HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-07-11; City Council; 10126; ZONE 9 - LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANb
AB#.M,LUL TITLE:
MTGa7/l,lRP
DEPT.r,M
c ZONE 9 -LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN
DEPT.
CITY A
CITY N
P g tT
CI 2
.. z 0 6 4 s z 3 0 0
The Plannin Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council adopt Re
No8 ' I ,-d ' 3 ' 7 approving the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning director an
Resolution No.,%q -J,?&ipproving the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9.
ITEM EXPLANATION
Zone 9 is the eighth property owner-initiated and privately prepared Local E
Management Plan to be heard by the City Council.
On May 17, 1989, the Planning Commission unanimously approved this plan as dcsc the minutes fTom the Planning Commission meeting attached as Exhibit 6.
This Plan analyzes all eleven public facilities to determine whether they conform with tl
adopted performance standards. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 I
specific conditions which must be complied with prior to approval of the first final
issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, within this zonc
conditions include providing a detailed financing plan guaranteeing construction of a1
facility improvements as identified in the Plan. Until this financing mechanism h
approved by the City, no final maps, grading permits, or building permits will be app
Zone 9.
Based upon the conditions contained in the Plan, all public facility performance stand
currently being met and will continue to be met as the zone builds out, with the exu
parks. There is currently a 4.36 park acreage shortfall in the Southwest Quadrant
zona in the quadrant (19, 20 and 22) are already conditioned to dedicate and/or impn
acreage. Thus, the shortfall will be corrected by those Zones as they final thei
by Sammis IPropertia. Until mitigation is provided, no further residcntial building per
be issued in Zone9 or the Southwest Quadrant.
During the Planning Commission hearing on this Plan, a question was raised regar
possible location of an elementary school within the Zone.
The Carlsbatd Unified School District's new School Site Study indicates that a site so
within Zone9 is being considered as an alternate to the General Plan designated site
22. A site within Zone 19 is also being considered. At this time it is not known wl-
the District will ultimately choose as the preferred location. Therefore, the Plan in
condition requiring Zone 9 to "deed an acceptable school site to the Carlsbad Unifie
District if it is determined by the District a school within Zone9 is warranted." If thc
decided to locate the school within Zone 9, the precise location will be determine
District.
Therelore, the Zone9 Plan dm not proposed any park mitigation beyond that already
Attachedas Exhibit No. 4 is the ExecutiveSummary from the Local Facilitics Managem
v 1 1 b c .rt
c Page Tm of Agenda Bill No. /b I I % b
E"MENTAL-
A Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning Director on August 19, 1988 indicating
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 is not anticipated to have any adverse impac
environment.
Commission on May 17, 1989.
The Local Eacilities Management Plan for Zone 9 will not cause any significant envir
impacts. The Plan is a public facilities planning document that implements Carlsbad's Geni
The Plan makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply of public faci
outlines the ]provision of adequate public facilities concurrent with the estimated demar
Plan recognks that CEQA review will be required prior to the development of any
private project that is generally discussed in this plan.
The Negative Declaration was recommended for approval by the
mscAL IMPACT
Staff time has been utilized in the preparation of this Plan. These costs will be recovere
the processing fee established by the City Council. It is anticipated that further staff tin
necessary to monitor this Plan and other zone plans on a yearly basis. The implementatir
Plan, however, should help future fiscal planning by estimating the timing of future public
and their costs.
ExHIBm
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
City (Council Resolution No. ;n-a3/
City (Council Resolution No. f??? r 23%
Location Map - Facilities Management Zone 9
Executive Summary - Zone 9
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2851 and 2852
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes dated May 17, 1989
1 I
c
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 v
RESOLUTION NO. 89-231 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION - FOR LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 9.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad did on -
11th day of July , 1989, hold a duly noticed public heal
prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consider
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the infc
submitted by staff, considering any written comments received, the City
considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration including I
Commission Resolution No. 2851 granting Planning Commission approval
Negative Decl arat i on; and
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the
Carlsbad, California as follows:
1) Thlat the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
2) That the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Dirt August 19, 1988 was prepared in compliance with the Ca Environmental Quality Act and Title 19 of the Carlsbad M Code.
3) That there is no substantial evidence that the pro conditioned may have a significant effect on the environme
4) That the City Council of the City of Carlsbad incorporates i resolution Planning Commission Resolution No. 2851 i findings contained therein.
....
....
....
....
....
....
A- .
