Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-07-15; Planning Commission; Resolution 3403. I ll 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3403 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 58 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT TOWNHOUSE PROJECT LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HARWICH DRIVE AND EDGEWAY WAY. CASE NAME: WVERA HILLS VILLAGE "L-1" CASE NO: CT 92-5/PUD 92-6/SDP 92-5 8 a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and Q WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of July, 1992, holc lo j/ WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimoq 'I // and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff 12 13 14 factors relating to the Negative Declaration. 15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissio 16 as follows: l" A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 18 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered a1 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Plannin to Exhibit "ND", dated April 30, 1992, and "PII", dated April 23, 1992, attache hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 19 Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration accordin 2o I 21 11 Findinffs: 22 23 25 2. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed projec 24 have a significant impact on the environment. 3. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significani 26 impacted by this project. 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project m; 27 ... 28 Ii PC RES0 NO 3403 1 Ij 0 0 ll PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Phmhg 1 2 3 4 5 6 71 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of Jdy, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Noble 81 Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners: Savary & Welshons. 1 8 /I ABSTAIN: None. 9 10 11 12 ATTEST: TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 14 l5 PLANNING DIRECTOR 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO 3403 2 0 * 0 .NEGATIVE DECLARATlON PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Northwest corner Harwich Drive and Edgemore Way, City of Carlsbad, CA. APN: 167-554-01 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of 58 townhome residential dwelling units and grading on a level lot to accommodate building foundations and an internal private driveway. 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 Ordinmce of the City of Carlsbad. AS a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a sigmficant 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 La 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 Jeff Gibson in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4455. - DATED: APRIL 30,1992 MICHAEL J. HO~MI~R CASE NO: CT 92-5/SDP 92-5/PUD 92-6 Planning Director CASE NAME: UVERA HILLS VILLAGE "L-1" PUBLISH DATE: . APRIL 30,1992 JC:km 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-1 576 (61 9) 438-1 161 0 a ENvlRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) - CASE NO. CT 92-5/SDP 92-5/PUD 9; DATE: A~ril23. 1992 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Calavera Hills Village "L-1" 2. APPLICANT: Sundance Financial Inc. 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 3900 Hamev Street San Dieao CA 92110 (619) 299-5100 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: March 17. 1992 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of 58 townhome residential dwellinn units and mad - on a level lot to accommodate buildinn foundations and an internal private driveway. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environmg The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. y checklist 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the propc project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare Environmental 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 sipficant 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 of project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Nega Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be dee: insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and 'YES-ir respectively. A discussion of potential &pacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form u DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discu: mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. e PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT a WU THE PROPOSAL DtRECmY OR INDIRECmY c 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? YES YES NO (sig) (insig) X - - X - - - -, - - X X - - - 5. Resdt in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? X - - - 6. Result in substantial changes in- air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? ,- - X 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? X - - - X - - - 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? X X - - - - - X - - - -2- 0 BIOLOGICAL -0 NMENP WIU THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTZY: - 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 14. Reduce the mount 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: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? YES YES (sid (insis) - - - - - - - - - - YES YES (si@ (i@ - - - - -3- NO X X X X X NO X X - 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? 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? 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? m YES - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - 4- YES (sid - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO (insis) X X X X X X X - X X X - X - X X - X - 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIREClZY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (si@ (iig) 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 imporcant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. - - X 34. 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.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively 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.) considerable? (“Cumulatively con- 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X - - X - - X - - - -5- 0 * DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 0 ms project is locared on the nQawcs1 corner sf HWsh QT~R ad Edpw Way an4 entds the further subdivision of a 6.28 acre parcel into 58 two and three-story residential townhomes. The project's grading would consist of 6,730 cubic yards of cut, 8,000 cubic yards of fiH, and 1,270 cubic yards ofiport on a relatively level infill lot that has been previously rough graded. Public street improvements have been constructed along Harwich Drive and Edgeway Way has been graded but paving, curb, cutter, and sidewalks have not yet been constructed. The site is adjacent to a two-story residential duplex development to the north, and vacant land to the south and easi. Physical Envimnxnent The lot is relatively level and the proposed grading to accommodate the internal private driveways and the split level building foundations is minimal, therefore, there would be little appreciable change in the topography. All the proposed development would remain on the flat portions of the site and the existing 2:l slopes would not be regraded. Drainage and erosion control facilities would be incorporated into the project as a standard engineering condition of approval for the Tentative Map, and no unstable earth conditions or unique geologic features are located onsite or in the general vicinity. Development of the project would create impervious surfaces onsite which reduce absorption rates and increases surface runoff and runoff velocities, however, the appropriate drainage facilities would be provided. Development of the project would incrementally contribute to the depletion of fossil fuel and to other natural resources, increase local and regional air emissions; however, this is not regarded as a significant impact in view of the small size of the project. Residential development at the proposed density for this site has been anticipated and planned for in the City's General Plan, as well as in the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan, therefore the above mentioned impacts to physical resources have been addressed and analyzed in the City's long range plans. The site is adjacent to residential development to the north and west and has been previously rough graded, therefore, there is limited potential for cultural resources. The property was field checked and no cultural resources were identified. In addition, the City's Cultural Resource Inventory Map indicates that there are no cultural resources located onsite. Due to the disturbed nature of the lot, sigmficant cultural resources are not anticipated onsite. Biolo4cal Environment The site has been previously disturbed by grading and is adjacent to existing residential development, thedore, the site has limited biological resource value, and there is no threat of introducing new species into a natural area or limiting the movement of native animal species. The site was field checked for biological resources and the lot contains no viable native habitat. -6- e 0 Human Environment Traffic impacts, increase to population, increased public facility demands and the planned land use , of the area have all been accounted for and planned in the City's General Plan, the Calavera Hills Master Plan, and the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan. The project conforms with the Land Use Element ofthe General Plan, the Calavera Hills Master Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, and is dmlaped at the apprspriate residential density (Residential Medium High, 8-iS dufaw). The project would be required to pay public facility fees that would be used to adequately mitigate any impacts upon utilities and public facilities. The proposed project would incrementally increase noise levels in the area due to traffic and would contribute to light and glare in the project vicinity, however these impacts are considered insignlficant due to the small nature of the project. The development would be compatible with surrounding land uses and the addition of landscaping will help reduce glare. This project is required to meet all City standards, ordinances, and policies, therefore, no safety impacts or human health concerns are anticipated. -7- e e ANALYSIS OF WLE 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. The analysis of viable alternatives to the proposed project revolves around two specific concepts; the definition of the project and its significant impact and the definition of what is a viable alternative . The courts have recognized that only reasonable alternatives need be discussed (Village Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. V. Board of Supervisors, 134 Cal. App. 3d 1022 (1982). measures. Public Resources Code section 21002 forbids the approval of projects with si@cant adverse impacts when feasible alternatiyes or feasible mitigation measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A "significant effect" is defined as one which has a substantial adverse impact. If nothing is significant than there is no substantial adverse impact and no justification for requiring a discussion of alternatives. There is no alternative to no Substantial adverse impact. These project alternatives exist as relative measures of unavoidable adverse impacts and mitigation -a- rn e DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - X t find the psposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a si@cant 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 sigmflcant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. -n 4/ 27 / zz" Date sip%tW 4kF- hLbw . Planning Direc JG:h LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPucABLEl -9- .J. 0 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES e mIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MJTIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. - Date Signature -10-