? Policy 1.1: Require the application of the City of As described in the Project Description and Vista Design Guidelines, including site design, shown in Figures 6a, and 7-10, the high quality architecture, lighting, and signage, when reviewing architecture, landscape architecture and Y and approving new development and signage meets or exceeds all design guidelines redevelopment. and standards. The proposed project has been designed to preserve cultural and natural resources present Policy 2.2: Provide flexibility in development on the site and will implement enhancements to standards to accommodate and enhance the public trail system in the City along Buena neighborhood variations within the City while Vista Creek. Building design and architectural Y ensuring that site and building design, elements are consistent with recently approved landscaping, and other amenities reflect projects. The project includes common open neighborhood characteristics. space throughout the site, and will restore the segment of the Buena Vista Creek that runs along the western portion of the site. The proposed multi‐family development will contribute to and will enhance the character of Vista. The project includes common open space Policy 2.5: Ensure that multiple‐family residential amenities totaling over 1.75 acres on-site, and development is sited and designed to enhance the will enhance the riparian corridor and residential character of Vista; includes amenities pedestrian linkages along Buena Vista Creek. such as open space, landscaping, and Y The proposed project includes trees, shrubs, architectural design that contributes to this vines and groundcover. Buildings will be set character; and minimizes impacts on adjacent back from East Vista Way to avoid visual residential development that is of a lower density. impacts, and single‐family residences to the east will still be able to enjoy existing views to the west and north. The subject site contains a slope on the east Policy 2.8: Consider adoption of a slope protection side which will be retained and preserved. ordinance as an amendment to the zoning Grading has been minimized to create a flat pad ordinance to better define grading standards for on the site while maintaining slopes and Y hillside development and ensure the protection of allowing for development of a 2.35-acre natural landforms in the review of new detention basin alongside the Buena Vista development. Creek. Policy 2.10: Discourage development on skyline ridges visible from scenic roadways and gateway The subject site is not defined as a skyline ridge. Y corridors. Skyline ridges are those which define the horizon. Proposed buildings are clustered towards the middle of the subject site to reduce visual Policy 3.1: Require all new development to be impacts from off-site. This clustering will also designed to minimize impacts on adjoining Y allow existing residents located to the east of residential neighborhoods. the project site to retain existing views to the west. Policy 3.2: Mitigate unacceptable levels of noise, The project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration odors, pollution, dust, light, and glare upon (MND) provides avoidance or mitigation Y residential areas and other sensitive receptors, measures to ensure that all impacts are such as schools and day care centers. reduced to less than significant levels. Policy 3.4: Require adequate off‐street parking for Each residential unit in the development will Y
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-71 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
Consistent LUCI Policies Project Description (Y/N)? all residential development. have at least one garage parking space. A total of 350 parking spaces have been provided on- site including 179 garage spaces, 144 open detached spaces, 3 accessible spaces and 24 open spaces adjacent to the vehicular bridge across Buena Vista Creek. The proposed parking meets the off‐street parking standards for multi‐ family dwelling units. The proposed project provides enhancements to the City’s public trail system along Buena Vista Policy 4.3: Ensure that new and redeveloped Creek thereby enhancing pedestrian projects are designed to improve pedestrian and connectivity north and south of the project site. Y transit connections, and connections to trail and From the public street, future residents and the bicycle networks. community will benefit from improved connections to pedestrian and bicycle networks. Policy 4.4: Encourage new and redeveloped projects to incorporate facilities that support Future residents will have access to bicycle Y bicycle use, such as bike racks, lockers, and/or storage in their private garages. showers, to the extent possible and appropriate. Policy 4.9: Ensure that new development complies with the California Green Building Standards Code (the CALGreen Code) to promote sustainable The project will comply with all applicable design and construction practices and positive building codes and standards in affect at the Y environmental impacts in planning and design, time of construction. energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, and material conservation and resource efficiency. The subject site is identified as a SANDAG Policy 6.1: Facilitate revitalization or Regional Smart Growth site given the existing redevelopment of underutilized commercial mix of single‐family, multi‐family, and mobile properties, districts, and corridors through home park residential development near Y promotion of compact and sustainable commercial centers. This underutilized land can development patterns that allow flexibility to meet support additional densities in this area, which local needs and respond to market demands. is in high demand in the City of Vista. The project site is located in two identified Opportunity Areas (OA‐1 and OA-2). The proposed project will comply with the policies for Opportunity Area by enhancing and improving pedestrian connections in the City along Buena Policy 6.3: Ensure implementation of focused Vista Creek, and will provide a direct connection revitalization and changes in areas known as to bus stops along East Vista Way and is within Y Opportunity Areas. walking distance to the City’s urban core. In addition, the main entry at Townsite Drive will be a signalized intersection which will provide safe pedestrians crossings to and from the project and adjacent commercial retail center uses along East Vista Way. Nearby residents have reported numerous Policy 6.4: Employ a proactive code compliance instances of criminal and drug activity on the effort to improve the appearance and safety of site. Development of the vacant property would Y non‐complying or neglected properties. deter this activity, making the neighborhood feel safer.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-72 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist
Consistent LUCI Policies Project Description (Y/N)? The proposed multi‐family project is sited in the urban core of the City within the Downtown Vista Policy 7.4: Promote Vista as a desirable place to Specific Plan area and near existing commercial do business by ensuring it has a positive image centers. Future residents are likely to support Y and identity, quality development, and attractive those businesses. In addition, the proposed streetscapes and gateways. project provides much needed workforce housing opportunities which are desired and in low supply. The subject site is a vacant, underutilized property not located in a Redevelopment area. Policy 8.2: Develop incentives to simulate Development of the proposed project would reinvestment in areas that are not within a deter criminal activities that have been reported Y Redevelopment area. on the site, and the addition of future residents would stimulate economic activity at nearby commercial centers. The scale and character of this type of project is Policy 9.1: Provide land use designations that consistent with existing land uses in the support semi‐rural, suburban, and urban housing Y surrounding areas, and is a housing type that is options. in demand in the City of Vista. The project will be conditioned to consult with Policy 11.2: Foster coordinated planning and California Native American tribes to ensure the cooperation with non‐governmental organizations, protection of cultural resources. Please refer to particularly those involved in resource protection, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Y in implementation of the City's land use planning specific mitigation measures. Elements of the policies. project will also require coordination and approvals from CDFW, USACE and FEMA. The subject site is identified as a SANDAG Policy 12.1: Work with SANDAG to achieve regional Regional Smart Growth site given the existing smart growth goals through implementation of the mix of single‐family, multi‐family, residential Regional Comprehensive Plan and Smart Growth development near commercial centers. Y Concept Map, as identified in the Opportunity SANDAG’s plan indicates that there is Areas and supporting goals and policies underutilized land in the area, while noting that throughout the General Plan. additional densities can be supported.
As shown in Table LU-1, above, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable goals and policies in the LUCI Element of the GP 2030 (2011). Therefore, no significant land use impacts would arise from development of the project.
Circulation Element As described in Table LU-2, the proposed project would be consistent with the following goals and policies of the City’s Circulation Element. Therefore, impacts related to consistency with Circulation Element would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-73 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE LU-2 CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES Consistent Circulation Element Goal/Policy Project Description (Y/N)? As described in Section XVI, Transportation/Traffic, and in the response below, the proposed project would result in CE Policy 1.2: Strive to maintain a vehicular Level of impacts to roadway locations that would lower Service (LOS) D or better throughout the City except the LOS. However, the traffic impact analysis for within areas designated for mixed-use Y indicates that no delay to existing intersection development, or areas designated to be more operating at LOS D or below would exceed 2.0 bicycle/pedestrian friendly. seconds therefore the project would not result in any significant traffic impacts and would maintain the City’s LOS standards. The proposed project would result in impacts to CE Policy 1.5: When a traffic analysis indicates that roadway locations that would lower the LOS. the LOS reaches “D” or below, the City will However, the traffic impact analysis indicates determine that improvements or operational that no delay to existing intersection operating changes are needed to maintain or improve the at LOS D or below would exceed 2.0 seconds LOS. Such improvements will either be the Y therefore the project would not result in any responsibility of the project applicant or the City will significant traffic impacts and would maintain identify potential funding and prioritization for the the City’s LOS standards. Therefore, the project necessary improvements through the CIP process. is consistent with this Circulation Element
policy. CE Policy 1.10: Require necessary conditions of approval on development projects to achieve LOS standards prescribed in this Element. Develop a No circulation related migration measures are checklist for development and redevelopment necessary and no significant impacts would Y project to ensure the inclusion of infrastructure that occur with project implementation. provides for safe travel for all users and enhances the project outcome and community impact.
CE Policy 1.11: Require all new development Mitigation Measure TT-1 as included in Section projects to participate in the City’s transportation XVI, Transportation/Traffic requires the project fee programs. These programs will be designed to to participate in the City’s transportation fee ensure that all new development projects fund their Y programs and fund needed improvements that fair share of the necessary long-term transportation would mitigate impacts generated from the improvements identified in this Element. proposed project.
The proposed project includes internal CE Goal 5 – Encourage alternative forms of walkways and bike racks. Additionally, the transportation to private automobiles that meet the project site would promote pedestrian needs of all City residents by providing improved Y connectivity within the urban core of the City by access to transit connections, to employment, and providing an important trail linkage along other activity centers. Buena Vista Creek. CE Policy 6.7: Require developers to provide facilities for pedestrian travel such as sidewalks, As described above, the proposed project design developments to provide pedestrian access includes walkways for pedestrian travel Y to the development via sidewalks, and avoid throughout the project site, and to areas that requiring that pedestrians use driveways to access are adjacent to the project site. development. Source: City of Vista General Plan, 2011
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-74 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Housing Element The 2013-2021 Housing Element of the General Plan includes a Housing Plan which outlines adopted goals and policies to achieve the City’s share of affordable housing goals, and its share of regional housing growth. The goals and policies that apply to the proposed project are as follows:
2. Housing Opportunities Goal 2.0 – Encourage adequate provision of a wide range of housing by location, type of unit, and price to meet the existing and future needs of Vista residents.
Policy 2.1: Seek to provide a variety of residential development opportunities to meet the City’s share of regional housing needs.
State law requires jurisdictions to provide for their fair share of regional housing needs through income categories to accommodate the forecasted growth in the number of households. The proposed project would provide new housing opportunities within the City, consistent with the General Plan land use designations, and in accordance with the above noted goal and policy of the Housing Element. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the Housing Element of the General Plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
Resource Conservation and Sustainability Element (RCS) The applicable goals and policies that apply to the proposed project are as follows:
RCS Policy 2.7: Through the 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.
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 9: Continue to provide parkland to effectively serve the recreational needs of the community.
RCS Policy 9.8: Encourage and where appropriate, require the inclusion of recreational facilities, permanently dedicated open space and/or trails within new residential subdivisions, and multi-family, commercial, and industrial developments, and within the Opportunity Areas identified in the Land Use and Community Identity Element.
RCS Goal 11: Continue to preserve and protect places, buildings, and objects that embody the City’s social, cultural, commercial, architectural, and agricultural history.
RCS Policy 11.3: Support preservation of historical resources, including providing for adaptive reuse and tax incentives, where appropriate.
RCS Goal 12: Acknowledge, preserve, and protect the City’s Native American heritage.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-75 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist 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 12.4: If significant Native American artifacts are discovered during pre- construction or construction phases of a discretionary project or during implementation of a grading permit, the first priority shall be: a) to avoid any further disturbance of those areas by re-designing the proposed development or project; and b) to have those areas placed into a protected open space via an open space easement of other protective measure. If avoidance is not feasible based on consultation with the Most Likely Descendant of the artifact, appropriate mitigation shall be required. Any discovered Native American artifacts shall be returned to their Most Likely Descendant and repatriated at the earliest opportunity.
RCS Policy 12.5: If Native American human remains and/or associated grave goods found during any activities identified in RCS Policy 12.4, the first priority shall be: a) to avoid any further disturbance of those areas in which remains have been found, and b) to have the remains and/or associated goods preserved in place via an open easement or similar protective land use measure. The second priority shall be that the Most Likely Descendant of the remains and/or goods, as determined by the NAHC, must also have the opportunity to recommend other culturally appropriate treatment.