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
m v
- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
, 198! City Council lheld on the 11th day of July
following votc!, to wit:
A\(ES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux ar
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
-- CLAUDE A. LEWIS: Mdlyor
ATTEST:
AGGid- ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, Q-k City Cler
(SEAL)
1
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
I
* 1
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
m 7
L RESOLUTION NO. 89-212
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL FAC I L IT1 ES MANAGEMENT PLAN 9.
WHEREAS, a Local Facil i ties Management Plan has been prep,
Local Facilities Management Zone 9 in accordance with Chapter 21.90
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on May 17, 1989 holc
noticed public hearing as required by law to consider said plan and
conclusion of the hearing adopted Resolution No. 2852 making findi
recommending that the City Council adopt a plan; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning
on August 19, 1988 indicating that the Local Facilities Management Pla
anticipated to have any significant adverse impact on the environment;
WHEREAS, the City Council at their meeting of the 11th I
, 1989 held a duly noticed public hearing and consid of July
testimony and arguments of anyone desiring to be heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
Carl sbad, Cal ifornia as fol1 ows I
1 1) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2) That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commi Resolution No. 2852 also constitute the findings and condi the City Council.
That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 dated I
1989 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated hi reference is hereby approved. Any development occurring w' boundaries of Zone 9 shall comply with all the terms and c( of said plan.
3)
....
....
....
1
< 1.
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I.1 7 13
14
15
16
I.7
@ v
- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
City Council held on the 11th day of July , 198
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux a
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST :
aA& 4.R-
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cle&
(SEAL)
i
I
I c w
L EXHl
L
ZONE 9
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE BOUNDh
LOCAL FACUTIES bIXNAGEMEM: FUN - ZONE 9
"r
, tW q
c .' I. EXECUT~VE SUMMARY
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 was prt pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program, Tit1
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The conter
the plan follow the outline established by Section 21.90.1 the Growth Management Ordinance. The Zone 9 plan is consi
with the Citywide plan adopted September 23, 1986.
The Zone 9 plan begins with assumptions used to generat
buildout projections for residential and non-reside development within the zone. The plan then phases or esti the zone's development on a yearly basis until buil Phasing is done to predict future facility demands for ea the eleven facility categories. Each facility that is rec to be addressed is then analyzed. The analysis includ inventory of existing and proposed facilities, a ph, schedule that establishes the timing for the. provisic facilities in relationship to demand, and a financing plan establishes various methods of funding facilities
improvements that are identified by the plan as needed. this zone plan is a regulatory document, each facility se
also contains conditions to ensure that public facilities conform to the adopted performance standards. The condi
will be adopted as part of the Zone 9 approval, and mand compliance will regulate future development within the zor
Exhibit 1 graphically illustrates the location of Zone 9 w the city. (page 8) Exhibit 2 is a brief synopsis of the Local Facilities Pla Zone 9. (page 9)
Exhibit 3 is a one-page highlight of the synopsis. (page 1
FINANCE OVERVIEW
The Local Facilities Managenent Plan for Zone 9 identifie facility which currently does not conform with the ad perfomance standards without special mitigation measures:
Parks - A shortfall of 4.35 acres in the southwest quad
Park District 3 currently exists.
1
w 1
AS part of this Local Facilites Management Plan, an attempt been made to bring these facilities into conformance with
adopted performance standards. During this process it become clear that no one financing mechanism can satisfy complex infrastructure requirements for this zone and of
southwest quadrant. However, a combination of finan techniques can address both the need for upgrading facili enabling them to conform with the adopted performance stand and ensuring conformance of future facilities as develoF occurs. A common set of goals for the financing of the m
facilities can be stated as follows:
Provide feasible financing techniques to en that all facilities are provided in conforn with with the adopted performance standards.
2. Provide for the implementation of finan techniques which consider the financial limitat associated with the high casts of infrastruc construction.
Provide for financing options which consider the needs of the city and property owners.
1.
3.
The adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements identified the various ways that capital improvements coul financed. of Carlsbad generally fall into two categories -- tl provided by developers as a condition of development appro1
and those provided by the City through a system of fees, tz or other financing sources.
It is the City's responsibility to plan for the construc and maintenance of City projects and to finance these proj in the best possible way. The following describes some of
financing options available:
A. cash/Pav-as-You-qo financins. The City has used
The capital facilities necessary to support the
method of financing for most capital improvemc constructed to date.
