HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-06-06; City Council; 10061; PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO SUBDIVIDE 40.5 ACRES INTO 90 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 1 OPEN SPACE LOT. | ZC-341| CT 85-34| SDP 88-19 - VIEWPOINTa os a, &!u ua 3 aa aac oa NW u 04 eo\ .rl w c,u 4co -rl a4 oE c3u sua 0 os uau
o\
\
\
03
W .. z 0 5
Q
I
a z! z 3 0 0
include a Q-Overlay. This additional level of review creat the opportunity to ensure that future development is compatib with both surrounding development and land forms.
The project complies with all the requirements of the Zoni
Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, and the Hillside Ordinanc
As proposed and conditioned, it also complies with the adopt
performance standards required by the Growth Manageme
Ordinance.
On April 19, 1989, the Planning Commission unanimously approv
relocating the rear property lines of Lots 37-40 to the east€
boundary of the SDG&E easement. The staff report to t
Planning Commission is attached as an exhibit. Through sta
review, project conditioning, and Planning Commission hearir
all issues have been satisfactorily resolved.
the project. The Commission, at that time, added one conditi
f * 0 I* i
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 14 u6/ i
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A mitigated Negative Declaration was issued for the project c January 6, 1989. The Mitigated Negative Declaration wz
submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30 day review peric
(SCH 89011109). All comments received from that review peric
are fully incorporated into the conditions of approval for tk tentative map. These conditions will be reviewed through monitoring program set up for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
If approved, increased need for City capital facilitic resulting from this development will be offset by the paymer
of the public facilities fee. Any capital facilities relatc
directly to this development will be constructed and paid fc
by the developer.
Increased operating expenses related to this development wil
be offset to some extent from increased tax or fee reveni
generated by the development. No detailed economic impac
analysis of this development has been conducted at this time s
predictions of the portion of operating expenses covered 1
additional operating revenue created as a result of th:
project cannot be made.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS
Local Facilities Management Plan Approved
LFMP Zone 6
Traffic Impact Study Required
Bridge & Thoroughfare District Required
EXHIBITS
1.
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos: 2831, 2832, 2833 & 28
4. Staff Report to Planning Commission dated April 19, 1989
City Council Ordinance No. d5-72
w/attachments
I
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Y? 13 a:& 08 uJ%
Le 15 qi ma 2: 16 $2 gY NE 17 -6
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
01
26 l4 iz
0
J i e W
ORDINANCE NO. NS-72
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM L-C LIMITED CONTROL TO R-1-7500 Q AND
OPEN SPACE ON APPROXIMATELY 40.5 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED 1,000 FEET NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF ALGA ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL.
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California d
ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
amended by the amendment of the zoning map to grant a change
zone from L-C Limited Control to R-1-7500 with a Q Overlay and C
Space on approximately 40.5 acres of property generally loca
1,000 feet northwest of the intersection of Alga Road and El Can
Real as shown on the map marked ZC-341, Exhibit ItZt1, attac
hereto an made a part hereof.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thi
days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to
adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at 1c
once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after
adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of
Carlsbad City Council on the day of , 15
and thereafter
1 L 4
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 0 SUI% m>c" 13 &EW qps 0U.g: ooqa 14 6222 mij~E 15
,->to< ZW0)O su~d ZJ 16
ZOSS 5$g2
>2% 17 60
LL 3.z:
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
It
e m
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tk
Council of the City of Carlsbad on the
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
day of
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR., City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L* RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
1 <
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
m
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2831
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBi
CONTROL (LC) TO R- 1 -7500-Q/OPEN SPACE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCA
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LIMI'
APPROXIMATELY 1000' NORTHWEST OF THE CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND
CAMINO REAL. APPLICANT! VIEWPOINT CASE NO. : ZC 341
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit:
Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26, Townst
12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernadino Meridian, County of San Dit
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the
Commission; and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request as provided by
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of April, 19
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said
and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consider
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heal
Commission considered all factors relating to the Zone Change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commis
follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearir
Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZC-341, based on the following f
and subject to the following conditions.
Findinrrs:
1. The Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan and Local
2.
Plan designation of RLM, Residential Low-Medium density, (0-4 du
The Zone Change will be compatible with surrounding residential la to the north, west, and south. Office/Comnercial uses to the ea be separated by a steep slope.
1 J
L
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
a 0
3. The Zone Change will preserve 13.2 acres as permanent open spacc
development .
4. The Zone Change is consistent with the Growth Management 1 because a local facil ities management plan was previously appi this zone (Zone 6). In addition, the density proposed by the (3.1 du/acre) is consistent with the growth control point (3.2 established by Proposition E, adopted November 4, 1986.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
protecting an area with sensitive environmental resources frc
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day (
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AYES: Chairperson Hal 1, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehubei
NOES i None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Holmes, Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
/Jy$J&k#c&&P- 'c 4 /&
MATTH W HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
P1 anni ng Director
PC RES0 NO 2831 -2-
1
1 I c
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2832
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSB
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PER
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1000' FEET NORTHW
OF THE CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL. APPLICANT: VIEWPOINT
CASE NO.: HDP 88-19
WHEREAS, a verified appl ication for certain property to wit:
Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26, Towns 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernadino Meridian County of San Die
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the
Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as pri
Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of Apri
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all test
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Cc
considered all factors relating to the Planning Commission Determina
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commi
fol1 ows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
8) That based on the evidence presented at the public hear
Commission APPROVES HDP 88-19, based on the following find
subject to the following conditions:
Findinqs:
1. The site's hillside conditions have been adequately identified
on Exhibit's "A" - "E", dated April 19, 1989.
2. These hillside conditions have been incorporated into the S consistent with the Hillside Development Regulations by the
The HDP 88-19 is consistent with the Growth Management Ordinanci
undevel opabl e 1 and was excl uded from density cal cul at i ons
terraced site plan.
3.
< 1
t
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
LO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a e
brapased density of 3.1 ;s below the growth control poi! established by Proposition E, adopted November 4, 1986.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the Local Coastal restricting grading on 40% slopes to only isolated pockets of limited areas essential for development. In addition, 13.2 I natural open space and an additional 3 acres of open space ease perimeter slopes have been dedicated as permanent open space.
Conditions!
1.
2.
Approval of HDP 88-19 is granted subject to approval of ZC-341 ai 34.
Approval is granted for HDP 88-19 as shown on Exhibit "A", dati 19, 1989, incorporated by reference and on file in the Department. Development shall occur substantially as shown otherwise noted in these conditions. Any requested or proposec to these exhibits shall first be submitted to the Planning Dire review.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day 0'
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Hall, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehuber,
NOES: None.
ABSENT : None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Holmes, Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
MATTHEW HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
-
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HaZMILLm PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 2832 -2-
I
1.
b
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2833
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSE
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP PROPERTY G EN ERAL LY LOCAT ED AP PROX I MATE LY 1 000 ' NORTHWEST 0 F CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL.
APPLICANT: VI EWPO INT
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26, Towns 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernadino Meridian, County of
Di ego.
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the
Commission; and
CASE NO.: CT 85-34
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as pr
Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of Apt-
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consi
request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and conside
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be he;
Commission considered all factors relating to the Tentative Tract Ma
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commi
follows:
A)
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hear Commission recommends APPROVAL of CT 85-34, based on the 1 findings and subject to the following conditions:
That the above recitations are true and correct.
Findinqs:
1. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan since the density of 3.1 dus/acre is within the density range of 0-4 specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Elemenl General Plan, and is at or below the growth control point of 3.
l
t
4
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 0
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density
development since the site is adequate in size and shape to act residential development at the density proposed.
3. The project is consistent with all City public facility poli ordinances since:
a) The Planning Comnission has, by inclusion of an appropr. condition to this project, ensured that the final map will
be approved unless the City Council finds that sewer serv is available to serve the project- In addition, the Plann Commission has added a condition that a note shall be pla on the final map that building permits may not be issued the project unless the City Engineer determines that SE service is available, and building cannot occur within project unl ess sewer service remai ns avai 1 ab1 e, and Planning Commission is satisfied that the requirements of
Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project,
The Carlsbad School District has written a letter, dated April 7, 1988, stating that school facilities will be available to this project.
c) Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of approval.
d) All necessary public improvements have been provided or w be required as conditions of approval.
e) The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities f Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will ena this body to find that public facilities will be availa concurrent with need as required by the General Plan.
Assurances have been given that adequate sewer for the
b)
f)
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future 1 since surrounding properties on three side are designated for res development on the General Plan and buffered from commercial dev to the east by an intervening steep slope.
5. This project will not cause any significant environmental impac Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning on January 6, 1989 and recommended for approval by the Commission on April 19, 1989. In approving this Negative Declara Planning Commission has considered the initial study, the staff ai all required mitigation measures and any written comments 1 regarding the significant effects this project could have environment.
project will be provided by the City of Carlsbad.
4.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -2-
I1
,
4
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
'I
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 *
6. The appl icant is by condition, required to pay any increase . facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, agreed to abide by any additional requirements established bj Facil ities Management P1 an prepared pursuant to Chapter 21.9 Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availat public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts creat project.
This project is consistent with the City's Growth Management [ as it has been conditioned to comply with any requirement apF part of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6.
This project was subject to Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Munic (Hillside Ordinance) and meets all the requirements of that CI ensure the sensitive treatment of the City's hillside resource2
7.
8.
Conditions:
1. Approval is granted for CT 85-34, as shown on Exhibit(s) "A" - 'It April 19, 1989, incorporated by reference and on file in the Department. Development shall occur substantially as showi otherwise noted in these conditions.
All conditions of Resolutions 2831, 2834 and 2832 are incorporate by reference.
The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24" x scale mylar copy of the Tentative Map as approved by the Commission. The Tentative Map shall reflect the conditions of by the City. The map copy shall be submitted to the City Engine to issuance of building permits or improvement pl an submittal , w occurs first .
Director prior to the recordation of the final map. Said map sh all lots and streets within and adjacent to the project.
5. This project is approved. upon the express condition that the f shall not be approved unless the City Council finds as of the such approval that sewer service is available to serve the subd
This project is approved upon the express condition that building will not be issued for development of the subject property unl City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at .
of application for such sewer permits and will continue to be a! until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the fina
7. This project is also approved under the express condition t applicant pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Cor July 28, 1987 and as amended from time to time, and any developmc established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the I Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth
2.
3.
4. A 500' scale map of the subdivision shall be submitted to the
6.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -3-
> c
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 *
management system or facilities and improvement plan and to ful subdivider’s agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated C 1988, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk and is incc
by this reference. be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this proj be void.
8. The applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior
If the fees are not paid this application
approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Muni ci pal Code.
9. The applicant shall provide school fees to mitigate condit overcrowding as part of bui 1 ding permit appl i cat i on. These fel be based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of buildin! appl i cat i on.
Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Water agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Costa Real Water D dated May 25, 1983.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation reqi the Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan approved by the City on September 2, 1987, incorporated herein and on file in the I Department and any future amendments to the Plan made prior issuance of building permits.
12. If any condition for construction of any public improvemc facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thereof, imposed approval or imposed by law on this project are challenged this 2 shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 65913 any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval s invalid unless the City Council determines that the project witt condition complies with all requirements of law.
13. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all c of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordina effect at time of building permit issuance.
Approval of CT 85-34 is granted subject to the approval of ZC 341
10.
11.
I 14. 88-7.
15. Prior to the adoption of the final flap, iff the park‘s standard is
in the SW Quad a Parks Agreement shall be required to incli following provisions:
a. The secured dedication of 4.9 acres of park land at a loca. be determined acceptable by the City.
b. Provide a letter of credit or some other secured fi acceptable to the City in the amount of $563,500.00 guarantee construction of 4.9 acres of park land from a financial inst and upon terms and conditions acceptable to the Finance Direc City Attorney at the time this agreement is executed.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -4-
I
\
c
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
c. Provide for the operating expenses of the park either t letter of credit or some other secured financing from a i institution and upon terms and conditions acceptable to thl Director and City Attorney or the establishment of a Park 3 Growth Management Fee that would cover the operational the park. The Parks Agreement shall determine the amoun costs and the length of time for which the developers District 3 would be responsible.
d. The Parks Agreement must be consistent with the requiremen!
