Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLFMP 87-18B; Carlsbad Raceway Business Park; Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP)CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 75APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) |~| Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit Administrative Variance Coastal Development Permit Conditional Use Permit Condominium Permit Environmental Impact Assessment General Plan Amendment Hillside Development Permit Local Coastal Plan Amendment Master Plan Non-Residential Planned Development Planned Development Permit Planned Industrial Permit Planning Commission Determination Precise Development Plan Redevelopment Permit Site Development Plan Special Use Permit Specific Plan Tentative Parcel Map Obtain from Engineering Department Tentative Tract Map Variance Zone Change List other applications not specified I.FMP Amendment CT 221-011-03, 04, 05, 222) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Tentative Map to divide a 146.3 acre site into 24 Carlsbad Raceway Business Park industrial lots and 3 open space lots; General Plan Amendment to amend PI/Odesignation to PI. 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) Raceway Properties, LLC MAILING ADDRESS c/o Kurtin 12750 Carmel Country Road CITY AND STATE ZIP San Diego, CA 921 30 Properties , Suite 204 TELEPHONE (619)7937933 ! CERTIFY^THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. . A}b(- -A- ft* SIGNATURE DATE 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) Hofman Planning Associates MAILING ADDRESS 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760)4381465 I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. L\^f /-h^..<e^^ r-2y-^ SIGNATURE C DATE Parcels 1,2,3A,3B and 4 within portions of Section 7) BfllEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION 13 and 18, Township 12 South, Range 3 West, San Bernadino Meridian in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California.NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. Form 1 6 X)PAGE 1 OF 2 8} LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE N/A North STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF Palomar Airport Road (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST)(NAME OF STREET) BETWEEN Loker Avenue East AND (NAME OF STREET) Business Park Drive (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 18 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 1 6) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 8,940 ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 24)IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMEBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPE TO ENT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT SIGNATURg FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE cr HDP PFf LftFP TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED . Sb 3 S"7. RECEIVED JUN 0 * 1998 riTY OF CARLSBAD -"-iDEPI APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. Form 1 6 PAGE 2 OF 2 REC'DFROM.-LLC.DATE ACCOUNT NO. 0 ftvmc-6 * . RECEIPTNd. DESCRIPTION tFMf dnu^A ww^cO-fipjuf LFfflfl 81- /t S&) '• 7708 06/04/98 NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY TOTAL AMOUNT GOTO - 0001 01 02 c~Fftni UNiOw-W/ '£, D&o'*—* ...-..— .>— . ••n--rilnr«iiniM«i PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION PROJECT NAME: CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK APPLICANT NAME: HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES Please describe fully the proposed project by application type. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: The Carlsbad Raceway Property is located north of Palomar Airport Road and west of Business Park Road. Existing development in the vicinity of the property includes light industrial land uses to the east and light industrial and office development to the north. The area immediately south of the property is currently undeveloped. The area to the west of the property is currently vacant and contains open space. The property is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 18. The proposed project includes the processing of a Tentative Map, Hillside Development Permit, General Plan Amendment, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment and an Environmental Impact Assessment Part 1 for the Carlsbad Raceway Business Park. The proposed Tentative Map will allow for the subdivision of 146.3 acre site into 24 industrial lots and 3 open space lots. A General Plan Amendment is required because the General Plan designation for this property is a split designation of Planned Industrial / Office. The General Plan Amendment would amend this designation to Planned Industrial only. The Carlsbad Municipal Code requires that a Hillside Development Permit be processed with this application since grading with occur on slopes in excess of 15' in height and 15% slope. The project will have 1,195,000 cubic yards of cut, 1,270,000 cubic yards of fill necessitating 75,000 cubic yards of import. Site access will be provided by a two lane east-west roadway (Poinsettia Boulevard). Access at the eastern end of the property would be from Business Park Road and Melrose Drive from the western end. In conformance with the goals of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan, a key north-south wildlife corridor is proposed for this project. This corridor would provide a link between existing open space on the Rancho Carrillo project to the south and open space to the north of this site. Additional open space would be provided along the northern portions of the site and off site to the north and northwest. Hofman Planning Associates Letter of Transmittal Corporate Office: 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Tel: (760)438-1465 Fax: (760) 438-2443 Date. Project: Delivered By: Attention: June 4,1998 Carlsbad Raceway Hedy Levine Planning Department Message: Please see the accompanying documents: Two (2) copies of the Transportation Analysis for the Carlsbad Raceway Business Park prepared by Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Two (2) copies of the Carlsbad Raceway Project Mitigation Plan prepared by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. Please include these studies with the submittal documents delivered earlier today for GPA 98-05, HDP 98-09, and CT 98-10. Please call me if you have any questions. From: Hedy Levine Hofman Planning Associates ! a n n: n c LI r G i e c T iv' a *~: a a e ;Ti e r ~ M s c JuneS, 1998 City of Carlsbad - Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK - Submittal for Tentative Map, General Plan Amendment, Hillside Development Permit, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Assessment Parti This letter accompanies the following documents / plans for the applications listed above: Land Use Review Application Form Two (2) Public Facility Fee Agreements (one original, one copy, includes project description and Articles of Organization) Three (3) copies of Preliminary Title Report Disclosure Statement (including Articles of Organization) Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part I Notice of Time Limits on Discretionary Applications Statement of Agreement, Tentative Subdivision Map Letter regarding Justification for Grading Check in the amount of $12,257.50 Check in the amount of $5,000.00 (LFMP Amendment) Ten (10) Site Plans Reduced Site Plan Ten (10) Landscape Plans Location Map Scale Map Constraints Map (one set) Preliminary Hydrology Map Hillside Development Permit Exhibits (5 sets) 2386 Faraday Avenue • SJ!ie ;20 • Carisoaa • CA 92008 • (619j 438-1465 • Fax. (619)438-2443 Two (2) copies of Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Update, prepared by MV Environmental, Inc. Two (2) copies of draft Biological Technical Report, prepared by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. Two (2) copies of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. Please call me at (760) 438-1465 if you have any questions or require any additional information. Sincerely, f°Hedy cc: Jon Kurtin The City of Carlsbad Planning Departs I A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No.\ P.C. AGENDA OF: October 17, 2001 Application complete date: March 25, 1999 Project Planner: Anne Hysong Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(BV ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 01-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK - Request for a recommendation of approval for a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum, General Plan Amendment, Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment, and Zone Change and approval of a tentative tract map, hillside development permit and planned industrial permit to allow the subdivision of a 146.3 acre parcel located north of Palomar Airport Road between future Melrose Drive and the City's eastern boundary into 25 industrial lots and 3 open space lots on property located in the P-M Zone in Local Facilities Management Zone 18. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5024, 5025, 5026 and 5027 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum, GPA 98-05, LFMP 87-18(8), and ZC 01-07 and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5028, 5029, and 5030 APPROVING CT 98-10, HDP 98-09, and PIP 01-01 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment to eliminate the Office (O) designation from the PI/O General Plan designation and to add the Open Space (OS) designation to the proposed project open space, to rezone the proposed open space from P-M to O-S and to amend the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan. The applicant is also requesting Planning Commission approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide and grade the 146.3 acre Carlsbad Raceway property into 25 industrial lots and three open space lots, a hillside development permit and planned industrial permit required for the project. Subsequent Planned Industrial Permits for the development of each lot created by the subdivision will be required prior to construction. As designed and conditioned, the project is in conformance with the General Plan, as amended, Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20), Hillside Development Regulations and Planned Industrial Permit zoning ordinances. The project complies with all applicable City standards, all project issues have been resolved, and all necessary findings can be made for the requested approvals. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The project proposes to subdivide and grade the 146.3 acre Carlsbad Raceway property into 25 GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(6, ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 0 A - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17,2001 Page 2 industrial lots and 3 open space lots. This action necessitates three legislative actions: (1) a General Plan amendment; (2) a zone change; and (3) a Local Facilities Management Plan amendment to update the Zone 18 LFMP to include the requirement to participate in the financing of Faraday Avenue and the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer. The LFMP amendment will also provide for a temporary sewer connection through the City of Vista Raceway sewer basin and outfall. The property is currently designated by the General Plan for Planned Industrial/Office (PI/O) land use and zoned Planned Industrial (P-M). The proposed General Plan Amendment eliminates the O designation and redesignates the portion of the property proposed to be developed with industrial lots to PI and redesignates the 43.36 acres of the property proposed to be dedicated as permanent open space to Open Space (OS). To ensure zoning consistency with the proposed General Plan land use designations, the portion of the property redesignated as OS would be rezoned to the O-S zone. The Carlsbad Raceway property is located north of Palomar Airport Road in the City's northeast quadrant. The property is surrounded by open space and industrial park development to the north, vacant industrial property and a small commercial development in the City of Vista to the east, a vacant industrially zoned property and Palomar Airport Road to the south, and the existing Carlsbad Oaks East industrial park to the west. The property is characterized by gentle slope terrain which descends northward into a prominent east/west canyon on the northern half of the property in which a drainage spans most of the length of the property. Tributaries to the main drainage occur in two smaller canyons on the southern half of the site which drain towards the north. Three other tributaries to the main drainage enter from the north side of the property. The drainage on site is an unnamed tributary to Agua Hedionda Creek which drains into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Two larger hills occur on the northern edge of the site and on the southwest corner of the site, and elevations range from approximately 310 feet to 495 feet above sea level. The Carlsbad Raceway has operated at the site since 1963 under a conditional use permit which expires in February, 2002. The raceway drag strip stretches about two thirds of the property from the northeast comer to the south central area. Much of the site is heavily disturbed in that the drag strip was created in the canyon bottom in the northeast area of the site where water has been diverted to flow alongside it in a previously upland area. Also, numerous dirt roads created from off-road motorcycle activity occur in all areas of the site. The southwestern portion of the site has also been used for agriculture, and a SDG&E powerline easement bisects the eastern half of the property. The north-central portion of the site, which is abutted by dedicated open space in the City of Vista, is the least disturbed portion of the property. The proposed industrial lots range in size from 1.1 acre to 8.7 acres. Future development of the industrial lots will require Planning Director approval of a Planned Industrial Permit. The project site includes a 50-foot (minimum) landscape buffer along Melrose Drive and 35-foot landscape setbacks along the projects internal streets. The Raceway property is a hardline area in the City's draft HMP, which identifies it as a part of a linkage (Linkage Area D) that connects core areas to the north and south of the property. Consistent with the HMP, a proposed 400' wide north-south habitat corridor that incorporates the existing SDG&E easement bisects the eastern half of the property and connects to an east-west habitat corridor that extends along the northern portion of the property (see Sheets 7 and 8). In conjunction with the proposed industrial project to the south, a common passive park area consisting of a waterfall and creek feature, an 8' wide segment of the Citywide trail system, and outdoor eating amenities will be developed GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-lc, ,)/ ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PL 1-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 Page 3 along the west side of Melrose Drive from Palomar Airport Road to approximately 600 feet north of the intersection (see Sheet 3). The subdivision is conditioned to construct Melrose Drive between Palomar Airport Road and its existing southerly terminus in the City of Vista as well as internal streets to City standards. The project will have three points of access. The project will have access from Melrose Drive and receive access from Poinsettia Avenue (Street "B"), a 52' wide east/west street that will provide a connection between Melrose Drive and Business Park Drive. Another access will be provided to the project by the extension of Paseo Valindo between Palomar Airport Road and Poinsettia Avenue. All of the lots will front on Street "B" except one lot (#25), located west of Melrose Drive, that will receive access from Melrose Drive. Internal project circulation will include minimum 52' wide streets (parking on both sides) and minimum 30-foot wide driveways. The subdivision and grading design is somewhat dictated by the three points of access to the property. Grading quantities for the project exceed the Hillside Ordinance "acceptable" range due to grade alteration for the short segment of Melrose Drive, which requires cut and fill to achieve the required grades at the existing points of connection. Slopes exceeding 40' in height are necessary to construct Melrose Drive. Aside from Melrose Drive, achievement of 1 acre minimum industrial lots with large flat building pads requires considerable alteration of the previous sloping terrain, i.e., large quantities of cut on the south side of Street "B" and fill on the north side with manufactured slopes descending into a northern canyon that will be preserved as open space. The mass grading has been designed to generally perpetuate existing drainage patterns; i.e., a public storm drain system that outlets into one of two detention basins that will drain into a tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek. Open space Lot 27 will include permanent NPDES drainage basins. This construction of Melrose Drive will create a detention basin east of the road and reduce the peak flow in the Agua Hedionda Creek tributary to below pre-development conditions The project is located within the boundaries of the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area and therefore subject to the McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances, standards, and policies: A. Carlsbad General Plan 1. General Plan Amendment 2. General Plan Consistency B. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) including: 1. Planned Industrial (P-M) Zone (Municipal Code Chapter 21.34); 2. Open Space (OS) Zone (Municipal Code Chapter 21.33); 3. Hillside Development (Municipal Code Chapter 21.95) GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(1 .,< ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP . .4)1 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 Page 4 C. Carlsbad Municipal Code, title 20 (Subdivision Ordinance) D. McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Plan (CLUP) E. Growth Management Ordinance / Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis section discusses compliance with each of these regulation/policies utilizing both text and tables. Al. General Plan Amendment The project site is currently designated by the General Plan for Planned Industrial/Office (PI/O) land use and is zoned Planned Industrial (P-M). The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change the property's dual PI/O General Plan designation to PI and Open Space (OS), thereby eliminating the Office (O) designation. The General Plan amendment would retain only the PI designation on the portion of the property proposed to be developed with industrial lots, and the 43.36 acres of property proposed to be dedicated as permanent open space would be redesignated to OS. Justification for elimination of the O designation, which allows office and related commercial use, is that it is unnecessary since professional offices that are incidental to the industrial uses and not retail in nature, are permitted by P-M zoning under the PI land use designation. Limited retail commercial uses that provide services to occupants of the industrial zones are also permitted by conditional use permit. To ensure zoning consistency with the proposed General Plan land use designations, the portion of the property redesignated as OS would be rezoned to the O-S zone. This action is consistent with the General Plan Open Space element and in accordance with the intent and purpose of the open space zone to designate as open space high priority resource areas at the time of development. A2. General Plan Consistency The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The following table indicates how the project complies with the elements of the General Plan: GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-llvJ)/ ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PL 1-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17,2001 PaeeS GP ELEMENT COMPLIANCE Land Use - PI Planned Industrial business park subdivision that is: • designed and landscaped within perimeter setbacks and manufactured slopes and properly functioning internal roads and adequately spaced driveways • compatible with surrounding industrial and open space uses • creates industrial lots that are large and level enough to accommodate industrial development including parking, loading, storage, and operational needs • conditioned to screen all storage, loading, mechanical equipment and meet all required performance standards for noise, odor and emissions. Circulation Construct the following roadway and intersection improvements in accordance with City standards: • Street "B" (Poinsettia Avenue) will be extended from its existing terminus west of Business Park Drive to Melrose Drive. • Melrose Drive will be constructed from Palomar Airport Road to the existing terminus in the City of Vista. • Financial guarantee of Faraday Ave. to extend the roadway from the existing terminus near Melrose Drive in Vista to the existing terminus near Orion Way in Carlsbad. • Onsite Street "A" will connect to the future industrial subdivision to the south (Palomar Forum), providing another network link and secondary access to Palomar Airport Road and to Melrose Drive/Business Park Drive. Open Space The project will result in the preservation of 43.6 acres of open space consistent with the City's HMP, provide a citywide trail segment, and rezone the open space easement to the Open Space zone. Noise Standards for noise generation and interior noise standards for future development will be required in compliance with the City's Noise standard and P-M zone performance standards. Parks Payment of park-in-lieu fee Public Safety Mitigation measures are required to significantly reduce the risk of exposure to hazardous substances during construction and from future industrial development Streets, sidewalks, street lights, and fire hydrants will be constructed per City standards Bl. Planned Industrial Zone In accordance with the Planned Industrial (P-M) zone ordinance regulations, a Planned Industrial Permit (PIP) is required for all industrial subdivisions. The majority of standards apply to the actual development of industrial lots. Subsequent approval of a PIP will be required for each GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(L,, ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP U.01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17,2001 Page 6 industrial lot prior to development. The proposed industrial subdivision is subject to standards for lot size, landscaped setbacks, mini park provisions, and subdivision design criteria. Compliance with the applicable standards is indicated in the following table. PLANNED INDUSTRIAL ORDINANCE STANDARD REQUIRED PROVIDED Prime Arterial Setback 50 Feet Entirely Landscaped 50 Feet Entirely Landscaped Local Street Setback 35 Feet Average 35 Feet Average Interior Side Yard Setback 10 Feet 10 Feet Rear Yard Setback 20 Feet 20 Feet Minimum Lot Area 1 Acre 1.4-9.7 Acres Outdoor Eating Area Mini-Park in lieu of outdoor eating area within 1,000 feet Mini Park satisfies outdoor eating requirements for Lots 1,2,3,24 Internal Street System Safe, efficient, functional Three points of access to ensure accessibility; street connections between Melrose and Business Park Drive to ensure timely emergency response Equipment Screening Architecturally integrated For future buildings: Prohibit placement of mechanical equipment on roofs unless project incorporates architectural treatment consisting of architectural elements or parapets that are of sufficient height and design to screen future mechanical roof equipment from adjacent scenic corridor and circulation arterial roadways. • Prohibit installation of roof screens other than building parapets or architectural elements that are integrated into the architectural design of buildings; Prohibit loading bays that are visible from Palomar Airport Road or Melrose Drive. GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-1 bv_»)/ ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PL ,1-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 Page 7 Architecture Architecturally integrated Require enhanced archi- tectural treatment of all building elevations that are visible from Palomar Airport Road or Melrose Drive. B2. Open Space Zone A habitat corridor consisting of three lots (26, 27, and 28) within the proposed subdivision will be dedicated as permanent open space in accordance with the City's Draft Habitat Management Plan. The property will be redesignated as General Plan open space and reclassified as an open space (O-S) zone . This action is consistent with the General Plan Open Space element and in accordance with the intent and purpose of the open space zone to designate as open space high priority resource areas at the time of development. The project is conditioned to preclude any use of the open space beyond the utility easements and permanent drainage basins identified on the tentative map. B3. Hillside Development Regulations A Hillside Development Permit is required for the Carlsbad Raceway property because the property contains slopes of 15 percent and greater with elevation differentials greater than 15 feet. The project consists of a grading design to create a landform that is consistent, with some modification, to the City's Hillside Development Regulations. The project's grading volume of 12,530 cubic yards/acre exceeds the acceptable range, i.e., it exceeds 10,000 cubic yards/acre. The project includes slopes that exceed 40' in height due to Melrose Drive and Street "B". Section 21.95.130 of the Hillside Development Ordinance excludes circulation arterial roads from hillside development standards. The majority of manufactured slopes proposed do not exceed 40'. Hillside regulations are intended to ensure that hillside landforms are developed in a sensitive manner and that the majority of visible manufactured slopes are undulated and do not exceed 40' in height. Although the Hillside Development Ordinance excludes industrial subdivisions from grading volume limitations and slope height restrictions, justification for exceeding the acceptable grading volume is still required. The following table indicates compliance with Hillside Development Regulations: HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE - SECTION 21.95.120 STANDARD PROPOSED PLAN COMPLIANCE Undevelopable Slopes: Natural Slopes of Over 40% Gradient with elevation differential > 15', a minimum area of 10,000 square feet and comprising a prominent landform feature. 9.3 acres of slopes greater than 40% exist on the property; however, 4.8 acres are previously graded (non- natural) and the remaining slopes with an elevation differential of fifteen feet or more comprise less than ten thousand square feet and do not comprise a prominent landform feature. Yes GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(L,, ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP t.-€l - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 PageS Grading Volumes > 10,000 cu yds/acre allowed if the project qualifies as an exclusion or modification per Sections 21.95.130 and 21.95.140* 12,530 cu yds/acre excluding Circulation Element Roadway (Melrose Drive). See the discussion below. Yes Maximum Manufactured Slope Height: 40 feet* Maximum manufactured slope height is 40 - 50 feet at locations (see Exhibit "B" - "L") due to Melrose Drive and the Street "B" access road through the subdivision. Yes Contour Grading: Required for manufactured slopes greater than 20' in height and 200' in length and visible from a Circulation element road, collector street or useable public open space Contour grading is proposed where applicable adjacent to and visible from Melrose Drive. Yes Slope Edge Building setback: 0.7 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical imaginary diagonal plane measured from edge of slope to structure NA - Buildings are not proposed at this time. Slope edge building setback will be analyzed with future Planned Industrial Permit applications for buildings. NA Landscape manufactured slopes consistent with the City's Landscape Manual All manufactured slopes are landscaped in accordance with the City's Landscape Manual with the exception of slopes descending into the northern wildlife corridor which will be revegetated with native species as a biological mitigation condition. Yes * Exclusions are permitted for grading volumes, slope heights and graded areas which are directly associated with circulation element roadways or collector streets, provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other City standards; and modifications are permitted for projects that will result in significantly more open space or undisturbed area that would a strict adherence to the Hillside Ordinance development and design regulations. Justification for the grading volume above the acceptable range is based on existing sloping terrain, the industrial subdivision design, and the construction of Melrose Drive and Street "B". The area proposed for development descends from south to north from approximately 500 feet to 320 feet at the eastern end of the property, 430 feet to 390 feet in the center of the property, and from 450 feet to 330 feet at the western end. An east-west access road (Street "B") between Melrose Drive and the existing terminus of Poinsettia Avenue in the City of Vista will provide access to large industrial lots on each side. The grading scheme necessary to create large flat industrial pads requires cut to lower the lots on the south side of Street "B" to the road elevation and comparable fill to raise pads on the north side of Street "B" to the road elevation. Lowering GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18, )/ ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PH x-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 Page 9 pad elevations on the north side of Street "B" to reduce slope heights and grading volumes would also preclude gravity sewer lines from those lots to Street "B". These site conditions and development parameters resulted in greater grading volumes and a minimal number of slopes exceeding 40' in height. C. Subdivision Ordinance The proposed tentative map complies with all requirements of the City' Subdivision Ordinance. All infrastructure improvements including frontage and project related roadways and construction of drainage and sewer facilities will be installed concurrent with development. The proposed project would subdivide the project site into 25 industrial lots and 3 open space lots ranging in size from 1.4 to 37.7 acres. The project grading to create building pads, private driveways and the connection of Melrose Drive to Palomar Airport Road will consist of 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and fill to be balanced onsite. The proposed project includes the construction of a new sewer line, which will be directed through Melrose Drive to connect to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer system. A temporary agreement may be provided to allow this project to sewer into the City of Vista's Raceway Sewer Lift station and outfall. Water service is provided by an existing 36" water line on Palomar Airport Road. Twenty-five temporary NPDES and desilt basins will be constructed at various locations throughout the project. Primary access to the site will be provided from Melrose Drive and nearby Business Park Drive. Access to the site will also be provided from Palomar Airport Road at its existing signalized intersection with Paseo Valindo by a connection to a future street through the Palomar Forum project (CT 99-06). The project is also conditioned to construct Melrose Drive from Palomar Airport Road to its existing terminus in the City of Vista, including curb and gutter, sidewalk, and street lights. The project is conditioned to install public interior Street "A" improvements for 72 foot width right-of-way and public interior Street "B" improvements for 126 foot right-of-way including curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, and fire hydrants. The proposed street system is adequate to handle the project's pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Emergency access can be accommodated at ingress and egress points provided from Melrose Drive. The project is also required, as a condition of the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan to participate in the financing and the construction of Faraday Avenue from Melrose Drive to Orion Way. D. McClellan Palomar Airport Land Use Plan (CLUP) The proposed industrial subdivision is located within the airport influence area and the eastern flight activity zone. The proposed development is consistent with the Planned Industrial land use designation that existed at the time the CLUP was adopted; therefore, compliance with the P-M zoning regulations at the time the proposed lots are developed will ensure consistency with the CLUP. Specifically, high rise development above the height limitations of the P-M zone and conditional uses that involve large groups of people are prohibited. GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(L,. ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 0. dl - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17, 2001 Page 10 E. Growth Management An amendment is proposed to the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 18 to reflect the proposed changes in land use. The plan has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The proposed document is the second amendment to the Zone 18 LFMP. It is necessary to reflect the approved final maps for Rancho Carrillo, the General Plan Amendment deleting the Office designation for the Carlsbad Raceway property, the new sewer and drainage facilities and the Citywide traffic study. The proposed zone plan covers the entire zone and analyzes the requirements for the eleven public facilities included within the growth management program. For each of the eleven public facilities the plan lists the required performance standard, provides a facility planning and adequacy analysis, required mitigation, and financing sources for any required mitigation. Special Conditions of the LFMP amendment include improvements to Palomar Airport Road, the construction of Melrose Drive, a financial guarantee for the construction of Faraday Avenue, and conditions for allowing a temporary sewer connection to the City of Vista Raceway Pump Station and outfall. The zone will be in compliance with the required performance standards by satisfying the general and special conditions listed in the zone plan. The facilities impacts of the project are summarized below: Zone 18 LFMP Summary STANDARD City Administration Library Waste Water Treatment Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Collection System Water IMPACTS Not Applicable Not Applicable 771 EDU Not Applicable 396 CFS 1 0,320 ADT Station #5 43.36 Acres Not Applicable 771 EDU 257,000 GPD COMPLIANCE W/STANDARDS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes V.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA guidelines and the Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The General Plan land use designation would remain the same except that the Office designation is eliminated and the proposed open space easement is redesignated as open space. These changes have no impact on the Planned Industrial land uses allowed by the existing PI/O General Plan designation since office uses are allowed under either designation. The project falls within the scope of the City's MEER for the City of Carlsbad General Plan update (EIR 93-01) certified in September, 1994, in which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for cumulative impacts to GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-lK_>)/ ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PL ,1-01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17,2001 Page 11 air quality and traffic. MEIR's may riot be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project except under certain circumstances. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEER was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino Real, has been mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. All feasible mitigation measures identified by the MEIR which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project. Potentially significant environmental impacts were identified for water quality, circulation, risk of exposure to hazardous materials, biological resources, and aesthetics. Mitigation measures to reduce water quality and circulation impacts include compliance with the project's summary NPDES study, the construction of Melrose Drive, a financial guarantee for the construction of Faraday Ayenue, and construction of Street "B" between Melrose Drive and Business Park Drive. Mitigation for biological impacts includes the creation of riparian habitat, acquisition of coastal sage scrub habitat, and preservation and revegetation of an HMP wildlife habitat corridor. Although the preferred wildlife habitat corridor mitigation does not include the Street "B" crossing, a cul-de-sac design on each side would require that the industrial lots located on the east side of the corridor receive access via Business Park Drive. This cul-de-sac design would create potentially significant traffic and safety impacts because: 1) the connection of Street "B" is necessary as mitigation to alleviate traffic congestion on Palomar Airport Road; and 2) the Fire Department could not provide emergency services to the area within the standard five-minute response time. Therefore, Street "B" has been designed as a through street to ensure emergency response within the five minute standard, improve emergency access to adjacent development, and provide a parallel roadway to reduce traffic on Palomar Airport Road. To reduce impacts to wildlife resulting from Street "B", the vertical road alignment is recessed below grade through the corridor to reduce the impact of the roadway to birds crossing the corridor. Mitigation measures to avoid the potential for exposure to hazardous materials include restrictions on grading operations to avoid exposure to pesticide impacted soils and the future industrial use of hazardous materials. Mitigation measures to avoid visual impacts to scenic corridors resulting from future rooftop mechanical equipment, loading bays, and poorly designed architecture include design restrictions prohibiting visible mechanical equipment and loading bays and requiring enhanced architecture at visible locations. During the 30 day public comment period, responses were received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Preserve Calavera, the Sierra Club, the Department of Toxic Substances, and Dr. Douglas Diener regarding the identification of environmental impacts and the adequacy of proposed mitigation. Based on comments received from the USFWS and CDFG regarding biological impacts resulting from the Street "B" crossing of the wildlife corridor, the cumulative loss of non-native grassland and southern mixed chaparral, an "occupied" classification of coastal sage scrub habitat, direct impacts to two sensitive plant species, the need for surveys for the burrowing owl, clarification of wetland impacts, and avoidance of invasive/exotic plant species adjacent to open space areas, the City GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(L,- ZC 01-07/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP c_,01 - CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK October 17,2001 Page 12 recirculated the mitigated negative declaration with added mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts. These additional mitigation measures include: 1) the payment of 5225,865.90 in mitigation fees for impacts to non-native grassland and chaparral; 2) preparation of an engineering and feasibility study for a potential wildlife crossing under Palomar Airport Road; 3) construction of an acceptable wildlife crossing or payment of $100,000 for impacts resulting from the Street "B" crossing of the north-south wildlife corridor; 4) replacement of sensitive plant species from container stock; 5) a requirement for a burrowing owl survey prior to construction; and 6) a requirement for the use of native plant species and avoidance of invasive/exotic plant species in project landscaping adjacent to the preserved open space. During the 30 day public comment period for the recirculated mitigated negative declaration, the City received letters from Preserve Calavera, the Department of Toxic Substances, and Isabelle Kay, Manager of the Dawson Los Monos Canyon Reserve regarding. These letters are attached and responses to the issues addressed in the letters will be provided as part of staffs public hearing presentation. In consideration of the foregoing, the Planning Director reissued a Mitigated Negative Declaration on September 6,2001. ATTACHMENTS; 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5024 (Mitigated Neg. Dec.) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5025 (GPA) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5026 (LFMP) 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5027 (ZC) 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5028 (CT) 6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5029 (HDP) 7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5030 (PIP) 8. Location Map 9. Disclosure Form 10. Background Data Sheet 11. Local Facilities Impact Form 12. Reduced Exhibits 13. Public comment letters from Preserve Calavera, Isabelle Kay, and Department of Toxic Substances 14. Full Size Exhibits "A" - "CC", dated August 15, 2001 AH:cs SITE CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK GPA 98-05/ZC 01-07/LFMP 87-18(B)/ CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 01-01 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application subminal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other counts, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document: however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Pan Raceway Properties. LLC Title Title Address Address 12672 Caminito Radiante San Diego. CA92130 OWNER (Not the owner's agent) . Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e. partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE• (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv- owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Part Racewav Properties. LLC Title Title Address Address 12672 Caminito Radiante San Dieuo. CA 92130 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or berieficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust N/A Non ProfilTrust N/A Title Title Address Address 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards. Commissions. Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? Yes If yes. please indicate person(s):_ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. SEE ADDENDUM SEE ADDENDUM Signature of owner/date Signature of applicant/date Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 Of 2 i bY: KUHI1N PROPERTIES; B7/06/2001 10:35 6192883169 858793797?; JUL-6-Ol 1C:05AK- DENTT/SCIACCA PAGE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDENDUM For Raceway Properties, IXC Raceway Properties, LLC is owned by die following individuals: ToddK.urtin-25% Bruce Elieff- 25% JonKunin-162/3% Richard Dentt -16 2/3% Frank Seiacca-16 2/3% We certify that all The above information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. Signature of owner/applicant Date Signature of owner/applicant Date ToddKurttn Prim or type name of owner/applicant Bruce Elieff Print or type name of owner/applicant Signature of owner/applicant Jon Kurtin Frank Seiacca Date Print or type name of owner/applicant 'Date Print or type name of owner/applicant Signature of owner/applicant Richard Dentt Date Print or type name of owner/applicant SENT 3Y: KURTIN PROPERTIES; 87/06/2881 18:35 6192JBB3169 8587937977; DENTT/SCIACCA-, DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDENDUM For Raceway Properties, LLC Raceway Properties, LLC is owned by the following individuals: Todd Kurtin -25% Bruce Elieff- 25% JonKurtin-162/3% Richard Dentl • 16 2/3% Frank Sciacca - J6 2/3% We certify that all ihe above information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. Signature of owner/applicant Date Signature of owner/applicant «/ Date Todd Kurtin Print ortypc name -of owner/applicartt Bruce ElicfL Print or type name of owner/«ppUcuit Jon Kurtin Date Print or type name of owner/applicant Signature of owner/applicant Richard Dentt Date Print or type name of owner/applicant Signature of owner/applicant Date Frank Sciacca Prim or type name of owner/applicant CJ / / EJD/ ^LIDi ID; tlD DJ.3ZOOO.LO3 UC.IN I I / bi DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDENDUM For Raceway Properties, LLC Raceway Properties, LLC is owned by the following individuals: Todd Kurtin-25% Bruce Elieff- 25% Jon Kurtin-16 2/3% Richard Dentt -16 2/3% Frank Sciacca-16 2/3% We certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. Signature of owner/applicant Date Signature of owner/applicant Date Todd Kurtin Print or type name of owner/applicant Bruce Elieff Print or type name of owner/applicant S ignature of owner/appl leant Date Signature of owner/applicant Date Jon Kurtin Print or type name of owner/applicant Richard Dentt Print or type name of owner/applicant Signature of owner/applicant Date Frank Sciacca Print or type name of owner/applicant BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(BVZC 01-07LFMP 87-18CBVCT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 01-01 CASE NAME: Carlsbad Raceway Business Park APPLICANT: Raceway Properties. LLC REQUEST AND LOCATION: A request for a General Plan Amendment to eliminate the Office(O) General Plan Designation and redesignate proposed open space to the Open Space (OS) General Plan Designation, a zone change to add Open Space zoning, a Tentative Tract Map. Hillside Development Permit, and Planned Industrial Permit for an 146 acre. 25 lot, industrial subdivision with 3 open space lots on property located north of Palomar Airport Road between the City's eastern boundary and future Melrose Drive. The project design includes a 400 foot wide north-south wildlife corridor that provides access to an east-west wildlife corridor within the northern portion of the property. Access to the industrial lots will be provided by construction of the remaining segment of Melrose Drive between Palomar Airport Road and the City of Vista boundary and the extension of Poinsettia Avenue from its existing westerly terminus in the City of Vista to Melrose Drive. No industrial buildings are proposed as part of the project. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The South Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 18. Township 12 South. Range 4 West. San Bernardino Meridian: Lot 2. Section 13. Township 12 South. Range 3 West. San Bernardino Meridian: and the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 18. Township 12 South. Range 3 West. San Bernardino Base and Meridian in the City of Carlsbad. County of San Diego. APN: 221-011-03:-04:-05 AND 221-010-022 Acres: 146.3 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 25 Lots GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: PI/O . Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A Existing Zone: P-M Proposed Zone: P-M. OS Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use: Zoning General Plan Current Land Use Site P-M PI/O Carlsbad Raceway North Open Space/Industrial City of Vista Open Space/Industrial South P-M PI Vacant East City of Vista City of Vista Commercial West P-M PI Industrial PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: San Marcos Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 771 EDU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued July 15. 2001 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated_ Other 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: GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(BYZC 01-07LFMP 87-18(B)/CT 98-10/HDP 98-09/PIP 01-01 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 18 GENERAL PLAN: PI/O ZONING: P-M DEVELOPER'S NAME: RACEWAY PROPERTIES. LLC. ADDRESS: HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES. 5900 PASTEUR COURT. SUITE 150. CARLSBAD. CA. 92008 PHONE NO.: (760) 438-1465 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 221-01 1-03;-04;-05 AND 221-010-022 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): INDUSTRIAL LOTS 146.3 AC/25 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: UNKNOWN A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 771 D. Park: Demand in Acreage = Not Applicable E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = 396 Identify Drainage Basin = B (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADT = 10.320 (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 5 H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = 43.36 I. Schools: Not Applicable (Demands to be determined by staff) J. Sewer: Demands in EDU 771 Identify Sub Basin = B (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD= 257.000 SHKT / r.r. TENTATIVE MAP FOR CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK SHADING ANALYSIS: cut i. ineao cr ns. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: rr m**» t Mvjon 4 «vm » OOP trans mn tt nammn.**9 Mttr groom WCOK •MM* f •* wnwjr attma not a r *nvr« mow «i * «f woor *«nuo»cflrs«wr* movn • wma cr <v*i *MT N.P.D.E.S. NOTE:j * vriw 14 im#r tr sownot/vwH iMmw4xnzi » uai jour tr rai&ac enema aw iff:nmtf gno0**t *** MS *ur/ MI/ tmor new • ovt r•« nr w«w« a*i/«w KCMMT otfd w mw mutt) »'*«out MOM. mmvtmmvD flj 9comot or frtown smut toa /?w rww a/we* xr*uw orar. t arr a mtat * » *v * »* ema f ft aunr 000* v V**xten*or* OWNER/SUBDIVWER: M KW©2001 O'Doy Conndonts. Inc. [7] EASEMENT TABLE 0 0 CM- EL0 :m.0 V «•* utm ucjc «w IMGOBUV «r wins 1MCKMM0 tmt UVTI "own" mnur HO" HJCTTW OMNT 5BW3WT*» »ari jrxw *w-«r-*r T tarn «v am «*EUVJ mat in na w /u/mer * i JMW /U/4WT* jm sic/tor * m-ntfit EASEMENT NOTES: i. laoon wm»twrr mf ax* »vf *m. n. tmrtaiomxmUHmi a***r. avo>» mier-t i *» usa&i atom w a/met sram HUTS M> root n «w or** am c« «• a/mv (a mans m*oi u m? # w » *w if «0 rr-uxrc or Oman «tMK LOT to. 111 t r —%~'i 't "n 9 f awa — 5str nm <«/*«* LOT AJUJ (Me.) ttft #2 t,i "n t' «.» atmi H SECTION 'j-A' - PfOm/L *oft±f •cc mmt-~s \^-rmra, "^ EXISTING MELMSe Off. (CITT OF VtSTA) PUBLIC Xj tor MWtriwr VOMB iffurosf OK. (an or UHLSBM) PUBLIC t« • X SMLF 9 TOP OF SLQPt J^avt* *a it (UK) -L-M SHCCT 2 or 14 SHKTS C.T. 98-10 EXISTING POINSfTTIA AVE. {CITY or VISTA) PUBLIC .& TYPICAL SE sccnoN l-i' - Access ROU)—tmr if xmn 10 f sccnoH 'o-o' - tcccss notp •O3UU CARLSBAD RACEWAYBUSINESS PARK COHCCPWU CVLWI1 OPCHINC HOUrKMON ncruti oesKH m iKf CHcmamm sn/cr BENCHMARK: mvsu> wmt arMDM* t. noo MWDr HOC rirr tovr* Of «ttv\*> *Mo tn cvnr*M oa WHO VJi @1W Q'Dai <:am»an\s. Inc. for is ' CARLSBAD RACEWAYBUSINESS PARK <E>?001 O'Doy Consultants, Inc. SHFFT 4 Of 14 SHEtTS C.T. 98-10 CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK st/rrr 5 or 14 SHCCTS C.T, 98-10 ,> ; SEE SHEET No. 4 CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK tor a • O2001 O'Doy Consultonts. tnc SEE SHEET No. 7 SHKT 6 or 14 SHKTS C.T. 98-10\ CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK (52001 O'Doy Cwsultonls, Inc. CCOV raM *O*1M COW* WKM ewmWr Of ft QJWOi I9>I3 »I|2, ^_./ '*P=r' 5 'Jfe;. i* SHEET 7 Or 14 SHEETS C.T. 98-10 CARLSBAD RACEWAYBUSINESS PARK SEE SHEET No. 9 SHEET s or 14 SHEETS C.T. 98-10 ti-'*-'*m CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK ©2001 O'Doy CwwUorits, Inc SEE SHEET No. 10 SHKr 9 Or 14 SHCCTS C.T. 98-10 CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK ©2001 O'Doy ConnHvls. Inc. BENCHMARK: mama* CMOOMP smrr tunvr *o>«*it#t lACMOt 4W*ae r*OP fDT KMD' Or AVOW'44A9T jfOW 0V CIWCTwtf CVa c«<*« «« «CM> "** Aorm ccwry tfj*t* ccw»*nr MM*- '«CV J0»' '0armm T»'/J *.si 0*O*y~TOXiErf!«.Tl * XSP #*/*>• ifH*Wff 'KM' M >Wff 0- HTFWfrt tt" DOO-B r m . a*rr yf M of"" r „ 'A . 101 !'•»__ •^j*^ !«•.. Lit «» ~o K Ti r-.r =u SEE SHEET No. //, SHFCT 10 Or 14 SHEETS C.T. 98-10 P.M. 16250 t S ' ; i-tl/ CARLSBAD RACEWAYBUSINESS PARK ©2001 O'Doy Consullonls. Inc. SHtET 11 OF 14 SHKTS C.T. 98-10 CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK FLAN - UELROSE DRIVE (CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT) BENCHMARK: crwcMV J'•Bfr ru*vrv 4WWQT. ftfflC /ITT «KA4ft?C*r «M0 O. CtMTTXa &U*P vji ©2001 O'Ooy Consullonts. Inc. C 0 N j u1 ' *^I tMf JT P*pnJV•*» Htr^-m vnt^t *. *« WTT *t.'H •«• •* . 'Jk «»•' ''• 'i ufi" w««L (At JT* -0 H IMXI* ^ 6 (3»*1 .1 ' -. ««r fM» J|r A WW»iJ.«r '( SKWW JM >> /Of* JiS* J***»' *i «Jw* *ev^' /J ^HW JM £ /El»*>fstz> j** 'i me - STREET 'A' CARLSBAD RACEWAY «""•-'••"» BUSINESS PARK BENCHMARK: £>200t 0'Do( Connllonls, Inc o i'f n. £37 SHKT 14 or 14 SHfrrs C.T. 98-10 SETBACK MAP no scnc LEGEND:SETBAS&'-FQTKSj i or art v on Mtf rt>w* MMM CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK BENCHMARK: O2001 O'Doy ConsuKonts, Inc. «W>* r HI _- O«T JB> IH0*^" »• ^ 'A v*n qyo •WOJK- vc*. t,ftt ._ nm«* N '1 RECEIVED G CfTY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING D-PT October 4,2001 Ann Hysong Senior Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Subject: Carlsbad Raceway MND Dear Ms. Hysong: Preserve Calavera is a grass roots group of users and residents of the Calavera area. We are concerned about this project because of its close association with the adjacent core habitat area that we refer to as the Calavera Preserve. Our objective is to assure that all of the projects in the surrounding area still result in a large, viable, diverse interconnected open space - one that serves our need to protect native plants and animals while still providing recreational and quality of life benefits to the residents of this area. This project proposes to destroy native habitat, impact a major regional watershed, and disrupt a regional wildlife corridor today for future potential business expansion that may not be realized for years. This is a high risk trade-off for the residents of this area who will bear the brunt of the increased traffic congestion and loss of open space. The residents of Carlsbad have made it clear in the recent survey that they want open space - not more industrial buildings. These public losses require adequate mitigation. The proposed MND has not accomplished the goals of completely and accurately describing the adverse impacts and then providing sufficient mitigation for these impacts. We are also concerned about mitigation management for this project. The approval process should not proceed without clearly defined plans for mitigation and a management process with standards and critieria that assure plan implementation and success. Correction of these deficiencies could allow this process to proceed without the need to prepare a more comprehensive Environmental Impact Report(EIR). However, this will require a comprehensive review and response to comments submitted on this MND. Failure to address the issues raised during this comment period is a clear violation of CEQA. Completion of the Melrose connector is important to relieve existing traffic problems and reduce the need for more roadway extensions into sensitive habitat- roads that will potentially be much more damaging that what is proposed with this project. We are anxious for the issues around this roadway and the associated projects to be resolved so that an improved Melrose connector can proceed, while Iof8 10/4/01 10:28 P 5020 Nighthawk Way - Ocean Hills, CA 92056 www.preservecalavera.org Keviseo CTrisoaa Kacewav comments other more damaging projects are put on hold. The document is also unclear on the details of mitigation. Since the proposed development is speculative the impacts are being mitigated by BMP's. We don't know what will be built, the existing biological resources are poorly documented, and the BMP's are not specified. This makes it difficult to evaluate the impacts of the project or the adequacy of the proposed mitigation. We assume that further project specific environmental review will be required when individual project development applications are submitted to the City of Carlsbad. The following are specific comments developed by members of our organization . Water 1. The project will significantly affect the water quality of Agua Hedionda Creek and Agua Hedionda Lagoon, an impaired waterway for bacteria and sedimentation. The MND needs to specifically address the potential for increased sedimentation from construction and grading activities that could further degrade the lagoon. 