In concept, the City charges the development communi. series of fees which provide the source of income to
for capital projects. When enough cash has t assembled, the City constructs the next capital pro in order of priority. This method forces the Cit!
delay construction of various projects until funds been collected. These fees include:
2
I 1 a w
1. Public Facilities Fee
2; Park-in-Lieu Fees t
3. Planned Local Drainage Fees
4. Traffic Impact Fees
5. Bridge and Thoroughfare Benefit District Fees
6. Water Fees
7. Sewer Fees
Special Districts collect their own various fees.
B. Reimbursement Aareements. In certain instances developer may ask the City to move a project forwai time and to construct a facility before funds have
collected. When this occurs, the City could adopt policy of having the interested developer construct project based on a reimbursement agreement. The would pay the developer back for the portion of project that was to be funded by City resources ot period of time. Payments would commence at the time City had originally scheduled the construction of facility in the Capital Improvements Program. Movin5 project forward in time is for the benefit of
developer. Theref ore, the City f s repayment woulc limited to the cost of the public portion of the prc and no interest would accrue to the developer. The of this method of project financing does not elim: the developer's obligation to pay City fees. developer must still pay all City fees associated wi development.
C. Credit for CitV Fees, When it is in the public intc
to construct certain public facilities earlier than k be possible under a pay-as-you-go program, the Citi consider giving a developer credit for fees that b otherwise be paid, up to the cost of the pu improvement. These credits would reduce the amoun fees payable in future years from a certain developm
Fee credits must be used carefully to avoid elimina of income from capital fees necessary to finance o
projects. Two alternatives exist for fee credits:
-- Full fee credit immediately: Under this opt the developer who builds a public improvement woulc eligible to deduct 100% of the cost of the improve, from fees payable. Once the fee credit is exhausted, developer begins paying fees as normally assessed by City. Under this option the developer gets immed. credit for the total cost of a project.
3
m - In -- Partial Fee Credit - credit over time: option, the developer who builds a public improvt receives a credit of the cost of a public improver
However, the use of that credit is spread over a SI of years. This allows the City to continue to receir
least a portion of fees designated for other cal
construction of public improvements that would
otherwise been paid for by the City. No interest 1
accrue to the developer as a part of this arrangement
D. Debt Financina. A range of debt financing alternat are available to the City. If it is in the pr interest to push a project ahead and to construc improvement before funds are on hand, debt financing be the answer. If the project is being pushed foi for the convenience or benefit of a developer, developer should bear the cost of issuance and inte over the life of the debt issue. The actual mechanic
a debt issue and how to determine the devel01 responsibility to support these costs would be definc the method of debt financing was chosen.
Some of the debt financing vehicles available are I
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS:
Under Council Policy No. 33, the City may assi developer in the construction of various pr improvements that may be financed through the us assessment districts if there is significant PC benefit from the improvement. In cases where a contribution is planned, the City may ask a develope pay the city contribution, the developer could the reimbursed at a later date (i.e., in the year that capital project has been originally scheduled construction) or through a system of credits as desc:
earlier.
ACQUISITION DISTRICTS:
projects while giving the developer credit for
below:
Under Council Policy No. 33, the City may assi
developer in the construction Of VarlOUS El\ improvements that may be financed through the us acquisition districts if there is significant pi benefit from the improvement. In cases where a contribution is planned, the City may ask a developc pay the City contribution. The developer could tht
reimbursed at a later date (i.e.., in the year tha- capital pro) ect has been originally scheduled construction) or through a system of credits as desc
earlier.
4
, w w
SPECIAL BENEFIT DISTRICTS:
State Law allows the formation of a variety of spC benefit districts. These districts may be used to the construction of parks, libraries, police or facilities, and street lighting systems to name a
These districts may be formed by vote of the prog owners who then assess themselves for the cos1
improvements.
The developer and/or land owner bears the burden of service payments. City participation in a distric this type is possible to the extent of pu improvements that would have otherwise been responsibility of the City. However, the movemeni capital improvements forward-in-time would require concession from the developer in offsetting inter
debt issue, or other additional costs,
COMMUNITY FACILITY DISTRICT: (MELLO-ROOS)
Under Council Policy No. 38., the City may assist thr Mello-Roos financing the construction of pul facilities in conjunction with development. Mello- Community Facility Districts (CFD's) operate similia: assessment districts, but provide a more flexible for governmental entities to finance a wider range public infrastructure, again through the issuance of exempt bonds. Facilities which may be financed L Mello-Roos District include parks, parkways, open spi schools, libraries, gas pipelines, telephone lines can be used to eliminate special assessment liens. TI districts may also pay operating costs to the extent services are in addition to those already being prov prior to the formation of the district.
