HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-09-01; Planning Commission; Resolution 3536i :e "I ..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1'7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
~
I
e e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3536
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A ZONE CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SPECIAL
USE PERMIT, AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 344 DWELLING UNIT
APARTMENT PROJECT ON PROPERTYGENERALLY LOCATED
ADJACENT TO AND WEST OF EL CAMINO REAL, SOUTH OF
CAMINO VIDA ROBLE, NORTH OF ALGA ROAD, IN THE
SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY, IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 21.
CASE NAME: VILLAS AT EL CAMINO REAL
CASE NO: ZC 93-02/SDP 93-O6/SUP 93-02/HDP 93-08
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 1st day of September, 1993
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimonj
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff
and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered al
factors relating to the Conditional Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning CommissioI
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planninj
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Conditional Negativc Declaration according to Exhibit "CND", dated July 22,1993, and "PII", date(
July 1,1993, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the followin1
findings:
FitldiIlES:
1. The initial study shows that the proposed project could have a significant impact 01
the environment, however, there will be no significant impact in this case becausc
the mitigation measures described in the initial study have been added to thl
project.
I
~
I
.. 0 a
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
28
I
2. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed project.
3. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantlq
impacted by this project.
Conditions:
1. Approval of this project, is subject to all conditions contained in Planning
Commission Resolution No.’s 3537, 3538, 3539, and 3540.
2. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation required by the Zont
21 Local Facilities Management Plan approved by the City Council on September 17
1991, incorporated herein and on file in the Planning Department and any futurr amendments to the Plan made prior to the issuance of building permits.
3. The applicant shall comply with the City‘s requirements of the National Pollutan
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide bes
management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior tc
discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by thc
City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs first
4. Prior to occupancy of dwelling units located adjacent to the northern property line
a six foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along this property line tc
minimize potential noise impacts from the adjacent industrial area. The material
of the wall shall be compatible with the materials of the residential buildings.
5. Plansy specifications, and supporting documents for all street and traiKc signa
improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Prior tc
issuance of a grading permit or building permity whichever ocm first, the applican
shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by
the following improvements:
a. Half street improvements, in accordance with City standards for a prim1
arterial, on that portion of El Camino Real along the limits of the project.
b. A fully activated trafhc signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and &I
proposed roadway that will front the project along the south side of &I project site.
6. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation requirements of the preliminary So;
and Geological Investigation for the project prepared by Geogon kc., dated Jd
1992 and any subsequent revisions to the report, prior to issuance of a gradin
permit.
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits the owner of the record of the propert
the existing ECR transportation corridor and overflight, sight, and sound of aircral , shall prepare and record a notice that this property is subject to noise impacts fro1 1 1
PC RES0 NO. 3536 -2-
I1
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
28
* e
operating fi-om Palomar Airport. The notice shall be prepared in a manner meeting
the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney. The applicant shall
post aircraft noise notification signs in all rental offices associated with the new
development. The number and location of said signs shall be approved by the
Planning Director.
8. Prior to approval of a building permit the project shall comply with all requirement!
of the project's noise study and Planning Department Noise Policy No. 17, or an]
other applicable and adopted noise standards in effect prior to issuance of thc
building permit. This includes mitigation to attenuate the project's exterior areas:
interior building areas, and exterior second and third-story balconies/decks, 3
subject to excessive traffic noise from ECR. If sound attenuation walls are provided
along ECR, the waUs shall be designed with pilasters, offset with tree wells, anc
landscaped to provide screening of the walls from ECR in order to reduce visua
impacts along the scenic corridor.
9. Prior to approval of a grading permit a detailed soils testing and analysis repoll
shall be prepared by registered soils engineer and submitted to the Pl-
Department and County Health Departments for review and approval. The repod
shall idenw a range of possible mitigation measures to remediate any potentiall]
significant public health impacts if hazardous pesticides or other chemicals arc
detected at high concentrations in the soil.
10. A note shall be placed on the grading permit stipulating that the following me-
shall be required to reduce construction-related air pollutants:
a. The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul routes shall be requirei
during dry weather conditions.
b. All unpaved areas shall be revegetated according to approved landscape plan
as soon as possible after grading.
c. AU construction-related Mc shall be restricted to routes that are dust
controlled, and reduced speed limits shall be maintained for all haul an(
construction vehicles.
d. All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high winds.
e. AU heavyduty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be operata
according to manufacturers suggested operating instruction (with the fuel
injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NO, emissions, bu
which would not result in excessive visible smoke emissions) in order tc
control pollutant emissions.
f. Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly schedulec
maintenance/tune-ups, and be turned off when not being utilized to avoic
excessive idling emissions.
