The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-06-17; Planning Commission; Resolution 3409< 1 a 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3409 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE A 65 LOT, 61 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDMSION ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF BATIQUITOS DRIVE BETWEEN ESTRAL DRIVE AND AVIARA DRIVE. CASE NAME: AVIARA PLANNING AREA 28 CASE NO: CT 90-31/PUD 91-4 8 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of June, 1992, 9 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and 10 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering al: XI. I/ testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the informatior 12 submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. 13 14 15 18 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. I'i' as follows: 16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissior B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Plannini to Exhibit "ND", dated June 20, 1991, and "PII", dated June 14, 1991, attache( hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 19 Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration accordini 2o I 21 11 Findinm: 22 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project ma; 23 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to environmental analysis conductec 24 have a significant impact on the environment. 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposec 26 25 for Aviara Master Tentative Map (CT 89-37). project. 27 28 ' I/ 0 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 4. The project will preserve in open space the previously deed restricted and coast; habitat areas. 5. The proposed project site has already been reviewed under the Master Plan EII 83-2(A) and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Aviara Phase I1 Mate Tentative Map (CX 89-37) and, as designed, the project implements a recommended mitigation measures of said EIR 83-2(A) and the Mitigated Negativ Declaration for CX 89-37. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannin Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of June, 1992, b the following vote, to wit: AYES: Vice-Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehube: Schramm, Welshons & Hall. NOES: Commissioner Savary. ABSENT: Chairperson Erwin. ABSTAIN: None. ATTEST: (tr ~~)~~~ BAILEY NOBLE Vice-Chairperson CARLSBAD P NING COMMISSION & l a I I PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3409 -2- ~ 28 0 0 NEGATNE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The 44.1 acre project site is located south of Batiquitos Drive and west of Aviara Drive. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tentative Tract Map to create 61 minimum 10,000 square foot single family residential lots and one open space lot. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implemenrarion of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Precection Ordinance of the City of Carisbad. As a resuit of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a signrficant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project, Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Depmmenr. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Depanment, 2075 Las Paimas Drive, Carisbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department wirhin 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department at 438-1 161, extension 4445. DATED: JUNE 20, 1991 - CASE NO: CT 90-31 14 v PiaEyDirector APPLICANT: AVIARA PA 28 MIC J. HOUMILL~R PUBLISH DATE: JUNE 20, 1991 CDc:m, e w ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART tI (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CT 90-31 DATE: June 14,1991 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Aviara PA 28 2. APPLICANT: Aviara Land Associates Limited PannershiD 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2011 Palomar Aimort Road, Suire 206 Carlsbad. CA 92009 (619) 931-1 190 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: October 24. 1990 5, PROSECT DESCRIPTIO!$: Tentative Subdivision MaD and madina for eventual construcrion 61 sinnle familv, detached residential units. EWRONMENTAL tMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a projecr may have a sigruficant effect on the environmc The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the fallowing pages in the fonn of a checklist. This check 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 Environme Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the projec any of its aspects may cause a signtficant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be chec to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect o project may cause a sinnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Neg Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be def insirmificarit. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and 'YES-i respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form u DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular anention should be given to discu mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined sigmficant. e PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result h 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 substantid 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 sire, structure or object? -2- W YES YES NO (sig) (insig) - - X - X - - - - - x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X - X - X X X - X X - X - W w BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WLL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (si& (insig) 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? - - X 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? - X - 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? HuMANENvlRoNMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fie, emergency or other public services? X - - X - - X - - - YES YES NO (si@ (insig) X - - - X - - - e -3- w HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECRY OR INDIMCTLY; 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer system, solid waste or hazardous waste conrrol systems? 