Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 91-02; Poinsettia Shores Master Plan; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (16)MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOUTION: A 162 acre PC (Planned-Community) zoned, Master Plan property on the north side of Batiquitos Lagoon, west of 1-5, east of Carlsbad Boulevard and south of the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park in the southwest quadrant of the City. PROJECT’ DESCRIPTION: A Master Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to change the land uses associated with the former Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan from RM, RMH, RC, P, N, TS/C, and OS to RM, RH, NRR, TS/C, and OS, General Plan designations. The Master Plan Amendment will guide the development of individual planning areas. 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 Mitigated 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on fle in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments fiom the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4441. DATED: AUGUST 12,1993 MICHAEL^: HO~~MLLER CASE NO: MP 17S(D)/GPA 91 -OS/ Planning Director LFMP 87-09(A)/LCPA 91-02 CASE NAME: POINSE’ITtA SHORES MASTER PLAN m:km PUBLISH DATE: AUGUST 12,1993 - x NOTICE OF COMPLETION Mail to: State Clearinghouse, 1400 lmth Street, Rm. 121, Sacramento, CA 95814 - 916/44S-0613 sa DTE klar: Project Titlo: MP 175(D)/GPA 91-O5/1FW 87-09(A)/A 91-02 - POINSETTIA SHORE WASTER PUN I_' Lead Agency: City of Carlobed Contact Person: Eric Mwt Street Address: 2075 Lao Palms Drive Phono: (619)438-1161, ext. 4Ul City: Carlsbad Zip: 92009 Cmty: San Diego PROJECT LOCATIOI: County: Son Dim0 Ci ty/Nearest Canmni ty: Carlsbad Cross Strrats: Futur8 intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard/Avmida EnciMs Totat Acrn: 162 ____________-.--___._______l___________l----------------.-..--.-------------------------------.----------------------..-------- Assessor's Parcel No. ~16-C20-79/216-1CD-17.18.19.25.27.29-3~ Section: Tup. Rango: Base: - Uithin 2 Miles: Stat8 Hvy #: 1-5 Uaternayr: $ Ai rpor ts : Rai lnayr: ATLSF Schools: ..__________.__________.________________--..------.-----------------.----------.-----------------..----------.-------..----..-.-- DOCUENT TYPE aim: - NW - Supplcnnt/S*sqrmt IIEPA: - NO1 OTWEI: - Joint Docment - Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH No.) - EA - Final D0c-t LNwDec - Other Mitigated Ncp Dec - Draft EIS - Other FOWS I - Draft EIR - _________.____._____.-------------------------------------.----------------------.-------.-----------------..-----.------------- LOCAL m1w TIPE General Plan Update General Plan &nenrhmt Cenoral Plan El-t Comnni ty Plan MvELwmIl nP€ X Residential: Units 451. Acrn M - *tor Facilitir: Typo cH;D Indurtriel: Sq. Ft. Acrr €#ploy* - Powr : ni= Office: sq. Ft. Acrw Enploy- - Transportation: Typo Commrcial: Sq. Ft. Acra Enployoos - Wining: Minora1 - uatts Educational - Uastr Trostmt: FIp -- - X Rlcr8atiOMl Travel ServicdCannrcial - Hazardous Uaste: - x other: Umlansd Arm - 7 urr Smco - 38 urn -____._____________--------------------.----------------.-.--.---------..-----.--------------..-----------.-.-....--.-------.--- PROJECT ISSUES 01- IN ooanm - X Ae8th.t i c/Vi sua l - Agricultural Lutd - Air Quality J- Archadogi ca l/H stor i cat L Coastal zon - X Dr8iMge/AbsOrptfon - Econarnic/Jok - Fiscal MOTE: Cleartnghwso will assign idontitication nrk.rs for all fram a Notico of Preparation or prwiow drsft docunt) pleaso fill it in. projuts. If a Scn rrrkr alro.dy oxist8 Rwhd for s project octotwr (8.9. 1989 ENV[RONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. MP 175(D)/GPA 91-05/LFMP 87-09(A)/LCPA 91-02 DATE: JULY 26. 1993 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Poinsettia Shores Master Plan 2. APPLICANT: Kaiza Poinsettia Corporation 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 7220 Avenida Encinas. Suite 200 Carlsbad. CA 92008 (619)931-9100 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMI'lTED: Julv 6.1993 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Master Plan Amendment. General Plan Amendment. Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. and Local Coastal Promm Amendment to change the land uses associated with the former Batiauitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan from RM. RMH. RC, P. N. TS/C and OS to RM. RH. NRR. TS/C and OS on a 162 acre master ~lan as shown on the attached exhibits. The master ~lan amendment will establish land use redations for the site and &de the development of individual Dlanning areas. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental [mpact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantid evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO will be checked to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insimificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and "YES-insig" respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined sisnificant. ,- PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? YES YES big) (big) 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? * 5. Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the come or flow of water (marine, tkesh or flood waters)? 8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any tut tal resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? NO X X - X - X - X - X - X - X - x x x -2- BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES big) Wig) 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? "ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? ' NO X X - X - x x 7 x x -3- "ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? Increase existing noise levels? Produce new light or glare? Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Generate substantial additional traffic? Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alter waterborne, rail or air traf'fic? Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YES (insig) NO X - X - 4- MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES (si@ 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 34. 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.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively con- siderable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES NO (insig) - x - x DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION This project involves the amendment of the fonner Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park (BLEP) Master Plan for property as shown on the attached location map. The land uses allowed under BLEP centered around a university/educational use with supporting and related land uses. The current master plan amendment (MP 175-D) proposes to rename the project to the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan and to replace the educational uses with residential uses. The master plan has a total of 451 dwelling units left to develop which the applicant will pursue in combination with a State allowed 25% density bonus to assist with affordable housing compliance. Also being processed with the master plan amendment is a General Plan amendment (GPA 91-0s) and a Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 91-02) to implement the proposed changes to the master plan. A Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment will also be processed to reflect the land use changes within the Zone 9 Local Facilities Management Zone. The site is currently vacant with the exception of the Rosalena single family neighborhood. With the approval of BLEP (October 22,1985), an environmental impact report was certified (EIR 84-3) for the master plan property. All environmental impacts associated with BLEP have been identified and mitigation measures are in place where appropriate. The amended master plan will involve land uses of lesser intensity than the previously approved educational park with less traffic and public facilities impacts. The applicant's Environmental Impact Assessment Part I included traffic, noise and geotechnical studies. This Mitigated Negative Declaration incorporates analysis from the certified EIR and will outline the necessary mitigation on a master plan level to offset archaeology, paleontology, visual resources, and noise impacts. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1. 2. 3. 4. As documented in EIR 84-03 and the applicant's geotechnical report dated June 4, 1986 by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, the site is not located near any active faults and no geologic conditions exist that would constrain the development of the master plan property or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards. The master plan property is mostly flat except for the lagoon bluff areas which will not be altered through project grading. An existing manufactured slope on the eastern edge of the master plan site will be cut to provide fill for the roadway and bridge embankments supporting Avenida Encinas. Otherwise, no appreciable change to the area's topography will occur and EIR 84-3 did not identify any unique physical features. At the master plan level as well as tentative map/planning area level, the project be conditioned to comply with the City's Grading Ordinance and standard landscaping and erosion control measures to prevent soil erosion onto the site as well as soil erosion offsite into Batiquitos Lagoon. Development of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan will not affect the ~hlraf sand movement patterns of the nearby coastal littoral area. No changes will occur to the channels of any streams or the Batiquitos Lagoon. The project will be required to maintain e!xisting/construct new drainage facilities as needed to prevent any impacts to Batiquitos Lagoon. -6- 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The primary impacts to air quality will result from automobile and truck emissions. EIR 84-3 stated that the increase in air pollution emissions should be considered insignificant. tn addition the master plan's proposed land uses and associated average daily trips (ADT) will be reduced from approximately 26,500 ADT (associated With the current BLEP master plan) to 12,300 ADT (associated with the amended Poinsettia Shores master plan). This will reduce impacts to air quality compared to the BLEP master plan. Approval of this master plan and the development of individual planning areas will not impact or substantially change air movements, odor, moisture or temperature. Standard grading conditions and procedures will minimize dust impacts during grading and construction phases. The project will not change the course or flow of marine, lagoon or flood waters. The master plan will be conditioned to maintain existing/construct new drainage facilities to remove pollutants from storm water and prevent undesired drainage from flowing into the Batiquitos Lagoon drainage basin. Standard grading, erosion control and landscaping per the City's Landscape Manual will control run-off and prevent pollutants in run-off from reaching the Batiquitos Lagoon. These standard measures will prevent any impacts to the quantity or quality of lagoon water, surface water, ground water or public water supplies. EIR 84-3 documented the lack of any natural resources on the master plan