PC RES0 NO. 3536 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 1)
g. The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall adhere to
AFCD Rules 67.0 and 67.7, to effectively control other construction-related
&!sons of air pollutants.
h. The Ensineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all grading
operations of the project.
11. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction
site within this project, the applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the
City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The applicant shall comply with all
conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the
hauling operation. If the source of imported dirt is within the limits of the City 01
Carlsbad, a grading permit will be required for the import site.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September, 1993,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz,
Welshons, Erwin & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary.
ABSTAIN: None.
ATTEST:
x&-
/
BAILEY NOB@, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
v MICHAEL J. HOLZMI~LER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3536 -4-
CONDJTIONAL NEGATIVE DEcLARATlON
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: West of El Camino Real between Alga Road and
Camino Vida Roble. APN: 215-020-15 and 215-
020-01.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of the; (1) construction of 372 - two and
three-story apartment dwelling units and associated driveways
and parking areas; (2) a main recreation facility to include a
pool, exercise room, leasing office, small gathering room,
kitchen, and maintenance/workshop facility; (3) several tot
lots; (4) grading to include, 122,000 cubic yards of cut,
190,OO cubic yards of fill, and 68,000 cubic yards of import;
(5) roadway frontage and intersection improvements to El
Camino Real; (6) dedication and construction of a local
collector street leading to the project from El Camino Real,
and; (7) a zoning land use change from Limited Control (LC)
to Residential Density Multiple (RDM) which pennits multi-
family residential land use.
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, Califomia 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 questions, please call Jeff Gibson in
the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 44
DATED: JULY 22,1993
CASE NO: VILLAS AT EL.CAMIN0 REAL
CASE NAME: ZC 93-02/SDP 93-O6/S€.JP 93-02/HDP 93-08
PUBLISH DATE: JULY 22,1993 x:km
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 (
- .. 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPUTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZC 93-02/SDP 93-O6/SUP 93-02/HDP 93-
DATE: July 1. 1993
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Villas at El Camino Real
2. APPLICANT: Aviara Land Associates Limited
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2011 Palomar Airport Road
Carlsbad CA 92009
(619) 931-1190
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: June 30.1993
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proiect consists of the: (1) construction of 372 - two and thr(
story apartment dwellinn units and associated drivewavs and parkinn areas: (2) a m:
recreation facilitv to include a -1. exercise room. leasinn office. small natherin~ roo1
kitchen. and maintenance/workshop facilitv: (3) several tot lots: (41 pdinn to incluc
122.000 cubic vards of cut. 190.00 cubic yards of fill.. and 68,000 cubic vards of import: (
roadway frontage and intersection imDrovements to El Camino Real: (6) dedication a:
construction of a local collector street leading to the proiect from El Camino Real, and: (7:
zonin~ land use change from Limited Control (LC1 to Residential Density Multiple (RDM) whi
permits multi-familv residential land use.
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 environmer
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. Tl
checklist 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposl
project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deading whether to prepare i
Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO' will be check1
to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of t
project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negati.
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemr insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and 'YES-insi
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form und
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussi~
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
- a 0
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
WIU THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY.: YES YES NO
(si@ (insig)
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards? - - X -
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? - X - -
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? - - X -
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?
X -
- -
- -
X - -
- -
- -
- -
-
X -
X -
-
X
X -
X -
-2-
,.
4- e a
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES
big)
i2. 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 fannland 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? -
HuMANENvIRo-
WILL.THE PROPOSAL DIREClZY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
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
big)
-
-
-
-
-
YES
(si&
-
-
NO
X -
X -
X -
X
X -
NO
(insig)
X -
X
” e 0
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTZY 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?
2 1. 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? -
4
YES
(insig)
-
X -.
X -
X -
X -
-
X -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NO
X
-
-
-
-
X -
-
X -
X
X -
X -
X
X
X -
,- 0 t
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO '
(sig) (big)
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. - - - 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
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 hture projects.)
