Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-17; Planning Commission; Resolution 36901 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 * PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3690 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE SECOND AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP A 78 UNIT TIMESHARE HOTEL ON A 2.35 ACRE PORTION OF AN 8.02 ACRE SITE EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND PONTO (ANACAPA) ROAD IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 22. CASE NAME: SEAPOINTE RESORT CASE NO: CT 93-10/CP 93-O7/CUP 93-04/HDP 93-10/SDP 94-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of Augu hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all t and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission consi factors relating to the second amended Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning COI as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the second amended Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", amended August 10, 1994, i amended August 8, 1994, attached hereto and made a part hereof, the following findings: FiIldiIlRs: 1. That the second amended Negative Declaration was proposed consistent California Environmental Quality Act. 2. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the prc have a significant impact on the environment. 3. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental i1 0 * 4. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the propose( 5. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be si@ 1 2 impacted by this project. 3 4 5 6 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of August, the following vote, to wit: 7 8 9 10 AYES: Chairperson Savary, Commissioners Welshons, Noble, Nielsen, and Monroy. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Erwin. 11 II ABSTAIN: None. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMC ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3690 -2- 0 City 0 of Carlsbac SECOND AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: East of the intersection of hacapa Road and Carlsb: Boulevard. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 78 unit, three story timeshare resort with underground parking locatc on 8.02 acres of land. Associated with the application is a two lot tra map for condominium purposes, a condominium permit, a conditional u' permit, a hillside development permit, a request for a General P1: Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment change the land use of a 2.35 acre portion of the site from office to Trav Services Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map and Local Coast Program Land Use Map and from Office to Commercial-Tourist on tl Zoning Map. No impacts have been identified and no mitigation will 1 required. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described proje pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and tl Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, 2 Amended Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact c the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file : the Planning Department. The Negative Declaration was first amended on March 22, 1994, to correct a typographical err( within one of the case file numbers. The correction had no effect on the project, did not create ne impacts or require mitigation. The second amendment to the Negative Declaration includes the disclosure that the project includc a Site Development Plan; that there is additional discussion of the project within the Part 11; th the inclusion of the Site Development Plan does not create changes to the project; that there a. no new impacts; and that there are no required mitigation measures. A copy of the Second Amended Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in tl Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from tl public are invited. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Plannir Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4448. DATED: MARCH 18, 1994 YbL FIRST AMENDED: MARCH 22, 1994 SECOND AMENDED: AUGUST 10,1994 +MI+ Plannin kii?&L irector . HOLZMILLE 8/ CASE NO: GPA 93-04/ZC 93-05/LCPA 93-04 CT 93-10/CP 93-O7/CUP 93-04/SDP 94-04/HDP 93-10 CASE NAME: SEAPOINTE RESORT CW:vd 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 - (61 9) 438-1 1 f 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. GPA 93-04/ZC 93-05/LCPA 93-04/CT 93-10/CP 93-07/CUP 93-04/SDP 94-04/H DATE: March 10. 1994/Amended Aums BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Seapointe Resort 2. APPLICANT: Continental Commercial Corporation c/o Timothy Stripe and David E 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5050 Avenida Encinas. Suite 2C Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 431-8500 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Aumst 20, 1993 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 78 unit, three story timeshare resort with underground parkinR locr acres of land. Associated with the application is a two lot tract map for condominium purposes, a cc permit, a conditional use permit, a hillside development permit, a request for a General Plan Amenc Chanze, and Local Coastal Prozram Amendment to chanze the land use of a 2.35 acre portion of ti office to Travel Services Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map and Local Coastal Promam La and from Office to Commercial-Tourist on the Zoning Map. No impacts have been identified and nc will be required. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment ap following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors th impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether tc Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked to indicate this determina * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project simificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insimificant. These findings are shown in the checkli headings "YES-sign and "YES-insig" respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DIS( ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which WOC be determined significant. 0 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NC big) (insig) 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? E - - > - 1 - 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? - - - 1 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? 