The URL can be used to link to this page

Res P-15-31RESOLUTION NO P -15 -31 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 15 -010 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 323 - 010 -15 WHEREAS, the City Council considered Minor Development Review Application (MDRA) 15 -010, a request to construct a 3,025- square -foot residence with a two -car- garage on a vacant, 1 2 -acre property located in the 13800 block of Belvedere Drive, within the Rural Residential C (RR -C) zone, and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2015, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting to receive testimony from the public, both for and against, relative to this matter NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows Section 1. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an Environmental Initial Study (EIS) and a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been prepared for MDRA 15 -010 The City Council has considered the EIS, MND and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program, and public comments received on the EIS and MND The subject EIS and MND documentation are fully incorporated herein by this reference The City Council finds, on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant impact on the environment, that the mitigation measures contained in the EIS included as Attachment 1 of the attached Exhibit A hereof will mitigate potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level, and that the MND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City The City Council hereby adopts the MND and the associated Mitigation Monitoring Program attached to this Resolution as Attachment 2 of Exhibit A. Section 2. A biological resources report, dated August 31, 2015, was prepared by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc on the property and for the proposal It was reported that the site contains 0 8 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS), with the remainder of the site consisting-of disturbed ruderal vegetation Implementation of the project will result in habitat impacts to approximately 0 18 acres of CSS The site is located outside of the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Mitigation Area Pursuant to the HCP, the project is required to mitigate impacts to CSS at a 2 1 ratio, for a total mitigation requirement of 0 36 -acres Mitigation can be met through off -site dedication of a Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over similar quality, unencumbered CSS habitat located within the Poway Mitigation Area and /or payment of a Habitat Mitigation In -Lieu Fee at the established rate at the time of payment. Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 2 The proposed project complies with the HCP and HCP Implementing Agreement. In accordance with the HCP, the required findings for approval of the proposed mitigation for the removal of CSS for the project are as follows A. While the project site is outside the Mitigation Area of the HCP, the mitigation is consistent with and furthers the implementing objectives of the HCP, since mitigation through off -site dedication of a BCE or payment of a Habitat Mitigation In -Lieu fee will be provided in compliance with the guidelines of the HCP The mitigation as outlined in Section 2 above is consistent with and furthers the implementing objectives of the HCP B The off -site habitat mitigation or payment of an In -Lieu Fee will enhance the long- term viability and function of the reserve system C The mitigation will be to the long -term benefit of the covered species and their habitats in that an off -site BCE within the Mitigation Area will be recorded or an In -Lieu Fee will be paid to go towards the purchase of land that will have undisturbed habitat on which a BCE will be recorded Said land will promote a meaningful addition to the assembly of a viable regional system of interconnected natural habitat resources, habitat linkages, buffers, and wildlife corridors D The mitigation will foster the incremental implementation of the HCP in an effective and efficient manner in that any off -site conservation area is required to be within an identified Mitigation Area within the City E The mitigation will not result in a negative fiscal impact with regard to the successful implementation of the HCP Section 3. Cultural survey reports dated July 2015 and September 2015 were prepared on the property by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc Significance testing was performed in the area of the proposed development. While cultural artifacts were recovered, the artifacts were determined not likely to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the area Site development can occur in the identified area of proposed development, provided a credentialed archeological monitor is present during grading excavation The remaining, undeveloped portion of the property will be preserved through the dedication of a cultural open space easement to protect potential significant cultural resources The City Council hereby adopts the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring Program included as Exhibit A. Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 3 PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway at a regular meeting this 15th day of December 2015 Steve Vaus, Mayor ATTEST Sheila R Cobian, CMC, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, Sheila R Cobian, CMC, City Clerk, of the City of Poway, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No P- 15 -31was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 15th day of December 2015, and that it was so adopted by the following vote AYES LEONARD, CUNNINGHAM, MULLIN, GROSCH, VAUS NOES NONE ABSENT NONE DISQUALIFIED NONE �,�LaLa�4 Sheila R Cobian, CMC, City Clerk City of Poway Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF POWAY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Name and Address of Applicant: Takeshi and Charlotte Hosokawa, 13601 Melissa Lane, Poway, CA 92064 2 Project Name and Brief Description of Project: Environmental Assessment and Minor Development Review Application 15 -010. A request to construct a 3,025- square -foot residence with a two -car garage on a vacant 1.2 -acre property located on the south side of the street in the 13800 block of Belvedere Drive, within the Rural Residential C zone. 3 In accordance with Resolution 83 -084 of the City of Poway, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Poway City Council has found that the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment and has approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration An Environmental Impact Report will not be required 4 This Mitigated Negative Declaration is comprised of this form along with the Environmental Initial Study that includes the Initial Study and Checklist and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program containing the mitigation measures approved for this project. 5 The decision of the City Council of the City of Poway is final Contact Person Carol Rosas, Associate Planner Phone (858) 668 -4659 Approved by Robert J Manis Director of Development Services Attachments 1 Environmental Initial Study 2 Mitigation Monitoring Program Date Attachment 1 CITY OF POWAY ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST A. INTRODUCTION Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 5 This Environmental Initial Study and Checklist, along with information contained in the public record, comprise the environmental documentation for the proposed project as described below pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Based upon the information contained herein and in the public record, the City of Poway has prepared a Negative Declaration for the proposed project. B PROJECT INFORMATION Project Title Environmental Assessment and Minor Development Review Application 15 -010 2 Lead Agency Name and Address City of Poway, Development Services 13325 Civic Center Drive, Poway, CA 92064 Contact Person and Phone Number- Carol Rosas, Associate Planner, (858) 668 -4659 4 Project Location. The 13800 block of Belvedere Drive, Assessor Parcel Number 323 - 010 -1500, Poway, CA 92064 5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address Takeshi and Charlotte Hosokawa, 13601 Melissa Lane, Poway, CA 92064 6 General Plan Designation Low Density Residential 7 Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation Attach additional sheets if necessary) The project involves the construction of a 3,025- square -foot single - family home with a two -car garage on a vacant 1.2 -acre property. The project also involves the construction of an access driveway and installation of a septic system to serve the residence. 