HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-02-01; Planning Commission; ; SDP 88-14|V 88-02 - BAGHERIDATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
I.
February 1, 1989
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
AP,ICATION COMPLETE DATE:
October 12, 1988
(i)
SOP 88-14/V 88-2 BAGHERI -Request for approva 1 of a Site Development
Plan to develop an eight unit apartment project along with a variance
to allow 5 substandard width garages located on the south side of
Navarra Drive, west of Viejo Castilla Way. The subject property is
zoned RD-Mand is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 6.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2824 denying SDP 88-14 and
Resolution No. 2825 denying V 88-2 based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Development Plan and a Variance
to develop an eight unit apartment project located as described above. A Site
Deve 1 opment Pl an is being requested because the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance
requires Planning Commission review for all apartment projects exceeding four
units. The applicant is also requesting a Variance for five of the eight two
car garages being proposed for this project. These five garages do not comply
with the city's minimum dimension requirements for two car garages.
The project is located in the RD-M Zone and has a General Plan Designation of
RH (15-23 du/acre) and a Growth Control Point of 19 du/acre. The proposed
project would be located on a .43 acre site and have a density of 18.6 du/acre.
The property is currently vacant and is surrounded by multi-family projects to
the north and east, the La Costa Golf Course to the south, and a vacant parcel
to the west. Most of the neighborhood has been developed with apartment and
condominium projects.
The proposed apartment project consists of 8 apartment units ranging in size
from 2105 to 2277 square feet. Three of the units face Navarra Drive while the
remaining five units overlook the golf course with the driveway and pool
amenities in the center of the site. The units are 2 story with a garage below,
and maintain a building height of 31 feet. A total of 20 onsite parking spaces
will be provided. Each unit will have a 2 car garage, five of which are proposed
with substandard widths. Four open visitor parking spaces will be provided
adjacent to the pool area. Minimal structural setbacks have been provided on
all sides of the property.
SOP 88-14/V 88-2 BAGHI
February 1, 1989
PAGE 2
The architectural materials of the proposed structure will incorporate light
pink stucco walls with a Delayo Buff (70% beige/30% orange-red) tile roof. The
project also includes a pool, jacuzzi, and balconies as amenities.
III. ANALYSIS
1. Does the proposed development comply with the development standards of the
RD-M Zone?
2. Can the required findings be made to justify the requested Variance for
substandard garage widths? They are:
a. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use
that do not apply generally to the other property or class of
use in the same vicinity and zone;
b. That such Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to
the property in question;
c. That the granting of such Variance wi 11 not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property
or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the
property is located;
d. That the granting of such Variance will not adversely affect
the comprehensive general plan.
3. Does the design of the proposed project justify the requested density?
4. Is the project consistent with Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 6?
IV. DISCUSSION
As proposed, this project complies with the minimal development standards of the
RD-M Zone in which it is located. All of the setbacks are minimal except the
front yard setback which is 15 feet rather then the 10 foot minimum allowed in
the RD-M Zone. The project also complies with the minimal parking requirements
for an apartment project.
The proposed garages for five of the eight units do not comply with the
dimension standards of section 21.44.130 of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. This
section of the ordinance requires that all two car garages have a minimum
interior dimension of twenty feet. This requirement is to provide adequate
space to open and close car doors when two full sized vehicles are parked in the
SOP 88-14/V 88-2 BAGHI
February 1, 1989
PAGE 3
garage. Staff made the applicant aware of this concern when this project was
first submitted for a preliminary review. The applicant did not wish to
redesign the project and has applied for a Variance to reduce the required
interior width of the garages from twenty feet to eighteen feet six inches.
Staff cannot make the findings required to support the requested Variance.
There are no extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property or to the
intended use that do not apply generally to other properties or apartment
projects in this area. The proposed project is on a lot that is similar in size
and shape to the surrounding lots in the vicinity. The lot has been previously
graded as have all of the other vacant lots in this part of La Costa.
The requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
property rights now possessed by other properties in the vicinity but denied to
the property in question. The applicant is requesting this variance to
construct five substandard width garages for an apartment project. Apartment
projects are not required to have two covered parking spaces. A variance is
necessitated solely by the design of the proposed project. If the applicant was
willing to work with staff to redesign the project the requested variance would
not be necessary.