REVENUE BONDS:
The City may elect to issue revenue bonds to fin; improvements related to utility functions or other ( services that generate a fee for service, although ot City functions could support the use of revenue bo1 If public improvements are being installed ahead schedule to accommodate a developer, the City wc expect the developer to offset many of the costs of : an issue as described above.
TAX INCREMENT BONDS:
Public Improvements in the City's redevelopment area be financed through the use of tax increment bonds.
Redevelopment Agency has developed a plan for construction of public improvements using this method
5
I v m
financing. A developer asking for public improvemen
be constructed ahead Of schedule must consider agency's ability and williflgness to defer other proj
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION:
Certain public facilities such as buildings ca financed through Certificates of Participation. Th
in effect a lease agreement between the City and an agency. A developer wishing to push projects fo might consider constructing facilities such as a li or fire station using this financing tool. The deve
lieu of payment for certain improvements.
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS:
The city has the ability to issue General Oblig Bonds to fund the construction of public improvem This can only be done with the approval .of 2/3 o voters in an election. It is unlikely that the City
have the ability to use this method of funding F
projects which benefit specific developments.
FINANCING POLICIES :
The adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements contains the following financing policies:
1. Recognize that those projects indentified ir
responsibility of the City to fund, however, priority for funding projects is at the discr of the City Council.
Recognize that the Capital Inprovements Prl will play a significant role in helpin establish compliance with the adopted perfor standards. Priority for the funding of pro should go to infill areas or areas of the where existing deficiencies exist.
Agree to consider assisting developers with cr against future fees, reimbursement agreem' forming assessment districts, etc. only when clearly in the public interest to do so c rectify public facility deficiencies and nc induce growth by prematurely upgrading p'
facilities.
Recognize that all credit or reimburs
arrangements will be made based upon the C plans for timing of certain public facilities.
may be asked to bear Certain costs or to accept cred
Public Facilities Fee Calculation are the ult
2.
3.
4.
6
(II w
improvement that the City had not planned f
example, if a developer wanted to put i
years and was not necessary to rectify an exi
deficiency, the City would not consider begi to provide credits or reimbursements until thc year, if at all.
Recognize that public facility improvements ma(
front or ahead of City plans by developers provide the funds necessary to cover ar
operating costs for the facility until the time City had previously planned to provide
facility .
with the recent reduction in residential dens.
and overall restriction on residential develop] recognize that it may be necessary to I charging fees to commercial and industrial uses in cases where they are not presc assessed. With the reduction in residential uses and density, it may be necessary to cl commercial and industrial developments to mak the deficit.
-
5.
6.
FINANCING SUMMARY
This Local Facilities Management Plan has identi certain facilities that will fall below the ado performance standards without the proposed mitigatic some time during the course of buildout. The develc
in Zone 9 propose to provide mitigation to bring into conformance with the adopted performance stand? The specific mitigation for each facility is shown ix corresponding facility sections of this plan.
This plan also identifies when future public facilj are needed as growth occurs to ensure compliance wit1 adopted performance standards. A complete finan
section is provided at the end of this plan w provides a description of the facility improvements t made, timing of improvements, cost estimates, and fur priorities.
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
161
w w
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2851 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CAL I FORN IA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE, WEST OF INTERSTATE 5, NORTH OF SOUTHERN CITY LIMIT, AND EAST OF THE PACIFIC OCEAN.
APPLICANT: SAMMIS
CASE NO.: LOCAL FACILITIES MASTER PLAN - ZONE 9
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of April, 1s
the 17th day of May, 1989, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescr
law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consideri
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the info
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the P
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commisi
follow^:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the P
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
findings and conditions: I 1 Findinss: 1 1. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 will not cau
significant environmental impacts. The plan is a public faci planning document that implements the existing General Plan. Th makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply of facilities, and outlines the provision of adequate public faci
concurrent with estimated demands. The plan recognizes that CEQA will be required prior to mitigation of any public or private F
that is generally discussed in the plan. A Negative Declaration h, issued on August 19, 1988 and recommended for approval by the P1 Commission on May 17, 1989.
26 j '
27 I
28 1
.f.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
e W
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the -
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairman Hall , Commissioners: Schlehuber, sct Erwin, Marcus and Holmes.
NOES : None.
ABSENT: Commi ssi oner McFadden.
