HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-05-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 2855.* 0 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2855
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLS CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR EXTENSION OF POINSETTIA LANE BETWEEN BATIQUITOS DRIVE AND APPROVED INTERSECTION OF POINSETTIA LANE AND ALGA ROAD. APPLICANT: HILLMAN PROPERTIES CASE NO. : PCD/GPC 89-1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of May,
a duly noticed pub1 ic hearing as prescribed by law to consider sai
and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consic
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the i
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, tt
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Decl arat
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Comn
fol 1 ows :
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, th Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Conditional Declaration according to Exhibit "ND" and "PII", dated March 1C March 6, 1989, respectively, attached hereto and made a pal based on the following findings:
Findinqs:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidenct
the mitigating conditions of approval are complied with.
2. Portions of the site have been previously graded for agriculti
3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generat
project may have a significant impact on the environment pro'
proposed project.
4. There are no sensitive resources 1 ocated onsi te or located s( significantly impacted by this project. However, projec. associated with the elimination of 4.5 acres of agricultural potential visual and erosion impacts associated with project g' be mitigated through compliance with the following conditions
(1) This project is approved subject to the condition manufactured slopes are fully landscaped and maintainc
5.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
project developer (Hillman Properties). Prior to the i a grading permit? a full 1 andscape and irrigation pl a1 submitted for review and approval to the Planning Direct plant types used along manufactured slopes shall be sel E not to cause any adverse impacts to adjacent agricultur;
(2) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project (Hillman Properties) shall be required to pay a< mitigation fees for 4.5 acres of agricultural land. This and structure shall be determined by the City of consistent with the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort FJ (MP-177).
(3) This project is approved, subject to compliance with the i tems :
a) Grading shall comply with the City of Carlsbad grading ordinance; and
b) Grading activity shall be prohibited during the rainy season, from October 1st to April 1st of each year; and
c) All graded areas shall be landscaped prior to October 1st of each year with either temporary or permanent 1 andscaping materials to reduce erosion potential. Such landscaping shall be maintained and rep1 anted if not we1 1 -estab1 i shed by December 1st following the initial planting.
d) A1 1 permanent runoff-control and erosion-control devices shall be developed and installed prior to or concurrent with any onsite grading activities.
e) When earth changes are required and natural vegetation is removed, the area and duration of exposures shall be kept at a minimum.
f) Soil erosion control practices shall be used against "onsite" soil erosion. These include keeping soil covered with temporary or permanent vegetation or with mu1 ch materi a1 s? speci a1 grading procedures? diversion structures to divert surface runoff from exposed soi 1 s? and grade stabi 1 ization structures to control surface water.
g) "Sediment control" practices shall be employed as a perimeter protection to prevent offsite drainage. Methods such as diversion ditches, sediment traps, vegetative filters, and sediment basins shall be expl ored.
PC RES0 NO. 2855 -2-
., e 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tf
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd (
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Erwin, McFadden & M
NOES : None.
ABSENT: Commissioners: Holmes, Schramm 8. Schlehuber.
ABSTAIN : None.
ATTEST: CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 2855 -3-
.' e' -
2075 US PALMAS DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CA 92009-4859 I 0 Exhib it "ND
MiqJ of anrlebna
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: This project is located between the eastern of Poinsettia Lane (approximately one mile east of 1-5) and the ar intersection of Poinsettia Lane and Alga Road.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquisition of property for the extension of Poin Lane, (approximately 1,900 feet) between the existing eastern termir Poinsettia Lane (one mile east of 1-5) and the approved intersecti Poinsettia Lane with Alga Road within the Aviara Master Plan Area (fol Pacific Rim Master Plan). Upon acquisition of this property, by eitht developer or the City of Carlsbad in the event the developer cannot acquir project developer (Hillman Properties) will construct this portion of Poin: Lane.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above desc
project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Calif Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of tht of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Conditional Negative Declar (declaration that the project, subject to the conditions by the City, wil have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the su project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Depart
A copy of the Conditional Negative Declaration with supportive documents file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palrnas Drive, Carlsbad, Calif1 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in wr to the Planning Department within thirty (30) days of date of isquance.
