The URL can be used to link to this page

2022-09 (EG)DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 RESOLUTION NO. PC 2022-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS PLANNING COMMISSION TO CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND MAKING THE REQUIRED CEQA FINDINGS INCLUDING FINDINGS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED MAREA VILLAGE DENSITY BONUS DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1900 AND 1950 NORTH COAST HIGHWAY 101 CASE NOS. MULTI-003780-2020, BADJ-003787-2020, CDP-003788-2020, AND DR-003786- 2020; APNS: 216-041-20, 216-041-21, and 216-041-06 WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential environmental effects of the project. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the draft EIR was published for a 45-day public and agency review period on September 24, 2021; WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050 and 15051, the City of Encinitas is the "Lead Agency" for the proposed Project; WHEREAS, the Draft EIR and Final EIR were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the City has independently reviewed and analyzed the Draft EIR and Final EIR, and these documents reflect the independent judgment of the City; WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the proposed Project, which the City has adopted or made a condition of approval of the proposed Project. The MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the Record of Proceedings for the proposed Project. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation measures. The City will serve as the MMRP Coordinator; WHEREAS, in determining whether the proposed Project has a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has based its decision on substantial evidence and has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091; WHEREAS, the impacts of the proposed Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the Final EIR; WHEREAS, the City reviewed the comments received on the Draft EIR and the responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add new information regarding environmental impacts associated with the proposed project that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. The City has based its actions on full appraisal of all comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the Final EIR; WHEREAS, the responses to comments on the Draft EIR, which is contained in the attached Final EIR, clarify and amplify the environmental analyses therein; DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 WHEREAS, the City has made no decisions that constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to certification of the Final EIR, nor has the City previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed Project; WHEREAS, copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and/or the Final EIR are, and have been, available upon request at all times at the offices of the City, custodian of record for such documents or other materials; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Encinitas has reviewed the Final EIR. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Candidate Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, certifies the Final EIR, and adopts the and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as follows: "SEE ATTACHMENTS" PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16T" day of June, 2022 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Doyle, Ryan, Sherod, Prendergast NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: RECUSE: None Dalton DocuSigned by: E 8644D Kevin Doyle, Chair ATTEST: Ea DocuSigned by: wt&A (h6mU.SSi E137385BA26B4C3... Anna Colamussi Secretary NOTE: This action is subject to Chapter 1.04 of the Municipal Code, which specifies time limits for legal challenges. DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 ATTACHMENT A CEQA FINDINGS OF FACTS DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Case No.: MULTI-003780-2020; CDP-3788-2020; BADJ-3787-2020; and DR-3786-2020 State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021020272 Lead Agency: City of Encinitas Planning Division 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 Preparer: Michael Baker International 5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260 Carlsbad, CA 92008 June 2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1 A. Record of Proceedings.........................................................................................................3 B. Custodian and Location of Records......................................................................................4 II. PROJECT SUMMARY..................................................................................................................5 A. Proiect Location and Setting................................................................................................5 B. Proiect Description.............................................................................................................5 C. Proposed Land Use.............................................................................................................6 D. General Plan Land Use and Zoning.....................................................................................20 E. DiscretionarV Actions ........................................................................................................26 F. Statement of Obiectives......................................................................................................1 III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................................................2 IV. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA............................................................................................3 V. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................................................5 VI. FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS..........................................................................6 A. Impacts Mitigated to Less than Significant Levels.................................................................6 B. Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Level of Less than Significant...........................................42 C. Growth -Inducing Impacts..................................................................................................49 D. Alternatives......................................................................................................................53 VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS......................................................................75 Vill. CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................78 Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page I i CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page I ii CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000, et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs §§15000, et seq.) promulgated thereunder, require that the environmental impacts of a project be examined before a project is approved. In addition, once significant impacts have been identified, CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require that certain findings be made before project approval. Specifically, regarding findings, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. (b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subdivision (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. (f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section. The "changes or alterations" referred to in Section 15091(a)(1) above, that are required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects of Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 1 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A the project, may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15370, including: (a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. (b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. (c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. (d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. (e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. Should significant and unavoidable impacts remain after changes or alterations are applied to the project, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be prepared. The statement provides the lead agency's views on the ultimate balancing of the merits of approving a project despite its environmental damage. Regarding a Statement of Overriding Considerations, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 provides: (a) CEQA requires the decision -making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a Statement of Overriding Considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. The following Findings of Fact (Findings) are the findings that are required to be made by the decision -making body prior to carrying out or approving the proposed project. Having received, reviewed, and certified the Final EIR for the Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project (proposed project), State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021020272, as well as all other information in the Record of Proceedings (as defined below) on this matter, the following Findings are hereby adopted by the City of Encinitas (City) in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for current and subsequent Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 2 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City and responsible agencies for the implementation of the project. Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project includes but is not limited to the following documents and other evidence: The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project; Written comments received on the NOP; Scoping Meeting(s) and written comments received at Scoping Meeting(s); The 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report and appendices for the proposed project; All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public the Draft EIR and Final EIR; All responses prepared by the City to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public on the Draft EIR and Final EIR; All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project at which such testimony was taken; The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the responses to public comments; All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference or cited to in the Draft EIR and the Final EIR; The Final EIR and all supplemental documents prepared for the Final EIR and submitted to the City of Encinitas Planning Commission prior to the Planning Commission hearing; Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, plans and regulations; Any documents expressly cited in these Findings; City staff report(s) prepared for the hearing(s) related to the proposed project and any exhibits thereto; Project permit conditions; and Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e). Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 3 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The Draft EIR and related technical studies were made available for review during the public review period on the City's website at http://www.encinitasca.gov/1-Want-To/Public- Notices/Planning-Building-Public-Notices (under "Environmental Notices"). Additional accommodations, such as the direct provision of hard copies, were provided as the public comment period occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic. Custodian and Location of Records The documents and other materials, which constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related to the project, as detailed in Section I.A. above, are located at the City Development Services Department, 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024. The City Clerk is the custodian of the administrative record for the project. Copies of these documents, which constitute the Record of Proceedings, are at all relevant and required times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the City's Development Services Department. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e). Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 14 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A PROJECT SUMMARY Project Location and Setting The proposed Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project (proposed project) is located on approximately 3.8 acres at 1900 and 1950 North Coast Highway 101 in the City of Encinitas (City), California, in coastal San Diego County. The project site is comprised of County of San Diego Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 216-041-20 (Parcel 1), 216-041-21 (Parcel 2), and 216-041-06 (Parcel 3). Regional access to the project site is via Interstate 5 to westbound La Costa Avenue, then to southbound North Coast Highway 101. The existing Seabluffe 255-gated townhome residential community is located directly adjacent to the south and west; Moorgate Road runs along the southern boundary of the site. A recently developed hotel is located adjacent to the north; further to the north is the Batiquitos Lagoon. North Coast Highway 101 forms the eastern boundary of the project site. The North County Transit District railroad runs generally north -south in the vicinity of the site and is located approximately 135 feet to the east at its nearest point, running along the eastern length of North Coast Highway 101 in Leucadia. The intersection of La Costa Avenue and North Coast Highway 101 lies approximately 215 feet to the northeast. The project site is currently occupied by an operating restaurant, a small commercial center, and a vacant structure formerly occupied by a restaurant use, along with various supporting surface parking areas and land that is undeveloped, yet disturbed. Project Description The project proposes a mixed -use development consisting of 94 for -lease apartments, a 34-room boutique resort hotel, and 18,261 square feet (SF) of mixed -use development. The project would also include a subterranean parking garage, a walking paseo, pedestrian plaza, and an outdoor seating area. Of the 94 residential apartment units proposed, 75 would be rented at market rate and 19 would be affordable housing units dedicated to "low-income" (80% area median income) qualifying residents. Additionally, 8 of the proposed hotel rooms would be economy, or "affordable," units. Improvements to North Coast Highway 101 are also proposed to allow for adequate ingress/egress. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a roundabout constructed along North Coast Highway 101 near the southern boundary of the project site. The roundabout would provide connection to a proposed access drive leading into the subject property. Associated landscaping would be planted to visually enhance the roundabout. In March 2019, the Encinitas City Council adopted a Housing Element Update (HEU) to its General Plan which provides the City with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent, and affordable housing for all within the City. Mandated by state Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 5 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A housing law, the purpose of the HEU is to ensure the City establishes policies, procedures, and incentives to increase the quality and quantity of the City's housing supply. Site 1 is identified in the HEU as Site 07: Jackel Properties. It is comprised of APN 216-041-20 ("Parcel 1;" approximately 0.69 acres) and APN 216-041-21 ("Parcel 2;" approximately 2.3 acres). The HEU assigns a minimum allocation of 33 residential units to Site 07, if developed as mixed - use with visitor -serving commercial uses and a minimum of 30 traditional overnight accommodations. Site 1 is zoned Limited Visitor -Serving Commercial (N-LVSC) with a Coastal Zone and R-30 Zone overlay. As stated above, as part of the HEU, this portion of the project site was allocated a minimum of 33 residential units if developed as mixed -use with visitor -serving commercial uses and a minimum of 30 traditional overnight accommodations (City of Encinitas 2015). Site 2 is zoned Commercial Residential Mixed 1 (N-CRM-1) and has a Coastal Zone overlay, with a maximum density of 25 dwelling units per acre. A Density Bonus Tentative Map, Design Review Permit, and Coastal Development Permit are required to allow for the proposed development. The Design Review Permit is required to ensure project consistency with objective design review guidelines established by the City of Encinitas. Due to its location within the Encinitas North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and the City's Special Study Overlay, R-30 Zone Overlay, and/or Scenic Highway/Visual Corridor Overlay, as applicable to the site, the project is also subject to certain special study requirements, overlay restrictions, and objective design guidelines related to grading, building design, landscaping, and other site improvements. Proposed Land Use A summary of the proposed development by land use type is included in Table 1, Proposed Development Summary. Details of each proposed land use component of the project are provided below. Table 1: Proposed Development Summary _ Proposed Land Use Site No. Square Footage' Number of DUs or Hotel Rooms Parcel 1 - -- Residential Parcel 2 65,524 84 Parcel 8,228 10 Subtotal -- 72,982 94 Commercial Parcel 1 -- -- Parcel 2 10,773 Parcel 3 7,488 -- Subtotal -- 18,261 -- Hotel Parcel 1 24,319 34 Parcel 2 - -- Parcel3 -- -- Subtotal -- 24,319 34 Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 6 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Table 1, continued Proposed Land Use Site No. Square Footage" Number of DUs or Hotel Rooms Open Space Parcel 1 -- - Private Open Space Parcel 2 6,575 (100 SF/DU)Z -- Parcel 3 -- -- Common Amenity Space Parcel 1 -- -- Parcel 2 21,344 (200 SF/DU)3 -- Parcel 3 -- -- Subtotal -- 27,919 -- Underground Parking Parcel 1 -- -- Parking Level 1 Parcel 2 39,079 -- Parking Level Parcel 2 39,079 -- Parcel 3 -- -- Subtotal -- 78,158 -- Utilities/Elevator Parcel 1 1-- Parcel 2 4,000 Parcel 3 1,000 -- Subtotal -- 5,000 -- TOTAL AREA (GFA) 193,720 1281 Note: DUs = dwelling units; SF = square feet; TBD = to be determined; GFA = gross floor area 1 - Note that SF shown is the total amount for each use. The SF would be divided amongst multiple stories where structures would be greater than one story in height. 2 - Based upon the 84 DUs for Site 1 under Residential, above. 3 - Based upon the 10 DUs for Site 2 under Residential, above. 4 - Gross Acreage: Parcel 1 = 30,096 SF; Parcel 2=100,357 SF; Parcel 3 = 34,652 SF 5 -128 DUs includes 94 apartment units and 34 hotel units Source: Stephen Dalton Architects 2020 RESIDENTIAL USES Residential Development - General The project proposes development of 94 new residential for -lease apartment units. Of the 94 residential units proposed in the community, 75 would be rented at market -rate and 19 would be affordable units dedicated to "low income" qualifying residents. Low income is defined as being affordable to households earning less than 80 percent of the area median income. The project site has been designated for a minimum of 33 residential units in the City's HEU. The proposed 94 residential units therefore meet the allotted minimum unit count. The proposed on -site residential uses would be constructed in two forms: a portion of the residential apartment units would be provided within four individual buildings in the western portion of the site. The remainder of the apartment units would be provided within the mixed - use commercial area in the eastern portion of the site, above the proposed retail commercial uses. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 7 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The residential uses would provide 6,575 SF of private open space (or 100 SF per dwelling unit). Additionally, approximately 21,344 SF of common amenity space (or 200 SF per dwelling unit) is proposed. Residential Apartment Use The project proposes residential apartment units within four individual buildings in the western portion of the site. The structures would each be three stories in height (maximum 34 feet). The individual unit types offered would include studios, lofts, and 1- and 2-bedroom apartments (approximately 380 SF to 1,223 SF in size). The average residential unit size would be approximately 834 SF. These four residential apartment buildings would be situated on a "podium" above a subterranean parking garage. The parking garage (two levels) would be recessed into the adjacent hillside so as to obscure the height of the structure when combined with the apartment buildings. parking garage is proposed to serve these residential uses, as well as the mixed -use development and the boutique hotel, as needed. MIXED -USE COMMERCIAL The proposed mixed -use development area in the eastern portion of the site would consist of 6 individual buildings ranging from one to three stories in height with retail commercial uses on the first floor. In four of these buildings, for -lease residential apartments are proposed on the second and/or third stories. Retail commercial uses would total approximately 18,261 SF. The apartment units would be lofts, 1- and 2-bedrooms, and would range in size from approximately 672 SF to 1,104 SF. The retail component would offer commercial space of varying square footage to provide potential tenants with options for leasing space that would meet their individual operational needs. It is anticipated that a range of uses from specialty retail shops, commercial office space, artist studios, restaurants (high turnover and quality), and other similar use types may occupy the development area. Depending on the type of commercial use proposed, hours of operation are expected to occur seven days per week and in conformance with the City's Municipal Code. HOTEL The project would include construction of a 34-room, approximately 24,319 SF boutique hotel. Eight of the guest rooms would be offered at an "economy" rate to ensure a full range of affordability to guests in accordance with the City General Plan and Local Coastal Program. It is anticipated that the hotel would be three stories in height and would include an outdoor swimming pool and spa. The hotel would be independently owned and operated by a private entity. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 18 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A COMMON/PUBLIC USE AREAS As part of the mixed -use area, the project would offer a walking paseo, pedestrian plaza, and an outdoor seating area. These uses would be open to the public and are intended to encourage social interaction and community engagement. A pedestrian bridge would also be constructed at the north end of the project site to connect the proposed hotel to the adjacent Alila Marea Beach Resort and indirect access to South Ponto State Beach. The project also includes two other pedestrian bridges: connecting buildings 1 and 2, and building 4 to building 6. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION Improvements to North Coast Highway 101 are proposed to allow for adequate ingress/egress. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a proposed roundabout to be constructed near the southern boundary of the site within the North Coast Highway 101 right-of-way. The roundabout would provide connection to a proposed on -site access drive (approximately 30 feet in width) having two lanes - for ingress/egress. The drive would extend to the west into the site, with one cul-de-sac proposed to extend to the north to provide access to the subterranean parking garage as well as the mixed -use area. The main drive would continue further to the west and then extend to the north to serve the proposed apartment units and the boutique hotel. These internal drives would provide adequate emergency access to all on -site development and would allow for emergency vehicle maneuvering and turnaround. Pedestrian access to the site would be provided at multiple points of ingress from the public right- of-way along the southbound side of North Coast Highway 101. It is anticipated there would also be pedestrian access to the site from the property adjacent to the north which is the site of a newly constructed hotel. NORTH COAST HIGHWAY 101 IMPROVEMENTS Improvements to North Coast Highway 101 are proposed to allow for adequate ingress/egress. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a proposed roundabout to be constructed along North Coast Highway 101. The roundabout would provide connection to a proposed access drive leading into the southern portion of the subject property. In March 2018, the Encinitas City Council approved the North Coast Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Project which would enhance the North Coast Highway 101 corridor both visually and in terms of safety and design. The project proposes a variety of improvements along the approximately 2.5-mile corridor between La Costa Avenue (north end) and A Street (south end) which include, but are not limited to, increasing pedestrian and bicyclist mobility and safety (i.e., enhanced sidewalks, new crosswalks, and widened bike lanes); decreasing traffic speeds to 30 miles per hour; preserving and restoring the tree canopy; providing street beautification measures with enhanced pavement treatments, street furniture, and opportunities for public art; constructing appropriate traffic controls and traffic calming measures, such as roundabouts; implementing road diet measures by decreasing travel lane number/width; providing measures Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 19 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A to improve vehicular, bike, and pedestrian safety at side street intersections; improving existing drainage and water quality through low -impact design measures and Green Street concepts; and, providing additional parking spaces, including more efficient reverse angle on -street parking and parking at designated areas within the North County Transit District right-of-way. The proposed project has also been designed with respect for the planned Highway 101 streetscape improvements to provide continuity and to minimize any visual incompatibility or conflict. Construction of the proposed North Coast Highway 101 streetscape improvements are planned to be implemented in two phases, with construction underway on the first phase at the present time. All existing City trees identified on the project site and some ornamental trees within the center median of the Highway 101 ROW are proposed to be removed as part of project implementation. As such, the project must comply with the requirements set forth in the City's UFMP. As none of the trees on -site are protected, a tree removal permit is not required. In accordance with the City's Tree Ordinance, any City Trees that are removed by the project would require a minimum 1:1 replacement tree of a type, size, and location to be determined by the City -approved arborist. The project would plant approximately 116 trees which exceeds the minimum 1:1 replacement ratio. All project landscaping has been reviewed by the City and determined to be in conformance with the City's Municipal Tree Ordinance and Urban Forest Management Program (2017b), and the North Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Plan being implemented by the City (City of Encinitas 2017a), as applicable. Routine maintenance of any landscaping within the North Highway 101 right-of-way would be the responsibility of the City. PARKING A total of 257 off-street parking spaces would be provided for the project through a combination of garage parking and limited surface parking. The project includes construction of an approximately 78,158 SF, two -level subterranean parking garage. The parking garage would offer parking spaces for use by hotel occupants, apartment residents, patrons of the proposed retail uses, and users of the on -site common use areas open to the public. Table 2, Parking Requirements, identifies the parking ratios and requirements for each of the uses proposed, consistent with the parking use categories and associated parking ratios identified in the Encinitas Municipal Code (Section 30.54.030 - Schedule of Required Off -Street Parking; applies to proposed non-residential uses) and the State Density Bonus law (applies to residential uses) . A total of 247 parking spaces are required; 257 parking spaces are proposed. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 10 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Table 2: Parking Requirements Parcel 1 Number of Units or SF Ratio Required Parcel 2 Parcel 3 Number of Units or SF Ratio Required Number of Units or SF Ratio Required Residential (Apartments) Studio -- -- -- 6 1/DU 6.0 1-Bedroom -- -- -- 60 1/DU 60.0 8 1/DU 8.0 2-Bedroom -- -- -- 18 1.5/DU 27.0 2 1.5/1DU 3.0 Guest -- -- -- -- -- -- Subtotal Residential -- -- -- -- 93.0 -- -- 11.0 Hotel 34 1.25 keys 42.5 -- -- -- -- -- Net Restaurant Dining -- - 1,737 SF 1/75 SF 23.2 1,119 SF 1/75 SF 14.9 Net Outdoor Dining -- -- -- 1,000 SF 1/75 SF 13.3 500 SF 1/75 SF 6.7 Retail + Commercial + BOH -- - 7,061 SF 1/300 SF 23.5 5,161 SF 1/300 SF 17.2 TOTAL -- -- 43.0 -- -- 153.0 -- -- 50.0 TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED 247 TOTAL SPACES PROPOSED 2571,z Notes: SF = square teet; DU = dwelling unit; BUH = back of house 1 15% of total parking spaces shall be equipped with fully operational electric vehicle supply equipment (39 spaces total). 2 A total of eight parking spaces would be designed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Source: Stephen Dalton Architects 2021 LANDSCAPING The City's Tree Ordinance and Urban Forest Management Policy (UFMP) requires compliance with the City's UFMP during construction and development. Protected trees include City Trees, Heritage Trees, and trees that are predesignated to be preserved. City Trees are those within the City's public rights -of -way, parks, or other public places and is maintained by the City. Heritage Trees means a tree of community significance located in the City on public or private property designated by the City in accordance with the following criteria: that is one of the oldest and largest of its species; is of unique form or species; has historic significance due to an association with an historic building, site, street, person or event; or is a defining landmark or significant outstanding feature of a neighborhood. The designation of a Heritage Tree on private property requires the written consent of the private property owner in a form deemed sufficient by the City Attorney. In accordance with General Plan Policy 3.6, the proposed project would be required to maintain significant mature trees to the extent possible and incorporate them into the design of development projects. There are 47 trees within the project boundary that have at a minimum of an 8-inch diameter tree trunk (12 inches combined trunk diameter for multi -stemmed trees). While the palm trees were found to be in fair to good condition, these trees are not considered as a high value, rare, Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 11 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A or possess Heritage Tree status. The other trees on -site are in poor to very poor condition and are not high value, rare, or possess Heritage Tree status. The project must comply with the requirements set forth in the City's UFMP. As none of the trees on -site are protected, a tree removal permit is not required. There are 54 total trees on the project site and 50 of the trees would be removed. The project would plant approximately 116 trees. As such, the project would more than double the current number of trees on -site. Most of the trees would range in size between 20"-36" box trees, and some of the Hong Kong orchid, western redbud, and fruitless olive trees would be 15-gallon. Shrubs would be planted in 1-to 5- gallon pots. Ornamental landscaping would be planted on -site to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the property. A variety of trees, shrubs, and ground cover is proposed. All proposed ornamental plantings, including landscaping for the on -site bioretention areas, would be a mix of City - approved native species; the use of non-native species is not proposed. All plantings would be low-water use with exception of limited areas where turf would be installed (high water use). Recycled water is not available to serve the site; however, the entire irrigation system would be designed to reclaimed water standards for future transition should reclaimed water become available. Landscaping would also be used to provide a visual transition between the proposed project and the streetscape enhancements being undertaken by the City as part of the North 101 Corridor Streetscape Improvement Project. The project's landscape design has been prepared in coordination with the streetscape design to ensure compatibility and continuity. Routine maintenance of all landscaping would be the responsibility of the property owner via a private contracted landscaping company. DESIGN CONCEPTS The mixed -use commercial square footage would be provided in six individual buildings to allow for the creation of public plazas and gathering spaces along the street edge to draw people into the interior of the development. This design technique would allow for views into the site, and from within the site looking outward to the northeast and to the Batiquitos Lagoon. Generally, the height of the proposed structures would gradually increase within the interior of the property as distance from Highway 101 increases. The proposed residential buildings in the western portion of the site would be oriented with the long axis trending east/west, thereby creating view corridors between the buildings. Finished grade for the residential buildings would be recessed below grade by one story to minimize the building height when viewed from existing residential uses located to the west (Seabluffe residential development). Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 12 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The project has been designed to include a variety of building sizes, roof shapes, colors, and materials. This design approach is intended to reflect the eclectic nature that contributes to the existing character of the Leucadia community. SIGNAGE Project signage would be consistent with signage design recommendations (with consideration of size, color, materials, location, scale, etc.) provided in the N101SP for residential and commercial uses to minimize potential aesthetic effects and to ensure consistency with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. One sign is proposed near the southerly entrance to the pedestrian plaza for identification purposes. It is anticipated that signage would be installed on the exterior of the individual uses (or within use areas). Within the interior of the site, signage would be installed to identify the apartments, the boutique hotel, and the various retail shops, restaurants, and other commercial uses, as well as for directional and informational purposes. WALLS AND FENCING A permanent shoring wall would be constructed along a portion of the southern property boundary and along the length of the western property boundary to stabilize the slope and to allow for construction of the drive aisle, parking garage, apartment uses, and the boutique hotel. The top of the shoring wall would only extend to the top of finished grade and would therefore not be visible from adjacent properties to the west and south looking into site. One to two retaining walls would be constructed in front of the majority of the shoring wall along the westerns and southern boundaries for additional engineering support. The retaining walls would vary in height from approximately two feet to 12 feet with cascading plant screening to visually integrate the walls into the surrounding landscape. The proposed project includes a variety of walls and fences. Due to the slope of the site, the project site includes internal retaining walls. The area between the hotel and building 5 would be separated by a retaining wall with a maximum height of 20 feet. The retaining wall would contain guardrails on top of these walls for safety. A 6-foot 6-inch wall would be constructed along the eastern boundary of the site along Highway 101. There are also two walls on the east side of the boardwalk that are adjacent to and visible from Highway 101. An additional series of retaining walls is proposed along the eastern border of the outdoor pool and spa and adjacent to N. Coast Highway 101 associated with the hotel use. A six -foot -high tubular steel security fencing would be installed around the pool/spa for security purposes (Building 11). An iron fence with masonry columns currently extends along the western property boundary (atop the slope); an existing freestanding masonry wall currently runs along the southern property boundary. The project proposes to protect these elements in place; no alterations to such features would occur with the project. