HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-11-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 3551> , * e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3551
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT
AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
TO CHANGE THE LAND USES ASSOCIATED WITH THE
FORMER BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK
MASTER PLAN FROM RM, RMH, RC, P, N, TS/C AND OS TO
RM, NRR, TS/C AND OS GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS IN
THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 9.
CASE NAME: POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER PLAN
CASE NO: MP 175(D)/GPA 91-05/LCPA 91-02/LFMP 87-09(A)
lo /I WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of October, 1993, 'I. j/ and the 3rd day of November, 1993, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law
12 II
13 ll to consider said request, and
14 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
15
and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all 16
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff,
I?' I/ factors relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
l8 I1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
19 I1 2o // as follows:
21 I) A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
22
23
24
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated August 12, 1993, and "PII",
dated July 26, 1993, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings and subject to the following condition:
25
26
....
27
28
....
ll
e 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
"3
Findings:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may
have a significant impact on the environment since a full environmental review of
the master plan property was certified (EIR 84-3) with more intensive educational
and related land uses than the residential uses being proposed with this amendment.
All sensitive lagoon slopes, habitat and wetland areas associated with the project's
open space have already been dedicated in fee title to the State of California. No
other significant environmental features are associated with the site which at one
time supported agricultural uses but is now vacant undeveloped land with the
exception of the Rosalina subdivision.
2. The site has been previously graded and contains no sensitive animal or plant
species with the exception of permanently protected master plan open space areas
associated with the lagoon environment (approximately 35 acres). The previously
graded portion of the site contains the existing alignment of Windrose Circle and the
that was disturbed in the past through agricultural uses.
I Rosalina neighborhood. The rest of the master plan area is mostly flat vacant land
I Il.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
3. The existing and proposed streets are adequate in size to handle the anticipated
traffic of approximately 12,300 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This amount of traffic
is less than the approximately 26,500 ADT approved with the former BLEP master
plan on the site. The alignment and configuration of the master plan circulation
system meets all City standards and will allow the orderly and functional
development of the master plan property.
4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly
impacted by the development and implementation of the master plan. The project
has been and will continue to be designed and conditioned to eliminate any
potential environmental impacts associated from the proposed development adjacent
to the Batiquitos Lagoon. The proposed master plan amendment will have no
environmental impacts to, or hinder the implementation of, the approved Batiquitos
Lagoon Enhancement Plan.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5. All environmental impacts identified in EIR 84-3 that required mitigation have either
completed the mitigation process or will be mitigated through the implementation
of this mitigated negative declaration as a follow up to the master plan property's
original environmental review. As outlined in the attached mitigation monitoring
program, these impacts involve archeological, paleontological and visual/aesthetic
resources and compliance with residential noise impact standards.
....
....
PC RES0 NO. 3551 -2 -
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
0 0
Condition:
1. The Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached as Appendix P to tht
Environmental Impact Assessment Part I1 with this Mitigated Negative Declaratior
shall be referred to for all environmental conditions, mitigation and monitorin)
measures applicable to the development of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan pe:
master plan amendment MP 175(D).
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planninh
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day of November, 1993,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz, Savaq
& Hall.
NOES: Commissioners Erwin & Welshons.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None. +4 -IF\
ATTEST:
J-
BAILEY NO&E, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
- MICHAEL J. HOLZMILYER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3551 -3 -
e 0
!
MITIGATED NEGATNE DECLARA'KON
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: A 162 acre PC (Planned-Community) zoned,
Master Plan property on the north side of
Batiquitos Lagoon, west of 1-5, east of Carlsbad
Boulevard and south of the Lakeshore Gardens
Mobile Home Park ixythe southwest quadrant of
the City.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Master Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Local
Facilities Management Plan Amendment, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment to change the land uses associated with
the former Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan
from RM, RMH, RC, P, N, TS/C, and OS to RM, RH, NRR,
TWC, and OS, General Plan designations. The Master Plan
Amendment will guide the development of individual planning
areas.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of *e above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carkbad. As a result of said
review, a Mitigated 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on ijle in the
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from
the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department
within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz in
the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4441.