DATED: March 10, 1989
CASE NO: PCD/GPC 89- 1
2 4, /g&
iMIcw EL 3. ioLzMILLER b Planning Director L:
APPLICANT: HILLMAN PROPERTIES
PUBLlSH DATE: March 10, 1989
APFErrCIIx F l MITIGATIOU MONITORING CHECKLIST
.
Exhibit 1
5/03/89
Fat.- tu: state clearingnouse, nth Street, Rm. 121, Sacramento, CA 9581 916/445-0613
14030 ". NOTICE OF COWPLETICM AMI EYVIROW)(EWTAL WaWENT FORM I see YOTI I =H#- I
1. Project Title Poinsettia Lane Extension/PropertY Acauisition
2. Lead Agency: City of Carlsbad 3. Contact Person: Chris DeCerbo
3a. Street Address: 2075 Las Palmas Drive 3b. City: Carlsbad
3c. County: San Dieqo 3d. Zip: 92009 3e. Phone: (619) t3a
. PROJECT LOCATION 4. Cmty: Sen bieso 4a. Ci ty/Comnmi ty: Car l sbad
Lb.(optional) Assessor's Parcel No. 4c. Section: Tup.
Sa. Cross streets: 1-5IAlqa Road 5b. Nearest Cmnity:
6. Uithin 2 miles of: a. State Huy No. 1-5 7. DOCUMENT TYPE
c. h
CEQA 01 - General Plan Update 01 - Residential: Units A(
For Rural,
b. Airports Palomar
8.. LOCAL ACTION TYPE 10. DEVELOPMENT TYPE -
01 - NOP 02 - Neu Element 02 I Office: Sq. Ft.
02 - Early Cons 03 X General Plan Consistency Acres Employee
03 X Neg Dec 04 - Master Plan 03 - Shopping/Comnercial: Sq. Ft.
04 - Draft EIR 05 - Annexation Acres Emp 1 oyees
05 - Supplement/ 06 - Specific Plan 04 - Industrial: Sq. Ft.
(if so, prior SCH # 07 - Redevelopnent Acres Employees Subsequent EIR
1 08 - Rezone 05 - Seuer: MGD
NEPA 09 - Land Division 06 - Uater: MGD
(Subdivision, Parcel Map.
06 - Notice of Intent Tract Map, etc.) 07 X Transportation: Type Major Arterial
07 - Envir. Assessment/ 10 - Use Permit 08 - Mineral Extraction: Mineral
FONS 1
08 - Draft EIS 11 - Cancel Ag Preserve 09 - Pouer Generation: Wattage
OTHER
09 - Information Only 10 - other:
10 - Final Docunent 9 TOTAL ACRES: 10.1 acres
11 - Other:
11. PROJECT lSSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT
01 X AesthetidVisual 08 - Geologic/Seismic 15 - Sewer Capaci ty 22 - Uater
02 X Agricultural Land 09 X Jobs/Housing Balance 16 X Soil Erosion 23 - Uetlar
03 X Air Quality 10 - Minerals 17 - Solid Uaste 24 X Uildl
- 12 X Other Property Acauisition Type:
04 X Archaeological/Historical/ 11 X Noise 18 X foxic/Hazardous 25 - Growti
Paleontological 12 X Public Services 19 X Traffic/Circulation 26 - lncg
05 x Coastal
06 - Fire Hazard
13 - Schools 20 X Vegetation 27 - Cunull
14 - Septic Systems 21 2 Uater Quality 28 - Other
07 - Floading/Drainage
12 FUNDING (approx.) Federal S State S Total S
13 PRESENT LAND USE AND 2ONING:RLM-Residential Lou Mediun (3.2 du/ac)
14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquisition of property for the extensionof Poinsettia Cane (approximately1,POO feetltn
eastern terminus of Poinsettia Lane (1 mile east of 1-5) and the approved intersection of Poinsettia Lane uit
the Aviara Master Plan Area (formerly Pacific Rim Master Plan). Upon acquisition of this property, by eithe
the City of Carlsbad in the event the developer cannot acquire, the project developer (HiIlman Properties) u
portion of Poinsettia Lane.
LC - Limited Control Zone
15. SIGNATURE OF LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE: aAW &U Date: 3 -7- - NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification nunbers for all neu projects. If a SCH Number already exists project (e.g. frm a (Notice of Preparation or previous draft docunent) please fill it in.
