HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-20; City Council; 11303; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT - GPA 90-6.% CIT*F CARLSBAD - AGEND~ILL i" !
? ./
AB # /I 303 TITLE:
MTG. 8/20/91 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - PARKS AND
RECREATION ELEMENT - GPA 90-6 1 DEPT. PLN I
DE
CI1
CI1
I
4 (d 8 )-I a a (d
w 0
U m
5
2 E
0 a
a,
?! i? !-I a
u 0
h. a-
ha, dm
ow u5
4 -4 UG
h E
ua .d a, *.3
sw a,
uw (d a& am u 031
)-I (UP
TI a aa,
4c a
fir0 1 ow v(d
'! 2
l-i m
\ 0 N \ 03
z
I- o
2
a 6
s Z
o
f
~~~ ~~
3ECOMMENDED ACTION:
If the City Council concurs, instruct the City Attorney's C to prepare documents APPROVING the Negative Declaration issc the Planning Director, and APPROVING GPA 90-6, adopting an UF Parks and Recreation Element.
ITEM EXPLANATION
The City's present Parks and Recreation Element was adopt
1982. In 1988, an update of the Element was prepared by the and Recreation Commission with the assistance of staff. processing of the updated element was deferred because the
Council appointed a Citizens Committee to update the existin! Space and Conservation Element and the City wanted to make that both proposed updated elements were consistent with other. The detailed Planning Commission Staff Report (attz explains this background further and sets out the primary ck to the Element and consistency with State Government Codes.
The Planning Commission considered the Parks and RecrE Element on June 12 and June 19, 1991. Comments received frc public were responded to by staff at the June 19th meeting ar contained in a memorandum to the Planning Commission fro Parks and Recreation Director dated June 19, 1991, whi, attached as Exhibit "3"l'. The Planning Commission unanin recommended approval of the revised Parks and Recreation El with only a few minor wording changes which are included i attached minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of JUI
1991. These minor modifications have been incorporated int
element.
One additional item needs to be noted. The City has star comprehensive update of the entire General Plan. Once the updated Parks and Recreation Element is adopted, it will 1 part of the draft General Plan document which will be preseni
the public for review and input as of the comprehensive GE Plan update process. Therefore, additional amendments t element may be proposed at a later time as part 01 comprehensive update.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration fo proposed update of the Parks and Recreation Element, findinc it would not have significant adverse impacts on the envirol The Negative Declaration was recommended for approval b Planning Commission on June 19, 1991. During the public c(
period, one objection to the proposed Negative Declaratic
1 I I) e
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. I/, 30 3
received (see attached Exhibit "4") @ After thoroughly revi
and analyzing the objection, staff still believes a Negativ Declaration is appropriate and adequate for the updated Ele The detailed reasons for staff's determination are contain the attached environmental documents. Specifically, a respor the objection is attached as Exhibit lr5I1.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impacts are anticipated from GPA 90-6.
future studies or programs, as recommended in this Element, be introduced to Council on a project-by-project basis.
fiscal impacts of each program or study will be evaluated individual basis.
EXHIBITS
1. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3258 and 3259
2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, dated June 12,
3. Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated June 19, from the Parks & Recreation Director
4. Response to Comments of the Proposed Negative Declarat
5. Public comments on the Proposed Negative Declaration
6. Minutes from Planning Commission Meetings of June 12 a
7. Parks and Recreation Element (previously distributed) June 19, 1991
y 'I! 0 e EXi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3258
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CAEUSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE PARKS AND
RECREATION ELEMENT UPDATE.
CASE NAME: PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
CASE NO: GPA 90-6
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared €or this projec
out for public review and comment on November 15, 1990; and
WHEREAS, one letter of comment was received; and
WHEREAS, Staff reviewed all objections and comments and aft€
review finds no substantial evidence to indicate that the updated element will s
impact the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 12th day of J
and on the 19th day of June, 1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pr
law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and con:
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the j
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, th
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning (
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, tl
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaratic
to Exhibit "ND", dated November 15, 1990, "PI", and "
November 5, 1990, attached hereto and made a part hereof, bs
following findings:
I
” ll 0 8
1 Findinas:
2 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the
3 amendment may have a significant impact on the environment.