property. Fuel and energy will be used during the grading and construction phases of this project in the form of gasoline and fuel. EIR 84-3 stated that BLEP could be adequately served by SDG&E for its natural gas and electrical xeds. Since the Poinsettia Shores project is less intense than the BLEP project, this projects demands on fuel and energy are not significant. EIR 84-3 identified four archeological sites within the master plan property; three were determined to be significant. Follow up data recovery efforts were canied out by archeologist Brian Smith and summarized in the report, 'The Archeological Excavations of Cultural Resources at Sites W-84, W- 88, W-95, W-97 and W-2251" incorporated herein by reference and on file in the Planning Department. One of the sites had human remains which have since been reinterred in an open space area within the master plan with the coordination and direction of a qualified Archeologist and Native American Coordinator. This was done in compliance with the mitigation measures of EIR 84-3. As concluded in the above referenced report, the sites are no longer considered significant. Further mitigation at this point involves the retention of an archeologist for pre- grading conferences and monitoring during grading operations where cultural sites are located. Paleontological resources also may be present on-site. paleontological mitigation propam will be required in conjunction with grading of the site. Adherence to the City's standard Br R NMENT 12/13. The majority of the project area (including all of the developable area of the property) is currently vacant and undeveloped. Previously, the site had been used for agriculture so there is no habitat value on the master plan property except for the lagoon, bluffs and wetland areas -7- which will be preserved in permanent open space. Therefore, there will be no impacts to sensitive plant species and no barriers to the normal replenishment of existing plant species will be created, Project landscaping will be the only plants introduced into the area. 14. The master plan property has been used for agricultural purposes in the past, however, no land within the master plan property is currently being used for agriculture. Furthermore, EIR 84-3 states that none of the soils on the site are considered "prime" agricultural lands per the Williamson Act definition. 15/16. Since the project area is pninarily vacant and undeveloped, there is minimum habitat value for animal species in the area. The exception would be the animal biodiversity associated with the lagoon and adjacent wetland areas which will remain open space so that there will be no impacts to the habitats or diversity of sensitive animal species or their natural patterns of movements or migrations. The biological resources of the lagoon will not be impacted by the development of the master plan's property. Domesticated animals in the form of household pets will likely be introduced into the area by future residents; however, this will not significantly impact the lagoon area's habitat or animal species diversity. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 17. The land uses currently allowed on the site are outlined in BLEP and center around a university/educational use with supporting residential, office and commercial uses. The proposed master plan amendment specifically seeks to alter the allowed uses on the east side to all residential (spreading the master plan's remaining allowed residential dwelling units) and leaving the west side with the currently allowed uses with the exception of the area north of Avenida Encinas which is proposed to go from a neighborhood commercial designation to an unplanned area designation, subject to future planning efforts. The proposed land uses are more compatible with existing/allowed adjacent land uses than the land uses contained in BLEP. Since the area is zoned Planned Community (PC) and requires master planning, the proposed land use changes associated with the current master plan amendment (and corresponding General Plan amendment) do not constitute a significant impact tO the planned land uses of the area. 18. The BLEP master plan did not substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services. The proposed master plan amendment will also not affect any public facilities or senrices since the intensity, traffic generation and demand on public facilities/services will be less than currently allowed. All performance standards and public improvement/infrastructure requirements of the amended Zone 9 Local Facilities Management Plan will be met and maintained in compliance with the City's Growth Management Program. 19. No new or modified solid waste or hazardous waste control systems will be required from the development of this master plan area. Overall sewer requirements will decrease from approximately 252,000 gallons per day (BLEP) to 151,140 gallons per day (Poinsettia Shores). The master plan will be conditioned to provide a sewer pump station for the east side of the master plan necessary to service the master plan area. The west side may be required to provide a sewer pump station during detailed planning and development efforts for the west side in the future. -a- 20. Approval of the master plan amendment and development of individual planning areas will not substantially increase noise levels beyond the short term grading and construction noise impacts. The project area is impacted by noise from the 1-5 freeway and the railroad right of way. Mitigation for the master plan amendment will include the requirement that residential planning areas have detailed noise studies done at the tentative map/PUD level to assure compliance with the City's noise policy. 