0’ e REVIEWING AGENCIES
Resources Agency
Air Resources Board
Conservation
Fish and Game
- Coastal Commission
Cal trans District
Cal trans - P1 anning
Cal trans - Aeronautics
Cal i fornia Highway Patrol
Boating and Waterways
Forestry
State Water Resources Control
Board - Headquarters
Regional Water Qual i ty Control
Board, Reg i on
- Division of Water Rights (SWRCB)
Division of Water Quality (SWRCB)
Department of Water Resources
Recl amat i on Board
Solid Waste Management Board
Col orado River Board
CTRPA (Cal TRPA)
TRPA (Tahoe RPA)
Bay Conservation & Dev’t Comm
Parks and Recreation
- Office of Historic Preservation
Native American Heritage Comm
State Lands Comm
Public Utilities Comm
Energy Comm
Food and Agri cul ture
Health Services
Statewide Health Planning (hospita
Housing and Community Dev’t
Corrections
General Services
Office of Local Assistance
Pub1 ic Works Board *
Office of Appropriate Tech. (OPR)
Local Government Unit (OPR)
Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
Other
FOR SCH USE ONLY
Date Received at SCH Catalog Number
Date Review Starts Proponent
Date to Agencies Consultant
Date to SCH Contact Phone
C1 earance Date Address
Notes:
0’ e Cxnmlt “pil”
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. PCDIGPC 89-1
DATE : March 6, 1989
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: Hillman ProDerties, Inc.
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2011 Palomar Aim
Suite 206
Carlsbad, CA 92001
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: November 20, 1988
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written
under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation:
- YES MAY BE
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering
of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground X surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of
modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
W
2. Air - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally
or regionally?,
3. Water - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
-2-
W
YES MAY BE - NC
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
... 0' 0
YES MAY BE
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species
of plants? X
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels? X
7. Lisht and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light or glare?
8. ' Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?
-3-
a' 0
YES MAYBE - N
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? -
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource? -
10. Risk of Upset - Does the proposal .involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset conditions? -
11. Population - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter -the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? -
12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? -
13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? X -
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? -
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems? X -
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X -
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? -
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians? -
-4-
e' 0 - YES
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection? -
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Enersy - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. , Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following
utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17* Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
-5-
MAYBE
0' 0
18.
19.
20.
. 21.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f )
9)
YES MAY BE N
Aesthetics - Will the proposal have
significant results in the obstruction
of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? -
Recreation - Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? -
Archeoloqical/Historical/Paleontoloqical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, ,structure, object or building? -
Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed proiect such as:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs
c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the si
e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
The project as proposed can be considered as the second phase of the construction of Poinsettia Lane between 1-5 and El Caminc
Real.
N/A. This road as proposed complies with all engineering desigr standards.
N/A. As required by the City of Carlsbad General Plan, this roac is to be constructed as a 102' wide, 4 lane, major arterial. This proposed alignment for Poinsettia Lane was selected in that it was deemed to be the alignment which could 'meet engineerinc design standards, while being the least impactful environmental
alternative. This alignment is also relatively fixed in that the western extent of the major road has already been constructed anc an eastern portion of the road, which will form the Alg2 Road/Poinsettia Lane intersection has already been approved.
This extension is required to.mitigate Citywide traffic impacts. It is also a condition of approval of an approved subdivisior within the City. This subdivision (Aviara Country Club and
Resort) is required to complete this circulation improvement prior to occupancy of any units.
See d) above.
NO project would be inconsistent with the General Plan.
-6-
e. 0
YES MAYBE
22. Mandatory findinqs of siqnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat af a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable'' means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
111, DISCUSSION OF' ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This project entails the acquisition of property for the extc
Poinsettia Lane (1,900 feet) between the existing eastern te: Poinsettia Lane (1 mile east of 1-5) and the approved inter-s Poinsettia Lane with Alga Road. Upon acquisition of this prop! project developer (Hillman Properties) will construct this PC Poinsettia Lane.
See the attached pages and surveys for environmental evaluation.