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 13 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A LIGHTING The project would install street lighting to provide an adequate level of nighttime lighting for safe motorized and non -motorized circulation and to increase public safety for nighttime pedestrian and bicyclist use. Lighting would also be installed at the access driveways to identify the project entrance and to provide safe ingress and egress. The proposed project would also include lighting for all parking areas, including garage levels. In addition to safety lighting for streets and parking areas, exterior building lights are proposed, both as safety lighting and architectural details on the residential and commercial buildings, hotel and pool area, as well as the public amenity area. All lighting would be consistent with the City's lighting standards, which require low-level lighting that would not exceed 0.5 foot-candle levels, light poles at a maximum height of 18 feet, and shielded lighting that is directed downward via 90-degree cutoffs to reduce light overspill onto adjacent properties. UTILITIES Water Public water service for the project would be provided by the San Dieguito Water District. Public water service is currently provided to the site to serve the existing commercial uses and former restaurant site. To serve the proposed development, five separate connections to an existing 12-inch water line located in Highway 101 are proposed. A new water line would also be constructed from its connection with the existing 12-inch water line in Highway 101, extending into the western portion of the site to serve the proposed apartment units and then northward to serve the proposed hotel use. All water lines have been sized to meet the anticipated fire flow requirements for the project. All on -site fire hydrants (four new on -site hydrants are proposed), on -site fire service pipelines, and building fire sprinkler laterals would be connected to the existing 12-inch water line in Highway 101. Sewer Sewer service for the project would be provided by the Leucadia Wastewater District (LWD). To serve the proposed development, two separate connections to an existing 8-inch sewer line located in Highway 101 are proposed. A new sewer line would also be constructed from its connection with the existing 8-inch water line in Highway 101, extending into the western portion of the site to serve the proposed apartment units and then northward to serve the proposed hotel use. Wastewater generated on the project site would be collected by the LWD. Flows from the site would be conveyed to an 8-inch diameter gravity sewer pipe that flows north to south parallel to the project's right-of-way line. The flows then continue to travel to the south approximately 92 Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 14 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A feet where additional flow from two other 8-inch diameter pipes combine and outlet into a 10- inch diameter pipe towards the east and into North Coast Highway 101. Wastewater conveyed through the district's sewer mains and pump stations is ultimately pumped to the Encina Wastewater Authority's (EWA) Water Pollution Control Facility located in the City of Carlsbad. LWD is one of six member agencies of the EWA (a joint powers authority) operating a regional wastewater treatment and disposal facility in Carlsbad. Stormwater Capture and Drainage Facilities In the existing condition, storm water runoff from the site generally flows overland and through an onsite storm drain easterly to North Coast Highway 101. There is offsite run-on from the unimproved area along the westerly and southerly boundary. The onsite storm drain connects to the storm drain located in North Coast Highway 101. Overland flow drains to North Coast Highway 101 where it enters the storm drain which conveys all flow northerly to an extended detention basin located adjacent to the east side of the South Carlsbad State Beach Parking Lot. Flow from the existing detention basin discharges to Batiquitos Lagoon and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. In the post construction condition, storm water would flow off surfaces (e.g., buildings, parking lots) to two types of biofiltration basins located throughout the site. Discharge from the biofiltration basins would then flow to an underground storage vault located in the northeastern corner of the project site. The vault would then be controlled to discharge to a proposed 18-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) which would connect to the back of the existing curb inlet located north of the project along North Coast Highway 101 which outlets to an 18-inch RCP which transitions to a 24-inch RCP which conveys flow northerly as in the existing condition to an existing outfall located on the east side of Highway 101 at the Batiquitos Lagoon. Offsite storm water that runs onto the site along the westerly boundary would be intercepted via a new concrete ditch and routed to proposed storm drain which runs along the northern boundary of the site and connects to the underground vault outlet pipe and continues as described above. Offsite run-on along the southern boundary would be captured in a new concrete ditch and discharged to North Coast Highway 101 via sidewalk underdrain. In this area, there would be no change in the offsite stormwater runoff rate or volume with project implementation. Long-term maintenance of the proposed stormwater facilities would be the responsibility of the property owner. Electricity and Natural Gas San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) currently provides electrical and natural gas services to the project site. All existing and future on -site utilities (electrical lines) would be undergrounded with the proposed improvements. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 15 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION PHASING All existing structures on -site would be removed to allow for development as proposed. Approximately 10,681 SF of building area would be demolished, including the small commercial center in the southeastern portion of the site and the unoccupied former restaurant building in the northern portion, along with all existing surface parking areas. Construction of the project would occur in one phase, projected to last approximately 16.5 months. Table 3, Anticipated Construction Schedule, provides durations of the project's major construction activities. Note that several of the construction components will overlap with the total construction phase expected to last approximately 16.5 months. All construction staging of materials and equipment would occur on -site; no construction staging on off -site property is required. Table 3: Anti GRADING Construction Schedule The entirety of the project site would be graded to allow for the proposed improvements. Grading would include approximately 50,700 cubic yards (c.y.) of cut and 2,300 c.y. of fill. All existing on -site vegetation would also be removed with project grading. Proposed maximum cut slopes would be approximately 31.5 feet in height; maximum fill slopes would be 18.4 feet in height. Grading activity is anticipated to last an estimated 3.5 months. BEACH SAND REPLENISHMENT An estimated 48,400 c.y. of sand material would be exported off -site for beach placement as part of the City of Encinitas Sand Compatibility and Opportunistic Use Program (SCOUP). The Opportunistic Beach Fill Program identifies construction projects that export sandy beach material and then haul the material to the beach at Moonlight, Cardiff, Leucadia or Ponto State Beach. The City works with developers to conduct monitoring and permitting and share the cost for hauling the material to the beach. All beach sand replenishment activities associated with the proposed project would be performed in accordance with the City's SCOUP environmental and regulatory requirements, Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 16 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A including restrictions on the timing and duration of sand placement and biological monitoring requirements. The source material from the project site would require sampling and analysis in accordance with Program requirements and regulatory authorizations to determine compatibility prior to placing it on the beach. Source material not meeting predetermined physical and chemistry standards would be rejected and require off -site disposal at an approved landfill facility. Beach replenishment is anticipated to last an estimated 3.5 months. SUSTAINABILITY The proposed project would promote sustainability through site design that would conserve energy, water, open space, and other natural resources. As part of this commitment, the project would implement core sustainable development features, including the following which have been incorporated into the project as design features: 1. The project would install low flow water fixtures in all residential apartment units, the hotel, and public restroom facilities within the mixed -use commercial development area. All lighting for the project would be designed using LED technology for both indoor and outdoor areas (5 percent over Title 24 Standards). Waste recycling bins would be provided on -site within both the residential and commercial areas. The project would provide separate waste containers to allow for simpler material separations, or the project would pay for a waste collection service that recycles the materials in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 341 to achieve a 75% waste diversion. All construction debris would be disposed of at a construction, debris, and inert -material recovery facility. The project would not install hearth/fireplace options in residential apartment units. The project would install roof -mounted solar panels across the project that would provide approximately 250 kilowatts (kW) of solar power. The project would install high -efficiency water heaters or solar water heater systems. It is anticipated that electric tankless domestic hot water heaters would be installed for the residential units (internal to buildings). The project would install a total of 39 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations in surface parking areas and in the parking garage. The project would comply with ENERGYSTAR appliance requirements and would meet or exceed ENERGYSTAR for Homes (Version 3 or above). Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 17 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The project would install water efficient/drought tolerant and/or native landscape, use smart evapotranspiration controllers, and/or would minimize use of conventional turf. The project would install high -efficiency heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems areas. The project includes a mixture of uses, including anticipated on -site restaurants/eateries and commercial services (including office space), on -site passive recreation areas, and is within walking and biking distance of off -site retail and commercial uses. The project would comply with CalGreen Tier 1 standards. The project would provide residential development within walking and biking distance of additional off -site local retail to reduce vehicle trips. The project is within 2.5 miles walking distance to an existing transit station (operated by North County Transit District). Existing bus stops are located adjacent to the southbound site frontage on Highway 101; an existing bus stop is located along northbound Highway 101. The project would provide 6 bicycle parking spaces on -site to encourage bicycle access to/from the site. The project design would provide all -electric residential and commercial uses (prohibiting the use of natural gas) with exception of future restaurant establishments where use of a natural gas flame is justified for cooking purposes (City Ordinance No. 2021-13). TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) PROGRAM A TDM plan would be prepared and implemented to provide the means to disseminate information to help tenants and employees learn about and use alternative forms of transportation other than single occupancy vehicles. The following TDM elements would be provided for the project: Voluntary employer commute program. Employers to provide information about the San Diego Association of Governments' (SANDAG's) iCommute program (www.icommutesd.com) and encourage carpooling. Develop and/or promote bicycle usage through a bikeshare program to help reduce vehicle usage and demand for parking by providing users with on -demand access to bikes for short-term rental, contribute to electric bicycle charging stations, contribute to bicycle infrastructure improvements, and disseminate a bicycle riders guide to make it easier for people to bike and walk to work. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 18 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Provide pedestrian improvements such as a connection to the hotel to the north and, indirectly, to the beach below. Provide information about maps, routes, and schedules for public transit near the retail buildings. CONSTRUCTION NOISE MANAGEMENT As a condition of project approval, a Construction Noise Control Plan would be prepared and submitted to the City's Planning and Building Department for review and approval. The plan would be required to demonstrate that all construction activity shall be in compliance with noise standards and the City's Municipal Code. The construction noise control plan may include, but is not limited to, the following: Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards and is in good working condition. Place noise -generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible. Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, temporary noise barriers or noise blankets around stationary construction noise sources. Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible. Construction -related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes. Construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction is permitted on Sundays or legal holidays. Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If the County or the job superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action taken to the reporting party. Project developers shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used during construction would be routed away from residential streets to the extent feasible. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 19 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A General Plan Land Use and Zoning Table 4, Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning, identifies the existing General Plan Land Use designations and zoning classifications, as well as existing overlay zones, for the three affected parcels that comprise the project site. No change to the existing zoning or General Plan land use is required or proposed to allow for project implementation. Assessor Parcel Site Number Number (APN) 216-041-20 (Parcel 1/Hotel Site) Site 1 216-041-21 (Parcel 2/Main Site) Site 2 216-041-06 (Parcel 3/Existing Commercial Site) Table 4: Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning General Plan / Encinitas North 101 Corridor Acreage Specific Plan Designation M Visitor Serving Commercial (VSC) 2.30 Zoning Limited Visitor Serving Commercial (N-L-VSC) Commercial 0.80 General Commercial (GC) Residential Mixed 1 (N- CRM-1) Overlay Zone(s) R-30 Zone Overlay Zone; Coastal Overlay Zone; Special Study Overlay Zone, Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone 'Acreage indicated assumes City approval of requested lot line adjustment between APNs 216-041-20 and 216-041-21. Source: City of Encinitas 2013- 2021 Housing Element Update (2019) R-30 Zone Overlay Zone; Coastal Overlay Zone; Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone Coastal Overlay Zone; Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone The City of Encinitas General Plan HEU was adopted by the City on March 13, 2019. Subsequently, on June 13, 2019, the California Coastal Commission unanimously approved the Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) associated with the City's Housing Plan Update. On July 10, 2019, the Encinitas City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2019-08, accepting the California Coastal Commission's LCPA as amended. Finally, on October 8, 2019, the California Department of Housing and Community Development certified the City's Housing Element. Site 1 is identified in the HEU as Site 07: Jackel Properties and is comprised of APN 216-041-20 ("Parcel 1;" approximately 0.69 acres) and APN 216-041-21 ("Parcel 2;" approximately 2.3 acres). The HEU assigns a minimum allocation of 33 residential units to Site 07, if the site is developed at a mixed -use ratio with visitor -serving commercial uses and a minimum of 30 traditional overnight accommodations. Site 2 (APN 216-041-06; "Parcel 3") totals approximately 0.80 acre. This property is not identified in the HEU. This parcel would be combined with the other 2 parcels to create the approximately 3.8-acre property (total) upon which the proposed project would be constructed. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 20 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Density Bonus A housing development including five or more residential units may propose a density bonus in accordance with California Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("Density Bonus law"). California's Density Bonus law is intended to encourage cities to offer bonuses and development concessions to projects that would contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of lower income housing in proposed housing developments. The proposed project meets the City's Municipal Code requirement of 25 du/acre and is therefore eligible for R30 Overlay zone development standards. The project proposes to provide 20% of the 194 residential units (or 19 units) as "low income"' affordable residential units (affordable to households earning no more than 80 percent of the area median income) and qualifies as a Density Bonus Project under SB 330. Under the State Density Bonus law, the project is afforded two incentives for each lot by providing 20% low-income units on both lots, as described below. Table 5: Summary of Proposed Units Parcels 1 and 2 Parcel 3 Proposed DU 84 DU 10 DU Proposed Market Rate Units 67 DU 8 DU Proposed Affordable Rate/Units (Low Income) in Perpetuity 13 DU 2 DU Proposed Affordable Rate Units (Low Income) for 55 Years 4 DU 0 DU Percent Affordable for Determination of Incentives 20% 20% Number of Density Bonus Incentives 2 2 Total Units 94 Notes: DU = dwelling units; AC = acres Incentive #1 Parcels 1 and 2: The incentive requested for Parcel 2 is an increase in the height limit for buildings 4 and 6 (flat roof structures) to 40 feet 6 inches above finished grade. The existing height limit for Parcels 1 and 2 is 35 feet for flat roof structures and 39 feet for sloped roof structures as is determined by the R-30 Overlay. The increase in the height limit to 40 feet 6 inches (or 10 feet 5 inches above that allowed within the Coastal Zone) is required to accommodate the necessary commercial ceiling height. Parcel 3: The building height limit for buildings located on Parcel 3 is 30 feet, regardless of roof type. The first incentive requested for Parcel 3 is an increase in the height limit to 39 feet 6 inches for Building 1 and 36 feet 6 inches for Building 2. The increase in the height limit to 39 feet 6 inches for Building 1 is required to accommodate the necessary commercial ceiling height 1 94 residential apartment units x 0.20 = 18.8 units, or 19 total units (rounded up). Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 21 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A discussed and the 3rd level of residential units. The increase in height to 36 feet 6 inches for Building 2 is to retain the loft storage. Incentive #2 Parcel 3: The second incentive requested for Parcel 3 is an increase in the maximum allowable stories from 2 to 3 for Building 1. The zoning regulations under N-CRM-1 allow for 2-story structures only. The request to increase the maximum allowable stories from 2 to 3 is required to accommodate the ground level commercial space. These incentives would result in identifiable and actual cost reductions that would facilitate the provision of affordable housing as proposed. Reauested Waivers of Develoament Standards There are no waivers being requested from applicable development standards with the project as proposed. North 101 Corridor Specific Plan (N101SP) The N101SP was adopted by the City in May 1997 (last amended December 2020). The document is called for in the City's General Plan in recognition of the corridor's unique character, needs, and opportunities. All components and requirements as specified in the General Plan are addressed in the N101SP. Components relating to aesthetic resources include Land Use and Development Regulations; Design Recommendations; Circulation Plan; Historic Preservation Plan; and various other chapters. The primary purpose of the N101SP is to "address the unique aspects, problems, and opportunities of the project corridor, and to maintain its identity, community character, and scale, while fostering the revitalization of the North Highway 101 commercial corridor" (City of Encinitas 1997). The Specific Plan area has been divided into separate zones. Within each zone, development standards unique to its needs and circumstances have been devised that differ from "City-wide" zoning standards as required. Zones are identified for residential, commercial, mobile home park, public/semi-public, historic park, and transportation corridor uses. Additionally, Chapter 4.0, Design Recommendations, of the N101SP provides specific design objective measures for future development within the Specific Plan area (e.g., architectural style, bulk, height, mass, scale, signage, compatibility). All development within the boundaries of the Specific Plan area, with few exceptions, is subject to the City's Design Review process. The project site is located within the boundaries of the N101SP. Chapter 2.0, Community Vision and Specific Plan Goals, identifies the following goals relevant to the project: Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 22 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Land Use Establish design guidelines and development regulations that encourage diverse, small-scale uses and family owned or operated businesses along the North Coast Highway 101 corridor; Encourage architectural diversity and a unique character along North Coast Highway 101; Enhance the overall image and streetscape in order to attract more visitors and shoppers to the corridor; and, Encourage land use buffers between incompatible uses such as commercial frontage adjacent to residential development. Coastal Overlay Zone The project site lies within the Coastal Overlay Zone and, as a result, requires a Coastal Development Permit to ensure conformance with the City of Encinitas Local Coastal Program (LCP). With the Coastal Overlay Zone, the City's General Plan serves as the Land Use Plan component of the LCP, while the Municipal Code provides the LCP's Implementation Plan. Pursuant to the City's LCP, the City is responsible for the issuance of the Coastal Development Permit for the project, subject to appeal to the California Coastal Commission. Projects within the Coastal Zone Overlay are subject certain design restrictions for developing in the Coastal Zone (i.e., building height limits, retaining view corridors, maintaining coastal access, protection of coastal resources, etc.). Special Study Overlay Zone A portion of the northernmost parcel (Parcel 1; APN 216-041-20) is located within a Special Study Overlay Zone. The other two parcels that comprise the project site are not within the boundaries of this overlay zone. The Special Study Overlay designation is used for preserving environmentally significant areas, as well as indicate those areas where development standards will be more stringent to minimize potential hazards to future development. A special study is required within this zone to assess the slopes on site. The Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone regulations shall apply to all areas within the Special Study Overlay Zone where site -specific slope analysis indicates that 10% or more of the natural area of a parcel of land exceeds 25% slope. A site -specific slope analysis was performed for the project area and indicated that all the slopes on the project site have been determined to be manufactured. As such, the project site is not subject to the Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone regulations. Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 23 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone The Resource Management Element of the City's General Plan identifies a number of visual resources within the City's boundaries that are considered to contribute to the scenic quality of the local Encinitas community as well as the larger region. The Resources Management Element identifies a variety of scenic vista points, defines critical viewsheds, and identifies scenic roadways and scenic view corridors. The project site is located along the North Coast Highway 101 corridor which, from certain vantage points, offers views to the north along the coastline and west to the Pacific Ocean. Additionally, views to the Batiquitos Lagoon may also occur from various vantage points within the City limits in the vicinity of the project site. The City identifies Highway 101 north of La Costa Avenue as a scenic vista point "to be acquired and developed" (City of Encinitas 2016). This vista point lies off -site to the north of the subject property and would not be directly affected by physical development proposed with the project. However, due to its proximity to this potential scenic vista point, the project site is identified as being within a "Vista Point Critical Viewshed." The City's Resource Management Element requires the City to designate Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay areas within which the character of proposed development is regulated to protect the integrity of the City's designated vista points (i.e., the potential vista point to the north of the project site). Critical viewsheds are defined in the Resource Management Element as those areas that extend radially for approximately 2,000 feet from the vista point and cover areas upon which development could potentially obstruct, limit, or degrade the view. Development within these critical viewshed areas is subject to design review to ensure building height, bulk, roofline, color, and scale do not limit or degrade existing views and that landscaping is used to screen undesirable views. Highway 101 from Encinitas Boulevard to La Costa Avenue and La Costa Avenue to South Carlsbad State Beach is identified as a Scenic Highway/Visual Corridor. As stated, the project site is subject to the Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay restrictions and to the City's design review process to ensure that the architectural style and character of the proposed structures and other improvements do not conflict with the surrounding character, obstruct scenic views, or reduce the value of any scenic resource. North Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Project The North Coast Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Project is currently being implemented by the City of Encinitas for an approximate 2.5-mile segment of North Coast Highway 101 in the northwest section of the City between La Costa Avenue at the north end and A Street at the south end in the City's community of Leucadia. The project would result in streetscape beautification along the corridor to include new sidewalks, enhanced crosswalks, landscaped medians, Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 24 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A roundabouts, dedicated bike lanes, parking, public art, and landscaping. The proposed project would require street improvements within the North Coast Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Project area. North Highway 101 Streetscape Improvement Project objectives include, but are not limited to, the following: Increase walkability through expanded sidewalks, pedestrian facilities, and safe pedestrian crossings; Increase the bicycle facilities available along the corridor with added and enhanced bike lanes and shared vehicle/bicycle lanes; Preserve and restore the tree canopy by replacing trees posing a safety hazard with new trees, adding hundreds of new trees, and focusing on a native and drought -tolerant landscape palette; Provide street beautification measures with enhanced pavement treatments, street furniture, and opportunities for public art; Respect and enhance the community character along the corridor; Construct appropriate traffic controls and traffic calming measures, such as roundabouts or a full signal at North Highway 101/La Costa Avenue intersection; Implement road diet measures by decreasing travel lane number/width; Implement measures to improve vehicular, bike, and pedestrian safety at side street intersections; Provide additional parking spaces, including more efficient reverse angle on -street parking and parking at designated improved areas in the North County Transit District (NCTD) right-of-way (ROW) along the east side of the corridor; Provide for appropriately -located and accessibly -designed bus stops and bus pull-outs to maximize ridership; Improve existing drainage and storm water quality by implementing low -impact design measures and sustainable Green Streets concepts including infiltration, biofiltration, and water storage areas; Relocate selected existing utility lines to improve connections and services; and Encourage greater business opportunities for shopping and entertainment and provide more gathering destinations for local residents. All such improvements would occur within the right-of-way of Highway 101, with limited effects to privately owned land. However, the project has been designed with consideration for these Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 25 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A planned improvements in the vicinity of the site, in particular along the project frontage where the private on -site development would abut the planned public improvements. Discretionary Actions The City of Encinitas is the lead agency for the project, as it is the agency with primary authority over the project's discretionary approvals. Several other agencies, identified as responsible and trustee agencies, would also use the EIR for their consideration of approvals or permits under their respective authorities. For the purposes of CEQA, the term trustee agency means a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project, which are held in trust for the people of the state of California. The term responsible agency includes all public agencies other than the lead agency that may have discretionary actions associated with the implementation of the proposed project or an aspect of subsequent implementation of the project. Accordingly, the approvals anticipated to be required from the lead agency, trustee agencies, and/or responsible agencies are listed in Table 6, Required Approvals and Permits. Table 6: Required Approvals and Permits Permit/Action Required Approving Agency Lead/Trustee/Responsible Agency JL Density Bonus Tentative Map City of Encinitas (City) Lead Agency Lot Line Adjustment City Lead Agency Coastal Development Permit (CDP) City Lead Agency Design Review Permit City Lead Agency Environmental Impact Report (EIR) City Lead Agency Construction and Demolition Permits City Lead Agency Public Right -of -Way Encroachment Permit City Lead Agency Stormwater Quality Management Plan/ City Lead Agency Drainage Plan Grading Permit City Lead Agency Building Permit City Lead Agency Improvement Plans City Lead Agency Landscape Plan City Lead Agency General Construction Stormwater Permit State Water Resources Responsible Agency Control Board Environmental Opportunistic Beach Replenishment Protection Agency, U.S. Program Sample and Analysis Plan and Army Corps of Responsible Agencies Permit Coverage Authorization Engineers, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project Page 1 26 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Conditions DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Statement of Objectives California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15124(b) requires the project description to contain a statement of objectives that includes the underlying purpose of the proposed project. The objectives of the project are identified below. The underlying purpose of the proposed project is to create a pedestrian -oriented development that provides a mixture of land use types, offers community services and passive recreational activities, and creates opportunities for attainably -priced residential rental housing across various income groups in conformance with the City's 2013-2021 Housing Element Update (Fifth Cycle). The project is guided by the following objectives: Provide housing opportunities consistent with the goals of the adopted City of Encinitas General Plan HEU, while minimizing environmental effects and protecting surrounding aesthetic resources. Design a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. Dedicate 20 percent of the total number of dwelling units as affordable housing units for low income families, thereby helping to meet state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encourage diversity within the community. Provide access to significant coastal resources to low income families consistent with goals and policies of the California Coastal Act. Provide a residential housing product aimed at meeting growing demand for for -lease apartment homes. Provide an overall design that achieves consistency with the goals and design review guidelines identified in the N101SP for Highway 101 within the community of Leucadia. Provide functional compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods and other nearby land uses while enhancing the City's ability to provide fiscally positive development. Create a walkable environment that promotes and enhances the pedestrian experience throughout the site, with safe, convenient, and attractive connections including a walking paseo, pedestrian plaza, and outdoor seating to support community engagement. Minimize visual impacts of the development by locating structures of lesser height along the Highway 101 frontage to enhance the pedestrian scale, while gradually increasing building height within the interior of the development. Minimize or avoid adverse impacts to designated scenic resources along the North Coast Highway 101 corridor. Provide a project design that enhances pedestrian connectivity to public transit and promotes use of alternative means of transportation. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Provide resident and commercial parking in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and encourage shared parking among the various non-residential uses within the project. Provide overnight visitor -serving accommodations in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and Local Coastal Program. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City distributed an NOP of the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse, local and regional responsible agencies, and other interested parties on February 12, 2021 for a 30-day public comment period. Various agencies and other interested parties responded to the NOP. An agency scoping meeting was held on March 12, 2021; however, no public agencies attended. In addition, a Citizen Participation Program (CPP) public meeting was held for the proposed project on December 15, 2020 from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on a virtual ZOOM meeting platform. All property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the project site were mailed a copy of the neighborhood letter and the vicinity map. A total of 89 individuals attended the CPP public meeting. The Draft EIR was prepared and circulated for review and comment by the public agencies and organizations for a 45-day public review period that began on September 24,2021 and concluded on November 8, 2021. A Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR was sent to the California State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research (SCH No. 20211020272). A Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR for review was mailed to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site as well as known public agencies, organizations and parties anticipated to have an interest in the project. The Notice of Availability was also filed with the County Clerk and published in the Coast News. The City received comments on the proposed project. Those comments and the responses to comments have been incorporated into the Final EIR; refer to Section 0.5, Comment Letters and Responses to Comments. It should be noted that as part of preparation of the Final EIR, and in response to public comments received during the 45-day public review period, minor revisions and clarifications were included in the Final EIR and to several technical studies prepared in support to the EIR. However, no such revisions resulted in any of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which states that "A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term "information" can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not "significant" unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to implement." Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A "Significant new information" requiring recirculation may include, for example, a disclosure showing that: 1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented. 2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt it. 4. The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. (Mountain Lion Coalition v. Fish and Game Com. (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1043). Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. Based on the revised project baseline and technical analyses, none of the significance findings originally identified in the EIR required revision, and no new significant impacts were identified. Therefore, recirculation of the EIR for public review is not required or proposed. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA CEQA Section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available that would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[...]" The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures that will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." CEQA Section 21002 goes on to state that "in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects." The mandate and principles announced in CEQA Section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that "changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1)). The second permissible finding is that "such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(2)). The third potential conclusion is that "specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)). CEQA Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 adds another factor: "legal" considerations (see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 565). The concept of "feasibility" of a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and core objectives of a project (see San Diego Citizenry Group v. County of San Diego (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 1, 18; see also City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417). "[F]easibility under CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors" (Ibid). The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding" a significant environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. The City must therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used. CEQA Section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate "mitigating" with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects" (CEQA Section 21002). For purposes of these Findings, the term "avoid" means to not result in a significant impact. In contrast, the term "substantially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of a mitigation measure or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect to a level less than significant. Although CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed]," these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a less -than - significant level or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant. Moreover, although CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely "potentially significant," these findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final EIR. In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur. Project modifications or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are infeasible. (CEQA Guidelines, §15091, subd. (a)(3)). With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened either through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or a feasible environmentally superior alternative, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its "unavoidable adverse environmental effects" (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15093 and 15043(b). The California Supreme Court has stated that, "[t]he wisdom of approving... any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced" (Goleta, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 576; see also Cherry Valley Pass Acres & Neighbors v. City of Beaumont (2010) 190 Cal.App.4t" 316, 357-359). LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS To the extent that these Findings conclude that various mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to require implementation of these measures. These Findings, therefore, constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City formally approves the proposed project. The adopted mitigation measures are included in the MMRP adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementation of the Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM As required by CEQA Section 21081.6 (a)(1), the City, in adopting these Findings, also concurrently adopts a MMRP. The program is designed to ensure that during implementation of the Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project, all responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified below in Section VII, Findings Regarding Significant Impacts. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with project mitigation measures. The MMRP will be available for the public to review by request during the mitigation compliance period, which is on -going following project approval through buildout of the project. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The monitoring program will serve the dual purpose of verifying completion of the mitigation measures for the project and generating information on the effectiveness of the mitigation measures to guide future decisions. FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS The Final EIR contains an environmental analysis of the potential impacts associated with implementing the proposed project. The Final EIR concludes that all significant impacts identified in the EIR can be reduced to less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures proposed with the exception of transportation impacts associated with vehicle - miles -traveled (VMT) which are considered significant and unavoidable. As the lead agency, the City of Encinitas must respond to each significant effect identified in the EIR by making "findings" for each significant effect. As part of the decision -making process, the City must determine whether or how to mitigate the associated significant effects of the project, including whether to implement a project alternative. Approval of the project despite identified significant and unavoidable environmental impacts would require a Statement of Overriding Considerations, explaining why the benefits of the project outweigh the environmental effects, as set forth in this document. Impacts Mitigated to Less than Significant Levels BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Threshold of Significance Issue 1 (EIR Impact 3.3-1): Substantial adverse effect on sensitive species A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would 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 (CDFW) or US Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS). Impacts The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. The State of California has incorporated the protection of birds of prey in Sections 3800, 3513, and 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code (FGC). All raptors and their nests are protected from take or disturbance under the MBTA (16 USC Section 703 et seq.) and California statute (FGC Section 3503.5). As discussed in Section 3.3 of the EIR, no candidate, sensitive, or special -status species were observed or recorded on the project site. However, the survey area and vicinity does provide Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A suitable foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of year-round and seasonal avian residents that could occur in the area. Based on the results of the habitat assessment and a review of specific habitat preferences, occurrence records, known distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that the survey area has a high foraging and moderate nesting potential to support Cooper's hawk, a low (nesting and foraging) potential to support California horned lark, a low (nesting and foraging) potential to support yellow warbler, and a low potential (nesting) to support California least tern. Because the project site is located within 0.25 mile of a known nesting site in Batiquitos Lagoon, although terns would not be expected under current existing conditions, there is the potential that terns may investigate the project site as a nesting or roosting location once the site has been graded if there is inadequate human activity on the site. Therefore, the potential for project construction activities to indirectly affect migratory bird or raptor nesting cycles within and adjacent to the project site exists. Such impacts are considered potentially significant. Cooper's hawk, California horned lark, and yellow warbler do not require focused surveys, and a nesting bird clearance survey would be adequate to determine presence. If project -related activities are to be initiated during the nesting season (January 15 to September 15), a pre - construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within one week prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities. If the project cannot avoid grading the site between April 1 and September 15, a presence/absence survey and monitoring for sign of any least terns flying over or landing on the site either during or after daily construction hours would be needed. If any of these species, or any other species protected by the California Fish and Game or MBTA, is actively nesting on the project site, implementation of nest avoidance measures would also be required to ensure compliance with state and federal laws protecting nesting birds as well as compliance with CEQA. Additionally, the palm trees and vacant structures on the site that are slated for removal have potential to support roosting bat species (including sensitive bat species) and may provide maternity roosts. If palm tree removal and building demolition occurs during the bat maternity season (March 1 through September 30), direct or indirect impacts to sensitive bat species could result. Explanation As discussed in Section 3.3 of the EIR, no candidate, sensitive, or special -status species were observed or recorded on the project site, and such species are not anticipated to occur on -site due to the due to existing conditions (i.e., developed land uses and highly disturbed conditions from uses past and present) and the absence of suitable habitat. However, migratory birds and raptors have been historically observed in the area; therefore, the potential for nesting and foraging in the area does exist and indirect impacts to breeding birds and/or raptors may occur Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A during project construction activities (i.e., clearing or grading) if construction occurs during the nesting/breeding season. Mitigation measure BIO-1 would be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant. Additionally, on -site trees and vacant structures (to be removed) may support roosting bat species. Therefore, potential impacts may result if demolition occurs during the bat maternity season (March 1 through September 30). Mitigation measure BIO-2 would be implemented to require verification by a qualified bat biologist that bats are not present on -site before palm trees and vacant structures are removed. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to bats to less than significant. Mitigation Measures 11310-1 Preconstruction General Avian, Raptor, and Least Tern Survey, and California Least Tern Monitoring. If the project construction occurs during the raptor and avian nesting season (raptor nesting season begins January 15; migratory bird nesting begins February 15; all raptor and avian nesting activity typically ceases by September 15), a qualified avian biologist with expertise monitoring least terns shall conduct a preconstruction nesting activity survey for migratory birds, raptors, and least terns on the project site and within 100 feet. The surveys shall be conducted no more than 3 days prior to commencement of construction activities. The qualified biologist will also examine the project survey area for all signs of least terns (e.g., nesting scrapes and/or nests). Impacts to California least tern shall be fully avoided. The qualified biologist shall be on - site during all construction activities between April 1 and September 15 to verify that least terns are not flying to or over the site during the day or roosting on the site at night. Any modification to the monitoring frequency and duration shall first be approved by the Wildlife Agencies prior to implementing the change. If least terns are observed flying over the site during construction hours or roosting on the site, avoidance measures (e.g. changing construction hours, staging equipment throughout the site) shall be implemented to deter terns from flying over and landing on the site and ensure the project's impacts on least terns remain less than significant. If California least terns occupy and nest on the site, construction within at least 500 feet or a suitable distance as determined by the qualified least tern biologist shall be delayed until any tern nests have gone to completion and the young have fledged and are no longer dependent on the project site for roosting. The monitoring biologist shall provide documentation of any findings to the City. Impacts to other nesting bird species shall also be avoided. If nesting birds are discovered during the preconstruction surveys or during construction, then avoidance measures will be undertaken and adequate buffers for each of the species will be established until the Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A juveniles have fledged and there has been no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. The monitoring biologist will monitor any nests and provide documentation to the City. BIO-2 Preconstruction Bat Monitoring. If construction occurs during bat maternity season (March 1 through September 30), a qualified bat biologist shall conduct bat surveys which include a combination of sampling, exit counts, and acoustic surveys, to determine if bats are occupying palm trees or vacant structures. If bat surveys are negative, palm tree removal and building demolition shall commence within three days after the survey. If bat surveys are positive, palm tree removal and building demolition shall be postponed until such time as the qualified bat biologist determines bats are no longer present. Timing/Implementation: Prior to project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measures 1310-1 and BIO-2 are feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measures 1310-1 and BIO-2 contain measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures (if necessary) to reduce the project's potential direct and indirect impacts on sensitive avian species and roosting bats (including maternity roosts) that may be inhabiting the project area prior to and/or during project demolition or construction. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not 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 CDFW or USFWS. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 4 (EIR Impact 3.3-4): Interfere substantially with the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would have the potential to interfere with the movement of 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. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impacts The project site is not located within any identified wildlife corridors. The site is located directly west of North Coast Highway 101, south of Batiquitos Lagoon, within an area surrounded by residential and commercial development. The survey area consists of disturbed areas, Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A ornamental vegetation, and intermixed with commercial land uses that have fragmented the connection between the survey area and surrounding naturally occurring vegetation communities and other natural habitats. On -site and surrounding development has degraded the on -site vegetation communities and has likely precluded the movement of larger mammals through the area due to the lack of suitable habitat and foraging opportunities. Further, elevated noise levels and lighting associated with surrounding land uses and vehicle traffic along North Coast Highway 101 decrease the suitability of the site to be used as a wildlife movement corridor. However, project implementation would require removal of the 43 trees on -site that provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds, that may occur in the area. Therefore, the project has the potential to adversely affect migratory bird and raptor nesting cycles within or adjacent to the property. Impacts are considered potentially significant. On -site palm trees and vacant structures that are slated for removal have the potential to support roosting bat species (and may provide maternity roosts). Project -related tree removal and demolition activities occurring during the bat maternity season may therefore result in direct or indirect impacts to bat species, if present. Explanation As evaluated in Section 3.3, Biological Resources, of the EIR, the project site is disturbed and does not support suitable habitat or water bodies for migratory species. The City's Draft Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan Subarea Plan identifies Wildlife Corridor Planning Zones in the Encinitas subarea. The project site is not located within these corridors. The project would not impede the use of any native wildlife nursery sites, as none exist in the area. However, migratory birds and raptors have the potential to nest and forage on or near the site due to the presence of on -site trees (to be removed with construction) and on other surrounding lands. Therefore, mitigation is proposed to remove the potential for the project to adversely affect migratory bird and raptor nesting cycles within or adjacent to the property. The project is subject to the requirements of the federal MBTA which would reduce the potential for temporary indirect impacts (e.g., noise, human presence) to migratory birds and raptors during project construction. As mitigation for potentially significant impacts to migratory birds and raptors, if project grading/construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season for breeding migratory birds and/or raptors, mitigation measure BIO-1 would be implemented to reduce indirect impacts to less than significant. Potential impacts may result if tree removal or building demolition activities occur on -site during the bat maternity season (March 1 through September 30). Mitigation measure BIO-2 would be implemented to require verification by a qualified bat biologist that bats are not present on -site Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A before palm trees and vacant structures are removed. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to bats to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures BIO-1 and BIO-2. Timing/Implementation: Prior to project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findine The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 are feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure BIO-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures (if necessary) to reduce the project's potential indirect impact on migratory birds and raptors during construction. Actions would be required to ensure that construction activities are restricted during the nesting/breeding season to avoid indirect disturbance of such species. Additionally, mitigation measure BIO-2 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures (if necessary) to reduce the project's potential direct or indirect impacts on roosting bat species during project tree removal and demolition. Actions would be required to ensure that tree removal and demolition activities are restricted during the bat maternity season to avoid direct or indirect disturbance of such species. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not interfere substantially with wildlife movement or impede use of native wildlife nursery sites. Impacts would be less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 7 (EIR Impact 3.3-7): Result in a cumulative impact on biological resources A significant impact relative would occur if the project would result in a cumulative effect related to biological resources when considered with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects within the identified study area. Impacts Although no sensitive species are located or were observed on the project site, the project would have the potential to contribute to a significant cumulative effect on sensitive species (migratory avian species or roosting bats) when considered with other development projects. Project construction activities may indirectly affect migratory bird or raptor nesting cycles within and adjacent to the project site and/or result in the potential to interfere with wildlife movement through the area or region. Cumulative impacts are considered potentially significant. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 11 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Explanation The geographic scope for cumulative impacts to biological resources are identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR. The cumulative study area also includes all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to cumulative effects on biological resources (EIR Table 3.0-2). The protection of biological resources in the City is generally enforced through the City of Encinitas Draft Multiple Habitat Conservation Program Subarea Plan. The project site is not located within the boundaries of the Draft Subarea Plan or an area identified as a migratory wildlife corridor. Furthermore, no other sensitive species have been documented on the project site due to the lack of suitable habitat and level of disturbance, and no wetlands or riparian habitat are present. Cumulative projects located within the City's Draft Subarea Plan area would be subject to the goals and policies outlined in the plan, and would be required to implement mitigation measures if a significant impact would occur as a result of project implementation. As such, direct and indirect effects to special -status species would be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. Project impacts would be limited to potential indirect construction impacts on raptors and migratory avian species, as well as potential direct or indirect impacts on roosting bat species . Impacts would be reduced to less significant with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 and BIO-2. Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation measures proposed, the project's contribution to a cumulative impact on biological resources would be less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures BIO-1 and 131O-2. Timing/Implementation: Prior to project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findin>; The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measures BIO-1 BIO-2 are feasible mitigation measures and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure BIO-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential cumulative impact on biological resources. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not contribute to a substantial adverse cumulative effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any candidate, sensitive, or special -status species, nor would the project contribute to a cumulative effect due Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A to interference with wildlife movement in the project area or region or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. CULTURAL RESOURCES Threshold of Significance Issues 1 and 2 (EIR Impacts 3.4-1 and 3.4-2): Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project were to result in substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 1S064.5. Impacts As discussed in EIR Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, no known historical or archaeological resources having significance have been identified on the project site (ECORP 2021; see EIR Appendices D-1 and D-2). However, the project area has been historically occupied by Native Americans for thousands of years and, due to the presence of sediments associated with human occupation of the region and the presence of previously recorded pre -contact resources in the surrounding area, as well as documented on -site conditions, the potential for subsurface resources is considered to range from low to high, depending on the location within the subject site. Therefore, the potential exists for unknown historic or archaeological resources to be present. The potential for project -related ground -disturbing construction activities to impact unknown historic and/or archaeological resources on -site is considered to be significant. Explanation As discussed in EIR Section 3.4, two cultural resources were discovered as a result of the field survey. The first was a historic built environment resource consisting of four buildings located at 1900 North Coast Highway 101. The prehistoric archaeology site (FEN-001) was also identified on -site and consisted of a small, diffuse scatter of four prehistoric artifacts including one fine- grained volcanic primary flake; one granite/quartz fire -cracked rock, one granite flake fragment, and one Santiago Peak Metavolcanic formation hammerstone. Further evaluation under the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) criterion and Section 15064.5(a)(2)—(3) of the CEQA Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code determined that neither is considered to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA and no additional recommendations were made for the resources. No impact would occur in this regard. A records search was conducted in September 2020 for the project site and a surrounding 0.5 mile radius and a site survey was conducted in October 2020. The records search determined that three previously recorded cultural resources are located within 0.5 mile of the project area; however, no significant archaeological resources were identified on -site from the records search, Sacred Lands search, field survey, or from further evaluation of the site. No known resources Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A have been identified on -site that would be eligible for listing under the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or CRHR criteria. Therefore, the project would not directly cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a known archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The potential exists for unknown historic or archaeological resources to be present on -site does exist. Project -related ground -disturbing construction activities may therefore have the potential to adversely affect unknown historic and archaeological resources on -site; such impacts are considered to be significant. Mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 would ensure that project impacts on unknown historic or archaeological resources are reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measures CR-1 Cultural Resources Monitoring Program. A Cultural Resource Mitigation Monitoring Program 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 traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) Native American monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground -disturbing activities associated with project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that may disturb original (pre -project) ground, including the placement of imported fill materials and related roadway improvements (i.e., for access). 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. 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 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. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American monitor, Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A 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 a Data Recovery Plan is required, then a TCA Native American monitor shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan. The qualified archaeologist and/or TCA Native American monitor may also halt ground disturbing activities around known archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features if, in their respective opinions, there is the possibility that they could be damaged or destroyed. The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all tribal cultural resources collected during the cultural resource mitigation monitoring conducted during all ground disturbing activities, and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site to the TCA Native American Tribe for respectful and dignified treatment and disposition, including reburial, in accordance with the Tribe's cultural and spiritual traditions. All cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division CR-2 Prepare Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report. 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 Development Services Director for approval. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 15 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A CR-3 Identification of Human Remains. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.S, 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 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. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findin The City finds that with implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1 to CUL-3, construction of the proposed project would not result in impacts to unknown historic or cultural resources because all construction activity would be monitored and construction halted if resources are encountered until they can be documented. Therefore, because there are no known cultural resources on -site and because CUL-1 to CUL-3 would mitigate potential impacts to unknown resources, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 3 (EIR Impact 3.4-3): Disturb human remains A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project were to disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Impacts No known cemeteries are located on -site and no such resources were identified during the records searches, consultation efforts, or field survey. Due to existing conditions on the subject property and the presence of previously recorded pre -contact resources in the surrounding area, the potential for subsurface resources is considered to range from low to high, depending on the location within the site. Additionally, the project vicinity has the potential to support buried pre - contact archaeological sites due to proximity to the Pacific Ocean and recognized regular use by Native Americans for thousands of years. As such, there is the potential that undiscovered human remains may be located beneath the ground surface. Therefore, the potential exists for human remains to be present on -site and impacts are considered to be significant. Explanation Although no known human remains have been identified on -site, the potential for project ground -disturbing activities to result in impacts to unknown resources does exist. The proposed project would comply with regulatory requirements for the treatment of Native American human remains contained in California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and 7052 and California PRC Section 5097. Implementation of mitigation measure CR-3 would reduce impacts on undiscovered human remains to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measure CUL-3. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that with implementation of mitigation measure CUL-3, the project would comply with regulatory requirements for the treatment of Native American human remains contained in California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and 7052 and California PRC Section 5097 if remains were discovered. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact to undiscovered human remains. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 4 (EIR Impact 3.4-4): Result in a cumulative impact on cultural resources A significant impact relative would occur if the project would result in a cumulative effect related to historical or archaeological resources or human remains when considered with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future projects within the identified study area. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Impacts No known historical or archaeological resources, or human remains, having significance have been identified on the project site. However, as the project area has been historically occupied by Native Americans and, due to the presence of sediments associated with human occupation of the region and the presence of previously recorded pre -contact resources in the surrounding area, the potential for subsurface resources on the subject site is considered low to high (depending on the location within the property). Therefore, the potential for project -related ground -disturbing construction activities to contribute to a significant cumulative impact on unknown historic and/or archaeological resources, including human remains, is considered to be significant. Explanation The geographic area of analysis for cultural resources includes the site, adjacent properties, and those properties identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR, including all 2019 HEU sites (see EIR Table 3.0-2) to the extent they may contribute to cumulative effects on historic and/or cultural resources. This geographic scope of analysis is appropriate because the archaeological, historical, and cultural resources within this area are expected to be similar to those that may occur within the site vicinity. Urban development over past decades in San Diego County has resulted in adverse impacts on cultural resources. No known cultural resources of significance or human remains have been documented on the project site, and therefore, no such known resources would be affected by development of the proposed project. However, construction activities resulting from the project would include grading and excavation in previously disturbed areas, which may have the potential to result in the encounter of undiscovered subsurface resources. Implementation of the proposed project could therefore contribute to potential cumulative impacts on cultural resources, including unknown archaeological and historic resources, as well as unknown buried human remains. Past, present, and foreseeable projects have similarly affected, or would have the potential to affect, cultural resources throughout the region over time. Mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 address the discovery and recovery of unknown archaeological and historical resources through construction monitoring, identification of potential resources, and evaluation of the significance of a find. Mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 would be implemented to reduce potential cumulative impacts from project construction on undiscovered resources, if encountered, to less than significant. Similarly, with conformance to applicable federal, state, and local regulations, combined with the evaluation of resource significance and implementation of mitigation measures in compliance with applicable legislation, it is anticipated that other cumulative development projects would be adequately addressed and impacts on historical and cultural resources and/or human remains would be reduced to the extent feasible. As such, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts on cultural resources would be less than cumulatively considerable. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant cumulative effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 are feasible mitigation measures and shall be required as conditions of approval. Mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 contain measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential cumulative impact on unknown historic and/or cultural resources during construction. Actions would be required to ensure that construction activities are properly monitored, and the results documented, and/or conducted to ensure proper adherence to applicable regulations pertaining to the discovery and treatment of any resources. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource, nor disturb human remains. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. ENERGY CONSERVATION AND CLIMATE CHANGE Threshold of Significance Issue 1 (EIR Impact 3.5-1): Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Impacts The proposed project would result in direct and indirect emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4), relative to potential GHG emissions. Direct project related GHG emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources; indirect sources include emissions from energy consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation. The project was calculated to generate GHG emissions of approximately 4.98 metric tons carbon monoxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year per service population, which would exceed the previously established significance threshold of 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population from the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP). Impacts would be potentially significant and mitigation is required. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Explanation GHG emissions would be generated by the existing on -site uses (restaurant and commercial center). Under existing conditions, on -site development emits approximately 549.02 MTCO2e/year. Direct Project -Related Source of Greenhouse Gases Construction Emissions. To adequately include GHG emission from construction in the lifetime/operational GHG estimates, construction emissions are amortized over a 30-year project lifetime. Construction GHG emissions are amortized (i.e., total construction emissions divided by the lifetime of the project, assumed to be 30 years), then added to the operational emissions to adequately include GHG emission from construction in the lifetime/operational GHG estimates. Project construction would result in an annual total of 33.47 MTCO2e (amortized over 30 years) which represents a total of approximately 1,004.16 MTCO2e from the overall construction activities (see also EIR Table 3.5-5). Area Source. The project would result in nominal (68.20 MTCO2e) area source emissions. Area source emissions would be generated due to an increased demand for fuels associated with the development of the proposed project. The primary use of fuel producing area source emissions by the project would be for consumer products, architectural coatings, landscaping, and natural gas (limited to restaurant use only). It should be noted that per City Ordinance 2021-13, no natural gas use would be associated with the proposed residential development. Mobile Source Emissions. The project would result in a net increase of 1,173 average dailyvehicle trips over existing conditions, which equates to approximately 1,565.21 MTCO2e/year of mobile source -generated GHG emissions as modeled in CaIEEMod. Indirect Project -Related Source of Greenhouse Gases Energy Consumption. Indirect energy consumption emissions were calculated using the CaIEEMod model and project -specific land use data. The project would indirectly result in 515.79 MTCO2e/year of GHG emissions due to energy consumption; see also EIR Table 3.5-5. Water Demand. Project operations would result in a demand of approximately 13.62 million gallons of water per year. Emissions from indirect energy impacts due to water supply would result in 52.25 MTCO2e/year. Solid Waste. Solid waste associated with project operations would result in 15.42 MTCO2e/year. Project Sustainable Design The project proposes design features that would reduce project related GHG emissions. The project would install water -efficient fixtures in compliance with 2019 CALGreen Code and would include recycling services per AB 341, which would divert at least 75 percent of solid waste generated on -site away from local landfills. Further, high -efficiency lighting would be installed in Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards which would reduce energy usage by approximately 30 percent compared to nonresidential buildings constructed under the 2016 Title 24 standards. In addition, the project would install solar panels on -site that would produce approximately 250 kilowatts (kW) of solar power. According to the City's CAP, the City would increase solar capacity by 1.9 megawatts (MW) from residential and commercial development by 2030 and reduce GHG emissions by 1,066 MTCO2e, which is equivalent to approximately 561 MTCO2e per MW. Therefore, the proposed on -site solar panels (250 kW) would reduce GHG emissions by 140.26 MTCO2e/year. Further, the project would include 39 on -site electric vehicle (EV) charging stations on -site. According to the City's CAP, the City would increase the number of EV charging stations by 866 from residential and commercial development by 2030 and reduce GHG emissions by 3,146 MTCO2e, which is equivalent to approximately 3.63 MTCO2e per EV charging station. Therefore, the 39 EV charging stations on -site would reduce GHG emissions by 141.68 MTCO2e/year. The total amount of project related GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources combined minus GHG emissions from the existing on -site land uses would total 1,703.33 MTCO2e per year. With the emission reductions from on -site solar panels and EV charging stations, as well as residential natural gas use per Ordinance 2021-13, the project related GHG emissions would total 1,364.42 MTCO2e/year. The project would increase population by 236 residents and employment by 38 employees (62 employees for the proposed project minus 24 employees for the existing uses), totaling 274 service population. As such, the project would generate GHG emissions of approximately 4.98 MTCO2e per year per service population, which would exceed the previously established significance threshold of 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population from the City's CAP. Mitigation measure GHG-1 would be implemented to require the project applicant to purchase and retire 18,739 MTCO2e greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year (emissions in exceedance of the City's threshold multiplied by the project service population of 274 multiplied by the 30 years of proposed project life equals approximately 18,739 MTCO2e total offsets required to be mitigated for the project). With implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1, the project would not exceed the GHG emissions threshold from the City's CAP, and impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measures GHG-1 Purchase and Retire Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Offsets. The applicant shall purchase and retire 18,739 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year, consistent with the performance standards and requirements set forth below. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 21 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The GHG offsets shall be secured from an accredited registry that is approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), or from an emissions reduction credits program that is administered by CARB. The GHG offsets shall be secured from an accredited registry that uses a CARB-approved protocol which meets the requirements of California Code of Regulations, Title 17, §95972(a). The GHG offsets shall be real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable, as those terms are defined in Health & Safety Code §38562(d)(1) and (2) and California Code of Regulations, Title 17, §95802. Carbon offset credits can result from activities that reduce, avoid, destroy or sequester an amount of GHG emissions in an off -site location to offset the equivalent amount of GHG emissions occurring elsewhere. For the purpose of Project mitigation, carbon offset credits shall consist of direct emission reductions or sequestration that are used to offset the Project's direct emissions. As described in CARB Determination for State Assembly Bill 734, all carbon offset credits shall be purchased from a carbon offset registry which is approved by CARB and uses CARB-approved protocols, which at present include the following: the American Climate Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Verra (formerly Verified Carbon Standard). The carbon offset credits shall be verifiable by the City and enforceable in accordance with the registry's applicable standards, practices, or protocols. The carbon offsets must substantively satisfy all six of the statutory "environmental integrity" requirements applicable to the CARB Cap -and -Trade Program, generally as set forth in both subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2) of California Health and Safety Code §38562: real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, enforceable, and additional. All offset credits shall be verified by an independent verifier who meets stringent levels of professional qualification (i.e., American National Standards Institute National Accreditation Board Accreditation Program for Greenhouse Gas Validation/Verification Bodies or a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Lead Verifier accredited by CARB), or an expert with equivalent qualifications to the extent necessary to assist with the verification. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in the event that an approved registry becomes no longer accredited by CARB and the offset credits cannot be transferred to another accredited registry, the project applicant shall comply with the rules and procedures for retiring and/or replacing offset credits in the manner specified by the applicable protocol or other applicable standards including (to the extent required) by purchasing an equivalent number of credits to recoup the loss. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Geographic Location: Carbon offset credits shall be obtained from GHG reduction projects that occur in the following locations in order of priority: (1) off -site within the neighborhood surrounding the project site, including Encinitas; (2) the greater North County community; (3) within the San Diego County Air Basin; (4) the State of California; and (5) the United States. For offset credits from projects outside the State of California, the applicant shall demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the City that the offset project meets requirements equivalent to or stricter than California's laws and regulations for ensuring the validity of offset credits. Any offset credits used for mitigation are subject to the approval of the City. Contracts for purchase of credits shall be entered into prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building and the applicant shall provide the third -party verification report concerning those credits, and the unique serial numbers of those credits showing that they have been retired. The City shall confirm receipt of the verification reports and serial numbers prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant cumulative effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure GHG-1 is feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure GHG-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential to generate GHG emissions. Actions would be required to ensure that the project applicant or its designee purchase and retire 18,739 MTCO2e greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year, consistent with the performance standards and requirements identified in mitigation measure GHG-1. With implementation mitigation measure GHG-1, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 5 (EIR Impact 3.5-5): Result in a cumulative impact on related to energy conservation and climate change A significant impact would occur if the project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment when considered with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future projects. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 23 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Impacts The proposed project is required to be consistent with the City's CAP through implementing the appropriate CAP measures and via implementation of mitigation measures, as applicable. The proposed project was calculated to generate GHG emissions of approximately 4.98 MTCO2e/year per service population, which would exceed the significance threshold of 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population from the City's CAP. Therefore, the potential for the project to contribute to a cumulative impact related to GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, is considered potentially significant and mitigation is required. Explanation The state of California has elected to reduce GHG emissions at the state level for activities under its control and has promulgated policy for local agencies to do the same. As such, the City predominantly uses the CAP as the mechanism to reduce GHG emissions and energy consumption in the City on a project -by -project basis. Cumulative projects that would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the proposed project's incremental contribution to GHG emissions are identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR. Additionally, to be conservative, the cumulative analysis included all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to certain issue -specific cumulative effects (EIR Table 3.0-2). The project is consistent with the City's General Plan and accounted for in the HEU. The project is required to be consistent with the City's CAP through implementing the appropriate CAP measures and implementation of mitigation measure. With implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1, the project applicant would be required to purchase and retire purchase and retire 18,739 MTCO2e greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year to comply with the City's CAP (emissions in exceedance of the City's threshold multiplied by the project service population of 274 multiplied by the 30 years of proposed project life equals approximately 18,739 MTCO2e total offsets required to be mitigated forthe project). With implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1, the project would not exceed the GHG emissions threshold from the City's CAP, and impacts would be less than significant. Other cumulative projects analyzed in the HEU would be consistent with the City's General Plan, and future projects would be subject to provisions of the CAP and any associated implementing ordinances in effect at the time of application submittal for those projects. Future development would also be subject to compliance with applicable federal, state, and local energy and building regulations to reduce potential GHG emissions. As to energy consumption, the cumulative impact analysis in the EIR focused on the three sources of energy that are relevant to the proposed project: (1) electricity (including energy required for water delivery, sanitary sewer, and solid waste disposal); (2) natural gas; and (3) transportation Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A fuel for vehicle trips associated with new development, as well as the fuel necessary for project construction. Construction of the cumulative projects listed in Table 3.0-1 and Table 3.0-2 of the EIR would not represent a substantial increase in demand for local or regional energy supplies because construction fuel use would be temporary and would cease upon completion of project construction. None of the cumulative projects are anticipated to involve unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long-term operational demand for electricity or natural gas. The proposed project includes project components to promote sustainability through site design that would conserve energy, water, open space, and other natural resources, and would become specific conditions of approval by the City. Other cumulative projects would also include project components to comply with the CAP and/or other local, state, and federal regulations. As required by CET-4 and CET-5 of the CAP, projects are required to install rooftop solar panels and Level II EV charging stations, which would reduce each cumulative project's energy consumption. The proposed project would also not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and would not contribute to GHG emissions in this regard. Project impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1. As such, the project's contribution to a cumulative impact relative to GHG emissions would be less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measure GHG-1. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findin>; The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant cumulative effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure GHG-1 is feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure GHG-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential to contribute to GHG emissions. Actions would be required to ensure that the project applicant or its designee purchase and retire 18,739 MTCO2e greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year, consistent with the performance standards and requirements identified in mitigation measure GHG-1. With implementation mitigation measure GHG-1, the project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 25 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A GEOLOGY AND SOILS Threshold of Significance Issue 9 (EIR Impact 3.6-9): Destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. Impacts The project site is considered sensitive for to be sensitive for paleontological resources. Therefore, the project has the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. Impacts are considered potentially significant. Explanation Fossil remains, fossil sites, fossil -producing geologic formations, and geologic formations with the potential for containing fossil remains are considered paleontological resources or have the potential to be paleontological resources. The potential for impacts on fossils depends on the sensitivity of the geologic unit and the amount and depth of grading and excavation. The Highway 101 corridor is underlain by a layer cake series of geologic units including Pleistocene -age (approximately 220,000 to 85,000 years old) old paralic deposits (broadly equivalent to the Bay Point Formation) and Eocene -age (approximately 46 to 40 million years old) strata of the Santiago Formation. The Bay Point Formation is known to preserve fossils of marine invertebrates but has also yielded fossils of Ice Age land mammals. Based on this fossil record, the Bay Point Formation is typically assigned a moderate to high paleontological sensitivity. Additionally, the Santiago Formation is known to preserve fossils of marine invertebrates (corals, bryozoans, clams, snails, crustaceans, and echinoderms) and marine vertebrates (sharks, rays, and bony fishes), as well as fossils of early turtles, snakes, lizards, crocodiles, birds, and land mammals (opossums, hedgehogs, bats, primates, rodents, early carnivorans, tapirs, and others). Based on this proven fossil record, the Santiago Formation is typically assigned a high paleontological sensitivity. The anticipated depth of project grading and excavation is anticipated to be up to approximately 32 feet below ground surface. Therefore, project grading and/or excavation activities may result in the unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources, or damage or destruction of unknown paleontological resources, that may be present below the ground surface. This would constitute a significant impact. Mitigation measure GEO-1 would address the inadvertent discovery of previously unknown paleontological resources and would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 26 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Mitigation Measures GEO-1 Paleontological Data Recovery and Monitoring Plan: A Data Recovery and Monitoring Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City. The plan shall document paleontological recovery methods. 1. Prior to grading permit issuance, the project applicant shall implement a paleontological monitoring and recovery program consisting of the following measures, which shall be included on project grading plans to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department: a. The project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified paleontologist to conduct a paleontological monitoring and recovery program. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual having an MS or PhD degree in paleontology or geology, and who is a recognized expert in the identification of fossil materials and the application of paleontological recovery procedures and techniques. As part of the monitoring program, a paleontological monitor may work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual having experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. b. The qualified paleontologist shall attend the project preconstruction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors concerning the grading plan and paleontological field techniques. c. The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on -site on a full- time basis during the original cutting of previously undisturbed portions of the underlying very old paralic deposits. If the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor ascertains that the noted formations are not fossil - bearing, the qualified paleontologist shall have the authority to terminate the monitoring program. d. If fossils are discovered, recovery shall be conducted by the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor. In most cases, fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time, although some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall have the authority to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. e. If subsurface bones or other potential fossils are found anywhere within the project site by construction personnel in the absence of a qualified paleontologist Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 27 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A or paleontological monitor, the qualified paleontologist shall be notified immediately to assess their significance and make further recommendations. f. Fossil remains collected during monitoring and salvage shall be cleaned, sorted, and catalogued. Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. 2. Prior to building permit issuance, a final summary report outlining the results of the mitigation program shall be prepared by the qualified paleontologist and submitted to the Development Services Department for concurrence. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils, as well as appropriate maps. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading permit; During project construction Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that the project would have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. Implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would reduce project impacts to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 10 (EIR Impact 3.6-10): Result in a cumulative impact related to geology and soils A significant impact relative could occur if the project would result in a cumulative effect related to geology and soils when considered with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future projects. Such effects include if the project would directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic -related ground failure, or landslides; result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; be located on soils that would be unstable as a result of the project resulting in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse; be located on expansive soils; have soils incapable of supporting alternative wastewater disposal systems; and/or directly or indirectly result in destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Impacts Similar to other development project within the region, the project site is located in a seismically active area. All areas of San Diego County are considered seismically active to a lesser or greater extent depending on their proximity to active regional faults. Impacts of the proposed project would be cumulatively considerable if the project, in combination with related projects, would Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 28 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A result in significant cumulative impacts. However, the effects of the cumulative projects are not of a nature to cause cumulatively significant effects from geologic impacts, or on -site soils, because such impacts are site -specific and would only have the potential to combine with impacts of the proposed project if they occurred in the same location. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to contribute to a significant cumulative impact relative to seismic hazards, soil instability, or other such geologic conditions. The project site is considered sensitive for paleontological resources and therefore, with consideration for other development projects, may have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature within the area or region. Project -related cumulative impacts are considered potentially cumulative considerable. Explanation Cumulative projects that would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the project relative to geology and soils are identified in Tables 3.0-1 and 3.0-2 of the EIR. Additionally, the cumulative impact analysis includes all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to certain issue -specific cumulative effects (see Table 3.0-2). The project would require grading of the subject property to allow for development as proposed. Although construction activities would have the potential to result in erosion or siltation on the project site, adherence to the recommendations in the geotechnical report and other grading and building requirements would mitigate erosion impacts to less than significant levels. Other cumulative projects would adhere to similar requirements, thereby minimizing cumulative scenario erosion impacts. Specifically, all planned projects in the vicinity of the proposed project would be subject to environmental review and would be required to conform to the City's General Plan and California Building Code. Other cumulative projects may be located in areas considered sensitive for paleontological resources. Such projects would be required to implement mitigation similar to mitigation measure GEO-1 identified for the project to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant levels. With adherence to grading and building requirements, the project would not contribute to cumulative impacts for geologic, seismic hazards, or related events because the project and other cumulative projects in the area would be required to demonstrate compliance with local, state, and federal building and safety standards prior to City issuance of grading and/or building permits. As a result, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to geology and soils, including paleontological resources, would be less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measure GEO-1. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading permit; During project construction Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 29 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findin The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure GEO-1 is a feasible mitigation measure and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure GEO-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential cumulative impact on unknown paleontological resources during construction. Actions would be required to ensure that construction activities are properly monitored and that any discovered resources are documented, recovered, and evaluated to avoid impacts to such resources. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Threshold of Significance Issue 2 (EIR Impact 3.7-2): Release of hazardous materials into the environment A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would 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. Impacts Based on the results of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) conducted for the proposed project (Hovey Environmental 2017 and 2019), the project site does not support any recognized environmental conditions (RECs) that require further review and/or testing. However, due to the age of the existing buildings on -site, asbestos and lead based paints may be present and are considered to be hazardous materials. As such, project impacts pertaining to the potential release of such hazardous materials into the environment are considered significant. No long-term operational impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials were identified. The project would not result in a significant impact in this regard. Explanation As stated, based on the results of the Phase I ESAs prepared for the project site, the property does not support any RECs that require further review and/or testing. However, due to the age of the structures on -site, there is a potential for the structures to contain lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials. Project demolition activities of structures composed of lead -based paint or asbestos -related material could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 30 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A release of hazardous building materials. As such, mitigation measure HAZ-1 would require an asbestos and lead material survey to be conducted by a qualified consultant to determine if the existing structures on -site contain lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials, and mitigation measure HAZ-2 would require a licensed abatement contractor to implement the approved abatement work plan prior to demolition of affected structures. Additionally, mitigation measure HAZ-3 would require an abatement close-out report to be prepared by the abatement contractor and submitted by the project applicant to the City of Encinitas Development Services Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. In addition to compliance with applicable local and state laws and requirements, implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 would reduce short term impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials occurring as the result of reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Limited use and storage of hazardous materials (i.e., cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers, other commercially available substances, as well as for cleaning and maintenance chemicals associated with the proposed on -site hotel pool) would occur in association with the proposed commercial and residential uses. Project conformance with existing local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to the routine transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes would ensure that potential adverse effects are minimized and that such substances are handled appropriately in the event of accidental release. Therefore, operational impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 Prior to demolition permit issuance, an asbestos and lead material survey shall be conducted by a qualified consultant to determine if the existing structures on -site contain lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials. If substances containing lead and/or asbestos are found on -site, an abatement work plan shall be prepared by the consultant for the proper removal and disposal of the materials in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The asbestos and lead survey results and any necessary work plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Encinitas Development Services Department (Planning Division). Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit; Prior to issuance of a building permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division HAZ-2 If on -site abatement of asbestos and/or lead materials is required, a licensed abatement contractor shall implement the approved abatement work plan prior to demolition of affected structures. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 31 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit; Prior to issuance of a building permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division HAZ-3 Prior to building permit issuance, an abatement close-out report shall be prepared by the abatement contractor and submitted by the project applicant to the Development Services Department for review and approval. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit; Prior to issuance of a building permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that the proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts relative to hazards and hazardous conditions (upset or accident conditions resulting in release of hazardous materials into the environment) as the result of the potential presence for lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials. Implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1 to HAZ-3 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 8 (EIR Impact 3.7-8): Result in a cumulative impact related to hazards and hazardous materials A significant cumulative impact would occur if the project would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; 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; emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; 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, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport; or, impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or, expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Impacts Project construction activities could result in the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as gasoline fuels, asphalt, lubricants, paint, and solvents. Although care will be taken to transport, use, and dispose of small quantities of these materials by licensed Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 32 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A professionals, there is a possibility that upset or accidental conditions may arise which could release hazardous materials into the environment. Accidental releases of hazardous materials are those releases that are unforeseen or that result from unforeseen circumstances, while reasonably foreseeable upset conditions are those release or exposure events that can be anticipated and planned for. Project construction activities would occur in accordance with all applicable local standards adopted by the City of Encinitas, as well as state and federal health and safety requirements intended to minimize hazardous materials risk to the public, such as Cal/OSHA requirements, the Hazardous Waste Control Act, the California Accidental Release Protection Program, and the California Health and Safety Code, in order to minimize project effects relative to hazards and hazardous materials. Additionally, the project would prepare and implement a Construction General Storm Water Permit (Order 2012-0006-DWQ) and stormwater pollution prevention plan. The contractorwould be required to implement such regulations relative to the transport, handling, and disposal of any hazardous materials, including the use of standard construction controls and safety procedures that would avoid or minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released would be appropriately contained and remediated as required by local and state laws. No RECs were identified as being present on -site. Due to the age of the existing structures on - site, it is possible that the structures may contain lead -based paint or asbestos -related construction products since these products were prevalent prior to the 1970s. As such, mitigation is required to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Additionally, the proposed project would implement mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 to ensure that the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment (i.e., lead -based paint and/or asbestos -containing materials). Explanation The geographic scope when considering cumulative impacts from hazards and hazardous materials included specific projects identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR. The cumulative impact analysis also included all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to certain issue - specific cumulative effects (see EIR Table 3.0-2). Impacts associated with hazardous materials are generally site -specific. As mentioned above, the proposed project must comply with all applicable local and state laws and requirements regarding the transport, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials and substances. Additionally, the proposed project would implement mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 to ensure that the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 33 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A through the release of hazardous materials (i.e., lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related materials). Construction activities occurring within the project site would not restrict access for emergency vehicles that respond to incidents on the site or in surrounding areas. No significant operational impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials were identified. The City Fire Department would review the proposed development plans prior to project approval to ensure adequate emergency access and circulation, as well as conformance with other fire protection requirements (e.g., sprinkler systems, fire hydrant locations). As mentioned under Impact 3.7-7, the project site is not located in a zone designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity. While areas in the City are designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity, cumulative projects would be required to implement mitigation measures to reduce the risk of wildfires, such as buffering on -site uses and establishment of fuel modification zones. Additionally, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfires as the project would be designed in compliance with additional guidelines from the City Fire Department related to fire prevention and subject to approval by the City's Planning Division (as applicable). Implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 prior to project construction would minimize the potential for the accidental release or upset of hazardous building materials associated with the project. As with the proposed project, cumulative projects listed in EIR Tables 3.0-1 and 3.0-2 would also be required to avoid and/or mitigate impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed project would involve the storage, use, disposal, and transport of limited amounts of hazardous materials to varying degrees during construction and operation/occupancy. Impacts from these activities are anticipated to be less than significant, and similar development projects would also be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and policies. Additionally, other cumulative projects would be required to coordinate with the City of Encinitas and the City Fire Department to ensure that they do not impede the implementation of an emergency plan or prevent emergency access in the affected area. As a result, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures HAZ-1 to HAZ-3. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of demolition permit; Prior to issuance of building permit Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 34 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Findin The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measures HAZ-1 to HAZ-3 are feasible mitigation measures and shall be required as conditions of approval. Mitigation measures HAZ-1 to HAZ-3 contain measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to minimize the potential for the accidental release or upset of hazardous materials or substances, such as implementation of an approved abatement work plan prior to demolition of affected structures and City approval of an abatement close-out report prior to the issuance of building permits. With implementation of such mitigation measures, the project would not result in a cumulative impact related to hazards and hazardous materials. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. NOISE Threshold of Significance Issue 2 (EIR Impact 3.10-2): Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project were to generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Impacts As discussed in Section 3.10, Noise, of the EIR, project construction activities have the potential to generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and construction equipment. Vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment used during project construction (i.e., small bulldozer, vibratory roller, etc.) would potentially exceed the Federal Transportation Administration's (FTA's) 0.2 inches/second peak particle velocity (PPV) threshold of architectural damage for existing properties located just to the west of the project site. Construction impacts are considered to be significant and mitigation measure NO1-1 would be required to reduce vibration levels below the established threshold. Project operations would not generate substantial levels of vibration due to the absence of vibration -generating sources. Impacts would be less than significant. Explanation Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 35 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Groundborne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures. Groundborne vibration decreases rapidly with distance. The nearest structures are multi -family residential buildings located approximately 20 feet west of the project boundary. As indicated in EIR Table 3.10-9, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment used during project construction would range from 0.0042 (a small bulldozer) to 0.2935 (vibratory roller) in/sec PPV at 20 feet from the source of activity, which would potentially exceed the FTA's 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold of architectural damage. Therefore, mitigation measure N0I-1 would be required to reduce vibration levels below the threshold. Mitigation measure NOI-1 would ensure the vibration level at the nearest structures would be closely monitored during construction and by adjusting the vibration frequency settings of the construction equipment, the vibration level would be below the 0.2 in/sec threshold at the nearest structures. With implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1, the proposed construction activities associated with the project would not expose sensitive receptors to excessive groundborne vibration levels. Vibration impacts associated with construction would be reduced to less than significant. Operation of the proposed residential, office, retail, restaurant, and hotel uses would involve occasional truck deliveries and trash pick-up, which would potentially generate groundborne vibration. However, truck operations would not be substantial and potential groundborne vibration levels would not be perceptible or felt at surrounding uses. Operation of the project would not generate substantial levels of vibration due to the absence of vibration -generating sources and such impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures N0I-1 Implement Vibration Control Measures During Construction. The project applicant shall incorporate the following measures on all grading and building plans and specifications subject to approval of the City of Encinitas prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit (whichever occurs first): The project applicant shall utilize a construction vibration monitoring system with the potential to measure low levels of vibration. The applicant shall adjust the vibration frequency settings of the equipment to ensure vibration levels do not exceed the 0.2 inch -per -second PPV threshold at the residential buildings located to the west of the project site. The project applicant shall conduct sensitivity training to inform construction personnel about the existing sensitive receptors surrounding the project and about methods to reduce noise and vibration. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading or building permit; Prior to and during project construction Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 36 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findin The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure NO1-1 is feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure NOI-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to minimize the potential for excessive groundborne vibration noise levels during construction through implementation of a construction vibration monitoring system and proper construction personnel training. Implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 4 (EIR Impact 3.10-4): Result in a cumulative impact related to noise A significant impact relative would occur if the project would result in a direct or indirect cumulative effect related noise when considered with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future projects within the identified study area. Impacts When determining whether the overall noise (and vibration) impacts from cumulative projects would be cumulatively significant and whether the proposed project's incremental contribution to any significant cumulative impacts would be cumulatively considerable, it should be noted that noise and vibration are localized occurrences; as such, they decrease rapidly in magnitude as the distance from the source to the receptor increases. Only those cumulative projects in the direct vicinity of the project study areas and those considered influential in regard to noise and vibration would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the proposed project's incremental contribution. As stated, project construction activities would not generate groundborne vibration off -site above the significance criteria (i.e. 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold for construction as established by the FTA) with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1, and project operation activities would not generate perceptible groundborne vibration. Although construction activities associated with the proposed project and off -site cumulative projects may overlap, off -site projects within the City would also be subject to the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold. Further, the cumulative development projects would be required to implement required mitigation measures on a project -by -project basis, as applicable, pursuant to CEQA provisions. Thus, the project and identified cumulative projects are not anticipated to result in a significant cumulative impact relative to groundborne vibration. The project would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site in excess of standards established in the local general plan Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, during construction or operations. Therefore, the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact in this regard., and impacts are considered less than significant. Explanation Cumulative projects that would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the proposed project's incremental contribution, and that are included in the analysis of cumulative impacts relative to noise, are identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR. In addition, the geographic scope includes all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to cumulative noise effects. Construction activities associated with the proposed project and cumulative projects may overlap, resulting in construction noise in the area. However, construction noise impacts primarily affect the areas immediately adjacent to the project site. As a condition of project approval, the project would be required to prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan to demonstrate that all construction activity is in compliance with all appliable City noise standards and submit it to the City's Planning and Building Department for review and approval, which would reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant levels. All other housing projects covered under the 2019 HEU would be subject to the same requirements. The construction activities associated with other cumulative development projects would also be required to comply with the City's Municipal Code and would incorporate mitigation measures on a project - by -project basis, as applicable, to reduce construction noise pursuant to CEQA provisions. With implementation of a City -approved Construction Noise Control Plan, the project's contribution to cumulative short-term construction impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. Long-term cumulative noise impacts from mobile sources would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on area roadways due to buildout of the project and other projects in the vicinity. When two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. An increase of 3 dB is widely accepted as "barely perceptible." With regard to traffic noise, traffic volumes would need to roughly double to result in a perceptible change in ambient noise levels. As shown in Table 3.10-10, Cumulative Traffic Noise, of the EIR, the combined effect for roadway segment noise levels would increase between 0.3 dBA and 1.1 dBA with development of the proposed project and other cumulative projects over existing conditions. As the noise increase would not exceed the 3 dBA threshold, the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact to any existing or future noise sensitive land use. Mobile source noise impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 38 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Although related cumulative projects have been identified within the project study area, the noise generated by stationary equipment on -site cannot be quantified due to the speculative nature of each development. Each cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and CEQA assessment, which would address potential noise impacts and identify necessary attenuation measures, where appropriate. Additionally, as noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts from stationary sources would be limited to each of the respective sites and their vicinities. The project would not result in significant stationary noise impacts and would not result in stationary long-term equipment that would significantly affect surrounding sensitive receptors. The project and identified cumulative projects are not anticipated to result in a significant cumulative impact in this regard. As stated, project construction activities would not generate groundborne vibration off -site above the significance criteria (i.e. 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold for construction as established by the FTA) with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1, and project operation activities would not generate perceptible groundborne vibration. Although construction activities associated with the proposed project and off -site cumulative projects may overlap, off -site projects within the City would also be subject to the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold. Further, the cumulative development projects would be required to implement required mitigation measures on a project -by -project basis, as applicable, pursuant to CEQA provisions. Thus, the project and identified cumulative projects are not anticipated to result in a significant cumulative impact relative to groundborne vibration. Cumulative impacts related to noise would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1. The project's contribution to a cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measure NOI-1. Timing/Implementation: Prior to issuance of grading or building permit; Prior to and during project construction Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Findine The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIR to a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure NO1-1 is feasible mitigation and shall be required as a condition of approval. Mitigation measure NOI-1 contains measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential cumulative impact relative to potential excessive groundborne vibration during construction. Actions would require that construction monitoring Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 39 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A occurs to ensure that project -generated vibration levels remain below the established threshold. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not result in groundborne vibration impacts to off -site properties during the construction phase. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Threshold of Significance Issue 1 (EIR Impact 3.13-1): Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would have the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. Impacts As discussed in Section 3.13 of the EIR, there are no known tribal cultural resources located on the project site. However, due to the known cultural sensitivity of the area, the potential for project -related ground -disturbing construction activities to adversely affect unknown tribal cultural resources on -site is considered to be significant. Explanation As discussed in EIR Section 3.13, no known tribal cultural resources or sacred lands have been identified on the project site. The project area has historically been occupied by Native Americans and, due to the presence of sediments associated with human occupation of the region and the presence of previously recorded pre -contact resources in the surrounding area, the potential for subsurface resources is considered moderate to high. The City has consulted with the potentially associated Native American Tribes in conformance with the requirements of California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52); however, such consultation has not resulted in the identification of any known tribal cultural resources on -site. Subsurface construction disturbances (e.g., trenching, excavation, grading) associated with the project would have the potential to impact unknown tribal cultural resources. To ensure proper protection of any unknown resources, should they be encountered during project -related ground disturbance activities, Native American monitoring is required. Monitoring would allow for any discovery of unknown resources to be readily managed in accordance with federal and state law to prevent potential damage to such resources. Implementation of mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 would reduce project impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 140 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Findin The City finds that the proposed project would have the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of unknown tribal cultural resources. Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1 to CUL-3 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Threshold of Significance Issue 2 (EIR Impact 3.13-2): Result in a cumulative impact related to tribal cultural resources A significant impact relative would occur if the project would result in a direct or indirect cumulative effect related to tribal cultural resources when considered with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future projects within the identified study area. Impacts There are no known tribal cultural resources located on the project site. However, due to the known cultural sensitivity of the area, the potential for project -related ground -disturbing construction activities to adversely contribute to a cumulative impact on tribal cultural resources within the area or region is considered to be potentially cumulatively considerable. Explanation Cumulative projects that would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the proposed project's incremental contribution, and that are included in the analysis of cumulative impacts relative to tribal cultural resources, are identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR. In addition, the geographic scope includes all 2019 HEU sites to the extent they may contribute to cumulative effects on tribal cultural resources. Although no known tribal cultural resources of significance or human remains have been documented on the project site, implementation of the proposed project could contribute to potential cumulative impacts on unknown tribal cultural resources, as well as buried human remains. Past, present, and foreseeable projects have affected, or would have the potential to affect, tribal cultural resources throughout the region over time. The adoption of state and federal laws related to tribal cultural resources, such as AB 52, provide a mechanism for consultation between California Native American tribes and lead agencies to address potential impacts of development activities on known and/or unknown tribal cultural resources. These laws have led to the discovery, recordation, preservation, and curation of artifacts and historic structures. Although inadvertent discoveries and potential impacts may still result on a project by project basis based on location, development type, and availability of data, compliance with regulatory procedures generally mitigate potential impacts to tribal cultural resources. The proposed project would implement mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3, which address the discovery and recovery of unknown tribal cultural resources through construction monitoring, identification of potential tribal cultural resources, and evaluation of the significance of a discovery. Mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce potential impacts from project Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 141 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A construction on undiscovered resources, if encountered, to less than significant. Similarly, with conformance to applicable federal, state, and local regulations, combined with the implementation of mitigation, it is anticipated that other cumulative development projects would be adequately addressed and impacts on tribal cultural resources would be reduced to the extent feasible. Therefore, individual project -level impacts associated with tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 and the proposed project and cumulative projects would be subject to conformance with applicable federal, state, and local requirements for the protection of such resources. The project's contribution to a significant cumulative impact on tribal cultural resources is considered less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3. Timing/Implementation: Prior to and during project construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that will substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the Final EIRto a level of insignificance. Specifically, mitigation measure CR- 1 to CR-3 are feasible mitigation measures and shall be required as conditions of approval. Mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3 contain measurable performance standards requiring specific feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's potential cumulative impact on unknown tribal cultural resources during construction. Actions would be required to ensure that construction activities are monitored and that the discovery of any resources is properly documented, evaluated, and recovered, as appropriate. With implementation of such mitigation, the project would not directly or indirectly impact unknown tribal cultural resources on the project site during the construction phase. The project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Level of Less than Significant The City hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measures outlined in the EIR and in this Resolution, the following impacts from the proposed project and related approvals cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein: Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 142 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A TRANSPORTATION Threshold of Significance Issue 2 (EIR Impact 3.12-2): Conflict and be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) A significant impact relative to this issue would occur if the project would conflict and be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision (b). Impacts Under the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Regional Transportation Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines, projects that generate greater than the minimum allowable average daily traffic (ADT) threshold (500 ADT or 1,000 ADT), but fewer than 2,400 ADT are required to conduct a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis using the VMT calculation tool generated by SANDAG. Projects that generate greater than 2,400 ADT are required to conduct a VMT analysis using the SANDAG Regional Model. The project would generate 2,003 ADT (or a net increase of 1,173 ADT above existing conditions). Based on the Regional TIS Guidelines, the project does not fall below the ADT screening threshold of 1,000 ADT, and a VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee analysis was therefore conducted. Based on the results of the SANDAG model, the proposed project would have a potentially significant VMT-related transportation impact. To reduce the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee associated with the proposed project to a less than significant level, VMT reducing measures are proposed. However, implementation of the proposed TDM measures would not reduce project related impacts levels below the established thresholds and transportation impacts relative to VMT would remain significant and unavoidable. Explanation The method used to derive and evaluate project VMT is determined based on a project's trip generation. Trip generation rates for the project were developed utilizing SANDAG's (Not So) Brief Guide to Vehicular Trip Generation (SANDAG 2002). Table 3.12-1 below identifies daily project trip generation for the project. As the project site currently supports active uses that generate traffic, a traffic credit was applied because the existing uses would be replaced by the project. Additionally, the existing uses and project have pass -by trips already on the roadways within the study area considered. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 143 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Table 3.12-1: Proiect Trip Generation Proposed Project Land Uses Rate Size and Units Average Daily Trips (ADT) Resort Hotel 10 /Room 34 Rooms 340 Multi -Family (>20 du/acre) 6/DU 94 DU 564 Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial 40/KSF 8,584 SF 343 Restaurant (sit down; high turnover) 160/KSF 3,905 SF 625 Restaurant (quality) 100/KSF 2,134 SF 213 Office 20/KSF 3,638 SF 73 Project Driveway Trips: 2,158 Pass -by Trips per SANDAG rates (Existing trips already on Highway 101) Specialty Retail (Pass -by = 15%AM, 10% PM): -52 Restaurant High Turnover (Pass -By = 12%ADT AM, 20% PM): -75 Restaurant Quality (Pass -By = 12% ADT AM, 10% PM): -26 Office (Pass -By = 4% ADT, AM & PM) -3 Project Primary and Diverted Trips: 2,003 Existing Uses to be Removed Land Uses Rate Size and Units Average Daily Trips (ADT) Restaurant (Roberto's fast food) 700/KSF 1,202 SF 841 Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial 40/KSF 2,249 SF 90 Credit for Existing Use Driveway Trips: 931 Pass -By Trips per SANDAG rates (Existing trips already on Highway 101) Restaurant Fast Food (Pass -By =12% ADT AM, 40% PM): -101 Credit for Existing Use Primary & Diverted Trips: 830 Net Change in Primary and Diverted Trips (primary - credit): 1,1731 Source: LOS Engineering, Inc., 2022 (Appendix L-1). 2,003 - 830 = 1,173 net change in primary and diverted trips DU = Dwelling Unit; ADT = Average Daily Trip; KSF = thousand square feet; SF = square feet Spreadsheet rounding may result in +1 to the above numbers. As shown, the project would generate 2,003 ADT. Project implementation would also replace the 931 daily trips associated with the existing on -site commercial operations. With consideration of the trip credit for existing primary and diverted trips (830 ADT), the project's net increase (above existing) would be 1,173 ADT (or 2,003 ADT minus 830 ADT). Based on the Regional TIS Guidelines, the project does not fall below the ADT screening threshold of 1,000 ADT; therefore, a VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee analysis was conducted to address both the residential and commercial uses proposed. The project site is located in Census Tract 177.01. Table 3.12-2 below provides the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee and the percentage by which the VMT for the project location exceeds the regional average. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 144 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Table 3.12-2: Project VMT Percentage of Regional Mean and Impact Summary Project Location: Percent Significant Metric % of Regional Average Above/Below 85% I Impact? VMT/Capita by Census Tract 177.01 VMT/Capita by City/CPA VMT/Employee by Census Tract 177.01 VMT/Employee by City/CPA Source: LOS Engineering, Inc., 2022 (EIR Appendix L-1 115.7% 30.7% (above) Yes 116.8% 31.8% (above) Yes 90.7% 5.7% (above) Yes 112.7% 27.7% (above) Yes The San Diego ITE VMT Guidelines use VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee to define a significant transportation impact when a project exceeds a level of 85% of the regional mean. The proposed project is considered to have a significant transportation VMT impact because the individual elements of the project would exceed 85% of the regional mean as follows: VMT per Capita (resident) by Census Tract is at 115.7% of the regional mean VMT per Capita (resident) by City/CPA is at 116.8% of the regional mean VMT per Employee by Census Tract is at 90.7% of the regional mean VMT per Employee by City/CPA is at 112.7% of the regional mean While the project is located on an infill site; would contain a mix of uses on -site; includes project design features to enhance sustainability; would provide for a variety of housing types including "low income" affordable housing; and is consistent with City's General Plan, Local Coastal Program, N101SP, CAP, Municipal Code, and SANDAG's The Regional Plan, impacts related to VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee would still exceed 85% of the regional average. The limitations of the SANDAG model and its inability to capture project features that could reduce the proposed project's VMT should be noted. SANDAG's Travel Demand Model is built at the regional level, inherently limiting its ability to capture the nuances of individual project sites, such as benefits of small-scale mixed uses, affordable housing components, or proposed travel demand management measures that would be provided by the project. Nonetheless, the project would have a potentially significant VMT-related transportation impact. To reduce the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee associated with the project to a less than significant level, VMT reducing measures would need to be implemented. Therefore, TDM strategies would be implemented as potential project mitigation, aimed at vehicle trip reduction and increased use of alternative travel modes. Enforceable additive measures are listed under mitigation measure TR-1. The project applicant proposes to implement the following TDM strategies which are not quantifiable by the SANDAG VMT Reduction Calculator: Voluntary employer commute program. Employers to provide information about the SANDAG's iCommute program (www.icommutesd.com) and encourage carpooling. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 145 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Develop and/or promote bicycle usage through a bikeshare program to help reduce vehicle usage and demand for parking by providing users with on -demand access to bikes for short-term rental, contribute to electric bicycle charging stations, contribute to bicycle infrastructure improvements, and disseminate a bicycle riders guide to make it easier for people to bike and walk to work. Provide pedestrian improvements, such as a connection to the hotel to the north. Provide information about maps, routes, and schedules for public transit. SANDAG's Mobility Management VMT Reduction Calculator Tool provides the means to estimate VMT reductions based on a project's design and planned programs. However, the SANDAG calculator tool does not provide measures for all of the proposed TDM strategies. The following TDM and project elements were entered into the SANDAG reduction calculator tool to determine the resulting VMT reduction. Voluntary employer commute program. The SANDAG model calculates a 6.2% VMT reduction with the implementation of a Voluntary employer commute program. Mixed -Use project. The SANDAG model calculates a 0.2% VMT reduction from pedestrian interaction between the mixed land uses. The SANDAG Mobility Management VMT Reduction Calculator Tool computed a total sum of 6.4% VMT reduction based on the two quantifiable VMT reduction measures that include: 1) the project's proposed voluntary employer commute program; and 2) benefits of being a mixed -use project that facilitates pedestrian interaction between the mixed land uses. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), which provides guidance on how to quantify greenhouse gas mitigation measures, states that the maximum combined allowable VMT reduction is 15% for land development projects located within suburban areas. Therefore, since the VMT associated with the proposed project ranges from 5.7% (VMT/employee) to 31.8% (VMT/capita) above 85% of the regional mean (see Table 3.12-2, above, excerpted from the EIR), the required VMT reduction needed to fully mitigate the VMT impact cannot be achieved. Additionally, it should be noted that the project is located on Highway 101 which offers access to MTS bus service that connects to the Encinitas Coaster Station (heavy commuter rail service). As a mixed -use project, the retail/commercial components would provide access to residential neighborhoods retail and food options that can be reached by walking, biking, and transit. The hotel component is also located within walking distance to the beach. Lastly, the project site is located adjacent to the City's Streetscape project, which provides dedicated bike lanes and reduced vehicular travel speeds to better balance the mobility needs between motorists, bicyclist, and pedestrians. While the proposed project is located on an infill site; would contain a mixture of uses on -site; includes a suite of project design features to enhance sustainability; would provide for a variety of housing types including "low income" affordable housing units; and is consistent with the City's General Plan, HUE, Local Coastal Program, N101SP, CAP, Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 146 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Municipal Code, and SANDAG's The Regional Plan, impacts related to VMT would not be reduced to 85% of the regional average, even after implementation of mitigation measure TR-1. While implementation of the proposed TDM strategies would not reduce the VMT impact to below a level of significance, they would provide some level of VMT reduction. The project location also provides significant opportunities for walking, biking, and transit usage. However, due to the CAPCOA constraints, the VMT impact remains significant, unmitigated, and requires overrides. Mitigation Measures TR-1 The following Transportation Demand Measures (TDMs) shall be implemented to further reduce potential effects relative to vehicle miles traveled. • Voluntary employer commute program. Employers to provide information about the SANDAG's iCommute program (www.icommutesd.com) and encourage carpooling. • Develop and/or promote bicycle usage through a bikeshare program to help reduce vehicle usage and demand for parking by providing users with on - demand access to bikes for short-term rental, contribute to electric bicycle charging stations, contribute to bicycle infrastructure improvements, and disseminate a bicycle riders guide to make it easier for people to bike and walk to work. • Provide pedestrian improvements, such as a connection to the hotel to the north. • Provide information about maps, routes, and schedules for public transit. Timing/Implementation: During project operations Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measure TR-1, transportation impacts associated with VMT would remain significant and unavoidable. As feasible mitigation measures are not available that would fully mitigate the impact to a less than significant level, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is included herein. Threshold of Significance Issue 5 (EIR Impact 3.12-5): Result in a cumulative impact related to transportation A significant impact relative would occur if the project would result in a direct or indirect cumulative effect related to transportation when considered with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects within the identified study area. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 147 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Impacts The project would not contribute to a significant cumulative transportation impact resulting from conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities; hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses; or, inadequate emergency access. Development projects would be evaluated on a project -specific basis for their potential to contribute to a cumulative effect in this regard. Additionally, all cumulative projects would be required to make payment of the City's Transportation Fees to ensure that transportation facilities continue to be adequately provided and maintained. As the proposed project was determined to have a less than significant impact relative to these thresholds, it is not anticipated that the project would contribute to a significant cumulative impact. The project would have the potential to conflict and be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). As direct impacts pertaining to VMT were determined to be significant and unavoidable, it is anticipated that the project would have the potential to, when considered with other development projects within the identified study area, contribute to a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Explanation The geographic study area for transportation impacts includes those projects that would have the potential to be considered in a cumulative context with the project's incremental contribution, and that are included in the analysis of cumulative impacts relative to transportation. The cumulative projects are identified in Table 3.0-1 of the EIR and also include all 2019 HEU sites (see EIR Table 3.0-2) to the extent they may contribute to a cumulative effect relative to transportation. When using an absolute VMT metric (i.e., total VMT, as recommended for retail and transportation projects), analyzing the combined impacts for a cumulative impact analysis may be appropriate. However, metrics such as VMT/Capita or VMT/Employee (i.e., metrics framed in terms of efficiency, as recommended for use on residential and office projects), cannot be summed because they employ a denominator. A project that falls below an efficiency -based threshold that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans would have no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less than significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact, and vice versa. According to ITE's Regional TIS Guidelines, the proposed project does not fall below the ADT screening threshold of 1,000 ADT. The proposed project is considered to have a significant transportation VMT impact because the individual elements of the project would exceed 85% of the regional mean for VMT/Capita by Census Tract and by City/CPA and for VMT/Employee by Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 148 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Census Tract and by City/CPA. Although mitigation measure TR-1 would be implemented to reduce the proposed project's VMT, it would remain above established thresholds, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Therefore, the project would result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact related to VMT; such impacts are considered to be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would result in the construction of 94 residential apartment units generating an estimated 236 residents, consistent with the HEU. It is not anticipated that the proposed project would create a significant new demand on existing transportation facilities either locally or on a regional level. Further, similar to other cumulative projects considered, the proposed project would be subject to payment of the City's Transportation Impact Fees to ensure that the City's transportation facilities are adequately maintained over the long-term. Based on the reasons discussed above, however, and that project -related cumulative impacts relative to VMT would be significant and unavoidable, even with the incorporation of mitigation measure TR-1, which would reduce the project's contribution to cumulative impacts to the maximum extent feasible along with other sustainability-related design features, the project's contribution to VMT impacts is considered to be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measure TR-1. Timing/Implementation: During project operations Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Encinitas Planning Division Finding The City hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measure TR-1, the project's contribution to cumulative transportation impacts associated with VMT would remain significant and unavoidable. As feasible mitigation measures are not available that would fully mitigate the project's contribution to a cumulative impact to a less than significant level, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is included herein. Growth -Inducing Impacts State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(d) requires an evaluation of growth inducing impacts that may result from a proposed project (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d); EIR, Section 6.3, Growth -Inducing Impacts). Growth -inducing impacts fall into two (2) general categories, direct and indirect. Direct growth inducing impacts are generally associated with the provision of urban services to an undeveloped area. The provision of these services to a site, and the subsequent development, can serve to induce other landowners in the vicinity to convert their property to urban uses. Indirect, or secondary growth -inducing impacts, consist of growth induced in the region by the additional demands for housing, goods and services associated with the population Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 149 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A increase caused by, or attracted to, a new project. However, the CEQA Guidelines do not require that an EIR predict (or speculate) specifically where such growth would occur, in what form it would occur, or when it would occur. The answers to such questions require speculation, which CEQA discourages (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15145). REMOVAL OF A BARRIER TO GROWTH Several types of projects can induce population growth by removing obstacles that prevent growth. An example of this type of project would be the expansion of a wastewater treatment plant, which would accommodate additional sewer connections within a service area and therefore would allow future construction and growth. Development of the project site would result in the improvement and extension of infrastructure facilities located in and/or adjoining the project site. Extensions of utility lines (water, sewer) or other infrastructure or services (e.g., fire protection services) may result in growth inducement, as such improvements allow for not only the development responsible for expanding the infrastructure, but also other projects proposed in the surrounding area due to the availability of new (i.e., previously inaccessible) infrastructure. However, the area surrounding the proposed project is already developed with similar residential and commercial uses which are currently served by existing utility infrastructure and adequate public services (e.g., required fire service response times can be met without new or expanded facilities or personnel). Further, utilities would be sized only to accommodate the proposed project and would not provide for additional capacity that may induce new development. As such, the proposed project would not be expected to induce growth as a result of new infrastructure or services. Obstacles to surrounding the project site are primarily due to the existing developed condition of the surrounding area, feasibility of development, economic constraints, permitting, or other development restrictions and regulations promulgated by local agencies. The proposed project is consistent with, and would not modify, approved land use and zoning designations and; therefore, would not foster growth, remove direct growth constraints, or add a direct stimulus to growth. Therefore, growth -inducing impacts are precluded because the infrastructure is sized to serve the proposed project and because the project would not affect the feasibility of development in the area, remove an obstacle to growth, or affect local agencies' development restrictions. ECONOMIC GROWTH The timing, magnitude, and location of land development and population growth in a community or region are based on various interrelated land use and economic variables. Key variables include regional economic trends, market demand for residential and nonresidential uses, land availability and cost, the availability and quality of transportation facilities and public services, proximity to employment centers, the supply and cost of housing, and/or regulatory policies or conditions. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 50 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A The proposed project would have the potential to result in economic growth through the construction of a mixture of residential and commercial uses, including anticipated on -site restaurants/eateries and commercial services (including office space), and common public use areas. Project construction would be performed by independent contractors hired by the developer. In general, construction workers would be drawn from the local labor pool. If contract workers were employed, they would not cause growth in the area due to the short-term and temporary nature of their employment. Operation of the proposed project is anticipated to result in 62 full-time permanent employees that are expected to be filled by the local workforce. Given that minimal number of permanent employees and the temporary nature of construction, the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect economic growth in the City. Additionally, hotel visitors would pay transient occupancy tax to the City that would improve the financial resources of the City. Residents and visitors of the proposed project would also support the local economy by shopping at local businesses and paying sales taxes. Therefore, the project would support the local economy in the short and long term. POPULATION GROWTH CEQA requires the consideration of the potential direct and indirect growth -inducing impacts of a proposed project. The proposed project consists of 94 for lease apartment units, 34 hotel rooms and 18,261 square feet of commercial space. According to the HEU, Site 1 (Parcels 1 and 2) of project site is designated with an R-30 overlay, which allocated a minimum of 33 residential dwelling units at the site, if developed as mixed -use with visitor -serving commercial uses and a minimum of 30 traditional overnight accommodations. Site 2 (Parcel 3) allows for maximum density of 25 dwelling units per acre. The proposed project would construct 94 for -lease apartment homes, which represents approximately 60% of permitted intensity on the site. As a result, the proposed project would increase the City population by 236 residents which would represent less than a 1% increase in the City's population (refer to Section 4.3, Population and Housing, of the EIR). It is noted that due to the inclusion of 19 affordable housing units, some portion of the project residents may already live in the City in larger households and qualify as eligible to rent one of the very -low income rental units; therefore, this population estimate is considered conservative. The environmental effects of increasing the City's population due to development of the project site are evaluated in the EIR. Mitigation measures are identified where appropriate to reduce such effects to a less than significant level. All impacts would be less than significant, with the exception of transportation impacts related to VMT, which would remain significant and unavoidable (refer to Section 3.12, Transportation, of the EIR). This significant, unavoidable impact is primarily a result of the location of the proposed project in a suburban neighborhood, as previously discussed. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 51 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A ESTABLISHMENT OF A PRECEDENT SETTING ACTION A Density Bonus Tentative Map, Coastal Development Permit, Design Review Permit and other discretionary approvals are required to allow for the proposed development. These actions are not considered precedent -setting actions (defined as any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification for subsequent situations), as they are commonly undertaken on a regular basis by many jurisdictions. All future discretionary projects in the project area would be processed through the City and evaluated for consistency with the General Plan, as appropriate. Such projects would be evaluated for growth -inducing effects and their potential to enable or encourage growth not intended or anticipated with buildout of the General Plan. Development of the proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan, Encinitas Municipal Code, Local Coastal Program, N101SP, Zoning Ordinance, and HEU, as applicable, and is allowed under the existing General Plan land use and zoning. Therefore, approval of the project would not represent a precedent -setting action that would encourage or allow for unplanned future growth within the area. FINDING Although the proposed project would construct 94 new for -lease apartment homes, which would account for approximately 236 residents, the proposed project would not result in a significant growth inducing impact as all of the environmental impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level with exception of impacts associated with VMT which would be significant and unavoidable. Furthermore, a portion of the project's residents are anticipated to be provided by the surrounding areas instead of new residents to the City, so the estimated population that would be generated by the project is considered to be conservative. Construction and operation of the on -site commercial facilities have the potential to result in economic growth in the region, but given the temporary nature of construction and limited full-time employees during operation, the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect economic growth in the City. Furthermore, the City finds, on the basis of the entire record, the project would not remove an impediment to growth, establish a precedent -setting action, or develop or encroach on an isolated or adjacent area of open space. Therefore, no growth -related impacts beyond the environmental impacts discussed in the EIR are anticipated. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c) requires an EIR to discuss the significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from implementation of a proposed project. Examples include a project's primary or secondary impacts that would generally commit future generations to similar uses (e.g., highway improvements at the access point); use nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project (because a large commitment of such resources make removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely); and/or result in irreversible damage from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project. Additionally, the City of Encinitas adopted its new Green Building Ordinance (Ordinance 2021- 13) in October 2021. The ordinance is aimed at advancing the City's climate action goals and Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 52 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A exceeds California's existing building energy standards, requiring improvements such as installation of or upgrades for solar photovoltaic systems, electrical appliances, insulation of hot water pipes and heaters, fittings in faucets and shower heads, light emitting diode (LED) lighting, attic air sealing and insulation, and other such building components. The ordinance prohibits the use of natural gas in residential and commercial uses, with exception of restaurant uses where the use of a flame for cooking purposes can be justified (and as approved by the City). As such, the City continues to acknowledge technology and regulations aimed at advancing new building regulations that exceed Title 24 requirements and is expected to continue to do so in the future. Construction and occupancy/operation of the buildings and infrastructure proposed with the project would require the commitment of energy, natural resources, and building materials. The project would not result in an unusually high demand for nonrenewable resources for construction or operation/occupancy and would implement state and local goals and policies directed at reducing reliance on fossil fuels and encouraging renewable energy. The project as proposed would include incorporation of solar panels capable of generating 250 kW of solar power and 39 EV charging stations that would reduce energy demand on nonrenewable resources. Furthermore, the project would incorporate other energy -saving features such as low - flow water fixtures, drought -tolerant landscaping, ENERGY STAR appliances, high -efficiency HVAC systems, and stormwater reuse systems on -site to collect, filter, and reuse captured stormwater in landscaped areas. Consistent with City Ordinance 2021-13, use of natural gas would be prohibited for the residential and commercial uses, with exception of future restaurants uses where justified and approved by the City. The project would also include a TDM Program to reduce VMT and associated air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the City finds, that the proposed project would not result in significant and irreversible environmental changes. Alternatives Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or a range of reasonable alternatives to the location of the project, that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project. An EIR does not need to consider every conceivable alternative project, but it does have to consider a range of potentially feasible alternatives that will facilitate informed decision -making and public participation. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), the discussion of alternatives must include several different issues. The discussion of alternatives must focus on alternatives to the project, or to the project location, which will avoid or substantially reduce any significant effects of the project, even if the alternatives would be costlier or hinder to some degree the attainment of the project objectives. The "No Project" alternative must also be evaluated. The "No Project" analysis must discuss the existing conditions and what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed project was not approved. The range of alternatives required is governed by a "rule of reason." Therefore, the EIR must only evaluate those alternatives Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 53 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives must be limited to only ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed project. Additionally, an EIR should not consider an alternative whose effects cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative. The CEQA Guidelines also require an EIR to state why an alternative is being rejected. If the County ultimately rejects any or all alternatives, the rationale for rejection will be presented in the findings that are required before the County certifies the EIR and takes action on the proposed project. According to Section 15126.6(f)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing feasibility of alternatives are environmental impacts, site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, General Plan consistency, policy preferences, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the applicant could reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternate site. The project alternatives are evaluated to determine the extent to which they attain the basic project objectives, while significantly reducing or avoiding any significant effects of the proposed project. The objectives of the proposed project include the following: 1. Provide housing opportunities consistent with the goals of the adopted City of Encinitas General Plan HEU while minimizing environmental effects and protecting surrounding aesthetic resources. Design a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. Dedicate 20 percent of the total number of dwelling units as affordable housing units for low- income families, thereby helping to meet state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encourage diversity within the community. Provide access to significant coastal resources to low-income families consistent with goals and policies of the California Coastal Act. Provide a residential housing product aimed at meeting growing demand for for -lease apartment homes. Provide an overall design that achieves consistency with the goals and design review guidelines identified in the N101SP for Highway 101 within the community of Leucadia. Provide functional compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods and other nearby land uses while enhancing the City's ability to provide fiscally positive development. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 54 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Create a walkable environment that promotes and enhances the pedestrian experience throughout the site, with safe, convenient, and attractive connections including a walking paseo, pedestrian plaza, and outdoor seating to support community engagement. Minimize visual impacts of the development by locating structures of lesser height along the Highway 101 frontage to enhance the pedestrian scale, while gradually increasing building height within the interior of the development. Minimize or avoid adverse impacts to designated scenic resources along the North Coast Highway 101 corridor. Provide a project design that enhances pedestrian connectivity to public transit and promotes use of alternative means of transportation. Provide resident and commercial parking in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and encourage shared parking among the various non-residential uses within the project. Provide overnight visitor -serving accommodations, including "economy" options in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and Local Coastal Program to ensure a full range of affordability. The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(e)(2)) require that the alternatives discussion include an analysis of the "No Project" Alternative. Consistent with the requirements of the applicable CEQA Guidelines, the EIR analyzed potential environmental impacts associated with the required "No Project" alternative, as well as other alternatives, to compare the resulting impacts to those anticipated to result with the project as proposed. The alternatives analyzed include: Alternative 1: No Project/No Redevelopment Alternative Alternative 2: No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative Alternative 3: Reduced Residential/Increased Commercial Alternative Alternative 4: Reduced Building Footprint and Increased Common Space/Public Amenities Alternative ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative The project site is located within the Leucadia Planning Area of the Highway 101 Corridor Specific Plan. The project site currently supports approximately 10,681 SF of commercial uses, including the small commercial center in the southeastern portion of the site and the unoccupied former restaurant building in the northern portion. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 55 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Under the No Project/No Redevelopment Alternative, the proposed project would not be adopted, and future development would not occur. As such, the existing commercial uses would continue to occur on -site in the same capacity as existing conditions. As no new development would occur, this alternative would not include the proposed improvements to North Coast Highway 101 to allow for adequate ingress/egress. It should be noted that this alternative would not be consistent with the City's requirement to provide for housing per the HEU and the City's obligations under the Regional Housing Needs Assessment. Additionally, under existing conditions, the number of employees for the commercial uses totals 24. With the No Project/No Redevelopment Alternative, no change in the number of employees would occur. Impact Comparison Biological Resources Impacts to biological resources generally occurs during ground disturbing and construction activities. As this alternative does not include such activities, direct or indirect impacts to biological resources would not occur with this alternative. In addition to avoiding tree removal in the Highway 101 median to provide access to the site, this alternative would also avoid tree removal of existing on -site trees, thereby eliminating disturbance to nesting or migratory avian species. Therefore, impacts to biological resources would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts to cultural and tribal resources generally occurs during ground disturbing activities. As this alternative does not include such activities, direct and indirect impacts to unknown cultural and tribal cultural resources are unlikely to occur with this alternative. Therefore, impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Energy Conservation and Climate Change The City has adopted an interim screening threshold of 900 MTCO2e per year based on guidance in the CAPCOA's CEQA & Climate Change report. As part of the project GHG analysis, existing GHG emissions from the commercial uses on -site were estimated to be approximately 549.02 MTCO2e/year which is below the City's screening threshold. As the project would not be developed under this alternative, it is reasonable to assume that GHG emissions from existing onsite uses would continue at the same level as current conditions. While these emissions would continue to contribute to global climate change, for CEQA purposes, such emissions would be less than significant. As such, this alternative would reduce impacts related to GHG emissions as compared to the proposed project. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 56 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources) Impacts to paleontological resources generally result from grading and/or excavation activities during construction. As this alternative would not include ground disturbing activities, impacts to unknown paleontological resources would not result with this alternative. Therefore, impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Based on the results of the Phase I ESA prepared for the project, mitigation measures would be required to reduce significant impacts resulting from potential release of hazardous materials into the environment. Mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 would require additional testing of the existing structures on -site to verify the absence of lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials and to identify any additional remediation required during demolition/deconstruction to safely transport and dispose lead -based paint and/or asbestos. Alternative 1 would not implement these mitigation measures as construction is not proposed, and therefore, demolition of any existing on -site structures would not be required. Hazardous materials would thus not be upset during construction activities. Since potential hazardous materials would stay in place, an impact would not occur. Noise The nearest structures to the project site are multi -family residential buildings located approximately 20 feet west of the of the project boundary. No significant construction or operational noise generation impacts would occur with project implementation. However, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment used during project construction would range from 0.0042 (a small bulldozer) to 0.2935 (vibratory roller) inches/second (in/sec) peak particle velocity (PPV) at 20 feet from the source of activity, which would potentially exceed the Federal Transit Administration's 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold for architectural damage. As no project would be constructed, vibration impacts from construction activities would not occur. Therefore, this alternative would reduce potential significant noise impacts relative to vibration as compared to the proposed project. Transportation As no development would occur under Alternative 1, the existing commercial uses would continue to operate as they do under current conditions, generating an estimate 931 ADT. No improvements would be made to enhance mobility (i.e., pedestrian, bicycling, transit) and no roadway improvements would occur for ingress/egress. It is noted that the vehicle miles traveled (VMT)/employee of the existing operations may exceed 85% of the regional average. However Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 57 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A as no development would occur on -site, it is reasonable to conclude that the No Project Alternative VMT/employee would result in reduced impacts related to VMT as compared to the proposed project as fewer daily vehicle trips would be generated and the only VMT would be generated by the existing commercial uses on -site. Therefore, this alternative would avoid significant and unavoidable impacts related to transportation (VMT) that would result from project implementation. Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts to tribal resources generally occur during ground disturbing activities (i.e., grading and excavation). As this alternative would not include such activities, direct and indirect impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources would not occur with this alternative. Therefore, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Alternative 1 Summary and Finding Impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, energy conservation and climate change, geology and soils (paleontological resources), hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources would be reduced as the project site would not be developed and existing on - site operations would be maintained at their current capacity. This alternative would also result in reduced transportation impacts as fewer daily vehicle trips would be generated by existing operations as compared to the proposed project. As such, this alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact related to VMT that would result from project implementation. With the No Project/No Redevelopment Alternative, no development or other site improvements would occur. As such, this alternative would not meet any of the project objectives, in particular, the provision of mixed -use development that would offer new residential housing opportunities (including affordable housing), or visitor -serving accommodations (including affordable "economy" options) in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and Local Coastal Program. Finding The City finds that the implementation of Alternative 1, No Project Alternative, would reduce potential environmental impacts when compared to the proposed project. However, Alternative 1 would not meet any of the project objectives. Therefore, while Alternative 1 would result in a reduced environmental impact relative to the proposed project, none of the basic project objectives would be met. The City therefore rejects Alternative 1. ALTERNATIVE 2: NO PROJECT/REASONABLY FORESEEABLE DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative Under the No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative, development would occur consistent with that allowed by the HEU. The property comprising Site 2 (Parcel 3) would Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 58 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A not be purchased by the developer and would remain in its current state with the small-scale commercial uses operating on -site; no demolition of or improvements to these uses would occur. Similar to the proposed project, a 34-room hotel (including affordable guest units) would be constructed on Parcel 1 in the northern portion of the site. On Parcel 2, 33 residential units (for - lease apartments) would be constructed, which represents the minimum number of residential dwelling units required by the HEU. This alternative would include 7 affordable residential units which represents 20 percent of the overall proposed units. As such, the number of affordable residential units would be reduced from 19 to 7 units. The remainder of Parcel 2 would be developed with approximately 10,774 SF of commercial space. Using the same estimate of 2.51 persons per household as the proposed project, this alternative would generate a resident population of 83 persons. Additionally, at an assumed employee demand of 250 SF/employee, the 10,774 SF of commercial space would generate an estimated 43.1 employees. Similar to the project as proposed, the 34-room hotel would generate approximately 9.8 employees. Therefore, development under this alternative would generate an estimated total of 53 employees, as compared to the 62 employees generated with the proposed project. Proposed access to the site would occur via the same improvements as proposed with the project, and similar median landscaping would be planted. Additionally, the provision of on -site landscaping and private common open space for the residential uses would occur consistent with City requirements. An on -site parking structure would also be constructed to serve the hotel, commercial, and residential uses. Impact Comparison Biological Resources Since the project site is largely void of biological resources, this alternative would generally not be expected to directly or indirectly impact sensitive wildlife or plant species. As with the proposed project, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to indirectly affect nesting avian species if determined to be present at the time construction is undertaken. However, as this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3), impacts to biological resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project as the area of potential disturbance would be reduced, as would be the number of trees to be removed from the site. This alternative would still require implementation of the same mitigation as the proposed project to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, but the severity of the impact would be reduced as compared to the project as Site 2 would not be developed. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 59 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Cultural Resources As with the proposed project, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown cultural resources. However, since this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3), the land area affected by grading and excavation activities would be reduced, thereby also reducing the potential to encounter unknown cultural resources of significance. This alternative would still require implementation of the same mitigation as the proposed project to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, but the severity of the impact would be reduced as compared to the project as Site 2 would not be developed. Energy Conservation and Climate Change As the property comprising Site 2 (Parcel 3) would not be purchased by the developer, GHG emissions generated by continued operation of the existing small-scale commercial uses would not contribute to emissions generated by this alternative. As stated, development under this alternative would result in a reduction in the number of residential apartment units developed on Parcel 2 would be reduced to 33 as compared to 94 with the project, and commercial space would be reduced to approximately 10,774 SF. Similar to the proposed project, a 34-room hotel would be constructed on Parcel 1. As such, it is anticipated that with the reduced development, which in turn would reduce associated construction demands, overall energy use, and traffic generation (i.e., reduced number of employee and resident vehicle trips), GHG emissions would be less than those generated by the proposed project. Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources) Impacts to paleontological resources generally occur during ground disturbing activities, such as grading and excavation. As this alternative would include construction activities, direct impacts to unknown paleontological resources may occur from the various subsurface construction disturbances associated with this alternative. However, as this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3), impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project as less land area would be disturbed, thereby reducing the potential to encounter unknown resources. This alternative would still require implementation of the same mitigation as the proposed project to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, but the severity of the impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed project as Site 2 would not be developed. Hazards and Hazardous Materials As this alternative would not develop Site 2 (Parcel 3) and this site would remain in its current state with the small-scale commercial uses operating on -site; no demolition of or improvements to these uses would occur, and therefore, no potentially hazardous substances (i.e., lead based paint or asbestos) would be released into the environment or require treatment. As such, this Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 60 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A alternative would not require the implementation of mitigation measures as would occur with the proposed project. Therefore, compared to the proposed project, the potential for significant hazards to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials would be decreased with this alternative. Impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. Noise The nearest structures are multi -family residential buildings located approximately 20 feet west of the project boundary. These multi -family residential buildings are immediately adjacent to Parcels 1 and 2. As these parcels would still be developed under this alternative, it is reasonable to assume that vibration impacts from construction activities would be similar to impacts generated by the proposed project. Mitigation measure N01-1 would be required to reduce vibration levels below the adopted threshold. No other construction or operational impacts are anticipated to occur with this alternative. Vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Transportation As shown Section 3.12, Transportation, the proposed project would generate 2,003 ADT. Project implementation would replace the 931 daily trips associated with the existing on -site commercial operations (or 830 ADT with credit for existing use primary and diverted trips). Therefore, the project's net increase (above existing) would be 1,173 ADT (or 2,003 ADT minus 830 ADT). Additionally, the proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan. However, based on the Technical Advisory and Regional TIS Guidelines, the project does not fall below the ADT screening thresholds of either 110 ADT or 1,000 ADT. The proposed project would exceed 85% of the regional VMT/capita or VMT/employee. As a result, mitigation measure TR-1 is proposed to require implementation of a TDM Program which includes measures to reduce the proposed project's VMT. The SANDAG Mobility Management VMT Reduction Calculator Tool computed a total sum of 6.4% VMT reduction based on the project's proposed voluntary employer commute program and the mixed land uses. However, as the project would not meet the 15% reduction threshold, a significant and unavoidable impact would occur. Table 5-2 below (excerpted from the EIR) provides an updated VMT estimate for Alternative 2. Table 5-2: Proiect Trip Generation for Alternative 2 Proposed Project Land Uses Rate Size and Units Average Daily Trips (ADT) Resort Hotel 10 /Room 34 Rooms 340 Multi -Family (>20 du/acre) 6/DU 33 DU 198 Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial 40/KSF 10,774 SF 430 Project Driveway Trips: 968 Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 61 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Pass -by Trips per SANDAG rates (Existing trips already on Highway 101) Specialty Retail (Pass -by = 15%ADT; 10% PM): -52 Project Primary and Diverted Trips: 916 Source: LOS Engineering, Inc. 2022b; see Appendix L-1. DU = Dwelling Unit; ADT = Average Daily Trip; KSF = thousand square feet; SF = square feet. Spreadsheet rounding may result in +1 to the above numbers. As shown, this alternative would generate 968 ADT, but after the pass -by trips are deducted, this alternative would generate approximately 916 ADT. As this alternative falls below the ADT screening threshold of 1,000 ADT, further VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee analysis is not required to address the residential and commercial uses proposed. Therefore, transportation impacts related to VMT would be less than significant for this alternative and this alternative would avoid the significant and avoidable impact that would result with implementation of the proposed project. As the ADT screening threshold would not be met, this alternative would not be required to implement mitigation measure TR-1 which addresses the proposed project's VMT impacts, including implementation of SANDAG's iCommute program, development of a bikeshare program, pedestrian improvements, and provision of wayfinding information for public transit. Tribal Cultural Resources As with the proposed project, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown tribal cultural resources. However, as this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3), impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project as the area of disturbance would be reduced, thereby also reducing the potential to encounter such resources. This alternative would still require the implementation of the same mitigation as the proposed project to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, but the severity of the impact would be reduced as compared to the project as Site 2 would not be developed. Alternative 2 Summary and Finding As this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3) and a reduced, less intensive development plan would be implemented, impacts to biological resources (e.g., potential to affect nesting avian species), cultural resources (e.g., potential to inadvertently discover unknown resources), energy conservation and climate change, geology and soils (paleontological resources), hazards/hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. Vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. This alternative would also result in reduced transportation impacts. As Site 2 would no longer be purchased and developed, the ADT from Site 2 would not be included for CEQA purposes. Since the ADT for this alternative falls below the screening threshold of 1,000 ADT, further VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee analysis is not required to address both the residential and commercial uses proposed. Therefore, transportation impacts related to VMT would be less than Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 62 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A significant for this alternative and this alternative would avoid the significant and avoidable impacts from the proposed project. Additionally, while this alternative would not include the purchase and development of Site 2 (Parcel 3), it should be noted that another developer may purchase and develop the parcel in the future. Such development may include residential or commercial uses similar to that currently proposed with the project. This alternative would meet the primary project objectives, such as designing a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. However, as the number of dwelling units would be reduced, this alternative would dedicate fewer dwelling units as affordable housing units for low-income families since the number of affordable units is based on a percentage of the total dwelling units proposed. Finding The City finds that the implementation of Alternative 2, No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative, would reduce potential environmental impacts when compared to the proposed project. Impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, energy conservation and climate change, geology and soils, hazards/hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources would be reduced with implementation of Alternative 2 as compared to the proposed project. Vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Further, impacts related to VMTwould be reduced to less than significant and would therefore eliminate the significant and unavoidable impact that would result with the proposed project. The subject site is specifically identified in the City's HEU as a suitable site to support residential development and help the City meet future housing demand. While Alternative 2 would result in somewhat reduced environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project, it would come at the expense of a providing a lesser number of affordable housing units for low-income families, thereby reducing potential rental opportunities for the City's low income residents. As such, the limited environmental benefits achieved with this alternative does not outweigh the loss of providing affordable housing that would help to meet state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encourage diversity within the Leucadia community. As this alternative would not meet such project objectives, and for the reasons described above, the City rejects Alternative 2. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 63 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A ALTERNATIVE 3: REDUCED RESIDENTIAL/INCREASED COMMERCIAL ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative The Reduced Residential/Increased Commercial Alternative would result in development of the site at a similar intensity as the proposed project with a reduction in the proposed number of residential units and an increase in the square footage of the proposed commercial uses. Under this alternative, the 34-room boutique hotel (with 8 affordable guest units) would remain. Additionally, Site 1 would be developed with 84 for -lease apartment units, which is the maximum number of dwelling units allowed under the existing zoning and similar to that which would occur with the proposed project. This alternative would remove the 10 dwelling units proposed on Site 2, so no residential uses would be proposed on Site 2. Private open space for the 84 residential units would also be provided as proposed with the project. This alternative would qualify for incentives under Density Bonus Law by providing "low income"Z affordable residential units (affordable to households earning no more than 80 percent of the area median income) which represents 20 percent of the overall proposed units. As this alternative removes 10 units, the number of affordable residential units would be reduced from 19 to 17 units. In addition to the 18,261 SF of commercial use as proposed with the project, this alternative would increase commercial uses by approximately 8,978 SF (this is equal to the 8,228 SF on Parcel 3 plus the 750 SF of required private open space as proposed with the project). Therefore, a total of 27,238 SF of commercial use would be provided. Using the same estimate of 2.51 persons per household as the proposed project, this alternative would generate an estimated resident population of 211 persons. Additionally, at an assumed employee demand of 250 SF/employee, the 8,978 SF of additional commercial space would generate an estimated 36 employees above the 62 employees generated with the proposed project. Therefore, commercial development under this alternative would generate an estimated total of 98 employees. Proposed access to the site would occur via the same improvements as proposed with the project, and similar median landscaping would be planted. Additionally, the provision of on -site landscaping and common open space for the residential uses would occur consistent with City requirements. An on -site parking structure would also be constructed to serve the hotel, commercial, and residential uses, as appropriate. z 94 residential apartment units x 0.20 = 18.8 units, or 19 total units (rounded up). Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 64 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Impact Comparison Biological Resources As this alternative would result in development of the site at a similar intensity as the proposed project, implementation of Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts to biological resources. Specifically, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to indirectly affect avian species if determined to be present at the time construction is undertaken. Additionally, as development of this alternative would affect the same land area as the proposed project, all existing trees (i.e., potential nesting sites) would be removed from the site, similar to that which would occur with the project. Therefore, impacts on biological resources would be considered similar to those that would result with the proposed project, and the same mitigation measures as identified with the project would be required. Cultural Resources As this alternative would result in development of the site at a similar intensity as the proposed project, implementation of Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts to unknown cultural resources as the proposed project. Specifically, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown cultural resources, as the area of land disturbed and the construction techniques (i.e., grading and excavation) would be similar. Therefore, similar mitigation measures as the proposed project would be required to address potential impacts to undiscovered cultural resources. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project and considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Energy Conservation and Climate Change While this alternative would remove the 10 dwelling units proposed on Site 2, the residential uses would be replaced with approximately 8,978 SF of commercial uses. Therefore, a total of 27,238 SF of commercial use would be provided. Although these changes would alter the site plan and construction plan, it is assumed that the overall intensity of project construction would be similar under this alternative as the proposed project, as the project components would be similar. The proposed project would have a total service population (net increase of residents and employees on -site) of 274 people. This alternative would generate an estimated resident population of 211 persons since this alternative would have fewer residential units. Additionally, the 8,978 SF of additional commercial space would generate an estimated 36 employees above the 62 employees generated with the proposed project for an estimated total of 98 employees. As such, this alternative would have a total service population of 309 people compared to the 274 people with the proposed project. Since the project emissions are divided by the service population, this alternative would result in less emissions per person. However, while this alternative would result in less impacts than the proposed project, this alternative would also Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 65 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A exceed the significance threshold of 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population from the City's CAP. Therefore, the impact would be potentially significant and mitigation would be required. As with the proposed project, mitigation measure GHG-1 would be implemented to require the project applicant to purchase and retire GHG offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions to 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population. With implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1, this alternative would not exceed the GHG emissions threshold from the City's CAP, and impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources) Impacts to paleontological resources generally occur during ground disturbing activities (i.e., grading and excavation). As this alternative would result in development of the site at a similar intensity as the proposed project, implementation of Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts to paleontological resources. Specifically, direct impacts to unknown paleontological resources may occur from the various subsurface construction disturbances associated with this alternative, as the same land area would be disturbed as with the project, and required excavations would be similar. As such, mitigation measures identified to reduce potential impacts resulting with the proposed project would also be required to address the recovery of unknown paleontological resources with this alternative. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Based on the results of the Phase I ESA, the proposed project would require mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant impacts involving the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment. Mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 would require additional testing of the existing structures on -site to verify the absence of lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials and any additional remediation during demolition/deconstruction required to safely transport and dispose any lead -based paint and/or asbestos. This alternative would implement the mitigation measures as the existing buildings on - site would be demolished. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Noise While land uses and intensities would be changed under this alternative, construction activities would be anticipated to be similar to those resulting with the proposed project. The nearest structures are multi -family residential buildings located approximately 20 feet west of the of the project boundary. As Parcels 1 and 2 would still be developed under this alternative, it is reasonable to assume that vibration impacts from construction activities would be similar to impacts from the proposed project. Therefore, mitigation measure NOI-1 would be required to Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 66 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A reduce vibration levels to below the adopted threshold. Vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. No other construction or operational impacts are anticipated to occur with this alternative. Transportation As shown EIR Section 3.12, Transportation, the proposed project would generate a net increase of 1,173 ADT (increase in the number of trips generated over existing conditions) and would therefore not fall below the ADT screening thresholds. The project as proposed would exceed 85% of the regional VMT/capita or VMT/employee and mitigation measure TR-1 would be implemented to require preparation of a TDM Program to reduce the proposed project's VMT; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Refer to EIR Table 3.12-2 for the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee percentages for the proposed project. As shown in Table 5-3, Project Trip Generation for Alternative 3, Alternative 3 would generate a net increase of approximately 1,471 ADT above existing conditions which is more than the proposed project (1,173 ADT). As this alternative would not fall below the ADT screening threshold of 1,000 ADT, a VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee analysis would be required to address both the residential and commercial uses proposed. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 67 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Table 5-3: Proiect Trip Generation for Alternative 3 Project Alternative 3 Land Uses Rate Size and Units Average Daily Trips (ADT) Resort Hotel 10 /Room 34 Rooms 340 Multi -Family (>20 du/acre) 6/DU 84 DU 504 Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial 40/KSF 17,562 SF 702 Restaurant (sit down; high turnover) 160/KSF 3,905 SF 625 Restaurant (quality) 100/KSF 2,134 SF 213 Office 20/KSF 3,638 SF 73 Project Driveway Trips: 2,457 Pass -by Trips per SANDAG rates (Existing trips already on Highway 101) Specialty Retail (Pass -by = 15% ADT AM; 10% PM): -52 Restaurant High Turnover (Pass -By = 12% ADT AM; 20% AM): -75 Restaurant Quality (Pass -By = 12% ADT AM; 10% PM): -26 Office (Pass -By = 4% ADT AM; 40% PM) -3 Project Primary and Diverted Trips: 2,301 Existing Uses to be Removed Restaurant (sit down; high turnover) 700/KSF 1,202 SF 841 Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial 40/KSF 2,249 SF 90 Credit for Existing Use Driveway Trips: 931 Pass -By Trips per SANDAG rates (Existing trips already on Highway 101) Restaurant Fast Food (Pass -By =12% ADT AM; 40% PM): -101 Credit for Existing Use Primary & Diverted Trips: 830 Net Change in Primary and Diverted Trips (for analysis): 1,4711 Source: LOS Engineering, Inc. 2022; see EIR Appendix L-1. 1 2,301 - 830 = 1,471 net change in primary and diverted trips DU = Dwelling Unit; ADT = Average Daily Trip; KSF = thousand square feet; SF = square feet Spreadsheet rounding may result in +1 to the above numbers. As with the proposed project, this alternative would be located on an infill site; would contain a mix of uses on -site; includes project design features to enhance sustainability; would provide for a variety of housing types including "low income" affordable housing; and would be consistent with City's General Plan, Local Coastal Program, N101SP, CAP, and SANDAG's The Regional Plan, impacts related to VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee would still exceed 85% of the regional average. Similar to the proposed project, to reduce the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee associated with this alternative, VMT reducing measures would need to be implemented. Transportation Demand Management strategies would be implemented as potential mitigation, aimed at vehicle trip reduction and increased use of alternative travel modes. Enforceable additive measures identified under mitigation measure TR-1 for the proposed project would be implemented to reduce potential VMT-related impacts; however, even with such mitigation, impacts relative to VMT would remain significant and unavoidable for this alternative, similar to the proposed project. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 68 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Tribal Cultural Resources As this alternative would result in development of the site at a similar intensity as the proposed project, implementation of Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources. Specifically, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown tribal cultural resources, as the extent of grading and/or excavation activities would be similar. Therefore, similar mitigation measures as the proposed project would be required to address undiscovered tribal cultural resources. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project and considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Alternative 3 Summary and Finding As this alternative would have a similar area of disturbance as the proposed project, and would require similar construction activities, impacts to biological resources (e.g., potential to affect nesting avian species), cultural resources (e.g., potential to inadvertently discover unknown resources), geology and soils (paleontological resources), hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources would be similar to the proposed project. However, this alternative would reduce impacts to energy conservation and climate change as this alternative would have a higher service population. Similar to the proposed project, VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. This alternative would meet the primary project objectives, such as designing a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. However, as the number of dwelling units would be reduced, this alternative would dedicate fewer dwelling units as affordable housing units for low-income families as the number of affordable units is based on a percentage of the total dwelling units proposed. Findin The City finds that the implementation of Alternative 3, Reduced Residential/Increased Commercial Alternative, potential impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts to energy conservation and climate change would be reduced, as would VMT impacts; however, VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, similar to the proposed project. The City finds that Alternative 3 would meet the primary project objectives; however, this alternative would result in the development of fewer for -lease apartment homes, thereby fewer dwelling units would be available as affordable housing units for low-income families as the number of affordable units is based on a percentage of the total dwelling units proposed. Thus, the limited environmental benefits achieved with this alternative does not outweigh the loss of providing affordable housing that would help to meet state -mandated affordable housing Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 69 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A requirements and further encourage diversity within the Leucadia community. For the reasons above, the City rejects Alternative 3. ALTERNATIVE4: REDUCED BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND INCREASED COMMON SPACE/PUBLIC AMENITIES ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative The Reduced Building Footprint and Increased Common Space/Public Amenities Alternative would reduce the overall building footprint on -site and allow for the provision of additional common public space and amenities, including enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Building 3 (2,249 SF one-story) and Building 5 (1,544 SF; 1 story), totaling approximately 3,793 SF, would not be constructed with Alternative 4. An incentive would be requested to increase the height of Building 2 from 2 stories to 3 stories. Building 2 would then accommodate the square footage of commercial uses removed with deletion of Buildings 3 and 5 to achieve a no net loss of commercial space. With Building 2 constructed as a 3-story building, this alternative would increase the number of proposed 3-story buildings fronting directly onto Highway 101. This alternative would also include expanded on -site bike facilities as compared to the project to encourage on -site employees, residents, and visitors to utilize alternative means of transit. Such facilities would include bike racks installed in the commercial mixed -use area and at each of the residential buildings; storage lockers available for short-term rental; on -site bike rental or a bikeshare program (i.e., on -demand access for visitors and hotel guests); and installation of an on -site electrical bike charging station. As Buildings 3 and 5 are not proposed to support residential uses with the project, no change in the overall number of residential apartment units would occur with this alternative. A total of 94 residential units would be constructed, with 19 units being low income affordable housing. Private open space for the residential uses would also be provided as proposed with the project. Additionally, common open space amenities on -site would be expanded to further encourage and support opportunities for community gathering and passive recreation. Such amenities are anticipated to include a centralized community green space/pocket park that could be used to support occasional small local events, public speaking engagements or lectures (i.e., educational presentations on Batiquitos Lagoon and subsequent nature walks, or as a meeting place/starting point for organized walking tours of the Highway 101 corridor); general community meeting and gathering space; and/or special events, such as an art walk or farmers' market, to entice local residents and visitors alike to the site. Additionally, enhanced landscaping would be accommodated within the community green space/park and other areas on -site as compared to the project (i.e., that could result in on -site tree replacement at a higher ratio than would occur with the proposed project). Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 70 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Using the same estimate of 2.51 persons per household as the proposed project, this alternative would generate an estimated resident population of 236 persons, similar to the project. Additionally, the commercial uses, including the hotel, would generate an estimated 62 employees, similar to the proposed project. Proposed access to the site would occur via the same improvements as proposed with the project, and similar median landscaping would be planted. Additionally, the provision of on -site landscaping and common open space for the residential uses would occur consistent with City requirements. An on -site parking structure would also be constructed to serve the hotel, commercial, and residential uses, as appropriate. It should be noted that increasing the height of Building 2 may potentially increase the perceived visual bulk and scale of the development which would affect public views along the Highway 101 corridor. Additionally, the increased height of Building 2 may affect private views from the adjacent Seabluffe residential development, particularly those residences located adjacent to the west with views across the site; however, only public views are considered within the legal framework of CEQA. Project impacts on aesthetic resources were determined to be less than significant in the EIR; refer to Section 3.1, Aesthetics. Although the increase in proposed height of Building 2 may increase the intensity of uses along the Highway 101 corridor, the 3-story building would not obstruct views of the scenic corridor and impacts would remain less than significant, similar to the proposed project. Additionally, as Building 3 would be removed with this alternative, the number of structures fronting onto Highway 101 would be decreased, providing additional views into the site and a sense of increased openness for pedestrians and others traveling along the project frontage. Impact Comparison Biological Resources As the project site is largely void of biological resources, this alternative would generally not be expected to directly or indirectly impact sensitive wildlife or plant species, similar to the proposed project. As with the project, construction of this alternative would have the potential to indirectly affect avian species if determined to be present at the time construction is undertaken through the removal of onsite trees that may be used as nesting habitat by avian species. Therefore, impacts on biological resources would be considered similar to those that would result with the proposed project, and the same mitigation measures as identified with the project would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. Cultural Resources As with the proposed project, construction on the subject site under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown cultural resources, and a similar land Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 71 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A area would be disturbed. Therefore, similar mitigation measures as the proposed project would be required to address undiscovered cultural resources. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project and considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Energy Conservation and Climate Change While this alternative would reconfigure the project site and remove Buildings 3 and 5, the project would still be constructed at the same intensity as the proposed project because the height of the remaining buildings would be increased to accommodate the uses originally designated for Buildings 3 and 5. Even though this alternative would require a modified site plan and construction plan, it is assumed that the overall intensity of project construction would be the same under this alternative as the proposed project since the project components would be the similar. The expanded on -site bike facilities, including bike racks installed in the commercial mixed -use area and at each of the residential buildings, proposed under this alternative would encourage the use of alternative means of transit; however, the reduction in GHG would not be expected to fall below applicable thresholds and thus impacts would remain significant. Mitigation measure GHG-1 requires the project applicant to purchase and retire GHG offsets to reduce the project's GHG emissions to 2.7 MTCO2e per year per service population. With implementation of mitigation measure GHG-1, this alternative would not exceed the GHG emissions threshold from the City's CAP, and impacts would be less than significant, similar to the proposed project. Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources) Impacts to paleontological resources generally occurs during ground disturbing activities (i.e., grading and excavation). Since this alternative would include construction activities similar to that of the proposed project, direct and indirect impacts to unknown paleontological resources may occur from the various subsurface construction disturbances associated with this alternative. As such, similar mitigation measures as required for the proposed project would also be required to address the recovery of unknown paleontological resources, if encountered during construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials As the existing on -site buildings would be demolished to enable construction of this alternative, similar to the proposed project, such activities may result in the potential release of hazardous substances, such as lead based paints or asbestos, due to the age of the on -site structures. As such, impacts resulting with this alternative would be similar to the proposed project and mitigation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 would be implemented to require additional testing in order to verify the absence of lead -based paint and/or asbestos -related construction materials Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 72 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A and any additional remediation required. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Noise The nearest structures are multi -family residential buildings located approximately 20 feet west of the project boundary. While this alternative would not construct Building 3 and Building 5, the buildings proposed closest to the western boundary would still be constructed. As such, it is reasonable to assume that vibration impacts from construction activities would be similar to impacts resulting with the proposed project. Therefore, mitigation measure NOI-1 would be required to reduce vibration levels below the threshold. Vibration impacts associated with construction of this alternative would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the proposed project. Transportation As this alternative would develop the site in the same intensity as the proposed project (i.e. residential uses, hotel, and commercial uses), this alternative would result in the same ADT as the proposed project. However, this alternative would include additional measures that would reduce VMT-related impacts. As compared to the measures identified in mitigation measure TR- 1, this alternative would include expanded on -site bike facilities as compared to the project to encourage on -site employees, residents, and visitors to utilize alternative means of transit. Such facilities would include bike racks installed in the commercial mixed -use area and at each of the residential buildings; storage lockers available for short-term rental; on -site bike rental or a bikeshare program (i.e., on -demand access for visitors and hotel guests); and installation of an on -site electrical bike charging station. While these measures would reduce the severity of the VMT impact, the resulting impact would still exceed thresholds and thus be considered significant and unavoidable. Tribal Cultural Resources As with the proposed project, construction under this alternative would have the potential to directly and/or indirectly impact unknown tribal cultural resources. As the extent of land area disturbed with this alternative and the construction methods used would be similar to that of the proposed project, the potential for impacts to occur are also considered to be similar. Therefore, similar mitigation as the proposed project would be required to reduce potential effects on undiscovered tribal cultural resources. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project and reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Alternative 4 Summary and Finding As this alternative would have a similar footprint and area of disturbance as the proposed project, impacts to biological resources (e.g., potential to affect nesting avian species), cultural resources (e.g., potential to inadvertently discover unknown resources), energy conservation and climate Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 73 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A change, geology and soils (paleontological resources), hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources would be similar to the proposed project. With the implementation of enhanced measures, this alternative would reduce VMT impacts compared to the proposed project. However, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as with the proposed project. As this alternative would support the similar uses and components as the proposed project, this alternative would meet the primary project objectives, such as designing a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. Findin The City finds that the implementation of Alternative 4, Reduced Building Footprint and Increased Common Space/Public Amenities Alternative, would reduce impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, energy conservation and climate change, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources as compared to the proposed project. Further, the City finds that this alternative would reduce VMT impacts compared to the proposed project; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as with the proposed project. The City finds that Alternative 4 would support similar land uses and components as the proposed project and would meet several of the primary project objectives, such as designing a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and State density bonus allowances and dedicating 20 percent of the total number of dwelling units as affordable housing units for low-income families. However, this alternative is in contrast to project objective 9 which is intended to minimize visual impacts of the development by generally locating structures of lesser height along the Highway 101 frontage to enhance the pedestrian scale, while gradually increasing building height within the interior of the development, and also runs contrary to project objectives 1, 6, 7, and 8 which pertain to aesthetics and streetscape compatibility. For the reasons above, the City rejects this alternative. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative be identified; that is, an alternative that would result in the fewest or least significant environmental impacts. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires that another alternative that could feasibly attain most of the project's basic objectives be chosen as the environmentally superior alternative. The No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. However, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2), a secondary alternative must be chosen since the No Project Alternative is environmentally superior. Therefore, Alternative 3, Reduced Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 74 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Residential/Increased Commercial Alternative, is considered the environmentally superior alternative as this alternative would reduce impacts to associated with VMT and energy conservation and climate change. However, as noted above, although reduced compared to the proposed project, VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. This alternative would meet the primary project objectives, such as designing a mixed -use development that provides needed multi -family residential housing in compliance with local and state density bonus allowances. However, as the number of dwelling units would be reduced, this alternative would dedicate fewer dwelling units as affordable housing units for low-income families as the number of affordable units is based on a percentage of the total dwelling units proposed. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the project against its potentially significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the project. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, if the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable." As noted above and described in EIR Section 3.12, Transportation, of the EIR, the proposed project would have a potentially significant VMT-related transportation impact. To reduce the VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee associated with the proposed project to a less than significant level, VMT reducing measures would need to be implemented. The City acknowledges that, while the project is located on an infill site; would contain a mix of uses on -site; includes project design features to enhance sustainability; would provide for a variety of housing types including "low income" affordable housing; and is consistent with City's General Plan, HUE, Local Coastal Program, N101SP, Encinitas Municipal Code, CAP, and SANDAG's The Regional Plan, impacts related to VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee would still exceed 85% of the regional average. The City acknowledges that TDM strategies to reduce VMT would be implemented as potential project mitigation, aimed at vehicle trip reduction and increased use of alternative travel modes; however, as VMT associated with the project ranges from 5.7% (VMT/employee) to 31.8% (VMT/capita) above 85% of the regional mean, the required VMT reduction needed to fully mitigate the VMT impact cannot be achieved. While implementation of the proposed TDM strategies would not reduce the VMT impact to below a level of significance, they would provide some level of VMT reduction. The City also recognizes the limitations of the SANDAG model used in analyzing the proposed project and its inability to capture project features that could reduce the proposed project's VMT. As SANDAG's Travel Demand Model is built at the regional level, it is limited in capturing the nuances of individual project sites, such as benefits of small-scale mixed uses, affordable housing Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 75 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A components, or travel demand management measures that would be provided by the project as proposed. The City acknowledges the consideration project alternatives in the EIR aimed at reducing the project's significant and unavoidable impact relative to VMT. A total of 7 project alternatives were identified, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) which requires that an EIR describe a reasonable range of project alternatives that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, while avoiding or reducing impacts associated with the project. Four of the alternatives identified were evaluated for potential environmental effects; 3 of the alternatives identified were considered but subsequently rejected from further evaluation. The project alternatives identified are consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), requiring that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project, or to the project location, which will avoid or substantially reduce any significant effects of the project, even if the alternatives would be costlier or hinder to some degree the attainment of the project objectives. In evaluating the alternatives identified, Alternative 1, No Project/No Redevelopment Alternative, was determined to avoid the significant and unavoidable VMT impact resulting with the proposed project but would not meet any of the project objectives. Alternative 2, the No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative, was also found to reduce VMT impacts to less than significant and would meet the primary project objectives; however, as the number of dwelling units would be reduced, this alternative would dedicate fewer dwelling units as affordable housing units for low-income families, thus less effectively achieving the objective of helping to meet state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encouraging diversity within the community. Evaluation of Alternative 3, Reduced Residential/Increased Commercial Alternative, and Alternative 4, Reduced Footprint and Increased Common Space/Public Amenities alternative, reached a similar finding of significant and unavoidable impacts relative to VMT, although such alternatives did achieve some of the project objectives identified. The City also recognizes the EIR considered and rejected from further consideration other project alternatives aimed at reducing significant and unavoidable impacts to VMT, including a Parking Reduction Alternative that would provide 241 residential parking spaces, which is the minimum number of parking spaces required under the reduced parking requirements allowed under state density bonus law. Given that this alternative would only reduce available parking by 16 spaces, the reduction in VMT is not enough to meet the 85% threshold considering that the VMT associated with the proposed project ranges from 5.7% (VMT/employee) to 31.8% (VMT/capita) above 85% of the regional mean. While there are qualitative benefits of reducing parking, such as limiting potential vehicles associated with the proposed project, there are no supported, quantifiable reductions to VMT allocable to this alternative based on meeting state density bonus minimum parking requirements. Forthese reasons, the Reduced Parking Alternative was rejected from further analysis in the EIR. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 76 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Other alternatives considered and rejected from further analysis included the Citizen Participation Program Alternative (which would remove the residential component of the project) and the Alternative Site Location Alternative (which would locate the project elsewhere in Encinitas). These alternatives would generally be anticipated to reduce and/or have similar impacts as compared to the proposed project; however, VMT-related impacts are anticipated to remain similar to the proposed project (significant and unavoidable). As these alternatives were found to not meet many of the project objectives, they were rejected from further analysis in the EIR. The City declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the project to the fullest extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures identified in the EIR; having considered the entire administrative record on the project; and having weighed the benefits of the project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, each of the social, economic, environmental, and other benefits of the project —including providing affordable housing for low income families, thereby helping to meet the state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encourage diversity within the community, and providing a range of affordability for overnight accommodations (boutique hotel) —have been determined to separately and individually outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable upon the following overriding considerations: SOCIAL BENEFITS 1. The project would provide visual and functional compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods, other nearby land uses, development, and natural features. 2. The project would create a walkable environment that promotes and enhances the pedestrian experience throughout the site by providing safe, convenient, and attractive connections, in addition to areas for social gathering and interaction. 3. The project would provide a site plan that creates connectivity to adjacent neighborhoods and public transit while promoting the use of alternative means of transportation such as pedestrian and bicycle transit. ECONOMIC BENEFITS 4. The project would provide for diversified housing (for -lease apartments) to meet current and future housing demands on a site located near available transit, retail, and recreational amenities. 5. The project would provide affordable housing within the project for low income families, thereby helping to meet the state -mandated affordable housing requirements and further encouraging diversity within the community. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 77 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A 6. The project would provide a range of affordability in the proposed overnight visitor - serving accommodations in accordance with the City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and Local Coastal Program, while increasing economic benefits and taxes generated from hospitality -related uses. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS 7. The project would provide at least the minimum number of units and housing opportunities that are consistent with the goals of the adopted City of Encinitas Housing Element Update, while minimizing environmental effects and protecting surrounding natural and aesthetic resources. 8. The project would minimize potential visual impacts on surrounding scenic resources by generally locating structures of lesser height adjacent to the N. Coast Highway 101 frontage, with buildings of increased building height being located within the interior of the property. 9. The project would provide for the design of buildings, public spaces, and uses that enhance and respect the scenic nature of the N. Coast Highway 101 corridor and the coastal environment and promote environmental stewardship within the Leucadia community. Accordingly, the City of Encinitas adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations, recognizing that the significant and unavoidable transportation (VMT) impact would result from implementation of the project. Having (1) determined that the alternatives evaluated in the EIR either would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant and unavoidable transportation impact or would be infeasible; and (2) recognized all unavoidable significant impacts, the City of Encinitas hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the project, as stated herein, is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of the project and outweighs and overrides its significant and unavoidable impacts, and thereby justifies approval of the Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project. CONCLUSION The City finds that it has been presented with the EIR, which it has reviewed and considered, and further finds that the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that has been completed in full compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City. The City declares that no evidence of new significant impacts as defined by the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 has been received by the City after circulation of the Draft EIR, which would require recirculation. Therefore, the City hereby certifies the EIR based on the entirety of the record of proceedings, including but not limited to the findings and conclusions reached herein. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 78 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A ATTACHMENT B MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 79 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A INTRODUCTION This document is the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Marea Village Mixed -Use Development Project (proposed project). An MMRP is required for the proposed project because the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project has identified significant adverse impacts, and measures have been identified to mitigate those impacts. This MMRP has been prepared pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, which requires public agencies to "adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment." WIN As the lead agency, the City of Encinitas (City) will be responsible for monitoring compliance with all mitigation measures. Different City departments may be responsible for various aspects of the project. The MMRP identifies the department with the responsibility for ensuring that each individual mitigation measure is completed; however, it is expected that one or more departments will coordinate efforts to ensure such compliance. The MMRP is presented in tabular form on the following pages. The components of the MMRP are described briefly below. • Potential Significant Impact: The significance threshold is restated to describe the potentially significant impact. • Mitigation Measure: The mitigation measures to be adopted (as identified in the EIR) are restated. • Timeframe of Mitigation: Identifies at which stage of the project the mitigation measure shall be completed. • Monitoring, Enforcement, and Reporting Responsibility: Identifies the department within the City with responsibility for mitigation monitoring. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 180 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 181 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CC Resolution No. 2022-xx — Exhibit XX Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Mitigation Measure Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring, Enforcement, and Reporting Responsibility Biological Resources BIO-1 Preconstruction General Avian, Raptor, and Least Tern Survey, and California Least Tern Prior to and City of Encinitas Monitoring. If the project construction occurs during the raptor and avian nesting season (raptor during project Planning Division nesting season begins January 15; migratory bird nesting begins February 15; all raptor and avian construction nesting activity typically ceases by September 15), a qualified avian biologist with expertise activities monitoring least terns shall conduct a preconstruction nesting activity survey for migratory birds, raptors, and least terns on the project site and within 100 feet. The surveys shall be conducted no more than 3 days prior to commencement of construction activities. The qualified biologist will also examine the project survey area for all signs of least terns (e.g., nesting scrapes and/or nests). Impacts to California least tern shall be fully avoided. The qualified biologist shall be on -site during all construction activities between April 1 and September 15 to verify that least terns are not flying to or over the site during the day or roosting on the site at night. Any modification to the monitoring frequency and duration shall first be approved by the Wildlife Agencies prior to implementing the change. If least terns are observed flying over the site during construction hours or roosting on the site, avoidance measures (e.g. changing construction hours, staging equipment throughout the site) shall be implemented to deter terns from flying over and landing on the site and ensure the project's impacts on least terns remain less than significant. If California least terns occupy and nest on the site, construction within at least 500 feet or a suitable distance as determined by the qualified least tern biologist shall be delayed until any tern nests have gone to completion and the young have fledged and are no longer dependent on the project site for roosting. The monitoring biologist shall provide documentation of any findings to the City. Impacts to other nesting bird species shall also be avoided. If nesting birds are discovered during the preconstruction surveys or during construction, then avoidance measures will be undertaken and adequate buffers for each of the species will be established until the juveniles have fledged and there has been no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. The monitoring biologist will monitor any nests and provide documentation to the City. BIO-2 Preconstruction Bat Monitoring. If construction occurs during bat maternity season (March 1 through September 30), a qualified bat biologist shall conduct bat surveys which include a combination of sampling, exit counts, and acoustic surveys, to determine if bats are occupying palm trees or vacant structures. If bat surveys are negative, palm tree removal and building Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 82 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timeframe of Monitoring, Enforcement, and Mitigation Measure Mitigation Reporting Responsibility demolition shall commence within three days after the survey. If bat surveys are positive, palm tree removal and building demolition shall be postponed until such time as the qualified bat biologist determines bats are no longer present. Cultural Resources CR-1 Cultural Resources Monitoring Program. A Cultural Resource Mitigation Monitoring Program Prior to and City of Encinitas shall be conducted to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any during project Planning Division cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the construction proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a qualified activities archaeologist and a traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) Native American monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground -disturbing activities associated with project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that may disturb original (pre -project) ground, including the placement of imported fill materials and related roadway improvements (i.e., for access). 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. 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 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. 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 Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 83 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Mitigation Measure Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring, Enforcement, and Reporting Responsibility avoidance is not feasible a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the lead agency under CEQA. If a Data Recovery Plan is required, then the TCA Native American monitor shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan. The qualified archaeologist and/or TCA Native American monitor may also halt ground disturbing activities around known archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features if, in their respective opinions, there is the possibility that they could be damaged or destroyed. The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all tribal cultural resources collected during the cultural resource mitigation monitoring conducted during all ground disturbing activities, and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site to the TCA Native American Tribe for respectful and dignified treatment and disposition, including reburial, in accordance with the Tribe's cultural and spiritual traditions. All cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. CR-2 Prepare Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report. 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 Development Services Director for approval. CR-3 Identification of Human Remains. 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 Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 84 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timeframe of Monitoring, Enforcement, and Mitigation Measure Mitigation Reporting Responsibility 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. Energy Conservation and Climate Change GHG-1 Purchase and Retire Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Offsets. The applicant shall purchase and retire Prior to City of Encinitas 18,739 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) greenhouse gas offsets to reduce the issuance of Planning Division project's GHG emissions level to 2.7 MTCO2e per service population per year, consistent with the certificate of performance standards and requirements set forth below. occupancy The GHG offsets shall be secured from an accredited registry that is approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), or from an emissions reduction credits program that is administered by CARB. The GHG offsets shall be secured from an accredited registry that uses a CARB-approved protocol which meets the requirements of California Code of Regulations, Title 17, §95972(a). The GHG offsets shall be real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable, as those terms are defined in Health & Safety Code §38562(d)(1) and (2) and California Code of Regulations, Title 17, §95802. Carbon offset credits can result from activities that reduce, avoid, destroy or sequester an amount of GHG emissions in an off -site location to offset the equivalent amount of GHG emissions occurring elsewhere. For the purpose of Project mitigation, carbon offset credits shall consist of direct emission reductions or sequestration that are used to offset the Project's direct emissions. As described in CARB Determination for State Assembly Bill 734, all carbon offset credits shall be purchased from a carbon offset registry which is approved by CARB and uses CARB-approved protocols, which at present include the following: the American Climate Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Verra (formerly Verified Carbon Standard). The carbon offset credits shall be verifiable by the City and enforceable in accordance with the registry's applicable standards, practices, or protocols. The carbon offsets must substantively satisfy all six of the statutory "environmental integrity" requirements applicable to the CARB Cap -and - Trade Program, generally as set forth in both subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2) of California Health Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 85 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timeframe of Monitoring, Enforcement, and Mitigation Measure Mitigation Reporting Responsibility and Safety Code §38562: real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, enforceable, and additional. All offset credits shall be verified by an independent verifier who meets stringent levels of professional qualification (i.e., American National Standards Institute National Accreditation Board Accreditation Program for Greenhouse Gas Validation/Verification Bodies or a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Lead Verifier accredited by CARB), or an expert with equivalent qualifications to the extent necessary to assist with the verification. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in the event that an approved registry becomes no longer accredited by CARB and the offset credits cannot be transferred to another accredited registry, the project applicant shall comply with the rules and procedures for retiring and/or replacing offset credits in the manner specified by the applicable protocol or other applicable standards including (to the extent required) by purchasing an equivalent number of credits to recoup the loss. Geographic Location: Carbon offset credits shall be obtained from GHG reduction projects that occur in the following locations in order of priority: (1) off -site within the neighborhood surrounding the project site, including Encinitas; (2) the greater North County community; (3) within the San Diego County Air Basin; (4) the State of California; and (5) the United States. For offset credits from projects outside the State of California, the applicant shall demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the City that the offset project meets requirements equivalent to or stricter than California's laws and regulations for ensuring the validity of offset credits. Any offset credits used for mitigation are subject to the approval of the City. Contracts for purchase of credits shall be entered into prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building and the applicant shall provide the third -party verification report concerning those credits, and the unique serial numbers of those credits showing that they have been retired. The City shall confirm receipt of the verification reports and serial numbers prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Geology and Soils GEO-1 Paleontological Data Recovery and Monitoring Plan. A Data Recovery and Monitoring Plan shall Prior to City of Encinitas be prepared to the satisfaction of the City. The plan shall document paleontological recovery issuance of Planning Division methods. grading permit; Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 86 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Mitigation Measure Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring, Enforcement, and Reporting Responsibility Prior to grading permit issuance, the project applicant shall implement a paleontological During monitoring and recovery program consisting of the following measures, which shall be construction included on project grading plans to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department: a. The project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified paleontologist to conduct a paleontological monitoring and recovery program. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual having an MS or PhD degree in paleontology or geology, and who is a recognized expert in the identification of fossil materials and the application of paleontological recovery procedures and techniques. As part of the monitoring program, a paleontological monitor may work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual having experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. b. The qualified paleontologist shall attend the project preconstruction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors concerning the grading plan and paleontological field techniques. c. The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on -site on a full-time basis during the original cutting of previously undisturbed portions of the underlying very old paralic deposits. If the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor ascertains that the noted formations are not fossil -bearing, the qualified paleontologist shall have the authority to terminate the monitoring program. d. If fossils are discovered, recovery shall be conducted by the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor. In most cases, fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time, although some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall have the authority to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. e. If subsurface bones or other potential fossils are found anywhere within the project site by construction personnel in the absence of a qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor, the qualified paleontologist shall be notified immediately to assess their significance and make further recommendations. f. Fossil remains collected during monitoring and salvage shall be cleaned, sorted, and catalogued. Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 87 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timeframe of Monitoring, Enforcement, and Mitigation Measure Mitigation Reporting Responsibility maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Prior to building permit issuance, a final summary report outlining the results of the mitigation program shall be prepared by the qualified paleontologist and submitted to the Development Services Department for concurrence. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils, as well as appropriate maps. Hazards and Hazardous Materials HAZ-1 Prior to demolition permit issuance, an asbestos and lead material survey shall be conducted by a Prior to City of Encinitas qualified consultant to determine if the existing structures on -site contain lead -based paint and/or issuance of Planning Division asbestos -related construction materials. If substances containing lead and/or asbestos are found demolition on -site, an abatement work plan shall be prepared by the consultant for the proper removal and permit; Prior to disposal of the materials in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The issuance of asbestos and lead survey results and any necessary work plan shall be reviewed and approved by building permit the City of Encinitas Development Services Department (Planning Division). HAZ-2 If on -site abatement of asbestos and/or lead materials is required, a licensed abatement contractor shall implement the approved abatement work plan prior to demolition of affected structures. HAZ-3 Prior to building permit issuance, an abatement close-out report shall be prepared by the abatement contractor and submitted by the project applicant to the Development Services Department for review and approval. Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 88 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A Timeframe of Monitoring, Enforcement, and Mitigation Measure Mitigation Reporting Responsibility Noise NOI-1 Implement Vibration Control Measures During Construction. The project applicant shall Prior to City of Encinitas incorporate the following measures on all grading and building plans and specifications subject to issuance of Planning Division approval of the City of Encinitas prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit (whichever grading or occurs first): building The project applicant shall utilize a construction vibration monitoring system with the potential permit; Prior to to measure low levels of vibration. The applicant shall adjust the vibration frequency settings and during of the equipment to ensure vibration levels do not exceed the 0.2 inch -per -second PPV project threshold at the residential buildings located to the west of the project site. construction The project applicant shall conduct sensitivity training to inform construction personnel about the existing sensitive receptors surrounding the project and about methods to reduce noise and vibration. Transportation TR-1 The following Transportation Demand Measures (TDMs) shall be implemented to further reduce During project City of Encinitas potential effects relative to vehicle miles traveled: operations Planning Division Voluntary employer commute program. Employers to provide information about the SANDAG's iCommute program (www.icommutesd.com) and encourage carpooling. Develop and/or promote bicycle usage through a bikeshare program to help reduce vehicle usage and demand for parking by providing users with on -demand access to bikes for short-term rental, contribute to electric bicycle charging stations, contribute to bicycle infrastructure improvements, and disseminate a bicycle riders guide to make it easier for people to bike and walk to work. Provide pedestrian improvements, such as a connection to the hotel to the north. Provide information about maps, routes, and schedules for public transit. Tribal Cultural Resources Implement mitigation measures CR-1 to CR-3. Prior to and City of Encinitas during project Planning Division construction activities Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 1 89 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 99B35F79-8D89-4441-B979-EDC7E960D710 Resolution 2022-09, Exhibit A ATTACHMENT C FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR) REFER TO PC ATTACHMENT 9 Marea Village Mixed Use Development Project Page 190 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program