2. Further study is needed to specifically address the TMDL of bacteria that would be added to the lagoon from this project, from the combined impact of this project and Palomar Forum, and from the cumulative impacts of projects in this area. 3. Mitigation must specify the methods that will be used to prevent silt and bacteria from reaching the lagoon and" further impair this waterway. This is a particular concern with the proposed use of the creek as part of the system of detention basins. The Regional Water Quality Control Board no longer approves in creek detention basins. A new plan will be required- and should have been developed prior to the issuance of the MND. The use of a mitigation that is not supported by the permitting agency does not constitute adequate mitigation. Circulation Traffic congestion is of concern to all of us in north county- and it is an area where good advance planning can have a significant effect. There are several major problems with the circulation study for this project that will lead to serious traffic and safety problems in a residential neighborhood, increased congestion in this important business corridor and worsened air quality for all of us. Further work is needed to adequately address these impacts. 1. The existing conditions analysis as shown on Figure 3-1 failed to identify current traffic levels on Melrose south of Faraday- an area very important to the adjacent residential neighborhood. The intersection analysis also did not look at any of the intersections that are key for this Vista neighborhood. There is a legitimate concern about cut-through traffic on these local streets. Impacts on this neighborhhood need to be specifically addressed. 2.. The short term future traffic conditions analysis described on page 6-1 failed to update the traffic model for changes in the adjacent cities. This has resulted in serious errors in the analysis. For example, it fails to include the proposed Home Depot project at Melrose and Sycamore in Vista. This project alone is expected to generate 5-10k ADT which will increase Melrose to over 60 ADT. Other Vista projects do not seem to be accurately reflected in either the baseline conditions or future traffic 2 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 PM Revised carisoaa naccway comments conditions. The impacts 01 die additional traffic for Home Depot ana for projects not reflected in the old model need to be added to the traffic study. The need for additional mitigation must be assesed. possibly partially conditional upon the approval of the Home Depot and other key projects. 3. There is no indication that traffic mitigation planning has been coordinated with the neighboring cities- whose related short term traffic improvements are all assumed to be in place. The improvements shown on pages 7-19 and 7-20 include several in the City of Vista. Coordination between the cities on roadway projects has been problematic. The public needs some method of assuring that planned improvements will actually take place. Opening of the new roadways should be conditional upon all of these other referenced improvements being in place. 4. The extension of Melrose across city boundaries has been the focus of a lot of regional controversy. Numerous newspaper stories, thousands of postcards, and proposed boycotts of Carlsbad businesses all indicate a high level of regional concern about this roadway. While there has been a lot of pressure to put the roadway through there remains a lot of opposition to its extension- particularly from the adjacent residential neighborhoods. The MND did not identify the level of controversy about this roadway extension. This controversy should have resulted in more extensive analysis of alternatives- such as a reduced roadway configuration. 5. The short term future conditions should also have modeled the roadway network with no El Fuerte or Faraday extension, and just with no El Fuerte. It is not possible to assess the interrelated impacts of each of these projects unless adequate alternatives analysis is done. There are significant environmental impacts associated with the extension of the other two roadways so they should not be assumed to be a done deal. 6. The 2020 build-out analysis should also have modeled Faraday terminating at El Fuerte, and with no El Fuerte extension. 7. Technically the project traffic volumes do not require freeway intersection analysis. However the failure of this city, and the other north county cities, to maintain any on-going cumulative impacts assessment for the associated freeway interchanges just keeps making a bad situation worse. There needs to be a point at which it is no longer ok to keep adding traffic because it just barely is below the threshold levels that require mitigation- all of the impacts on local freeway interchanges require mitigation and it is poor planning to pretend they can be ignored. 8. Table 10-1 in this report does not match 10-1 in the Palomar Forum report- although both claim to be based on the same source data and to include the same improvements. 9. There are several discrepancies between existing traffic volumes, and proposed mitigations as shown in this project and the nearby city of Vista Home Depot project. These discrepancies occur along the prime arterial (S. Melrose Dr) at major intersections. The Home Depot project adds a signal at Oakridge Way and Melrose Dr, which is not addressed in this project. Coordination of analysis and mitigations along this roadway is essential- and clearly has not taken place at this preliminary planning stage. (See Attachment A) 10. This project traffic study fails to even mention public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian improvements- all of which could be designed to mitigate the impacts of increased use of this area and reduce traffic. Instead of contributing to more roads these project should be providing funds for transit capital 3 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 P improvements and on-going operating cods. SANDAG has prepared a long range transit improvement plan for the Palomar Airport Rd corridor. The findings from this should be integrated with all new projects in this corridor. Biological Resources .,•: We have very little left of our precious open space in north county- yet it remains a major attractant to residents and visitors, and is central to our quality of life. We southern californians love our outdoors- and we don't have a lot of it left. Addressing these concerns will result in a better project- one that preserves our quality of life, and assures adequate preservation of habitat for the native plants and animals. 1. The construction of Poinsettia Road through to connect with Melrose bisects the proposed wildlife corridor. The open space that remains will only function as stepping stones for bird migration, and not as viable wildlife corridors. Providing a low elevation roadway across a wildlife corridor leads to a lot of roadkill- not to a healthy animal population. This constitutes a significant adverse impact which was not adequately addressed. The project should be conditional upon Poinsettia being reconfigured as a cul-de-sac. Stating that full paved roadways are required as part of the fire management plan is not an acceptable argument. Thousands of acres of land will be preserved in north county- and paved access roads are not required every few feet. Air tankers and buckets are used for fire suppression in these areas- and have a track record of success. The fire management program needs to be revised to reflect current planning to protect sensitive habitat- minimizing the use of roads. 2. Additional field studies are required to adequately describe the existing biological resources and to assess project impacts. The biological studies were conducted over just a few weeks and failed to address normal seasonal variations. Trapping surveys need to be conducted for small mammals and bird surveys need to be conducted on a monthly basis to accurately describe avian utilization of the habitat. Specific surveys using established protocals are indicated for Arroyo southwestern toad, California red-legged frog, American peregrine falcon (there is a nesting pair just east of the site in Vista that forage on the site), and Least bell's vireo. Streams should also be sampled for any sensitive fish species. The survey for the CCG is of particular concern- a three day sample in March does not constitute a representative survey for this sensitive species- especially when there are documented sightings on essentially all of the adjacent properties.. We conducted a field observation on August 31,2001 and found numerous examples of sensitive species that had not been identified in the official biological survey reports. (See attached map and notes.) A pair of Ca Coastal gnatcatchers were observed on site and potentially a third was heard. (See map locations # 5 and #6.) Mitigation for the sensitive species within the proposed area for development has not been addressed in the MND. Further mitigation is required. At a minimum this should include mitigation for the small patch of native grassland. 3. Our wildlife tracking surveys, under the expert supervision of the San Diego Tracking Team, have identified the presence of a resident bobcat in the area of the Melrose connector. Loss of the bobcat 4 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 PM population in this area with. ^jacent residential development will rei>_t in a significant decline in the bird population. The biological studies failed to mention the presence of bobcat and coyote and their impact on threatened species. Access to a large preserve space is required for the predator mammals that are essential to control feral cats who prey on the threatened and endangered bird species. Mitigation is required to assure that a viable predator population remains. Furthermore field observation makes it clear that the existing upland dirt roads that parallel the raceway in the proposed preserved areas along the riprian corridor are a veritable wildlife freeway. Bobcat, coyote, racoon, bird, lizard, and three snake trails were observed- with high volumes of recent use. The eastern end of this corridor is cut-off by Business Park Rd. There is connectivity to the core area on the western end- but the corridor is extremely constrained at the area marked # 12 on the map. This pinch point could be mitigated by integrating plantings on the slopes for the Vista industrial sites along this finger canyon. The area identified as a wildlife corridor marked # 11 on the map is along the power line easement, shows signs of prior clearing, and goes across the natural canyon- not a normal movement path for wildlife. This is a corridor that looks like a corridor on a piece of paper- but does not function as a viable corridor in the real world. 4. The planned extension of Melrose is a major bi-section of the existing regional wildlife corridor that extends from the San Marcos hills along Agua Hedionda Creek and then disperses along the creek, into the Calavera preserve, and to other connecting open space. The proposed 12' arch under Melrose is insufficient mitigation for the impacts to this major regional wildlife corridor without the introduction of dirt floor and some plant cover. There also needs to be provision for drainage - which is clearly not adequate in the existing culvert undercrossing. Furthermore the culvert design neds to specifically address the need for human as well as animal movement through this area. Employees in the local industrial businesses use this open space for recreation, and it is linked by long established informal trails to the core area to the northwest. Human access needs to be planned for so it occurs where it will have minimal adverse impact on sensitive plants and the wildlife corridors. 5. There is no provision for protection of the existing wildlife corridor during construction. Specific mitigation is required to minimize the adverse impacts to the wildlife that will be caused by this construction. 6. Approximately 77.2% of the parcel will be developed. While this is consistent with Carlsbad's draft HMP, it is not consistent with the standards of the draft regional MHCP. Wildlife corridors require a minimum 1,000 feet width with a pinch point of no less than 500' for a maximum length of 400'. Furthermore sensitive waterways require a minimum buffer of 100' from each bank. Neither of these criteria have been met. The MND must provide for full compliance with the standards included in the MHCP. 7. Because this area is connected to a proposed large preserve core area, the MND needs to assess how the proposed development is integrated with preserve planning. This would include specifying site specific areas for mitigation, defining criteria for mitigation success, and corrective action, and funding for long term mitigation monitoring. None of this is addressed in the MND. 5 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 P Revised cansoaa Raceway vommenis 8. There are six distinct sensitive vegetative communities that will be impacted by this project. The proposed mitigation in most cases is replanted manufactured fill slopes. Such habitat offers little value for native wildlife, and is a poor substitute for what currently exists. Direct impacts from grading include 9.6 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub(DCSS) and 21.6 acres of Southern Mixed Chaparral, plus additional impacts to Freshwater Marsh, Southern Willow Scrub, and Mule Fat Scrub, non-native grassland, and a small patch of native grassland. The mitigation acreages fail to accurately account for the large amount of land within the proposed preserved area that is not currently supporting habitat- the extensive network of roads and trails- in some places 20' wide, and other areas degraded by the racecourse use. If these areas are to be included within the mitigation acreage then the mitigation plan needs to fully address the amount and location of this restoration or this acreage needs to be deducted. 9. The proposed mitigation does not take into account the reduced value of the remaining habitat. Reducing the area of habitat significantly reduces the value of the habitat. The proposed mitigation for DCSS at 2:1 correctly assumes this is occupied habitat, but not all areas were mapped and accounted for and the chapparral is functioning as CCG habitat which was not factored in.. 10. The mitigation plan needs to specify site specific areas for mitigation, define criteria for success, identify funding mechanisms, and provide for corrective measures if mitigations fail to meet success criteria. The map titled Wetland and Upland Mitigation Areas does not address all of the mitigation issues. For example, there are invasive plants (pampas grass) in the area marked 13 on the map. The mitigation plan needs to address the need to remove invasives and do some restoration work in the areas proposed for preservation. 11. The area proposed for grading is poorly planned and does not take advantage of already disturbed areas but instead proposes to grade sensitive undisturbed habitat. Alternatives should include more sensitive site planning that place a higher regard on protection of the little that remains of undisturbed sensitive habitat. This should include the areas marked 1,2,3, and 4 on the map. 12. Wetlands impacts are specifically protected under the MHCP. The MND fails to identify any effort to avoid wetlands impacts, and only when this is determined infeasible to propose mitigation for an adverse impact. Southern Willow Scrub has a poor success ratio for replanting. The mitigation ratio should therefor be increased to at least 3:1 with adequate monitoring to ensure success. 13. The MND needs to specify field monitoring that will ensure that grading is done consistent with permits with sanctions and penalties for non-compliance by contractors. Continuous on-site monitors may be required during grading to protect both natural and cultural resources. 14. Cumulative impacts for loss of sensitive habitat and the further fragmentation of critical habitats has been ignored and must be included in the MND. 15. The payment of fees to the city of Carlsbad for non-native grassland mitigation and for a potential wildlife corridor under Palomar Airport Rd requires some assurances that the proposed work will be done, in a timely manner, with adequate public input. We are very pleased that the need for a Palomar Airport Rd wildlife undercrossing has been acknowledged. This is an important issue for regional wildlife movement between core habitat- and this location is a priority area of concern. However, paying fees toward a wildlife crossing is not the same as 6 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 PM building a wildlife crossing. Carlsbad does not have a good track reco.d of using funds allocated for mitigation to actually complete the mitigation as planned. We are concerned that the same thing that happened with Mt Calavera could happen here- the city accepts funds, puts them in the bank, does no mitigation work for years, and then only does part of the work that was planned. There needs to be a control system in place to assure that funds are spent in a way that really benefits wildlife movement- and habitat replacement. No grading permits should be issued until a detailed plan is in place. Penalties and sanctions should be inclcuded in the plan so that if the city fails to complete the work as planned there will be funds provided for another agency to direct the work. 16. The overall mitigation plan needs to address timing and sequencing of mitigation and construction. Prior case law requires that mitigation be in place before the habitat being mitigated is destroyed. The mitigation plan needs to address the restoration and improvement of the preserved area, relocation or mitigation for sensitive species on the area to be developed, and then the construction on the developed portions of the land that will destroy sensitive habitat. 