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a sigmficant 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 transporration 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. Obstmct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 4- w YES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - YES big) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO (ins@ X X X X X - x - X X X X X - x - X - X - e I MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGMFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR tNDIE6TLY: 33. Does the project have the potentid 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 Orare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. VEg (sig) YES (insig) NO X - - - 34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-tern, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A shon-tern impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of rime while long-term impacts will endure weil into the future.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X - - X - - - X - - - -5- w, w DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The proposed project involves the finish phg (21,200 cubic yards) Qf a previously .mass-ga&d sire consrluction of residential streets, drainage and other infrastructure, and tentative subdivision of Planninl Area 28 of Aviara Phase 11. The tentative map includes 61 single family residentid lots on minimum 1o,oo( sq. ft. lot areas. One open space lot is also proposed over the 44.1 acre site. The area proposed for finish grading has been previously graded per subdivision map CT 89-37. N, encroachment into previously designated open space areas are proposed by the project. It is located in an are anticipated for residential development per the City's General Plan, and the Local Coastal Program for th affected area. For this environmental analysis, staff conducted several field trips to the subject properry and reviewed rh Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 83-2(A)) and th In that: (1) the proposed project site has already been reviewed under the Master Pian EIR 83-2(A) and rh Mitigated Negative Declaration for Aviara Phase tI (CT 89-37), (2) as designed, the project implements a recommended mitigation measures of EIR 83-2(A) and the Phase 11 Mitigated Negative Declaration, and (3 the project will preserve in open space the previously deed restricted coastal habitat areas, no environment: impacts are anticipated. There were no public comments received in response to the Notice for a Negatik Declaration. Phvsicai Environment Mirigated Negative Declaration for Aviara Phase I1 Master Tentative Map which already covered this propem 1. The project is a previously graded site containing no unstable earth conditions as discussed in the Soi Report for CT 89-37. 2. Relatively minor topographic changes will result from the project. Only 21,200 cubic yards of balance earthwork are proposed. This equates to approximately 480 cu/yds of soil movement per gross acrc Such minor topographic changes are not considered to be sigdicant. 3. Drainage and erosion control facilities will be incorporated into the project to adequately reduc potential soil erosion impacts. A permanent desiltation basin has been constructed along the southel boundary of Planning Area 28. 4. Potential erosion impacts to Batiquitos Lagoon will be adequately mitigated as discussed in respon #3 above. 5. Construction emission and minor fugitive dust generation impacts associated with project grading a considered short term and insi&cant. Dust generation can be adequately controlled through waterir operations. Air quality impacts associated with future development of housing upon this area is n considered significant in itself. Long term full mitigation of regional air quality impacts will require th dependence upon the automobile be reduced regionally and statewide. 6. In that no structural development is proposed at this time, impacts to air movement are not anticipate Air quality impacts from dust generation can be adequately controlled through watering operatio: during project grading. -6- 0 a DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION cont'd 7. This project will not change the corne or flow of water as no strew are located in [he heaare arm and all drainage waters will be handled by proposed drainage facilities. 8. Development of this project (tentative map grading and road construction) will create imperviom surfaces which would reduce absorption rates and incrementally increase uoff velocities. Howeve to accommodate this increased runoff, drainage facilities will be incorporated into this project a1 future residential development upon the site, thereby mitigating this concern. 9. No inordinate depletion of any natural resources is anticipated by the subdivision, grading, a] construction of infrastructure proposed by this project. 10. No sigdicant impact as discussed in #9 above. 11. A thorough archaeological testing of the area was conducted in 1987 as part of EIR 83-2(A). ; archaeologist and a paleontological expen: wdl be present during grading to monitor operations in i effort to preserve any uncovered objects. 12. Surface disturbance and grading for the project .will not encroach into any native habitat area and w not affect the onsite or contiguous coastal deed restricted biological areas (wetlands, coastal sage), 13. No impacts to the above mentioned coastal deed resmcted areas are anticipated in that proje landscaping proposed adjacent to this habitat shall be required to be compatible and non-invasive. 