DATED: AUGUST 12,1993 1 MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
CASE NO: MP 175(D)/GPA 91 -OS/ Planning Director
LFMP 87-09(A)/LCPA 91 -02
CASE NAME: POINSE'ITLA SHORES MASTER PLAN
PUBLISH DATE: AUGUST 12,1993 ENM:km
e a
EWTRONMENTAL WACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
BACKGROUND
CASE NO. MP 175(D)/GPA 91-05/LFMP 87-09(A)/LCPA 91
DATE: JULY 26, 1:
1. WE NAME: Poinsettia Shores Master Plan
2. APPLICANT: Kaiza Poinsettia Corporation
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 7220 Avenida Encinas. Suite 200
Carlsbad. CA 92008
(619)931-9100
4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMIlTED: Jdv 6.1993
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Master Plan Amendment. General Plan Amendment. Local Fats
Management Plan Amendment. and Local Coastal Prom Amendment to change the land t
associated with the former Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan from RM. RMH.
P. N. TS/C and OS to RM. RH. NRR TS/C and OS on a 162 acre master ~lan as shown on
attached exhibits. The master plan amendment will establish land use redations for the
and guide the development of individual planninn areas.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct
Environmental Impact Assessment to detennine 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
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 Environmel
Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the projecr
any of its aspects may cause a significant 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 significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negal
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deer
insimificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and "YES-.h
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form un DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discuss
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be detennined significant.
e 0
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT I
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 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)?
YES YES NO
big) (ins@
- - X -
- - X -
- - X -
- - - X
- - X
- - - X
1 - - - X
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply? - - X -
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources? - - - X
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? - - X
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object? - X - -
-2-
0 0
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
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?
YES
(sigl
-
-
-
-
t -
I"ANENVrR0NMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIREclzY OR INDIRECIZY: 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 NO
(big)
- X -
- - X
- - x
- - X
- - X
YES NO
(insig)
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?
YES
big)
-
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?
- t
-
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 NO
(big)
X -
- .X
- - x
X -
- .X
- - x
- X
- - X
- - X
- X
- - X
- X
X
-
- -
X - -
X - -
x -
X - -
0 0
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-tenn, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
35. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively con-
siderable" means that the incremental
effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.)
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
YES YES NO
(si@ (insig)
- - X -
a - - X
- - - X
- - x
-5-
a 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This project involves the amendment of the former Batiquitos Lagoon Educational park @Up) Mas1
Plan for property as shown on the attached location map. The land uses allowed under BKP center
around a university/educational use with supporting and related land uses. The went ater PI;
amendment (MP 175-D) proposes to rename the project to the Poinsetria Shores Mater p\m and
replace the educational uses with residential uses. The master plan has a total of 451 dwelling units 14
to develop which the applicant will pursue in 'combination with a State allowed 25% density bonus
assist with affordable housing compliance. Also being processed with the master plan amendment i3
General Plan amendment (GPA 91-05> and a Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 91-02)
implement the proposed changes to the master plan. A Local Facilities Management Plan Amendme
will also be processed to reflect the land use changes within the Zone 9 Local Facilities Manageme
Zone. The site is currently vacant with the exception of the Rosalena single family neighborhood.
With the approval of BLEP (October 22,19851, an environmental impact report was certified (EIR 84-:
for the master plan property. All environmental impacts associated with BLEP have been identified a
mitigation measures are in place where appropriate. The amended master plan will involve land US
of lesser intensity than the previously approved educational park with less traffic and public faciliti
impacts. The applicant's Environmental Impact Assessment Part I included traffic, noise and geotechnic
studies. This Mitigated Negative Declaration incorporates analysis fkom the certified EIR and will outh
the necessary mitigation on a master plan level to offset archaeology, paleontology, visual resources, ar
noise impacts.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. As documented in EIR 84-03 and the applicant's geotechnical report dated June 4, 1986 1
Woodward-Clyde Consultants, the site is not located near any active faults and no geolog
conditions exist that would constrain the development of the maspr plan property or increase tE
exposure of people or property to geologic hazards.
2. The master plan property is mostly flat except for the lagoon bluff areas which will not be altere
through project grading. An existing manufactured slope on the eastern edge of the master pla
site will be cut to provide fdl for the roadway and bridge embankments supporting Avenid Encinas. Otherwise, no appreciable change to the area's topography will occur and EIR 84-3 di
not idendfy any unique physical features.