ABSTAIN : None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST:
,’ /! ! llcci - * riiL&c t y. 4 bLL &-
MICHAEL 3. HOLZNILLER ’
15
16
17
2o I
21
22
23
24
26
25
27
28
-2-
i
PC RES0 NO. 2851
a
2075 US PALMAS DRIVE TELl
CARLSBAO, CA 92009-4859 (619)
Mitn of Marlatrail
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Avenida Encinas and Poinsettia Avenue intersectic
and surrounding 417 acres.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 9 which guarantec the adequacy of pub1 ic facilities concurrent with development to adoptc performance standards.
project pursuant to the Guide1 ines for Implementation of the Cal iforni Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the Cil of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaratic that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is heret
issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in tt
Pl anni ng Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in tl Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Commeni from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Plannii Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above describi
, r\
DATED: August 19, 1988 /~\~~<&\*, ii, I;, MICHAEL J. HOLmiLLiiY CASE NO: LFMP 9 P1 anni ng Director
APPLICANT: Sarnmis Properties
PUBLISH DATE: August 19, 1988
BH:af
6 I
0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. LFMP 9
DATE : Ausust 15, 1988
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: Sammis ProPerties
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2650 Camino Del Rio N
#loo, San Diego, CA 92108 (619) 298-7112
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: Auaust 8, 1988
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written
under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
YES MAY BE
1. Earth - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions
or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements,
compaction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
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 river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
0 0
- YES MAY BE j
2. Air - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
b. The creation of objectionable
c. Alteration of air movement,
of ambient air quality?
odors?
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?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
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?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public
I water supplies?
-2-
0 0
= MAY BE 1
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?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
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)?
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
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
7. Liaht and Glare - Will the proposal sig-
increase existing noise levels?
nificantly produce new light or glare?
significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?
8. Land Use - Will the proposal have
-3-
0 0
YES MAY BE
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 resources?
natural resource?
Risk of Upset - Does the proposal
explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the
10.
involve a significant risk of an
11. Powlation - Will the proposal signif-
human population of an area? X
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 movement?
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? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
r
-4-
0 0
- YES MAY BE
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for 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?
facilities?
including roads?
15. Enersv - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?
Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
16.
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
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)? i,
-5-
0 0
YES MAYBE -
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. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontoloqical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building?
21. Analyze viable alternatives to the DroDosed Project such as:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desigi 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) The project is a public facility information and planning study. Phased planning will not efficiently or adequately address the need for public facilities.
b) The project is a public facility information and
planning study.
c) The project is a public facility information and planning study.
d) Uses for the area covered by the plan are based on the existing General Plan.
e) The plan considers phased development.
f) The project is a public facility information and
planning study.
g) As the project is a public facility information and planning study the no project alternative would not assure adequate public facilities to meet demand. The no project alternative would therefore cause the most detriment.
r 1
-6-
0 0
YES MAYBE
22. Mandatorv findinas of sisnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment?
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
time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.)
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
relatively brief, definitive period of
c. Does the project have impacts which
either directly or indirectly?
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 is a facil. planning document. The intent of the plan is to establish paramt and thresholds that assure public facilities are available needed as determined by the City's adopted performance standards accomplish this purpose occasionally locations and costs of pi facility improvements are estimated for informational purpc These estimates may result in increased development fees.
Traditionally the developer in maximizing their capital return p( such fees on to the home buyer or tenant. This results in h
priced housing which affects the availability of low and mod1 income housing. However, as real estate value is deten
primarily by location, without other market incentives, i
either low or moderate income housing due to its view proximil
unreasonable to assume the sub] ect property would be developed . the Pacific Ocean.
-7-
0 a
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
It is not the development fee that will force low and moderate in families into other communities, but the existing nature of
market place.
It is recognized that CEQA review for these public facilj
estimates is general, and does not satisfy CEQA requirements for specific project. The Zone 9 Local Facilities Management
requires complete CEQA review prior to initialization of any pi or private project discussed in the Local Facilities Management I
P
-8-
e 0 r<
IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect I
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significai effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effec. this case because the mitigation measures described on an attach1 sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
X
S@J
-
Signature
8 * \!&e 'W
Date
k /&-/& ., !rLld,
I date Planning' 6ire&or
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
I
-9-
.i e . 11 *
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEA1
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
7
-10-
'> ", ,'.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
g
10
11
12
13 I
a 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 2852 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 9 ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE, WEST OF INTERSTATE, NORTH OF SOUTHERN CITY LIMIT, AND EAST OF
THE PACIFIC OCEAN.
