The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1991-04-17; Planning Commission; Resolution 3216,' I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3216 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT, FLOODPLAIN SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND EL CAMINO REAL SCENIC CORRIDOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITIONAL PARKING LOT AT THE EXISTING LA COSTA HOTEL AND SPA RESORT. CASE NAME: LA COSTA HOTEL & SPA PARKING LOT CASE NO.: CUP 258(B), SUP 90-12, SUP 90-13 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of April, 199 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the informatic submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planni: Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissil as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planni Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Conditional Negatj Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated March 7, 1991, and "PII", dat February 26, 1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on t following findings: FindjIlW: 1. The initial study shows that the proposed project could have a significant imp; on the environment however, there will not be a significant impact in this ci because the mitigation measure described in the initial study has been added to 1 project. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analy! I' 0 a 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed 1 project. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly impacted by this project provided that the mitigation measure is complied with as conditioned. Conditions: 1. The project is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions 3217,3218 and 3219, plus compliance with the following mitigating condition: Prior to approval of grading permit, the applicant shall revegetate the creek area where vegetation has been removed with the following native hydroseeded mix or comply with the Department of Fish and Game permit requirements for revegetation if a permit is required. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Native Hydroseed Mix Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort Elymus triticoides Beardless Wild Ryegrass Stipa lepida Foothill Stipa Stipa pulchra Purple Stipa Phalaris lemmonnii Lemon Canary Grass* Rumex heginus Golden Dock Scirpus californicus California Bulrush Scripus robutus Bull Tule Bromus carinatus California Brome *Make sure non-native species of Canary Grass are not used. These species are invasive II 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 .... .... .... .... .... PC RES0 NO. 3216 -2- .. 0 0 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannin Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of April, 1991, b 1 2 3 // the following vote, to wit: 4 5 6 AYES: Vice-Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehube Schramm, McFadden, Marcus & Hall. NOES: None. 7 /I ABSENT: Chairperson Holmes. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ABSTAIN: None. ATTEST: ?ir6., GLL" TOM ERWIN, Vice Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DIRECTOR 19 1 2o I 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 3216 -3- 28 ,. - t, Rm. 121, Sacramento, U 95814 - 916144 I scW# 1 See MOTE Belar: Project Title: La Costa Hotel and Sm Parkitw Lot - CUP 258(A)/SUP 90-12/SUP 90-13 Lead Agency: City of CarlSbad Contact Person: Anne Hysong Street Address: 2075 Las Patmas Drive Phone: (619) 438-1161 City: Carlsbad Zip: 92009 County: San Diego PROJECT LOCATION: County: San Dieso City/Nearest Cannunity: Carlsbad Cross Streets: El Camino Real/Ca Costa Avenue Total Acres: Assessor's Parcel No. 216-123-05/217210-04 Portion of 216-123-06 Section: 35 Tup. 112s Range: R4U Base: - Uithin 2 Miles: State Hwy #: 1-5 Uaterways: San Marcos Creek _"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Airports: Rai luays: Schools: ~~~~~~~~""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~ DOCUClEYT TYPE CEaA: - NOP Supplement/Subseqwnt YEPA: - NO I OTHER: - Joint Docunent Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH No.) - EA - F i na 1 Docunent Draft EIR FONSI - - Heg Dec - - Other - Draft EIS Other - _____"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~ - - LOCAL ACTION TYPE - General Plan Update - Specific Plan Rezone Awxat ion General Plan AmeKment General Plan Element Comwity Plan - Master Plan Planned Unit Developnent - X Cond. Use Permit Amend. - - - Prezone RedeveIopnent - - - Coastal Permit - Site Plan - Land Division (Subdivision, X Other SDecial - - - Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) Use Pervit DEVELWMEYT TYPE """__"__"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""- - - - Residential: Units Acres Office: Sq. Ft. Acres Enp 1 oyees Cmrcial: Sq. Ft. Acres Enployees Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres Enpl oyees - Educational - Recreational """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~ PROJECT ISsLlES DISCUSSED IN WQ#YT ." - Uater Facilities: Type HGD - - Transportation: Type - Mining: Mineral - Uaste Treatment: Type - Hazardous Uaste: Type - X Other: Addition of a wrkinq lot to an exis, - Pouer: TYpe Watts - hotel resort. """"""""""""""""""".""""" - Aesthetic/Visual - X Flood Plain/Flooding SchooLs/Universities Water Quality Agricultural Land Forest Land/Fire Hazard - Uater SUPPLY/ - Air Quality - Geologic/Seismic Sewer Capacity Ground Uater Archaeological/Historical - Minerals Coastal Zone - - Noise Solid Uaste Uildlife Economic/ Jobs Public Services/Facilities - - - Traffic/Circulation Landuse - F i scat - Recreation/Parks - X Vegetation - Cunulative Effec - - - - Septic System - - - Soi 1 Erosion/CaTpection/Grading 2 Uetland/Riparian - X Drainage/Absorption Population/Housing Balance - Toxic/Hazardous - - - Growth Inducing - - - Other _______"______"__"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-----"-""----"----"-"-"---"----------- - Present Land Use/Zoning/kmal Plan Use Hotel/Resort/Zone: C-2 (Cannercial)/General Plan: RC (Recreation Cmrcial) ________""___"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""--------"---"---"----"-----"""--------- Project Description ~TE: Clearinghouse will assign identification nunbers for all neu projects. If a SCH nunber already exists for a Project frcm a Notice of Preparation or previous draft docunent) please fill it in. Revised Octobe AH: km CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDEZESS/LOCATION: 2100 Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, CA 92009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Pennit to allow the construction of an additional parking lot at the existing La Costa Hotel and Spa Resort. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Conditional Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Conditional Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any the Planning Department at 438-1161, extension 4457. DATED: MARCH 7, 1991 CASE NO: CUP 258(A)/SUP 90-12/SUP 90-13 APPLICANT: LA COSTA HOTEL AND SPA PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 7,1991 AH:km 23375 Las Palmas Drive 0 Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161 w w ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 258(Al/SUP 90-12/SUP 90-13 DATE: FEBRUARY 26. 1991 SCKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: La Costa Hotel & Spa Parking - Lot 2. APPLICANT: La Costa Hotel & Spa 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: SeDternber 26, 1990 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTIOK: SDecial Use Permits and an Amendment to a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a SO0 space employee parking lot within the San Marcos Creek flood plain. VIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact :essment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact :essment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological 1 human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the ;is for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked to indicate this determination. An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insidcant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings YES-sig" and YES-insig" respectively. liscussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under CUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for )acts which would otherwise be determined significant. ,, w PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT mu THE PROPOSAL DrREcrLY OR rmrmmxy: 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 5, Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? 8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10, Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- e YES YES big) (insig) - - - - - NO X X X X x X X X X X X W - BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT [LL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY. . Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? ', Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? .. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? I. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? 1. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMAN ENVIRONMENT ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: . Alter the present or planned land use of an area? . Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? YES (W YES (si& - - -3 - YES (insig) X - YES (insig) - - NO X X X X NO X X *. '> w e HUMANENVIRONMENT wru THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? YES YES NO big) (insis) - - x X - - X - - X - - X - - X X - - - - X - - X X - - - - 29. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 30. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? 31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X - - - x - X - - X - - - -4- w w ,I MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE TILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 3. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 1. 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.) 5. 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 with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) considerable when viewed in connection 5. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES YES NO (si& (insig) X X X X -5- 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Physical Environment 1-3. The proposed site is a previously graded flat parcel requiring an approved grading permit which w: preclude any unstable earth conditions. No geologic hazards are located on site. 7. The parking lot will be constructed within the limits of the 100 year floodplain, however, no structurl are proposed and the proposed grading will actually reduce the area of 100 year flood inundation. TI hydraulic analysis performed by Rick Engineering Company indicates no substantial change to the flc of flood waters will result from this project. 