- - X -
X - - -
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which 'id3 cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - - - X
-5-
If e 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The. 23.82 acre site is located adjacent to El Camino Real on the west side of the road and approximately t
mile south of Palomar Airport Road, within Section 23 Township 12 South and Range 4 West. The pro:
is located on the coastal plain in the northern part of San Diego County. The property occupies a port
of the mesa top which lies at the southeast extent of Canyon de las Encinas. The site consists of ger
sloping topography and a small erosional drainage that crosses a portion of the property, exiting at
northwest corner and subsequently traveling into Canyon de las Encinas to the northwest. Canyon de
Encinas ultimately empties into the Pacific Ocean approximately three miles to the west. Elevations on
site range tiom 230 to 322 feet above mean sea level. Two soil types occur within the area: Huerhureo lo
along the eastern higher portion of the property and loamy alluvial land-Huerhuero complex on the remain
of the site. Both are comprised of sandy marine sediments with a clay subsoil. The site has been clea
presumably for agriculture, although native vegetation does exist in the far western portion of the site. :
majority of the property contains only sparse remnants of native vegetation, including disturbed 1 undisturbed Southern maritime chaparral, very small isolated areas of arroyo willows and coast live oak, i
some Del Mar Manzinita.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Based on the mitigation recommendations from the Preliminary Soil and Geological Investigation for project prepared by Geogon Inc., dated July 1992, and compliance with the Hillside Development Regulatio
there would not be a significant impact on soils and geology. The soils report states that; "No soil or geolo
conditions were encountered which would preclude the development of the property as presently plann
provided the recommendations of this report are followed". Erosion control measures including landscap:
on manufactured slopes, adequate drainage facilities, and proper soil compaction would all be conditiom
approval for the project and be required by the Engineering Department prior to issuance of the grad
permit.
The San Diego regional air basin has. a non-attainment status with respect to COY 0-3 and PM-10, howel
cumulative impacts to air quality from this project would not be considered significant because the incre;
of residential density adjacent to the industrial comdor is consistent with the Regional Air Quality Strateg
(RAQS), provides an improved jobs housing balance, and would help reduce roadway congestion, vehicle t
lengths, and vehicle cold starts, (residents are more likely to walk or bike to work). Otherwise, the 01
measure likely to mitigate the cumulative regional air quality impact to a level below significant would
to curtail future development in the air basin until attainment is achieved, or reduce the region's depende1
upon the automobile. The project by providing higher residential density and lower income housing ck
to industrial employment is incrementally contributing to the regional air quality solution. Compll
mitigation of the regionwide air quality problem shall require regionwide efforts beyond the scope of c
project.
Construction activities associated with the project would result in potential short-term air quality impac
Principal pollutants from these activities'include fugitive dust particles due to grading and transportation
construction materials and, to a lesser degree, emissions for construction vehicles. The Grading Ordinar
contains provisions to minimize the release of construction related pollutants; therefore, air quality impa'
resulting from future construction activities on-site would not be considered sisnificant as long as t
-6-
.II 0 e
appropriate ordinances and the conditions of this environmental document are complied with, (see attack
csnditions) .
The project would not result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, modification of the channel o
river or stream or the bed of the Ocean or any bay, inlet or lake. The project would not substantially char
the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters). There are no streams or lakes on the site 2
the project is located over three miles from the ocean.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant must comply with the requirements of the Natio
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant would be required to provide
best management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensit
biological areas. Compliance with this requirement would reduce any water quality impacts to below a le
of significance.