The proposed project would be in compliance with the project relevant policies in the RCS Element (listed above). The GHG Emissions section of this document evaluates and discloses the contribution the proposed project could have on climate change (RCS Policy 2.7); the project proposes to use many drought-tolerant and native species in its landscaping plan and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques are incorporated into project design in accordance with current storm water regulations to manage storm water and urban runoff (RCS Policy 4.6). The project includes recreational amenities, open space for recreation and protected open space areas (RCS Goal 9 and Policy 9.8).
As described in Section V, Cultural Resources, the proposed project would preserve and protect historical resources (RCS Goals 11 and 12, and Policy 11.3). In addition, representatives of the San Luis Rey Band took part in on-site field surveys conducted as part of the preparation of the cultural resources report, and contributed to the procedures for protecting known and unknown significant archeological features (RCS Policy 12.3). Furthermore, the project would be implemented consistently with RCS Policies 12.4 and 12.5, which would protect unknown resources in the event of discovery during construction activities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the RCS Element of the City’s General Plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Preservation Plan The City is part of the North County MHCP, which is a comprehensive conservation planning process developed to identify and protect critical habitats for a wide range of plant and animal species within a 20,000-acre preserve system in North San Diego County. To implement the provisions of the MHCP within Vista, a Biological Preserve Overlay (BPO) has been created and identified as the City’s regional habitat preservation system in the GP 2030. The project site is not within or adjacent to any land that has a BPO designation. Therefore, the development of the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-76 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of the MHCP, and impacts related to the MHCP would not occur.
The proposed project includes enhancements to the Buena Vista Creek and the adjacent riparian corridor and would retain as many native trees along the creek as possible.
Other General Plan Elements The proposed project would be conditioned to comply with all applicable noise standards, would be adequately served by existing public services, and would require compliance with the City’s building, and fire codes and with the CBC. Consequently, no inconsistencies with the City’s Noise Element and Public Safety, Facilities, and Services Element are anticipated as a result of project development; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
ZONING CODE Consistency with Residential Zone Designation The site has an existing zoning designation of DVSP (2015), Civic Center District and would be consistent with the development standards contained in the plan.
Per Chapter 18.64 in the Vista Development Code, an assessment is required for determining project consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Code, development standards, design guidelines, etc. With approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map, Condominium Housing Permit, Site Development Plan, and compliance of the residential development standards and design guidelines discussed below, the proposed project would be consistent with the residential zoning, and impacts would be less than significant.
Compliance with Development Standards The proposed project would implement the development standards delineated in the DVSP (2015) for the project site in terms of height, bulk and density. The proposed project meets the City’s parking requirements by including 350 parking spaces. The landscaping of the proposed project would exceed the ten percent minimum by covering approximately 44 percent of the residential lot area, including the common recreation areas, landscaped area between and around buildings, and all walkway and parking area lighting would meet the outdoor lighting standards in Section 18.58.260 of the Development Code.
Trash and recycling enclosures would have solid walls, roofs and other elements that would meet the requirements in Section 18.58.590 of the Development Code; the project would meet the environmental performance standards of the General Plan for air quality and noise (see related sections in this document); and the distance between buildings would meet the Specific Plan minimums.
There is a City requirement for the provision of outdoor space of 100 sq. ft. per dwelling unit, which can be provided as common open space or private open space. The proposed project would meet this requirement by providing 1.75 acres of private and common open space including private open space provided by patios and balconies. In addition, the project would provide additional public enhancements along the Buena Vista Creek and a large 2.35-acre detention basin which would be enhanced with landscaping.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-77 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Overall, the proposed project would comply with the applicable development standards, and impacts would be less than significant. c. NO IMPACT. The applicant for the proposed project seeks approval of applications for a Tentative Subdivision Map, Condominium Housing Permit, and Site Development Plan for the development and construction of 179 residential units (and associated improvements) on the existing and vacant 13.42-acre project site. Land uses immediately surrounding the subject property, including their respective general plan land use and zoning designations, are included below in Table LU-2..
TABLE LU-2 SURROUNDING LAND USES Direction Land Use General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Commercial and office uses, Neighborhood Commercial (CN) C-1 (Commercial) North Buena Vista Creek and trail & Open Space (OS) & OS (Open Space) Mixed Use (MU), Civic Activity The historic Rancho Buena Vista (CA), High Density Residential Downtown Vista Specific Plan South Adobe, office and commercial (HD) & Medium Low Density (SP-DV) uses Residential (MLD) Existing single-family homes, Medium Low Density Residential Downtown Vista Specific Plan East multi-family homes and a (MLD) (SP-DV)& C-1 (Commercial) church. Wildwood Park, Fire Station No. Neighborhood Commercial (CN), 6, commercial and office uses Civic Activity (CA) and & Open Downtown Vista Specific Plan West along the East Vista Way Space (OS) & Parks and (SP-DV) corridor Recreation (PR) Source: City of Vista GIS 2017
Given the surrounding land uses, the proposed residential project would be characterized as an urban “infill” development. As indicated in Table LU-2, and discussed in the other land use and planning sections above, development of the proposed project would not be incompatible with the surrounding land uses, which includes a mixture of residential and commercial uses. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-78 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XI. Mineral Resources Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 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
Comprehensive Plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION a - b. NO IMPACT. The California Department of Conservation’s Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) does not identify the project site as an area with high potential for aggregate or mineral resources (DMG 1993). The City’s GP Update does not identify the project site as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource, and significant impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-79 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XII. Noise Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project result in: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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 public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project in the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The discussion below is based on the analysis contained within the Buena Vista Apartments Project, Noise Assessment Study prepared by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., March 2017 (Noise Study [Helix, 2017]) for the proposed project. The document is on file and available for review in the City’s Planning Division office.
DISCUSSION a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION. The proposed project is located in the city of Vista on a 13.42-acre site at the location of the former Sycamore Creek Mobile Home Park, within the DVSP (2015). The project proposes the construction of 14 three-story buildings for 179 multi-family residences, a fitness center, clubhouse, and pool area. According to the Noise Study (Helix, 2017), potentially significant noise impacts associated with the project from construction would primarily be from grading, hard rock handling, and general construction equipment noise impacts. Additional results of the analysis indicate that future vehicle noise from East Vista Way and Civic Center Drive would be the principal source of community noise that could affect the proposed project. Noise from the project’s heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) was also analyzed.
Noise sensitive receptors (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. The project site is located east of East Vista Way, between Vale Terrace Drive and Civic Center Drive. The closest sensitive receptors to the site consist of single- and multi-family residences to the east, a homeless shelter to the north, and a church southeast of the project site. The applicable City noise thresholds and standards, as well as the potential impacts, are discussed below.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-80 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist REGULATORY FRAMEWORK As discussed in the Noise Study (Helix, 2017), 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. For most acoustical studies, the monitoring interval is generally taken as one-hour, and is abbreviated Leq-h.
Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern 1 dBA changes in sound levels, when exposed to steady, single-frequency (“pure-tone”) signals in the mid-frequency (1,000 Hz–8,000 Hz) range. In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dBA are generally not perceptible. It is widely accepted, however, that people begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments. Further, a 5 dBA increase is generally perceived as a distinctly noticeable increase, and a 10 dBA increase is generally perceived as a doubling of loudness.
California Noise Control Act [California Health and Safety Code – Division 28] The California Noise Control Act is a section within the California Health and Safety Code that describes excessive noise as a serious hazard to the public health and welfare and that exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage. It also finds that there is a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in the urban, suburban, and rural areas. The California Noise Control Act declares that the State of California has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise. It is the policy of the State to provide an environment for all Californians free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.
California Noise Insulation Standards [California’s Title 24 Noise Standards. Cal. Adm. Code Title 24, Chap. 2-35] Interior noise levels are governed by the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Noise Insulation Standards, which the City has adopted in the Noise Element of the GP 2030 (2011). If noise sensitive structures (e.g., residential units) are proposed in an area where the exterior CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) exceeds 60 dBA, the project proponent must obtain an acoustical analysis showing that the proposed design would limit interior noise to less than 45 dBA CNEL.
City of Vista General Plan 2030 Update, Noise Element The Noise Element of the City’s General Plan includes a noise/land use compatibility matrix for assessing the suitability of different categories of planned land uses based on exterior noise level exposure (Table NE-3 from the City General Plan). For the project’s proposed residential land use (Medium Density Residential), the Noise Element specifies exterior noise levels up to 60 CNEL as normally acceptable and up to 70 CNEL is conditionally acceptable. Noise levels exceeding 70 CNEL are generally unacceptable for medium density residential uses.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-81 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist In addition, the City defines specific maximum noise levels that shall not be exceeded for both interior and exterior use areas. A proposed project shall not generate noise levels that exceed these standards. As stated in the Noise Element, the provisions of the State’s Noise Insulation Standards (California Administrative Code, Title 24) would be enforced to specify that the indoor noise levels shall not exceed 45 dB CNEL (or Ldn) due to the combined effect of all noise sources. The State requires implementation of this indoor standard when the outdoor noise levels exceed 60 dB CNEL (or Ldn). Title 24 requires that this standard be applied to all new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings, other than detached single-family dwellings. As a matter of policy, the City applies this standard to new single-family developments, mixed-use developments, and condominium conversions where appropriate. Table N-1 in Vista’s GP 2030 Interior and Exterior Noise Guidelines, below, provides limits for various types of land uses.
TABLE N-1 CITY OF VISTA GP 2030 INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR NOISE GUIDELINES Maximum Noise Level Land Use (LDN or CNEL, dBA) Interior1,2 Exterior Residential – Single Family, Multi-family, Duplex 45 653 Residential – Nursing Homes, Hospital 45 653 Private Offices, Church Sanctuaries, Libraries, Board Rooms, Conference 45 - Rooms, Theaters, Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Meeting Halls, etc. Schools 45 654 General Offices, Reception, Clerical, etc. 50 - Bank Lobby, Retail Store, Restaurant, Typing Pool, etc. 60 - Manufacturing, Kitchen, Warehousing, etc. 65 - Parks, Playgrounds, etc. - 654 Golf Courses, Outdoor Spectator Sports, Amusement Parks, etc. - 704 1 Noise standard with windows closed. Mechanical ventilation shall be provided per UBC requirements to provide a habitable environment. 2 Indoor environment excluding bathrooms, toilets, closets, and corridors. 3 Outdoor environment limited to rear yard of single-family homes, multi-family patios and balconies (with a depth of 6 feet or more) and common recreation areas. 4 Outdoor environment limited to playground areas, picnic areas, and other areas of frequent human use. Source: City of Vista General Plan Noise Element
City of Vista Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32, Noise Control) Sections 8.32.010 through 8.32.060 of the City of Vista Municipal Code pertain to City noise requirements and enforcement of violations. 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-2, Applicable Exterior Property Line Noise Limits, lists the applicable exterior property line noise limits. This table is specific to the City of Vista and replaces the table in Section 36.404 of the County noise ordinance. It is unlawful for any person to cause or allow the creation of any noise to the extent that the one-hour average sound level at any point on or beyond the boundaries of the property exceeds these limits.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-82 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE N-2 APPLICABLE EXTERIOR PROPERTY LINE NOISE LIMITS Applicable Limit One-hour Zone Time Average Sound Level (Decibels) A-1, E-1, O, OSR 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p. m. 50 R-1B, MHP 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a. m. 45 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 55 R-M 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 50 C-1, C-2, O-3, C-T, OP, M-U and 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 60 Downtown 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 Legend: A-1 = Agricultural; C-1 = Commercial; C-2 = Commercial; C-T = Commercial Transient; E-1 = Estate; I-P = Industrial; MHP = Mobile Home Park; M-U = Mixed Use; O = Open Space; O-3 = Office Park; OP = Office Professional; OSR = Open Space Residential; R-1B = Residence; R-M = Multi-Residential Source: City of Vista Municipal Code Section 8.32.40
The project site and vicinity is zoned for the DVSP (2015). Neighboring parcels are zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residential), C-A (Civic Activity) and C-1 (Commercial). The adopted County of San Diego Noise Ordinance also stipulates controlling construction noise. San Diego County Code Sections 36.408 and 36.409, Construction Equipment, state that, except for emergency work, it shall be unlawful for any person to operate or cause to be operated, construction equipment:
1. From 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 2. On Sunday or a holiday. For the purposes of this section, a holiday means January 1, the last Monday in May, July 4, the first Monday in September, December 25, and any day appointed by the President as a special national holiday or the Governor of the State as a special State holiday. A person may, however, operate construction equipment on a Sunday or holiday between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the person’s residence or for the purpose of construction of a residence for himself or herself, provided that the operation of construction equipment is not carried out for financial consideration or other consideration of any kind and does not violate the limits in Sections 36.409 and 36.410. 3. Except for emergency work, it shall be unlawful for any person to operate construction equipment or cause construction equipment to be operated, that exceeds an average sound level of 75 dBA for an 8-hour period, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise source is located or on any occupied property where the noise is being received.
