The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-05-06; Planning Commission; Resolution 3380li 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3380 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A SINGLE LOT SUBDMSION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 16 AIRSPACE TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUM UNITS. CASE NAME: LA COSTA FAIRWAY VILLAS CASE NO: CT 91-5/HDP 91-10/CP 91-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 6th day of May, 1992, ho a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimor I 1 lo /I and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by sta: 11 12 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered : factors relating to the Negative Declaration. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissic as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the PlanniI Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "NI dated April 9, 1992, and "PII", dated August 30, 1991, attached hereto and mal a part hereof, based on the following findings: FindillES: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project m have a significant impact on the environment. 23 25 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed proje 24 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analys 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significan 26 impacted by this project. 27 .... 28 .... 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannir Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of May, 1992, by tl following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Nobl Welshons, Savary & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. %L ATTEST: TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 ~ l4 : 15 11 PLANNING DIRECTOR 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO. 3380 -2- NEGATIVE DECLARATION p~wa ADDRESS/LX)(=ATION: South of Gibraltar Street at the intersection of Jerez Court. PROECI' DESCRIPTION: 16 unit Townhome Condominium project on 1.17 acres of land. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the.Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 21 days of date of issuance, If you have any questions, please call Wter Westman in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4448. DATED: APRIL 9,1992 CASE NO: CT 91-5/HDP 91-10/-CP 91 -3 Phnhg Director CASE NAME LA COSTA FAIRWAY VILLAS PUBLISH DATE. APRIL 9,1992 Cw:h .. .. 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 0 (61 9) 438-1 161 e .. 0 E9MRONMEWTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO' BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CT 91-5/HDP 91-10/CP 9 DATE: AUGUST 30,1991 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: LA COSTA FAIRWAY VILLAS 2. APPLICANT: HOSSEIN ZOMORRODI 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5983 CIRRUS STREET SAN DIEGO, CA 921 10 ~ ~~~ 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: JUNE 3.1991 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SINGLE LOT SUBDMSION FOR 16 AIRSPACE TOWNHC CONDOMINIUMS. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Ardcle 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduc~ Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environrr The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This chec 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmf Impact Report or Negative Declaration. . * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the proje any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO'' will be che to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect c project may cause a si@cant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Neg Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be dec insimificant. These fidings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and 'YES-j respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form t DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discu mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. ., e * PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES (si@ (insig) 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? - X 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 hel or energy? 11. Alter a sisnificant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - - - - -2- NO X - - X X -. x X X X X X X a BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT . . .WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES (sig) (insig) 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including plants)? trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic - - 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? - - - - 15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all .water dwelling organisms and insects? 16. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the , migration or movement of animals? - - - - HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES (*I (insig) 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? - - 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? 7 - -3- NO X X X - X X NO X - X - m 0 HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY 19. Result in the 'need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? YES YES big) (insig) - - 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)? - - - - X - - 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? 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? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4- ,. NO x X - - - X - .X - X X - - X - 'X X - - X X - X X m e, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFIWCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY 33. Does the project have the potential to- substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or. animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-tem, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) YES (sig). - - e 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - YES NO (insig) - - X - X - X - - - X -5- e 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The project proposes approximately 2845 cubic yards of cut, 2410 cubic yards of M, dth a export quantity of 435 cubic yards. Grading quantities based on a net pad area of 37,264 square feet, .85 acres, will be 3347 cubic yards per acre. Grading will eliminate a tri-split pad situation and create a bi-level developable pad. Because the site has been previously graded, the change in the topography will not be considered significant. 