APPLICANT: SAMMIS
CASE NO.: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 9
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of C
and referred to the Planning Commission, and
WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 8797 adopting t
Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishing facility ZOI
performance standards for public facilities, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 9808 requir
processing of a Local Facilities Management Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8110 an
151 16 I
I? i
Carlsbad, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of April, 1
the 17th day of May, 1989, hold a duly noticed public hearing as presci
20
21
22
23
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be hear
Commission considered all factors relating to the Local Facilities Mar
Plan for Zone 9.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commis
1 6) That based on the evidence presented at the public hear €ommission recommends APPROVAL of Local Faci 1 i ties Management PI 9, based on the following findings and subject to the f
2, condi ti on ;
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Findinqs:
1) That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 is consist the Land Use Element, the Public Facilities Element, and tt
Elements contained in Carlsbad's General Plan.
That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 is consist
Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Managemt
amended by Ordinance No. 8110 and Ordinance No. 9829 and with the 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan.
That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 and the cor contained therein will promote the public safety and welfare by I that public facilities will be provided in conformance with the performance standards.
4) The Local facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 will control tht and locations of growth by tying the pace of development to the pr
of public facilities and improvements.
5) The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 will ensure facilities and services are available in conformance with the performance standards prior to development occurring.
2)
3) 9-
Condition
1) Approval is granted for Local facilities Management Plan - Zor
contained in the Plan titled Local facilities Management Plan dated April 19, 1989, incorporated herein by reference.
181' -.-
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
*-*
*..
...
1..
e-*
*..
***
*-*
PC RES0 NO. 2852 -2-
IC1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9 8
10
11
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED dt 'a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th daj
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairman Hall 9 Commissioners! Sthlehuber, Schramm, Erwin, Marcus and Holmes.
NOES : None.
ABSENT: Commi ssioner McFadden.
ABSTAIN : None.
9 MATTHEW HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMM I SS IC
ATTEST :
16
17
21
22
23
24 I
28
0 MINUTES e I I, . , tt.h
I \
-
COMMISSIONER. Hay 17, 1989 PLANNING COWISSION ?age 3
t
2) LOCAL FACILITIES WAGEHENT PLAN ZONE 9 - Request
approval of the Local Facilities Hanagement Plan for
Zone 9 on property located in the southwestern quadrant
of the City adjacent to the northwestern edge of
Batiquitos Lagoon.
Don Rideout. Senior Xanagement Analyst, presented an overview
of the Zone and stated that this is the fourteenth zone plan to be presented for approval and the eighth to be prepared by
property owners. Zone 9 is located in the southwest quadrant
and is 417.7 acres in size. Existing development consists of the Lakeshore Mobile Home Park with 384 coaches, the
Poinsettia Village Shopping Center, and the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park. The Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park has
75 existing units with a total at buildout of 526 units. The
compliance With Proposition E and the City-wide facilities .
and improvements plan. The impacts discussed in the zone plan are basad on this buildout figure as well as the
projected buildout of nonresidential development. provided in the plan to indicate the proposed timing of need of certain public facilities, which is only an estimate. Facilities must be provided consistent with the actual number of units constructed.
Brian Hunter. Senior Planner, discussed Parks Facilities. This is the first privately prepared plan which doesn’t
propose mitigation for that facility shortfall. Existing
demand in the southvest quadrant is 36.36 acres of park;
existing supply is 32 acres of park (which is in the process
of being acquired) leaving a deficit of 4.36 acres. acquisition and improvement in this quadrant that meets or
exceeds this deficit would mitigate the shortfall. example, the Zone 19 plan was conditioned to dedicate 24.25 acres and improve 15 acres with their first final nap. The
Engineering Dcpartmant has indicated that this could be done
as soon as next month.
funding for and improve five acres. Zone 22 was conditioned
zone total at buildout will be 910 units which is in
Phasing is
the
Any park
For
Zone 20 was conditioned to provide
to provide funding to acquire and improve 4,4 acres of park
land vith their first residential final map. The funding
source for 10 acres of the existing 32 acre supply was a $1 million letter of credit from Sanrnis. Unfortunately, that
still does not meet the standard. Until it is met, there
will b. no residential development allowed.
Steven Jantz, Associate Civil Engineer, discussed Drainage,
Circulation, and Saver Collection.
Drainage - The plan proposes a storm drain system which is somewhat different than shown in the current Drainage
bster Plan. The Master Plan proposes a future system routed
through the bluff close to the Carlsbad State campground.
However, in order to preserve bluff stability, this plan proposes a storm drain system which will run southerly adjacent to the railroad right-of-way into a desiltation
basin along the north shore of the Batiquitos Lagoon and must be built concurrent with development in the remaining two
phases of the Zone 9 plan.