8 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Surrounding development includes similar large lot, low density residential development to the east, west and north and moderate density single - family residential development to the south. 9 Other agencies whose approval is required (e g permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 6 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Public Services ❑ Population and Housing ® Biological Resource ❑ Utilities and Service ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Mineral Resources Systems ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Hazards /Hazardous Materials ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise ® Cultural Resources ❑ Agricultural /Forestry ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Recreation Resources ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment ❑ and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case as revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent and /or mitigation has been agreed to A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an I n ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed 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 Carol Rosas -City od Poway 2 November 5, 2015 Date Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 7 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 C EIS and Checklist LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on X a scenic vista? b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and X historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site X and its surroundings? d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely X affect day or nighttime views in the area? FORESTRY 11. AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project a Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide X Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 8 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED 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 X 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 X 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 X land? e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non- X agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? AIR QUALITY. - - available, e significance criteria established • applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing X 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 X standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Resolution No. P -15 -31 Page 9 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or X regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game 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, X 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.) X through direct removal, filing, 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 X 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 X policy or ordinance? f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 10 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation Ian? CULTURAL V. • Would the Project: a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical X resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature? d Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries? GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would -..- a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, Injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alqulst -Paolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on X other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b Result In substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X 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 X landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 11 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED d Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform X Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property? e Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal X systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VILGREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may X have a significant impact on the environment? b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose X of reducing the emissions of greenhouse ases? VIII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. . • the project a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the X routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and X 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 X 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 X result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Resolution No. P -15 -31 Page 12 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED 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 X airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within the project area f For a project in the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a X safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g Impair Implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? h Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death Involving wlldland fires, including X where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? HYDROLOGY QUALITY. • • the project: a Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? 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 lever (e g , the X 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 X 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, X Resolution No. P -15 -31 Page 13 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED 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 stormwater X drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollute runoff? f Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede X or redirect flood flows? i Exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding X as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a Physically divide an established community? X b Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, X or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X community conservation plan Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 14 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 10 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED RESOURCES. X1. MINERAL Would the project: a Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be X of future 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 X general plan, specific plan or other land use Ian? XII.NOISE. Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local X general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground X borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the X 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 X people residing or working In the project area to excessive noise levels? f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 10 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 15 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 11 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED XIII.POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and X businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction X of replacement housing elsewhere? XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services i Fire protection? X it Police protection? X in Schools? X iv. Parks? X v Other public facilities? X RECREATION. a Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities X 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 X which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 11 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 16 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 12 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC Would the project: 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 X 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 X 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 X that results in substantial safety risks? d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e g - sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or X incompatible uses (e g farm equipment)? e Result in Inadequate emergency access? X f Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or X otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE Would the project: a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control X Board? 