City's Growth Management Program.
e. If any reimbursements and/or park-in-lieu fee credits a given, the Parks Agreement shall provide a mechanism to dc
The applicant shall provide the following note on the final ma subdivision and final mylar of this development submitted to tl
"Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes i
Management Control Point for each General Plan land use desi Development cannot exceed the Growth Control Point except as prc Chapter 21.90. The land use designation for this development is 4 du/ac). The Growth Control Point for this designation is 3.2 units per nonconstrained acre.
17. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall est Homeowner's Association and corresponding covenants, condit. restrictions. Said CUR'S shall be accompanied by a letter ref required conditions and specific page of CC & R's on which tl addressed. Said CC & R's shall also include notification to the property owners that a commercial project has been approved property to the east and that, although impacts have been miti much as possible, impacts may occur.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall a Site Devel opment P1 an which shall address bui 1 ding el evat i ons, height, distance between structures, distance from tops Of SI0
slopes of roofs.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedit 91 to the Homeowners' Association as permanent open space. Lo1
the open space easements on lots 1-19 and 44-49 shall be mainti the Homeowners' Association. This stipulation shall be include( CC & R's.
20. The applicant shall be responsible for implementing the mi
measures as specified in Exhibit "X", the applicant shall responsible for any fees for such program as established by 1 Council prior to the issuance of building permits.
16.
18.
19.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -5-
1 4
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
I
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 8
21. Archaeology:
a. Prior to approval of the final map or the issuance of a grac permit, whichever comes first, the applicant shall per1 archaeological mitigation on the subject site as detaile( the Data Recovery Plan prepared by Westec Services and di
July, 1988.
A1 1 archaeological materi a1 recovered during the project S\
be described in a professional report which receives suffici distribution to insure its availability to future research€
A copy of this report shall be submitted to the Planr Director prior to the occupancy of any units.
All archaeological material recovered during the project SF
be donated to a local institution which has proper facilit for curation, display, and use by interested scholars and general pub1 i c.
Pursuant to the Native American Heritage Conission letter the City of Carlsbad dated September 29, 1988, the applic shall submit written evidence to the Planning Director to sh monitor and report compliance with the following condition mitigate any potential impact to Native American remains. the preservation and protection of Native American remains associated grave goods, the following actions must be taken the applicant imnediately upon the discovery of remains a construction site:
i, Stop work imnediately and contact the County Coroner Planning Director of the City of Carlsbad.
i i . The Coroner has two working days to examine remains af being notified by the person responsible for excavation. If the remains are Native American, Coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native Ameri Heritage Commission.
iii. The Native American Heritage Comnission will imnediat
notify the person it believes to be the most liki descendent of the deceased Native American.
iv. The most likely descendent has 24 hours to m recomnendations to the owner, or representative for treatment or disposition with property dignity, of remains and grave goods.
v, If the descendent doesn‘t make recomnendations within
hours the owner may reinter the remains in an area of 1
property secure from further disturbance, or
If the owner doesn’t accept the descendent’s recomnenc the owner or the descendent may request mediation by thl American Heritage Commission. Phone number (916) 322
b.
c.
d.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -6-
I
$
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a 0
22. Pal eontol ogy
a. Prior to any grading at the project site, a paleontoloc shall be retained to perform a walkover survey of the site to review the grading plans to determine if the prop1 grading will impact portions of the Santiago Formation. A I of the paleontologist's report shall be provided to
Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit.
b. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the applic to perform periodic inspections of the site and to sal! exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of some of fossils present in the Santiago Formation, it may be necesi to collect large samples of matrix for laboratory procesi through fine screens. The paleontologist shall make peril reports to the Planning Director during the grading proce
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grac in the area of an exposed fossil in order to facilit eval uat i on and, i f necessary, salvage arti facts.
All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-prc institution with a research interest in the materials, sucl the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and grading activities of the project shall be resolved by Planning Director.
23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
c.
d.
e.
landscape plan to the Planning Director for review and approv 1 andscape pl an shall incorporate "coastal sage scrub" tyg materials in the landscape palette along the site's easterly slc intent of this planting is to design a corridor of "naturalize( biological habitat which is aesthetically pleasing, contrc erosion, and is not a fire hazard.
Prior to approval of any grading or clearing permit, the applica install a temporary fence to the satisfaction of the City Engi Planning Director the easterly boundaries of Lot 91. The pres areas and fence details shall be delineated on the grading plan
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall c a chain link fence or approved equal with a gate to be approved b along the southerly boundaries of lot 91.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall landscape plan and an open space maintenance program to the Director for review and approval. The landscape plan shall add slopes greater than 6 feet in height and shall comply with '. protection program specified in pages 29-33 of the Landscape Gu
24.
25.
26.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -7-
!I
V 4
$
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e m
Manual. The open space maintenance program shall comply requirements listed in pages 34-36 of said manual. Immediately
grading activity, all perimeter slopes shall be landscaped in a with the approved landscape plan and all interior slopes great feet shall be temporarily hydroseeded. The grading bond for thi shall include provisions to guarantee compliance with this c
Landscape and irrigation plans and cost estimates shall be apl the Planning Director prior to the issuance of grading permits
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant at his op enter into a common maintenance agreement with the adjacent owner to the east for maintenance of the slope between properties. The applicant may also agree to install an irrigatic inside the subject site and provide a stub-out for the irrigatic of the easterly property owner.
Prior to the occupancy of individual units, the applicant shall ( a block and wrought iron wall at the top of adjacent perimeter Said wall shall be faced with stucco to be compatible with development. In those lots where noise attenuation is necess
a. A 4-foot wall or berm shall be located along the top of slope at the rear of Lot 47.
b. A 5-foot wall or berm shall be located along the top of slope at the rear of Lot 46.
c. A 6-foot wall or berm shall be located along the top of . slope at the rear of Lots 44 and 45.
d. A 6.5-foot wall or berm shall be located along the top of. slope in the side yard of Lot 1.
e. A 7-foot balcony barrier shall be indicated on building pli for Lots 1, 45, 46 and 47.
The applicant shall provide these noise mitigation measures tc with the current Noise Policy. If the Noise Policy is revised ai CNELs become acceptable, the applicant may do a revised noise a to comply with those standards.
The applicant shall submit a street name list consistent with the
street name policy subject to the Planning Director's approval F final map approval.
30. The developer shall install street trees at the equivalent of intervals along all public street frontages in conformance with Carlsbad standards. The trees shall be of a variety selected f approved Street Tree List.
27.
28.
applicant shall comply with the following measures:
29.
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -8-
1
1
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
34
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
31. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall requir and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation signs.
All sales maps that are distributed or made available to the pub1 include but not be limited to trials, future and existing schools and streets.
33. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Building Direct, review the architectural plans to ensure compliance with the California interior noise standard of 45 CNEL. At that t additional measures (thicker glazing, sound absorption matei shielding of vents) to further attenuate the noise to an acceptat
Prior to recordation of the final tract map, the owner shall pre record a notice, in a manner meeting the approval of the Director and City Attorney (see Form Noise l), that his propert subject to impacts from the proposed or existing Transportation C
Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, the owner of r the property within the boundaries of this map shall prepare an a notice (Form Noise Z), in a manner meeting the approval of the I Director and the City Attorney, that this property is sub overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from Palomar J
36. Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, an avigation ( over this property shall be offered for dedication to the Count: Diego in a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director Attorney (See Form Noise 3).
and/or rental offices associated with the new development. Thc and locations of said signs shall be approved by the Planning I (See Form Noise 4).
38. The lot lines of lots 37-40 shall be revised to move the rear 1( to the easterly edge of the SDG&E easement.
Enqineerinq:
39.
32.
shall be required.
34.
35.
37- The applicant shall post aircraft noise notification signs in a1
Prior to issuance of any building permit for the project, the de shall submit a detailed report prepared by a registered civil e acceptable to the City on the existing condition of the Ayer trunkline. The report shall be based upon a video inspection trunkline adjacent to the project site and extending to the sek station. The video tapes shall be submitted to the City Engine the report and shall become the property of the City. The repor detail the condition of the pipe and recommend any remedial n necessary to bring the sewer line into conformance with City St; If any repairs are necessary the developer shall submit a p
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -9-
I
\.
1
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 @
schedule of repairs and a method of financing such repairs accef the City Engineer. This condition may be satisfied by developers with similar conditions.
Repair or reconstruction of the Ayers sewer trunkline shall be c prior to occupancy of any portion of this project unles: demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Di rector that:
a.
b.
40.
Adequate capacity is available to accomnodate the sewage f this project, and
An agreement and appropriate security (bond) is accepted by of Carl sbad. The agreement shall guarantee the proportion2 of this project (by equivalent dwelling unit) for the r( reconstruction ofthe Ayers sewer main, pump station or for including but not limited to; manholes, laterals, tru facilities, pump station and force mains.
41. The developer shall submit approval by the California State Comnission prior to final map approval.
42. Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire twenty-four (24 from the date of City Council approval unless a final map is r( An extension may be requested by the applicant. Said extension
an extension, the City Council may impose new conditions and ma: existing conditions.
43. No grading permits shall be issued for this subdivision prior to q of the final map.
44. The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to the commencc any clearing or grading of the site.
45. The grading for this project is defined as "controlled grad Section 11.06.170(a) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Grading 5 performed under the observation of a civil engineer whose respon2 it shall be to coordinate site inspection and testing to compliance of the work with the approved grading plan, submit r reports to the City Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter : the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
graded" geologic plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer. 1 shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading ope a1 1 geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and based on a contour map which represents both the pre and PO grading. This plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer engineering geologist. The plan shall be prepared on a mylar or drafting film and shall become a permanent record.
approved or denied at the discretion of the City Council. In ai
46, Upon completion of grading, the developer shall ensure that
PC RES0 NO. 2833 - 10-
1
%
$
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 0
47. No grading shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision letter of permission is obtained from the owners of the propert i es e
A separate grading plan shall be submitted and approved and a grading permit issued for the borrow or disposal site if locate the city limits.
48.
49. All slopes within this project shall be no steeper than 2:l.
50. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any construction site within this project the developer shall submi receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul roi developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
The developer shall exercise special care during the constructi of this project to prevent any offsite siltation. The develop provide erosion control measures and shall construct t desiltation/detention basins of type, size and location as app the City Engineer shown and specified on the grading plan and shall be constructe satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the start of any other operations. Prior to the removal of any basins or facili constructed the area served shall be protected by additional ( facilities, slope erosion control measures and other methods req approved by the City Engineer. The developer shall maint temporary basins and erosion control measures for a period satisfactory to the City Engineer and shall guarantee their mail and satisfactory performance through cash deposit and bonding in and types suitable to the City Engineer.
Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shall be b or installed as may be required by the City Engineer.
Prior to approval of the final map the developer shall pay or en1 an agreement with the City to pay for a proportional share
drainage area fees established as a result of the forthcoming
The developer shall construct desiltation/detention basins of a . size and at locations as approved by the City Engineer. The dL shall enter into a desiltation basin maintenance agreement and s maintenance bond satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to the a of grading, building permit or final map whichever occurs first f project. Each desiltation basin shall be serviced by an all- access/maintenance road. The provisions of this agreement shal to any offsite borrow sites which may be utilized in the construc this project as required by the City Engineer.
55. Prior to completion of grading activity, a fence shall be ir around the proposed desiltation basin as required by the City En
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -11-
51.
The basins and erosion control measures
52.
53.
Drainage Pl an Update.
54.
/f
1 I
t
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1'1
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
The desiltation basin shown on the southwest portion of the tent< is to be constructed as a temporary basin. Prior to final map the developer shall bond for the removal of the basin and the t of the public drainage pipe to the southwest of the SDG&E easemei road. Extension of the drainage pipe shall be completed direction of the City Engineer when the upstream basin stabilized against erosion.
The owner of the subject property shall execute a hold harmless i regarding drainage across the adjacent property prior to the apl the final map for this project.
Drainage from this project enters into two existing desiltatic identified as DG 17 and DG 27 on the Drainage Master Plan for 1 Prior to approval of the final map the developer shall ente
a pro-rata share of the basin against siltation occurring f
project. The agreement shall remain in effect until such tim City Engineer determines that the project site has been ad stabilized against erosion.
56.