Approval of this variance would be detrimental to other properties in the
vicinity. The approval of this variance could establish a precedent that would
encourage other project proponents to apply for variances rather then designing
projects in conformance with City Standards. The subject property is vacant,
flat, and regularly shaped; there is no reason an apartment project that
complies with all applicable City Standards cannot be designed on this site.
The approval or denial of the requested Variance would probably have no impact
on the City's General Plan.
In addition to the substandard garages, staff has a number of other concerns
with the proposed apartment project: ( 1) the site wi 11 be dominated by an
asphalt driveway which will completely surround the common recreation area; (2)
the four guest parking spaces will probably not be utilized due to their awkward
design; (3) in some areas between the common recreation area and the rear
building the driveway narrows to 22 feet -this will make it difficult to access
the garages, even if they are equipped with automatic garage door openers; and
(4) the proposed buildings are large and boxy with little architectural relief.
The applicant is trying to place too many large townhouse type units on this
site. The size of the proposed units, 2105-2277 square feet, will be far larger
than most apartment projects in Carlsbad. The size of the units with the
density proposed (18.6 du/acre) makes good design on the site difficult. Staff
does not believe that the design of the project would justify any density over
the minimum of 15 dwelling units per acre. The large units create a dominance
of asphalt and structures. Staff believes it would be possible to develop this
property with eight smaller units with a better design that would not require
a variance or lowering the density to accommodate larger units. The applicant
has not been willing to change the design for the proposed project.
The proposed project would be consistent with the Local Facilities Management
Plan for Zone 6. The project's density of 18.6 du's/acre would be slightly
SOP 88-14/V 88-2 BAGHI
February 1, 1989
PAGE 4
below the site's growth control point of 19 du's/acre. The Zone 6 Local
Facilities Management Plan does indicate that all Zone 6 public facilities and
services are in conformance with the adopted performance standards.
In conclusion, staff cannot make the findings necessary to grant a Variance and
the design of the project does not justify the requested density; therefore,
staff recommends denial of SOP 88-14 and V 88-2.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2823, 2824, 2825
2. Location Map
3. Background Data Sheet
4. Disclosure Form
5. Growth Management Assessment Form
6. Reduced Exhibit
7. Exhibits "A"-"D", dated October 12, 1988
WJD:l h
December 23, 1988
'-0 ~ ,. ~ 1 .i_.s"°" T"r.!" />\, i(~r 1 ~JJ 1
Golf Course
' '
Golf Course
BAGHERI
DR
G ity of Carlsbad
SOP. 88-14 / V 88-2
CASE NO:
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
SOP 88-14 V 88-2
APPLICANT: BAGHERI
REQUEST AND LOCATION: REQUEST APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 8 APARTMENTS AND A VARIANCE TO ALLOW SUBSTANDARD
GARAGE WIDTHS -WEST OF VIEJO CASTILLA -SOUTHSIDE OF NAVARRA DR.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT #40 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 1 ACCORDING
TO MAP 6117 IN CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
APN: 216-130-06 Acres----=.AJ_ Proposed No. of Lots/Units-'8=------
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation ~R~H~---
Density Allowed 15-23 DU/AC Density Proposed 18.6 DU/AC
Existing Zone ~R=□~-~M _____ Proposed Zone -~R□~-~M __
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Site
North
South
East
West
RD-M
RD-M
PC
RD-M
RD-M
Zoning Land Use
VACANT
EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY
GOLF COURSE
EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY
VACANT
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District SAN DIEGEITO Water COSTA REAL Sewer LEUCADIA
EDU's __ Public Facilities Fee Agreement, Date OCTOBER 3, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
~X~_ Negative declaration, issued January 6, 1989
__ E.I.R. Certified, dated _________ _
Other, ___________________ _
e. DISCLOSURE FORM -
APPLICANT: Ht-MID ~A6HEf2.-t I FPS· I 7ull/<;AN J/'88M!
Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication
AGENT:
MEMBERS:
L:/1/14 Tl VBtzT() N Business Address
Telephone Number
Name
Business Address
Telephone Number
Name (individual, partner, joint
venture, corporation, syndication)
Business Address
Telephone Number
Name
Business Address
Telephone Number
Home Address
Telephone Number
Home Address
Telephone Number
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
I /We understand that if this project is located in the Coastal Zone, I /we will apply
for Coastal Commission Approval prior to development.
I /We acknowledge that in the process of reviewing this application, it may be
necessary for members of City Staff, Planning Commissioners, Design Review Board
members, or City Council members to inspect and enter the property that Is the
subject of this application. I /We consent to entry for this purpose.
I /We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this disclosure
is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be relied upon
as being true and correct until amended. • .>) i
,/ -/;// .
/ I / ,f'1•-
,~=~k;;N~ J
BY --, l ,
)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO.: SOP 88-14/V 88-2 BAGHERI
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: ~6~_ GENERAL PLAN: ~R~H~_
ZONING: ~R-=D---M~-----------------
DEVELOPER'S NAME: ~B=A=G=HE=R=I ____________ _
ADDRESS: 13394 TIVERTON ROAD -SAN DIEGO, CA 92130
PHONE NO.: 481-7050 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 216-130-06
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): .43 AC
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: ___________ _
A. City Administrative Facilities; Demand in Square Footage= 29.6
B. Library; Demand in Square Footage= _li_,_.8.
C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
D.
E.
Parks;
Drainage;
Demand in Acreage= .059
Demand in CFS=
Identify Drainage Basin= LEUCADIA
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
F. Circulation; Demand in ADTs = _§L
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Fire;
Open Space;
Schools;
Served by Fire Station No. = _2_
Acreage Provided -
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer;
-_4_
Demand in EDUs -_8_
Identify Sub Basin -__
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water; Demand in GPO -8 x 220
,-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
r
-
-
-
-
1--
=~
~
-
:
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
:
:
.
.
.
-
-
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
-
=
:
;
;
;
:
-
=~
.
'1
1
·
·
--
-
--
-
.
.
J
~
--
l
~-
•
I
,J
l
i
-
~
C-
C
'
j,
,
,
q-
-
-
-
)
'
--
-
·-
'1
1
.-
-
-
_,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
-
-
-
1
7
1.1
'
I
/
~
~-
,
-
.r
JI
~
I
I
-!
:
:
-
~
-
-
__
j
f
:
!
'
_
'-
.
.
_(
[
l
-~
(~
~
-
I 1
-
--
-
-
~
-
-
-
-
-
.
·
.
jb
-
-
.
s
.
-
-
-
--
•
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
°'
1-
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
•
-
11
1
--
-
-
-
-
-
=
-
-
=
-
~
•
I
, .
~
~u
~
\.
,~
... .
,.
.,
--
-
'
,,
-.
.
..,
_
_
.,
'
•
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
""
'
,
.
,
--
-
-
·
·
' r
., :
•,I
,. ,.
~ .. ;,,.
,.-,.'
'
I}
•
' •
O!L MAR
•
0 ..
••
•
-~'!""'--~--"---\ ""· -·.' ~~':--.,.,-:--r;---,'1--, ···.-;,--·
' ; , ,•-.
' ~·-•------·-·--
i '
' ' ' '
\ I •,
i
I ' . , I'
''
-, ";" .... ~--.,, 1;-·::·
'
•
L I
'
:S•j-·, •
' . .,
".
:; . ;i, -
'
..:'.'...:,....,..:;,...._.....,:..,
:;, \ifJ.\.".·~~~~u~
,·. ,f ., ' ·,,:,:,) : ' . . . ,'..:... ~; ..... ;~·.,~J....,;.:._;:.-~·-·-, ··:..::.;.;.:..:::::~'
_:_ .... , ..• ; ... .l...;-.-·--·.:..; ,_ .. ;: ~:..-~·,..;.+~.:...:-;~~~;::.:
,_ ,-<. --'---~---....,. ____ ,. ____ _
--·--·--·~ .,..
• '
, . .[
.. ·':'
l ·,,' -~. ·•,; :·," '
. . ,
,I•
I
' I
l -' ) ~-
-~
'--..;;
• ·•,.,""
I
-
!''.' '·
! '
I.