Section 36.410 of the County’s ordinance also provides an additional limitation on construction equipment beyond Section 36.404 pertaining to impulsive noise. Except for emergency work or work on a public road project, no person shall produce or cause to be produced an impulsive noise that exceeds the maximum sound level shown in Table N-3 Maximum Sound Levels (Impulsive), when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise source is located or on any occupied property where the noise is received, for 25 percent of the minutes in the measurement period.
The minimum measurement period for any measurements is one hour. During the measurement period, a measurement must be conducted every minute from a fixed location on an occupied
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-83 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist property. The measurements must measure the maximum sound level during each minute of the measurement period. If the sound level caused by construction equipment or the producer of the impulsive noise exceeds the maximum sound level for any portion of any minute, it will be deemed that the maximum sound level was exceeded during that minute.
TABLE N-3 MAXIMUM SOUND LEVELS (IMPULSIVE)
Occupied Property Use Decibels (dBA) LMAX Residential, village zoning or civic use 82 Agricultural, commercial or industrial use 85
Source: County of San Diego Municipal Code Section 36.410
Excessive noise exposure is defined as noise levels that exceed the standards in the Vista General Plan for the associated land use.
NOISE MODELING SOFTWARE Modeling of the exterior noise environment for this report was accomplished using two computer noise models: Computer Aided Noise Abatement (CadnaA) version 2017 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. It allows for the input of project-related information, such as noise source data, barriers, structures, and topography to create a detailed CadnaA model, and uses the most up-to- date calculation standards to predict outdoor noise impacts.
CadnaA traffic noise prediction is based on the data and methodology used in the Traffic Noise Model (TNM). The TNM calculates the daytime average hourly LEQ from three-dimensional model inputs and traffic data (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2004). Computer Aided Design (CAD) plans provided by the project architect were inputted into the models. 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.
Project construction noise was analyzed using the Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM; USDOT 2008), which utilizes estimates of sound levels from standard construction equipment.
BASELINE NOISE LEVELS The existing noise environment is generally quiet due to its distance from nearby roadways. The site is subject to some background noise from nearby vehicular traffic on East Vista Way. Other noise sources include children playing at nearby Wildwood Park, and from visitors at the Rancho
Buena Vista Adobe gardens. The project is subject to some distant aircraft noise, though the site is not located near any active airports. The nearest airports are McClellan-Palomar Airport, located 5.5 miles to the south, and Oceanside Municipal Airport, located 6.5 miles to the west.
As discussed in the Noise Study (Helix, 2017), in order to identify the existing ambient noise at the project site, short-term noise measurements were taken at three locations. The first measurement
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-84 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist site was located on the east side of East Vista Way, between the roadway and 99 Cents Only Store parking lot. The second measurement site was located at a residential development east of and at a higher elevation than the project site. The third measurement site was located at the southern edge of the project site, near Wildwood Park and the Rancho Buena Vista Adobe. The measured noise levels and related environmental conditions are shown in Table N-4, below. Traffic volumes and counts for the timed measurement (and the one hour equivalent volume), are shown in Table N-5.
TABLE N-4 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS Measurement 1 Date: February 15, 2017 Conditions: Temperature: 71°F. Wind Speed: 5 mph. 48% humidity. Sunny. Time: 2:19 p.m. – 2:34 p.m. Location: Near 705 East Vista Way
Measured Noise Level: 71.9 dBA LEQ Notes: Dry conditions, asphalt roadway, four lanes.
Measurement 2 Date: February 15, 2017 Conditions: Temperature: 71°F. Wind Speed: 5 mph. 48% humidity. Sunny. Time: 2:52 p.m. – 3:02 p.m. Location: Near 658 Bel Air Drive West
Measured Noise Level: 54.1 dBA LEQ Notes: Distant traffic noise, birds in nearby bushes. Small car park nearby.
Measurement 3 Date: February 15, 2017 Conditions: Temperature: 70°F. Wind Speed: 3 mph. 48% humidity. Sunny. Time: 3:17 p.m. – 3:27 p.m. Location: Within project site, near Rancho Buena Vista Adobe
Measured Noise Level: 49.9 dBA LEQ Distant traffic noise, no children/field trips. Some noise from nearby park. Ambient Notes: nature sounds/bird sounds. Source: Helix, 2017
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-85 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE N-5 RECORDED TRAFFIC VOLUME AND VEHICLE MIX Roadway Traffic Autos MT1 HT2 15-minute Count 620 12 5 East Vista Way One-hour Equivalent 2,480 48 20 Percent 97% 2% 1% 1 Medium Trucks (double tires/two axles) 2 Heavy Trucks (three or more axles) Source: HELIX, 2017
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS Construction and Demolition Noise Construction of the project would involve demolition of existing pavement, grading, paving of the site, and erecting new buildings. The magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction 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. A homeless shelter is located north of the project. Residences and a church are located south and east of the project, with some properties on a hill above the site.
Construction noise impact analysis includes hard rock handling, which is typically significantly louder than other activities and has the greatest potential to create impacts to off-site sensitive receptors.
Grading and hard rock handling involves the ripping of materials, the drilling of non-rippable materials, and the breaking of oversize materials typically using a dozer, excavator, and breaker, with an off highway truck to haul the materials. Table N-6 lists the typical construction equipment that may be used in development of the project site and their estimated noise levels at 70 feet away.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-86 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE N-6 TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS Percent Operating Hourly Operating Unit LMAX at 70 feet dBA LEQ at 70 feet Time Time per Day Backhoe 40 4 74.6 67.7 Compactor 20 4 80.3 70.3 Compressor 40 4 74.7 67.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 40 4 75.9 68.9 Concrete Pump Truck 20 4 78.5 68.5 Dozer 40 4 78.7 71.8 Dump Truck 50 4 73.5 66.6 Drum Mixer 40 4 77.1 71.1 Excavator 40 4 77.8 70.8 Front End Loader 40 4 76.2 69.2 Generator 50 4 77.7 73.1 Mounted Impact Hammer 20 2 87.4 74.4 Paver 50 4 74.3 68.3 Roller 20 4 77.1 73.7 Scraper 40 4 80.7 67.1 Scraper/Dozer 40 4 80.7 73.7 Source: HELIX, 2017
Construction equipment would not all operate at the same time or location. Furthermore, construction equipment would not be in constant use during the 8-hour operating day. For modeling purposes, the construction equipment was assumed to operate at a conservative distance of 70 feet from the nearest residence.
Based on these assumptions and the equipment noise levels listed in Table N-6, the noise level for typically used loud construction equipment that could be used for eight hours of continuous construction, such as a scraper and dozer, at the nearest sensitive land use would be 77.2 dBA (Helix, 2017), which is higher than the City’s construction noise threshold of 75 Leq-8h (75 dBA averaged over 8 hours). However, this estimated construction noise would not exceed the peak noise threshold of 82 dBA at residential property lines. Construction noise modeling outputs are found in Appendix D in the Noise Study (Helix, 2017) on file with the City.
A hydraulically operated impact hammer attached to a tracked excavator is commonly called a breaker. These units are used in site preparation to reduce pavement and/or large granitic materials to a size where they can either be transported off site, buried on site for fill, or used as riprap or landscaping materials. Assuming use for approximately 2.25 hours during an 8-hour construction day, a breaker would generate a one-hour LEQ of 74.9 dBA at a distance of 70 feet. Impacts from a breaker used more than 2.25 hours per day at this distance would be potentially significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-87 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist In summary, construction noise generated from different pieces of construction equipment (noise from a combined scraper and dozer and from a breaker) would exceed the City’s construction noise threshold, and would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels. To reduce impacts on nearby residences from grading and pavement breaking related construction noise, construction noise reduction measures are required. Implementation of program-level and project-specific mitigation measures would ensure that the potential impact is reduced to a less than significant level.
The DVSP Update Program EIR (2009) included the following mitigation measure that applies to projects within the DVSP:
MITIGATION MEASURE N-1 Construction contractors for projects within the DVSP Area shall implement the following measures to minimize short-term noise levels caused by construction activities. Measures to reduce construction/demolition noise shall be included in contractor specifications and shall include, but not be limited to, the following: • Properly outfit and maintain construction equipment with manufacturer- recommended noise reduction devices to minimize construction-generated noise. • Operate all diesel equipment with closed engine doors and equip with factory recommended mufflers. • Use electrical power to operate air compressors and similar power tools. • Employ additional noise attenuation techniques as needed to reduce excessive noise levels so that construction noise would be in compliance with San Diego County Code Sections 36.408 and 36.409. Such techniques shall include, but not be limited to, the construction of temporary sound barriers or sound blankets between construction sites and nearby noise-sensitive receptors. • Notify adjacent noise-sensitive receptors in writing within two weeks of any construction activity such as jackhammering, concrete sawing, asphalt removal, pile driving, and large-scale grading operations that would occur within 100 feet of the property line of the nearest noise-sensitive receptor. The extent and duration of the construction activity will be included in the notification.
In addition to Mitigation Measure N-1, the following project-specific mitigation measure would further reduce noise from scrapers/dozers and breakers:
N-2 The Project Applicant shall employ the following construction noise attenuation measures in addition to those described in DVSP Noi-1 to be included on the construction plans that ensure compliance with the noise limit and submitted to the City of Vista Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of the grading permit. These measures include: • 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. • 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.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-88 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist • No project-related public address or music system shall be audible at any adjacent sensitive receptor. • The use of a dozer and scraper within 30 feet of the project’s southern, eastern, and northern boundary may be within 70 feet of a nearby residence. If this equipment is to be used within 70 feet of a nearby residence, operations shall be conducted in this area for no more than 3 hours of an 8-hour construction day. Operation of a scraper and dozer shall not be more than 40 percent of a given hour. • The use of a breaker within 30 feet of the project’s southern, eastern, and northern boundary may be within 70 feet of a nearby residence. If this equipment is to be used within 70 feet of a nearby residence, operations shall be conducted in this area for no more than 2.25 hours of an 8-hour construction day. Operation of a breaker shall not be more than 20 percent of a given hour. • 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.
Rock Crushing Rock crushing may be required for large material, such as pavement. If rock crushing is to be conducted on-site, machinery should be located at the furthest distance from surrounding residences. Rock crushing machinery may emit noise levels up to 95 dBA at 50 feet (Medlin & Associates 2014). Assuming a rock crusher is located at the furthest distance from nearby residences, approximately 450 feet from the nearest residences, and assuming a noise attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance, noise levels from the breaker would be 76 dBA. This would be above the limit in Threshold 2 of 75 dBA LEQ and 82 dBA LMAX. If on-site rock crushing is required, impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure N-3 would ensure that potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURE N-3 If on-site use of a rock crusher is required for existing pavement, it should be located at least 450 feet from nearby NSLUs at the western boundary, where it will have minimal impact on surrounding residences. A temporary sound barrier shall be placed around the rock crusher and should stand at least as tall as the highest part of the crusher, at a minimum of eight feet, as necessary to shield receivers to the west and south and meet threshold sound limits of 75 dBA LEQ and 82 dBA LMAX. .
