ATTACHMENT 3 Environmental Review Documents for the Parks Master Plan The following are the environmental documents associated with the Parks Master Plan. The environmental documents include the Errata sheet, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. 1 Community Development Department Parks Master Plan Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Errata Sheet February 5, 2019 Introduction This errata sheet presents, in strike through and underline format, the revisions to the Parks Master Plan Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) text as a result of public and Planning Commission comments. The revisions to the IS/MND reflected in this errata sheet do not affect the adequacy of the environmental analysis contained in the Parks Master Plan IS/MND that was circulated for public review. Because the changes presented below would not result in any new significant impacts or increase in impact significance from what was identified in the IS/MND, recirculation of the Parks Master Plan IS/MND is not required. ERRATA TEXT CHANGES Mitigation Measure AEST-1 appearing in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration on page 2, in the Initial Study Checklist on page 39 and in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Mitigation Measure AEST-1 (All Existing and Planned Parks): To avoid light and glare impacts from park projects and to protect the coastside dark night skies valued by the Park Master Plan, the City shall prepare a lighting plan for each park project that contains a night lighting element to it. The lighting plan should provide design and illumination requirements of the project and address how the plan reduces any light and glare impacts and protects dark night skies, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The lighting plan shall specify how light will be shielded and contained within the park site to the greatest extent possible. Mitigation Measure BIO-7 appearing in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration on page 6, in the Initial Study Checklist on page 129 and in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Half Moon Bay Zoning Code 18.35.035 requires that a qualified biologist prepare a biological report prior to any project within 100 feet of any sensitive habitat area, riparian corridor, bluffs, sea cliffs, or wetlands. The biological report would include a map of sensitive natural communities and measures to protect sensitive natural communities. The project shall be designed to avoid sensitive vegetation communities (e.g., ESHAs). If, despite avoidance measures, the project construction inadvertently results in any loss of sensitive vegetation communities, compensatory mitigation shall be required at a 31:1 ratio, or greater as required by the regulatory agencies and at the discretion of the Community Development Director, by means of restoration (e.g., removing non-native plants and planting native vegetation) in similar habitat adjacent to the project (i.e., area of disturbance), but still within the Half Moon Bay City Hall 501 Main Street Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 (650) 726-8280 www.hmbcity.com Page 2 park boundary. The City shall prepare a Restoration and Monitoring Plan for any loss of sensitive vegetation communities. The monitoring plan shall be made available to the public for review for a period of at least 30 days prior to Restoration Plan implementation. The Plan shall describe the methods and practices to be employed, and include, at a minimum, the following: • A clear statement of the goals of the restoration for all habitat types; • Designation of a qualified biologist as the Restoration or Mitigation Manager responsible for all phases of the restoration; • Identification of the parties responsible for the Restoration Plan implementation; • A specific grading plan, if the topography must be altered; • A specific erosion control plan, if soil or other substrate will be disturbed during restoration; • A weed eradication plan designed to eradicate existing weeds and control future invasion by exotic species; • A planting plan based on the natural habitat type; • An irrigation plan that describes the method and timing of watering and ensures removal of watering infrastructure by the end of the monitoring period; and • A monitoring plan with performance goals/success criteria, assessment methods, and a schedule.; and • Feasible contingency measures if success criteria are not met within the established timeframe. Effectiveness: This measure would avoid significant impacts on sensitive vegetation communities. Implementation: A Restoration and Monitoring Plan shall be prepared for any sensitive vegetation community impacts. The Restoration and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and made available to the public for a period of 30 days prior to the Restoration Plan implementation. Timing: During and following construction. Monitoring: Any restoration and monitoring work shall be documented and submitted to the City. Monitoring shall be continued until the success criteria identified in the Restoration Plan are met. Project Description, page 33 2.9.1 SCOPE OF CEQA REVIEW The PMP is a long-range planning program that guides how existing parks should be improved and expanded. The PMP also directs the location and needs of future park developments and new recreation facilities to meet the goals of the community. It establishes a policy framework to govern decision-making Half Moon Bay City Hall 501 Main Street Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 (650) 726-8280 www.hmbcity.com Page 3 that concerns the physical development of City parks. While the PMP identifies specific types of park improvements contemplated it does not present project level design plans for any specific improvement or project. In the absence of project level information, this Initial Study identifies general areas of potential environmental impacts that could occur from the implementation of the PMP, and identifies how existing City policies, programs, and procedures, as well as regulatory standards and programmatic procedures, would reduce or avoid environmental impacts. The impact analysis presents general programmatic mitigation measures that would be applied to future projects to reduce or prevent environmental impacts. Adoption of the Master Plan would not authorize any specific development, or the construction of improvements contemplated in the PMP. Specific development or improvement projects recommended by the PMP would require further evaluation under CEQA once design and implementation information become available. However, certain types of improvements or modifications identified in the PMP are considered routine maintenance activities (e.g., placing trash receptacles, maintaining restrooms, painting infrastructure, maintaining landscaping) and typically are not considered to be projects under CEQA or are and are Categorically Exempt from CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15060 Preliminary Review) because they typically do not have the potential to cause significant impacts. In addition, certain types of improvements or modifications contemplated under the PMP could be implemented if they are found not to be a project under CEQA. If the City can document these improvements do not have potentially significant impacts, no additional CEQA review would be required. These types of projects/improvements may include, but are not limited to: • Addition of electric outlets in parks where electrical facilities currently exist; • Removal/replacement of existing picnic tables; • Construction of new restrooms or other small structures in parks; • Incorporation of sustainable practices in the maintenance and management of parks; • Improvement of landscaping with sustainable plantings; • Improvements that may assist the City in meeting or exceeding Americans with Disabilities Act requirements in parks; • Improvement of existing trail connections and access; • Development of adult fitness areas in parks; • Integration of nature into urban parks; • Enhancement of existing seating areas in parks; • Enhancement of existing sports fields; and • Creation of wayfinding signage of safe routes to parks. Once project-level information is developed for broader activities proposed pursuant to the guidelines and recommendations of the PMP, the City would review the project under CEQA and determine the appropriate level of environmental impact analysis. In the absence of even conceptual-level design and implementation information, this Initial Study cannot evaluate the potential environmental impacts of many of the activities contemplated in the PMP. Future review of these projects would focus on those site-specific and localized environmental issues that could not be examined in sufficient detail as part of this IS/MND. Half Moon Bay City Hall 501 Main Street Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 (650) 726-8280 www.hmbcity.com Page 4 However, for those projects included in the PMP all adopted mitigation measures would apply through the MMRP. Noise Impact Analysis, page 195, last bullet point City of Half Moon Bay General Plan • Exhibit 7 8 sets the maximum acceptable noise level for the land use category of playgrounds and neighborhood parks at 70 CNEL. Noise Impact Discussion beginning on page 194 3.12.1 Environmental Setting Noise may be defined as loud, unpleasant, or unwanted sound. The frequency (pitch), amplitude (intensity or loudness), and duration of noise all contribute to the effect on a listener, or receptor,