57.
secured drainage basin maintenance agreement with the City to
The Tentative Map as proposed includes a Minor Diversion of Drainage Water to the Drainage course located southwest of the project development. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the developer shall obtain the approval of the downstream property owner or shall redesign the drainage system so as not to divert drainage or increase drainage runoff beyond pre-redevelopment conditions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
58. The developer shall make an offer of dedication to the City public streets and easements required by these conditions or shob tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the f for this project. All land so offered shall be granted to the C and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost to t Streets that are already public are not required to be rededica
59. Alga Road shall be dedicated by the developer along the sub frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 51' fee conformance with City of Carl sbad Standards prior to occupancj bui 1 di ngs.
Direct access rights for all lots abutting Alga Road except fo to S.D.G.&E. facilities and for maintenance of open space shall b on the final map. Direct access rights for Lots 47, 48, 49, 50 20 to Mimosa Street shall be waived on the Final Map.
61. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all impr shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. approval of the final map, the Subdivider shall install, or install and secure with appropriate security as provided
60.
improvements shown on the tentative map and the following impn
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -12-
I I
1
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer:
a.
b.
Alga Road as shown on the tentative map.
All site improvements shown on the tentative map including not limited to; streets, sewer, water, storm drains, st) lights, street and median irrigation systems, and retail walls adjacent to public right of ways.
c. A fully actuated traffic signal at Mimosa Street and Alga Rf
d. Improvements to Alga Road/El Camino Real intersection identified in Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan.
62. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months map approval and/or improvement plan approval, whichever occur:
63. The traffic signal at Mimosa Street and Alga Road shall not be i until directed by the City Engineer.
64. Unless a standard variance has been issued, no variance fr Standards is authorized by virtue of approval of this tentative n width of Alga road is greater than the standard for a secondary because of adjacent, approved alignments and the inclusion of
median.
65. The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations an requirements of the respective sewer and water agencies r services to the project.
66. This project is approved specifically as 1 (single) phase.
67. All concrete terrace drains shall be maintained by the hom association (if on commonly owned property) or the individual owner (if on an individually owned lot). An appropriatelj statement clearly identifying the responsibility shall be place CC&R' s.
The Subdivider shall provide separate sewer, water, gas, and t services with meters to each of the units.
69. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.I
Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
70. Irrigation systems to accommodate future reclaimed water SI designed consistent with Title 17 of the California Administrati\ Offsite future reclaimed water distribution systems should be anti
minimize street excavation.
68.
by the installation of adequately sized Sleeves at crossing PO
71. Some improvements shown on the Tentative Map and/or required t conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City
PC RES0 NO. 2833 -13-
l
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a 0
subdivider has sufficient title or interest to permit the impr to be made without acquisition of title or interest. The st shall conform to Section 20.16.095 of the Carlsbad Municipal CC
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this the owner shall give written consent to the annexation of the ai within the boundaries of the site plan into the existing City of
73. No lot within the subdivision shall be further subdivided. A
Fire:
74. Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building pla be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department.
75. Additional public and/or onsite fire hydrants shall be provided i necessary by the Fire Marshal.
76. The applicant shall submit two (2) copies of a site plan locations of existing and proposed fire hydrants and onsite rl drives to the Fire Marshal for approval.
77. An all-weather access road shall be maintained throughout const1
78. All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtenances s operational prior to combustible building materials being locate project site.
72.
Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1.
this effect shall be placed on the final map.
79. Fire retardant roofs shall be required on all structures.
80. Brush clearance shall be maintained according to the specif- contained in the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guide1 ines Manual.
81. All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems, ai sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the project shall be SI to the Fire Department for approval prior to construction.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall submii Fire Department a map, showing the street network, conforming foll owing criteria:
* 400' scale (1:4800) * Photo reduction on mylar * At least two existing streets and/or intersections st
* Maps shall include at least .the following information:
82.
referenced on the map (not a separate vicinity map)
* Street center1 ines * Street names * Fire hydrant locations
PC RES0 NO. 2833 - 14-
I
,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
lo
11
12
13
e e
83. The applicant shall agree to pay a fee established to cover tht
updating Fi re Department response maps.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day (
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Hall, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehuber Holmes, Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
21
28
il
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO, 2833 -15-
<
I
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 e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2834
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBi CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGAT DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE MAP, AND HILLS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY 1000' FEET NORTHWI OF ALGA ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL. APPLICANT : V I EW PO I NT
CASE NO.: CT 85- 34
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of April, 1
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said
and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and conside'
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the in1
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaratic
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commi
follows:
A)
6)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Mitigated Decl arati on according to Exhibit "ND" , dated January 6, 1985
89011109, dated December 21, 1988, and "PII", dated December 1
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following f
Findinqs ImDacts and Mitisation:
1. Although the proposed project could have a significant effecl environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case mitigation measures have been added to the project to a poi1 clearly no significant effect would occur; and
There is no substantial evidence that the project as conditioned a significant effect on the environment. 2.
3. That the Planning Commission finds and determines that the M
Negative Declaration has been completed in conformance w
California Environmental Quality Act, the state guidelines imp1 said Act, the monitoring requirement as specified in Public R Code Section 21081.6 and the provisions of Title 19 of the I Municipal Code and that the Planning Commission has reviewed, cor and evaluated the information contained in the Declaration.
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
a 0
4. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved for this projec Planning Conmission on April 19, 1989. The Mitigated Declaration identified impacts from the proposed project and s
mitigation measures (agreed to by the applicant), which are in( conditions of approval in Resolution No. 2833 for the Tentative I identified impacts will be mitigated as described below:
a. Biolocw
Identified on the subject site were four sensitive plant affected by the proposed development. The site also cont
acres of land with slopes of 25% or greater which conta chaparral and oak woodland. These areas will be mitigatec preservation of 13.2 acres in permanent open space and an ad 3 acres of open space easements on the perimeter slopes. space areas will be protected from property owner encroachmei placement of stucco walls at the tops of all perimeter Implementation of these measures will preserve the qual i tj environment and the more sensitive plant species located subject site.
b. Archaeol osy
The excavation and data recovery program, specified in the M
Environmental Quality Act regulations regarding the preserv
cultural resources and reduce the overall impact to insignificance -
Negative Declaration, will ensure compliance with the Ca
c. Noise
Potential noise impacts from Alga Road will be mitigated thr use of berm and walls. Balcony barriers have also been reqi second story windows or doors on impacted lots. Implement; these measures will reduce noise impacts to a 1c i nsigni f i cance.
d. Traffic Circulation
Identified impacts were very minor in nature due to the low pi ADTs (900) and will be mitigated through installation of minoi striping. A traffic signal will also be provided at Mimosa i
project will remain therefore at a level of insignificance. Road when traffic warrants are met. Impacts from the 1
Conditions:
1. All conditions of Resolutions 2831, 2832 and 2833 are incorporate1 in their entirety.
2. The proposed project shall comply with the environmental mit monitoring program indicated on attached Exhibit 1, dated April l!
PC RES0 NO. 2834 -2-
/I
I
,
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
20
I,
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plan
Commission of the Gity of Garlsbad, California, held on the 19th day o
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES : None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Chairperson Hall, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehube
Holmes, Erwin, McFadden &. Marcus.
4pZ?@Lr& MATTH W HALL, Chairman
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
-3- PC RES0 NO. 2834
I I Ex hi @ a
+ 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CA 920094859
aitv df &fdBbUb
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARAiION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Northwest corner OF El Camino Real and A approximately 600 feet west of El Camino Real.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone Change from Limited Control to R-1-7500 and Tract Map to subdivide 40.5 acres into 90 single family lots with 1. reserved as permanent open space. Project also includes a Hillside De Permit.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above ( project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Ci Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Mitigated Negative Dec (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive docrirnerits 1: in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, Californi
Comments from the public are invited, Please submit comments in writir
Planning Department within thirty (30) days of date of Yssuance.
DATED: January 6, 1989
CASE NO: CT 85-34/ZC-341/HDP 88-19 Planning Director
APPLICANT: Viewpoint
PUBLISH DATE: January 6, 1989
1 _I >*are .oar ngnc~se, ‘-~2 :er:,- j:ree:, 27. ‘Z:, Sac-am-ts, :A i5ai. ?. , 5,*-j da,j
L *ICE OF mLETIOY AW EWIRO)#NTAL & F~lll( 1;;; y&yrc
.%
1. Project Title Vieuwint
2. Lead Agmcy: City Of Carlsbad 3. Contact Person: Adrienne LS
3a. Street Address: 2075 LES Palms Drive 3b. City: Cart sbad
3c. County: Sen Di ego 3d. Zip: 92009 3e. Phone: (619) G38-1
PROJECT LOCATION 4. COMty: $an Diego Le. City/tmnity: Carlsbad
4b.(optionaO Assessor’s Parcel NO. 215-050-03. OL, 05 4c. Section: Tup.
5a. Cross streets: Alaa Road and El Camino Real 5b. Nearest Camunity: Cartsbad
6. Uithin 2 miles of: a. State Hwy No. 1-5 b. Airports Palmar
7. DOCUMENT TYPE 8. LOCAL ACTION TYPE 10. DEVELOPMENT TYPE
- CEQA 01 - General Plan Update 01 X Residential: Units 90
01 - NOP 02 - Neu Element 02 - Office: Sq. Ft.
For Rural,
02 - Early Cons 03 - General PLan Amer*tnent Acres EnplOl
03 X Ueg Dec
04 - Oraft EIR 05 - Annexation Acres
05 - Supplement/ 06 - Specific Ptan 04 - Industrial: Sq. Ft.
(if so, prior SCH # 07 - Redevelopment Acres Enployees
06 - Master Plan 03 - Shoping/Carmercial: Sq. Ft. -
Elrployees
Subsequent EIR
1 08 X Rezone 05 - Sewer: MGO - HEPA 09 1 Lad Division 06 - Water: MGD
06 - Notice of Intent
07 - Envir. Assessment/
(Subdivision, Parcel Map.
.Tract Map, etc.) 07 - fransportetion: Type
10 - Use Permit 08 - Mineral Extraction: Mineral -
FONSI
08 - Draft EIS 11 - Cancel Ag Preserve 09 - Power Generation: Uattage
0- 12 - Other Type:
10 - final Docunent 9 TOTAL ACRES: GO
09 - Information Only 10 - Other:
11 - Other:
11. PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT
22 - u
24 x u
25 - G
12 J- Public Services 19 x Treffic/Circutation 26 - 1
27 X C 05 & coastal 13 - Schools
06 - Fire Hazard 14 - Septic Systems 21 X Water Quality 28 - 0
07 x Ftooding/Drainage
12 FUHDING (approx.) Federal t State S Total S
13 PRESENT LAND US€ AND ZONING: Vacant - LC (Limited Control)
01 X Aesthetic/Visuel 08 - Geologic/Seisrnic 15 X Sever Capacity
02 - Agricultural Lend
03 X Air Quality
23 - U 09 - Jobs/Housing Balance
10 - Minerals
16 2 Soil Erosion
17 - Solid Uaste
04 x Archeeological/Historicat/ 11 X Noise ’8 - lox i cl H a z ardous
Pa I eont ol og i ca I
20 X Vegetation
14 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS: 90 lot subdivision on 40 acres.
/
/ [? ’ L1.l ./ Date: - 15. SIGNATURE OF LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE: - MOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification nunbers for el[ neu projects if a ScH Hmr already ex
from a (Notice of Preparation or previous draft docunent) please fill it in.
- -* 1: 7
! ld’ { f’ s , i
1 REVIEWING AGENC
CTRPA (Cal TRPA)
TRPA (Tahoe RPA)
Bay Conservation & Oev't Con
0
Resources Agency - Air Resources Board - Conservation
Fi sh and Game Parks and Recreation
X Coastal Commission Office of Historic Preservat
Caltrans District x Native American Heritage Corn
Caltrans - Planning
Cal trans - Aeronautics Public Utilities Comm
California Highway Patrol Energy Comm
Boating and Waterways
Forestry Health Services
State Water Resoruces Control
State Lands Comm
Food and Agr i cul ture
Statewide Health Planning (h
Housing and Community Dev't Board - Headquarters
Regional Water Quality Control Corrections
Board, Region General Services
Division of Water Rights (SWRCB) Office of Local Assistance
Division of Water Quality (SWRCB) Public Works Board
Department of Water Resources Office of Appropriate Tech.
