HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-01-06; Planning Commission; Resolution 3477T
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
~
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3477
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE
MAP TO CREATE SEPARATE LEGAL PARCELS FOR A
PROPERTY SEPARATED BY THE REALIGNMENT OF PASEO
DEL NORTE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PASEO DEL
NORTE NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND PEA
SOUP ANDERSEN'S.
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
CHANGE FROM L-C-Q TO C-T-Q AND A TENTATIVE TRACT
CASE NO: ZC 92-02/CT 92-07
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 6th day of January, 19!
lo Ii hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
11 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimc
12
and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered I.3
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by st;
14 11 factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
15
16
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commiss:
17 I/ as follows:
18
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Plann 19
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration accord 20 to Exhibit "ND", dated November 5, 1992, and "PII", dated October 28, 19
21
22
25
24
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project r 23
Findin@:
2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analq
26 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed proj
have a significant impact on the environment,
27
28
e e
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
4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significant
impacted by this project.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannb
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of January, 1993,l
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schrm Welshons, Savary & Hall.
NOES: Commissioner Erwin.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ctviey -*jq 4
A+
BAILEY NOBk, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3477 -2-
28 ll
-
0
City of -
0
Carkbad
NEGATIVE DECLARARON
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA"ION: West side of Paseo Del Norte, north of Pea Soup Andersen's in Local Facilities Management Zone 3,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A zone change from L-C-Q (Limited Control, Qualified
Development Overlay Zone) to C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist,
Qualified Development Overlay Zone) on 2.3 net acres and a
Tentative Tract Map to create separate legal parcels for a
Tentative Tract Map applications also include property on the east side of Paseo Del Norte, north of Palomar Airport Road
which is analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report
(EIR 91-3) for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
property separated by Paseo Del Norte, The Zone Change and
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
impacr 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
" 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any, questions, please call Don Neu in the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within
Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4446.
DATED: NOVEMBER 5,1992
CASE NO: ZC 92-02/C" 92-07
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH
PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 5,1992 -
DN:vd
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 - (619) 438-1 161
' NOTICE OF COMPLETION
'Mail to; State Clearinghouse, 1400 Ten reet, Rm. 121, Sacramento, CA 95814 - 9161
Project Title: ZC 92-02/CT 92-07 - Carlsbad Ranch ET
Lead Agency: City of Carlsbed - Planning DeDartment Contact Person: Don leu
Street Address: 2075 Las Palms Drive Phone: (619) 438-1161, ext. 4446
City: Carlsbad Zip: 22009 County: San Diego .
PROJECT LOUTIOY:
County: San Dieso City/Nearest Comnnity: Carlsbad
Cross Streets: Paseo Del Norte & Palmar Airmrt Road Total Acres: 2.3 net
Assessor's Parcel No. 211-021-26 Section: Tw. Range: Base: -
Within 2 Miles: State Hr/ #: 1-5 Uaterways: Pacific Ocean & Aqua Hedionda Laqoon
"_""i""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Airports: HcClellan-Palmr Rei \ways; AT&SF Schools: MIA
DOCUQWT TYPE
"""""""""""""""""""""."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
UQA: - NOP - Supplement/Subseqwnt NEPA: - NO1 OTHER: - Joint Docwnt - Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH No.) - EA Final Docwnt - X Neg Dec - Other - Draft EIS - Other - Draft EIR - FONSI
-
LOCM ACTION TYPE
- General Plan Update - Specific Plan - X Rezone Amexat i on
General Plan AmerhKnt - - Master Plan Prezonc Redevelopent - General Plan Element - Plamed Unit Developnent - Coastal Permit Use Permit - Comnunity Plan - Site Plan - X Land Division (Subdivision, - Other
Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.)
_"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
- - - -
DEVELOPWENT TYPE - Residential: Units Acres Water Facilities: Type Off ice: Sq. Ft. Acres Enployees Transportation: Type x Comnercial: Sq. Ft. N/A Acres 2.3 Errployees N/A - Mining: Mineral
Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres E- 1 oyees - Power : Type Uatts ,
___""__"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
- Ma - - - - - - Educational - ' Uaste Treatment: Type - Recreational - Hazardous Waste: Type - Other: """."""""""""""""""""""""~""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~
PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN -yT
- X Aesthetic/Viswl Flood PlairVFlooding - Schools/Universities - X Uater Quality - x Uater Supply/ X Agricultural Land Forest Land/Firc Hazard - Septic System
X Air Quality - - X Geologic/Seismic X Seuer Capacity Ground Uater - X Archaeological/Historical - Minerals X Soil Erosion/Crmpaction/Grading - Uetland/Riparia
X Coastal Zone - X Noise Sol id Uastc Uildlife
X Drainage/Absorption Population/Housing Balance x Toxic/Harardous - - Growth Inducing
- Fiscal - RecreationfParks - X Vegetation - Cmlative Effe
Other
- - - - - -
Econcmic/Jobs X Public Services/Facilities X lraffic/Circulation - - X Landuse - -
.............................................................