4 2. The proposed amendment, a revision to the Parks and Recreation Elemc
City of Carlsbad General Plan, is not associated with any development PI
5
3. The Open Space and Conservation Element is a policy document and 6
will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
7 address the timing of open space acquisition or development and spec
projects will be subject to further, more specific environmental review a
8 proposed.
9 4. The Negative Declaration contains adequate information to support tl
that the approval of the updated Element will not have significant advm 10 on the environment.
ll!/ PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tht
l2 I/ Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of June, l3
14
i i the following vote, to wit:
15
16
17
18
AYES: Chairperson Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
Savary, Erwin, Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
19 /I ABSTAIN: None.
20
21 ‘ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson
22
23
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIC
ATTEST:
24 -
25 2kk3ki2eA
26 11 PLANNING DIRECTOR
27
28
PC RES0 NO. 3258 -2-
I I e
City
0
of Carlsbac
NEGATMZ DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESSLOCATION: Citywide
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendments to the text of the Parks and Recreatio,
Element (see attached).
The City of Carisbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described projec
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. &'a result of sai
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impac
on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action
on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Plannin
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the pub11
are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 da)
of date of issuance.
- pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Ac
DATED: November 15, 1990 J. MLZM&ER MICHAEL
CASE NO; GPA 90-6 Planning Director
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: November 15, 1990
TW:wo
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 '
I a e
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
UPDATED PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMEN’
The Current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted by the City Council on June 15
1982. Since that date. many changes have occurred within the City requiring an update o
its Parks and Recreation Element. The principle changes necessitating a revision to th
current Element include development and population growth, contemporary parks an1
recreation concepts. revised priorities €or future park acquisition, budgetary consideration:
and the implementation of the City’s Growth Management Program.
In April 1985. the Parks and Recreation Department began the process of updating tk
Parks and Recreation Element. A subcommittee, consisting of three Parks and Recreatic
Commissioners and two staff members was formed to prepare a revised Element. TI
subcommittee met regularly for over a year. The Parks and Recreation Commission ai:
held numerous meetings where the Element update was an agenda item. All subcomrnittc
meetings and Parks and Recreation Commission meetings were open for public commer
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element is to plan, develop, and provic
quality park facilities and recreational programs to,ensure that the residents of Carlsbad a
afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiences. The goals, objectives, ar
policy and action programs of the Element deal with park development, recreatic
programs, and special resource and open space/Historical-Cultural uses. The Element ai:
addresses park standards and identifies anticipated park development projects.
9
1 I e WE @ GPA 90-6
DATE: November 5, 1990
ONM MENTAL WAC3 ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I
(To be Completed by APPLICANT)
Applicant: Citv of Carlsbad
Address of Applicant: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad. Ca 92009
Phone Number: (619) 438-1161
Name, address and phone number of person to be contacted (if other than Applicant
N/A
i
GENERAL INFORMATION: (Please be specific)
Project Description: Amendment to the text of the Parks and Recreation Element.
"
-
(See attached).
Project LocatioIVAddress: Citvwide
Assessor Parcel Number: N/A -
General Plan/Zone of Subject Property: N/A
Local Facilities Management Zone: N/A
1s the site within Carlsbad's Coastal Zone? Partiallv
Please describe the are surrounding the site to the
North: Citv of Oceanside. Vista East: Citv of San Marcos, Vista
South: Citv of Encinitas. Countv of San Dieno West: Pacific Ocean
List all other applicable pennits & approvals related to this project:
None
r 0 PROJECTDESCRWKON 0
UPDATED PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
The Current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted by the City council on June
1982. Since that date, many changes have occurred within the City requiring an UF
of its Parks and Recreation Element. The principle changes necessitating a revision tr
current Element include deveiopment and population growth, contemporary parks
recrearion concepts, revised priorities for future park acquisirion, budgetary considerar
and the implementation of the City's Growth Management Program.