12 Resolution No. P -15 -31 Page 17 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 13 LESS THAN ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED b Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, X or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the X 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 X needs? g Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to X solid waste? MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 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 a plant or animal X community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples or the mayor periods of California history or prehistory? 13 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 18 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT NO IMPACT b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a X 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 X either directly or indirectly? D DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please refer to the Environmental Initial Study Checklist Form above when reading the following evaluation AESTHETICS a Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant adverse impact on the aesthetics of the area While the 1 2 -acre hillside property is currently undeveloped and natural in appearance, development of the project site with a single - family residence and access driveway will be consistent with the existing residential development on the adjacent properties b No Impact. The project will not have significant impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway Therefore no impact would occur c No Impact. See I a above d Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes the development of a single - family home and access driveway in an area that is surrounded by existing residential development. The proposed development of the site could result in an incremental increase in ambient light levels resulting from the new single - family residence This impact however, would be minimal, and thus considered less than significant. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES a No Impact. According to the California Important Farmland Finders Map prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, the subject property is mapped as other land, and urban land and built up land, which is surrounded on all sides by urban development and not suitable for livestock and agricultural related use The site is not designated as prime, unique or farmland of statewide importance The project therefore will have no impact on the agricultural resources in the area 14 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 19 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 b No Impact. The zoning designation of the subject property is RR -C Both residential and horticultural uses are permitted within the RR -C zone In addition to the construction of a new residence, the property could also be used for horticultural purposes The project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impact would occur c No Impact. The project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production The zoning designation of the subject property is zoned RR -C Both residential and horticultural uses are permitted within this zone If approved, the project site could be developed with a residence, and conceivably could also be used for horticultural purposes No impact would occur d No Impact. The project would not result in the conversion of any forest land to non - forest use, so no impact would occur e No Impact. The project would not directly impact forest lands, nor introduce new elements into the landscape that would contribute to future conversion of agricultural use to non - agricultural use or forest land to non - forest use The subject property is undeveloped There is no evidence that the subject property has ever been used for agricultural purposes and presently no agricultural activity is occurring on the site The proposed project will result in the development of a single - family residence No impact would occur III AIR QUALITY a. No Impact. The City of Poway is part of the San Diego Air Basin and air quality in the area is administered by the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) An air quality management plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be taken by a City, County or region classified as a non - attainment area to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring the area into compliance with the requirements of federal and state air quality standards, and to coordinate regional and local governmental agencies to achieve air quality improvement goals A San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan — 1994 (jointly developed by the Air Pollution Control District and the San Diego Association of Governments - SANDAL) exists for the San Diego area and provides strategies for pollution control to improve air quality in the region Land use plans and build out projections of the General Plans of jurisdictions within the San Diego area were considered in establishing the strategies of the Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan The Poway General Plan includes strategies that are directed toward reducing air emissions through land use patterns, transportation planning, regional agency cooperation, energy conservation, and construction The project is consistent with the Poway General Plan strategies, in that this type of proposed residential development was envisioned on property designated for low- density residential development, like the site Therefore the project is also consistent with the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan The project will not have a significant adverse long -term impact on air quality in the area In the short term during construction, the project will implement dust control measures Therefore, the project would not violate any air quality standard 15 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 c d e No Impact. See III a above No Impact. See III a above No Impact. See III a above No Impact. See III a above Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 20 IV BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated The project involves the construction of a residence and an access driveway on a vacant residential lot. The property is surrounded by existing low and moderate density single - family homes The topography of the site consists of steep to moderate slopes which range in elevation from 630 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to 716 feet above MSL. The project is not located within the Mitigation Area, the Biological Core and Linkage Area (BCLA) or any Proposed Resource Protection Area (PRPA) of the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) The site is also not within the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey area A biological resources report, dated August 31, 2015, was prepared by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc on the project. It reported that the 1 2 acres site contains approximately 0 80 -acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) which is considered to be a sensitive habitat type The remainder of the site consists of disturbed ruderal vegetation No sensitive animal species were observed on the property during the biological site assessment. Only one sensitive, covered plant species was observed - 81 Coast barrel cactus plants Due to the location of the area of development, two of the Coast barrel cactus will be impacted by the project. Of the 0 80 acres of CSS on the property, the project will disturbed approximately 0 18 acres The impacted habitat will be mitigated at a 2 1 ratio, for a total of 0 36 acres Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc reported that implementation of the following project mitigation measures will address the identified potential significant impacts to biological resources to a level that would be less than significant. Mitigation A. Prior to issuance of a Grading or Administrative Clearing Permit or installation of the septic system impacts to 0 18 -acres of CSS and