3. At the master plan level as well as tentative map/planning area level, the project will b
conditioned to comply with the Ciws Grading Ordinance and standard landscaping and erosio
control measures to prevent soil erosion onto the site as well as soil erosion offsite into Batiquitc
Lagoon.
4. Development of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan will not affect the natural sand movemer
patterns of the nearby coastal littoral area. No changes will occur to the channeh of any stream
or the Batiquitos Lagoon. The project will be required to maintain existing/construct new drainag
facilities as needed to prevent any impacts to Batiquitos Lagoon.
-6-
e 0
5. The primary impacts to air quality will resdt from automobile and truck emissions. EI~ 84-
stated that the increase in air pollution emissions should be considered insignificant. [n additio
the master plan's proposed land uses and associated average daily trips (ADT) will be reduced fro1
approximately 26,500 ADT (associated with the current BLEP master plan) to 12,300 AD
(associated with the amended Poinsettia Shores master plan). This will reduce impacts to a
quality compared to the BLEP master plan.
6. Approval of this master plan and the development of individual planning areas will not impact (
substantially change air movements, odor, moisture or temperature. Standard grading conditio1
and procedures will minimize dust impacts during grading and construction phases.
7. The project will not change the come or flow of marine, lagoon or flood waters. The master pla
will be conditioned to maintain existing/construct new drainage facilities to remove pollutants fro1
storm water and prevent undesired drainage from flowing into the Batiquitos Lagoon drainag
basin.
8. Standard grading, erosion control and landscaping per the City's Landscape Manual will contrc
run-off and prevent pollutants in run-off from reaching the Batiquitos Lagoon. These standar
measures will prevent any impacts to the quantity or quality of lagoon water, surface wate
ground water or public water supplies.
9. EIR 84-3 documented the lack of any natural resources on the master plan property.
10. Fuel and energy will be used during the grading and construction phases of this project in the fori
of gasoline and fuel. EIR 84-3 stated that BLEP could be adequately served by SDG&E for i!
natural gas and electrical needs. Since the Poinsettia Shores project is less intense than the BLE
project, this project's demands on fuel and energy are not significant.
0
11. EIR 84-3 identified four archeological sites within the master plan property; three were determine
to be significant. Follow up data recovery efforts were carried out by archeologist Brian Smith an
summarized in the report, 'The Archeological Excavations of Cultural Resources at Sites W-84, V
88, W-95, W-97 and W-2251" incorporated herein by reference and on file in the Plank
Department. One of the sites had human remains which have since been reinterred in an opc
space area within the master plan with the coordination and direction of a qualified Archeologi
and Native American Coordinator. This was done in compliance with the mitigation measures (
EIR 84-3. As concluded in the above referenced report, the sites are no longer considerc
significant. Further mitigation at this point involves the retention of an archeologist for pr
grading conferences and monitoring during .grading operations where cultural sites are located.
Paleontological resources also may be present on-site. Adherence to the city's standas
paleontological mitigation program will be required in conjunction with grading of the site.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
12/13. The majority of the project area (including all of the developable area of the property)
currently vacant and undeveloped. Previously, the site had been used for agriculture so there no habitat value on the master plan property except for the lagoon, bluffs and wetland are:
-7-
e 0
which will be preserved in permanent open space. Therefore, there will be no hpacts
sensitive plant species and no barriers to the normal replenishment of existing plant species v
be created. Project landscaping will be the only plants introduced into the area.
14. The master plan property has been used for agricultural purposes in the past, however, no la
within the master plan property is currently being used for agriculture. Furthermore, EIR 8'
states that none of the soils on the site are considered "prime" agricultural lands per the Williams(
Act definition.
