Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-08-28; Planning Commission; ; Pacesetter HomeCITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEAPRTMENT REPORT .FOR AUG~ST 28, 1973 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON: CONSIDERATION OF E.I.R. CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE CONSIDERATION OF MASTER PLAN CASE NOS: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 188 ZONE CHANGE NO. 125 MASTER PLAN NO. 132 APPLICANT: Pacesetter Homes, Inc. c/o Terry L. Crowther 4540 Campus Drive Newport Beach, California, 92660 I. GENERAL INFORMATION: A. Request: The applicant requests acceptance of a Final Environmental Impact Report and approval of a preannexational zone change from E-1-A (County) to P-C (Planned Community) and a Master Plan for a 60 acre parcel, to include a possible total of 400 dwelling units on a portion of the west half of Section 21,, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Diego. • B. Background: The subject 60 acre parcel is generally located east of Lowder Lane, midway between Palomar Airport Road and Poinsettia Lane. Surrounding land ·uses include: West: Alta Mira (overall gross density of 10 d.u./acre) and Park Site. North: McReynolds Property (overall gross density approved by Master Plan equals 7 d.u./acre) and County area currently used for agricultural purposes. East: Agricultural uses in County. South: Casas de las Poinsettias (10 d.u./acre) and Ayres property (8 d.u./acre). C. Zoning and General Plan: 1. Zoning: Existing: E-1-A (County) Proposed: P-C Adjacent: West: P-C North: P-C & E-1-A (County East: E-1-A (County) '·south: P-C & RD-M 2. General Plan: The adopted General Plan designates this area as Low Density Residential (3-7 d.u./acre). The General Plan also shows four (4) school sites (2 elementary, one Jr. High and one High School) separated by parks on the subject property~ The site contains approximately 60 acres gross. Subtracting 15 acres (25%) for expected streets leaves 45 net acres. Using an average of 5 d.u./acre the existing General Plan would permit 225 dwelling units. Using a maximum figure of 7 d.u./acre, the General Plan would permit 315 dwelling units. These figures disregard the proposed school sites. The applicant is proposing 400 dwelling units for a net density of 8.9 dwelling units per acre. The densities requested are not consistent with the adopted General Plan, and, if approved, would require a General Plan Amendment. D. Public Notification: The required public notices have been published and mailed regarding these items. II. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 188 A. Project Description: Other sections of this report and pages 1-9 of the draft E.I.R. provide an adequate description of the pending applications. Prior to submittal of a Specific Plan, the applicant would have to submit supplemental information to cover those impacts that can not be fully evaluated at this time (i.e. grading, circulation, etc.}. B. Environmental Setting Without The Project: Pages 10-19 of the draft EIR provide this information. There is nothing of much environmental significance on the site except for the tomatoes and flowers under cultivation and the lack of some community services and facilities. There is a good evaluation of the existing tax yield on page 19 of the draft EIR. It is interesting to compare this table to the expected tax yield shown on page 25. C. Identify Environmental Impacts: Pages 20-28 of the draft EIR describe the environmental impacts expected to occur as a result of this development. Many of the impacts cannot be fully evaluated until specific development plans are prepared. Staff comments include: l. Hydrologic Impacts -the statement on page 20 referring to the flushing action of the tides in Bataquitos Lagoon is inaccurate since there is no significant tidal action in that lagoon. 2. Atmospheric Impacts -emphasis is directed to the last paragraph in this section (page 23). 