21. . Through the site design and conditions of approval for individual planning areas, no light or glare will be permitted to be directed offsite of the master plan property. Lighting within planning areas will be low intensity and shielded from upward reflections. New light will not be a sigmficant impact. 22. The grading and construction proposed for the master. plan area will not involve the application, use or disposal of hazardous materials or substances. 23. The allowed density associated with this project is contained in BLEP which essentially allows a total of 451 new dwelling units to be built on the master plan property. This density is consistent not only with BLEP but with the Citfs Growth Management Program and the Zone 9 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP). While the applicant will be pursuing a State allowed 25% density bonus in conjunction with affordable housing units, the overall proposed density can be physically accommodated onsite and will not constitute a substantial altering of the area's density. 24. The project proposes to construct housing units on the east side of the master plan. The west side may create a need for housing in the area if the non-residential land uses for the west side are actualized. Overall, this project will supply housing units; not create a need for additional housing. 25. The Poinsettia Shores project will generate less traffic than the currently allowed BLEP project (approximately 26,500 ADT vs. 12,300 ADT) as documented in the applicant's traffic study by Urban Systems Associates, Inc. dated May 17,1993. A substantial increase in traffic will not result hm the Poinsettia Shores project and all major roadways, through their alignment and classification, will be able to adequately serve the master plan. 261 A large demand for new parking facilities will not be created by the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan. Each planning area and associated use will provide required parking per the code. 27. The proposed land uses of Poinsettia Shores will impact roadways and intersections more than the currently vacant land does, however, it will be less of an impact than BLEP. As mentioned, the planned circulation and roadway alignment system will be adequate to serve the area and be in compliance With the Zone 9 LFMP. 28. The master plan site is outside of the McClellan-Palomar Airport influence area so no impacts to or fkom ak traffic will result. No waterborne traffic occurs in the vicinity and the operations of the railroad right of way will not be impacted by the master plan or the planned railroad crossing bridge of Avenida Encinas. -9- 29. The master plan circulation system will include standard provisions for transportation systems accommodating vehicles with bicycle lanes and sidewalks for pedestrian movements so that there will be no increased traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. 30. The master plan’s circulation system, as well as individual planning areas’ circulation, will be reviewed by all pertinent City departments to ensure that there will be no impacts to any emergency response procedures or evacuation plans. 31. The master plan has the potential to create a significant visual impact through the development of structures near the lagoon environment. EIR 84-3 established certain development standards to act as visual mitigation to the impacts created by blufftop development. A 45-50 foot minimum structural setback from the blufftop was established and will be a minimum requirement for blufftop planning areas. A larger setback will be required through the master plan and planning area approval processes. To assist in reducing visual impacts to insignificance, EIR 84-3 specified a reduced building height limit for single story structures and a minimum percentage of single story units within a planning area. In addition, specifications were outlined with regards to accessory structures and allowances for public access/trails within the blufftop setback area. EIR 84-3 also required a buffer of at least 80 feet between the mobile home park to the north and any structures within the master plan. Part of the mitigation program associated with this environmental review and the master plan amendment will be the fornulation of development standards designed to mitigate visual impacts. Standards will be established for each blufftop planning area with the master plan amendment approval. These standards will be similar, or more restrictive, to those items outlined in EIR 84-3 and will include: a minimum structural setback from the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park, a minimum structural blufftop setback, a reduced height limit for single story structures (based on the Citfs current height dehition), a minimum percentage of single story structures per planning area, and provisions for public access/trails within blufftop setback areas. 