Construction Groundborne Vibration Construction of the proposed project involves equipment that could result in groundborne vibration. This includes use of a breaker (described above) to break rock, and a vibratory roller (primarily used to achieve soil compaction as part of the foundation and paving construction). The vibratory roller would be used within 90 feet of the nearest residence. A vibratory roller creates approximately 0.210 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet, which would be below the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold for non-engineered buildings at 90 feet (construction vibration damage criteria from the City’s GP 2030 PEIR, 2011). Therefore, construction impacts associated with the vibratory roller (and other typical construction equipment) would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-89 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Vehicular Traffic Noise Traffic data for roadways in the project vicinity (East Vista Way and Civic Center Drive) are based on volumes from the project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), which determined that the project would generate 1,074 average daily trips (ADT). The Noise Study (Helix, 2017) estimated vehicular noise under the Cumulative Plus Project scenario. To identify the future on-site noise levels from traffic, Helix modeled 8 common use areas (such as the pool area and town square) and 8 locations that are planned for private exterior uses (such as private patios). Noise levels did not exceed 60 CNEL, and thus would not exceed the 65 CNEL maximum allowable exterior noise level that is acceptable for development of new residential uses. Thus, the proposed project would not expose future residents to noise levels in excess of standards, and impacts would be less than significant.
The noise generated from the 1,074 ADT would be considered significant if it results in a noise increase of 3 CNEL or more. Helix modeled the increase in traffic noise generated by the proposed project for roadway segments at Vista Village Drive, East Vista Way, Townsite Drive, Civic Center Drive, and North Santa Fe Avenue. The greatest increase would be 0.1 CNEL on East Vista Way between Civic Center Drive and Townsite Drive and on Townsite Drive between East Vista Way and North Santa Fe Avenue. This increase is less than the 3 CNEL threshold; therefore, noise impacts related to traffic generated from the proposed project would be less than significant.
HVAC The project includes the outdoor installation of HVAC condenser units that would be placed on each building’s rooftop. Typical HVAC units generate a noise level of 56 dBA at a distance of 7 feet. Based on the building’s rooftop plans, each residential unit would have a corresponding condenser unit on the rooftop. Seven nearby off-site residences were modeled, with the resulting highest noise level being 44.2 dBA. With the planned shielding, condensers would not generate noise levels above the City’s nighttime allowable hourly limit of 45 dBA for residential zones. Impacts related to HVAC equipment noise would be less than significant.
Noise from the Closing of Car Doors One potential source of operational noise from the parking lot includes the closing of car doors. Helix took measurements of noise from the closing of car doors and modeled that at 150 feet from nearby residences, one minute per hour of continuous door closures would create 28.7 dBA at the nearest property line. These noise levels are less than the 45 dBA limit. Impacts related to increases in ambient noise levels from project-related noise from car door closing in the parking lot would be less than significant.
Interior Noise Levels The Noise Study (Helix, 2017) estimated vehicular noise under the Cumulative Plus Project scenario to determine if any interior noise impacts would occur from implementation of the proposed residential uses. As described above, the City’s regulations require preparation of an acoustical analysis showing that the proposed project design would limit interior noise to less than 45 dBA CNEL in areas, such as the project area, where the exterior ambient noise exceeds 60 dBA. Thus, noise modeling was conducted at road-facing building façades at a height of 25-feet to determine whether interior noise levels would exceed City General Plan and Title 24 regulations.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-90 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist As explained above, building façade noise levels would not exceed 60 CNEL on any road-facing residential building. Conservatively assuming that standard architectural materials attenuate noise levels by 15 CNEL, interior noise levels would not exceed the DVSP (2015) (and Title 24) interior noise standard of 45 CNEL for multi-family residences (Helix, 2017). Impacts related to interior noise levels would be less than significant. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS As described above, due to the granite rock material on the project site some specialized equipment would be used to break up granite rock materials. This includes use of a breaker site for breaking rock and demolishing pavement, which would generate instantaneous groundborne vibration. The typical construction equipment used for project development would not generate substantial groundborne vibration. However, use of a breaker could result in noise and vibration impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Thus, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3 are provided, which would minimize potential noise and vibration effects to adjacent residences. With implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3, impacts related to short-term construction related groundborne vibration would be less than significant.
OPERATION IMPACTS Vehicle traffic over a maintained roadway is not generally considered a significant source of groundborne vibration. In addition, the project site is surrounded by residential, recreational and retail commercial land uses, which do not generate a substantial number of large haul truck trips that could create substantial groundborne vibration and affect the proposed residential uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration, and groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. As described above, operation of the proposed project would generate noise from vehicle trips to and from the proposed residences, HVAC systems, and parking lot noise.
Vehicular Traffic Noise The proposed project would generate 1,074 average daily vehicle trips. The increase in traffic noise from implementation of the project would be greatest on East Vista Way between Civic Center Drive and Townsite Drive and on Townsite Drive between East Vista Way and North Santa Fe Avenue, where ambient noise would be increased by 0.1 dB CNEL, which is far less than the 3 dB CNEL threshold. Therefore, traffic noise generated from implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels, and impacts would be less than significant.
HVAC As described above, the proposed residences would have HVAC units that would be located on each building’s rooftop, and are estimated to generate a noise level of 56 dBA at a distance of 7 feet. Seven nearby off-site residences were modeled, with the resulting highest noise level being 44.2 dBA. With the planned shielding, condensers would not generate noise levels above the City’s nighttime allowable hourly limit of 45 dBA for residential zones. Impacts related to HVAC equipment noise would be less than significant.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-91 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Noise from the Closing of Car Doors Also, as described above, the closing of car doors in the parking lot would result in noise levels of less than 45 dBA. Impacts related to increases in ambient noise levels from project-related noise from car door closing in the parking lot would be less than significant. d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION. As described above, the ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site is generally related to vehicular noise on roadways. Ambient noise measurements in the project vicinity identified that noise ranges from 49.9 dBA near the Rancho Buena Vista Adobe garden and 71.9 dBA along East Vista Way. Construction of the project would create an increase in noise on the now vacant project site. As described above, the noise level generated by construction at the nearest sensitive land use are anticipated to be up to 77.2 dBA (Helix, 2017). This includes rock crushing activities described above. The increase in construction noise over the existing ambient environment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. However, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3 have been included (as described and listed above), which would reduce temporary increases in noise on adjacent sensitive land uses to a less than significant level. e. NO IMPACT. The proposed project site is located approximately 6.5 miles north of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and 7 miles southeast of the Oceanside Municipal Airport, and is not located within the Airport Influence Area. The proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive airport related noise levels. Impacts would not occur. f. NO IMPACT. The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and the project would not expose people to excessive airstrip related noise levels. Impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-92 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XIII. Population and Housing Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through an extension of roads or other infra-structure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
DISCUSSION a - c. NO IMPACT. INDUCE SUBSTANTIAL POPULATION GROWTH The proposed project involves the construction and occupancy of 179 new residential units on a 13.42 acre site. Approval and development of this project is not expected to significantly increase population growth in the area because the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s GP 2030 (2011). The GP 2030 and associated PEIR anticipated 14,775 additional persons, and up to an additional 4,532 residential units (see Section X - Land Use and Planning in this document for more information). Furthermore, the project would be constructed on a site and within an urbanized area of the city that has existing infrastructure and public services. As a result, development of the project would not result in potentially growth-inducing effects by extending utilities into an undeveloped area.
DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL EXISTING NUMBERS OF HOUSING OR PEOPLE The project site does not currently contain any existing housing; therefore, development of the project would not displace any people or necessitate the construction of replacement housing. Consequently, substantial direct or indirect population growth, or the displacement of people or housing would not occur with project development; as a result, significant impacts would not occur.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-93 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant Significant Significant No Impact XIV. Public Services with Impact Impact Mitigation a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: 1. Fire protection?
2. Police protection?
3. Schools?
4. Maintenance of public facilities including roads?
5. Other public facilities?
DISCUSSION a1 - 5. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to fire protective services, police services, schools, roads and other public facilities. The proposed project involves the construction and occupancy of 179 residential units within 14 buildings on a previously developed and now vacant 13.42-acre site in the northern urbanized core of the city. Potential impacts on each public service is discussed below.
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES The proposed project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable fire codes set forth by the State Fire Marshall, the VFD, and the City’s building code. Development of the proposed project may result in an incremental 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 area. Fire protection services would be available from the Fire Station No. 6, which is located adjacent to the site at 651 East Vista Way, and Fire Station No. 3 located at 1070 Old Taylor Street, 1.1 miles to the north.
In addition, VFD has reviewed the site and architectural plans, and identified recommendations to reduce potential impacts to fire protective services. Some of these recommendations are also included in the Conditions of Project Approval for the project. Further, prior to final project approval, the City’s Fire Marshall would verify that the project has been designed to conform to code, including the emergency access gate from Alta Vista Drive (off Civic Center Drive). Also, development impact fees would help to ensure funding continues to be provided to the VFD. Therefore, development of the proposed facility would not exceed the capacity of the VFD to serve the site or other areas with existing fire protection services and resources, and would result in less than significant impacts.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-94 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist POLICE PROTECTIVE SERVICES The San Diego County Sheriff’s Department is contracted by the City to provide law enforcement to the city and the surrounding unincorporated areas. The Sheriff’s Station (or the Vista Patrol Station) is located at 325 South Melrose Drive, Suite 210. There are also two neighborhood offices, one at 340 Townsite Drive and the other at 1477 Moon Road; one storefront office is located at 30 Main Street in Vista Village, which is located approximately 1.3 miles to the southwest of the project site. The Department’s services include general patrol, traffic enforcement, criminal investigation, juvenile services, communications and dispatch, and various management support services. Law enforcement services are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and include Community Service Officers, canine handlers, and narcotics and gang investigators.
The proposed project would result in additional on-site population that could create the need for police services. However, the development would occur within an area of existing residential uses that is regularly patrolled by the Sheriff’s Department. In addition, the Sheriff’s Department has reviewed the site and architectural plan submittals and provided recommendations to the applicant to reduce potential security impacts. As a result, the site and building design of the project has incorporated appropriate security considerations including low-intensity security lighting for the purposes of wayfinding and safety and building structure security, and an electronically operated emergency access gate. These security considerations could help reduce the need for law enforcement services. Overall, it is anticipated that the proposed project would not result in the need for new or remodeled police facilities. Therefore, the project would not exceed the capacity of the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department to provide police protective services to the residents of the project, and impacts are expected to be less than significant.
SCHOOLS The Vista Unified School District (VUSD) provides school facilities and services to students within the project area and City of Vista. The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of 179 residential units. As described in the GP 2030 PEIR (2011), VUSD uses the student generation factors that are listed in Table PS-1. As shown below, it is anticipated that approximately 80 total students would be generated from build out of the proposed project.
TABLE PS-1 STUDENTS GENERATED BY PROJECT Number of Students Type of School Grades Served Student Generation Rates1 Generated by Project
Elementary K-5 0.2354 43
Middle 6-8 0.0990 18
High School 9-12 0.1030 19
Total K-12 0.4374 80
1 Generation rates are per the total multi-family units of the project – 124 and are rounded up. Source: Vista General Plan 2030 Update PEIR, 2011
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-95 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist The area schools within the Vista Unified School District (VUSD) that would serve the project include Beaumont Elementary School, Rancho Minerva Middle School and Vista Magnet Middle School, and Rancho Buena Vista High School. Approval and development of this project is not expected to significantly increase population growth in the area. This is due in part to the proposed project’s compliance with the policies and goals of the Land Use and Community Identify Element and the Housing Element of the City’s GP 2030 (2011).
As stated in previous communications from VUSD on similar projects, the applicant of the proposed project would be subject to paying the District’s statutory fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 et seq. (currently $3.20 per sq. ft., for residential projects). According to Government Code Section 65996, the development fees are deemed to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation.” As of July 2016, the Vista Unified School District’s school fee is $3.20 per square foot of accessible space for residential projects. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 et seq. payment of these fees would offset any potentially significant impacts to school facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC FACILITIES The proposed project may result in an incremental increase in the use of libraries, senior centers, and other public facilities. However, with a projected total of approximately 584 people occupying the 179 residential units at full build out, project development is not expected to substantially increase the demand of these services such that construction of new or expanded facilities is required.10 Maintenance of public roads in the vicinity of the site (e.g., East Vista Way and Townsite Drive) is provided by the City. Due to the size and scope of the proposed project, and associated vehicular traffic and required street improvements, project development is not anticipated to increase roadway maintenance on local roads above normal levels. As a result, less than significant impacts on maintenance of public facilities would occur with project implementation.
10 Projected total occupancy is based on 3.26 persons per household (Vista GP 2030 Update, Chapter 7 – Growth Inducement, 2011).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-96 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XV. Recreation Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 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?