the two Coast barrel cactus shall be mitigated at a 2 1 ratio (0 36- acres) This requirement shall be met through off -site dedication of a Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over similar quality and type habitat. In lieu of the off -site dedication, the applicant may opt to pay the Habitat Mitigation In -Lieu Fee at the established rate at the time of payment. Presently the rate is $17,000 /acre Prior to issuance of a Grading or Administrative Clearing Permit or installation of the septic system for the project temporary fencing (bright orange plastic fencing, stakes, flags or markers) shall be installed along the limits of development to avoid impacts during grading and construction All temporary fencing shall be noted and delineated on the project grading plan and associated construction drawings The W. EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 21 applicant shall have said fencing inspected by the Engineering Inspector prior to any site disturbance A written certification from the engineer of work, or a licensed surveyor, shall be provided to the Engineering Inspector stating that all protected areas are fenced in accordance with the approved project plans B Permanent low profile fencing shall be installed to replace the temporary fencing to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services prior to occupancy approval C In accordance with Condition H of the Poway HCP Incidental Take Permit, a take of active California gnatcatcher nests, which includes harassment of the bird due to grading noise and vibrations from February 15 through July 1, is not permitted Therefore, grading and removal of habitat during this time frame will only be permitted subject to the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures, to the satisfaction of the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS,) are implemented There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume during nesting season Before issuance of a Clearing /Grading Permit, if grading or clearing is to occur between February 15 and July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for a CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey, and a report for the area to be cleared and /or graded and CSS habitat areas within 500 feet of such area The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate survey methodology The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or in CSS habitat within 500 feet of such area. To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery Permit from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed gnatcatcher nest monitoring activities during the clearing /grading operation Should the report show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded /cleared, or within CSS habitat located within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence clearing /grading within the gnatcatcher nesting season from February 15 through July 1 If gnatcatchers are nesting within the area to be graded /cleared, or within CSS habitat located within 500 feet of said area, no grading will be allowed during this time 17 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 22 The biologist must attend the City's pre- construction meeting for the project and must be present on -site during all clearing /grading activities to monitor that the clearing/ grading activities stay within the designated limits During this period, the biologist shall also monitor and survey the habitat, on a daily basis, within the area to be cleared /graded and any habitat within 500 feet of said area for any evidence that a gnatcatcher nest(s) exists or is being built. Weekly monitoring summaries shall be submitted to the Planning Division Should evidence of a gnatcatcher nest(s) be discovered, the grading operation shall cease in that area and be directed away from the gnatcatcher nest(s) to a location greater than 500 feet away from the nest(s) If grading is required to stop due to the presence of active nests, the applicant shall be required to provide erosion control, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer This paragraph must be included as a note on the cover sheet of the clearing /grading plan The biologist shall provide the City with written confirmation that the limits of clearing/ grading are in accordance with the project's Biological Resource Assessment. Upon completion of the clearing /grading activities, the applicant's biologist shall submit to the Director of Development Services a biological monitoring report summarizing the daily observations of the biologist, including whether any gnatcatchers or evidence of active gnatcatcher nests were present during clearing and grading activities within the area and any habitat within 500 feet of said area b Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. See IV a above c No Impact. The project site does not support any wetlands, nor would the project propose any activity that could result in substantially adverse effects on wetlands No impact would occur d No Impact. The project site is not located within any reported local or regional wildlife corridors Given the developed nature of the surrounding properties, the project site would not serve any meaningful wildlife corridor function, nor would it be likely to provide a native wildlife nursery site No impact would occur e No Impact. The project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation ordinance No trees will be impacted by the project, so no permits would be required from the City for the project. No impact would occur f No Impact. The Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan /Natural Community Conservation Plan (HCP /NCCP) serves as the planning document for the protection and management of biologically effective, interconnected open spaces in the City of Poway The Poway Subarea HCP /NCCP, which was adopted in April 1996, is consistent with the regional and sub - regional planning efforts within San Diego County pursuant to the State of California's NCCP act of 1991 The project is not located within the Poway Subarea HCP Mitigation Area No impact would occur ff.] Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 23 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 V CULTURAL RESOURCES a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated The subject property is mapped in the Poway General Plan as being in area where there is moderate potential for cultural resources to exist. The site was surveyed and a records search was completed by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc Cultural Resources Survey reports dated July 2015 and September 2015 were prepared for the project. The survey findings are on file in the office of the Poway Development Services, Planning Division It was reported that 24 archaeological sites had been recorded within one mile of the project site and a portion of site CA- SDI -15993 was recorded on the property immediately to the east of the subject site The survey of the subject site found that an extension of site CA- SDI -15993 exists within most of the subject property Significance testing was completed only within the area of direct project impacts to the CA- SDI -15993 site Testing included the collection of surface artifacts and excavation of eight shovel test pits Testing resulted in the recovery of 47 surface artifacts It was determined that the portion of the CA- SDI -15993 site within the proposed development impact area does not qualify as a site eligible for nomination to the California Register of Historical Places due to its limited information potential (not likely to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation) Therefore Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc did not classify the portion of site CA- SDI -15993 within the project impact area as significant under CEQA. In that no significance testing was completed on the portion of site CA -SDI- 15993 beyond the proposed limits of development the potential remains for a significant impact to the remaining untested portion of site CA- SDI -15993 Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc reported that the following project mitigation measures will address the identified potential significant impacts to cultural resources Mitigation A. The remaining untested portion of site CA- SDI -15993 within the subject property shall be preserved in a cultural open space