3. Geologic Impacts -the appli~a~t has stated that their intent is to keep grading to an absolute m,n,mum. -2- 4. Biotic Impacts -the existing agricultural uses have virtually eliminated natural vegetation and the wildlife that would be affected by the encroachment of man. 5. Socio-Economic Impacts -(a) The existing use of the site for cultivating tomatoes and flowers indicates a relatively high value for agricultu~al purposes (page 14). (b) The principal potential impacts of the proposed project will be social and economic as affecting various community services, principally schools (page 25). D. Adverse and Irreversible Effects of the Project: These impacts are again reiterated on pages 29 and 33 of the draft EIR. E. Short and Long-Term Use of Land: This information is discussed on page 33 of the draft EIR. F. Growth Inducement Impact: This impact is adequately described on pages 34-35 of the draft EIR. G. Mitigative Measures: On page 29 of the draft EIR, it is stated that the 11 impact on the schools could be mitigated in part by the dedication of an appropriate amount of land toward a school site or equivalent funds with which to purchase land at an alternate site.11 It is also stated on page 30-that the 11 potential impact of storm drain flow into the lagoon can be mitigated by draining the site northward into Canyon de las Encinas." H. Alternative Choices: Alternatives to the proposed development are discussed on pages 30-32 of the draft EIR. I. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ACCEPT this Final Environmental Impact Analysis, along with the draft EIR and the comments received from the reviewing agencies, as the Final Environmental Impact Report for the aforedescribed project. III. CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 125 A. Description of Application: The applicant is requesting approval of a preannexational zone change from E-1-A (County) to P-C (Planned Comruunity). Approval of this reclassification would become effective upon the date that the subject property is annexed into the City of Carlsbad and, because of the nature of this zone, would not allow any specific forms of development prior to the approval of a Master Plan, Specific Plan and Tentative Map. B. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that it be moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that Zone Change No. 125 BE APPROVED Justification is based upon: -3- 1. P-C Zoning is the best way to assure the City proper controls over the development of this area. 2. P-C zoning, by itself, does not establish any commitment to density or design; it only establishes a concept of development that would be consistant with the adopted General Plan. 3. P-C Zoning, by itself, would not have an adverse impact on the environmenta. IV. CONSIDERATION OF MASTER PLAN NO. 132 A. Description of Project: The Master Plan, as presented, is composed of three basic elements: 1. Density: The applicant is requesting a gross density of 7 dwelling units per acre. This density is in keeping with those densities approved. to the north {McReynolds), west (Alta Mira) and south (Occidental Petroleum)~ but is not consistent with the recommended densities of the existing densities. 2. Circulation: The subject property is located east of I-5, South of Palomar Airport Road and North of Poinsettia Lane. Lowder Lane has also been established through Alta Mira from P.A.R. south to Poinsettia Lane. The Master Plan proposes an extension of a new street in Alta Mira, Camino de las Ondas, easterly to the northerly extension of Batiquitos Drive (also the southerly extension of Macario Road). These two extensions would only be half-street improvements along the southerly and easterly boundaries of the property. The other half-street improvements of Camino de las Ondas would be the requirement of the Hester Development (Occidental Petroleum) currently on file with the Planning Department. There are no precise plans for the extension of Batiquitos Drive. 3. Parks: The Master Plan makes provisions for the connecting link of the park corridor that has been established through the Occidental Petroleum property, the Alta Mira development, and the McReynolds 1 property. There is a problem with the house that is existing in the south\'1est corner of the subject property, part of the area proposed for park dedication. B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff suggests that the Master Plan BE APPROVED with a density of 7 dwelling units per net acre. A precedent has already been established for densities of 7-10 d.u./acre for those areas between I-5 and Batiquitos Drive and between P.A.R. and Poinsettia Lane. However, the resulting developments are within the density range of 3-7 dwelling units per net acre. The relatively level terrain of the subject site is more conducive to higher net densities than those sites with topography problems. Because of this factor, staff recommends that it be moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that Master Plan No. 132 BE APPROVED WITH AN OVERALL NET DENSITY OF 7 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. Justification is based upon: -4- l. The proposed developme~t will be consistant with surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed development is not likely to cause any significant environmental impacts at this lesser density. 