DISCUSSION a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. There are several existing City park facilities that are located within two miles of the project site, which include:
• Wildwood Park, located at 651 East Vista Way, and is adjacent to the project site • Civic Park, located at 200 Civic Center Drive, which is 0.3 miles from the project site • Raintree Park, located at 545 East Townsite Drive, which is 0.4 miles from the project site • Luz Duran Park, located at 340 East Townsite Drive, which is 0.6 miles from the project site • Brengle Terrace Park, located at 1200 Vale Terrace Drive, which is approximately 1.1 miles from the project site • Rotary Lane, located at the intersection of Palm and Vista Village Drives, which is 1.3 miles from the project site
In addition to the above listed park facilities, there are several other existing City recreation facilities located within two miles of the project site, which include:
• Rancho Buena Vista Adobe, located on Civic Center Drive, adjacent to the project site • Jim Porter Recreation Center, located at 1200 Vale Terrace Drive, which is 1.1 miles from the project site • Gloria McClellan Adult Activity and Resource Center, located at 1400 Vale Terrace Drive, which is 1.1 miles from the project site • Linda Rhoades Recreation Center, located at 600 N. Santa Fe Drive, which is one mile from the project site • Wave Water Park, located at 101 Wave Drive, which is 0.9 miles from the project site
The proposed project involves the construction and occupancy of 179 residential units on a vacant 13.42-acre site. When fully occupied, these units are anticipated to house approximately 584 residents. The proposed project design includes on-site recreational amenities for the residents, which includes 1.75 acres of open space (consisting of common (1.50 acres) and private (0.25 acre) as well as public recreational components.
The project includes approximately 65,540 SF of common usable open space (equal to approximately 366 SF/unit), which exceeds the required outdoor space of 26,850 SF (150
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-97 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist SF/unit) per the DVSP (2015). The central recreation complex includes community use buildings with a clubhouse to provide space for the management offices, lounge, game room, internet café, and community kitchen and dining area. The nearby exercise building will be a state-of-the-art facility with a wide range of equipment, classes and training opportunities. The clubhouse and recreation complex in this area were designed to be the center of community activities for this development, incorporating community garden space, tot lot, and bocce ball court. Additional recreation amenities for residents are provided, including BBQ areas, a dog park, a community gathering node, natural style playground and pedestrian linkages throughout the property, and to the adjacent, planned creek trail.
The proposed project also includes restoration of the native riparian habitat and enhancement work to expand the Buena Vista Creek corridor and creek capacity. This restoration will be within the portion of the property being retained in public (city) ownership. The proposed project also includes the construction of a public walking trail along the creek from Townsite Drive to Wildwood Park. The proposed creek habitat restoration effort provides an expanded riparian buffer to the creek from the public trail and residential development. The proposed habitat restoration would result in a 50-foot average buffer from existing riparian habitat along the creek on-site with an allowance for the creek trail to be located within the outer portion of the buffer. Existing large, native trees include two coast live oaks, one black cottonwood and one western sycamore which would be retained.
Within the 1.50 acres of common open space, proposed outdoor recreation areas include a community pool and spa, fire pit, community barbeque areas, turf area, bocce ball, dog park, and plots for resident gardens. A fitness center and pool building (restrooms and pool equipment), along with a small maintenance building are also located in this community area, with smaller barbeque and play areas in other portions of the site. Walkways would provide pedestrian connections between the buildings and common outdoor recreation areas.
A slight increase in demand on the existing public recreational resources could occur from the additional residents that would be generated from the project. However, impacts from the proposed project are anticipated to be minimal due to the inclusion of the open space and recreational amenities in the proposed project, and due to the existing amount of park and recreation facilities that are in the vicinity of the project site. The slight increase in demand for public recreation facilities that could occur from the project residents would be spread amongst the existing facilities. Therefore, the project would not result in an 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, and impacts would be less than significant. b. NO IMPACT. As stated above, the proposed project design includes recreational amenities such as a community center, pool, garden, fire pit, tot lot, and other common open space areas. As previously identified, a demand on existing recreational resources may be anticipated with any residential development within the city. Although the number of residents housed by the project may result in an incremental increase on existing recreational resources within the city, the impact is anticipated to be insignificant given the availability of recreational amenities discussed above. Therefore, the expansion of existing recreational facilities or the construction of new recreational facilities is not anticipated, and significant impacts would not occur with project development.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-98 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XVI. Transportation/Traffic Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Conflict with adopted policies plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
The following discussion is based on the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by STC Traffic Inc. on August 30, 2017 (STC, 2017) prepared for the proposed project. The TIA report is on file and available for review with the City’s Planning Division.
DISCUSSION
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of a 179 residential units on a 13.42-acre site located off Townsite Drive and East Vista Way between Civic Center Drive and Vale Terrace Drive. A summary of the results of the TIA (STC, 2017) is discussed below.
The project will take primary access from a proposed driveway at the existing cul-de-sac of Townsite Drive. Secondary access will be provided on East Vista Way approximately 400 feet south of Townsite Drive. Signalized access for the project site will be provided at the existing intersection of East Vista Way / Townsite Drive. The secondary access driveway intersection at East Vista Way will be stop-sign controlled at the driveway approach of the intersection and restricted to right-turn in/right-turn out access only.
CITY OF VISTA THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE The City’s threshold of significance relies upon peak hour traffic operations at intersections rather than roadway segment analyses. Roadway segment Level of Service (LOS) standards are generally
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-99 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist used as long-range planning guidelines to determine the functional classification of roadways and are not always accurate indicators of roadway performance. Typically, the performance and LOS of a roadway segment is heavily influenced by the ability of intersections to accommodate peak hour volumes. Therefore, peak hour intersections within the study area are the focus of the project traffic analysis summarized in this document, since intersections control the movement of vehicles along road segments. Further information on the roadway segment analysis is found in the TIS (STC, 2017).
LOS is the term used to denote the different operating conditions that occur under various traffic volume loads. LOS designations range from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst operating conditions. The City considers LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours to be the threshold of significance for intersection LOS. This is consistent with the approach of other jurisdictions within San Diego County and past studies conducted within the city.
A project is considered to have a significant impact on the operation of an intersection when one of the following occurs: • The addition of project traffic results in a LOS dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. • If an intersection is operating at LOS E or F under the no-project scenario and the project adds more than an additional two seconds of average vehicle delay. • In the longer-range cumulative condition, if the addition of project traffic results in a LOS dropping from LOS D or better to LOS E or F, or if an intersection is predicted to operate at LOS E or F without the project and the project would contribute to the average vehicle delay (regardless of time), the project is determined to have a cumulatively significant impact.
Any impacts that are considered significant or cumulatively considerable require mitigation in order to reduce those impacts to less than significant levels.
PROJECT STUDY AREA AND EXISTING CONDITIONS The project study area is generally determined by the limits or extent of where 50 peak hour project trips would travel to or from the site based on Congestion Management Program (CMP) guidelines, or it can be determined by City staff. According to the TIA (STC, 2017), the study area for the analysis was determined by City staff, and the following nine key intersections were ·analyzed:
• East Vista Way / Bobier Drive-Foothill Drive • East Vista Way / Oak Drive • East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive-Anza Drive • East Vista Way / Townsite Drive • East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive • Civic Center Drive / Eucalyptus Avenue • Vista Village Drive / N. Santa Fe Avenue • N. Santa Fe Avenue / Townsite Drive-Los Angeles Drive • East Vista Way / Secondary Project Access
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-100 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Existing Levels of Service Table TT-1 summarizes the existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour LOS of the key intersections based on the existing peak hour intersection volumes and existing intersection geometry.
TABLE TT-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS - KEY INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LOS Existing (Base) Conditions
Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Avg. Delay Avg. Delay LOS2 LOS2 (sec.)1 (sec.)1 East Vista Way / Bobier Drive‐Foothill Drive 49.7 D 52.4 D East Vista Way / Oak Drive 9.1 A 17.7 B East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive‐Anza Drive 42.9 D 58.9 E East Vista Way / Townsite Drive 23.6 C 15.9 B East Vista Way‐Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive 24.7 C 26.4 C Civic Center Drive / Eucalyptus Avenue 37.3 D 30.4 C Vista Village Drive / N. Santa Fe Avenue 36.6 D 35.9 D N. Santa Fe Avenue / Townsite Drive‐Los Angeles Drive 26.5 C 28.3 C East Vista Way / Secondary Project Access Does Not Exist Notes: All intersections are signal controlled. Deficient intersection delay and LOS indicated in bold. MSSC: Minor-Street Stop Control 1 Delays are reported as the average control delay for the entire intersection at signalized intersections and the worst movement at unsignalized intersections. 2 LOS calculations are performed using Synchro 9 and are based on the methodology outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) where applicable. Synchro 9 based on the 2010 HCM does not accept the existing lane configuration for the intersection of East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive; therefore, the 2000 HCM was used to evaluate LOS at this intersection. Source: STC, 2017
As shown in the table above, the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better) during both the AM and PM peak hours, except for the intersection of East Vista Way and Vale Terrace Drive/Anza Drive, which currently operates at an LOS E in the PM peak hour.
Existing Transit Service North County Transit District’s (NCTD) BREEZE Bus Line operates service Routes # 306 and # 318 along East Vista Way, which connects to and from the Vista Transit Center and the SPRINTER line for regional transit.
The project site is within walking distance of four transit bus stops along East Vista Way (two in each direction of travel) that serve North County Transit District (NCTD) Routes 306 and 318.
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Sidewalks currently exist on both sides of East Vista Way and the north side of Foothill Drive. In addition, crosswalks currently exist at the East Vista Way and Civic Center Drive intersection, which is adjacent to and just southwest of the project site.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-101 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Class II bicycle lanes currently exist on East Vista Way along the project frontage. Bicycle access to the site will be provided via Townsite Drive and the secondary driveway located approximately 400 feet south of Townsite Drive.
These existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities provide safe non-vehicular access and circulation to the retail commercial uses that are located to the north, northwest, and southwest of the project site.
Proposed Project Trip Generation The trip generation data represents the amount of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. Based on the April 2002 SANDAG Trip Generation rates for multi-family residential units (with a density of > 20 units per acre), the project is estimated to generate a total of 1,074 trip- ends per typical weekday. Of these trips, 86 would be AM peak hour trips and 108 would be p.m. peak hour trips. Table TT-2 provides a summary of trips generated by the proposed project.
TABLE TT-2 PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Trip AM Peak PM Peak Land Use Units ADT Rate % Trips Split In Out % Trips Split In Out Multi - Family Residential 179 6/DU 1,074 8 86 (2:8) 17 69 9 97 (7:3) 68 29 >20 DU/acre Note: DU = Dwelling Unit. Source: STC 2017, SANDAG, Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates, April 2002.
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS Short-term construction traffic impacts are anticipated from vehicles hauling demolition material away from the project site, exporting soil from the site, delivering construction materials and supplies, and transporting construction personnel to and from the site. It is assumed that construction traffic would arrive at/depart from the project site via East Vista Way and Townsite Drive. During peak hauling periods associated with transporting demolition waste, exporting soil off-site, and bringing building materials to the site, there is the potential for significant impacts to roadway segments and intersections along the truck route from the project site if substantial truck trips occur during the AM and PM peak hours. However, as stated in Chapter 2, Project Description of this document, as part of the Conditions of Project Approval the Owner and/or Contractor would be required to prepare and implement a Construction Traffic Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer to avoid significant construction-related impacts to nearby streets and intersections, especially during peak hour times. Therefore, impacts to traffic during the construction period of the project would not be significant.
OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Existing Plus Project Conditions As shown in Table TT-3, the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better) during both the AM and PM peak hours, except for the intersection of East Vista Way and Vale Terrace Drive/Anza Drive, which operates at an LOS E in the PM peak hour.
As shown in Table TT-3, consistent with Existing conditions, the intersection of East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive would continue operating at LOS E during the PM peak hour based on the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-102 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist traffic volumes and current signal timing splits. Table TT-3 also shows that with the addition of project-related traffic to existing traffic volumes at East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive, the forecast increase in delay would not exceed the significance threshold of 2.0 seconds. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact at East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive and no mitigation measures are required under Existing Plus Project conditions.