Based on the Cultural Resource Reconnaissance Report for the project prepared by RECON, dated July ~
1992, and the archaeology study conducted by Archaeological Associates, Ltd. in June 1983, there would
no significant impacts to cultural resources. No prehistoric or historic sites were located onsite. The projl site contains the tertiaxy-aged Torrey Sandstone, colluvium, alluvium, t.opsoil, and fill material, therefo
there is a low potential for the discovery of fossils. Significant impact to paleontology resources from gradi
of the site is not anticipated.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Based on the Biological Technical Report for the project prepared by Anita M. Hayworth, Biologi
Consultant, dated July 8, 1993, there would be no significant impacts to biological resources. The biologi
survey and analysis evaluated potential impacts to biological habitat, sensitive animal and plant species, a
potential wildlife corridors. The report concluded that no impact would occur and mitigation would not
required. The California Gnatcatcher was observed on the property in June 1992, however, the species Y
not observed utilizing the property in the last three site surveys from the July 8,1992 to Jme 1993. S:
Scrub habitat was not located onsite and the site is not considered a breeding site for California Gnatcatchc
The project site contains no prime agricultural Qass I or 11 soils, and is not currently under agridtu
cultivation nor has the site been cultivated in the recent past. The onsite soils consist of HrC (Class IIIe
and LvF3 (Class VIIIs-I). The project site is not located in the Mello 11 Agricultural Overlay 20:
Development of the site would not preclude or negatively effect agricultural development on surroundi
properties. The SDGU powerline easement separates the site from adjacent land to the west, a non-load
collector street would separate the site from the greenhouses/nurseries to the south, and ECR separates t
site from the property to the east. Construction of the non-loaded collector street leading from the projc
to ECR would not preclude access to the agricultural parcels to the west via the dirt road called La Co!
Blvd. or the parking lot of the greenhoWnurseries to the south. Access from Street "A" to the parking :
of the greenhouse would be provided directly across from the project entrance (300 feet east of the E(
intersection) with a driveway that travels east along the northern property line of the greenhouse, pard
to Street "A," and connects with the parking area. The greenhouse operation and retail flower shop men
have direct driveway access leading directly to El Camino Real and that access would not be affected by tl
project.
-7-
.* 0 0
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
The project site and the property to the south and west are all designated for residential land use on t:
General Plan Land Use Map. The increase in residential density on this parcel would not exceed the high(
density range permitted by the General Plan (RH). Due to the project's location adjacent to El Camino RC
(ECR) and the provision of a non-loaded collector street leading from the project entry to ECR, traffic WOI:
not adversely affect the surrounding properties. The General Plan allows density increases above t
maximum designated density range for a property to enable the development of lower-income affordal
housing. This site is appropriate for a higher residential density and complies with the General Plan locati
criteria for affordable housing for the following reasons: (1) the proposal is compatible with the swoundi
uses, including the industrial land uses to the north (see explanation below on industrial land z
compatibility); (2) the planned public facilities in Zone 21 are adequate to handle the increased dens,
without the need to amend the facility plan; (3) the project site is located in proximity to a major roadw,
(ECR) with appropriate transit facilities and large employment centers, including the City's industrial.pax
to the north and the shopping centers located one mile south.
Increasing the planned residential density of the site from 138 dwelling units to 372 dwelling units WO~
not significantly impact the provision and availability of public facilities .within the local Faciliti Management for Zone 21. The project is subject to all the conditions and facility service level requiremex
within the approved WMP for Zone 21. The required compliance with the plan would assure that there 2
no significant impacts to public facilities. Growth Management dwelling unit buildout caps would not
exceeded in the southwest quadrant due to the fact that the additional density for this project would
transferred from the bank of surplus dwelling units in the quadrant.
Based on the Noise Technical Report for the project there would not be a significant impact to the projc
created by traffic noise from ECR if the study's recommended mitigation measures are adhered to. Sou;
walls, berms, or a combination of both would be required along ECR to mitigate exterior traffic noise
comply with Planning Department Policy No. 17. The project would be conditioned to require that tl
interior albuildings exposed to traffic noise be sound attenuated to 45 Dba CNEL. In addition, all exteri
usable second-story balconies exposed to traffic noise must provide sound attenuation to 60 Dba CNEL p
the requirements of Policy No. 17. If sound attenuation walls are provided along ECR, special landscapi
and wall design criteria shall be required to offset any potential visual impacts the walls may create al01
ECR
The project would not create significant impacts on surrounding property from light and glare because t
SDG&E powerline easement separates the site fkom adjacent residential land to the west, a non-load1
collector street would separate the site hm the greenhouses/nurseries to the south, ECR separates the si
from the property to the east, and large setbacks and topography separate the project from the industrial us
to the north. In addition, the residential structures would have tile roofs and stucco exteriors that would n
reflect excessive amouts of natural light. The project would be conditioned such that all project lighti
shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. In additio
large quantities of landscaping, including trees and shrubs, would be added to the project area and this wou
also minimize glare and light from structures and parking areas.