In April 1988, the Parks and Recreation Department began the process of updarin;
Parks and Recreation Element. A subcommittee, consisting of three Parks and Recre
Commissioners and two staff members was formed to prepare a revised Element.
subcommittee met regularly for over a year. The Parks and Recreation Commission
held numerous meetings where the Element update was an agenda item. All subcom
meetings and Parks and Recreation Commission meetings were open for public COIN
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element is to plan, develop, and prc
quality park facilities and recreational programs to ensure that the residents of Car
' are afforded the opporrunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiences. The goals, objec
and policy and action programs of the Element deal with park development, recre
programs, and special resource and open space/Historical-Cultural uses. The Elemen
addresses park standards and identifies anticipated park development projects.
-2-
I 0 [Please be Sdc. Attach Additional paw or Exhiiits, if ns Om)
1. Please describe the project site, including distinguishing natural and mma
characteristics. Also provide precise slope analysis when a slope of 15’ or kgk and 15% grade or greater is present on the site.
The Parks and Recreation Element is not site specific, it is a policy document a
as such will not result in any physical change in the environment, rhe pm
goal of the Element is to plan, develop and provide for quality park facilities a
recreational programs to ensure that residents of Carlsbad are afforded 1
opportunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiences, both active and passi
Although the park inventory has identified several areas for future p;
development, the timing for acquisition and development depends on 1
requirements of the Growth Management program as development occurs.
Subsequent to the General Plan Amendment, a range of specific park developmc
projects will be proposed. These projects will be subject to further CEQA revie
2. Please describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design and,
operation of the project.
The Parks and Recreation Element promotes the use of energy saving technolc
in all rehabilitation and park development projects. The incorporation of enel
conservation measures would be made part of individual park developml
projects on a project-by-project basis.
3. PLEASE ATI’ACH A PROJECT SUUMARY SHEET WHICH SHOWS T
FOLLOWING:
a. If a residential project, identi@ the number of units, type of units, sched
of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household s
expected, average daily traffic generation (latest SANDAG rates).
N/A
b. If a commercial project, indicate the exact type, activity(ies), square foot: of sales area, average daily traffic generation (latest SANDAG rates), park
provided, and loading facilities.
N/A
c. Ifan industrial project, indicate the exact type or industry(ies1, average di
trafl[ic generation (latest SANDAG rates), estimated employment per sb
time of shifts, and loading facilities.
N/A
d. If an institutional project, indicate the major project/site function, estima
employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and commu~
benefits to be derived from the project.
N/A
-3-
1 I, ENVIRONMEN IMPACT ANALYSIS 0
Please answer each of the fallowing questions by plackg a =heck ;n
appropriate space. Then fully discuss and explain why each item was checked or no. Provide supporting data if applicable. Attach additional sheets
necessaxy.
YES i
1) Could the project significantly impact or change
present or future land uses in the vicinity of
the activity? -
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element is to plan, develop,
provide quality park facilities and recreational programs to ensure that
residents of Carlsbad are afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum lei:
experiences. The Element is a policy document. As such, present land uses
not be sigruficantly impacted or changed. Specific future park developments
be subject to further CEQA review.
2) Could the activity affect the use of a recrea-
tional area, or area of aesthetic value? X
The Parks and Recreation Element is a policy document which establi
recreational opportunities consistent with existing General Plan policies.
Element does establish policies and objectives for the siting, acquisition and de
of park facilities and recreational programs.
The Pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element emphasized more passive use conc
with the acquisition of smaller neighborhood, mini, and vest pocket parks. Pre
park development philosophy concentrates on providing larger community p
which incorporate a multitude of both active and passive recreational ameni
. i .. -
3) Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood? -
This Element is primarily a policy document which is intended to plan, dew
and provide quality park facilities and recreational programs, as such, no act
will affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood.
4) Could the activity result in the displacement of
community residents? -
This Element primarily addresses unimproved lands. No residents woulc
displaced.