Recl amat i on Board Local Government Unit (OPR)
Sol id Waste Management Board
Go1 orado River Board Other
- Santa Monica Mountains Conse
FOR SCH USE ONLY
Catalog Number Date Received at SCH
Date Review Starts Proponent
Date to Agencies Consultant
Date to SCH Contact Phone
Clearance Date Address
Notes:
J
r
$ 0 LOCATION f@AP
I
67 -I
City of Carl
zc-34 1
CT 85-2
VIEWPOINT HDP 88-
b
-
I 0 FEE: s175.00
- RECEIPT NO:
e
ENVIRONMENTAL Ii-IPACT ASSESSMEtiT FORM - Part 1
(TO Be Completed by APPLICANT)
CASE NO: CT
DATE :
-
3/ -
Applicant:
Address of Applicant: 4241 JUTL‘WD DRIVE SUITE 215
L‘ E S TAN A
SAN DIEGO, CA 92117
Phone Number: ( 619 ) 483-4880
Name, address and phone number oE person to be contacte’d (if o
Appl iCant) : DANIEL E. REHM, HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIArES
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Description of Project: VIEWPOINT-REVISED CAKLSBAD TRACT 85-34; ‘rHF,
SUBDIVISION OF APPROX. 40.5 ACRES TQ CREarE A 94 - UNlT [sJuE-FAMr1.y w
SUBDLVISION.
Project Locat ion/Address: CUKKEN‘I’LY VACANT PROI’! KIY I,uCAIF:I) ON IfIE NVH
ALGA ROAD, IMMEDIATELY WEST OF MTPIOSA DRIVE.
Assessor Parcel Number: 215 - 050 - 3,4 AND 5.
Zone oE Subject Property: EXISTING ZONE: LC!FKO~’OS[:I) ZorJL-: KL
Proposed Use of Site: 93 UNIT SINGLE FilP!LLY L)Et/lLItEU SUf3DIVISLU
List all other applicable applications related to this project!
REVISED CARLSBAD TRACT 85-34; ZONE CHANGE 341.
2+ Describe the a(AviLi area, includinq dis 9 ~qui,.,inq natural
made characteristics: also provide precise slope analysLs wh
THE PROJECT SI-: IS A CURRENTLY Vr?CAYT PROPERTY OF APPR(
ACREAS t CHARACTERIZED BY VXRLABLE SLQfE STEEP3ESS AND TOP#Cmpkrc FOR~S 85% OF THE SITE HAS SLOPES 252 OR LESS IN STEEPNESS,
appropriate.
[IF [l{E RF+\[N[~c 8,6% OF THE AREA IS BETWEEN 2540% SLOPE AND 6.5Z O'F THE SITE EXCEEDS &I
EXISTING SLOPES FALL EITHER WEST TO SOUTHWEST OR EAST TO SouTHmsr A~'I-\Y
HIGH POINT OF THE SITE WHICH IS LOCATED SLIGHT= NORTHEAST FRO?! 7ti~ (;EN
SITE, A 100 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT CONTAINING SDG&E HLGH VOLTAGE LINES C~O:
SITE IN A NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION CROSSING THE SOVTHWEST QCTADrWNT OF mi
3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the
and/or operation of the project.
1) SUBDIVISION DESIGNED TO WIXIZE SOUTHERLY ORIENTATION OF INDIVIDUXI
OPTIMUM SOLAR ACCESS.
2) CUT AND FILL EARTHWORK QUANTITIES BALANCE ONSITE THUS CONSERVING EN1
NECESSARY FOR TRANSPORT OF IMPORT OR EXPORT,
3) THE 'IRCULATION DESIGN OF THE SUBDIVISION IS THE MOST EFFICIENT PATI
GIVEN THE TOPOGRAPHIC CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE, THUS MINIMIZING THE I
VEHICULAR TRIPS WITHIN THE PROJECT. 4. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of uni
range o€ sale prices or rents, and type oE household size ex
APPROX. NO. OF UNITS *PPROX* UNIT SIZE APPROX, SALE PRICE APPT
93 1500-2000 SF. $130,000-$160,000
5. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city
regionally oriented, square €ootaqe OE sales area, and loadi
Eacilities.
N/h
6. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift 1 o ad i ng E ac i 1 i t .i e s .
N/A
7. If institutional, indicate the mayor function, estimated emE
shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and communi!
to be derived from the project.
NiA
-2-
'X, ENVIRONMENTAeMPh-l ANALYSIS 6
Answer the following questions by Placing d chock in the a, space. (Discuss all items checked "yes". Attach additloni
necessary,)
YES
1) could the project significantly chanqe present
land uses in the vicinity of the activity?
2) Could the activity affect the use o€ a recreational area, or area of important aesthetic value?
3) Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood?
4) Could the activity result in the displacement of
-
community residents?
5) Could the activity increase the number of low and
6) Could the activity decrease the number of low and
7) Are any of the natural or man-made Eeatures in the
modest cost housing units in the city?
modest cost housing units in the city?
activity area unique, that is, not €ound in other parts of the county, state or nation?
8) Could the activity significantly affect an historical or archaeological site or its settings? YES
9) Could the activity siqnificantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource?
10) Does the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource?
11) Could the activity significantly affect Eish, wildlife or plant Iffe?
12) Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the activity area?
13) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's lagoons, bays, or tidelands?
14) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's beaches?
IS) Could the activity result in the erosion or
16) Could the activity serve to encourage development
elimination of agricultural lands?
of presently undeveloped areas or intensify develop-YES ment of already developed areas?
-3-
, e 0 YES
17) Will the activity require a variance frcm
established environmental standards lair, water, noise, etc.)? -
18) Will the activity require certification, authoriza- tion or issuance of a permit by any local, state or
Eederal environmental control agency? YES
19) Will the activity require issuance o€ a variance
or conditional use permit by the City?
20) will the activity involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials?
facilities in a flood plain?
facilities in the area of an active fault?
-
213 Will the activity involve construction of
22) Will the activity involve construction of
23) Will the activity involve construction of
24) Could the activity result in the generation o€
25) Could the activity result in the generation of
- ,.
facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater? YES
significant amounts of noise? YES
significant amounts o€ dust? YES
trees, or other materials? :26) will the activity involve the burning OE brush,
27) Could the activity result in a significant chanae in the quality o€ any portion of the reqion's air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground water, off-shore.)
consumption (electricity, oii', natural gas, etc.)?
Land form? YES
(a) Indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic yards: 243600 CUT/237600 FILL.
(b) Percentage of alteration to the present
(c) Maximum height oE cut or fill slopes:
28) Will the project substantially increase €uel
29) Will there be a significant change to existing
land Eorm: 76.3 2
30 FEET .
30) Will the activity result in substantial increases
31) Is the activity carried out as part of a larger
in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets?
project or series of projects?
-4-
e - '11. STATEMENT d)NON-S IGNI F ICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFF ECTs
If you have answered yes to one Or more O€ the questions
1 but you think the activity will have no significant en
effects, indicate your reasons belaw:
111. COMMENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS IN SECT
(If additional space is needed for answering any questio
additianal sheets as needed,)
- -- Signature pletinq Report)
Date Signed 3/&/E8
..
-5-
Exhibi
J 0
ENVIRO % ENTAL IMPACT ASSES8MENT FORM - pm~ zr
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CT 85-341zc-341
DATE : 12/19/88
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: Westana Builders
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT:
4242 Jutland Drive. Suite 215
San Dieuo. CA 92117 (619) 483-4880
3, DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: 9/5/85 (See attached memo)
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
- YES MAYBE
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
.a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures?
compaction or overcovering of the sail? x
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel or a
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
b. Disruptions, displacements,
river or stream or the bed af the
m
YES MAY BE -
2. Air - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
b. The creation of objectionable
of ambient air quality?
odors? - -
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
e. Discharge into surface waters,
-
-
-2-
r m 0
- YES MAY BE
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, microflora and aquatic plants) ? -
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
agricultural crop?
-
- X
d. Reduction in acreage of any -
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels?
Liaht and G1 are - Will the proposal sig-
nificantly produce new light or glare?
Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?
6.
7.
8.
-3-
I I,
- YES MAY BE
0
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
have significant results in:
natural r8sburces?
natural resource?
involve a significant risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited
radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset conditions?
11. PoDulation - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?
13. TransDortation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
10. Risk of Upset - Does the proposal
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
>I
movement? x
b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
air traffic?
motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
-4-
1 8,
- YES MAY BE
0
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need €or new or altered governmental services in any of
the following areas; - a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
f. Other governmental services?
15. Eneruv - Will the proposal have
facilities?
including roads?
significant results in:
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development
16. Utilities - Will the proposal have
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
.. of new sources of energy?
significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?.
b. Communications systems?
c. Wat-?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health - Will the proposal have.. significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
-5-
, 7 Q,
- YES MAY BE
e
18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have
significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in creation of an aesthetically offensive public view?
19. Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Archeolosical/Historical/Paleontolouical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or bui Id ing 3
Analyze viable alternatives to the ProDosed sroiect such as:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desi1 c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
a) Due to the hilly terrain of the subject site, the proposed proj
would be difficult to develop in a phased manner. Grading d
development would not appreciably alter the environmental impac
to the existing site constraints - open space easement, st
slopes, and connection with existing roadways. ClUSt€ development with small lots is an alternate site design; howet the biological impacts would not be any different. The neqat
visual impacts would most likely be much greater- Larger g
would be required and thus more grading. Such a project wc also present a very dense appearance and be incompatible b approved development to the west.
-
21,
. in one area would impact another area. Additionally, phasing
b) Other site designs for the proposed development are limited
-6-
101 : VIA&E ALTERNATIVES T & HE PROPOSED PROJECT (Continued)
e) This alternative would involve a change in the density of
project and would result in a reduction of the number
residential units. As a consequence, the project would gene
slightly less traffic, air quality emissions and noise. Eff associated with development onsite and the conversion of va
land to urbanized uses would be essentially the same under
option. Adoption of this alternative could reduce effects
biological and visual resources by reducing the encroachmeni the project into steep slopes and sensitive biological habit;
The current project has already been designed to avoid tl
areas as much as possible. A project redesign would
eliminate any significant environmental effects. Given current zoning, General Plan designation, and open SI
dedication, a reduced project is not feasible.
d) Alternative uses are not appropriate for this constrained S: Single family residential is the most flexible and site sensit
type of land use for this location. Single family residentia: also consistent with the General Plan and LCP designation for 1 site.
.. e) The proposed project is consistent with development occurrinc the vicinity. This includes residential units to the south west. The project, therefore, will be consistent with surrounc
land uses. Due to existing or approved development, pul
facilities will be available to serve this site.
f) Development on another site could possibly reduce the numbei . impacts created by the project; however, these impacts have t
. addressed in the attached mitigation measures. The site w( still be designated for residential uses so that construcl
elsewhere would in effect only delay development of the site
g) The "no project" alternative would retain the site in
undeveloped state. The changes in land use, visual qual
biology, cultural resources and noise as well as incremei
increases in traffic and air quality would not occ 'Implementation of this alternative would not necessarily elimii
future development and associated environmental effects since
property is designated by the City for residential development
is surrounded by existing and future residential developmc Given the continued growth in the City of Carlsbad, as well a,
the entire region, the demand for new residential development i
continue. The proposed project is consistent with the Genc
Plan and as conditioned would not have any significant, advc
environmental effects. Therefore this alternative would re!
only in a delay of development of the site.
-7-
m - YES MAYBE m
'22. Mandatorv findinas of siqnificance -
a. 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 CO~Unity, 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.
b. 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.)
c. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (*'cumulatively con- siderablell 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.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
-
either directly or indirectly? -
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The applicant proposes the development of a 40.5 acre site with SlIlgle-family residential dwelling units. A proposed open space 1 including the SDG&E easement, would retain approximately 13.2 acres the total 40.5 acres) in natural open space in the western portion the site, with approximately 3 additional acres of open space easernei
placed on the slopes throughout the proposed development. The averi proposed lot size is 8,800 square feet, resulting in a developme density of approximately 3.1 dwelling units (d.u.1 per acre of lar Access to the site would be from Alga Road to the south and from th
-a-
1 0 - DIYCUSSION OF ENVIRON AF, TAL EVALUATION (Continued)
future southern extension of Mimosa Street to the site's n boundary. Internal circulation would include the project's ex
of Mimosa Street south to Alga Road, an internal loop road w Connections t0 Mimasa Street ,. and three small cul-de-sacs,
A landscaping plan has been proposed for all manufactured slopes project. The exterior slopes which are contiguous to the ope area will provide a transitional appearance from the existing habitat to semi-natural species along the bottom of the slc ornamental species from the middle to the top of the slope. The on the interior of the development will be primarily planted
mixture of ornamental species.