-7-
0 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
1. Earth - The subject property consists of a moderate slope risin to the east (elevations ranging from 220' above MSL to 300' abov MSL. At the eastern end of the praperty is a canyon with
bottom .elevation of 220' above MSL. The proposed road alignmen
extends 900' uphill from its connection point at the west end a
approximately a 13% slope. It continues over a level are (currently under agricultural use) for approximately 700 feet an across a small canyon located at the eastern edge of th
property.
Construction of this section of Poinsettia Lane will requir
245,000 cubic yards of grading. Topographic changes will includ depressing the road (40-45') over the central portion of the sit and filling in the eastern most canyon (40' ) . These potentia topographic impacts are not regarded as significant for thl following reason: Because this section of Poinsettia Lane i; relatively fixed in that the western extent of this road ir already constructed, and an eastern portion of the road, whicl
will form the Alga Road/Poinsettia Lane intersection, has alread:
been approved. Relative to these points being fixed and the roac
needing to comply with design standards, this alignment wil require the least amount of grading.
There are no unstable earth conditions or unique geologic substructures in the project area. Drainage and erosion contro.
facilities will be incorporated into the project to adequatell
reduce soil erosion impacts. The project has also beel
conditioned to richly landscape the project manufactured slopes
2. Air - The improvement of Poinsettia Lane to major arteria: standards will allow and project east-west local and regiona: traffic to move more efficiently thereby contributing to tht attainment of regional air quality standards. Constructiol emissions are considered short-term and insignificant.
3. Water - Development of this project would create imperviou:
surfaces onsite which would reduce absorption rates and increasc surface runoff and runoff velocities. However, to accommodatc
this runoff, and runoff from surrounding areas, the project will
incorporate drainage facilities (swales) along its length, anc other erosion control facilities (brow ditches) to mitigate thesc
concerns.
4. Plant Life - As shown in the attached biological surveys (Westec,
1988), the subject property includes the following habitats:
non-native grassland, disturbed scrub, agricultural (4.5 acres)
disturbed coastal sage scrub (1.5 acres) and eucalyptus grove. While essentially all of these habitat types will be impacted bl the proposed project, none of them are considered sensitive, nor
are they expected to support sensitive animal or plant species.
-8-
0' 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
The Mello I1 Local Coastal Program (LCP) , which covers the E
property, specifies that all slopes 25% and greater pas:
coastal sage scrub communities should be preserved. Whi subject property does include 1.5 acres meeting the 25% slc coastal sage habitat criteria, it is important to note th Mello I1 LCP does allow disturbance of these identified with habitat for purposes of constructing circulation e roads. In accordance, no slope/coastal sage habitat impac
anticipated.
The 4.5 acres of agricultural land which would be elimina the extension of Poinsettia Lane will be mitigated throuc payment of Agricultural Conservation Mitigation Fees, pe?
under the Mello I1 LCP. This project has been condl accordingly.
.. 5. Animal Life - The biological surveys (Westec, 1988) prepar.
this project specified that no sensitive, rare or endal
animal species exist upon the subject property.
6. Noise - Short-term noise may be associated with constrl
equipment during the construction of the road extension.
the land adjacent to the project site is currently vacar impacts are anticipated as a result of.this short-term act:
After construction, traffic on Poinsettia Lane may resu significant exterior noise impacts if residential developme proposed along the property adjacent to the road. Pot€ future noise impacts can be mitigated to a level significance through incorporation of noise attenuation mez
into project design as dictated by future acoustical analy
7. Liqht and Glare - Street lighting is not part of this project will be added as a subsequent phase. The street lighting wi needed for public safety. However, potential light and impacts can be mitigated through the use of low sodium s
lights.
8. Land Use - The improvement of Poinsettia Lane to "major arte:
standards will be consistent with the General Plan. This
improvement will permit this major road to operate a
acceptable level of service.
The extension of Poinsettia Lane to Alga Road could change
uses in the vicinity, in that the road extension may prc
development upon adjacent areas, that could utilize the imp]
access both to the east as well as the west. However, thj not considered a significant impact, in that this extensic Poinsettia Lane .is a Circulation Element Roadway and
construction and associated effects have been considered ir
General Plan.
-9-
.I 0'
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
9. Natural Resources - Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally contribute to 'the depletion of fossil fuels and
other natural resources required for project construction. This
short-term construction impact is not regarded as Significant.