4
1 I 0 .YES - N
5) Could the activity increase the number of low and
moderate cost housing units in the city? - -
The Parks and Recreation Element does not address residential land uses.
6) Could the activity sigruficantly affect existing
housing or create a demand for additional housing? - -
The Parks and Recreation Element does not address Residential Land Uses. Pa
and recreational programs will be an asset to the community, but will not cre
a demand for additional housing or affect existing housing.
7) Are any of the natural or man-made features in the
activity area unique, that is, not found in other
parts of the country, state or nation? - -
Presently developable parkland acreage typically contains slopes of less than 1
and is excluded from areas subject to flooding, easements, environm
constraints, or other constraints. As such, park development is not anticipatec
areas of unique man-made or natural features. Additionally, specific future
development will be subject to further CEQA review.
8) Could the activity sigmficantly affect a '
historical or archaeological site or its settings? -
Goals and Policies of the Parks and Recreation Element promote the preserval of these resources.
9) Could the activity significantly affect the
potential use, extraction, or conservation of a
scarce natural resource? -
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a policy document. Preser
developable parkland areas are sites which do not contain environme
constraints. As such, the development of parkland should not affect the poter
use extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource. Addition; individual parkland developments will be subject to further CEQA review.
lo) Could the activity significantly affect fish,
wild& or plant resources? -
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a palicy document. Presel
developable parkland areas are sites which do not contain environme
constraints or other constraints. As such, the development of parkland should
significantly affect fish, wildlife, or plant resources. Additionally, indivi(
parkland developments will be subject to further CEQA review.
0
-5-
ll 4 a *YES r
11) Are there any rare or endangered plant or animal
species in the activity area? - -
The Parks and Recreation Element is prGnarily a policy document. Presen
developable parkland areas are sites which do not contain environmel
constraints or other constraints. As such rare or endangered plant or ani
species should not be affected by this Element. Individual parkland developmc
will be subject to further CEQA review.
12) Could the activity change existing features of
any of the City's stream, lagoons, bays, tidelands
or beaches? -
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a policy document which supp
the Goals of the General Plan, including Goals of the Open Space and Conserva
Elements which promote the protection, preservation, and conservation of tk
resources. Individual parkland developments will be subject to further CE
Review.
13) Could the activity result in the erosion or
elimination of agricultural lands? -
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a policy document which suppl
the Goals of the General Plan, including Goals of the Open Space and Consenra
Elements which propote the protection, preservation, and conservation of tl
resources. Individual parkland developments will be subject to further CI
review.
14) Could the activity serve to encourage development
of presently undeveloped areas or intense
development of already developed areas? -
The Parks and Recreation Element is a policy document that deals with
planning, development, and the provision of quality park facilities and recreatic
programs only. This document should not seme to encourage developmen
undeveloped areas or intensify development of already developed areas.
15) Will the activity require a variance from established environmental standards (air, water, noise, etc.)? -
This is an Element of the General Plan, no development is recommended
would require variances from established environmental standards.
16) Is the activity canied out as part of a larger project or series of projects? - X
The City of Carlsbad.is currently in the process of updating it's General Plan.
part of that process, the Parks and Recreation Element is being updated.
Element contains goals, objectives and policy and action programs.
-6-
I 0 em 1
17) Will the activity require certification, authorization
or issuance of a permit by any local, state or
federal environmental control agency?
~-
-
T& is an Element of the General Plan which constiNtes a legislarive act ~f
City; it will be effected by consultation of responsible and other agencies.
18) Will the activity require issuance of a variance
or conditional use permit by the City? -
This is an Element of the General Plan, no permits will be necessary.
19) Will the activity involve the application, use, or
disposal of potentially hazardous materials? -
This is an Element of the General Plan, no development is recommended w
would involve the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials.
20) Will the activity involve construction of
facilities in a flood plain? -
No construction is proposed as part of the update of the Parks and Recrez
Element.
21) Will the activity involve construction of
facilities in the area of an active fault? -
No construction is proposed as part of the update of the Parks and Recres
Element.