The preliminary grading plan proposes 213, 000 cubic yards of fill, resulting in no export material. Manufactured slopes of
1 gradient would be created in a number of areas onsite, -with a slope height of 30 feet. The proposed grading plan would result majority of the development concentrated in the eastern and portions of the site, with the open space lot situated to the the residences, The Southwestern boundary of residential deve
would be the SDGbrE easement. Some grading would occur southwestern corner of the site along Alga Road to accommod# construction of Alga Road.
1. Earth
The proposed development will regrade the existing north-soutl by lowering it approximately 20 feet. The design typically pi terraced pads following the general terrain. This is con5 with the City's grading and hillside ordinances which hav implemented in the project. Any increase in runoff will be dc
by way of temporary basins and erosion control practice! unstable earth conditions or unique geologic structures are on the project site or general vicinity.
2. Air
The project would contribute to the incremental increase il
and regional emissions; however, the residential buildout ( site is planned for in the City's General Plan. It has al! included in the residential buildout of the Local Fac Management Plan for Zone 6. The emissions generated b development have been anticipated and would not adversely the attainment of regional air quality standards. Const
emissions are considered short-term and insignificant.
-9-
Q
' DI:!CUSSION OF ENVIRO dhTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
A 3. Water
Development of the project would create impervious surfacg which would reduce absorption rates and increase surface ri runoff Velocities. To accommodate this runoff, when del
occurs the project will be conditioned to install drainage fa4 and slope erosion control measures. As identified in t: Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, all existing drainagc within this zone are adequate to serve the residents anc property in this area. The subject site will connect underground pipe system and empty into an existing mastei desiltation basin which discharges into Batiquitos Laqoon.
4. Plant Life
The proposed project would develop 27.3 of the 40.5 acres w project site. There are no rare or endangered plant species on the property. Identified on the subject site are four ! plants species which will be affected by the proposed devl This represents an incremental but insignificant impact regional populations of these plant species.
The project site contains 6.2 acres of land with slopes c greater which contain mixed chaparral, oak woodland, and areas. Of this 6.2 acres, 1.9 acres would be impacted, how acres are already disturbed. This loss is offset by the ret a much larger 13.2 acre open space system onsite. Three-ten
acre of oak woodland has already been removed by the constr
Alga Road.
The proposed landscape plan would introduce ornamental spe'
a site currently containing native vegetation. The plan wo native species directly adjacent to all open space areas. Th native species would transition into mixed species and 1
purely ornamental species. This gradual transition would s buffer between native and non-native plant life, redu potential impacts to below a level of significance.
5. Animal Life
Development of the site would remove some animal habitat; retention of the open space onsite would serve as a functiona for species in the project vicinity. In addition, reduce would be expected as larger predators are excluded a influences take effect. Therefore, the reduction of the an onsite does not represent a significant impact.
-10-
1 eJ
L DIPCUSSION OF ENVIRO __ JR NTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
.- Although development of the project would reduce some of the
habitat onsite, the retention Of the 13.2 acre open space serve as a functional habitat, thus reducing the adverse i
a level of insignificance.
6. Noise
The traffic generated by the proposed project would incr contribute to the community noise levels along Alga Road ai project vicinity. community buildout would increase noise le
the 60 dB(A) CNEL standard in those areas onsite immediately
to Alga Road. The incorporation of noise walls and balcon
those areas affected by the significant traffic noise wou onsite noise levels to below a level of significance.
I
7. Liaht and Glare
The development of the Viewpoint site would introduce st residential lighting and reflective surfaces (windows) on a is currently undeveloped. However, residential homes exist south of the site, the Pacific Rim project is being developed to the site to the west, and a commercial/post office/cit- complex is proposed directly to the east. Because there street lights in the area, there will be more liqht and g1a
future Once the adjacent complex and Pacific Rim are built
project would incrementally, and insignificantly, contributd
and glare in the project vicinity.
8.. Land Use
The proposed project will develop a currently vacant site single-family dwelling units and an open space lot. Altho is an alteration of the existing land use, residential devel
the site at a density of up to 4 dwelling units per ac conformance with the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The the site would place the zoning of the site in conformance
General Plan designation, therefore, no significant land us would occur.
9. Natural Resources
Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally c
to the depletion of fossil fuel and other natural resources for construction of the project. This is not regarc
significant impact in view of the limited scale of the proj
10. Risk of Upset
The proposed project, due to its residential nature, does nc a significant increase in the use of chemicals, pesticides, hazardous materials.
-11-
I e
DI'XUSSION OF ENVIRO !ab "TAL EVALUATION (Continued)
' 11. PoDulatioq
The proposed project will incrementally increase the Populat region, However, such a development is planned for the sit,
proposed density of 3.1 dwelling units per acre is below I growth control point of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. The ;
population is below that which has been anticipated and represent a significant impact on population and growth in tl
12. Housinq
This project would create an incremental demand for 2 housing. The City's Growth Management Program ensures additional housing is developed, all required public facil services are provided concurrent with need. In accordance, I
are anticipated.
13. TransDortation/Circulation
The proposed development will generate additional vehicula
but the estimated 900 ADTs is not considevled to be signific:
generation was included in the Local Facilities Management Zones 6 and 19 to determine impacts on adjacent roadways. ? impacts of this development on adjacent circulation systen
minimal. Mimosa Street will be extended or improved thr project to the north to eventually connect to Dove Lar connection will improve circulation in the general vicinit]
14. Public Services
The proposed project was included in the Local Facilities 1 Plan for Zone 6. The public facility fees/conditions imposc plan area will be used to mitigate any impacts upon public within the project vicinity.
16. Utilities
The public facility fees required to be paid by this projec used to adequately mitigate any impacts upon public utilit: the project vicinity.
17. Human Health
The proposed residential project will not create any healt as a result of development of the subject site.
18. Aesthetics
The proposed grading plan for the project would create mal slopes which would range up to 30 feet in height. In the t
-12-
I a
- DI3CkJSSION OF ENVIRO IdE NTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
portion of the property, these slopes would be above manufactured slopes of up to 20 feet in height, resulting in artificial slope along the eastern site boundary that would b from El Camin0 Real to the east. However, buildout of the c
complex between the road and the Viewpoint property and the
landscaping of the slope would ultimately obstruct the viet
slope. Views of the site from the south would not be sign
altered, although the 30 foot manufactured slope would be v motorists along Alga Road and Mimosa Views from thc
Rim project to the west would not change appreciably. No sic
impacts are anticipated.
Street.
19. Recreation
The project will be required to pay park-in-lieu fees as a
contributing towards the fulfillment of park requirements
southwest quadrant of the City.
20. Archaeolouical/Historical/Paleontolouical
Development of the Viewpoint project would result in thl
disturbance of prehistoric site SDi-4358 (W-108) and indirect.
the portion of SDi-4358 (W-108) located to the north of the E
This disturbance is considered a potentially significant i cultural resources. A data recovery program will be initiate(
sites, and these significant impacts would be reduced to beloi
of significance.
22. Mandatory Findinas of Sisnificance -
a) The biological resource mitigation program that is proposed of this project will set aside 13.2 acres as permanent open a means of preserving the quality of the environment and
sensitive plant species located on the subject site.
b) The project helps implement one of the long term goals of the Plan by providing an "urban low-medium density resident; characterized by single-family homes - 0-4 dwelling units an
c) The impacts created by the proposed project are not signifi
will be mitigated through the conditions of approval imposec
project as well as those listed in Section V of this documen
d) The project should have both direct and indirect positive ef humans by implementing the City's residential and open space
-13-
f e m Iv$ * D3TERMINATION (Ta Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effe
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signif
effect on the environment, there Will not be a significant eff 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
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
X
,n
I' ; vi' :Id^ * (I3( L,ni. /I/, ,/ p ~ Date Signature /
1 1 I4/& Date
V.MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
All submittals to the City of Carlsbad to fulfill the conditio1 mitigated Negative Declaration shall reference: a) the project fi b) this Negative Declaration's State Clearinghouse number ai specific mitigation number listed below.
Conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall a landscape plan to the Planning Director for review and ai The landscape plan shall incorporate "coastal sage scrub" tyl materials in the landscape pal'ette alonq the site's easterl] The intent Of this planting is to design a corridor of "natuz biological habitat which is aesthetically pleasing, contrc erosion, and is not a fire hazard.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant will en1
a common maintenance agreement with the adjacent property c the east for maintenance of the slope between the two pro1
The applicant will also agree to install an irrigation systei the subject site and provide a stub-out for the irrigatior of the easterly property owner.
2.
-14-
* #r 0 e -- MI- TGATING MEASURES (Continued)
' 3. Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant will a designate the westerly 13.2 acres as permanent open space.
4. Noise
To mitigate the exterior first and second floor impacts the measures would be required on Lots 44-47, and Lot 1:
a) A 4-foot wall or berm located along the top of the slo]
b) A 5-foot wall or berm located along the top of the slo]
rear of Lot 47.
rear of Lot 46.
c) A +foot wall or berm located along the top of the si01 rear of Lots 44 and 45.
d) A 6.5-foot wall or berm located along the top of the slo
e) A 7-foot balcony barrier would be required on Lots 1, 45
side yard of Lot 1.
47.
5. Paleontoloav
a) Prior to any grading at the project site, a paleontolog be retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and the grading plans to determine if the proposed grading wi
portions of the Santiago Formation.
b) A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils the Small nature Of Some of the fossils present in the Formation, it may be necessary to collect large samples for laboratory processing through fine screens..
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct q
the area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate e
and, if necessary, salvage'artifacts.
d) All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, n institution with a research interest in the materials, sc San Diego Natural History Museum.
e) Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologis1 grading activities of the project shall be resolvec Planning Director.
c)
-15-
'! e e
-4. MI" IGATING MEASURES (Lontinued)
* 6. Archaeoloav
a) Prior to approval of the final map or the issuance of permit, whichever comes first, the applicant shall archaeological mitigation on the subject site as detail, Data Recovery Plan prepared by Westec Services and dal
1988
b) A11 archaeological material recovered during the project described in a professional report which receives si distribution to insure its availability to future resear copy of this report shall be submitted to the Planning prior to the occupancy of any units.
All archaeological material recovered during the project donated to a local institution which has proper facilj curation, display, and use by interest scholars and the public.
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
process a Site Development Plan. This plan shall address b elevations, building height, and distance of buildings from
slopes.
8. Prior to approval of any grading or clearing permit, the ap shall fence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and P Director, all areas to be preserved. The preservation ari fence details shal.1 be delineated on the grading plan.
c)
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING M
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
0- J- 0- 2rg 74--&
Date s i g na t ur/
-16-
Ed!dENTAL
I I 3 $2 LttJ 3 vc, a P, Io4 'rJ 4 .-I Odd &A- rc
Q) u.
a02 0
a$- 5 .z -4 Oa fac ?E
=I. a8g
g ET; d 2%
0 * t 40 LL nzn
u 0 ,pz n g5"
b 8' "Oeu
z d $§S=: z *%a% :=:
2 S!dg m a
0 C ;E: h4 E5 ax n
E :2 a,
0 C plm
+=A ro Ea 0
w eqg! cir di
m
0 rc Q, 6s
Q) m 0 03
arnz - ;!kg Y *-
i$F am gegc .- m
E W 2D* 2+J
1
N
LA p- a4
cc
C 0 3 CB ,o*y =r +, ZQ 3
M I 2.A 2s Ln gu'llg 4c 28
$Z *2P, n e
43 ** u c.-I 0 6 a0 Ltdl va p+oe
092s
\
F
I
5 4
a 2
0 gz
0 S
8
bo
40
'?Si c
a4*+r 8440 eSSg = n
rLg 2:g. x 5 md 04 & *c4= + I@$$
-4 C 8 Q, aag
gzg;
"8 ;8 p
3; 0 8);
* a ZSZa
i!!#G; p,:
{R: 1
+>
A 00 S .-
m
Q)=r *- I
31
>- CP)JW El3:gl p:
2s am
2333 cQ)
2; e$
.. "&ST: ;E
c,
4c
$8
t;, 0 Em w
oal E&
*m
;J
-z *.( L-h 2x22 p1* H 0 ou
-..... U. c
411918 MITIGATIOri MONITORING m ChcLKLIST
rn .w bo rc zn 0-
0 . - 3. u- G s U 2 2s ms g *E 2 2 '3 QUl 3 '3;
kt; ig C
SF WE 2: $5 b, ab,
sa4 a 9 .: 2 % 2 m E : 2 .t!