TABLE TT-3 SUMMARY OF KEY INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LOS UNDER EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS Change AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Significant in Delay Intersection Impact? Avg. Delay 2 Avg. Delay 2 AM/PM 1 LOS 1 LOS AM/PM (sec) (sec) (sec) East Vista Way / Bobier Drive‐Foothill 49.7 D 52.4 D 0.0/0.0 No/No Drive East Vista Way / Oak Drive 9.1 A 17.1 B 0.0/0.0 No/No East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive‐ 43.2 D 59.1 E 0.3/0.2 No/No Anza Drive East Vista Way / Townsite Drive 28.8 C 19.4 B 5.2/3.5 No/No East Vista Way‐Vista Village Drive / 33.2 C 25.6 C 8.5/-0.83 No/No Civic Center Drive Civic Center Drive / Eucalyptus Avenue 37.5 D 30.7 C 0.2/0.3 No/No Vista Village Drive / N. Santa Fe 36.9 D 35.9 D 0.3/0.0 No/No Avenue N. Santa Fe Avenue / Townsite Drive‐ 26.6 C 28.5 C 0.1/0.2 No/No Los Angeles Drive East Vista Way / Secondary Project 11.1 B 15.9 C -- -- Access Notes: Deficient intersection delay and LOS indicated in bold. MSSC = Minor Street Stop Control Source: STC, 2017 1 Delays are reported as the average control delay for the entire intersection at signalized intersections and the worst movement at unsignalized intersections. 2 LOS calculations are performed using Synchro 9 and are based on the methodology outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) where applicable. Synchro 9 based on the 2010 HCM does not accept the existing lane configuration for the intersection of East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive; therefore, the 2000 HCM was used to evaluate LOS at this intersection. 3 The decrease in delay is a result of project-related traffic being added to movements where reserve capacity is available within the green times for these movements during the PM peak period cycle length. The additional traffic to these movements results in more vehicular throughput during the available green times and results in a lower average delay for these movements.
Opening Year Cumulative (2019) Conditions The evaluation of traffic conditions in the project’s opening year of 2019 includes existing traffic volumes, plus an ambient traffic growth factor of one percent per year from development projects that are pending and approved, but not yet constructed. The cumulative projects list that was used in this traffic impact analysis is provided on page 23 of the TIA (STC, 2017) on file with the City.
As shown on Table TT-4, the following intersections are forecast to operate at deficient levels of service (LOS E or F) during the peak hours without and with the proposed project:
• East Vista Way / Bobier Drive-Foothill Drive (AM: LOS E)
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-103 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist • East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive (AM: LOS E)
Table TT-4 shows that with the addition of project-related traffic to Near-Term conditions traffic volumes at the above-listed deficient intersections, the forecast increase in delay would not exceed the significance threshold of 2.0 seconds. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact at any of the study intersections and no mitigation measures are required under the cumulative Year 2019 With Project conditions.
TABLE TT-4 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2019) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay w/o Change LOS w/o Significant Project in Delay Intersection Project Impact? Avg. Delay 2 Avg. Delay 2 (sec) (sec) 1 LOS 1 LOS AM/PM AM/PM (sec) (sec) AM/PM AM/PM East Vista Way / Bobier 69.8 E 53.6 D 69.8/42.9 E/D 0.0/0.7 No/No Drive-Foothill Drive East Vista Way / Oak 9.3 A 19.9 B 9.3/19.8 A/B 0.1/0.5 No/No Drive East Vista Way / Vale 56.1 E 52.7 D 55.6/52.4 E/D 0.5/0.3 No/No Terrace Drive-Anza Drive East Vista Way / 35.2 D 31.6 C 27.5/27.1 C/C 7.7/4.5 No/No Townsite Drive East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / 36.0 D 30.6 C 35.8/29.8 D/C 0.2/0.8 No/No Civic Center Drive Civic Center Drive / 39.3 D 30.5 C 38.9/30.1 D/C 0.4/0.4 No/No Eucalyptus Avenue Vista Village Drive / N. 37.1 D 36.7 D 36.9/36.7 D/D 0.2/0.0 No/No Santa Fe Avenue N. Santa Fe Avenue / Townsite Drive- 27.9 C 29.5 C 27.7/29.2 C/C 0.2/0.3 No/No Los Angeles Drive East Vista Way / Secondary Project 11.1 B 15.6 C Does Not Exist Access (MSSC) Notes: Deficient intersection delay and LOS indicated in bold. MSCC – Minor Street Stop Control 1 Delays are reported as the average control delay for the entire intersection at signalized intersections and the worst movement at unsignalized intersections. 2 LOS calculations are performed using Synchro 9 and are based on the methodology outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) where applicable. Synchro 9 based on the 2010 HCM does not accept the existing lane configuration for the intersection of East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive; therefore, the 2000 HCM was used to evaluate LOS at this intersection. 3 The decrease in delay is a result of project-related traffic being added to movements where reserve capacity is available within the green times for these movements during the PM peak period cycle length. The additional traffic to these movements results in more vehicular throughput during the available green times and results in a lower average delay for these movements. Source: STC, 2017
Horizon Year 2035 Conditions The Year 2035 Cumulative traffic volumes were derived from the SANDAG Series 12 regional traffic model for the year 2035. The SANDAG Series 12 traffic model assumes the buildout of the City of Vista General Plan land uses and roadway network. The forecast model volumes in the
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-104 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist study area were reviewed and refined where appropriate to ensure consistent growth within the study area from existing to 2035 conditions.
Year 2035 Cumulative conditions assume the buildout of the City of Vista General Plan Circulation Element roadway network. Therefore, the following roadway improvements are assumed to be completed prior to the year 2035 within the project study area:
• East Vista Way from Bobier Drive to Civic Center Drive, Improved to a 6-lane Urban Major; and • Vista Village Drive from Civic Center Drive to SR-78, Improved to a 6-lane Urban Major.
The cycle lengths and splits for the intersection coordination plans were optimized based on the above listed roadway improvements and to accommodate the anticipated traffic growth through the study area by the year 2035.
As shown in Table TT-5, the following study intersections are forecast to operate at deficient levels of service (LOS E or F) under Year 2035 Cumulative conditions both without and with the project:
• East Vista Way / Bobier Drive-Foothill Drive (AM: LOS F; PM: LOS E) • Civic Center Drive / Eucalyptus Avenue (PM: LOS E)
As shown in Table TT-5, with the addition of project-related traffic to Year 2035 Cumulative conditions traffic volumes at the above-listed intersections, there is a forecasted increase in delay that would contribute to the average vehicle delay regardless of time. Therefore, the project would result in significant cumulative impacts at the above-listed deficient intersections. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure TT-1, cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.
MITIGATION MEASURE TT-1 The Applicant and/or Owner shall participate in the City’s Impact Fees for Arterials Streets and Traffic Signals program to pay its fair-share of the improvements needed to mitigate cumulative project impacts to the intersection of East Vista Way and Bobier Drive‐Foothill Drive, and to the intersection of Civic Center Drive and Eucalyptus Avenue.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-105 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist TABLE TT-5 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LOS UNDER HORIZON YEAR 2035 CONDITIONS Delay w/o Change Significa AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS w/o Project in Delay nt Intersection Project Avg. Delay Avg. Delay (sec) (sec) Impact? LOS2 LOS2 AM/PM (sec)1 (sec)1 AM/PM AM/PM AM/PM East Vista Way / Bobier Drive-Foothill 86.3 F 63.6 E 86.1/62.3 F/E 0.2/1.3 Yes/Yes Drive East Vista Way / Oak 10.6 B 20.5 C 10.6/20.4 B/C 0.0/0.1 No/No Drive East Vista Way / Vale Terrace Drive-Anza 44.7 D 32.7 C 44.5/32.4 D/C 0.2/0.3 No/No Drive East Vista Way / 13.3/ 43.8 D 20.9 C 30.5/36.5 C/D No/No Townsite Drive 7.5 East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / 20.9 C 24.5 C 20.1/23.7 C/C 0.8/0.8 No/No Civic Center Drive Civic Center Drive / 33.6 C 65.9 E 33.5/64.0 C/E 0.1/0.9 No/Yes Eucalyptus Avenue Vista Village Drive / N. 46.2 D 41.2 D 46.2/41.1 D/D 0.0/0.1 No/No Santa Fe Avenue N. Santa Fe Avenue / Townsite Drive- 29.6 C 32.7 C 29.4/32.5 C/C 0.2/0.2 No/No Los Angeles Drive East Vista Way / Secondary Project 9.6 A 9.3 A Does Not Exist Access (MSSC) Notes: Deficient intersection delay, LOS, and significant impact indicated in bold. MSCC – Minor Street Stop Control 1 Delays are reported as the average control delay for the entire intersection at signalized intersections and the worst movement at unsignalized intersections. 2 LOS calculations are performed using Synchro 9 and are based on the methodology outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) where applicable. Synchro 9 based on the 2010 HCM does not accept the existing lane configuration for the intersection of East Vista Way-Vista Village Drive / Civic Center Drive; therefore, the 2000 HCM was used to evaluate LOS at this intersection. 3 The decrease in delay is a result of project-related traffic being added to movements where reserve capacity is available within the green times for these movements during the PM peak period cycle length. The additional traffic to these movements results in more vehicular throughput during the available green times and results in a lower average delay for these movements. Source: STC, 2017 b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. A Congestion Management Program (CMP) is a state-mandated program enacted by the State Legislature with the passage of Proposition 111 in 1990, administered by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). The purpose of a CMP is to develop a coordinated approach to managing and decreasing traffic congestion by linking the various transportation, land use, and air quality planning programs throughout the County.
In 1991, San Diego County adopted the initial CMP statute, which includes a requirement to evaluate the transportation and traffic impacts of large projects on the regional transportation system. The criteria for which a project is subject to the regulations as set forth in the CMP are determined by the trip generation potential for the project. Currently, the threshold is 2,400
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-106 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist average daily trips (ADT) or 200 peak hour trips. The project is estimated to generate a total of 1,074 trip-ends per typical weekday. Of these trips, 86 would be AM peak hour trips and 108 would be p.m. peak hour trips. Therefore, the project trips would not exceed the threshold, and impacts would be less than significant. c. NO IMPACT. Development of the proposed project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, which would result in substantial safety risks. The project site is located approximately 6.5-miles northeast of the McClellan Palomar Airport. Project traffic would not cause an increase in air traffic levels, or create a physical impediment that would necessitate an alteration of flight patterns. Significant impacts would not occur with project development. d. NO IMPACT. The proposed project includes solely residential uses, and does not include any incompatible uses, such as farm equipment. The project would also not increase any hazards related to a design feature. The on-site circulation layout prepared for the project shows that the project design provides fire truck accessibility and turning ability throughout the secondary project access point off of Alta Vista Drive and Civic Center Drive. Therefore, impacts related to vehicular circulation design features would be less than significant. e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Vehicular access to the proposed project would be provided from Townsite Drive via East Vista Way. An emergency access to the proposed development would be provided at the southern end of the site from Alta Vista Drive and Civic Center Drive. The emergency access would only be used by fire and rescue vehicles should emergency access be necessary. In addition, the project design provides fire truck accessibility and turning ability throughout the project site. Furthermore, the project has been designed to incorporate all required Vista Fire Department standards to ensure that its implementation would not result in hazardous design features, or inadequate emergency access to the site or areas surrounding the site. Meeting these standards would be verified upon plan check, prior to receipt of building permits. Therefore, impacts related to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant. f. NO IMPACT. As described above, the North County Transit District’s (NCTD) BREEZE Bus Line operates service (Routes # 306 and 318) along East Vista Way and Foothill Drive, which connect to and from the Vista Transit Center and the SPRINTER line for regional transit. Bus stops for both lines are located across the street from the project site. Sidewalks currently exist on the west side of East Vista Way and the north side of Foothill Drive. In addition, crosswalks currently exist at the East Vista Way and East Bobier Drive/ Foothill Drive intersection, which is adjacent to the project site.
Class II bicycle lanes exist on East Vista Way along the project frontage, and on East Bobier Drive, which is across the street from the project site. These existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities provide safe non-vehicular access and circulation to the retail commercial uses that are located to the north, northwest, and southwest of the project site.