32. No impacts to the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities will be created by the development of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan. The master plan will, however, create recreational opportunities in the form of a recreational center with such amenities as a swimming pool, tennis courts and passive areas. In addition, the master plan will provide a public access lagoon blufftop trail along the project‘s southern perimeter. -10- ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATrVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT‘ SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and g) no project alternative. The development of the master plan area will take place in at least two phases. The first phase will develop the east side of the master plan and the second phase will develop the west side. The east side development may occur in more than one phase. No site designs for individual planning areas are being approved with this master plan amendment. However, some development standards will be established for planning areas to guide the site designs of individual planning areas. The circulation and roadway design of Avenida Encinas is being established by this amendment and is the result of staff‘s review to ensure compliance with Citfs standards as well as to ensure a master planning approach to the site. The proposed scale of development is in keeping with the allowed dwelling units available for the master plan property and is less intense in non-residential square footage and scale than the BLEP master plan. The area is zoned PC which requires a master plan. Since a master plan exists, an amendment is the proper way to modify allowed land uses. The proposed residential land uses are compatible and acceptable alternatives to the educational uses allowed under BLEP. Agricultural uses are not economically viable or desired by the current master plan property owner. The west side of the master plan is set up to be planned in detail and developed at some future time. Near term developments will focus on the east side’s residential planning areas. Conceivably, alternate sites for the proposed land uses exist. However, the subject master plan property is capable of accommodating the proposed land uses and no sisnificant unmitigable environmental impacts will be created. The no project altemative would leave the site mostly vacant and undeveloped as it currently is. The City and existing residents within the master plan are anticipating continued planning and development efforts on this property to remove the educational uses of BW. The no project alternative does not contain significant environmental benefits. -11- DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - X 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 Mitigated 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 Planning Directow W LIST MITTGATING MEASURES (IF APPLI CABLE1 Land Use/Visual ImDacts 1. The master plan amendment will establish a minimum structural setback from the existing mobile home park for all planning areas adjacent to it. This minimum setback shall be equal to, or greater than, the setbaWdfer outlined in EIR 84-03. 2. The Master Plan Amendment will establish development standards for the east side’s residential planning areas adjacent to the lagoon bluff top that will be similar to, or more restrictive, than those outlined in EIR 84-03. These standards shall address: A. B. C. A minimum bluff top structural setback. Reduced single story height limitations. A minimum percentage of single story structures. D. Provisions for public access along the bluff top perimeter. -12- 3. The Master Plan Amendment will establish development standards for the west side's planning area adjacent to the lagoon bluff which wiU be similar to, or more restrictive, than those outlined in EIR 84-03. These standards shall address: A. B. Building height limitations. C. A minimum blufftop structural setback. Provisions for public access along the bluff top peheter. Archaeolo!zy The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require a qualified archaeologist to monitor all grading activities near or on the archaeological sites documented in EIR 84-03. Paleontolonv The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require a qualified paleontologist to be involved with all grading operations and comply with the City's standard paleontological mitigation program. - Noise The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require residential planning areas to have detailed noise studies done and incorporated at the tentative map/PUD approval level to assure compliance with the City's noise policy. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM TABLE AmACHED -13- , Seabluff A880CfatOlr a California Ganeral Partnership By: Hackatt Management Corporation, a California Corporation, PROJECT NAME: Poinsettia Shores Master Plan FILE NUMBERS: MP 175lDVGPA 9145/LFMP 87-09( A) APPROVAL DATE: EIR OR MITIGATED NEG. DEC.: Mtimted Nenative Declaration The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and Mfills the Ciry's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). Development standards addressing: Buffer from existing mobile home park 0 Lagoon bldltop strucmd setbacks. 0 Reduced single story height limitations 0 Minimum percentage of single story smctures Provisions for public access along the lagoon perimeter adjacent to the project site. Archaeologist involved in monitoring operations per the recommendatiom of previous investigations. Compliance with the Civs standard paleontological mitigation program. Compliance with the Ciws noise policy for residential planning areas. . projcet, Master Plan Amendment Project, Master Plan Amendment project, Master Plan Amendment Wcct, Master Plan Amendment Monaoring shown VerifKd Department onplans implementation Remarks Planning Planning Planning Planning Qpe = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Depamnent, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information. wMwn- . 4 City of Carisbad MP 175(D)/GPA 91-051 POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER PLAN I LcpA 91-42 I POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER PLAN 1 MP 175 D)/GPA 91-051 L PA 91-02 ~