easement. B Construction excavation monitoring is required by a properly credentialed archeological monitor to ensure that undiscovered features are not encountered during grading and that the proposed cultural open space easement area is not inadvertently impacted Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. See V a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated See V a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated See V a VI GEOLOGY AND SOILS a i No Impact. No known active faults traverse the project site Murphy Canyon Fault is the nearest main southern California fault, located approximately 13 miles southwest of the project site Three major fault systems within the project vicinity include the Elsinore, San Jacinto and Rose Canyon faults The active Elsinore fault trends northwest and is about 19 miles northeast of Poway The San Jacinto fault is also an active northwest- trending fault about 45 miles northeast of Poway The Rose Canyon fault is located about 16 to 20 miles west of Poway in the Pacific Ocean and is considered potentially active There 19 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 24 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 is potential for some local damage in the event of a major earthquake along one of these fault systems, which could result in significant impacts to project facilities While the potential for on -site rupture cannot be completely discounted (e g unmapped faults could conceivably underlie the site), the likelihood for such an occurrence is considered low due to the absence of known faulting within or adjacent to the site As a result, no impacts related to fault rupture will occur a ii No Impact. The project site is located in seismically active southern California and is likely to be subjected to moderate to strong seismic ground shaking Seismic shaking at the site could be generated by events on any number of known active and potentially active faults in the region, including several unnamed faults, larger faults such as Murphy Canyon Fault, and major fault systems such as Elsinore, San Jacinto and Rose Canyon An earthquake along any of these known active fault zones could result in severe ground shaking and consequently cause injury and /or property damage in the project vicinity The proposed residence will be required to be designed and constructed pursuant to existing guidelines such as the City of Poway's Grading Ordinance and Building Code) No impact would occur a iii No Impact. The project site is not located in an area that has potential for liquefaction Thus, no impacts from seismically related ground failure would occur a iv No Impact. There are no known landslides on the property Therefore no impacts should occur from landslides b Less Than Significant Impact. Grading activities will comply with City requirements, including implementation of standard erosion control measures, and will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil Impacts are less than significant. c No Impact. See VI a iv above d No Impact. See VI a iv above e Less Than Significant Impact. The new home will be serviced by a private septic system A conceptual septic system has been designed for the project and it is anticipated that the soil on the site is adequate for the system to function properly Therefore the project should have no septic system related impact to soil on the site VII GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS a Less Than Significant Impact. Greenhouse gases (GHGs), allow solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth's atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth's atmosphere GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities, and the accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the Earth's temperature Emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are thought to be responsible for the enhancement of the greenhouse effect and contributing to what is termed "global warming Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, states that climate change and global warming is generally the result of greenhouse gases caused by carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions CO2 emissions come primarily from the burning of fossil fuels (vehicle emissions) and energy consumption AB 32 mandates that California reduce its' annual greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 25 Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) aligns regional land use, transportation, housing, and greenhouse gas reduction planning efforts SB 375 requires Air Resources Boards to set regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles and light trucks for 2020 and 2035 (GC § 65080(b)(2)(A)) The targets are for the 18 Municipal Planning Organizations (MPOs) in California In response to, and in compliance with, the State measure the San Diego Association of Governments ( SANDAG), as San Diego's MPO, adopted emission reduction targets of 7 percent by 2020 and 13 percent by 2035 While SANDAG has published the proposed target levels, the standards for measuring the significance of a project's cumulative contribution to global climate change, nor a consistent method to achieve these reductions, have not been determined The state of California's Climate Change Scoping Plan aims to reduce state and local GHG emissions by primarily targeting the largest emitters of GHGs transportation, including emissions from vehicles, and energy sectors The project involves the construction of one residence Item XVI a below concludes that the project is not anticipated to result in substantial numbers of new vehicle trips on local roads Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Less Than Significant Impact. See VII a above VIII HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a No Impact. Pursuant to Government Code Section 659625 the subject property is not listed on the current listing of the Hazardous Materials Establishments and Sites as prepared by the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health The project is the construction of a single - family home and the use will not involve hazardous materials No transport, storage or use of hazardous materials beyond that which typically occurs with a single - family residential use will occur No impact would occur b No Impact. As the project does not propose the use of hazardous materials, it will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No impact would occur c No Impact. As the project does not propose the use of hazardous materials, it will not emit hazardous emissions or acutely hazardous materials into the environment. No impact would occur d No Impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962 5, as such would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. No impact would occur e No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. The closest airports to the project site are Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, located approximately 6 5 miles southwest of the project site and Gillespie Field, located approximately 10 miles southeast of the project site Thus the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area and no impact would occur No impact would occur 21 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 26 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 f No Impact. See Item VIII a above The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area and no impact would occur g No Impact. The project would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan The project would not interfere with people's ability to utilize roadways for evacuation purposes and, on a more local level, emergency vehicle lanes within the project parking lot would be kept free of vehicles and storage materials in compliance with City ordinances Accordingly, no impact would occur h No Impact. According to the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) map for Poway (CAL FIRE 2009), the project site is not located within a VHFHSZ. Therefore no impact would occur IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a Less Than Significant Impact. The project will comply with all storm water quality regulations, which will be ensured as part of future grading and building plan review The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts will be less than significant. b No Impact. The project does not propose any construction