The proposed project would install on-site bicycle racks and ADA compliant stairs and walkways to provide a pedestrian connection between the project and Foothill Drive, which would provide a
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-107 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist safe path of travel for residents walking to the nearby commercial centers. The project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, such as bikeways or bus stations, as addressed in the Land Use and Planning Section of this document. As a result, the proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-108 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XVII. Utilities and Service Systems Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. 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? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
DISCUSSION a. NO IMPACT. The project’s private sewer lines would connect with existing City of Vista sewer mains located within East Vista Way. Wastewater is treated at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility, which is a conventional activated sludge wastewater treatment plant with a treatment capacity of 36 million gallons per day (mgd). The sanitation district and wastewater treatment facility operate in accordance with applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the project’s wastewater system has been designed to comply with these treatment requirements. Therefore, upon development, the proposed development would tie into existing wastewater/sewer lines and would adhere to all wastewater treatment requirements specified by the City and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board so that significant impacts would not occur. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Sewer lines exist in the roadways adjacent to the project site and extend on-site and were previously used by the former mobile home park that was operated on-site. A 15-inch sewer line is located within East Vista Way. The proposed project would install on-site wastewater sewer lines that would convey wastewater from the on-site uses. Sanitary sewer service will be provided via a connection to the existing system south on the adjacent Rancho Buena Vista Adobe property.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-109 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Based on the City’s Sewer Master Plan Update (January 2008), the proposed project would be expected to generate approximately 20,947.5 gallons per day (gpd) (7.98 acres x 2,625 gpd per acre) of wastewater. The project’s private sewer lines would connect with the City’s existing sewer mains within East Vista Way. The City’s system serves roughly 16,000 parcels and has an average flow of 5.57 mgd.11 As stated above, wastewater from the project would be treated by the 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 not require new water/wastewater facilities to be built or existing facilities to expand; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As described in the Hydrology and Water Quality section of this document, the proposed project would replace the remnant driveways and concrete pads at the site with pervious areas associated with the widened creek channel, trail, detention basin and site landscaping, and would include development of new impervious surfaces from building pads, driveways, roadways, parking, and other such project features, which would result approximately 41.3 percent of the site being impervious and 58.7 percent being pervious. Although a change in distribution between impervious and pervious surfaces would occur by implementation of the project, the post- construction drainage would mimic the existing drainage conditions and reduce peak stormwater flows (Hydro Study, Hunsaker, 2017). In addition, the proposed project would improve hydrologic conditions along the Buena Vista Creek through enhancements to conveyance and capacity.
The City requires 100-year runoff from a project to be no greater than the existing condition 100- year runoff. In order to meet this requirement, stormwater runoff from the site will be collected in curb inlets and distributed to underground storage facilities east of the creek. A pretreatment device is required to reduce the influent sediment load and avoid oversizing of underground infiltration storage facilities. These storage facilities will be constructed over existing soil which was tested and can provide infiltration for water quality, the preferred treatment in the current water quality permit. Storage will provide necessary contact area to achieve a drawdown of the required treatment volume within 36 hours, and include storage and flow control measures to meet hydromodification management requirements prior to discharge into the creek. Flood attenuation will be achieved in these storage facilities to avoid increasing peak runoff rates into the creek. Discharge points will be into energy dissipation structures incorporated into the design of the expanded creek area that would be excavated from the upland portion of the site.
As determined in the Hydro Study (Hunsaker, 2017), the storage volume was designed to control the velocity and amount of runoff to ensure that runoff does not exceed pre-development conditions. Because runoff would not exceed pre-development conditions, implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would not occur. d - f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Construction of the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to water supplies, wastewater capacity, and permitted landfill capacity. Potential impacts on each utility service are discussed below.
11 The combined average measured flow total (including 3.17 mgd from Buena Sanitation District) is 8.75 mgd (City’s Sewer Master Plan Update 2008).
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-110 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLY Development of the project site, which has been previously developed but is currently vacant, would increase the demand for potable water that is needed to serve the proposed 179 residential units. Water service for the project would be provided by the Vista Irrigation District (VID) from mains in East Vista Way and a private water supply loop will be developed on-site to serve the new uses. The VID is a member agency of the San Diego County Water Authority (SDWA). VID imports approximately 70 percent of its potable water supply from SDWA, who in turn buys it from 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. The average daily demand of potable water for the proposed project would be approximately 32,718 gpd (7.98 acres x 4,100 gpd per acre).12
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 Senate Bill 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 the 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 (VID’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 2015 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 24,147 Acre Feet in 2040. In the analysis of a single- dry year through 2040, VID’s 2015UWMP (June 2016) findings 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 2015 UWMP (June 2016) expects
12 Based on a worst-case unit demand factor for multi-family residential land use designation in VID’s Potable Water Master Plan, December 2000.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-111 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist 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 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 2015 UWMP (June 2016) identifies a diverse mix of water resources projected to be developed over the next 25 years to ensure long-term water supply reliability for the region. For example, existing and planned supplies from the Imperial Irrigation District transfer, canal lining projects are considered “verifiable” sources, and planned supplies from the seawater desalination project in Carlsbad (now in operation) would be considered a drought-resilient supply. 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 2015 UWMP (June 2016) section on water supply reliability, under a single dry-year assessment using a very conservative assumption regarding limited Metropolitan supplies during a single dry water year, and assuming SDCWA and member agency supplies are maintained and developed as planned, along with achievement of the additional conservation target, no shortages are anticipated within the Water Authority’s service area in a single dry year until 2035. These shortages would be eliminated should MWD supplies approach the supply levels projected in their 2015 UWMP Single Dry Year Supply Capability. 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. Therefore, it is anticipated that the SDCWA would be able to meet VID’s increased demands during a single-dry water year. For SDCWA’s UWMP (June 2016) multiple dry-year reliability analysis, the conservative planning assumption is that MWD will be allocating supplies to its member agencies. Because it is uncertain in the future how MWD will allocate supplies to its member agencies, the analysis in SDCWA’s 2015 UWMP (June 2016) assumes supplies are allocated based on preferential right to MWD supplies. If a shortage occurs, the SDCWA plans to utilize action measures in its Water Shortage and Drought Response Plan. These actions include
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-112 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist 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. Over the last five years the SDCWA has developed a carryover storage program to more effectively manage supplies. 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 would be achieved through compliance with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance in the City’s Development Code, Chapter 18.56. An Estimated Total Water Use Worksheet for the proposed project would be required to be submitted in the application for a Grading Permit, which would have to be under the Maximum Applied Water Allowance. Accordingly, staff review of the worksheet would require the proposed project to be in compliance with the Vista Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.
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 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 any 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, as discussed in the above analysis the development of the project would not require new or expanded water entitlements from VID, or require new water resources be found.
WASTEWATER CAPACITY As previously discussed above, the proposed project would be expected to generate approximately 20,947.5 gpd of wastewater. The City’s sewer system has an average sewage flow of 5.57 mgd, which is part of the total 36 mgd wastewater treated at the Encina Wastewater Authority’s facility. The City of Vista, through its Sewer Master Plan Update prepared in collaboration with the Buena Sanitation District, is restoring and upgrading the capacity and condition of the existing sanitary sewer conveyance system over a 20-year period. The additional wastewater contribution from the proposed project would be considered negligible in relation to the current or future treatment
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-113 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist capacities at the Encina Facility and the conveyance capacity of the City’s sewer system. Therefore, project-related impacts would be considered less than significant.
PERMITTED LANDFILL CAPACITY Development of the project would result in a slight increase in domestic municipal solid waste generation because of the proposed land use. The project would 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 tons per day. 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. g. NO IMPACT. The proposed project would 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.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-114 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Less than Potentially Less than Significant XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance Significant Significant No Impact with Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation a. Does the project have the potential to 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
plant or wildlife community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plant or wildlife 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 considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION. With implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, direct and indirect impacts to biological resources from project construction could result in potentially significant impacts. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BR-1 to BR-9, these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. According to the Cultural Report (Helix 2016), no direct significant impacts would occur with project implementation. However, given the potential for unknown subsurface cultural resources, avoidance and/or mitigation is required. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 to CR-6, potentially significant impacts to known and unknown cultural resources would be reduced to a less than significant level. The project site does not lie near any known cemeteries. However, it is possible that construction activities could unearth previously unknown vestiges, particularly given the cultural sensitivity of the area. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-7 would ensure that human remains were treated with dignity and as specified by law, which would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in individually limited, but cumulatively considerable significant impacts. All resource topics associated with the project have been analyzed in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and were found to pose no impacts, less-than-significant impacts, or less than significant impacts 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.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-115 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project proposes the construction and occupancy of 179 new residential units on a vacant 13.42-acre site. The project would not consist of any use or any activities that would negatively affect any persons in the vicinity. All resource topics associated with the proposed project have been analyzed in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and were found to pose no impacts, less-than-significant impacts, or less than significant impacts with mitigation. Consequently, the project would not result in any environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 3-116 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers
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, City Planner/Deputy Director, Community Development Dept., City of Vista
Greg Mayer, P.E., City Engineer, Engineering Department, City of Vista
Jason Christman, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer, Land Development Div., City of Vista
Sam Hasenin, P.E., T.E., Principal Engineer, Traffic Engineering Div., City of Vista
Joanne Dramko, AICP, Group Manager-Environmental Planning, Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. - City’s Noise consultant
Mary Robbins-Wade, Director of Cultural Resources, Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. - City’s Cultural Resources consultant
Dr. Valorie Thompson, Principal, Scientific Resources Associates - City’s Air Quality and GHG consultant
Ann Gunther, AICP, Vice President, The Lightfoot Planning Group 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 Initial Study where that information is relevant to the analysis of impacts of the proposed project. All referenced documents that are starred (*) are on file and available for review at the City of Vista Planning Division office located at 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1993. Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Western San Diego County Production- Consumption Region. Special Report 153. California Department of Conservation. 2004. San Diego County Important Farmland Map.
City of Vista. 2009. Downtown Vista Specific Plan Update, Program EIR.November.*
City of Vista. 2015. Downtown Vista Specific Plan. September. Available on-line, http://records.cityofvista.com/WebLink/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=1357569&cr=1
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 4-1 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers
City of Vista. 2013. Climate Action Plan. Available on-line, http://www.cityofvista.com/home/showdocument?id=84
City of Vista. 2016. City’s Interim Policy of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Significance Thresholds. April 6.*
City of Vista. 2016. GIS City-Wide Map - http://gis.cityofvista.com/vista. Accessed November.
City of Vista. 2011. City of Vista General Plan 2030 Update and Program EIR. December. Available on-line, http://www.cityofvista.com/services/city-departments/community- development/building-planning-permits-applications/vista-general-plan-2030
City of Vista. Revised 2011. Appendix G - Stormwater Standards Manual.
City of Vista. Various. Municipal and Development Code. Available on-line, http://www.cityofvista.com/WebLink8/login.aspx?dbid=0&dest=Browse%2Easpx%3Fstarti d%3D43617
County of San Diego. 2009. Municipal Code Section 36.410. San Diego County Code of Administrative Ordinances. Title 3, Division 6, Chapter 4. Noise Abatement and Control. January.
Geocon Inc. 2016. Update Geotechnical Report. September 12.*
Geocon Inc. 2017. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment. March 10.*
Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. 2016. Cultural Resources Survey. October 3.*
Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. 2017 (HELIX, 2017). Buena Vista Apartments Project. Noise Assessment Study. March 2017.*
Hunsaker & Associates. 2017. Stormwater Quality Management Plan. July.*
Hunsaker & Associates. 2017. Tentative Map Hydrology and Hydraulic Study. April.*
Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2016. Biological Impact Analysis Report. August 29.*
San Diego County Water Authority. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June.
Scientific Resources Associated. 2016. Air Quality Assessment. November 3.*
Scientific Resources Associated. 2017. Greenhouse Gas Analysis. January 19.*
STC Traffic Inc. 2017. Traffic Impact Analysis Report. August 30.*
Tory R. Walker Engineering. 2016. Floodplain Study for Monarch Buena Vista. August.*
Vista Irrigation District. 2000. Potable Water Master Plan. December.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 4-2 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study City of Vista Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers
Vista Irrigation District. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June 28. Preparers Leslea Meyerhoff, AICP, Principal, Summit Environmental Group, Inc.