3. Based upon.the recently adopted City Council policy of no further General Plan amendments at this time, this leaves two options for the applicant which are: The development can occur at 7 d.u./acre or development can be held in abeyance until the present on-going General Plan amendment is completed which may indicate a more appropriate density for the subject site. C. CO~p)TIONS OF APPROVAL: Any approval should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Any development shall be limited to a density of 7 d.u./net acre which means exclusive of any public street. 2. The approval of a Master Plan is granted for the land described in the applicantion and any attachments thereto, and as shown on the plot plan submitted labeled Exhibit A. The location of all buildings fences, signs, roadways, parking areas, landscaping, a,d other facilities or features shall be located subs,tantially as shown on the plot plan labeled Exhibit A, except or unless indicated other- wise herein. 3. All requirements of any law, ordinance or regulation of the State of California, City of Carlsbad, and any other governmental entity shall be complied with. 4. Prior to obtaining a building permit and within 30 days hereof, the applicant shall file with the Secretary of the Planning Commission written acceptance of the conditions stated herein. 5. Compliance with and execution of all conditions listeg hereon shall be necessary, unless otherwise specified, prior to obtaining final building inspect--on clearance. Deviation from this requirement shall be permitted only by written consent of the Planning Director. 6. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall enter into a mutually acceptable agreement with the Carlsbad Unified School District to provide for future school requirements that will result from the proposed development. 7. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Specific Plan and Tentative Map for this development. 8. The alignments and widths of the Camino de las Ondas extension and the Batiquitos Drive extension shall be determined by the Dept. of Public Works and the Planning Dept. prior to the submittal of Specific Plans. -5- 9. The proposed park corridor shall be coordinated with the Parks and Recreation Department prior to the submittal of Specific Plans. 10. An archeological field check of the site shall be done prior to the submittal of a Specific Plan. All findings shall be reported at that time with the supplemental Environmental Impact information. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo from Fire Dept. listing requirements for this project. 2. Letter dated July 11, 1973 and July 25, 1973 from Carlsbad Unified School Dist. 3. Letter of July 19, 1973 from Department of Parks and Recreation -San Diego 4. Letter dated August 8, 1973 from San Diego Coast Regional Commission 5. Letter dated July 20, 1973 from County Dept. of Sanitation & Flood Control 6. Letter dated June 12, 1973 from J. B. Askew, County Health Officer. 7. Letter from San Diego Museum of Man dated August 20, 1973. • -6- \11JRITE IT-DON'T SAY: IT INTER-DEPARTMENT tv1EMORANDUM TO: FrWM: PLANNING DEPT. FIRE DEPT. DATE .June Z6 SUBJ€CT: ZC-125, MP-132 -Pacesetter Development.- 19 73 Fire;hydrants & fire flow as per Fire Dept. requirement. A.M. P. M. Subdivider shall maintain passable vehicular access to all buildinDs and fire hydrants during construction . . Fire hydrants to be in service prior to framing. G.w~./2-i REPLY ON THIS SHEET FROM A •. WOLENCHTJK B/C CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 801 PINE A VENUE City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 July 11, 19 73 RECEIVED JUL 12 1973 Attention: Mr. Donald A. Agatep, Director of Planning AD CID' OF. CARLS B Gentlemen: f.lannlng Department Reference: Pacesetter Development The Governing Board of the school district at a meeting held on June 2 5, 1973 reviewed the information presented by your department on June 6, 1973 concerning a real estate development known as Pacesetter Development, which will consist of approximately 420 dwelling units. ' As a result of this review, it is estimated from the number and types of residences planned