LS $4: no nc 2b ns :s.."
%g
a!$
S rc 0 .-
sm Q)
5 U
a
6
.- rnL Q rnQ) Q .-Q m* Q zm
= .- om '0
LVI L,
LL LC
L *-
05" 4n *Jp &2 z 35;
1 ad
dr-4 0 a
h42 $=*,
M.-i eoc 408
42% c*e 0 dl
a- roc1 kg"' - z.8 i
P) 01 I 2 SI:
'1 tJ
Ltd
SPO
*4
;a@
-I 815: o E
S
*I
C 8Si; - m Emel
n - e(
t'E3;
4& ygq "'e:
U c, II .c SO *J G+Zg 0 -Ll+ L
-a rn *., J-. ro Fa6g: 2% kg 0
€Ea 2s L $20 Q) ;Am a~ E h dm< QEp p .& gss-= uti -4 he cfs mrn alU *- Q) .- ags -- a$ ;;V)QL * v:sg,
"3 Ck & -I2dl
41
*a0 0 Lt4c E 1+, t
*bOQbOI/ am6
x,' d -4c =? c=I. =I.o ag+,
Q)u * ,rm Q j,;,Q 4 c 23334
.. rn- - uu3 al N
mc, m
S ual
e- .w c, rn E- rcb. o fllZ8b me- u - Lm- Q) .. . .
Q .f "g q Q)* t QZ-kE i +i'iilf
I
+Y
=m*a
- -+JQfS m
0 wptw v, m.,
QL~ Q)~ =S bb-*VIL
Q)lQ
rn?
OQn nm a2 ma^^ 2
6 $2".
522 ++J
OUJFD al UId '3 4 4 Odd LCXh a0-
e
M lJ&
F
rl OQ fiac
rc 0
N
6, Lg::
a $a Cr
=t M *qc 09 2 40
(age@
m hCi
: UcS W :<:*
i, 2s e,
%J IdZZ -4c $8 s 321
@do= arc L6 - =f 52a0 H e T d Q$SZ
Nd 4 % ak
El 8228 0 d a ;E: hFl gz
Elg e: z:
u 8- gb3"
:a 0 36
g3di g;!!
a4;; 3-4
+; 3 d
\D zqg LC
N
N nu nrl
0
u 0 cLc e 85P)
C 0 4 fn 3 -4 In
09 ..
LCP, 0ea ~ ,a
UI C 5
W a83
x a
s
E 2
UQ OQI
VI w IP E;
bo
$0 $"
34 m 042+ fa~i I
6k s bo-4 a+
L 0
L*
-
.I m S r;:
0 0% c, -0
az
UI rc h *$
3 -L "a k $S 2 u; .- m L s *- 5- U hi
2:g .SA a os iE
.- TU 'Q
u *- -Ls L 0 .- mm LV4
.u p
.; f .g Q g rn cQ : 8 .z 8;;
S .- . V
6
a F:
2 L 0,
?- Q$ mo
0 m ss
xm
aJ -0, 82
QQY alorl 2 n nn nEm I%
.-
I a2 LmL
aU:
cc 060,
6,. z -IP QU
xJ3 e2l h4 a4 -00 sa0
-44 0 0
@4 LC42 azC,
""8
42n
$g@ h4&
v!! .- .- P 80s ar S s * '- S Bf $.
S m S m Ea8 E n E -c 4
c 0IDm IC, I
a g,. m 2 3 rn2
a ti;:
CQR 04 6- toe
CI,
r) cn S F1 S
C m
.E
- 5 n
haJ 0 0 k46
*boQbO! w 4* QeSPS IQgg
E4". g: oe.2 Q:; ZSQ,E .. Oh = $ .E 0 4 3 233$ E iou
r) Q.5 & & .E E .m c:, 0 am $--s rnaw
2eum
w .- S - -de Q)g g% azsQ I i2g$ c,
rl 1"
3A
>- a1 .- ms * CQIe -50 r:
0 $ma J -uw
0
e,
rl.rla, g""s 4 ZS!!;
Lc L-L
ZS X
aam wo 3p:
CLU
oa =a w 2'E 0 2s P)u
v 83i
+pgy 2:;3Cl
m to Fa851
+LC 4r
BC6si
ss q-j
.- m? p2 4 qz;
-am gu.;; 5, E$$ 6 SC:?
; ;m:
-LC+ I - .- 02 -n
€2
2s SI
;,.m $2 Coa
2,nE a emL
.-
C L la m
.z a .- m i jrs! s?
zm -u
Jm tn Dl*
> 1- m QE
L- .-
ma urn .u e mu. --
a, '- O P2S2S
rl &FH, * ~TlSZO
-a m; 4 6- 0 E
It
424a
=Vl*a
'd aLa
*
Ef4VIRUflMENTAL
3 $3 I
kZ:CI O :b pr) aog - 9 cns rc 2b4 0 :om
cr) SPC' 2.z Q)
a Q.. ~ n2; F +--4dv 0 A m2.f
P, ms8 i 3pz ;u =-
gsg;
'""0
W 3 s;
9? :a@
8 0s: 2
3 ;*2* 0 :3
go% 28 UCAO kO1
Oeo ;z "4 240iz kti
z /ij 895:
BE
di
rJ, +C
cr4J c, o*a al tpd q.4 -4 OA-4
*- .- EU rcLm
so
Qm+ 9) 6;
0) L"U .
a om Q
= .2LS L L Crn * pr) 02 LC 40 N pa a.4
0 cn
a$R+J
a
rl
m -$ 0, I d GQ 0 m co *' -4c
0 D.Q urn e '20" n \ -
aB4 I U
U .% &J 2 m
$852
2 #;;
N4
;E: kd ts c
02 m: G o b :* UY
'"68 M *'boO
2 si ;a z4 ad:@ lasi =
c LJ Ip
$8 5 M-4 fad
+JcS= zags
4mc
oc" dr-4, --$e
g{E; $7 s
>- g*aC afgp
"8 $3 2
X 0 H 4 J%3g nl a
0 czn 0@3 e> m4
0 z ZrX 0
w
Lrc
C 04
2:p
d> w
CI C .-
a II
0 a1
CI .- C@le t
ma, 2: .. Q) m c" 2 k-
2n 1 0 MC 4 L 2 Eg X O 3p ZL 4 Ew
2z 22
-U -a ,;j 5 d464 $;; s m>
M sa 0 0Ip 4 aL 'Clk - * LLQ or x 4 3c
wo -e on4 =tL PI4 64 0 4lu
4/19/89 MITIGATIOI{ MONITORING ChciKL IST
T + a T
T E P
'T
hdr
a64
E u-. CC Om@
a
a .a
i332
tu-
32 a2 2
' 2::
d@O ad
-44 0 a
kd2
!lrr
Ut-4 8
-.loti
422
ro'C
33
.n 02
!E!!
44 iD,
ea:
L.J
$a gF1
8C 2
" 2etV
4 c -4ap
a 9lld = .;'q
$8 !z
rl +, alrcca
k 03 I'S clu
Q 434 &COk
w& =a>
4 cr
&4 vg
snu
+A
8 4;
eoc ;Po@
c~e 04 6
kc@
CL am AC
cl
001
Ti
0 k.4 c 3'
9)Qm urn M
rlk -8-4 90CB mo
I+ 9-4c 3Q'
1
q!3; -krl
0 C
+J am 0,
'3 4 6 2 :&Pi j
4
or: 0)
,* w e
,
MEMORANDUM
DATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 1988
TO: FILE
FROM: PROJECT PLANNER, ADRIENNE LANDERS
SUBJECT: CT 85-34, VIEWPOINT, EIA PART I1
When the Viewpoint project was submitted, an Environmental Assessment Form P I1 was completed by staff. Since that time a number of changes in City pol occurred which necessitated a revision and updating of the responses in the P, 11 form. These changes contributed to revisions of the project as well as del,
in processing, Some of these changes included the City’s Growth Managem,
Ordinance, the Zone 6 Plan, the Hillside Ordinance, the proposed noise standan and the Zone 19 park dedication. For these reasons, staff determined it WOI be appropriate to revise and update the previously prepared Part 11.
\
AML:af ct8534 .mem
1
< 0 W
APt LIGATION COMPLETE DAT November 30, 1988
STAFF REPORT
DATE : April 19, 1989
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANN I NG DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 88-19 VIEWPOINT - Zone Change from LC to R- 7500-Q/Open Space and tentative tract map for subdivision of 40 acres into 90 buildable lots and 1 open space lot and a Hillsi Development Permit for property located approximately 1000 fe
northwest of the intersection of Alga Road and El Camino Real in t Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 6.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2834 recommending APPROVAL the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and ADOPT Resolutio 2831, 2832, and 2833 recommending APPROVAL of ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 88-19, bas on the findings and subject to the conditions contained herein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The app’licant is proposing a tentative tract map to subdivide the subject si into 90 single family lots and one open space lot. The proposed open space 1 would retain approximately 13.2 acres in natural open space in the weste portion of the site, with approximately 3 additional acres of open spa easements placed on the slopes throughout the project. The project, locat
within the Coastal Zone, will also require approval of a zone change fr
Limited Control (LC) to R-1-7500(Q)/Open Space (OS) as well as approval of
Hillside Development Permit. The site has a General Plan designation
Residential Low Medium (RLM 0-4) which will continue to be in effect.
The proposed project was originally submitted in September 1985; however, duri
review of the project a number of changes in City policy occurred whi
contributed to revisions of the project as well as delays in processing. So
of these changes included the La Costa Traffic Study, the Growth Manageme,
Ordinance, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, the Hillsic
Ordinance, the City Noise Policy, and the southwest quadrant park dedicatioi The applicant has addressed these policy changes and has redesigned the proje several times to accommodate each change as it occurred.
The average proposed lot size is 8,800 square feet, resulting in a developme
density of approximately 3.1 du/acre. The project connects with Mimosa Stre
Lane to the north.
to the south and provides for a connection with the future extension of DO
1
I' e a ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 8&-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989 PAGE 2
The topography of the site is dominated by a north-south trending ridge, whi is cut by numerous gullies, particularly to the west. The eastern side of I ridge is relatively level. The site vegetation consists primarily of nati chaparral, with small areas of oak woodland in the northwestern and southwest€ corners of the site, and scrub vegetation in the eastern portion of the si1 The entire site drains to the south toward Batiquitos Lagoon. The project s- is essentially undeveloped at this time. A portion of the grading for the AI Road extension has recently been completed along the southern boundary of t
site, extending into the Pacific Rim development. Improvements onsite inclu
a number of dirt roads that traverse the property and a San Diego Gas a Electric (SDG&E) service easement that contains a high voltage overhe transmission line across the southwestern quarter of the site. Adjacent to t property to the north are agricultural lands and single-family residences; the south are single-family homes; to the east is the recently approved Von C Ahe commercial site; and to the west is an undeveloped elementary school sit
The preliminary grading plan proposes 251,063 cubic yards of cut, 205,232 cut yards of fill, with 45,831 cubic yards of export material. Manufactured sloy: of a 2 to 1 gradient would be created in a number of areas onsite, with maximum slope height of 30 feet. Slopes along the northeast corner would rea a maximum of 54 feet when combined with approved slopes to the east. T proposed grading plan would result in the majority of the developme concentrated in the eastern and central portions of the site, with the op space lot situated to the west of the residences. The southwestern boundary residential development would be the SDG&E easement. Some grading would occ in the southwestern corner of the site along Alga Road to accommodate t construction of Alga Road.