John Hamilton, AICP, Environmental Planner, City of Vista
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 4-3 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
ATTACHMENT A Figures 1-11
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
ATTACHMENT B MMRP
CITY OF VISTA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PC16-0394
August 2017
Project Name: Monarch Buena Vista Project
Description: The proposed project includes a Site Development Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map and a Condominium Housing Permit for a 179-unit residential development located on 7.98 acres of a 13.42 acre site. The project also includes a 2.35-acre City- owned and operated flood control detention basin on a 5.44 acre parcel within the overall 13.42 acre site. Additional improvements include restoration and enhancement activities including a public trail along Buena Vista Creek; shared public parking lot improvements; and construction of an access road into the residential development from Townsite Drive, using a double culvert road crossing over Buena Vista Creek.
Location: The subject property (APN: 176-300-54 & 55) is located at 751‐753 East Vista Way, on the east side of the street, between Civic Center Drive to the south and Townsite Drive to the north, adjacent to Buena Vista Creek, in the city of Vista, California.
The following Mitigation Measures have been incorporated into the project design or are to be implemented before or during construction in accordance with the Conditions of Project Approval, thereby reducing all identified potential impacts to less than significant levels.
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE BR-1 To avoid potential significant impacts to Cooper’s hawk, vegetation clearing, grubbing, and/or grading within potential nesting habitat on-site (i.e., exotic riparian woodland, nonnative vegetation, southern willow scrub-mature trees only) for this species should be conducted outside the breeding season. If work is conducted during the breeding season, then a pre-construction survey for Cooper’s Director of Prior to issuance of hawk nests should be conducted to determine the exact location of a Cooper’s hawk nesting site. If a Community a Grading Permit Cooper’s hawk nesting site is identified within the study area, then an appropriate avoidance area (e.g., Development 300-foot radius buffer) from the Cooper’s hawk nest site should be established and monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure normal Cooper’s hawk nest chronology for the subject nest site throughout the project construction activity period. BR-2 To avoid potential significant impacts to Nuttall’s woodpecker, vegetation clearing, grubbing, and/or grading within potential nesting habitat on-site (i.e., exotic riparian woodland, non-native vegetation, southern willow scrub-mature trees only) for this species should be conducted outside the breeding season. If work is conducted during the breeding season, then a pre-construction survey for Director of Prior to issuance of nesting Nuttall’s woodpecker within a tree cavity should be conducted to determine the exact location of Community a Grading Permit a Nuttall’s woodpecker nesting site. If a Nuttall’s woodpecker nesting site is identified within the study Development area, then an appropriate avoidance area from the Nuttall’s woodpecker nest site should be established and monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure normal Nuttall’s woodpecker nest chronology for the subject nest site throughout the project construction activity period. BR-3 The proposed project mitigation for permanent direct impacts to 0.15 acre of exotic riparian woodland (i.e., ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFW regulated nonwetland waters/streambed) would consist of the preservation/conservation of 0.15-acre native riparian habitat (i.e., federal and state regulated non- Director of Prior to issuance of wetland resources) within the Guajome Creek Wetland Mitigation Site associated with the City of Vista’s Community a Grading Permit Storm Water Conveyance System Maintenance Program. The allocation of 0.15-acre for mitigation shall Development be documented by the HMP Administrator (the City of Vista Director of Planning and Engineering) in accordance with the HMP, prior to issuance of a grading permit. BR-4 To avoid any inadvertent impacts to sensitive biological and/or jurisdictional resources, construction employees shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the proposed footprint and designated staging areas and routes of travel. The construction area(s) Director of Ongoing during shall be the minimal area necessary to complete the project and shall be specified in the construction Community construction plans. Construction limits shall be fenced with orange snow screen. Exclusion fencing shall be maintained Development until the completion of all construction activities. All employees shall be instructed that their activities are restricted to the construction areas. BR-5 To avoid any inadvertent impacts to sensitive biological and/or jurisdictional resources, a qualified biologist shall monitor construction activities throughout the duration of the project vegetation Director of Ongoing during all clearing and brushing activities to ensure that all practicable measures are being employed to avoid Community vegetation clearing incidental disturbance of habitat and any target species of concern outside the project footprint. The Development activities project biologist shall be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to confer with staff from the City of Vista to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat protection measures.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE BR-6 Any habitat destroyed that is not in the identified project footprint shall be disclosed immediately Director of Ongoing during any to the City of Vista, applicable wetland regulatory agencies, and/or Wildlife Agencies. Community ground disturbing Development activities BR-7 The proposed native habitat restoration and enhancement planting installation effort identified along the eastern side of Buena Vista Creek shall be initiated within 60 days of construction and creek Shall be initiated widening/restoration grading along the creek, or just prior to the rainy season within the same calendar Director of within 60 days year of the impacts (in case the timing of the completion of project construction occurs within or near the Community following grading or summer months when planting should be not installed) to ensure that non-native invasive species do not Development construction along invade and/or expand on-site and/or in the project vicinity including downstream due to the proposed the Creek project activities. BR-8 Implementation of standard construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as straw wattles and silt fencing will be installed where applicable but in particular along the impact footprint Ongoing during any along the creek slope prior to construction. Similarly, these BMPs would be maintained or replaced during City Planner ground-disturbing construction as needed and post-construction in preparation of the habitat restoration effort within activities temporary impact areas to avoid inadvertent impacts (e.g., erosion, runoff, sedimentation) to adjacent sensitive habitats/resources. BR-9 If construction cannot avoid the avian and raptor breeding season (generally defined as February 1 through September 15), a pre-construction survey for active raptor and migratory bird nests protected under MBTA and/or CDFG Code should be conducted prior to the start of construction. The results of the Two weeks prior to survey should be submitted to the City of Vista in the form of a written report, and should include the City Planner the start of date(s) of the survey, the name(s) of the investigator(s), the total field time of the survey efforts, a constriction description of the survey area(s), and if any active nests were found. If an active bird nest were found, then all construction activities undertaken for the project shall comply with the regulatory requirements of the federal MTBA and CDFG Codes Sections 3503 and 3513. CUL-1 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 full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure (including bridge abutments, and the City’s Flood Control Detention Basin); grading or any other ground disturbing or Prior to issuance of City Planner altering activities, including the placement of any imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be a Grading Permit absent of any and all cultural resources); the riparian restoration/enhancement activities and trail construction along Buena Vista Creek; and related road improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of infrastructure, and the realignments and/or expansions to East Vista Way or the southern emergency access improvements as shown on Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, Attachment A, in this MND. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following: • The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc. • The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre- construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors to present the archaeological monitoring program. • The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. The Applicant, or Owner, and/or Grading Contractor shall notify the Director of Community Development, preferably through e-mail, of the start and end of all ground-disturbing activities. • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA 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 TCA Native American Monitor, in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA 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 San Luis Rey Band shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan. CUL-2 Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and subject to approval of terms by the City, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement with the San Luis Rey Band, a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) tribe. A copy of the agreement shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the San Luis Rey Band Prior to issuance of for the protection and treatment of, including but not limited to, Native American human remains, City Planner a Grading Permit funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through a monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, off-site infrastructure installation, grading, and all other ground disturbing activities. CUL-3 Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and in order for potentially significant unknown archaeological artifact deposits and/or cultural resources to be readily detected during mitigation Prior to release of monitoring, a written Controlled Grade Procedure shall be prepared by a Qualified Archaeologist, in City Planner Grading Bond consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, the San Luis Rey Band, and the Applicant or Owner, subject to the approval of City representatives. The Controlled Grade Procedure shall establish
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE requirements for any ground disturbing work (e.g., excavations, grading, etc.) within the northern portion of the project site that is designated as the Future Flood Control Basin (see Figure 4, Proposed Site Development Plan, in Attachment A). The Controlled Grade Procedure shall include, but not be limited to, appropriate operating pace, increments of removal, weight and other characteristics of the earth disturbing equipment. A copy of the procedures shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit. CUL-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 Prior to release of (such as, but not limited to, the Research Design and Data Recovery Program) shall be submitted by the City Planner Grading Bond Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American Monitor’s notes and comments, to the City’s Director of Community Development for review and approval. CUL-5 All cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to Ongoing during any the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission per California City Planner ground disturbing Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. activities CUL-6 Recovered cultural material of historic significance shall be curated with accompanying catalog, Ongoing during any photographs, and reports to a San Diego curation facility that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part City Planner ground disturbing 79. Recovered cultural material of tribal cultural significance shall be repatriated as stipulated in the pre- activities excavation agreement as described in CR-2. CR-7 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 TCA 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 Ongoing during any temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that City Planner ground disturbing the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native activities 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 make a determination 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 the TCA Native American Monitor. HM-1 A Phase II ESA shall be conducted prior to the initiation of grading on-site to determine if residual Prior to the pesticides are present in soil on the Site. The Phase II shall include soil sampling and analysis near the City Engineer initiation of grading former permanent structures to determine if deteriorated lead from paint sources potentially impacted onsite soil at the Site. All recommendations of the Phase II shall be implemented prior to the initiation of grading
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE activities on-site to the satisfaction of the City. HM-2 During grading operations, observations shall be made during any future ground disturbing activities for areas of possible contamination such as, but not limited to: the presence of underground Ongoing during City Engineer facilities, buried debris, waste drums or tanks, or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, grading operations disposal shall occur in accordance with City, County of San Diego, and State and federal regulations. N-1 Construction contractors for projects within the DVSP Area shall implement the following measures to minimize short-term noise levels caused by construction activities. Measures to reduce construction/demolition noise shall be included in contractor specifications and shall include, but not be limited to, the following: • Properly outfit and maintain construction equipment with manufacturer-recommended noise reduction devices to minimize construction-generated noise. • Operate all diesel equipment with closed engine doors and equip with factory recommended mufflers. Ongoing during all • Use electrical power to operate air compressors and similar power tools. City Engineer active construction • Employ additional noise attenuation techniques as needed to reduce excessive noise levels so that phases construction noise would be in compliance with San Diego County Code Sections 36.408 and 36.409. Such techniques shall include, but not be limited to, the construction of temporary sound barriers or sound blankets between construction sites and nearby noise-sensitive receptors. • Notify adjacent noise-sensitive receptors in writing within two weeks of any construction activity such as jackhammering, concrete sawing, asphalt removal, pile driving, and large-scale grading operations that would occur within 100 feet of the property line of the nearest noise-sensitive receptor. The extent and duration of the construction activity will be included in the notification. N-2 The Project Applicant shall employ the following construction noise attenuation measures in addition to those described in DVSP Noi-1 to be included on the construction plans that ensure compliance with the noise limit and submitted to the City of Vista Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of the grading permit. These measures include: • 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. • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (e.g., in excess of 5 minutes) to be prohibited. Ongoing during all • Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas to be located as City Engineer active construction far as practicable from noise sensitive receptors. phases • 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. • The use of a dozer and scraper within 30 feet of the project’s southern, eastern, and northern boundary may be within 70 feet of a nearby residence. If this equipment is to be used within 70 feet of a nearby residence, operations shall be conducted in this area for no more than 3 hours of an 8-
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
STAFF TIMING OF DATE OF MITIGATION MEASURES MONITOR COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE hour construction day. Operation of a scraper and dozer shall not be more than 40 percent of a given hour. • The use of a breaker within 30 feet of the project’s southern, eastern, and northern boundary may be within 70 feet of a nearby residence. If this equipment is to be used within 70 feet of a nearby residence, operations shall be conducted in this area for no more than 2.25 hours of an 8-hour construction day. Operation of a breaker shall not be more than 20 percent of a given hour. • 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. N-3 If on-site use of a rock crusher is required for existing pavement, it should be located at least 450 feet from nearby NSLUs at the western boundary, where it will have minimal impact on surrounding Prior to the start of residences. A temporary sound barrier shall be placed around the rock crusher and should stand at least City Engineer any rock crushing as tall as the highest part of the crusher, at a minimum of eight feet, as necessary to shield receivers to activities the west and south and meet threshold sound limits of 75 dBA LEQ and 82 dBA LMAX. TT-1 The Applicant and/or Owner shall participate in the City’s Impact Fees for Arterials Streets and Traffic Signals program to pay its fair-share of the improvements needed to mitigate cumulative project Prior to issuance of City Planner impacts to the intersection of East Vista Way and Bobier Drive‐Foothill Drive, and to the intersection of a Grading Permit Civic Center Drive and Eucalyptus Avenue.
Monarch Buena Vista – P16-0394 August 2017 Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study