15/16. Since the project area is primarily vacant and undeveloped, there is minimum habitat value 1
animal species in the area. The exception would be the animal biodiversity associated with t
lagoon and adjacent wetland areas which will remain open space so that there will be no impal
to the habitats or diversity of sensitive animal species or their natural patterns of movements
migrations. The biological resources of the lagoon will not be impacted by the development
the master plan's property. Domesticated animals in the form'of household pets will likely
'htroduced into the area by future residents; however, this will not significantly impact t
lagoon area's habitat or animal species diversity.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
17. The land uses currently allowed on the site are outlined in BLEP and center around
university/educational use with supporting residential, office and commercial uses. The proposl
master plan amendment specifically seeks to alter the allowed uses on the east side to i
residential (spreading the master plan's remaining allowed residential dwelling units) and leavi
the west side with the currently allowed uses with the exception of the area north of Aveni
Encinas which is proposed to go from a neighborhood commercial designation to an unplann
area designation, subject to future planning efforts. The propose@ land uses are more cornpatit
with existing/allowed adjacent land uses than the land uses contained in BLEP. Since the area
zoned Planned Community (PC) and requires master planning, the proposed land use chang
associated with the ment master plan. amendment (and corresponding Gend Plan mendmen
do not constitute a significant impact tq the planned land uses of the area.
18. The BLEP master plan did not substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergenc
or other public services. The proposed master plan amendment will also not affect any publ
facilities or services since the intensity, traffic generation and demand on public fadities/Senricl
will be less than mtly allowed. All performance standards and publ
improvement/infrastcture requirements of the amended Zone 9 Local Facilities Management Pk
will be met and maintained in compliance with the City's Growth Management Program.
19. No new or modified solid waste or hazardous waste control systems will be required from d.
development of this master plan area. Overall sewer requirements will decrease fro1
approximately 252,000 gallons per day (BLEP) to 151,140 gallons per day (Poinsettia Shores
The master plan will be conditioned to provide a sewer pump station for the east side of tk
master plan necessary to service the master plan area. The west side may be required to provii
a sewer pump station during detailed planning and development efforts for the west side in tl
future.
-8-
” a 0
I
20. Approval of the master plan amendment and development of individual planning areas will nc
substantidy increase noise levels beyond the short term grading and construction noise impact
The project area is impacted by noise from the 1-5 freeway and the railroad right of wa
Mitigation for the master plan amendment will include the requirement that residential PI&
areas have detailed noise studies done at the tentative map/PUD level to assure compliance wil
the City‘s noise policy.
21. Through the site design and conditions of approval for individual planning areas, no light or gla:
will be permirii to be directed offsite of the master plan property. Lighting within planning are;
will be low intensity and shielded from upward reflections. New light will not be a sigrufica:
impact.
22. The grading and constntction proposed for the master. plan area will not involve the applicatio
use or disposal of hazardous materials or substances.
23. The allowed density associated with this project is contained in BLEP which essentially allows
total of 451 new dwelling units to be built on the master plan property. This density is consiste:
not only with BLEP but with the City‘s Growth Management Program and the Zone 9 Loc
Facilities Management Plan (LFMP). While the applicant will be pursuing a State allowed 25
density bonus in conjunction with affordable housing units, the overall proposed density can 1 physically accommodated onsite and will not constitute a substantial altering of the area’s densit
24. The project proposes to construct housing units on the east side of the master plan. The west sic
may create a need for housing in the area if the non-residential land uses for the west side a
actualized. Overall, this project will supply housing units; not create a need for additional housin
25. The Poinsettia Shores project will generate less traffic than thegurrently allowed BLEP proje
(approximately 26,500 ADT vs. 12,300 ADT) as documented in the applicant‘s traffic study 1
Urban Systems Associates, Inc. dared May 17,1993. A substantial increase in traffic wilt not res1
from the Poinsettia Shores project and all major roadways, through their alignment a
classification, will be able to adequately serve the master plan.
26. A large demand for new parking facilities will not be created by the Poinsettia Shores Master Pla
Each planning area and associated use will provide required parking per the code.
27. The proposed land uses of Poinsettia Shores will impact roadways and intersections more than tl
currently vacant land does, however, it will be less of an impact than BLEP. As mentioned, tl
planned circulation and roadway alignment system will be adequate to serve the area and be
compliance with the Zone 9 LFMP.
28. The master plan site is outside of the McQellan-Palomar Airport influence area so no impacts
or from air traffic will result. No waterborne traffic occurs in the vicinity and the operations
the railroad right of way will not be impacted by the master plan or the planned railroad crossi
bridge of Avenida Encinas.
-9-
0 0
29. The master plan circulation system will include standard provisions for transportation systen accommodating vehicles with bicycle lanes and sidewalks for pedesman movements so that he
will be no increased traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians.