! l l
I
l
1
)
,--·
' L I I I
Lttj j-Jp, ~ t:if-. 'L:.A ~,.s; ~&UTH. Ul-ll·T ~?'~ 1.,
[f,.f '1-IH? • t:11Y. t?I"' ~!M:>,At7, U"UN'l)'. tJf ~N. t,~/
~T/3:-PF: • ~L.IF't?~IP., Aea?~J:;iiNG .. 1? i<lAf'. "TH~F .
1'0 .• 6'117 • riL.eO IN 71,te. OFFlte Of "fl£ e&Ul-l1Y I • . . ~~~ t?I-9A-N Dll:60 COUtJ1'Y o!--1 JUf.le. ~, ~
' .•
. . '
J~Ut-ATia~
W-M rz.lt ..•.
YJtlf.
1,•-0• ~T .
!?'-1," ~,oe. :
.·:.10·;-o··~
~l'b91l' Jdr ~ 1~7~1 .. ~,FT,.-
I.ii!~~•----_:--__ -~--412%:
~:\7>1=;:~:·~,~-~-~ 4
,,
I" ___ ..... _
-·_,.. ... , ,,<,.,
I
'
'
I
--· ,;·•·:~:-~-...
----\:i:, '!i.:J~," -:-..
-l. -t ·''
' •
r
!
l
I
I
I,
\
I I
,.,~--
-.. ,. ·•ff~_~:.: ,, ·--..
!
I
' I f i ! .
L __ _
I
'
•
I I
•
e,, ~ ~HT ,Af Af1ME~Tt • . . ' ' ' . ' '
l.,AW,1A ,
AU!i l O 1988
~CITY OF' CARLSBAD
EVELOP. PROC. SE.~V. DI\' .
• '
I
. ·. ,;';
.;, ,;, ·., 1.1·>.~ .• ;. ·, ~
·:;,);,.
/"
~ .-''1 ,,'·-/,.'
;·1 i\
,-, ...
~ .. --· )'' .. , '" r,.,·-
,t) '",' !
'i
' '
'
--.~·; .•• ..... +.·.··.-•. . :,..,-' ·:
--~·:· • ' ' : ' . .-·
! .. " '~-., .....
' :
\ \
,, ..
i
' -: ,;
z
·(l\
·-•~
. ,0 :,,;it)
,'
' I '
• I
.~.~~--
)
I
_,_,, ~·-•. t'
' , -, ., ... . . ,.-, ".' '., .... '·•·:~~ ' -
lfl+P<,--0(
I
I
.
'
... , ,
_,,. J
I
-.: '
-
I
i
' -~-i/F"---_ .,, ___ ,_" .. ,.
• I , ,-,
-,• ~-':,t;i ·.,
• .. • _ 1 ..:..:..:.. .. --, , ____________ ::..,_,·._....:,._ .-~--·--L---------.-•·--·-·~
:;:=·~='=:::::rre=•· .::::::::l9=CA===· F:!=:::-:::::::.::;::::~:::::::::-·-,-=-=: .. c-C~· ::=:::· _ t::.;.:::.-·• _ .-.. ~•-_._ -==· ___ ~~~--~-. .
-·-• ;,--: -_ ..... • ---· .,.... ,.-. "'--,, ·------,--c _, "-,c---;-,·--~-;-,'·_:;-::: _, __ :-~:: ~ke.:.' \J~ = .•• IQ •~~--~t:~
:,.;_;_.c---.,~-'--.... ...:.. t•' __ ._._~-:--1~_,...._-t' . . '
'' ,\·,,<,
·-..r.?.·
I, ..
,._ .... f
,·{1 ..
:i.·:
I,,·
'
I
(
\
\ •,,)
1,,-' • ..
,, " .. ---..: .. _...!,-., ___ _
'' ' '\ . ,,
' . ' .. ,
l,
' '
'·: '
( .. -. . .
. '.1 -~;:.:::-_·,·.:;
' "'
],',
.. ______ _
' ',
.,
---· ----.-:.. .:.;_--:.__ -----•• ~<' -:='.~-=--~ --
' i
:I'
'
I
"j
I !