Circulation - The plan requires the completion of
Windrose Circle and Batiquitos Drive, including the railroad Crossing bridge and as development continues, the remaining
facilities required will be the completion of the Poinsettia and 1-5 bridge in approximately 1993, the widening of
Poinsettia Boulevard from Avenida Encinas to Carlsbad Boulevard, and future improvements to the Carlsbad Boulevard/
Poinsettia intersection by the year 1995 and 2000. Prior to
L
, Page ir May 17, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION
1
recordation of the first final map, issuance of grading or
building permits, vhichever occurs first, for any remaining
development in Zone 9, a comprehensive financing program to
guarantee the construction of those circulation facilities
must be approved.
- Sever - T'he analysis indicates that the existing sever
system impacted by development in Zone 9 currently meets the performance standard and vi11 Continue to do so until buildout of the City. Hovever, a future sewage pup station is required to serve the future development uithin Phases 2 and 3.
2 and 3 in Zone 9, a financing mechanism guaranteeing that pump station, including operating and maintenance costs in perpetuity, must be approved.
Don Ridaout concluded the staff report by stating that the . devalopars of Zone 9 will be required to provide a financing plan to the City's satisfaction guaranteeing funding for the facility improvawnts identified in the plan. plan must ba approved before recordation of any final map or
issuance of a grading or building permit, vhichever occurs first .
Commissioner Ervin inquired if all drainage vi11 go into one
desiltation basis or if there vi11 be another basin. Mr. Jantz replied that thrae desiltation basins have been
approved in Zone 9. there are two planned in the Sammis project. All three are
permanent desiltation basins.
Commissioner Erwin noted a date error on Resolution NO. 2851.
Commissioner Ervin felt that there vas a conflict betveen the
Exhibit 2 Facilities Sumnary Chart and the abbreviated handout. He inquired if the summary chart in the notebook takes precedence and was advised that it does.
Comissioner Ervin does not like having a school site adjacent to the railroad tracks and inquired if there is any
way to change the location. Mr. Hunter replied that the school site location vi11 be vorked out through the school district and can only be changed vith their direction.
Chairman 8.11 opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Jon Delling, 285 Windmere Circle. Carlsbad, representing Spmmis Properties, addressed the Comission and stated that they concur uith staff on the items discussed and agree vith
the zone plan as submitted.
Coamisrionar Ervin inquired if Syrmis vould have any problem
uith moving the school site avay from the tracks.
Therefore, prior to further development vithin Phases
This financing
His report vas referring to a new basin;
Mr. Delling replied that Smin must dafer to the school district
for that decision.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Comission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the
Comission members.
Comissioner Schlehuber can support the staff recornendation.
COMMISSION EF
.
-
Page 5 Hay 17, 1989 PLANNING COWISSION r
Hotion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Resolution No. 2851 recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No. 2852 recommending approval of Local Facilities
Management Plan Zone 9, vith a correction to Line 24 of
ReSOlUtiOn No. 2851 changing the date to May 17, 1989.
3) PCD/GPC 89-2lEIR 87-2 - Request for approval of a Planning Comission Determination/Ceneral Plan
Consistency finding and a certification of the
Environmental Impact Report for improvements to Cannon
of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon between Car Country Drive
and future Faraday Avenue.
Road, a sewer interceptor and sewer pump station, south
Gary Wayne, Principal Planner, stated that Section 65401 of
the California Government Code requires that a Generol Plan
consistency determination be made for major projects.
Richard Allen. Advanced Planning Engineer, revieved the
background of the request and stated that this public project consists of the construction of Cannon Road to Faraday Avenue (approximately one mile) to major arterial standards
including a 450 ft. bridge and a sever and forced main pump station which will be on a separate aligmnt adjacent to the Agw Hedionda Lagoon. The road construction includes four
traffic lanes. bicycle lanes, sidewalks. street lights, and a
raised landscaped median. The project is consistent with the City's circulation element and the Agua Hedionda land use
plan and follows the alignment reconrmanded in that plan. The EIR identified two impacts:
alignment, and (2) the length of the bridge. alignment was selected to reduce construction and future
energy and maintenance costs. It was located in an existing
slides of the surrounding area and an example of a camouflaged pump station.
forced main on Cannon Rood would cost $400,000 per year at
buildout for energy and maintenance costs due to the high
elevation required for pumping flows. The increased height requires much higher pump pressures and could result in a pump failure. The advantages of a lagoon alignment would be
reduced cost and reduced pressure uhich could preclude a pump failure. The proposed bridge would require a fill about 200
ft. long at the east end of the bridge.
would cost 5l.S million more. Staff recomends approval.
Comission.r Erwin inquired about the projected daily traffic
count at buildout.
the numbers vith him.