The development of high density residential land use adjacent to existing industrial development creates tl
potential for significant land use compatibility impacts, (i.e. noise, hazardous materials & visual impacl
etc..), however, there is adequate building separation between the two land uses and heavily landscap
-8-
.. m, 0
setbacks and topographic separation to ensure that land use compatibility impacts =e not significa
P,roposed residential structures are approximately 80 to 130 feet from the closest existing industrial buil&
located on the industrial lots to the north. In addition, the industrial buildings are approximately 10 to :
feet lower in vertical elevation than the northem property line of the project site. The project's landscapi:
would provide a sufficient visual buffer with a combination of trees and shrubs planted along the northe
property line. The existing slopes adjacent to the industrial lots also contain dense stands of trees and sh
that would provide additional screening. All industrial land uses in the Planned Industrial Zone (PM), whi
includes the industrial area adjacent to this project, are subject to performance standards that control noi
levels (Maximum 65 Ldn at the propw line), odors, vibration, heat, glare, air emissions, onsite storage, a~
industrial waste discharge. These safe guards would ensure that the residential land use is compatible wi
the industrial land use. To further ensure that no potentially significant noise sources generated from t
industrial buildings impact the residential land use, the project would be conditioned to require a six fc
high solid masonry wall located along the entire northem property line. This wall would provide vist
screening, security, as well as sound attenuation at the property line.
Based on the Limited Environmental Assessment Report for the project prepared by GeoSoil kc., dated Aug~
3,1992, there has been no documented unauthorized release or disposal of hazardous waste on the propert
or within a one (+) mile radius of the project site, therefore, there would be no significant impacts resulti
from hazardous waste on or near the site. The report did not sample the soil and the parcel was utilized f
agriculture in the past, therefore, the potential exists for soil contamination due to historic pesticide us
Prior to approval of a grading permit for the project the soil must be tested for pesticide residue.
significant levels of pestiade residue are present in the soil the appropriate mitigation measures shall 1
required and may include a health risk assessment study, removal of the soil and proper disposal, placeme
of the soil in deep fills, or other recommendations of the soils report. Agricultural runoff from tl greenhouses to the south is currently diverted to the west and away from this site. The greenhouse drains:
flows into a detention pond located onsite, therefore, adverse impacts from agricultural runoff would n(
significantly impact the site.
Based on the Traffic Study for the project prepared by Weston Pringle & Associates, dated July 15, 199
there would be no significant circulation or traffic impacts if the study's proposed mitigation measures we
implemented, (See the attached traffic mitigation conditions). Development of the project would not requi
offsite public road or utilities improvements (i.e. sewer, water, and drainage) into Zone 19, 20, or 2
therefore, the project would not have a growth inducing impact on surrounding vacant land.
The preliminary grading plan comprises the import of approximately 68,OOO cubic yards which must 1
transported from offsite. To reduce traffic hazard impacts to motor vehicles and bicyclists the applicant
required to obtain a Haul Route Pennit from the Engineering Department. This permit will ensure that truc
traffic does not adversely impact residential streets that are not designed to handle heavy truck traffic.
Compliance with the City's Hillside Development Regulations (i.e. slope height and length, grading volume
etc..), and landscaping of the manufactured slopes would ensure that the project's grading does not resu
in significant visual impacts. The provision of an earthen landscape berm with a screen wall, landscapin
and a five to fifteen foot grade differential along ECR would visually screen the parking areas and residenti
structures from the ECR scenic conidor and reduce all visual impacts to below a level of significance. TI
project site is not visible from major public viewpoints to the south, west or north. The apartment building
are setback from ECR approximitely 90 to 160 feet and comply with the setback standards of the EL Camin
Red Scenic Corridor Standards.
-9-
-. e 0 Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the project will have a significant adverse imp
on the environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse ,impacts. Public resources CO~
Section 21002 forbids the approval of projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives
mitigation measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A "significant effect" is defined as one which h
a substantial adverse impact. Given the attached mitigation conditions, this project has "NO" significa
physical environmental impacts, therefore, there is no substantial adverse impact and no justification f requiring a discussion of alternatives, (An alternative would not lessen an impact if there is no substant
adverse impact).
-10-
a
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 NEGA?T 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 requirt
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- X 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there v 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 si&cant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENT1
IMPACT REPORT is required.
7/ z o/ 73
Date u Wtwe
’r/24/”, 3
Date Planning Direcw V
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE1
1. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation required by the Zone 21 Local Faciliti
Management Plan approved by the City Council on September 17,1991, incorporated herein and on fi
in the Planning Department and any future amendments to the Plan made prior to the issuance of bud&
permits.