./ I I I I I I I
I,
I ,I •
l
Ill <fi
I
'
____ .:.----::!
I I
/
'I '
/
' I.-, '
-> .', • "l,
:·• :,:
··1.
I
I
! • ;
' ~; •
GR O ._ .. _
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
' ' ','A• • . '.-.
. .-•,
CASE No._Vll.....J/.',?..!g"!-.~.=2.-;_ ____ _
('
·I
I ' '
II :: ·ii
Ii
'
" ,,
·,·.·. ' ' • ·~., ,·~ .•· r
','-,•
-·"'\.
• .. fj, . • '
'
\.'\·~:<: / L'.
'' ' .. i • • •
'-~' ' ... ~ ' ,, '
·;'·ti
,1;
..
......
'
,' ,'·
' ' ' ~. ··; \'~ J
: ... ,,
.).1-~,
'1'
ic
•t,
..,,,\':•{>/,(://: >-
• '.--J
''f "' :·,' ,, ·.'
•
• ,:··---c,-.,,"•+,.,.,.f,'--'~----.•\-·•·
l <\ ',,
.;-<:;
'1 •
. : "
·-''
:_,
4, ; 1:-, :,: ,.
\;·
':_ j •. J •~• I
, ', .. ;, .. /
• .• 1 . ,
,' ~)'.', .. ?,
••.·
" ·..;:· ' , • • ·.r
. •, . ": ,; '
i.-·-·i~
. ' ... ', 1'.
. ,;,
," ,, ·, : ' .. ,
>,_ ,,
-' ~' ' --------,.i _'.i_:.. }.·:/::,t,'-t
. ·'\,')' . .,,.vJ; ,,, , ·'._fi_ ~ •
-~~-' ... \"
,'.1· /-'-.·
,·
,
' :~.
-'".<"' ·': '' ,•.
_,.... ,' ... ,.~. -~
e:r[
·1.r_._:_; ~-~~"·-~.·
4 •, ·--~ f./
l .. : -
I l
',
I .
-':1,:-·_ t .
'
' .
---·..:.·.-. ;· • \.•·~ .•--.-·-.
. ';\~•:'
~-~-.~\\~•I •
. ,. ,"' ,,
· ':: I 2·~ .· ... , ·,-~" {i'
_.; ,~ .•",.
,.
,· .. -
• .... ---d-~ ......... --·. -
1;::~;:.:.~,z:·~ .. _::_·~~~.~:: .'-:C:,._,,'.,J:...,'f.••·7'1":·.~:;;-: J~-."'":-:C":--~~ -;.~_----;---............ -.--:··· ···•-,,•.-•f·: ...... ~~ •
~:•.' -,, .. -··:: .'.•~:::-•i,-:•~·~.,----~ ........•• .,...:--"" ... '7""""~ .... -•----··-
• < :-. • -~ . ,, •
,.
I
'\ ..
.... : > ;~ •, -~ ., '
.. _' -·~,
1,;
i:·~',{'t
.,-,,,
•'~\.:.-.
: "f ", f •
",;:'
~..::....:. ,..__,,.,., .. -..., ··--~ ; .... , -· .
' !
l I
fl I I
I I
I
\;.
• '.\~.f:
'
i '\.
i
_,._.._._'..._,
~'-·
. ~ ~· ~ ,,,
,;°)}(/ ;~}
·, ·/
' .
\
' .,, . ...;:. .. ;... ..... ~·
' '
'
i
,:
~·,,
1:i . ~ I_ !,,
' '
. ' .. ~ ....
'' i
.
-~-... -,--.....:. ---· -~~
.,,, .. ''
.. ,r
•
,;J·'.;<' ~·· ,,
•
' '
' j
•
I
i '! I ., ,
I
,I
' I
i
i • J_
~-~:,-?·
\ ':. :,,(
,.·· ., .. ,
'. <· ··:·.
" .;,, ,.,~,
'. ~: 11..
/t/ ~ 1' 'I • '• 1\'•
/t~~(f~:z:
',q .-,,,.• ·r , , . .,_.