17. Carlsbad has used all of their authorized take of DCSS under the provisions of rule 4(d). The city is therefor not authorized to issue take permits, nor is any other agency allowed to authorize further take permits until approval of Carlsbad's HMP. Noise People and animals both need some level of peace and quiet to thrive. The proposed noise mitigations for this project need to address both. 1. Because of construction in nearby projects with impacted DCSS, there should be no impacts to DCSS during the Gnatcatcher breeding season. Blasting and extensive grading is proposed for the nearby Carlsbad Oaks North project. The disruption of normal movement and nest location is expected to be extreme from the combination of projects in this area. The Mitigated Negative Declaration fails to take into account the impacts of the combined projects that are all within the same linkages and stepping stone area of expected bird movement. Either a comprehensive/grading/noise impact schedule needs to be established for all of the projects in this area, or this project must restrict grading and construction activity during the breeding season. 2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration failed to adequately assess the impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood in Vista, or the users of the industrial/commercial facilities that surround this site. The greatly increased traffic volumes on Melrose will impact the entire length of the roadway from 1-78 south. Much more extensive analysis of impacts is required. 3. Noise testing needs to be done from the level of the residences which varies greatly along Melrose. Cultural Resources 1. We are concerned that this project, by making the known significant archeological site under the Vista portion of the Melrose roadway even more difficult to access, could lead to future loss of this site. We would like to see an independent review of the 1989 and 1999 RECON report to review alternatives to assure that this site has been best protected and documented. 2. There is no indication that there has been consultation with local representatives of the historical 7 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 P native american tribes. Tritk. representatives need to be consulted ai>w included in the mitigation management plan. 3. If during construction there is discovery of human remains in the project area (Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, an^.Section 5097.94 or the Public Resources Code of the State of California), construction would need to coordinate with the San Diego County and the Native American Heritage Commission to address the disposition of the human remains. Recreational l.This area is connected by informal trails through to core areas up La Mirada Canyon to the north and east, and to the Calavera preserve on the west. Employees of the other industrial parks in this area commonly use this space for hiking, biking, and picnicing before and after work and throughout the work day. These projects need to be designed to provide for separate outdoor areas for the industrial park users that help serve as buffers to the native habitat. There also needs to be planned access for such recreational use, while still protecting sensitive habitat and wildlife corridors. 2. A link of the regional trail network is planned through this area. Connecting trails will need to be provided to assure that "unplanned" ones dont develop on their own. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. We look forward to working with you to revise this project proposal so that we all end up with a project that is a benefit to this area- and not just a blight of more empty industrial pads, a degraded lagoon and less native open space. Sincerely, Diane Nygaard on behalf of Preserve Calavera Art: Map 8 of 8 10/4/01 10:25 PM I 1 Corethrogyne sp. 2 Cordylanthus sp. 3 >Adolphia californica - Ca. spinebush 4 >Quercus delmosa 5 Pair of CCG landed on Adenbstema fasciculatum 6 Heard CCG Additional native plants tha- w- 8 East end, gradec slcce ~a~-~- Drive: Malosma laurina" .laure'^ (lemonadeberry) ; Quercus duincsa 9 S-facing slope of NE corner: integrifolia, Malosma laurina,' s Artemisia californica (coastal s Lonicera sp. (honeysuckle); 10- At East end of raceway, N-fa diversifolia (Summer holly) - ra (have photo) LEGEND DCSS sws MFS FWM SMC NNG AC DIS -D Diegan coastal sage scrub Southern willow scrub Mule fat scrub Freshwater marsh Southern mixed chapparal Non-native grassland Agriculture Disturbed habitat/developed Indicates disturbed habitat Cd Ac Qa Sc Age Pe Ce Summer Holly '(Comarosi California adolphia (Adoi Coast Live Oak (Quercus Ashy-spike moss (Selagint Del Mar manzanita (Arcti Dot-seed Plantain (Planta Owl's Clover (Castilleja e Wetland and Upland CARLSBAD R oberved but not shown on old map:- rth, adjacent to Business Park ac); Rhus integrafolia Iphia californica, Rhus ia mellifera (black sage), ), Nassella lepida (bunchgrass), 11 "Wildlife Corridor" across canyon 12 Pinch point 13''Invasive plants- pampas grass g slope: Comarostaphylos shrub; several large specimens divers'ijolia) California) 'olia) •inerascens) hylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia) •ecta) (potential quino checkerspot butterfly host pla l) (potential quino checkerspot butterfly host plant) Permanent Impacts Temporary Impacts to be Revegetated Area to Have Soil Broken Up and Seeded Potential Wetland Restoration Areas Streambed Restoration Area I of oti/ - - itigation Areas WAY figure? UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO UCSD BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • LOS ANGELES • RIVERSIDE • SAN DIEGO • SAN FKANC1SCO f;^ ; ,.l W'-V3 SANTA BARBAKA • SANTA era: NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM TELEPHONE: (S58i 534-:o?-' 9500 OILMAN DRIVE FAX (858) 534-7108 or 8:2-06% LA JOLLA. CALIFORNIA 92093-0116 e-mail: ikav(^u.-<c.cdu October 5, 2001 Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Via Facsimile to: (760) 602-8559 Attn: Anne Hysong, Planning Department Re: Carlsbad Raceway Business Park and Palomar Forum Business Park joint project hearing scheduled for October, 2001 (CASE NO. GPA 98- 05/LFMP 87-18(B)/CT98-10/HDP98-09/PIP 01-01) Dear Commissioners: The University of California Natural Reserve System owns and manages the Dawson-Los Monos Canyon Reserve ("Reserve"), that lies along the Aqua Hedionda Creek, at the eastern boundary of Carlsbad. It lies to the northwest of the Carlsbad Raceway parcel, connected to it by the high quality habitat on the Carlsbad Oaks North property. The Reserve has been identified as core, high quality habitat in the North San Diego County Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MHCP), and in the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The Dawson Reserve supports a wide range of habitats, from mature oak, sycamore and willow woodland along the creek, to mixed chaparral and coastal sage scrub. To date, the reserve has lost major components of the ecosystem due to isolation from large blocks of habitat inland, and habitat fragmentation, notably large animals, including golden eagle, mule deer, and mountain lion. We are, however, fortunate to still have several species at the highest trophic levels, including coyote, bobcat, fox. and many species of raptors. This is almost certainly because of the large areas of semi-natural land that are still available to individuals of these species, through connections to parcels of land beyond the relatively tiny 200 acres of the Dawson Reserve. The City of Carlsbad has recognized the importance of such connections, and called them out in the core and linkage concept of the HMP. The two properties under consideration by the Commission for development approval contribute significantly to one of these connections: Linkage Area D connects the Reserve to extensive areas of natural open space through the Carlsbad Oaks North proposed industrial project, and UCC UO LJ 1 thus to major core open space to the south, northeast, and east. Within the City of Vista to the north of the Raceway parcel is designated open space that also functions as habitat through these connections. The current plans for the Carlsbad Raceway Business Park and Palomar Forum jeopardize the realization of a functional habitat preserve, as envisioned and planned by the residents of Carlsbad and the surrounding cities, by the resource agencies, and by City of Carlsbad staff. The remainder of this letter details the specifics of our concerns regarding this plan. 1. Need for a full Environmental Analysis The scope and impacts of the project certainly merit a full environmental analysis; a mitigated negative declaration is clearly inadequate. For instance, one of the exemptions sought by the applicant — to the grading limits of 10.000 cu yds of fill per acre acre is based on the assumption that the major arterial that they will be building for the public infrastructure. Melrose Drive, is the environmentally preferred alternative. This has not been determined, since an environmental analysis of alternatives has not been carried out. Furthermore, it is certain that these two projects combined and separately will have major impacts on the remaining open space in the area, with the resulting consequences, including habitat loss, stormwater runoff, air pollution, loss of dark skies, traffic congestion, degradation of' views, etc. However, except for traffic analysis, no cumulative impacts have been analyzed. We suggest that an equally wholistic approach be taken with other areas of potential significant impact, through the completion of a thorough Environmental Impact Report. Although these two projects were superficially (and inconsistently) combined for impact analysis, there is not enough effort to look at the surrounding properties and their projected development and/or preservation as open space. The watershed (drainage of the Aqua Hedionda) as a whole should be the minimum area used for cumulative analysis. In addition, the degree to which the projects comply with, and affect the preserve creation goals of. the HMP and MHCP should be presented. When this is done, to say that the project "conforms with.." these plans will not be sufficient; a case needs to be made to support this contention, with precise and specific information, and clear-cut examples. In support of the application for the project approval the latest evidence provided to the interested public appears to be nothing more than the Environmental Impact Assessment Form (El A) dated 3/28/96. If this is the case, it is certainly out of date. In any case, the following environmental factors will be subject to potentially significant impacts under the proposed projects; they should therefore have been checked (in addition to those that were) as ''Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated", or "Potentially Significant Impact", in the extended Environmental Impact Assessment form (pages 5-10), whether or not the impacts are mitigated: I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. d) Agricultural resources: agricultural land will be converted to industrial; Cbad Raceway comment 10/05/01 Page 2 of 7 —^ e) Disruption of the community: the introduction of more traffic and industrial area will exacerbate the division of south Carlsbad from north Carlsbad. III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. f) significant changes in topography will accompany these projects: g) land subsidence is likely unless alluvial material is removed as mitigation. IV. WATER. There WILL be: a) changes in absorption rates, and the amount of surface runoff; b) exposure of people and property to flooding, both upstream and downstream; d) changes in the amount of surface water in the Aqua Hedionda Creek and Lagoon: h) impacts to groundwater quality (BMPs have been proposed to be incorporated as mitigation.) IV. AIR QUALITY. The projects as designed will likely: b) expose sensitive animals, plants, and humans to pollutants; c) alter air movement, moisture, and temperature locally due to hardscaping; d) create objectionable odors due to construction and industrial processes. In addition, there is no clear evidence that any measures other than circular reasoning have been undertaken to reduce the significant impacts of added aerosols to the San Diego Air Basin: just because the project lists the measures recommended by the final Master EIR for the city's update of the General Plan does not mean that any such measures have been incorporated. They are certainly not explicitly called out. Furthermore, the MEIR is no longer adequate as it is older than five years, and substantial changes have occurred in that time. VI. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION. The following should have been listed as having significant impacts due to the proposed projects: b) & e) hazards to safety of pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers due to the enhanced speeds allowed on roads of the width prescribed for business parks in Carlsbad. VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. The proposal would result in impacts to: b) Locally designated species (i.e. those called out as covered in the MHCP, including Ouercus dumosa, Ouercus agrifolia, Comarostaphylos diversifolia, Adolphia californica, Ferocactus viridescens, California gnatcatcher, Black-tailed jackrabbit, coyote, bobcat, Cooper's hawk, Black-shouldered kite, and possibly burrowing owl); this does not mean that other sensitive and target species will not also be significantly affected, just that the author is not aware of their status on the sites (e.g. particular herptiles, nocturnal animals, wet-season species, etc.) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. Coastal sage scrub, southern mixed chaparral, mixed (native and non-native) grassland) will be destroyed; The following resources will potentially be significantly impacted, in spite of the mitigation measures proposed, and should therefore be indicated as "Potentially Significant Impact": d) Wetland habitat: riparian habitats including southern willow scrub, baccharis scrub, oak woodland; and C'bad Raceway comment 10/05/01 • Page 3 of 7 uct ut> ui uj:oup P-a e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors: the designated wildlife habitat linkage D is severeh compromised by the plan as proposed. VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. a) Adopted energy conservation plans, such as those incorporated into the county-wide REGION2020 and others call for a different approach to growth, including more integrated communities, and fewer roads. b) Similarly, non-renewable resources, including petroleum and open space would be used in wasteful and inefficient manners by the mode of wholesale land recontouring to place low buildings with large footprints, such as are envisioned on such sites. The developments as conceived in the proposed projects entail the continued development of Carlsbad using an outdated (30-year old) vision. There is no evidence that any of SANDAG's recommendations for "Smart Growth" are being incorporated. See, for example, their website describing goals and methods for more energy-efficient communities: hnp://wwav.sandag.org/whats_new/work_program/work_program_105.html#105.14 IX. HAZARDS. c) The development of the industrial parks will almost certainly lead to the importation of materials that pose a hazard to human and environmental health. These problems should be examined during this stage of the development process, since to wait until individual parcels are developed would be illegally piecemealing the project. The introduction of industrial processes, vehicle traffic, and thousands of individuals into an area of habitat that is highly flammable, and the resulting increased likelihood for fire is not discussed. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Fire protection: the reduced level of service that might be available if the lesser environmentally damaging projects are built are discussed in the document; the "potentially significant impact" column should have been checked. d) The need for indefinite maintenance of the infrastructures supporting these industrial parks, including roads, sewer, storm drains, street lighting, etc. could have a significant impact on the ability of the city's departments to provide adequate service to their residents in the long-term. This item should have been checked as having at least a "Potentially significant impact." XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Sewer systems are identified as being impacted, albeit at a level deemed below significant. It is not clear why water treatment and distribution facilities (c) and stormwater drainage (e) are not impacted to the same degree. The latter is discussed in the document, but it is not evident that the measures proposed will mitigate the negative effects of the proposed projects. XII. AESTHETICS. The project will most likely have potentially significant impacts on all three categories listed (impairing scenic views; affecting aesthetics; and creating light and glare) and should thus be recognized at that level. ""**' XV. RECREATION. Contrary- to the assessment of NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT given in the checklist, there WILL most likely be an increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks and other recreational facilities as a result of the projects: first, at least some portion of the employees of the business parks will reside in the city of Carlsbad or neighboring cities; second, there is a recognized need C'bad Raceway comment 10/05/01 Page 4 of 7 ucz. uo ui u J for recreational facilities in competitive business areas, as employees need to exercise or relax before, during, and after work. In addition, trails and paths that are offered as amenities by tilt- business park will be used to access the open space, thus requiring the development of a iarcer trail system. Finally, if bicycles are to be encouraged as a form of transportation in the area, the necessary facilities should likely be a recreational resource as well. a) The existing recreational opportunities afforded by natural open space (the chance to view wildlife; the enjoyment of open space; the ability to walk along a natural riparian corridor, etc.) will surely be negatively impacted by these projects. 