Due to the complex nature of the proposed project, all discretionary actions a related planning issues are discussed individually below.
111. ANALYSIS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL
P1 anninq Issues
1. Does the design of the proposed subdivision address t environmental sensitivities of the site?
DISCUSSION
When the project was submitted in 1985, staff completed an Environmental Impa Assessment Part I1 (Initial Study) which determined that there was a potenti< for limited environmental impacts. The project planner at that time made tl decision to require environmental studies which included biology, traffil noise, and archaeology. These studies identified potential impacts ai mitigation measures which would reduce the environmental impacts to a level I non-significance. These were prepared as a comprehensive environmental analys (Exhibit "X") and included proposed mitigation measures. Staff refined the
I e 0 ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 88-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989 PAGE 3
measures and included them as conditions in the Mitigated Negative Declaratic The applicant agreed to comply with the conditions and signed the Mitigat Negative Declaration. Major areas of environmental concern are discussed bel c
1. Circulation
The proposed development will generate additional vehicular traffic of estimated 900 ADTs. The area between the project and Dove Lane has I potential to develop with approximately 40 additional single family dwell in! This area, in addition to the project site, would generate a total of 1,330 AL which can be accommodated by the proposed circulation design. The project h been conditioned to design and bond for a traffic signal at the intersection Mimosa Street and Alga Road. In addition, the project will be responsible f 100% of the cost of a signal at this intersection when traffic signal warran are met. This project has also been conditioned to provide mitigation for A1 Road and El Camino Real as identified in the Zone 6 plan (Exhibit "F").
2. Rialaav
The proposed project would develop 27.3 of the 40.5 acres within the projc site. There were no rare or endangered plant species observed on the propert Identified on the subject site were four sensitive plants species which will affected by the proposed development. This represents an incremental t insignificant impact to the regional populations of these plant species.
The project site contains 6.2 acres of land with slopes of 25% or greater whi contain mixed chaparral, oak woodland, and disturbed areas. Of this 6.2 acre 1.9 acres would be impacted, however, 0.4 acres are already disturbed and acres in developable areas consist of isolated pockets of land. This loss offset by the retention of a much larger 13.2 acre open space system onsi (Exhibit "X", page 17). Three-tenths of an acre of oak woodland has alrea been removed by the construction of Alga Road; however, the proposed developme will not encroach or disturb the remainder of the oak woodland.
A landscaping plan has been proposed for all manufactured slopes on the projec The exterior slopes which are contiguous to the open space area will provide transitional appearance from the existing natural habitat to semi -natur species along the bottom of the slope and ornamental species from the middle the top of the slope. The slopes on the interior of the development will primarily planted with a mixture of ornamental species.
3. Archaeoloqv
Development of the proposed project would result in the direct disturbance an archaeological site located on the north-south ridge running through t middle of the property (Exhibit "X", page 5). The City has traditional required the developer to perform excavation and data recovery on archaeolo sites. This form of mitigation was included as a condition in the Mitigat Negative Declaration and agreed to by the applicant. Additionally, the propos was reviewed by the Historical Preservation Commission and found to acceptable. Excavation and data recovery is also in compliance with t Cal i forni a Environmental Qual i ty Act.
r 7 9 ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 8-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989- PAGE 4
4. Noise
The City has recently approved a Noise Policy which, requires that the projecl buildout noise level be mitigated to a maximum of.60 dba CNEL at:
A.
B.
Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet above finished grade level, and
Immediately above the highest window or door opening in a dwelling unit.
The applicant has proposed mitigation to comply with these requirements.
The proposed project will be impacted by noise from Alga Road. Buildout traff volumes along this road are projected to be approximately 24,400 ADT. Sever lots will be impacted by noise and will require sound attenuation through t use of walls/berms (4' - 6.5' in height, Exhibit "X", page 4-29). Second-stc windows and doors will also be impacted by noise from Alga Road. To redu noise levels immediately above the highest window or door opening to 60 dB( CNEL, a 7' foot balcony barrier has been required on second story windows doors on the impacted lots. This mitigation is illustrated on Exhibit "X", pa
4-30.
B. ZONE CHANGE (ZC-341)
P1 anninq Issues
1. Are the proposed zone changes consistent with the General Plan a
Are the proposed zone changes consistent with surrounding land us and zoning?
Local Coastal Plan designations on the property?
2.
DISCUSSION
The proposed zone change from Limited Control (LC) to R-1-7500-Q/Open Space consistent with the subject property's General Plan and Local Coastal P1 designations of RLM, Residential Low - Medium (0-4 du/acre). R-1-7500-Q is implementing zone for property designated as RLM. The rationale for t additional requirement of a Q - Overlay (site development plan) is discuss under Section E, Hillside Development Permit. The open space zoning designati will serve as an additional protection of Lot 91 by legally excludi development in this area. Both the open space zone and the proposed R-1-750 Q zone as well as the uses permitted within these zones will be consistent wii the surrounding land uses. Property to the south is already developed with I
is likely to be developed similarly. Land to the west is designated in tl Pacific Rim Master Plan as an elementary school site and consistent wi.
1-7500 lots, Property to the north has the same General Plan designation ai
)I 8 0 ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP tr-19 VIEWPOINT
April 19, 1989 PAGE 5
residential uses. Land to the east is proposed to be developed with a pub library and post office; however, these uses will be separated from the propo residences by a heavily 1 andscaped, intervening slope. The proposed zoning average lot size of 8,800 square feet will create development compatible w existing and potential single family development in the area.
C. COASTAL
P1 anninq Issues
1. Does the proposed project implement the policies of the Mello segment of the Local Coastal Plan?
DISCUSSION
The proposed project is consistent with the relevant policies of the Mello segments of the Local Coastal Plan. These policies include the preservation natural vegetation on steep slopes (25% or greater) and the adoption of eros control standards. Slopes of 25% or greater with native vegetation are requii to be preserved in permanent open space easements unless they would precli reasonable use of the site. The purpose of the open space easement is to redl the potential for erosion, prohibit the removal of natural vegetation, and protect visual resources.
Development of the subject site has been designed to concentrate the units the flatter eastern portion to protect the steep slopes and sensitive vegetat located in the southern and western portions of the site. Seventy percent all slopes in excess of a 25 percent gradient would be preserved (Exhibits 'I page 4-23). Because the steep slope areas proposed for development are not p
impacts are anticipated. In addition, the project has been reviewed by Coas Commission staff on a preliminary basis. It was their opinion that preservat- of the western portion of the site would sufficiently mitigate removal of 1 isolated pockets of steep slope areas.
of a major corridor and are such small areas, no significant environmen
D. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (CT 85-34)
P1 anninq Issues
1. Does the proposed tentative map satisfy all requirements of I Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and the State f Act?
As proposed, this subdivision meets all of the requirements of the Carlst Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act. The proposed map a improvements are consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan. The site
applicant. With an average lot size of approximately 8,800 square feet, t proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size for an R-1-7500 zone. Except on 1 cul-de-sacs, all lots have a minimum street frontage of 60 feet and an aver:
physically suited for the type and density of development proposed by t
q m ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 8-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989
PAGE 6
buildable pad depth of approximately 100 feet. Even the smaller pads are st large enough to accommodate single-story homes of as much as 2400 square fe(
Overall, the proposed project complies with the Subdivision Ordinance and State Map Act. In addition, the project helps to fulfill a General Plan g1 of providing a variety of housing types. In the last three years, this is I first project of this size requesting approval of R-1-7500 square foot lots,
E. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (HDP 88-19)
Planninq Issues
1. Does the proposed project implement the development standai established by the Hillside Ordinance?
DISCUSSION
The proposed project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Hillsi Ordinance and also complies with the specified development standard Generally, the ordinance addresses the following issues: density calculatic grading amounts, grading contours, and hillside design. These are discuss bel ow.
Both the Hillside Ordinance and the Growth Management Ordinance consider certa lands to be undevelopable and excluded from density calculations. For tk project, these include power easements, wood1 and habitats, ha1 f of 25-4 slopes, and 40% or greater slopes. With these deleted, the proposed density 3.1 du/acre is below the growth control point of 3.2 du/acre (Exhibit "G").
Approximately 8,778 cubic yards of grading per acre is proposed. The gradi plan for the site proposes approximately 251,063 cubic yards of cut and 205,2 cubic yards of fill with 45,831 cubic yards of export (Exhibit "H"). The sit after grading, would still follow the north-south tending slope of the land wi level building pads terraced up the slope (Exhibit "I"). This is consiste with the Hillside Ordinance by preserving the general slope of the existi topography. It should be noted that normally grading amounts are usually larg for single family lot subdivisions (as opposed to PUD or condominil subdivisions) because each single family lot must have a minimum 60 foot stre frontage. In addition, the vertical and horizontal a1 ignments of streets serve such a subdivision require reduced gradients and therefore, larger amoun of grading.
Slopes and streets of the proposed project are designed to follow or emula the natural land contours. Curvilinear slopes vary in height from 20 feet 30 feet. All perimeter project slopes are conditioned as open space easement The applicant will be required to landscape these slopes for fire protection well as open space maintenance as required by the City's Landscape Guidelin Manual (Pages 29-36). The applicant has also been conditioned to construct stuccoed slump block and wrought iron wall at the top of all perimeter slopc to protect the open space areas.
9 m ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 8-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989 PAGE 7
The developer is not proposing building elevations or floor plans at the prese
time. This is permissible under the Subdivision Map Act and Zoning Ordinan for single family dwelling projects not developed as planned unit development To ensure that the building designs are consistent with the Hillside Ordinanc staff required the accompanying zone change to include a Q-overlay. Th overlay will require a site development plan to be approved prior to t issuance of building permits. The site development plan will address buildi height, distances from tops of slopes, distances between structures, elevatio of buildings, and slopes of roofs. This additional level of review creates t opportunity to ensure that the proposed project is compatible with bo surrounding development as we1 1 as surrounding 1 and forms,
F. GROHTH MANAGEMENT
P1 anninq Issues
1. Is the proposed project consistent with the Growth Manageme Ord i nance?
Discussion
The subject property is located within Local Facility Management Zone Southwest Quadrant. The impacts on public facilities created by the propos project and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summariz bel ow:
FAC I L ITY COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARD
- City Administrative Facilities Yes
Library Yes
Wastewater Treatment Yes
Parks - See discussion below.
Dra i nage - See discussion below.
- See discussion below. Ci rcul ati on
Fire Yes Open Space - See discussion below.
School s Yes
Sewer Service - See discussion below.
Water Service Yes
-
-
-
-
-
1 0 ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP (s 8-19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989 PAGE 8
1. Parks
At the present time, there exists a park shortage of 4.2 acres in the southwe quadrant, or Park District 3. This project has been conditioned to bring par into conformance with the adopted performance standard by financing t construction of 4.2 acres to make up the current shortfall as well as t acreage required for 90 additional units within Park District 3. Prior to t recordation of the final map, the developer will be required to enter into parks agreement with the City to fund necessary park land to bring parks in conformance with the standard.
2. Drainaqe
This project meets the guidelines with respect to drainage as identified in t current Master Drainage Plan. The City is currently revising this Pla therefore, the project has been conditioned whereby the applicant agrees to sic an agreement which requires him to pay any fees or construct new facilities l determined by the revi sed P1 an.
3. Circulation
The LFMP for Zone 6 indicated that intersection improvements would be necessa at Alga Road and El Camino Real within one to three years (1988-1990). T proposed project directly impacts this intersection. Even though the impact minimal, the Growth Management Ordinance requires that as development occurs ti performance standards must be maintained, therefore prior to recordation of t: final map, a mitigation plan must be approved by the City Engineer to provic the needed facilities. The Pacific Rim and Von Der Ahe properties which a) further along in processing, also impact this intersection and were al: required to provide mitigation as deemed acceptable by the City Engineer.