-
Present Lend Use/Zoni~Gmmral Plan Use Undeveloped, previously graded site/L-C-9 (Limited Control, Pualified Developnent Overlay 21
(Travel Services Cannercial).
.............................................................
Project Descriptian A zone Change from L-C-a to C-T-9 (Tourist-Conmercial, Qualified Developnent Overlay Zone:
net acres and a Tentative Tract Map to create separate bgal pereels for I praperty Sepal Paseo Del Yorte. The Zone Change and Tentative Tract Hap applications also include propert:
east si& of Pas- Del Norte, north of Palomar Airport Road which is analyzed in the Pros
(EL! 91-3) (SCH H2071027) for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification mrs for all ne; projects. If a SCH nunber already exists for a projec from a Notice of Preparation or previous draft docwnt) please fill it in. Revised Octo1
DN:vd
0 0 - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART lI
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZC 92-02/CT 924 DATE: October 28. 19:
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Zone Change and Tentative Tract MaD
2. APPLICANT: Carltas Company
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(619) 431-5600
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: September 28. 1992
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A zone change from L-C-0 to C-T-0 to make the zoning consiste!
with the TS General Plan desimation and a subdivision to create two seDarate legal parcels on proDe:
presentlv separated by Paseo Del Norte. The maioritv of the'Zone Change and Tentative Tract MI
applications pertain - to propertv located on the east side of Paseo Del Norte. north of Palomar Air~c
Road which is analvzed in EIR 91-3 for the Carlsbad Ranch SDecific Plan.
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 environmc
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This check
8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project i
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 significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be chec
to indicate this detennination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of
project may cause a simificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Nega
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deel
insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings '"YES-sig" and "YES-ir
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form u
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discus
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be detennined significant.
0 e
PHYSICAL ENvlRoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
(si@
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? -
YES
(insig)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NO
x
X -
X
X -
X -
X -
X
X
X
X
X -.
-
-2-
I a 0
BIOLOGICAL ENVTRON"
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
(si@
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 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? 7
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
(si&
17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services?
-
-
.. -
-3-
YES
(insig)
-
-
-
-
7
YES
(big)
-
-
NO
X -
X
X
X
X -
NO
X -
X -
0 0
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
big)
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 ivacuation plans?
-
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view? -
YES
(insig)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational oppo&ties? - -
-4-
NO
x -
X
X -
X
X -
X
X
X -
X
X
-
-
X -
x
X
X -
-. h4ANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
(sig) (insig)
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-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
considerable? (“Cumulatively con-
siderable” means that the incremental
effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection
effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.)
with the effects of past projects, the
X - - -
- - X -
X - - -
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause’substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - - X -
..
-5-
0 m
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This environmental analysis is confined to the 4.6 gross acre (2.3 net acre) parcel proposed on the west si
of Paseo Del Norte immediately north of Pea Soup Andersen's. The project includes a zone change from L-C
(Limited Control, Qualified Development Overlay Zone) to C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist, Qualified Developme
Overlay Zone) to make the zoning consistent with the TS (Travel Services Commercial) general plan land t
designation. Also proposed is a tentative tract map to make this proposed 2.3 net acre parcel a separ:
parcel. It was separated from property on the east side of Paseo Del Norte by the realignment of this ro:
The realignment did not however create two separate legal parcels. Both the zone change and tentative m
applications also include property on the Carlsbad Ranch located on the east side of Paseo Del Norte , no]
of Palomar Airport Road which are analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-3) for t
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore this environmental analysis is confined to this 2.3 net acre proper
Physical Environment
1, A report titled, "Phase I Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, California" was prep4
for the project by Geotechnics Incorporated. The report is dated September 25, 1992. This lot on the w
side of Paseo Del Norte is located on the Lindavista Formation. Generally, the Lindavista Format:
encountered in the subsurface exploration is dense to very dense and non-expansive. No faults w'
observed on this site which was previously graded and is relatively flat. Only minimal grading would
needed for development of the site therefore, no unstable earth conditions will be created.
2. The property is relatively flat and has been previously graded. Only a minor amount of finished grad
will be necessary to develop the property. No significant change to the topography of the site will occ
3. Public street and drainage improvements exist on the property's frontage. In addition an existing concr
channel is located on the property to channel drainage from two 48 inch pipes located under Paseo :
Norte. No significant erosion problems have occurred on the property.
4. As indicated under item 3 above drainage facilities exist which will carry drainage waters to city appro
outlets.