2. Mitigation for habitat impacts a) Wetlands The area proposed for wetland mitigation is apparently planned for an area that is topologicalh unsuitable (i.e. it is upland, and not adjacent to existing wetland vegetation see Figure 3. Mitigation Areas, Carlsbad Raceway Project Mitigation Plan, Helix, 1998.) In addition, the 0.08 acres that are needed for mitigation for the Palomar Forum project are not included in existing plans. b) Coastal Sage Scrub Mitigation for Diegan coastal sage scrub includes 8.5 acres of seeding on manufactured (2:1) slopes. It is not clear that this will result in functional wildlife habitat, or that this is an adequate acreage for restoration, at 1:1, since 100% success is rare. Furthermore, there appears to be no plan for fire protection or setbacks from native vegetation, which should occur only in the development footprint and not in the designated mitigation area. c) Oaks There are no explicit plans for mitigating for the losses of oaks (Ouercus agrifolia and Quercus dumosa) on either of the projects, in spite of the fact that oak woodland is to be conserved under the HMP. d) Overlooked species and occurrences It is not clear whether the ten Comarostaphylos to be transplanted include those NOT shown on the vegetation resources map: many locations of this and other species were overlooked. Examples: 1. Comarostaphylos was observed on the north-facing slope at the east end of the dragstrip, but was not shown on the map. 2. Large clusters of Ouercus dumosa to the west of the Comarostaphylos were not recorded on the map. 3. Ouercus agrifolia individuals on the north-facing slope were apparently overlooked. 4. An area of Baccharis scrub in the center of the former circular racetrack was shown as a bare, disturbed area. 5. It therefore appears that the applicant(s) are not be proposing sufficient mitigation for impacts to sensitive species and habitats. Cbad Raceway comment 10/05/01 ' Page 5 of 7 uct ut) ui e) Inadequate mitigation In addition, the remaining mitigation proposed for impacts to Southern Mixed Chaparral. Non- native grassland, and the transaction of the wildlife corridor by Poinsertia appear inadequate, for the following reasons: 1. $100.000 is not sufficient to construct a major bridge such as would be required. 2. NO land in the vicinity of Carlsbad can be purchased for S3,949 per acre, so this is inadequate mitigation for impacts to non-native grassland; additionally, the targeted acquisitions need to be identified as part of the mitigation proposal. 3. Similarly, land cannot be purchased for $7,897 per acre, as proposed for mitigation for chaparral, so this is also inadequate mitigation. Any such purchase alternative needs to identify the acquisition parcels prior to project approval. In general, the mitigation and monitoring plans need to be much more explicit and need to be made available for review by the public as part of the environmental review process that culminates in City Council consideration, and should NOT be drawn up after the fact of public review. 3. Wildlife corridors The two parcels proposed for the Carlsbad Raceway and Palomar Forum projects make up the northern portion of linkage area D. as described in the HMP. According to that document (p. D- 6) "The-northern section of this linkage includes the disturbed area near the Carlsbad Raceway that should be evaluated for potential restoration. This section should be a moderately effective corridor for birds and mammals." However, as proposed the corridor is not only quite narrow (less than 400 feet wide in some areas), but it is completely transected by roads in two places. Most noticeable is the obstacle created by placing Melrose Drive on fill across the northwest corner of the Raceway site. The wildlife undercrossing proposed appears to be a culvert that is 180 feet long, 12 feet high, and 5-20 feet wide. A bridge would provide a far superior solution to the problem, and should be studied as a real alternative. (N.B.'It is almost impossible to visualize either of these with the plans provided, as they are so reduced as to be unreadable.) The Poinsettia (aka Street B) Avenue alignment also cuts across the wildlife corridor, rendering it another "sink" for non-flying wildlife, where inevitable deaths will eventually have a negative impact on the population at large. There are numerous studies and publications on the issue of habitat linkages and corridors, and the degrees to which various configurations (bridges, culverts, etc.) are successful. Please contact my office if you do not already have copies of these references for the Planning Commission before the hearing. 4. Circulation "The project, upon ultimate development, will produce a potentially significant impact of increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion unless mitigation is incorporated." (p. 15, EIA). The mitigation proposed is to complete all the planned roads in the area. It has not yet been decided C'bad Raceway comment 10/05/01 Page 6 of 7 p. O whether these projects (Faraday, El Fuerte, etc.) should be constructed. Therefore there appear? to be a very real need for a thorough alternatives analysis, in the form of an Environmental Impact Report. This section of the document also presents unsubstantiated conclusions that fly in the face of current evidence to the contrary, i.e. that building more roads eases congestion and encourages alternative forms of transportation: "The additional roadways (Melrose. Poinsettia, and Faraday) and capacity (Palomar Airport Road) will ... reduce conflict on roadways, and facilitate alternate modes of transportation." Finally, the justification for using the 1994 MEIR to allow the "Statement of Overriding Considerations" to stand is that "... no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified..." and that''...there is no new available information which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified." In light of the construction and occupation of major business and residential projects in Carlsbad and the neighboring cities, and the major increase in long-distance commuters in the past 5 years on San Diego's freeways, these statements should be re-examined. 5. Hydrology The proposal to use the wildlife corridor/riparian restoration site as a detention basin is ill- conceived. This very same concept has been rejected during preliminary reviews of the Carlsbad Oaks North development plans, and should not be used here. Detention basins intended to mitigate for the runoff created or exacerbated by a development project need to be located completely within the development footprint, not within areas designated as habitat preserve, and certainly not across the mouth of the designated regionally-significant wildlife passage. Thank you for your consideration of these points. These projects can be developed as assets or as detriments to the City of Carlsbad and the region, and it is your decisions that will make the difference. Sincerely, IsabeT Manager. Dawson-Los Monos Canyon Reserve cc: USFWS CDFG Preserve Calavera Chad Racewav comment 10/05/01 ' Page 7 of 7 UO U 1 l_> O . C. J p UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO UCSD BERKELEY • DAVIS • IKVINE • LOS ANGHLES • RIVERSIDH • SAN DIEGO • SANPRANCISCO p-",.. , t^'cl iANTA BARBARA • SANTACttl..: Natural Reserve System Phone: (858) 534-207" 9500 Oilman Dr. Fax: (8581 822-0696 La Jolla. CA 92093-0116 ikas @ucsd.ecu FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: Ann Hysons: Affiliation: City of Carlsbad. Planning Dept. Fax: (760) 602-8559 Phone: Date: 10.8.01 Number of pages (including this one): 8 From: Isdbelle KttV Affiliation: UCSD Natural Reserve System Fax: (858) 822-0696 Phone: (858)-534-2077 Comments: Ann, Since 30 days from the date of the release of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad Raceway and Palomar Forum projects seems to have been last Saturday, I am assuming that it is okay to send this comment letter in to you today. Please call to let me know you've received it, and if you have any questions, or if you cannot accept it. Regards, Isabelle -fa Depaitment of Toxic Substances Control Edwin F. Lowry, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue ,., t u u- L. Cypress, California 90630 - -.^24^.- - ~ -Winston H. Hickox 'r '.' -<>.N Gray Davis Agency Secretary ,c' A ^''\ Governor California Environmental £' Protection Agency t- September 20,2001 ' fuwmcDEnutnar ODr« Ms. Anne Hysong ^~--—^ ' City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CARLSBAD RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK - CT 98-10 - (sen # 2001071072) Dear Ms. Hysong: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Negative Declaration (ND) for the above-mentioned Project. Based on the review of the document, DTSC's comments are as follows: 1) The ND needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the site. 2) The ND needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated sites within the proposed Project area. For all identified sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment. 3) The ND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation and the government agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. 4) Since a significant hazard to the public may be associated with future uses of the site, potential uses and storage of hazardous materials should be addressed in the ND. A hazardous materials storage permit may be required from an appropriate regulatory agency that has jurisdiction to regulate hazardous substances handling, storage, treatment and/or disposal. Contact the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) to evaluate the permit requirements. 5) Since a significant hazardous impact is expected, the potential exists for the inadvertent release of hazardous materials from the future uses and storage of hazardous material. It should be addressed in detail in the ND. The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Califomian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at www.dtsc.ca.gov. ® Printed on Recycled Paper Ms. Anne Hysong September 20, 2001 Page 2 ... 6) The ND indicates that some areas within the proposed property may be affected by contamination from previous and current uses of former heavy equipment storage, ASTs, agriculture chemical residue, 55-gallon drums, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), and Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB). Any hazardous wastes/materials encountered during construction should be remediated in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. Prior to initiating any construction activities, an environmental assessment should be conducted to determine if a release of hazardous wastes/substances exists at the site. If so, further studies should be carried out to delineate the nature and extent of the contamination. Also, it is necessary to estimate the potential threat to public health and/or the environment posed by the site. It may be necessary to determine if an expedited response action is required to reduce existing or potential threats to public health or the environment. Because of a non- immediate threat, the final remedy should be implemented in compliance with state regulations and policies rather than excavation of soil prior to any assessments. 7) The project construction may require soil excavation and soil filling in certain areas. Appropriate sampling is required prior to disposal of the excavated soil. If the soil is contaminated, properly dispose of it rather than placing it in another location. Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) may be applicable to these soils. Also, if the project is planning to import soil to backfill the areas excavated, proper sampling should be conducted to make sure that the imported soil is free of contamination. 8) The ND indicates that the contaminated soil at property will be paved with asphalt parking lots and roadways. Indicate whether this option is approved by a regulatory agency as a remedial alternative. Otherwise, appropriate environmental studies should be conducted and the approval should be obtained from a regulatory agency to implement this alternative. If capping is the preferred remedial alternative, appropriate institutional controls such as a "deed restriction" should be placed on the property with the County Recorder's Office so that any future soil disturbance could be eliminated. Also, the integrity of the cap should be maintained. Therefore, an operation and maintenance plan should be implemented as a condition of approval of this ND. 9) The ND fails to address the remainder of the Hazards section checklist of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which includes the following questions: • Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? • Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of Ms. Anne Hysong September 20, 2001 Page 3 hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? • For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 10) If during construction of the project, soil and/or groundwater contamination is suspected, suspend construction in the area and implement appropriate Health and Safety procedures. If it is determined that contaminated soil and/or groundwater exist, the ND should identify how any required investigation and/or remediation will be conducted and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. DTSC provides guidance for Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). Also, DTSC is administering the $85 million Cleanup Loans and Environmental Assistance to Neighborhoods (CLEAN), which provides low-interest loans to investigate and clean up hazardous materials at properties where redevelopment is likely to have a beneficial impact to a community. The CLEAN program is comprised of two main components: low interest loans of up to $100,000 to conduct PEAs of underutilized properties, and loans of up to $2.5 million for the cleanup or removal of hazardous materials also at underutilized urban properties. These loans are available to developers, businesses, schools, and local governments. For additional information on the VCP or CLEAN program, please visit DTSC's web site at www.dtsc.ca.gov. If you would like to meet and discuss this matter further, please contact Ms. Rania A. Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479. Sincerely, Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E. Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office cc: see next page Ms. Anne Hysong September 20, 2001 Page 4 cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 07/12/2001 15:09 7604382443 HOFMAN PLANNING PAGE 02 Circulation Condition B Estimated Cost Financing Mechanism Guarantee Responsible Area Faraday Avenue - El FuerteQrion Street to Melrose Drive $10,700,000 Source: O'Day Consultants 5/8/01 Bridge and Thoroughfare District Formation of and participation in bridge and thoroughfare district Zones 18 north of Palomar Airport Road,J£i!n6 16 Financing Mechanism This facility consists of the construction of the Faraday Avenue extension between El FuerteOrkfla Street and Melrose Drive. It shall be included in a Bridge and Thoroughfare District. Financing Guarantee Formation of a Bridge and Thoroughfare District, a Community Facilities District, an assessment district or some other financing mechanism prior to the recordation of the applicable final map by the first developer in Zone 18 north of Palomar Airport Road. If the Bridge and Thoroughfare District is not formed, then an alternative financial mechanism equivalent to a Bridge and Thoroughfare District or aa Improvement Agreemgint^may be proposed. Any financial guarantee proposed must be approved by the Carlsbad Citv Council. If an Improvement Agreement is utilized as an alternative financing mechanism, then the improvement agreement shall be in accordance with Section 66462 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Re imburscmcnt If the developer(s) area required to construct these facilities then they may be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to Section 20.16.041 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. In addition, if their benefits extend outside the boundaries of the development, the developer constructing these facilities may enter into a private reimbursement agreement with the owners of benefited properties . 151 Zone J8 LFMP Amendment - DRAFT 07/12/2001 15:09 7604382443 HOFMAN PLANNING PAGE 03 Circulation Condition A.I.a.Melrose Drive - North City Limit to Palomar Airport Road Estimated Cost Financing Mechanism Guarantee Responsible Area $4,300,000 Source: O'Day Consultants 5/8/01 Bridge and Thoroughfare District Formation of and participation in Bridge and Thoroughfare District Zones 18 north of Palomar Airport Road financing Mechanism This facility consists of the construction of a six lane prime arterial between the north City limits and Palomar Airport Road. The existing intersection at Melrose Drive and Palomar Airport Road shall be modified to provide one southbound right turn lane, two southbound left turn lanes, three southbound through lanes, two eastbound left turn lanes, and one additional westbound right turn lane for a total of three. It shall be included in a Bridge and Thoroughfare District. Financing Guarantee Formation of a Bridge and Thoroughfare District, a Community Facilities District, an assessment district or some other financing mechanism prior to the recordation of the applicable final map by the first developer in Zone 18 north of Palomar Airport Road. If the Bridge and Thoroughfare District is not formed, then an alternative financial mechanism equivalent to a Bridge and Thoroughfare District may or an Improvement Agreement may be proposed. Any financial guarantee proposed must be approved by the Carlsbad City Council. If an Improvement Agreement is utilized as an alternative financing mechanism, then the improvement agreement shall be in accordance with Section 66462 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Reimbursement If the developer(s) area required to construct these facilities then they may be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to Section 20.16.041 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. In addition, if their benefits extend outside the boundaries of the development, the developer constructing these facilities may enter into a private reimbursement agreement with the owners of benefitted properties. 