activities that would directly affect groundwater, contribute to the depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge No impact would occur c Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves the development of a new residence and access driveway Grading associated with the building pad and driveway will be required to comply with all storm water and water quality regulations While the project will result in alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site, it would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off- site A less than significant impact would occur d Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves the development of a new residence and access driveway Grading associated with the building pad and driveway will be required to comply with all storm water and water quality regulations While the project will result in alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site, it would not result in a substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff which would result in flooding on or off -site A less than significant impact would occur e Less Than Significant Impact. The project has been designed such that the amount of storm water runoff beyond which currently occurs will be negligible Runoff from the site will be treated to minimize pollutants in compliance with City standards Best management stormwater treatment site design features will be implemented with the project and runoff treatment will occur on site Therefore Impacts will be less than significant. f Less Than Significant Impact. The project has been designed to comply with all storm water and water quality regulations, and contains permeable areas for surface water percolation Therefore, the project will not otherwise substantially degrade water quality A less than significant impact would occur g No Impact. The project site is not located 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 area Based on the fact that the project site is not located within a mapped inundation area the project would not place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area No impact would occur 22 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 27 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 h No Impact. See response IX.g The project will not place structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area which would impede or redirect flood flows No impact would occur i No impact. The project is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area or near any bodies of water Therefore the project will not 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 No impact would occur j No Impact. The project site is not near any water body No impact would occur X LAND USE AND PLANNING a No Impact. The project has been designed to conform to the General Plan, to be in character with development in the area and comply with applicable City development requirements The project does not have the potential to physically divide an established community No impact would occur b No Impact. The project site is zoned and designated by the City of Poway General Plan for residential use No impact would occur c No Impact. See IV f No impact would occur XI MINERAL RESOURCES a No Impact. Pursuant to the City of Poway Master Environmental Assessment prepared in conjunction with the update to the Poway General Plan in 1991, there are no known mineral resources on the site b No Impact. See Item XI a XII NOISE Less Than Significant Impact. The project is the construction of a single residential residence and access driveway located in an area that is surrounded by existing single - family residential development. Noise associated with adjacent uses will not impact the project since noise associated with the adjoining residential uses will be minimal The project will result in an incremental increase in the ambient noise level of the area Noise from the project will be that typical to residential uses and will have a less than significant impact on adjacent uses Less Than Significant Impact. The project grading activities (grading for driveway and building pad) will result in temporary or periodic increases in the generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels typically related to construction Per City standards, the noise generating construction activities are limited to certain times of the day and days of the week. A less than significant impact could occur Less Than Significant Impact. See XII a above Potentially a less than significant impact could occur Less Than Significant Impact. The project grading activities (grading for required driveway and building pad for proposed residence) will result in temporary or periodic increases in noise typically related to construction Per City standards, the noise generating construction activities are limited to certain times of the day and days of the week. Potentially a less than significant impact could occur 23 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 28 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 e No Impact. The closest airports to the project site are Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, located approximately 6 5 miles southwest of the project site, and Gillespie Field, located approximately 8 miles southeast of the project site The project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area of either of these airports No impact would occur f No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip Therefore, the project would not expose people residing within the project to excessive noise levels and no impact would occur XIII POPULATION AND HOUSING a No Impact. The project will result in the construction of single - family residence and access driveway A residence is a permitted use within the Rural Residential C zone and the development is consistent with the low density land use designation for the property Therefore, the project is consistent with the density limitation of the underlying zoning and General Plan designation for the site No impact would occur b No Impact. See XIII a c No Impact. See XIII a XIV PUBLIC SERVICES The project will not have a significant adverse impact on the public services of the area. There are adequate public services to serve the project. a i Fire Protection — Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is served by the City of Poway Fire Department. The project could result in an incremental increase in the demand for fire protection and emergency services The site is already included within the Fire Department service area Any specific service provided should there be an (unexpected) emergency call to this project is accounted for No new or upgraded fire protection facilities would be required as a result of establishment of this project and no physical impacts resulting from construction of new facilities are identified A less than significant impact would occur a ii Police Protection — Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Poway contracts with the San Diego County Sheriffs Department for law enforcement services The project site is currently served by the Poway Station, which is located at 13100 Bowron Road The site is included within the Sheriffs service area. Any specific service provided should there be an (unexpected) emergency call to the site is accounted for No new or upgraded police protection facilities would be required as a result of establishment of this project and no physical impacts resulting from construction of new facilities are identified A less than significant impact would occur a iii Schools — Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in a new residence Children from the site will be accommodated by existing schools which are in proximity to the project site The project is consistent with the density limitation of the underlying zoning and General Plan designation for the site A less than significant impact would occur a iv Parks — Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not require new or physically altered park facilities as the construction of one new residence is consistent with the density limits of the General Plan Project residents can be accommodated in existing parks that are in proximity to the site A less than significant impact would occur a v Other Public Facilities — Less Than Significant Impact. The project would result in an incremental increase in the