4. Open Space
The Citywide Facilities 'and Improvements Plan determined that Zone 6, as i infill zone and substantially developed, met or exceeded the open spac requirements. The proposed project, therefore did not need to address th facility; however, the applicant has agreed to dedicate 13.2 acres as permanei open space and an additional 3 acres of open space easements on the perimetf slopes. (Exhibit "J")
5. Sewer
This project will sewer utilizing the South Batiquitos pump station and forc main. The Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan, along with the Zone 19 Loci Facilities Management Plan, identified a need to upgrade the pump station ar corresponding force main when 200 additional EDUs utilize that line. Tt proposed project has been conditioned to provide necessary financing to ensui that this line can be upgraded and, prior to recordation of the final map, th applicant will be required to provide pro rata share of funds to make thi improvement. As proposed and conditioned, the project meets the adopte performance standard for all public facilities.
9 a ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 8- 19 VIEWPOINT April 19, 1989' PAGE 9
GI SUMMARY
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, the Local Coast Plan, the Zoning ordinance, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Hillside Ordinanc and the State Map Act. It has also addressed the environmental sensitiviti of the site and has met or exceeded the adopted performance standards for a public facilities. Therefore, staff recommends approval of ZC-341, CT 85-3
and HDP 88-19,
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2834 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2831 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2833 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2832 5. Location Map 6. Zone Change Map 7. Background Data Sheet 8. Local Facilities Impacts Assessment Form 9. Reduced Exhibits "F" - "K", dated April 19, 1989 10. Reduced Tentative Map 11
12. Exhibit "X", dated April 19, 1989 (Previously distributed)
13. Full size Exhibits "A" - "E", dated April 19, 1989
AL:1 h January 26, 1989
Letter from Historical Preservation Commission, dated January 17, 1989
r
I
a LOCATION MIP
SWALLOW LN
-.
LC
(RLM)
4
SITE
City of Carlsbad
C- 1.C-2 COMMERCIAL 0 (C) A-'I SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(ALL41 0-4
zc-3
CT 85-
HDP 88
RD-M MULTl RESIDENTIAL m CO, COUNTY 0 (RM) 4-8 (RMH) 8-16 I
() QENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
VI E W POINT
1
.L ,' &NE CHANGE?..IAP
-.-
-~
LC
(RLM)
(RLM 1.
ALGA n
z ?'!T ? i-- R-1 -)? 0
(RMH)
4
SITE
City of Carlsbad B
C- l.C-2 COhlMERClAL U (C) R- 1 'BINOLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 0 (RLM) 0-4
zc-3
CT 85-
VIEW POINT HDP 88
RD-M MULTl RESIDENTIAL UCO- COUNTY 0 (RM) 4-6 (AMH) 8-16
() QENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
* 4B
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: ZC 341/CT 85-34/HDP 88-19
APPLICANT: VI EWPOINT
REQUEST AND LOCATION: ZONE CHANGE FROM LC TO R-1-7500-0 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 40.5 ACRES INTO 90 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND
ONE OPEN SPACE LOT.
CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL APPROX. 1000’ FROM EL CAMINO REAL.
LEGAL DESCRIPTI0N:Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26,
TownshiD 12 South, Ranqe 4 West, San Bernadino Meridian,
ALSO A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AT THE NORTHWEST
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO APN: 215-050-03, 04, 05 Acres 40.5
Proposed No. of Lots/Units 90 SFD lots and 1 ODen %ace Lot.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation RLM
Density Allowed 3.2 GROWTH CONTROL POINT Density Proposed 3.1
Existing Zone LC Proposed Zone R-1-7500-Q
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zon i nq Land Use
Site LC VACANT
North LC RANCH/SFD
South R- 1-7500 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
East RP - Q/C - 2 VACANT COMMERCIAL SITE
West PC VACANT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE
PUBLIC FAC I L IT I ES
CARLSBAD/ School District CARLSBAD Water COSTA REAL Sewer CARLSBAD
EDUs 90 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, Date 3/29/88
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Negat i ve decl arat i on, i ssued
E.I.R. Certified, dated
Other, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATED JANUARY 6, 1989
I * CITY OF CARLSBAD 0
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO.: VIEWPOINT - ZC-341/CT 85-34/HDP 88-10
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 6 GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: PROPOSED R-1-7500-0
DEVELOPER'S NAME: WES MUDGE
ADDRESS: 4241 JUTLAND DRIVE, SUITE 215, SAN DIEGO, CA 92117
PHONE NO.: 438-4880 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 215-050-03, 04, 05
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 40.5 ACRES
A. City Administrative Facilities; Demand in Square Footage = 33
B. Library; Demand in Square Footage = 178
c. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
D. Parks; Demand in Acreage = .67
E. Drainage; Demand in CFS = 12CF
Identify Drainage Basin = DE/ (Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) 900 F. Circulation; Demand in ADTs =
G. Fire; Served by Fire Station No. = #2
H. Open Space: Acreage Provided - 13.
25
I. Schools; (Demands to be determined by staff) 25 - 7J J&
90 J. Sewer; Demand in EDUs -
Identify Sub Basin - 6(A
K. Water; Demand in GPD - 19,8
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
---_
EXHIBIT
4119189
8. '0 e 'I '
, ...- 1) ,
. r - .*--
3 c t ...'
./- NI
Undevelopable Acreage
0 - 25% SLOPE 2.7 40% slopes or greater 40.5 Cross acres
25 - 40% SLOPE 3.1 Power easement Woodland habitat
3.5 112 of 2540% slopes -11.3 Undeveloped acreage o
29.2 Net Acres c FEE 90 units I 29.2 = 3.1 DUslAc
FlGl
4l
Slope Analysis of the Existing Topography of the Viewpoint Site
\\\'WESTEC services, 1%.
. ..., .,
z2 N.- EXHIBIT H ui-
22. E I 4/l9/89 ZGZ E$
2 ".a $
I- ;*?g L 22 ;$?: f
435 , 81
. u Y)< .+
'0 A
2
l-
d :i
0 B $5 8 El$ v) :a
% j!I IjiI io? E;:: s w , .% f Hi +:E& L e i ii.! ,gig::
li fpI ';w 2; Obi 0 izf E a : ao.:qaqif 2 5gi i f t.a:s,;g.:
1a ato 0, E i 8. .).
oB![ %
a nja 3 ?$ Z??$& :;d <u HE .!:
x!b n I a I:f ! qmzsLiG 2.3;g i :43 .8nf.p $gu!:
Z!? 6 z 2:: 2 ,$ .;$p:gfg:s :~sza:ggD~ IJ;lg &i a3 1 w mgig up$ :,?a$ z ;.$3rgwJ; :x.gs$:a 9s pgEi"=-"-3*
/AAAA:"*:g$ 8,:q:rC u-53 (3 I?$gEK :q+gg u-nno, P.l
? Ad$ w a PHHi (3 lLJ 2.1 e:]'!x 3 3 z €!*-***-*;:x; !g:::gq;I: wii?
*-e B
z 5; c - $0 9 *. z
2 - m*;z
2 i. 3:: :: KiE .. 1; 1 I :: Ens. <s 8
9 Ui;Ocnb 3 ;I: 3 m,f 5 !jb s dl
,. g!
'#
I
*d
I
000
I.
I
..
,'
', ! .. . <.
S c -1 A , I
.I 8,
z
ii 5
I
15 VEOLr\H p 0 '9ia i I dirnr - u vwiiu P
la %a i Ih
A ?I /
I
1;
0 iB 18 : \!
\-I
.,.ma ace! bsc~avn i
I I \
I 1;
.- PC?? !?*-- inla 7 % 6%
i 4:
!3 iil;
Y 3 \; !! 5
maa ow- +
B
Y
-
!,
I* Id
',
C '0 PP
2 n-r----& z m
5 F :I ,r; F
0 - cn W v)
n Y
II 10
0,
en
D
\f 9
C m+=- - r: :qj
INxW.8b. la-€ 5-t-
\ I
\ x\ \ !\ A t\ (I I $1 c
?I
d \ 1 :I ti;
Tmrummr' 3 ava-~-s+1#*3%i- I s \ -
41
7L.O *nr,nix 7%%*2,,,*,": 1 ,._ .
L z: n- EXHIBIT J w-
d $?; 4/19/8 9
if
IYI z [$; - k sa=? 3 s+ 8.28 - =z ;iz: 5
WO? ei:a ::
In. :mu 23 .f
33 i
q
v): 4 ii c
z EtH a
0 6 $0. 0
x- r*;z <
0 fl 9
sf
S w; + $15 j [ ; i is," &f Eaz
2 I $18 88diFJii j=j a! 081 E%.
wv
B
J i;s [ tl ~~~~e .;g ;E if ab! a E j!i *;x* y :: s5fs~: EB' 2;!;g3r: .I x!s 0 1 1.1 ZL. O
E. ! f:QiEJpi[;g@r -.I qg zip Bfi!;;; ?2 x i .'H u!![,a;Qij bD =iK y:d: OD 44 Wnafglg,: ; ;,*
.A:::: (3 li,g[!nfE; $; q: 2zg 5 2:::
z GW a5 gi g4;ii;iii!! 0::- (5 'riri '; sui .I t Jr f 5 iJi&;:: ;!2i
e 111 11 I( a Ea= ag$ ., 3i 3: 25 I& ii
'- 2 B w
Pt
t i53:$:53:: 'b
6 i- LlI s
0 la? 5
"3: :
9 ,5' %Pi > *z
w SIj,ij 0 b! $;:;gxjjz ' $$;iiffhgg
*$ <, >$
. *
5
Z L. B 0
---rn~muai n q 4/lS/89 ?
G
6 6
2
6
0) W $6
-I Vi
B $6 O
rA
21 x
- - i 9 3
- -- I zz x-.
5; E. oa 5: 5.2 !
-a
-
:E 0
I) f
m ,u
I-
8 3 2
5 *.
nnnPHP
P i .)
(
(
(
.... I
(
U
5
; ............. - - - - - - - - - - - - . .I.".jX x . - - - - - - . - ...... , .
............ .. ......_** 3 ....... - - - - - - - - - - - - . Q.. " ...... j I::: """X : : 2 1 :::::; - :. cm ". OW
.I : :x F ;;,;: .. '=a si; ss .* L:;2 ax ; :;;$ --- 4 - j - ..::.:: si;! 4 ;$zf f f !f 2 ;;E;;; 1 L...* c
cn
pig
;: d ::I .v
I)... LE';:: :: : - .I.-
xu :a:: 3$kif * 1 { ; ~
CI
F .L s"; 02 n :::: 8. D -I* .. .C j ..E :: :: 0 *I .- " ; ::, i: *I .\ c I- I ;;_a o 8-Y 31.82 :: .: : c PO : f :!qJ s a':$?:: : ii2.f : i,:?;: :;;; : p;;; ; ;q r" ::s;;; i ! ;": 2 .:x::., ; e:::: e ;;i:;i .--.. 2
t ;
r ::;: 4 py g 3'2:: ;
.I. SII. E 1; *I* -1 z3c3:: f
- -0." , =.;2:: : :;::: =
; :::: 8 ..DO... :: 5:.*
; ** . bi i
n ps i- '
a- &L I-2 pi 4
iz U .i 1 q
uig
/ \a Srq .W 4 2
! 'if c
P f ilii Jlii Ep
a !&[:;,/
.. :ti inq F-
I 2 21; [la ds 31 'g)! [i sd,tg #;if ;; ;: 1;s :I1 gI!i &; 1. ...A. l$ql:: .&gSl,!. :E !is n 1 f!griBsi[g!s j, 31 Irq ZBp 1 y$[ .sli 9 rfi $"$x~ f' + UPfIeel!
8St: :q [lip i.1 1 Liz: Izij $y ~Wai
8 1' Jr 8 Y BiBnee
.o n 8 fa: 2
a0-x ai:a 3
w 1 i! 8
1 'i v)= 1 e Lu ;. .i. .- I- $13 01;
1
6 _-
03. -;x
..;' S e 6 /y.( ?3$ 3Y
F =' !# i!' Ohi i :: i Lb ; 9
I II I D ;j ... .. .
$33 w 2% (3 ::: 0 ne< Oi
I !
. I
.... 2s: yvv
id:? ::: r:: <a. . :-
9 \r
U 8 T
c
JANUARY 17, 1989
,I,: ,‘I j”lP 1 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM : HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
VIEWPOINT - ARCHEOLOGICAL MITIGATION
The Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the
archeological site mitigation required by the City for the
Viewpoint project.
what we believe to be adequate preservation in archeology.
The mitigation required complies with
A &,{, bJip 1
ROY BLACKFORD
Chairperson
RB: PC: ec