149 Zone 18 LFMP Amendment - DRAFT 07/12/2001 15:09 7604382443 HOFMAN PLANNING PAGE 04 Circulation Condition A.l.b.Palomar Airport Road - Melrose Drive to East City Limits Estimated Cost Financing Mechanism Guarantee Responsible Area $775,000 Source: O'Day Consultants 9/8/00 Developer Funding Participation in improvement agreement Zone 18 north of Palomar Airport Road Financin Mechanism A ills cons is LS or TnTCiSCvnon \?i i ajto*ii<i]i seo Valinde to provide one southbound left tmn lane, -one southbound through-right tnrn lane, one eastbound left turn lane, one westbound right-turn 1 ana. frontage improvement^ jiccessarv to prpvidq (ftirb. gutter, sidewalk and one additional westbound through lane for a total of three. It shall be privately designed and constructed by the first developer requiring the need for it^JUje firtandihfl fliMI .fat ..piteiviiitefliihy the developer. Financing Guarantee This facility shall be constructed or an improvement agreement shall be provided prior to the recordation of the applicable final map by the first developer in either Finance Area U or V requiring the need for the specific segment of the roadway. The improvement agreement shall be in accordance with Section 66462 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 20.16,060 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Said improvement agreement shall be secured with one of the following forms of security as described in Section 20. 16.070 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code: surety bonds, cash, irrevocable instrument of credit or letter of credit, acceptable to the Financial Management Director and the City Attorney. Reimbursement The developer(s) required to construct these facilities may be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to Section 20. 16,041 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. In addition, if their benefits extend outside the boundaries of the development, the developer constructing these facilities may enter into a private reimbursement agreement with the owners of benefitted properties. 150 Zone 18LFMP Amendment - DRAFT PROJECT NAME: Carlsbad Raceway Business Park APPROVAL DATE: October 17. 2001 FILE NUMBERS: GPA 98-05/LFMP 87-18(BVZC 01-07/CT 98-10/ HDP 98-09/PIPO1-01 CONDITIONAL NEG. DEC.: 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 fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). Mitigation Measure Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks 1. a. Prior to the recordation of a final map, the developer shall design, dedicate, and bond for the following roadways: • Melrose Drive shall be constructed as a Prime Arterial from existing terminus at the Carlsbad / Vista boundary south to the intersection of Palomar Airport Road. Additional Right turn lanes are required at Poinsettia Ave and at Palomar Airport Road. • Poinsettia Ave. ("B" Street) shall be constructed as an Industrial Collector from Business Park Drive to Melrose Drive. Additional widening may be required at the Poinsettia / Melrose intersection to accommodate turn lanes. • Intersection improvements to Faraday Ave at Melrose Drive including but not limited to: Additional right of way, additional roadway, lane configuration, traffic signal modification and inter-connect, street signs, and roadway striping. Plancheck Engineering Grading/ Improvement Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. 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 RD - Appendix P. Mitigation Measure b. Prior to recordation of final map, Faraday Ave. shall be financially guaranteed as a Secondary Arterial to be constructed, *as specified in the appropriate agency permissions, from the existing terminus in the City of Vista west of Melrose Drive to the existing terminus in the City of Carlsbad at Orion Way. 2. Potential impacts to water quality shall be mitigated through compliance with the provisions of the "Carlsbad Raceway/Palomar Forum Storm Water Pollution Prevention" summary NPDES study prepared for the project by O'Day Consultants dated June 6, 2001. 3. Biological mitigation to mitigate both upland and wetland habitats, as described in Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. mitigation proposals, shall consist of the following: • Preserve 9.6 acres of DCSS on site • Restore 8.5 acres of DCSS on manufactured slopes adjacent to wildlife corridor • Decompact and seed 9 acres of disturbed habitat onsite with DCSS seed mix "• Provide a 12' high arched wildlife movement under- crossing at Melrose • Create 1.84 acres of wetland habitat including: 1 .46 acres of wetland habitat and .38 acre of streambed habitat and removal of exotic weeds for a period of 5 years • Plant as container stock 100 California adolphia and 20 summer holly in upland restoration areas. • Conduct burrowing owl surveys prior to construction and relocate if necessary. Monitoring Type Plancheck Plancheck - Receipt of wildlife agency permits Monitoring Department Engineering Planning Shown on Plans Grading/ Improvement Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: * Amended per City Council direction December 4, 2001 Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular this column will be initialed and dated. mitigation measure. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. RD - Appendix P. Mitigation Measure • Obtain all necessary permits from U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Game prior to final map approval. • Submittal of wetland and coastal sage scrub restoration program for approval by City and wildlife agencies prior to construction activities. • Prior to final map approval: • Provide an engineering and feasibility study for a potential wildlife crossing under Palomar Airport Road; • Either construct an acceptable wildlife crossing on Street "B" or pay $100,000 to mitigate the effect of the Street "B" crossing of the wildlife corridor if an acceptable crossing is not constructed; • Pay $225,865.90 to mitigate impacts to non-native grassland and southern mixed chaparral • If HMP is approved prior to final map approval, the engineering and feasibility study is not required and the mitigation funds will be used for acquisition of acreage in the designated core area as described in the City's HMP. • If the HMP is not approved prior to final map approval, the City in consultation with the wildlife agencies will determine the most beneficial use of mitigation funds including but not limited to: acquisition of acreage in the County Core area; construction of a wildlife crossing under Palomar Airport Road; or other programs as determined by City to enhance habitat preservation in the City. Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. 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 RD - Appendix P. Mitigation Measure 4. The tentative map will be conditioned to require that the following mitigation measures will be incorporated into projects prior to approval of the Planned Industrial Permit required for each lot. • Prohibit placement of mechanical equipment on roofs unless project incorporates architectural treatment consisting of architectural elements or parapets that are of sufficient height and design to screen future mechanical roof equipment. • Prohibit installation of roof screens other than building parapets or architectural elements that are integrated into the architectural design of buildings; • Prohibit loading bays that are visible from Palomar Airport Road or Melrose Drive. • Require enhanced architectural treatment of all building elevations that are visible from Palomar Airport Road or Melrose Drive. Monitoring Type Plancheck Monitoring • Department Planning Shown on Plans Future PIP site plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. 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 RD - Appendix P. Mitigation Measure • Facilities which store, handle, or use any quantity of a toxic or highly toxic gas as defined in the most currently adopted fire code which are also regulated substances as defined in the California Health and Safety Code 25532(g) shall prepare an offsite consequence analysis (OCA). The analysis shall be performed in accordance with Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations _2750.2 through _2750.3. If the OCA shows the release could impact the residential community, the facility will not store, handle or use the material in those quantities. If a decrease in the quantity of material reduces the distance to toxic endpoint to where the community is not impacted, the facility shall be able to utilize the material in that quantity. • Note: Computer models may be utilized as a tool to determine the distance a hazardous material can travel if released to the atmosphere. Parameters such as temperature, wind speed, atmospheric stability, quantity released, material properties and type of release (e.g. a pressurized release of gases) are considered by these models. Models can be overlayed onto maps which will show the distance to toxic endpoint in the event of a release. Models can be performed under "worst case" meteorological and chemical release conditions. Under this situation, the maximum harm potential is determined for the specifics of the material in question. The use of these models is the most sophisticated method available to ensure community safety. 5. Mitigation to ensure no risk to human health is that prior to development of the property, the applicant shall solicit peer review of these findings by San Diego County Department of Environmental Health-Site Assessment and Mitigation Division (DEH-SAM) Technical Review Board and incorporate any recommendations into the project. Monitoring Type Plan Check Monitoring Department Planning Shown on Plans Grading Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. 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 RD - Appendix P. August 7, 2001 TO: DISTRIBUTION LIST FROM: DON RIDEOUT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER ZONE 18 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN The attached document is the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 18 which includes the Raceway and Forum properties. It is being provided to you to accompany the staff report and other items for the Raceway project which is scheduled for the August 15 Planning Commission meeting. The purpose of the document is to describe the public facilities impacts of the proposed development in the zone and the mitigation that is required to maintain compliance with the City's Growth Management Program. If you have any questions regarding the document, please call me at 602-4602. August 6, 2001 TO: ANNE HYSONG CLYDE WICKHAM PLANNING COUNTER STEVE JANTZ FROM: DON RIDEOUT ZONE 18 LFMP (RACEWAY) Attached is the final draft of the Zone 18 LFMP. It is scheduled for Planning Commission for August 15. Please let me know if you see anything that we missed in our earlier reviews. n Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Management Fiscc; Analysis July 13, 2001 TO: Clyde Wickham Steve Jantz Don Rideout FROM: Bill Hofman SUBJECT: Zone 18 LFMP - Proposed Sewer Mitigation Condition. Based on meetings we have had with the City over the last three years and based on the most recently adopted Zone 18 LFMP, we believe the attached condition is the most appropriate for application to the Raceway and Palomar Forum properties. It was never the intent of the city in the past to require that the Raceway and Forum properties be responsible for the construction of the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor line. Both these properties have paid significant funds to allow for them to sewer through the Buena Vista Interceptor using capacity from the city of Vista. It was always understood, however, that when the SAHI was built, that these properties would tie into the SAHI. In the , meantime, it has always been the intent of these properties to sewer through the City of Vista since they have already paid for the capacity. It would seem to us as unreasonable that after paying such a significant sum to Vista that these properties would also have to financially guarantee the SAHI line. Our proposed condition meets the needs of the city in ensuring that adequate sewer service will be available to the project without placing an unreasonable financial burden upon the applicant. If we cannot secure an agreement with Vista for temporary sewer into the Buena Vista line, then we will not be able to proceed without SAHI. We understand and accept this potentiality. At that time, the developer will have the choice of not proceeding or helping with the funding of the SAHI line. In all likelihood, it would not get to this point. Regardless, the city has adequate protection under its Growth Management Plan to ensure that development will not proceed without adequate sewer capacity. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. 5900 Pasteur Court • Suite 150 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • (-760) 438-14o5 o OPEN SPACE No special conditions. SCHOOLS A. Carrillo Elementary School has been constructed and dedicated to SMUSD. No further mitigation for development south of Palomar Airport Road is required. B. Mitigation fees for industrial uses will be paid to SMUSD for development north of Palomar Airport Road at the rate in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits. SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM A. ALL WATERSHEDS All development within Zone 18 will be required to pay the appropriate sewer connection fee prior to issuance of any building permit. B. WATERSHED A: f 1. All Zone E benefit area fees and sewer connection fees shall be paid to the City of Carlsbad. f 2. Prior to the recordation of a final map, grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, one of the following must occur: a. A financial guarantee for the connection to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor (SAHI) Sewer shall be in place. No building permits shall be issued until it can be shown to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the construction of the SAH sewer trunkline improvements downstream of the building site will be completed prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. An alternative improvement(s) or mechanism(s) that would ensure adequate capacity to serve the project may be implemented if such alternative is approved by both the Planning Director and City Engineer; or b. The developer shall secure a temporary flow transfer agreement between the Developer and the City of Vista which would provide for temporary sewer service in the Raceway Pump Station and Outfall by the City of Vista. Zone 18 LFMP Amendment 14 DRAFT - Jul\ 12, 2001 07/12/2001 15:09 7604382443 HOFMAN PLANNING i^Aut 01 Hofman Planning FAXTKANSMITTAL Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis DATE: July 12, 2001 PROJECT: ZonelSLFMP FAX: 602.8559 602-8562 NO. PAGES: 4 ATTENTION: Don Rideout Steve Jantz If all pages are not received, please call (760) 438-1465 Message: The following are the changes to the Circulation portion of the Finance Plan chapter for Zone 18. Please review and provide me with your comments. Thanks! FROM: Stan Weiler 5900 Pasteur Court • Ste 150 • Carlsbad • CA 92008 • 760-438-1465 • Fax 760-438-2443 Memorandum TO: Associate Planner Anne Hysong Principal Planner Don Rideout FROM: Associate Engineer Clyde Wickham Associate Engineer Steve Jantz DATE: July 9, 2001 CONDITIONS FOR RACEWAY & FORUM There are 2 major issues currently being considered regarding the guarantee and feasibility of Faraday Ave., and the temporary out of basin sewer service through Vista's Raceway Sewer Pump Station. The purpose of this memo is to confirm the current position on the issues and share the two (2) draft conditions of approval. Faraday Avenue The construction of Faraday Avenue must be financially guaranteed prior to approval of development and that the financial mechanism (ie; financing district) must be approved by the City Council. Prior to Council approval of the financing mechanism, the EIR must be certified and the resource agency permits must be secured. Therefore, the condition submitted to the Planning Department is as follows: 34. Prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of any development permit, a financial guarantee for the construction of Faraday Avenue extension between Orion Way and Melrose Drive shall be approved by the Carlsbad City Council. Sewer Connection The property owners have been included with the Raceway Pump Station Assesmeent District and have paid assessment to VSD. This portion of the Zone 18 development has been given sewer capacity rights through VSD's capacity in the Buena Interceptor. Carlsbad does not have capacity in the Buena Interceptor to accommodate an out-of-basin request at this time. Therefore, the condition is as follows 23. Prior to recordation of the final map or issuance of any development permit, the developer/owner shall either: A. Effect a flow transfer agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the City of Vista which would provide for temporary sewer service in the Buena Interceptor by the VSD; or B. Provide for the connection to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer when the interceptor is in place. 24. Prior to recordation of the final map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first for APN 221-022-05, the developer/owner shall obtain a letter from the VSD indicating that there is available capacity and facilities to accommodate temporary flows. If this lot cannot sewer into the VSD on a temporary basis, said lot shall be clearly labeled as "Non-Buildable" until such time as sewer service is available by the appropriate agency. If you have any questions, give us a call at extensions noted below. CLYDE WICKHAM - 2742 Associate Engineer - Land Development Division STEVE JANTZ - 2738 Associate Engineer - Planning and Programs Division July 3, 2001 TO: PRINCIPAL PLANNER DON RIDEOUT FROM: Associate Engineer Steven Jantz LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 18 The following comments are based on my recent review of the Zone 18 LFMP: 1. The page references for all the exhibits are incorrect. Please revise the page references and the "List of Exhibits" accordingly. 