Longer term, secondary impacts associated with the consumption of fossil fuels by automobiles are beyond the scope of mitigation by this project .
10. Risk of Upset - This project does not increase the risk of release
of hazardous materials resulting from accidents. Instead, by increasing overall traffic capacity of the City's roadways, such
risks will be reduced.
11. Population - Implementation of this project may promote (allow)
growth within the project area. However, since, under the Citywide Growth Management Program, all required public facilities
and services must be available, concurrent with need, no growth
related impacts are anticipated.
12. Housinq - See 11 above.
13. Transportation/Circulation - This project should have a positive
effect upon local and regional traffic circulation. In
combination with the improvement of Alga Road, between El Camino Real and this proposed extension of Poinsettia Lane, a much needed
alternative major east-west circulation link will be constructed within the southern portion of the City. These improvements will reduce traffic congestion, and other traffic hazards upon other
existing City east-west corridors (La Costa Avenue, Palomar Airport Road) .
The project will not generate new traffic, but instead provide a means to accommodate existing and future traffic at acceptable levels of service. No parking facilities are involved, and no parking will be permitted along this.road. As noted above,
implementation of a new east-west corridor between El Camino Real
and 1-5 will function to reduce traffic hazards.
14. Public Services - The only effect the project will have on public facilities or services is an anticipated increase in allocations
for road maintenance. This is not considered a significant, adverse impact on City facilities.
15. Enerw - Incremental (non-substantial) amounts of energy (fuel)
will be used during project construction. Regional growth, coupled with societal dependence upon the automobile for access will require increased supplies of energy. However, the
construction of Poinsettia Lane will not have any significant effect upon energy demands.
-10-
0' 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
16. Utilities - Only storm water drainage facilities will be al by this project, and overall this is considered to be benet
'17. Human Health - As discussed above, public safety will be inc
as a result of this project.
18. Aesthetics - Although, significant grading (245,000 cu. yds
be required for this project, all manufactured slopes w
fully landscaped. No significant views will be impact
obstructed by this project.
19. Recreation - N/A since the project will have no effect
recreational amenities.
20. Archaeoloqical/Historical/Paleontolosical - Cultural re:
investigations conducted upon the subject property (see att;
Westec, 1988) concluded that no significant Cultural resc exist upon the subject property.
t
-11-
.. e. 0
IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect 01
the enviro,nment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
March 6, 1989 U,k izu Date Signature - "
"
37,1&.fC"C 7 I Mf-7
Date &Ad!! u
Planning Director6
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
(1) This project is approved subject to the condition that al:
manufactured slopes are fully landscaped by the project develope] (Hillman Properties). Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a full landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted for revie1 and approval to the Planning Director.
(2) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project develope: (Hillman Properties) shall be required to pay agricultura: mitigation fees for 4.5 acres of agricultural land. This fec total and structure shall be determined by the City of Carlsbad
consistent with the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort Maste; Plan (MP-177).
(3) This project is approved, subject to compliance with the followinc items:
a) Grading shall comply with the City of Carlsbad grading ordinance; and
b) Grading activity shall be prohibited during the rainy
season, from October 1st to April 1st of each year; and
c) All graded areas shall be landscaped prior to October 1st of each year with either temporary or permanent landscaping materials to reduce erosion potential. Such landscaping shall be maintained and replanted if not well-established
by December 1st following the initial planting.
-12-
'= . e, 0
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
d) All permanent runoff-control and erosion-control devic
shall be developed and installed prior to or concurre with any onsite grading activities.
e) When earth changes are required and natural vegetation removed, the area and duration of exposure shall be kE
at a minimum.
f) Soil erosion control practices shall be used again "onsitelf soil erosion. These include keeping soil cover
with temporary or permanent vegetation or with mu1 materials, specialgradingprocedures, diversion structur to divert surface runoff from exposed soils, and grai
stabilization structures to control surface water.
g) ffSediment controlff practices shall be employed as
perimeter protection to prevent offsite drainage. Methot such as diversion ditches, sediment traps, vegetatiT filters, and sediment basins shall be explored.
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING M
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
.~> 0- Signature
-13-