30. The master plan's circulation system, as well as individual-planning areas' circulation, ~ill '
reviewed by all pertinent City departments to ensure that there will be no impacts to a
emergency response procedures or evacuation plans.
31. The master plan has the potential to create a significant visual impact through the developme
of structures near the lagoon environment. EIR 84-3 established certain development standar
to act as visual mitigation to the impacts created by blufftop development. A 45-50 foot minimu
structural setback from the blufftop was established and will be a minimum requirement f
blufftop planning areas. A larger setback will be required through the master plan and pl&
area approval processes. To assist in reducing visual impacts to insignificance, EIR 84-3 specifil
a reduced building height limit for single story structures and a minimum percentage of single st01
units within a planning area. In addition, specifications were outlined with regards to access01
structures and allowances for public access/trails within the bluffrop setback area. EIR 84-3 ah
required a buffer of at least 80 feet between the mobile home park to the north and any smctur~
within the master plan. Part of the mitigation program associated with this environmental revie
and the master plan amendment will be the formulation of development standards designed
mitigate visual impacts. Standards will be established for each blufftop planning area with tl
master plan amendment approval. These standards will be similar, or more restrictive, to tho
items outlined in EIR 84-3 and will include: a minknun structural setback from the Lakesho
Gardens Mobile Home Park, a minimum structural blufftop setback, a reduced height limit fi
single story smctures (based on the Citfs ament height definition), a minimum percentage (
single story structures per planning area, and provisions for public access/trails within blufftc
setback areas.
ap
32. No impacts to the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities will be created by tl
development of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan. The master plan will, however, creal
recreational opportunities in the form of a recreational center with such amenities as a swimmir
pool, tennis courts and passive areas. In addition, the master plan will provide a public accer
lagoon blufftop trail along the project's southern perimeter.
-1 0-
0 0.
mwsrs OF WLE ALTERNATWES 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 project, and
g) no project alternative.
a) , The development of the master plan area will take place in at least two phases. The first pha
will develop the east side of the master plan and the second phase will develop the west side. TI
east side development may occur in more than one phase.
b) No site designs for individual planning areas are being approved with this master pk
amendment. However, some development standards will be established for planning areas 1
guide the site designs of individual planning areas. The circulation and roadway design I
Avenida Encinas is being established by this amendment and is the result of staff’s review I
ensure compliance with Citfs standards as well as to ensure a master planning approach to tl
site.
c) The proposed scale of development is in keeping with the allowed dwelling units available for tl
master plh property and is less intense in non-residential square footage and scale than the BLE
master plan.
d) The area is zoned PC which requires a master plan. Since a master plan exists, an amendme:
is the proper way to modify allowed land uses. The proposed residential land uses are compatib
and acceptable alternatives to the educational uses allowed under BLEP. Agricultural uses are n
economically viable or desired by the current master plan property owner.
e>’ The west side of the master plan is set up to be planned in detail and developed at some futu
time. Near term developments will focus on the east side’s residential planning areas.
f) Conceivably, alternate sites for the proposed land uses exist. However, the subject master pla
property is capable of accommodating the proposed land uses and no significant unmitigab:
environmental impacts will be created.
g) The no project alternative would leave the site mostly vacant and undeveloped as it currently i
The City and existing residents within the master plan are antiapating continued planning ar
development efforts on this property to remove the educational uses of BLEP. The no projej
alternative does not contain significant environmental benefits.
-1 1-
e e
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
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
- t find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, becau
the environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunctic
with previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review
required. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- X 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, the will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on i
attached sheet have been added to the project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will
proposed. .
- I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and i
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAn REPORT is required.
55. G. 93 E& /VI&%
Date Signature -3
qi./$5
Date
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE1
Land Use/Visual Impacts
1. The master plan amendment will establish a minimum structural setback from the existing mob
home park for all planning areas adjacent to it. This minimum setback shall be equal to,
greater than, the setbawuffer outlined in EIR 84-03.
2. The Master Plan Amendment will establish development standards for the east side’s residenb
planning areas adjacent to the lagoon bluff top that will be similar to, or more restrictive, th;
those outlined in EIR 84-03. These standards shall address:
A. A minimum bluff top structural setback.
B. Reduced single story height limitations.
C. A minimum percentage of single story structures.
D. Provisions for public access along the bluff top perimeter.
-12-
0 0
3. The Master Plan Amendment will establish development standards for the west side's plm
area adjacent to the lagoon bluff which will be similar to, or more restrictive, than those outline
in EIR 84-03. These standards shall address:
A. A minimum blufftop structural setback.
B. Building height limitations.
C. Provisions for public access along the bluff top perimeter.
Archaeology
The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require a qualified archaeologist to monitor 2
grading activities near or on the archaeological sites documented in EIR 84-03.