that the anticipated number of school age children, Kindergarten through 12th Grade, residing therein will be a total of 300 to 350 students. The district does not have facilities to provide for a single-session educational program for children who will be residing in this proposed development. In addition, the district does not have any funds to provide for facilities to house these children. To date, no agreement has been reached with the subdivider to provide financial assistance for school facilities which will be needed if and when these residences are constructed. It is requested that approval of this proposed residential development be withheld until a firm agreement is reached between the developer and the Governing Board of the district for provision of necessary school facilities. It will be greatly appreciated if copies of this letter are made available to members of the City Council and the Planning Commission. FHL:HCH:me ADMINISTRATION ;;;;lf· HOWARD C. HA N10N District Superintendent 729-1191 ( / -\ CARLSBAD UNlFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 801 PINE AVENUE City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 July 25, 1973 RECEIVED ..JUL 2 G 1973 Attention: Paul A. Williams, Planning Depart~ent Gentlemen: CITY OF CARLSBAD _ Planning Department Reference: Pacesetter Homes The Governing Board and school district administration appreciate the opportunity of reviewing the environmental impact report for the proposed Pacesetter Homes as submitted by your agency on July 17, 1973. J.t is the opinion of the district that this development when completed may have from 300 to 350 school age children in residence. It is noted that the information presented concerning the school situation is quite extensive on pages 29 through 32 of the report. It is also noted in the report that all or a portion of four proposed school sites are tentatively located in this tract. It is suggested by the school board and district administration that arrangements be made to work with the City Planning Department to see if some of these sites can be located on adjoining properties so that they might serve other proposed residential developments as well as the Pacesetter Homes project. It is hoped that the above information will be useful and in accordance with your request for comments and observations ~y representatives of this district. Sincerely yours, ~r.5'~~~ FHL:HCH:aw Att.: Environmental Impact Report for Pacesetter Homes ADMINISTRATION HOWARD C. HAR:fON District Superintendent 729-9291 STATE Of CAUFORNIA-RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 52.n Jiego Co2.St Area ?. O. Box 38 C~lsbad., Califorr...ia 92008 July 19' 19R E ~c E I 1/ E D. f,·1r. Paul ) ... "/lilliams Planning Department City of Carlsbad 1200 31m Avenue Carlobad, California 92008 Dear J;Ir. Williams: JUL 2 0 1973 CITY OE CARLSBAD Planning Department RONALD REAGAN, Governor Tha.."lk you for the opportunity to re~rie,·r the draft environraental impact report on Pacesetter Homes. ;le have no corn:nents on the ·report ·and are returning it as you requested. Sincerely, ~w!°~~ Area 7.I21ager JP.N:rlm ST;:..T: OF c;1.•_1:=0RNIA-CAL1;::QnNIA CO~T :ONE CONSEi'IVATION COMMISSION SM1 DIEGO COAST REGIONAL COMMISS!ON 6,54 MISSIO:-l GOi'IGc ROAfJ, SUIT::: :?::?0 SA,'I .Jl~GO, CALIFOR1'!1..i. 92120-T::L.(714) 2$0-6992 August 8, 1973 ~~chael C. Zander City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Califonri.a Dear Mike: 92008 In response to the two E...--ivironmental Impact Reports that you transmitted to us, we are fori-mrdin.g the following corr.men.ts. Pacesetter Homes - does not lie vr.i.thin our permit jurisdiction Carlsbad Beach arid Tennis Club Of concern here would be: 1. The proximity of the development to both the beach and especially the mouth of Agua Hedi.onda Lagoon. If and when the project cor.:.es before the Sa..--i Diego Coast Regional Commission for a development permit, the treatment of the interface between ocea."1, lagoon mouth and development will be closely scrutinized for probable undesirable environmental impacts 1 and; -• MALCOLM A. LOV:c Cha;rman WILLIAM A. CRAVEN ·vicit Chairman JEFFERY D. FR.:I.UTSCHY R;,presentati~e to the California Coastal Zone Cor:servatior, Comrni~slon THOMAS A. CRA,\IDALL Executive Director 2. Also, the cumulative impact of current local develop-· . ment trends, especially increases in density, on the coastal environment and resources of this area, will be of primary concern to the Commission. Very truly yours, ~ Assistant Executive Director M[K:gj RECEIVED /AUG 9 1973 tlTY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY C. J. HOUSON Director Depart111ent of Sanitation & Flood Control County Operations Center, 5555 Over land Avenue, San Diego, California 92123 ..... Telephone: 278-9200 2 :.) July 1973 Mr. Donalc A. ;\9ate;), Director of Plann.ing City -of Carlsbad 120'.) Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: Pacesetter Homes--Environmental Impact Report ~ECEIVE-D JUL 2 7 1973 .CITY PF CARLSBAD f:lannmg Department We have reviewed the report as req·uested in your letter of 17 July 1973. The report provides a comprehensive, but general, analysis of the environmental resources within this area. Our comments pertain only to drainage problems that may arise from the project. l. The project area is within the boundaries of the San Diego County Flood Control District. • Therefore storm drainage systems should meet the standards of the District and be approved by the District. 2. The hydrologic analysis of storm run:)ff appears to be low. Since the site contains 60 acres and there is offsite drainage area contributing to flows, wz presume that even with a low, future d3ns ity of 0-2 dwellings per acre we can anticipate a runaff greater than stated, 3. The soil strata of sandy loam on a 7 per cent slope would appear to have a high potential for erosion, rather than a slight potential, particularly if grading continues during the storm season. However the effects could be mitigated by requiring erosion control measures to be implemented if grading is al lm-1ed duiing the storm season. • 4. The statement on increased runoff (page 20) appears to be inappropriate. Intense storms wil 1 increase the runoff not "vary from near zero.11 5. The statement (on page 30) diverting drainage from its natural path into Canyon de las Encinas would constitute a legal problem on surface waters. The diversion would have to be approved by all downstream property owners affected by the diversion. Paces et t :.r Homes 2J July l :,73 Page 2 (- ~/2. wil J s .:·.:nit specific recor.:rnndati-:ms ·J,1 drainage as c,Jr.ditions of a;)proval of the t~rcat1ve map when it b~comes ava;Jable to us, ~e are rct~rning your report as requ~st~~. C. J. H01.i.'. )N By2:.,kZ~ G. J. //\IAK Princi~al Civil Engineer HS:kk Enclosure 2960 Pio Pico Drive Mr. Donald A. Agatep Director or Planning Caxlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 June 12, 1973 Telephone: 1114) n9.1111 RECEIVED CITY OF. CAF\1..~i.11 ,.., elannlng Dep.:.1rt,, . .,;,1 Subject: Comments Relative to ZC-123; V-228, MP-128, ZC-124; MP-125, ZC-120; CT 73-30; ZC-1222, SP-127, ZC-125, MP-132; ZC-121, SP-126 Dear Mr. Agatep: Your request for our recommendations concerning the above subject develop- ments has been received and reviewed by this department. These developments would be acceptable to the Department of Public Health provided: 1. All domestic water supplied to these developments comes from the Carlsbad City Water Company. 2 • .AJ.1 buildings constructed in these developments are connected to the Carlsbad Public Sewer System. 3. The sewer and water lines are not laid in the same trench in any of these developments. 4. Proper drainage is maintained throughout these developments so a~ to prevent ponding and/or storage of surface water. Very truly yours, {V 'lf:1!j-~ ~t:), llr-3"~ Hea.lth Officer, City of Carlsbad JBA:J1lW:ds cc: Federal Housing Administration Veterans Administration Department of Real Estate (Sub. Sec.) SAi\ JlEGO i\/lUSEUiv1 OF iv1AN A11 ed::ua:ional, non-pro/ii corpo,~titJ,., fo:,nded in 1915, ,oi- lec;i11g for postdri:y and dirpl.iying tot! life and his:ot'J of man. August 20, 1973. Mr. Donald O. Asquith, Vice President, Envicom, Physical, Ecological & Social Science Consultants, 16255 Ventura Boule~ard, Suite 615, Encino, Calif. 91316. Dear Mr. Asquith, We have your request pertaining to the possibility of endangered archaeological sites in the project entitled Pacesetter Homes. Our records show two archaeological sites in the general vicinity. One, No.W.115 in our nomenclature, is slightly to the north. Another, W.113, is slightly to the east of your indicated area. The proximity of these two sites would suggest a possibility that others lie nearby and perhaps within your indicated project area. A field check would be highly desirable. Very sincerely yours, ~ J:\UG 23 1973 CITY OF Cft.RLSBAD flanning Oc:pc;1ru11ent ; ... ·.·:.~--··: ... ~~ (.: _______ ._:)