2. The applicant shall comply with the Citfs requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminatic
System (NPDES) permit. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce surfa
pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements sh
be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever occurs fir
3. Prior to occupancy of dwelling units located adjacent to the northem property line, a six foot high sol
masonrywallshallbeconstructedalongthispropertylieeto~potentialnoiseimpactsfiomt
adjacent industrial area. The mat& of the wall shall be compatiile with the mat& of the resident: buildings.
-1 1-
I 0 '0
4. Plans, specifications, and supparting domments for all street and traffic signal improvements shall 1 prepared to the satisfaction of the City Ehgheer. prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permi
J whichever occurs first, the applicant shall.install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate securi
as provided by, the following improvement:
a. Half street improvements, in accordance with City standards f0r.a prime arterial, on that portion of
camin0 Real along the limits of the project
b. A fully activated traffic sigd at the intersection of El Camino Real and the proposed roadway that w front the project along the south side of the project site.
5. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation requirements of the Prehmmq .. Soil and Geologic
Investigation for the project prepared by Geogon Inc., dated July 1992 and any subsequent dons
the repoa. prior to issuance of a grading permit.
6. Prior to the issuance of building permits the owner of the record of the property shall prepare and reco
a notice that this property is subject to noise impacts from the ezcisting ECR transportation corridor a
overflight, sight, and sound of aircdt operating hm Palomar Airport. The notice shall be prepared
a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney. The applicant shall pc
aircraft noise notification signs in all rental offices associated with the new development. The number a~
location of said sip shall be approved by the Planning Director.
7. Prior to approval of a building permit the project shall comply with all recpimnents of the project's noj
study and Planning Department Noise Policy No. 17, or any other applicable and adopted noise standa~
in effect prior to issuance of the building permit. This includes mitigation to attenuate the projec
exterior areas, interior building areas, and exterior second and third-story balconies/d&, if subject
excessive traffic noise fiom EClL If sound attenuation walls are provided along ECR, the walls shall
designed with pilasters, offset with tree wells, and landscaped to provide screening of the walls from E(
in order to reduce visual impacts along the scenic corridor.
8. Prior to approval of a grading'pexmit a detailed soils testing and adysis report shall be prepared
registeredsoils~andsubmittedtothePlarmingDepartmentandcolmtyHealthDepartments~
review and approval. The report shall identify a range of possible mitigation measures to remediate a
potentially significant public health impacts if hazardous pestiades or other &emids are detected at hi
concentrations in the soil. Such mitigation options shall include at a minimum.
a. RemoveanycantaminatedsoilandhaultoaStateedfdladfiL
b. Cap the area of sail contaminaton with material appropriate for the containmentofthespecificty
of chemical, taking-into account its rate of absorption and tdaty level.
9. Anoteshallbep~cedonthegradingpermitstipulatingthatthefollo~measuresshallberequired
to reduce construction-related air pollutants:
aThewateringofallsrnfacesbeinggra~andhaulro~esshallbereqtriredduringdryweatt
conditions.
-12-
.' .' -0 0
b.AUunpavedareasshallberevegetatedaccordingtoapprovedlandscapeplansassoonaspossl'ble
I aftergrading.
C. All COnstructian-reiated traffic shall be dad to rout- that are dustcontrolled, and reduced spet
limits shall be maintained for all haul and construction vehicles.
d. All construction activities shall be Mted during periods of high winds.
e. All heavyduty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be operated according to maaufacture
suggested operating instruction (with the hd-injection timing retarded to recommended lwek for N( emissions, but which would not result in excessive vkiile smoke emissions) in order to control polluta
emissions.
f. Construction equipment shall be subject to regdady scheduled main.tenance/tune-ups, and be turn
off when not being utilized to avoid excessive idling emissions.
g. The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall adhere to APCD Rules 67.0 and 67.'
to ef€ectively control other construction-related emissions of air pollutants.
h. The Ehghmkg Department shall monitor for compliance de all grading operations of the projec
10. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within th
project, the applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed ha
route. The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impo:
with regards to the hauling operation. If the source of imported dirt is within the limits of the City
Carlsbad, a grading permit will be required for the import site.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WlTH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REMEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJEm.
,ii, 7 2o 73
JG:vd
-13-