'Manufactured slopes as part of the site will be planted for beautification and erosion control. In addition to the manufactured slopes will be some retaining walls. The greatest percentage of the retaining walls will be as part of the structures and will therefore not be visible. The project is not adjacent to any significant bodies of water. The La Costa Golf Course north of the project is in a one hundred year flood plain. That flood plain will not be affected by the proposed development. Although CEQA does allow for a certain percentage of particulates to be released, the cumulative effect will contribute to the further degradation of the basins air quality. As a residential project there are can be required for the operation of the project nor can there be restrictions on the use of fireplaces, bar-b-ques, etc. It is not anticipated that the proposal will have an effect .on air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature. Because of the topography of the site, the location of the garage to the living portion of the units varies. Some of the buildings proposed are two stones over a garage and others have a "downslope" configuration with the garage at the upper stories. Theses design concepts work well with hillside conditions. No uses have been identified specific to the residential nature of the project which would have offensive odors, create moisture or change the general temperature. As with all construction, the rate at which water percolates to the water table will be altered. Because the area in question is relatively small, alteration does not mean adverse impacts .. No significant natural resources have been identified as being used for the development of the site. It is not anticipated that substantial amounts of fuel or energy will be necessary to operate the proposed residences. The use of water on-site can be regulated through the installation of low flow fixtures and drought tolerant landscaping with automatic irrigation. The project site has been previously disturbed by grading. There has been no evidence of archeological, paleontological or historical significance on the site. not many opportunities'to adequately address the issue of air quality. No special ride share programs .. -6- m . BIOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENT . Trees planted as part of an earlier improvement are located adjacent to the street on the site. The construction purposes it is anticipated that they can be replaced by new trees. It is suspected that the lack of overall growth on the site is a result of previous grading. Landscaping will be provided along with development of the project. The site has not been used as an agricultural site nor is it a viable location for crop production. There is not enough acreage for agriculture and its proximity to adjacent residences may have negative effects if there was farming. It is assumed that because there is an absence of vegetation on the site that there are no species of animals which are dependent on the site. No wildlife was observed during field inspections. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT The site is designated as a residential site on the General Plan and Zoning maps. The proposed use is consistent with those designations. There is no pending or anticipated future applications for a change to the designated Zoning or General Plan. biological value of the trees has been determined to be not sigmficant. If they are removed €or It is not anticipated that there will be a significant increase in demand for sewices provided from public utilities, schools, police or fire. Sewer needs can be accommodated by the existing system so there is no need to expand or create a new system. Noise and light will be generated from the project, however not in significant quantities. Lighting on the site will be designed to provide enough illmination for safety purposes on-site and will be directed away from adjacent residences. Noise will be produced from everyday occurrences typical to a residential development. Noise levels will not exceed existing levels of adjacent uses. The project will not be effected by outside sources of light and noise. By nature of a residential development, the population will change because there will be additional housing. Providing housing will have a beneficial effect on the housing demand. Traffic will be generated at an assumed rate of eight average daily trips (ADTs) per day per unit. This equates to 128 .NITS. Gibraltar is at full width and has been designed to accommodate local residential traffic. All parking will be provided on-site. With these circumstances there will not be a significant adverse effecl on the environment. The project will not impact existing transportation systems; alter waterborne, rail or air traffic; increase traffic hazards; or interfere with emergency response plans. The proposal will neither add nor remove existing recreational opportunities. -7- e 0. ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT If the development was phased the ultimate impacts of the project would be delayed until all phase! were complete, However, the ultimate impacts are not considered significant so there wodd nor bi an overriding environmental benefit by phasing. The project could be redesigned, the scale of development could be reduced or the uses could bc different. Any combination of the above alternatives may have an effect on the overall impacts Because of the relatively small size of the site any changes made would not have a significant beneficia environmental impact. Development at a future date will postpone impacts until that *e. Services are available now an( there are no significant biological impacts that have been identified. No alternate sites have been reviewed. The no project alternative would have no environmenta impacts to existing conditions but could have an economic impact. -8- DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATP DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because t environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction w previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is requirc Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there I 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 ENVIRONMEM IMPACT REPORT is .required. 8*&Ml W' \)b"k Date Signature ++" Planning Direcur LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1 -9- .. . ' v e'. v APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT r HAVE WEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WI"H THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature CW:lh -10-