1 - > - z - 1 - 1 1 - - z - n -z - 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 (sig) - - - HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 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 (sig) -3 - YES (insig) - YES (insig) X - NO - X X - 3 - )r - E - N( - - 0 0 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES big) 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? - 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? 29. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 30. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency 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 N( 1 1 - - - 3 - 7 1 - A - - - - - - - - - 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-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.) YES YES NO big> (insig) E - - E - - - 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? 7 1 - - 7 1 - -5- 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Phvsical Environment There are no known conditions on the site that would expose the project to geologic hazards ol Grading proposed for the project is subject to the Hillside Development Ordinance and will be in a with standard grading principals and practice which include erosion control and compliance with th Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards. There is no development proposed wil greater than 40% or within slopes greater than 25% which also have sensitive resources. The s developed primarily through export of approximately 25,000 cubic yards of earth. Although the site is near the Pacific Ocean, it is not contiguous and development of the propefl directly effect beach sand or modify a channel of free flowing waters. The project is a commercial residential timeshare and the typical operation of such uses does nc change to air flow, movement, or temperature and does not consume great quantities of natural fuel or energy. The project will be required to obtain gas and/or electric service from San Dieg Electric and will be charged the appropriate service fees. Biological Environment The site is currently in a disturbed state as a result of previous grading and agriculture. There are sensitive species of plants or animals within the area of development on the site. There is also nl that there will be adverse impacts to the biological environment offsite as a result of this develo] Human Environment The project proposal to develop a timeshare includes a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Coastal Program Amendment. The requested change is from Office (0) to Travel Services Come The change will have some effect on the distribution of traffic and the hours of activity on the site change it is anticipated that activity on the site will change from daytime, 8:OO a.m. to 5:OO p.m., tc Future traffic patterns may change from heavy peaks in the morning and evening hours for an of a more even flow throughout the day and mid-day on Saturdays when guests are checking in anc timeshare. Adequate parking for the proposed use will be provided in an onsite underground garage at a ra than that required by the Zone Code (Title 21). 94 parking spaces are required and 99 are provic timeshare developments have been approved with the same parking standard and operate successfi the city. The combination of existing and future street improvements will adequately serve circulai Anacapa Road from the project entrance to Descanso Boulevard and Descanso Boulevard betwee Road and Carlsbad Boulevard will have the design capability of accommodating 10,000 ADT. Thc not anticipated to generate more than approximately 624 ADT. The unsignalized intersection c Road and Descanso Boulevard will not have enough traffic to assess a Level of Service (LO: signalized intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Descanso Boulevard will operate at a LOS of 'Ii All of the utility services required by this development will be provided by standard meth development will introduce insignificant levels of noise and light into the area. In addition, the 1 -6- 0 e have a standard condition to design exterior lighting to be shielded so as not to encroach ontc properties. Therefore, the California State campground located across the street will not be impac the evening hours by ambient light. Noise generated by occupants of the project will be no differel noise that can be generated by occupants of the adjacent uses. For this reason, noise is not cc impact. No special "use" conditions need be applied to the project to ensure compatibility. The sight is visually prominent from Carlsbad Boulevard. Through a Site Development Plan the he project may reach an overall height of 55 feet. As proposed the building does not exceed 45 highest point. Construction of a building within the height limits at this location will not be an ad1 impact because views of the site are from a distance to the east and predominantly from a higher The combination of height and distance allow the residents to the east of Interstate 5 horizon vi Pacific Ocean. Those properties adjacent to the south and the north will not have views of the o( west impaired by the project. The project is also located a sufficient distance to the east o Boulevard that it will not dominate the vistas from the corridor. The subdivision of the property through the Tentative Map and the Condominium Permit will have 1 effect on the property. An analysis of alternatives to the proposed project is not required for this Negative Declaration 1 impacts have been identified. -7- a 0 DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a N DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, be environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjuncl 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 atta sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIROb IMPACT REPORT is required. * hT%)W\h\)& /4 P- 10- 7# Date / LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE1 ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -8- a e , . DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a h DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, be environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunc pre.viously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - [ 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 art: sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be propose( - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIROl IMPACT REPORT is required. ~*. (h5G \-* Signature 4+- LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -a- a 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 CW:vd -9-