need for use of public facilities or service, but M Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 29 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 would not require new or physically altered public facilities A less than significant impact would occur XV RECREATION a Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves the construction of a new residence This would result in an incremental increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional park or other recreational facilities Project residents can be accommodated in existing parks that are in proximity to the site The project would have a less than significant impact. b Less Than Significant Impact. Existing recreation facilities can accommodate the increased demand expected from the new residence The project would have a less than significant impact. XVI TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC a Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for performance of the circulatory system The project will result in the construction of one new single - family residence The estimated average daily trips (ADT) associated with the additional new home is ten (10) Therefore, the project will result in an incremental increase in traffic in the area, which is considered to be less than significant. b Less Than Significant Impact. The SANDAG Congestion Management Program (CMP) is intended to determine if a large project (greater than 2,400 ADT AM or PM peak hour trips) would adversely impact the CMP transportation system A CMP analysis is not required for this project because the project is calculated to generate fewer than 2,400 ADT AM or PM (an additional 10 ADT) The project would have a less than significant impact. c No Impact. The project site is not located within an Airport Influence Area Therefore, the project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that would result in substantial safety risks No impact would occur d No Impact. The project involves the construction of a new single - family residence Adequate roadway access exists to the site No impact would occur e No Impact. The project does not involve any roadway or traffic improvements, land use changes or changes to the existing facilities that would result in inadequate emergency access No impact would occur f No Impact. The project involves the construction of a new single family residence and access driveway The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities No impact would occur XVII UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a No impact. The project will be served by a private septic system The project would not require the construction or expansion of any wastewater facilities or exceed applicable wastewater treatment requirements Therefore no impact would occur b No Impact. See Item XVII a for a discussion of the adequacy of wastewater treatment facilities The project will not require or result in the construction of 25 Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 30 EIS and Checklist MDRA 15 -010 new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities No impact would occur c Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in an incremental increase in stormwater runoff in the area. The project is required to comply with the City's stormwater management regulations and provide any necessary site specific stormwater improvements Adequate public stormwater facilities exist in the area to serve the site The project would not result in the construction of stormwater facilities that could cause a significant impact on the environment The project would have a less than significant impact. d Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is within an area identified to be served by the public water system and will result in an additional residence Because the project would not generate significant amounts of water demand, it would not require the construction or expansion of any facilities Adequate water facilities and services are in place to serve the project site It is anticipated that a less than significant impact would occur e Less Than Significant Impact. See XVII a above f Less Than Significant Impact. The project would be served by an existing solid waste disposal service with sufficient capacity The project would result in the creation of one additional home It is anticipated that a less than significant impact would occur g No Impact. The project residents will appropriately separate their waste so that recyclables and controlled wastes are separated from landfill trash in accordance with the City's waste reduction and recycling program The project would comply with all federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste, including the California Integrated Waste Management Act. No impact would occur XVIII MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated See response lV a b Less than Significant Impact. The project will have an incremental impact that would be less than significant, when considered cumulatively with past and future projects The project, as well as past projects and future projects have or will comply with the land use and density limitations of the City's General Plan Infrastructure and services per the General Plan are in place or are planned and will be provided to accommodate future projects A less than significant impact would occur c Less Than Significant Impact. See responses I a and d, IV a, VI b and e, VII a and b IX.a, c, d and e, XIV i, ii, iii, iv and v; XV a and b, XVI a and b, XVII c, d, e and f Wplanning \15 reports \mdra \mdra15 -010 hosokawa \EIS and checklist W. Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 31 ATTACHMENT 2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR MDRA 15 -010 Section 21081 6 of the Public Resources Code requires that public agencies "adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designated to ensure compliance during project implementation " This mitigation monitoring program has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081 6 of the Public Resources Code Non - compliance with any of these conditions, as identified by City staff or a designated monitor, shall result in issuance of a cease and desist order for all construction activities The order shall remain in effect until compliance is assured Non - compliance situations, which may occur subsequent to project construction, will be addressed on a case -by -case basis and may be subject to penalties according to the City of Poway Municipal Code When phasing of development has been established, it may be necessary for this Monitoring Program to be amended, with City approval Topic Mitigation Measure Timing Responsibility Biological A. Impacts to 0 18 -acres of A. Prior to A. Applicant Resources Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) and Grading the two Coast barrel cactus Permit or shall be mitigated at a 2 1 ratio Adminis- (0 36- acres) This requirement trative shall be met through off -site Clearing dedication of a Biological Permit Conservation Easement (BCE) issuance or over similar quality and type site habitat. In lieu of the off -site disturbing dedication, the applicant may activity opt to pay the Habitat Mitigation In -Lieu Fee at the established rate at the time of payment. Presently the rate is $17, 000 /acre B Temporary fencing (bright B Prior to B Applicant orange plastic fencing, stakes, Grading flags or markers) shall be Permit or installed along the limits of Adminis- development to avoid impacts trative during grading and construction Clearing Permit The fencing shall be inspected issuance or by the Engineering Inspector site ground prior to any site disturbance A disturbing written certification from the activity engineer of work, or a licensed surveyor, shall be provided to the Engineering Inspector Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 32 stating that all protected areas are fenced in accordance with the approved project plans C In accordance with C Prior to C Applicant Condition H of the Poway HCP grading or Incidental Take Permit, a take activity on of active California gnatcatcher the site nests, which includes pursuant to harassment of the bird due to an grading noise and vibrations approved from February 15 through Grading or July 1, is not permitted Adminis- Therefore, grading and removal trative of habitat during this time frame Clearing will only be permitted subject to