)f\:f/j_~/.
~t_,_;;:_:' :: ",: :
"· -.•-'."; • ! ~~;
i
\·~ S';
" ... ,
'.i: . . : ;' : .. _t,> ·::-,. ..
'"'-
'· •,,·, { ,.,:; .,
:1 '.;.,:
'-<• ..
. 1.·'.:-
'':I; -
'.
.i
,.
'' •.
,.
I . '·
·!
' . '
i
,,
' ~~!
I ! '
-~[
-1
i
I ·I
" I 0,,
I I
-"'!
'•' c, I ,. . "
i ,.
t ' !
' .
•
'
ti>'.£ , '
. ''
. '-'
·,:; i 'Ir", .. .,:_ ·:::~--\~ ( l ,, ~~.--P"-1--1-l---1-'--'I---..-'-"-'-'
-j .-.,_~~
\. ' I .. ,, \·
.,,
I, L
I ...
_, ...
"'~"-... ;>''
C=
,
"'-,,,. •'J.. /:,:, __ '<._
'i • '
i ,,
' '
' •.•'· k
';:..__. •'":";""":+.;.:-.. ,,-
,, '
' ' '. • ~-
\ .. , .. •
.,
('"
i-! ·, I
I
'! !
I
;.
• '.· .
--'~--r--. .
• •'' I •
!
•
'.
.,
' . ' ., t !'., -: .~
'f~, .. • . . "
I
i I
I
' '
l l
I
I I I
i
'
'l I _, ___ ,_
I
"~!
-I I
"'i I •
:-r
I.
I I
! ' I
I
'-i
' -) " ' I
l
' I
i
I '
i ' I
t I I !
. I '.,.-1
I
. :::.r.
!
·"' i .. " i
--..,. I. I
" '
,,
• .,-~~ :, j. • .,. ,,,
. ,_l
• l" • . j · J • ·-1f :
---/-·-~---~~--'1~1 _· -~-----~-__ _ j •
I
' '
i
.,, ... __ _
.,
n:
.i
,
fl'.-l-+-1---Uf
. ,:
..
·'
..
(··· ;,--,--
. :,
:,:"
-
' ; .' :; ·.
< " -' ••• '
I .
' I
I
i
I .I
'. ' I , .
. '
i '
!
. I ,.
~ ,, ~
-" ___ • _)':I'=--~:~:~.-,,---~~---:· __ ;.:.::.~::-·---·j '\
' J
,.
.. ..
!
,/ '.',:' •,•
,. '_:,···,:-;:(:,';': (~ ".',:
\-: ,;><\. -~'.: ·: \:.'.: -:.·jI -.k:·· .-'. •• i::
h
' I
i I I
I
I
i
I
'' . '
' l
.
• i>
_-j,
I· " I.
~i "i!'i
I: -..;---r--'\\--~
l I ,. ' " l
I I
l
' -1 • I
I
\ .•
',i •
·i
i
•
..
I Lt-I~-I •
~ -F'"'f""9~"1E·f ;;;J
ur.-_ -+--i-+-+-+➔,
' I ,-
1
I
I
I
I
I I \
\,
,.
,1
' l
t
I ' I
l
I.' •
·,
I
. i
I
I
.
, __ ..,-;-,.:.---· ---~---
.
,.,.
j
'.
~-V
't
I •
I 8 -
.. :...\>:··
'\:.
6"
' '
...
,"
I l
=:+-~--'!,.----· -
•
,.
I
I
, I
I
\ ' \
'" . .
'
,,
.
!
,\
\
''.• ' ·\" ' .
'~,:
I
I I ' • '
l
I
ii
, .
•
(-'.-'---
lr
/
..
. " . . '
I
_I.
I ii
I i ! '
I
I
i I.
:1 I
i :
' . I_
' l
I
I
I .
1-,
i
I
. :
CITY OF Cl'iRLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
.-
.'