Paleontology
The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require a qualified paleontologist to be involved wi
all grading operations and comply with the City's standard paleontological mitigation prom.
Noise
The Master Plan Amendment will be conditioned to require residential planning areas to have detailc
noise studies done and incorporated at the tentative map/PUD approval level to assure compliance wi
the City's noise policy.
t "IGATtON MONITORING PROGRAM TABLE ATACHED
-1 3-
0 e
I
L
A"
P -
.THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE R€WEWED THE ABOVE MITTGATmG MEASURES
AM) CONCUR WITH Lnre ADDlTIdN OF THESC: MeAsuRES TO THE PRWCT,
;4y7#j3
idant, ~aiza PQanr@ttia
wntfih m 3,3993
Seabluff A8nacfrta8, a California General Partnarship BY: Backmtt anagenent CoFporation a California Corporatlan, Its Gana a1 Partna
BY! $Gy*-
Pra8 "'r dent c- #lek*tt K
8
% 173
t
.1& '
e 0
APPENDIX P ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONTXURING CHECKLIST
h 0
CT E c4
9 s
2
n 6c
U -
v) h
cI( 4
3
s
cn cl w
..
3 z w
3
5
i4
6 4
P 8
E
0
'0 I
z PI ..
6 q
3
z
0
E 3 e 3 l
Y *a
Y B 8 5
d
OJ
..
P
E 2
4 0 F 52
5 0 n:
w
E s a
2 >
5
acu g *; z
:.$
.g ;;; z
c we 0 'C P, *g 0
.z d
0%
$Z€
s -5 0
z2z
y m.D
qaaJ 343
-au .-) m p) Q f
ZC
4 '3 o$
3 -2 2 g-z 2
3 $3
-8 3 -g 3 4 *g
3 53
.s 8 3
&2! 3+
?a€ 3 Es
E -- 3 5.2 a -& 5
:a7353
L-( ZpA 2 ax2
u S p g 3 E$ o%$e -3 as& %.E Q,
cE!a
&s 0)
%be z8 2-00
%US
21;
0 $lf
g *z .CI
-5 a U
mu
WE
hU u u
Q)es
boo .
co
*f" c mu 3
oicg
*-s 8 3 hE8
,0033 a
Page 1 of 1
a Y
U m
.w 9
U $23 Q"
3 4 :s
eg3. .gsa 5 %a 3.: :i:g 4 g
423 3k.s 5 ." 35%
M8 2 s
Sf q
*- - .2 (8 8 E453
ta a% 8 e 8 3.: B 0 gG.2 a 0 2-g &% 0 00 E .z 3 .s
2.58$ e a"*
Y*gJO .* ai 4% h g B 3 g :*a c 2
3WPM lp,+ v := f .s &a8 s 8 *3 g f en z
g& MI 1 3 ,e"
-3 o&t 00iz %
k.8 g'E I
!j g2
-E .3 2 Pi
sa ti9
i.! ggp
Ern>& AV*
3
g B
T e e LOCATION MAP
”
POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER PLAN W l7 D)/GF# 91-051 LCW d*/w 87-09(A
L
b
i e 0 OCTOBER 20,M
I
ROPOSED GENERAL PLI
“-1.11
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
MTIQLJITOS LACOON
-city of Carlsbad
POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER PLAN GPA 91-05/LCPA 914
r
1 NdTrCs OF COnPLgTrON 0 0
Mail to: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth Street, Rm. 121, Sacr-to, u 95814 - 916/45-~613 FYI see rm &Lou:
Projat Title: UP 175(D)/CPA 91-05/LFMP 87-G9(A)/A 91-02 - POINSETTIA SHORE MASTER PLAN
Lead Agency: City of Carlsbad Contact Person: Eric Umz
Street Address: 2075 Las Palms Drive Phone: (619)438-1161. ext. 4U1
City: Cartsbed Zip: 92009 Cmty: San Di-o _____"_""""""""""""".""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
PRWECT LOCCITIOY:
County: San Dieso City/Nearcst Cmity: Carlsbed
Cross Streets: Future intersection of Cartsbsd Bculevard/Avenida Encinas Total Acres: 162
Assessor's Parcel YO. ~16-120-f9/216-140-17.18.19,25,27,23-33 Sstim; Twp, Rv: oasc: -
Uithin 2 Miles: State Hwy #: 1-5 Uaterways: Pacific Ocean and Batiaritos Lasoon
Airports: Rai lwaym: ATLSF Schools:
....................................................................