14. As stipulated in the Master Plan, the conversion of agricultural lands shall be pemitted upon payne of agricultural conversion fees. In accordance, the project applicant has already paid to the Sra Coastal Conservancy agricultural -&tigation fees required for the development of the project site. 15. As discussed in #12 above, the previously deed resmcted coastal sage and wetlands habitat wdi maintained in open space. Accordingly, no sigdicant impacts to habitat or species are anticipated 16. No new animal species or migration barrier will occur as a result of the project, as further discuss( in #I2 above. Human Environment 17. Development of this project will be consistent with the General Plan, Master Plan 177 and the E2 Batiquitos Lagoon LCP. The land uses proposed will be intemally compatible as well as beb Compatible with adjaccnt uses. 18. As discussed in the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan, with the payment of all fees and f: construction of Alga Road and Batiquiros Drive), all public facilities and services will be available meet the demands of the fume development of 61 single family residences proposed on the project si1 No adverse impacts should result. implementation of all improvement conditions (Le. upgrading of the Batiquitos sewer pump static -7- t w D~SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION cont'd 19. Although this Tentative Map does not propose any actual residential development, any Subsequer dwelling unit construction onsite shall not be permitted until the Batiquitos Sewer Pump Station i upgraded. 20. Construction of the project (grading and road developmenc) may result in minor short [em insimcar construction noise impacts upon surrounding existing and proposed residences. Otherwise, he hcu residentid uses on the subject property will be acoustically compatible with surrounding existing ar future residential uses. At the time that future residences are constructed upon the subject propen traffic noise impacts from 1-5 shall be required to be mitigated as specified with the Acousrical stuc for Planning Area 28 (Mestre-Greve Associates 1/90). 21. Future lighting utilized onsite will be directed so as to not impact adjacent future views. 22. Because this is a residential project, it will not involve a sigdicant risk of an explosion or the relea: of hazardous substances. 23. The proposed density of the project results in 1.38 du/ac. This is in compliance with the Master Plar anticipated 1.44 du/ac. 24. The project will provide additional housing units to meet existing demand. 25. A total of 610 average daily vehicle trips will be generated by the project which will not significan impact the circulation system as discussed in EIR 83-2(A) and LFMP 19. 26. The demand for parking facilities created by this project will be satisfied onsite. Two garage spaces v be provided for each unit and adequate on street guest parking will be provided throughout the proje 27. The additional 610 ADT generated by the project will be accommodated by the existing and planr circulation network. This minor increase in traffic is not considered sigmficant. 28. The project site is outside of the Airport Influence Area for Palomar Airport. 29. The project, as designed, will nor cause conflicts at its intersections with Batiquitos Drive. 30. The project will not interfere with emeqency response plans. 31. Manufactured slopes created through the already approved Phase I1 mass pding (which includes site) wiil be fully landscaped consistent with approved plans. Otherwise, the finish grading (21,: cubic yards) of the subject property would not result in a visual impact. 32. The project will have no effect whatsoever on existing recreational opportunities. -a- c w maysrs OF WLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH As: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate Ate 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 projecr alternative. a) The project scale, 61 residential lots, is not of a size where phased development would ' beneficial. b) The project has been designed consistent with the Aviara Master Plan and all City ordinances. i open space areas are avoided. c) The project is designed at slightly less scale (density) than allowed by the Master Plan for the an d) The project is in conformance with the City's General Plan and the Master Plan, Alternate u: would require amendment of these documents. e) The proposed project involves subdivision and grading of the site only. Development of the s will occur only if facilities are guaranteed. f) The proposed project is the environmentally preferred project for the site. g) The "no project" alternative is not in conformance with the General Plan/Master Plan designat for the site, therefore, it is not environmentally preferable. . -9- A 4 m W DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Depamnent) On the basis of this initial evaluation: 7 X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a signrficant effect on the environment, and a NEGAT~ DECLARATION will be prepared. - [ find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because th environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wi~ previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is require( Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a signtficant effect on the environment, there M not be a signrficant 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. - t find the proposed project MAY have a sigmficant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTP IMPACT REPORT is required. (I; . - \,wj/ - r i, L 9 LH- c// p . Date Date cDc:rvo LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE2 -10- 4, W W MPL.ICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT 1 HAVE EVEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature -11-