-';t
·., ·,:,:,·
CASE No.__,V'--.e'i..1,?:..-_'Z-::;_ _____ _
'
i'
. . ~·> ~ ,;: "
'i
l I
i I,
' '
'
2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CA 92009-4859
Qtitu nf Qtartshah
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
TELEPHONE
(619) 438-1161
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Located west of Viejo Castilla Way on the south side
of Navarra Way.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request approval of a Site Development Plan to allow 8
apartment units along with a Variance to allow substandard garage sizes.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described
project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City
of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration
that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby
issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments
from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning
Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance.
DATED: January 6, 1989
CASE NO: SOP 88-14/V 88-2
APPLICANT: • Hamid Bagheri
PUBLISH DATE: January 6, 1989
MJH:WJD/lh
SDP8814V.NEG
' ~
Planning Director
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM -PART II
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. SDP 88-14 V 88-2
DATE: October 11. 1988
I . BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: --=HAM==I=D"----'B=A=-G=H=E=R=I'------------------------
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 13394 TIVERTON ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92130
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: ~D~e~c~e=m=b~e~r~2_1~,~1=9~8~8~----------
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written
under Section III -Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
1. Earth -Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions
or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements,
compaction or overcovering
of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of
modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or
off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel or a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
YES MAYBE
X
X
X
X
X
X
2. Air -Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. Water -Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patters, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not
limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public
water supplies?
-2-
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4. Plant Life -Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
5. Animal Life -Will the proposal have
significant results in:
6.
7.
8.
a. Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles,
fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,
insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of
animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise -Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels?
Light and Glare -Will the proposal sig-
nificantly produce new light or glare?
Land Use -Will the proposal have
significant results in the alteration of
the present or planned land use of an
area?
-3-
MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9. Natural Resources -Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
10. Risk of Upset -Does the proposal
involve a significant risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset conditions?
11.
12.
Population -Will the proposal signif-
icantly alter the location, distribu-
tion, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area?
Housing -Will the proposal signif-
icantly affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation -Will the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
-4-
MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
14. Public Services -Will the proposal have
a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need for new or
altered governmental services in any of
the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Energy -Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities -Will the proposal have
significant results in the need for new
systems, or alterations to the following
utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health -Will the proposal have
significant results in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health
hazard (excluding mental health)?
-5-
MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
18. Aesthetics -Will the proposal have
significant results in the obstruction
of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive
public view?
19. Recreation -Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities?
20. Archeological/Historical/Paleontological
-Will the proposal have significant
results in the alteration of a significant
archeological, paleontological or
historical site, structure, object or
building?
YES MAYBE
21. Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed project such as:
NO
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs,
X
X
X
c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter-
nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
A. The proposal will include only 8 dwelling units, all of which will be
developed as a single phase.
B. Alternate site design could be used to eliminate the need for a
variance for the garage widths.
c. A reduction in the size of the units would allow more flexibility in
the arrangement of the units to accommodate the required garage size.
D. N/A, since the site is designated for multifamily residential
development.
E. Development at some future time would not be environmentally
preferable since all public facilities and services currently exist
to serve the proposed project.
F. N/A, since the site is designed for such use.
G. A 11no-project11 alternative would leave the lot vacant until
developed at some future time.
-6-
22. Mandatory findings of significance -
a. Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, or curtail the diversity
in the environment?
b. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A
project may impact on two or more
separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment is
significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
The proposed project consists of an eight unit apartment complex to be
located in a multi-family residential neighborhood. Staff has done two
field inspections and it appears that the proposed project will not
create any negative environmental impacts for the following reasons:
1. Earth: The proposed project would consist of only
approximately 25 cubic yards of grading.
4&5. Plant and Animal Life: The proposed project is located in a
built out neighborhood. Previous development would have
already disturbed any existing habitat.
a,11,12. Land Use, Housing & Population: The proposed project is
consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan and Local Facilities
Management Plan 6.
-7-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CONTINUED):
12. Transportation: Navarra Ori ve was designed to accommodate the
additional traffic created by this project.
20. Archeological/Historical/Paleontological: Field inspections
of the site showed no evidence of any potential
archeological/paleontological site.
In summary, it appears that the proposed project will not create any
negative environmental impacts and staff feels comfortable in issuing
a Negative Declaration.
IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
f I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
___ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
___ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date Signature'
Date ~ctbd Plan'ngDector
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-8-