5. The proposed zoning designation will make the zoning for the site consistent with the General Plan L;
Use Designation. The existing General Plan Land Use Designations are utilized by the Air Qua
Management District to develop the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is based on the populati
housing, employment and land use forecasts in effect when the plan was prepared. Therefore, the exis1
land use was considered in the SIP and will not result in an increase from what was anticipated for
site based on the land use designation.
6. The proposed tentative map and zone change for the site will not substantially change air movemen
development of the site will result in building separations which provide for air movement.
7. The project will not change the course or flow of water as no streams are located in the area and drak
waters will be handled by existing facilities.
8. Surface waters will not be hipacted by the project and water will be supplied to the site by the Carls Municipal Water District.
-6-
e 0.
9. No natural resources exist on this previously graded site which is bordered by existing development
graded vacant property or public improvements.
10. As a result of the relatively small size of the property development of this site is not expected to US
substantial mounts of fuel or energy.
11. his previously graded site does not have a significant potential for containing archeological (
paleontological objects.
Bioloaical Environment
12, Vegetation on site consists primarily of weeds and grasses as the property has been previously grade(
13. Existkg species of vegetation on the property are not environmentally significant, therefore, tf
introduction of new species of plants will not cause an adverse impact.
14. Development of the site will not reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affe
farmland of state or local importance.
15. Because the project site has been previously graded , it does not presently provide habitat for wilm
16. The commercial uses allowed by the land use designations will not result in the introduction
domestic animals into the area.
Human Environment
17. The proposed zone change will make the zoning for the site consistent with the general plan land I
designation.
18. All necessary public utilities and services will be provided in conformance with the Local Facilit
Management Plan for Zone 3.
19. Sewer systems exist to accommodate development .of the site.
20. The site fronts on Paseo Del Norte a secondary arterial and is in close proximity to Interstate
Surrounding land uses are commercial or agricultural. Development of the site with a commercial
will generate additional vehicle traffic which will not significantly increase ambient noise levels.
21. When the site is developed necessary lighting will be required to be directed so as to not iml
adjacent properties.
22. The commercial tourist zone limits the types of commercial uses that can be permitted on the prope
AS a result of the types of land uses that can be permitted on the property there is no sigruficant
of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances from the site once it is developed.
23. The density of the human population of the area will not be substantially altered as development of
site will implement the existing general plan land use designation for the site.
-7-
a e
24, Commercial development of the site will not affect existing housing and will not generate a significa
demand for additional housing.
25. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 was based on the buildout of the existing general pl
designations. The proposed actions will implement the existing general plan designation.
.,
26. Any parking demanded created by development of the site d be required to be satisfied on s
pursuant to the City's Zoning Ordinance.
27. Street improvements presently exist dong the properties frontage on Paseo Del Norte.
28. The site is within the outer limits of the airport influence area for McClellan Palomar mort and
located outside of the 60 CNEL noise contour. No impact to airport operations is anticipated.
29. The number of access points to the site will be limited as the property fronts on a secondary arter
This will help to limit potential conflicts with bicyclists or pedestrians.
30. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans. The existing public roadway will not
significantly impacted or altered by the project.
31. Development of this site will not obstruct a scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public vic
The site is located between Paseo Del Norte and Interstate 5 in addition to being lower in elevat than property to the east.
32. Commercial development of the site will not create a large demand for recreational facilities.
..
-8-
a e
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
4
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 project, and
g) no project alternative.
a) The proposed actions for this relatively small site cannot be phased.
b) Site designs are not being considered as part of the actions being requested on this site.
c) No plan of development is being proposed as part of the actions requested on the site at this time.
dl The requirement for development to be consistent with the general plan which designates this prop and the adjacent properties to the north and south as Travel Services Commercial (TS) results in th
being no alternate uses for the site than those permitted by the TS designation and commercial-tou
zone.
e) The site is not proposed to be developed as part of the actions being requested. However, there is
environmental advantage from deferring development of this site.
f) The proposed actions will create separate legal parcels .from property separated by the realignmen:
Paseo Del Norte and will remove the limited control zoning to replace it with a zone consistent with
general plan designation for the site. Therefore, alternate sites do not need to be considered for tE
actions.
g) The no project alternative would not be environmentally superior as the project site contains no signific
environmental resources and is located adjacent to a secondary arterial.
-
-9-
e a
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 NEGATr DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because 1
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction w
' previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is requir
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there 1 not be a sigruficant 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 ENVlRONMENl
IMPACT REPORT is required.
4
'i 7. /(- .- u, ,-y- '/Z ,&.e,, 7 L:!
Date Signature
\ " 41+dJ4 Planning Director - v
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING - PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE]
-10-
r 0 @
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDlTION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT,
Date Signature
DN:vd
..
&-
-1 1-