2. The estimated construction costs for the Public Works Center identified in the City Administrative Facilities section should be updated according to the recently adopted 2001/02 CIP. 3. Page 87 - The document provides traffic counts for existing conditions and Year 2000. Since we are in 2001, please explain the need to provide both analyses. Also, I don't understand the ability to reduce the level of service at PAR and Paseo Valindo by the installation of a painted right turn arrow. My recommendation is to remove this location from the chart since Paseo Valindo is not a circulation element roadway and the analysis is not required per growth management guidelines. 4. Page 88 — The analysis assumes construction of other roadways outside the boundaries of Zone 18. What are the resulting impacts to affected roadways if these segments are not constructed by other development projects? This analysis should be discussed in the zone plan. 5. The condition for the construction and financial guarantee of Faraday Avenue should mirror that of the condition included in the CT for the project. Please refer to the Project Engineer for the appropriate condition. 6. The Sewer Section should be revised to include the appropriate conditions established in the CT for the project. The first priority should be connection to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor with a temporary alternative to sewer through the Vista Sanitation District's (VSD) Pump Station. The developer is within the assessment district and has been paying the appropriate assessment for sewer service. The VSD should provide sewer service through their pump station and capacity rights within the Buena Interceptor. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 2738. c: Carrie Loya 07-02-01 Meeting SUBJECT: Zone 18 LFMP amendment - Carlsbad Raceway/Palomar Forum Attendees - Clyde Wickham, Steve Jantz, Bob Wojcik, Don Rideout, Anne Hysong Concerns - LFMP Sewer and Circulation sections : Circulation Issue: Carlsbad Raceway and Palomar Forum are being required to construct Melrose and guarantee construction of Faraday through participation in financing district. The question on the table is how to condition Zone 18 LFMP circulation section since without Faraday, Melrose connection will cause failures on Palomar Airport Road: per Steve Jantz, since we don't have council direction yet, we will condition zone plan to require Faraday to be secured through formation of financing district AND require that permits be issued by USFWS, CDFG, AND ACOE (wildlife agencies) prior to issuance of final map. When the Zone Plan amendment goes before Council, they will have the opportunity to support or approve an alternative to the above. Clyde will rewrite project circulation conditions to cross reference the conditions approved in the LFMP regarding this issue. Clyde will revise project conditions. Steve and Clyde will return comments to Don Rideout who will submit to applicant/Hofman Planning. May require a meeting with applicant. Sewer Issue: Project is part of assessment district in Vista guaranteeing them capacity in the Raceway Pump Station. Applicant apparently thinks they also have capacity in Vista's portion of capacity in Buena sewer line. Vista says they do not. Carlsbad's capacity in that line is exceeded in some locations -no more capacity available to anyone. Zone plan will be written so that the option to utilize Vista's capacity in Buena line if agreement for such can be acquired from Vista; otherwise, they are required to install the South Agua Hedionda Sewer or wait until it is available for use. This avoids any discussion in the Zone 18 LFMP regarding failure of sewer capacity in the City with respect to the Buena line. January 5,2001 TO: PRINCIPAL PLANNER, DON RIDEOUT FROM: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, CLYDE WICKHAM Consultant Project Engineer, Glen Van PesKi RE: RACEWAY & PALOMAR FORUM LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 18, AMENDMENT We have completed our first review of the amendment (dated September 21, 2000) of the Zone 18 LFMP. Our review primarily was for Land Use issues relating to Wastewater, Drainage, Circulation, and for conformance to the engineering aspects of proposed development applications. We have noted general comments below. Executive Summary The proposed amendment should address the previous conditions and mitigation to be incorporated into this document. (Ref. 3rd paragraphe page 1... This document will replace the previous... The issue of previous comments, mitigation and conditions could be addressed by reference to exhibit_ on page _. Please address any remaining residential projects remaining in zone 18. I believe only a few villages are remaining to be subdivided. If all residential construction is accounted for then a statement should clarify. The list of public facilities on page 3 should be a little more specific as to which improvements are funded. Example: Drainage improvements funded by Rancho Carrillo, see exhibit _ or page _. Drainage improvements funded by developer(s) see exhibits or page _. The same comment applies to Circulation. Please address the Melrose & Faraday participation as a Bridge and Thoroughfare district or by Assessment District as a financing alternative. Sewer is vague and unclear as far as a list of public facilities required to serve development in Zone 18. Add specifics, in summary of course. Water is also non-descript and raises ambiguity. Add specifics as mentioned above similar to sewer and drainage. Also discuss reclaimed water as it applies to Zone 18. Page 4 discusses a financing plan (agreement?) that addresses all of the public facilities in zone 18. This plan or agreement should address circulation, drainage or sewer as it applies to development north of Palomar Airport Road, please advise or submit a draft for reference. »«*w^owpre^^pcnwTnnTTCC™wnnowre^^onwCT^^o^^reTwratca^no a pi <^t4i i iuie lu ^XMM^H. «_, include a list of the existing or adopted conditions of LFMP Zone 18. This amendment can add or delete special conditions (if satisfied or met). I believe the drainage performance standard is not met downstream of zone 18, and detention is needed as an existing condition. The Rancho Carlsbad Channel and Basin Project has identified mitigation that affects this watershed. Circulation, page 15 should identify item C.) Faraday Ave. Improvements as a district participation. Page 16 identifies the need to sewer out of approved sewer basin. This direction is a policy issue and should be approved as part of the LFMP Amendment. The capacity issue must also be resolved and specific details of time (temporary), and the cost should be specifically addressed. This project could pay double fees as part of Carlsbad service area and as part of Vista sewer pump station and capacity charge. Comments on page 16 should be more specific. Exhibit 7 as well as other exhibits should include the extension of Poinsettia from Vista and Paseo Valindo / Street "A". Exhibit 17, Non-Residential Projections appear to be (including zone 16) contrary to the developer and city approved phasing scenarios of the 5 large projects. These scenarios were approved as part of the City's 3rd party review and the regional traffic modeling effort. Exhibit 20 indicates old relocated facilities (5) not used today. Revise to include Faraday Building. Page 46 should also be corrected. Page 56 would be a good place to discuss Wastewater Capacity and Financing issues. Will this project use Vista's Capacity from the proposed out of basin proposal or will there be a lease agreement between Vista and the developer for an interim agreement in trunk lines as well as capacity rights in the treatment Facility. Page 71 needs to identify the City Project "Rancho Carlsbad Channel and Basin Project. Page 75 D. 2b.), the last sentence is unclear. Reword or clarify. Do you mean any grading or development north of Melrose? Page 76 (IV Financing) should identify the financing responsibility of the proposed detention basin. The traffic section on page 77 is still under review. Overall there is concern that the Faraday connection and joint participation is not addressed. This project does have an impact to Faraday and must participate in the district to construct the Arterial. More comments will follow on traffic and the Faraday Arterial connection. The sewer section on page 98 contains statements that out of basin sewer service are permitted. The policy decision of sewer service is established in the city's master plan of sewerage and is silent on the proposed raceway scenario. More discussion and explanation should occur on this idea. A temporary condition could be feasible or and inter agency agreement and joint City participation in basin reconfiguration could be required. I don't believe the answer is as simple as described from a few meetings with Wilson Engineering, City of Vista, and Carlsbad. Exhibit 40 should include both the City of Vista (Raceway) and the Buena Sanitation force mains and should clearly describe the "alternative alignment" to the pump station and into one of the out of basin facilities. The facilities identified on page 101 and referred to on exhibit 40 are un-clear. I believe there are 2 force mains that run parallel to El Camino Real. The capacity rights to the Buena Sanitation District Trunk Line should be verified. I don't believe there is capacity available in this facility. The alternative discussion on page 107 is outdated. The alignment is shorter than to the intersection of Faraday / Melrose, it cuts across to intercept Faraday about 1000' west of the Melrose / Faraday intersection. Page 114 should address the portion of zone 18 that cannot sewer into the Vista Raceway Pump Station. Exhibit 46 is supposed to reflect Water District Boundaries. It appears to be a copy of sewer district facilities. The details of the exhibit are light and impossible to read. The City of Carlsbad (CMWD) position on water service should be identified on page 119. The comment that the zone can be served either way is misleading. The terms "possible" and "potential" use of reclaimed water should be removed (page 129). The wording is OK except for the 2 places where possible & potential should be removed. Appendix 2 - Circulation is still under 3rd party review by Susan O'Rourke. As previously stated, we are concerned that the LFMP is unclear and not committing zone 18 regarding the need, the impact and the responsibility to participate in Faraday Ave. as an arterial connection to El Camino Real. The assumption that the arterial is the sole responsibility of zone 16 is misleading and, we feel inaccurate. The discussion has historically been that a district made up of Raceway, Forum, and the Oaks would construct the improvements to Melrose and to Faraday at the same time. This is the first document that we have seen contrary to that understanding. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this LFMP. If you have any questions, please contact us. Clyde Wickham, P.L.S. Glen K. Van Peski, P.E. Associate Engineer Consultant Project Engineer January 4, 2001 TO: PRINCIPAL PLANNER DON RIDEOUT FROM: Associate Engineer Steven Jantz Review comments - Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 18 After complete review of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 18, the following comments are submitted for your review and consideration: • The Executive Summary provides a general overview of the residential potential for the area south of Palomar Airport Road, specifically the Carrillo Ranch Master Plan area. Since the Carrillo Ranch Master Plan has been adopted and a majority of the villages have final tract maps, I recommend that this section be revised to show actual adopted residential dwelling unit numbers and approved development densities rather that potential development. In other words, bring this Zone Plan up-to- date with approved dwelling unit numbers. • The Phasing Projection exhibits indicate timing of adjacent zone plan developments. These charts should be reviewed by the Planning Department and the timing of other developments confirmed. This would be necessary to ensure that future impacts are adequately analyzed in order to determine the timing of future infrastructure construction. The Circulation Section was not fully evaluated since the final traffic study was not included in this submittal and was not received during my review period. The next submittal must have the final traffic study to facilitate complete review. The Sewer Facility Analysis requires coordination with the Vista Sanitation District. I understand that the raceway basin was allowed to be included within an assessment district for a pump station, however, future, the City of Vista indicates that upgrades are necessary. I recommend that the applicant provide a letter from the City of Vista indicating what future improvements will be required and who is responsible. It should be noted that the entire area of Zone 18 is within the Carlsbad Municipal Water District boundaries. The section should be revised accordingly. The following is a list of itemized comments from various pages within the document: (,0V Page Comment 1 2" paragraph identifies an existing failure at PAR and ECR.- Has this been fixed with dual right turns? Development Assumptions - This zone plan amendment should specifically identify the developments in Carrillo Ranch and the Vpproved residential density and types. Justify the use of 7 APT per 1000 square \eet of building coverage Bottom page - place page numbers next tcA:esponding exhibits Indicates both Circulation and School Performance Standards are not met with existing development 13 With City Admin and Library Facilities, the technical analysis should determine the adequacy of the facilities and not be solely based on the assumption that the reduction in density will ensure compliance with the performance standards. 30 Various charts indicated different net developable acres for the PI designations (128.6 vs. 132.9). Make all charts consistent 40 Non-residential development in Zones 15, 16 and 17 should be reviewed with Planning. Is the proposed timing consistent with project applications for those individual areas? 43 Can the first phase of non-residential development in Zone 18 be completed in 2001? Actual demand may not occur until 2002. 45 Identify and locate the Faraday building and the future Public Works Facility. 46 Revise to include Faraday and Public Works Facilities (include appropriate square footages). 75 The mitigation section should include a condition that future development must comply with the water quality objectives of existing and future NPDES requirements. _ 77 Circulation section will be reviewed upon submittal of final traffic study. 81 Last paragraph indicates that there is a potential failure at ECR and PAR if Farday Avenue is not constructie»£AHowever, the property owners have agreed to participate in a BTD to ensure construction of Faraday. There is not a mitigation measure or construction timing of Faraday included in the Zone Plan. 84 2005 analysis assumes construction of certain roadways and, when completed, will not create a failure. In addition, Zone 18 assumes these to be built by other zones. However, review of the phasing charts indicates that these zones will not begin construction until after 2005. Therefore, these roadways would not be built and the circulation improvements would be necessary to ensure compliance with the performance standard. 86 Has the dual right turn proposal been reviewed and accepted by the City's Traffic Engineer? 101 The City of Vista has indicated that additional facilities may be necessary around the existing pump station to accommodate future flows from Zone 18 (ie, pump station and force main upgrades). Applicant should coordinate with Vista Sanitation District. A letter from the District indicating available capacity or facility upgrade requires should be provided. _ 103 Exhibit 41 combines the flows and capacities of two separate systems. The analysis should be divided into two categories - the Buena Interceptor system and the Vallecitos Interceptor system. According to the 1992 Sewer Master Plan, capacity in various reaches of the Buena Interceptor may have been reached. This would indicate that future flows from Zone 18 may not be allowed until additional capacity is obtained. 113 Even though this property is within the Vista Assessment District; future sewer flows will be applied to Carlsbad Sewer Capacity rights. As mentioned above, there may not be adequate capacity in various reaches of the Buena Interceptor sustem. 114 Zone 18 should include a mitigation measure for the construction of the SAFfl reaches that are necessary to connect to the future line required of Zone 16. This may required the construction of Reaches SAffl T1A and TIB. 116 According to CMWD, the entire northern portion of Zone 18 is within the service area of CMWD. The appropriate sections and exhibits should be revised accordingly. 116 All analysis should be consistent to the 1997 Water Master Plan. Please revise to current document. 119 The VIP facilities referred to in Exhibit 48 are not shown. Provide if necessary. 120 The 12 inch fail safe line is not shown on Exhibit 48. 123 Indicates 186.9 net acres of Industrial. Exhibit 6 shows 191.3 net acres. Please revise and ensure that all exhibits are consistent. e Wickham - Pa|gmarForumTraffi>*'tudy From: Lloyd Hubbs To: Bob Wojcik Date: 12/13/00 3:17PM Subject: Palomar Forum Traffic Study Bob,I just reviewed the Palomar Forum Traffic Study. 11 appears to be a good document. I do have one concern. In 2005 they assume Poinsettia is in and El Fuerte to Faraday and Farraday to Melrose. This is an acceptable assumption for Palomar Forum but the Zone 18 Traffic Study needs to address the Zone buildout with the existing network plus zone traffic. This should show failures for which Faraday would be the mitigation. This creates the nexus for the Bridge & Thoroughfare District condition. Please send me a copy of the Zone Traffic Study as soon as it is available. Thanks. CC: Clyde Wickham; Glen Van Peski; Skip Hammann