Permit the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures, to the satisfaction of the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) are implemented There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume during nesting season Before issuance of a Clearing /Grading Permit, if grading or clearing is to occur between February 15 and July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for a CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey, and a report for the area to be cleared and /or graded and CSS habitat areas within 500 feet of such area The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 33 survey methodology The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or in CSS habitat within 500 feet of such area To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery Permit from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed gnatcatcher nest monitoring activities during the clearing /grading operation Should the report show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded/ cleared, or within CSS habitat located within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence clearing /grading within the gnatcatcher nesting season from February 15 through July 1 If gnatcatchers are nesting within the area to be graded/ cleared, or within CSS habitat located within 500 feet of said area, no grading will be allowed during this time The biologist must attend the City's preconstruction meeting for the project and must be present onsite during all clearing /grading activities to monitor that the clearing/ grading activities stay within the designated limits During this period, the biologist shall also monitor and survey the habitat, Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 34 on a daily basis, within the area to be cleared /graded and any habitat within 500 feet of said area for any evidence that a gnatcatcher nest(s) exists or is being built. Weekly monitoring summaries shall be submitted to the Planning Division Should evidence of a gnatcatcher nest(s) be discovered, the grading operation shall cease in that area and be directed away from the gnatcatcher nest(s) to a location greater than 500 feet away from the nest(s) If grading is required to stop due to the presence of active nests, the applicant shall be required to provide erosion control, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer This paragraph must be included as a note on the cover sheet of the clearing /grading plan At a minimum, all protected biological areas, as shown on the grading plan, shall be staked by a licensed surveyor and delineated with lathe and ribbon The applicant shall have said staking inspected by the Engineering Inspector prior to any grading, clearing or grubbing A written certification from the engineer of work, or a licensed surveyor, shall be provided to the Engineering Inspector stating that all protected areas are staked in accordance with the approved project plans The biologist shall provide the City with written confirmation that the limits of clearing/ grading are in accordance with the project's Biological Resource Assessment. Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 35 Upon completion of the clearing /grading activities, the applicant's biologist shall submit to the Director of Development Services a biological monitoring report summarizing the daily observations of the biologist, including whether any gnatcatchers or evidence of active gnatcatcher nests were present during clearing and grading activities within the area and any habitat within 500 feet of said area D Permanent low profile D Prior to D Applicant fencing shall be installed to approval of replace the temporary fencing Occupancy to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services prior to occupancy approval Cultural A. The remaining untested A. Prior to A. Applicant Resources portion of site CA- SDI -15993 on issuance of the subject property shall be the project preserved in a cultural open Grading space easement. Permit or Adminis- trative Clearing Permit. B A Mitigation Monitoring B Prior to B Applicant and Reporting Program shall be ground implemented to monitor ground- disturbing disturbing activities by a activity properly credentialed archeological monitor and a recognized Native American monitor to ensure that if buried cultural materials, either historic or pre- historic, are present, they will be handled in a timely and proper manner - 1 The applicant shall provide written verification that a certified archeological monitor and recognized Native American monitor have been retained to implement a Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 36 monitoring program This verification shall be presented in a letter from the project archeologist to the Planning Division of the City of Poway 2 The certified archeological monitor and the Native American monitor shall attend the pre - grading meeting with the contractors to explain and coordinate the requirements of the monitoring program 3 During the original cutting of During site Applicant previously undisturbed grading activity deposits, the archeological monitor(s) and Native American monitor shall be on- site, as determined by the project archeologist, to perform periodic inspections of the excavations The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and abundance of artifacts and features 4 Isolates and clearly non- significant deposits will be minimally documented in the field so the monitored grading can proceed 5 In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, the archeological monitor shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground - disturbance operation in the area of discovery to allow for the evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources The project archeologist shall contact the Planning Division of the City of Poway at the time of discovery The project archeologist, in consultation with the City of Poway, shall determine the significance of the discovered resources Concurrence from the City of Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 37 Poway Director of Development Services must be obtained with the evaluation before ground disturbing activities will be allowed to resume in the affected area. For significant cultural resources, a Research Design and Data Recovery Program to mitigate impacts shall be prepared by the project archeologist and approved by the City of Poway before being carried out using professional archeological methods If any human bones are discovered, the county coroner and City of Poway shall be contacted In the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the most likely descendant, as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted in order to determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains 6 Before ground disturbing activities are allowed to J resume in the affected area, the artifacts shall be recovered and features recorded using professional archeological methods The archeological monitor(s) shall determine the amount of material to be recovered for an adequate artifact sample for analysis 7 All cultural material collected Prior to Building Applicant during the grading monitoring Permit program shall be processed issuance and curated according to the current professional repository standards The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility (one meeting the Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Resolution No P -15 -31 Page 38 m¢igauon monitoring vrogram Heviseo Archeological Collections standard — 36CFR79), to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation 8 A report documenting the field and analysis results and interpreting the artifact and research data within the research context shall be completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the City of Poway Director of Development Services prior to the issuance of any building permits The report will include DPR Primary and Archeological Site Forms C The cultural artifacts that C Prior to C Applicant were found on the subject Building property during the archeological Permit testing on the property issuance completed by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc shall be curated at an appropriate curation facility (one meeting the Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Archeological Collections standard — 36CFR79 m¢igauon monitoring vrogram Heviseo