Cotmissioner Ervin inquired if measures vould be taken for
nois. depression. Mr. Allen replied that a 2-112 ft. concrete barrier on each side of the bridge should mitigate
noise,
Conmissioner Erwin inquired if there is some vay the road
could be depressed to eliminate noise. Mr. Allen replied
that the road will be depressed in several areas due to the
terrain. Hovever. access to the adjacent properties must be
considered.
(I) the sever force main
The proposed
dirt road and will not impact the wetland areas. He showed
The alternative to placing a
A longer bridge
Mr. Allen replied that he did not have
Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
COMMISSIONEI
Ervin Hall
Holmes
Marcus
Schlehub,
Schramn
w NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING w -. . * a> *
b .- c
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will ho
a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Californi at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, , to consider approv
of a Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 (Sammis).
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to atte
the public hearing.
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub1
hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to t
City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: LFMP 9 APPLICANT: SAMMIS PROPERTIES PUBLISH :
If you have any questions, please call
-3 qgY--~[b \
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
" W W - __
" , ',.h
.- (Form A)
c
L -
L
I
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM:
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
A?! I?f;- rnMa.Qp-y4f P +
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
Hd 1.
I 4 for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
Thank you.
(n-/5-84 - Date Assistant City Man--
?&: cschc, /&hKYa -& &7d &pp Qd.
-
m hm
L
I ,- 0 -,* Is
.I
t"
.
(IIV JmI \\ ~~IfXyI PIC,[
*.
'd QT *
0 0 md',i b
9"
c NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LFMP-9
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold
public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Califo
at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, to consider approval of a Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 (Sammis).
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Growth Manage
Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be lim
to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City c
Carlsbad, City Clerk's Office, at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: SAMMIS PROPERTIES
PUBLI SB : June 30, 1989 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
ZONE 9
A
till OI CUM - . - - - - - __ - - __ - - - - -. - -.__ - - - - __ Zone 9
Local Faclllties Mar,agernerit Plari
I__-. -__- I._-”- I-_- _-- returned to the bridgy ‘g 111 I unsure what the ship’s exact d was or its course in the ATLANTA UP) - A series of man. Twenty-four were taken to ients before the accident. He explosions and fire broke out to- hospitals, he said.
the captain, Iakovos day in an office building, killing The fire began about 10:30 and rgudis, had made many turns at least four People and injuring was out by shortly after noon. ng his approach to Nar- dozens of others, authorities Firefighters were searching the
insett Bay to avoid small said. building floor by floor to see if s in the area. One woman leaped from the any victims were inside. ?-creating the vessel’s Sixth floor and firefighters on Mike Blackman, a worker in se and speed before the ac- ladders pulled several more of- one of the sixth-floor offices, was nt will be a major part of the fice workers through broken rescued by a fire department stigation, said Richard windows as thick, black smoked ladder truck from a window Ison, one of two safety board billowed around them. broken out with a chair. After stigators hearing the case. The fire apparently was con- breaking out the window, :orgudis, 43, remained con- fined to the sixth floor of the Blackman said, “we were all just
1 aboard ship in lieu of building on Peachtree Street, the hanging out trying to breathe. )OO bail on federal pollution city’s main thoroughfare, but the We thought we were gone.” ages. whole building was evacuated.
I Thursday, a Commerce The midrise building has about Witnesses reported hearing artment guide, titled “United 10 stories. several explosions as the fire
es Coast Pilot,” was entered Four people were killed and at broke out, and said there had vidence at the hearing. The least 38 others were injured, said been an electrical problem in the
e advises foreign ships and Keith Williams, a police spokes- building a short time before. vessels on foreign trips that
r need to board a pilot out- the line from Point Judith to konet Point before entering
VI! ube uklr ’111 Iy 111 G k 4
Published daily by South Coast Newspapers. Inc bay. 1722 South Hill Street Oceensrde CA 92064 Telephone 433-7333 Second class postage paid at Oceanside. CA 9M54 (US 057700) ut it also says pilots board at Postrraster -Send address change to BladeCituen PO Box 90. Oceanside CA92054 Brenton Reef Light Tower,
Coast Guard marine safety ?e in Providence.
IC HEARING LFMP-9
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue,
Carlsbad, California at 6:OO pm on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, to consider
approval of a Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 9 (Sammis).
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Growth
Management Department at 438-1161.
hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the
City of Carlsbad, City Clerk’s Office, at
or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT. SAMMIS PROPERTIES
PUBLISH: June 30,1989 Carlsbad City Council
<