The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-06-15; Planning Commission; Resolution 36690 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3669 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CAEUSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW GRADING TO CREATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY BUILDING PADS ON A 2.26 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 3800 ALDER AVENUE IN THE R- CASE NAME: ALDERESTATES CASE NO: HDP 93-O3/SUP 93-01 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of June, 1 a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, ana 1-15 ZONE. 10 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all t 11 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submittec 12 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission cons l3 14 factors relating to the Negative Declaration. 15 16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Co: as follows: 17 18 19 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according 1 "ND", dated March 9, 1994, and "PII", dated March 9, 1994, attach1 20 II and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 21 ll Findinm: 22 11 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the prc 23 I1 have a significant impact on the environment. - 24 25 26 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposec 2. The site has been partially disturbed by previous development and a grading required to accommodate the project is minimal and confine developable, unconstrained areas of the site. 27 28 11 0 0 4. There are no sensitive resources located so as to be significantly impacte, 1 project. 2 3 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 4 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of June, 199 5 following vote, to wit: 6 7 AYES: Vice Chairperson Welsons, Commissioners Erwin: Compas, and Nielsen, and Monroy. 8 NOES: None. 9 ABSENT: Chairperson Savary. 10 11 12 ABSTAIN: None. l3 ~ 14 15 ;jATTEST: ~~ MICHAE J. HOLZMILLER 1 IPfY PLANNI G DIRECTOR VJ .I i j 4: /*.. -~:,",,! * Jjdl ;#,,&:/ ,l,'f;:,/L&/ KIM WELSHONS, Vice Chairpers CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMIS 20 21 22 24 25 26 23 I 27 11 PC RES0 NO. 3669 -2- 28 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Mail to: State C!earinghouse, 1400 Ten reet, Rm. 121, Sacramento, CA 95814 - 916 r"---- I See NOTE Below: SCH .# Project Title: Alder Estates - HDP 93-03/SDP 93-01/MS 93-02 Lead Agency: City of Carlsbad Contact Person: Anne Hysonq Street Address: 2075 Las Palmas Drive Phone: (619) 438-1161, ext. 4477 City: Carlsbad Zip: 92009 County: San Diego """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""."""""" PROJECT LOCATION: County: San Diego City/Nearest Comnunity: Carlsbad Cross Streets: Skyline and El Camino Real Total Acres: 2.26 Assessorls Parcel No. 207-063-24 Section: Twp. Range: Bi Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: Interstate 5 Waterways: Agua Hedionda Lagoon Airports: McClellan-Palomar Railways: AT&SF Schools ""___"_"__""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" DOCUnENT TYPE CEQA: - NOP - Supplement/Subsequent NEPA: - NO1 OTHER: - Joint Docu, - Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH No.) EA F i nal Docu~ X Neg Dec - Other Draft EIS Other - - - Draft EIR - - ___ FONSI - "__"__"""_""_"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~. LOCAL ACTION TYPE - General Plan Update - Specific Plan Rezone Annexa t i ( General Plan Amen&ent Master Plan - - - Prezone Redeve lo( General Plan Element Planned Unit Development - X Use Permit Coastal F Comnunity Plan Site Plan - - - - - - - - - X Land Division (Subdivision, X Other 1 Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) Permi t DEVELOPnENT TYPE - X Residential: Units 3 Acres 2.26 Water Facilities: Type ""__"__""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~. Office: Sq. Ft. Acres Employees Comnercial: Sq. Ft. Acres Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres Emp 1 oyees Power: - - Transportation: Type - Employees Mining: Mineral - - Type - Educational - Waste Treatment: Type - - __ Recreational - Hazardous Waste: Type - Other: .......................................................... PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT - X Aesthetic/Visual - Agricultural Land - Air Quality - ArchaeologicaL/Historical - X Coastal Zone - Drainage/Absorption - Economic/Jobs - Fiscal __ Flood Plain/Flooding - Schools/Universities - Geologic/Seismic Sewer Capacity - Forest Land/Fire Hazard __ Septic Systems - - Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading - - Solid Waste - Recreation/Parks - X Vegetation Minerals Noise - - Population/Housing Balance - Toxic/Hazardous - Public Services/Facilities - Traffic/Circulation """""_"_"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~ Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use - Water Qua Ground Wa - Wet Land/R - Water Sup1 - Wi \dl i fe - Growth In! __ Landuse __ Cumulativl Other - """""_"" - Single family residential / R-1-15/ RLM """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""". Project Description Three lot subdivision and grading of a hillside lot with frontages on El Camino Rei Avenue. NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers for all new projects. If a SCH number already exists for a PI from a Notice of Preparation or previous draft document) please fill it in. Revised [ NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 3800 Alder Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Three lot subdivision and grading necessary to create thre single family hillside lots with frontages on El Camino Real an Alder Avenue. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described projec pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Ac and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of sai review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significar impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for th action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Pl- Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from th public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department withi 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Anne Hysong in th Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4477. DATED: MARCH 9,1994 - CASE NO: HDP 93-03/SDP 93-01/MS 93-02 Planning Director MICHAEL J. HOBMILLER CASE NAME: ALDER ESTATES PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 9,1994 I 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1 16' 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. HDP 9 DATE: Februar BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Alder Estates 2. APPLICANT: BHA. INC./Gavla Erickson 3. ' ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 3800 Alder Avenue ~ Ca&bad. CA 92008 (619) 434-1812 4. DATE EM FORM PART I SUBMITED: A~ril7.1993 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Three lot subdivision and pdinz necessary to create th family hillside lots with frontanes on El Camino Real and Alder Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City cc Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the en1 The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. "hi identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed p. provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Envi Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NOt will b to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial. evidence that any asp project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can bc insidcant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and '7 respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the fc DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to d mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. a e PHYSICAL ENvrRoNMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIREmY: 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 sigiZicant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - -2- YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - N - - - - - - - 1 - 1 A - 1 A - , - 0 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES big) 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? - - - - - HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? YES (sit?) - - -3- ., YES (insig) - - - - - YES (big) - - NI 1 - 7 A - 1 - 1 - 8 - NC X - X - 8 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 (sig) - 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? 29. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 30. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? 31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? - - - - - - - - - - - 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opprtunities? - 4- YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - N( 1 1 - z z - - 1 - 7 1. - E E - - J - X X - - x - X - X - X - 0 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNlFICANCE 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-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 hture.) 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.) YES YES N( (sig) (big) - - - - x - X - X - - - 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - - - X I - -5- 0 e DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1-3. The project's compliance with the City's grading ordinance requirements will avoi resulting unstable earth conditions or exposure to geologic hazards which may currentl; at the proposed site. The project is designed in accordance with the Citfs Hillside Or& prohibiting an appreciable change in the hillside topography. 4. No waterways are located in the project area. 5-6. The addition of two single family lots will have no significant impact on air quality, move odor, moisture, or temperature. 7. The project is not located within a floodplain. 8. The project will not adversely impact the quality or quantity of surface water, ground 1 or public water supply since the project will be conditioned t6 connect to the City's sew water systems and to construct the necessary drainage facilities in accordance with the Master Drainage Plan. 9. The subdivision will create three single family lots within an urbaniied, infill area wj 10. The creation of two additional single family lots will not result in the use of subs1 11. The location of the subdivision in an urbanized area previously subdivided and g impact to natural resources. amounts of fuel or energy. precludes the likelihood that significant archeological or paleontological resources exist o and there are no historical resources located in the area. 12. The subdivision grading boundaries are limited to areas of less than 25% slope containin2 native and exotic species thereby creating no adverse impact to the diversity or numb plant species. 13. Landscaping of manufactured slopes which transition into natural terrain already lands with non-native exotic species will not introduce new species into the area or act as a b, to the nod replenishment of existing species. 14. No agricultural crop or prime agricultural land will be impacted by this project. 15/16. ' The infill subdivision will have no impact on the diversity or number of animal species in nor will it result in the introduction of new spcies of animals or block the movement 0: 17/19. The infill subdivision is consistent with the parcel's low medium density residential designation and the necessary public facilities and services are already provided to the . -6- 0 e 20/21. Additional noise, light, and glare will occur due to the addition of two single fam however, noise levels will not be significant. Subdivision design and compliance wi development policies will avoid light and glare impacts to the surrounding areas. 23/28. The subdivision will result in two additional single family homes in an existing neighborh will not substantially alter the population density, generate substantial additional traffic demand, or impact existing transportation systems. Lot sizes will be consistent with SI development, and future structures are likely to be custom homes consistent with the neig 29/30. The project is located within an existing neighborhood and will not increase traffic h interfere with emergency response plans, 31. The future structures are required to set back from existing and proposed top of slop aesthetically offensive views along El Camino Real in accordance with the Hillside De Ordinance and the El Camino Real Corridor standards. 32. No existing recreational opportunities will be impacted. 33. The intill subdivision in which grading is limited to previously disturbed areas of less slope will have no substantial impact on the physical, biological, or cultural environmc 34/35. The residential infill subdivision is compatible with surrounding development and alrez by existing public facilities and services; therefore, it will not result in long term or c impacts to the area. 36. The infill project is too small in scale to significantly impact the quality of life conditic in the residentially designated area. I -7- 0 e ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and g> no project 'alternative. a) Although the three lot subdivision will be graded in one phase, the construction of custom homes will be phased, b-d) The subdivision design, scale, and type are consistent with the General Plan land use designation and zoning for the area which is residential low medium density requiring single farnily development on a minimum of 10,OOO square foot lots. The design is also consistent with the Mello I1 Local Coastal Program prohibiting development on slopes > 25%. Several alternative subdivision designs have been reviewed including a small lot PUD however, these designs were not compatible with the area. Due to the configuration of the existing parcel located at the end of a cul-de-sac with minimal frontage on a public street, the flag lot designs provide the greatest compatibility with surrounding neighborhood and offer the most sensitive hillside design. e) The surrounding development resulted from a subdivision completed approximately 30 years ago. Therefore, the infill subdivision is not premature. f) Although there are other larger parcels in the vicinity which can be subdivided into smaller parcels, these alternatives are no more desirable than the project since significant environmental impacts will not occur as a result of this development. g) The no project alternative would only delay this infill subdivision which is required to comply with growth management and hillside development standards limiting development on hillside lots. The three lot subdivision design is sensitive to the hillside by avoiding development on 25%+ slopes as well as requiring terraced hillside architecture and adequate structural setbacks from the top of manufactured slopes. -8- e 0 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 F DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, bc environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjum previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attac 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 ENVIROPl IMPACT REPORT is required. - \ 7- 4 -7c-J Date + Planning Direchi u LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE] ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE] -9- 0 0 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature AH:lh - -10-