8, Proposed drainage consists of a 280’ grassy swale from each end of the parking lot leading to discharge into San Marcos Creek. This system is designed to meet the requirements of the Natioc Pollutants Discharge Elimination System Permit and should reduce any adverse impact to water qualj in San Marcos Creek. Biolonical Environment The proposed parking lot is located on a previously graded and denuded site surrounded by the existing Costa development and its construction will create no significant adverse impact, however, the addition the parking lot requires an amendment to the La Costa Hotel & Spa conditional use permit. Because SOI of the resort’s facilities are located adjacent to San Marcos Creek within the floodplain, periodic removal vegetation (California Bulrush) under the bridge which interfere with drainage is necessary to protect t resort from flooding. The recent removal of vegetation along the sides and bottom of the creek east of t. bridge has resulted in the reduction of Tules (California Bulrush) and increased the erosion/sedimentati, potential. Required mitigation to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance includes a revegetation pl comprised of species native to the general area and characteristically occurring in a wetland habitat. -6- w - wysrs OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. a) The proposed parking lot will add required parking to an existing commercial resort, therefore, phasing development is not a viable alternative. b) The 500 space parking lot has been reviewed for compliance with Engineering standards and zoning requirements regulating parking stall size and aisle width. Landscaping has been required to enhance the parking lot which is accessed from a private drive. The proposed design meets all City standards for parking lot design. c) The scale of development is required to provide additional parking for the commercial resort. The parcel is adequate to accommodate the parking lot and landscaped setbacks with minimal grading. d) The site is located in the San Marcos Creek floodplain which requires the approval of a Special Use Permit prior to development. The proposed parking lot includes no structure and does not change the flow of flood waters; therefore, any alternate use requiring a structure is less desirable than the proposed use due to its potential impact to the floodplain. e/g) The proposed site is a part of a large commercial resort. The lot was graded and denuded and ha: remained undeveloped during various development projects at the resort. Current City parkins standards for hotels require substantially more parking than currently exists at the La Costa resort therefore, delaying the 500 space parking lot to a future date is not a viable alternative. f) The La Costa resort is almost entirely developed with the exception of two future parking lots. Thf proposed site is the only remaining area sufficient in size to accommodate a 500 space parking lo necessary to bring the hotel resort into conformance with current parking standards. Surroundin1 sites close enough to provide parking to resort users have already been developed; therefore alternate sites are not available to accommodate the proposed use. g) As previously stated, the no project or delayed project alternatives are rejected due to the need fo: additional parking to accommodate the existing hotel resort. -7- ., w m DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATn DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because tl previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is require Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wi X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there w not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENT, IMPACT REPORT is required. 34- 9 / Date 3-1- y/ Date AH:rVo:km LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) Prior to approval of grading permit, the applicant shall revegetate the creek area where vegetation has be removed with the following native hydroseed mix or comply with the Department of and Game pen requirements for revegetation if a permit is required. Native Hydroseed Mix Artemisia douglasiana Elymus triticoides Stipa lepida Stipa pulchra Bromus carinatus Phalaris lemmonnii Rumex fueginus Scirpus robustus Scirpus californicus Mugwort Beardless Wild Ryegrass Foothill Stipa Purple Stipa California Brome Lemon Canary Grass* Golden Dock California Bulrush Bull Tule I *Make sure non-native species of Canary Grass are not used. These species are invasive I 1 1 -8- w - .. 'PLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EWEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. 3- $- q/ /&& Date Sidture -9- .. I. 0 0 P cd > 1 a 7 z % h ., c $i ?k 22 to h- ;bcmg:c3 m fb roq 119 wz 3 1, " 11 3 3. II o, g $3 z.m 0 eg E... & g gx 8 2 z".; "a.s,% E g g&g Mi g "z-23E $ssp VI 3: 0 0 p. E? 2% ZggY g. ; g- 3 &Eo2 i?? 3 z %TOT gw s 3 El x'd - 2 El g! E 5.; g. 5Fq. - El 30, fd zw 35 gz m 2-@g !@ gg F 5' 2. i 5 5:g g&gg F *W 7 rD g9 z: a g 0 II z El R 0 P.g 2 w W VI- = 70 I-i P 2 * 3. W 2W 3. % c rp.? Dm- a W 2.. E r+ (D p. m c W s 1 3- 0 VI &2rtW % 2 G z$p 53WS m-4 mm !? EgmZ r 2zsg -n b 7Sg-W %El E cz z. 3:a m .e 3. 5 z. % mm 9 3 fg. p'7 a&$ p ;E*$$ & q$ E;] @ s c %3 z g 2 s. 0 tD K E- s 91 1 qb w * jg. 0 $1' 13 w 3 En 7 g r 3 Cos Ka 1% g- q: R g-4 rD w 8; ZZEl F.2 2 E :% c+, F- E Q o'< X 5- g. [ 7 c E G n B 0 0 fb v) 3 3. s N 0 + al ? Y 0 3'Od r-D g.r 203 msg KS $. $ 5.4 s'd 2. q EO 2 aw % r 7 - Et. 9, E& VJft us- 3- 'd-m , g. $ 2. E 5. g. w Fgg 5-5- : 3mE: gY2 fb?< -0= a ru Y, 6 %!g gg E; s 5W g fb E5. @* 5 3 E2- Enl 70 7 a0 5- v, aW oon n5k 3. ?z 3. 7 50 ZgP 09s -I= a 32% 6- n 21 i 7$ 5 2. C.V c, %3 5. 3. 1 5g 2 5 gTJ x L3. "-E8 zm- 5' 5 VI 2Eg VJO pg Y 2° E% E: 2- $ 252 0 2. E 5 2. $ E" - CR cc, - 3. fb ..m =r z3a %g g2 82 FZ uk Zr? .. Ls 58 k m 26: B rE FP v) & Q m 6 0 EE 7s 05: 5 .. :z 2z zg zz 0 ZN 8% gz .. g? s K 5 2 F $ ? > nm s- 3. ow Y EY 0, 3. 0, 2