DOCUEYT TYPE
CEaA: - NC? - SupQlwnt/Subscqucnt WEPA: - no1 -a - FCUSI
Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH Mo.)
Draft EIR '
OTIER: - Joint Docummt - Final Docmmt - Other Mitigated Ntp Dee X Ncg Dtc - - Draft EIS - Other -
......................................................................
LOCAL m1ar TIPE
- X - - -
General Plan Update Specific Plan - Rezone - Amexation Gmral Ptan Arrcdrrnt X Waster Plan Amdnent - - Prezmo General Plan Elanant Plamed unit Developnent - Use Permit Cmity Plan Site P~M - - Ld DiVi8iW (WiviSial, X Other LCPA
- - R.d.veLopnent - Coastal Permit -
Parcel Hap, Tract nap, etc.)
DMLBIEWT TW€
""."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""".""",
- X Residential: Units 4Sl* Acres 88 Off ice: Q. Ft. Acres Enployees Carmcrcial: sq. Ft. Acres Enplgr88S
- Ulter Facilities: Type
Trmsprtation: Typ. -
Industrial: sq. Ft. Acres Eaploym - Wining: Mineral
Uatts Educational - Power : - Yaste Treatmnt: - HarardouP Uoste: X Recreational Travel Servicc/Ccmnrcial 0 -
- X Other: Urrpllmcd Area - 7 acrar Swce - 38 acres
PROJECT 1-S DISaJSSED IN WCuEn - X Aesthetic/Viswl - Flood PLain/Flooding - SchaolsMivrrritir Uater Qurl i ty - Uter SIIpQly/
"""""""""""""."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""."""""""""""""
Agricultural Lad
Air Owtity - - Fornt LWFire Haz8rd - Septic Systrr - - G.ologic/Seiric - S-r CwuitY Grard Uater
-
X Archacological/Historica~ - Winrrlr J- Sot 1 EroriWC~ttaJGradiw J- Wtlnd/Rip.rian X Coastal Zone x WOiH - Solid Uute - Yildlife - X Drainage/Absorption - Popriatfwnousing Balance - Toxttmzardarr - Growth trdwing - F i scat X RecrutiWParkr - Vegetation - Curlative Effect - Econanic/Jobs X PWic krvices/Pacilitirr J- Traffic/Cireulation L L- - Other
P-t Lad UsefZming/wl P1.n Uu
This master pl~ property is currently vacant except for 75 single fmily Lots (70 built, 5 vacant). The PC zone rrquires ms planning. The current Land use designationr reflect the eatiaul uses of the forrr ktiquitoo Lagoan Educational Park (BL. Master Plan. This Muter Plan AarnQrnl will replace dsational and relatd wes with residential ues.
-""""""""""""--"""""r""""""""""""""""""~*"""""""""""""""""""""""-
~""~"""~~""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~""""""""""~""~"""~"""~~..
Projat Description
A Master Pln Amndmnt, Gmral PlM bamdnent, Local Facilities -t Pln -t, ad Local C-tal Progrr Ammh to chaqe the land uses associated uith the fomr Batiwitor Lagoon Ed~crtional Park Wuter Pln fra Iw, RMH, RC. P, Y, TS/C, OS to RW, RH, NRR, TS/C, and OS General Plan designations. The Uarter Pln bmenbnt uitl guib th8 bvrlqamt of individ plaming areas.
WE: Clearinghouse wilt aosiw identification err for 811 m projwts. If scn .&r already Mists for project (e.
fror a notice of Prap.ratim or previous draft docrarnt) plea88 fit1 it in. R~isd Octobcr 15
-~
*PIUS 25% State Densitv 8-