22) Could the activity result in the generation of
significant amounts of dust? -
. No construction or other activity is proposed as part of the Parks and Recrez
Element that would generate dust.
23) Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials? -
No activity is proposed as part of the Parks and Recreation Element that
involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials.
0%
W @YES - Nl
24) Could the activity result in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the region’s air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground
water, off-shore.) - -
NO activity is proposed as part of this Element which would sigruficantiy char
the quality of air and/or water resources.
25) Will the project substantially increase fuel
consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.)? - -
This Element is primady a policy document, no construction is proposed.
26) Will the activity involve construction of facilities
on a slope of 25 percent or greater? - -
This Elemenr is primarily a policy document, no construction is proposed,
27) Will there be a signrficant change to existing .i
- land form?. - -
(a) Indicate estimated grading to be done in
(b) Percentage of alteration to the present
cubic yards: N/A .
land form: N/A .
(c) Maximum height of cut or fill slopes:
N/A
This Element is primarily policy document, no clearing, grading, grubbing or or
changes to the existing environmental conditions is proposed.
28) Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? 7 I
This Element is primarily policy document, no construction or Other activit
proposed which would substantially increase the use of utilities, sewen, drains
Streets.
29) will tbc project significantly increase wind or
water erosion of soils? -
This Element is primarily a policy document no activity is proposed that W(
increase wind or water erosion of soil.
-8-
, .YES r:
30) Could the project significantly affect existing
fish or wildlife habitat? - -
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a policy document which SUPPC
the Goals of the General Plan, including Gods of the Open Space and Consemat
Elements which promote the protection, preservation, and conservation of lk
resources. Individual parkland developments will be subject to further CE
review.
31) Will the project significantly produce new light
or glare? -
This Element is primarily a policy document, no activity is proposed which w(
produce light or glare.
.i ..
-
-9-
q I r. STATEMENT OWN-SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONME
If you have answered yes to any of the questions in Section [ but think the actil
will have no Significant environmental effects, indicate your reasom below:
2) COULD THE ACI"IVITY AFFECT THE USE OF A RECREATIONAL AREA, OR & OF AESTHETIC VALUE?
The Parks and Recreation Element is a policy document which establis
recreational opportunities consistent with existing General Plan policies.
Element does establish policies and objectives for the siting, acquisition and de!
of park facilities and recreational programs.
The Pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element emphasized more passive use concf
with the acquisition of smaller neighborhood, mini, and vest pocket parks. Pret
park development philosophy concentrates on providing larger communiry pi
which incorporate a multitude of both active and passive recreational amenil
As the philosophy of parks has changed, future planned parks will conform to
new policies, and thus planned recreational areas will be effected by these I
goals, objectives, and policies. The changes however, are recommended in 0:
to improve park and recreation services to the City residents. As such, tl
changes should not constitute a significant impact to the use of recreational ar
16) IS THE ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT AS PART OF A LARGER PROJECT OR SEF
OF PROJECTS?
The City is currently embarking on a major update of its General Plan. '
update will include work on all of the General Plan Elements, including the P
and Recreation Element. As the City proceeds with the update process, it ma
necessary to further revise the Parks and Recreation Element, to ensure
thoroughly revised and integrated General Plan. It is anticipated that as pa
the overall General Plan update process, a more thorough environmental re7
will be completed.
9
-10-
111. COMMENTS OR %ORAnONS TO ANY OF THE 0 @ STTONS IN SECTION
(If additional space is needed for answering any questions, attach additional' shee
as needed.)
Signature 4 A -A& Lu?dy>L (Person Completing Report)
Date Signed 'm~w,u""h;i-\ 5 . \?20
Tw:h
-11-
0 0
ENVlR0N"AL IMPAm ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. GPA 90-6
DATE: November
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Parks and Recreational Element Amendment
2. APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad. CA 92009
(619) 438-1161
.4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: .i - ..
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the text of the Parks and Recreational E attached).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a signrficat effect on the e
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. 7
identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Er
Impact Repon or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that tl
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" wi
to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any
project may cause a $dcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify fc
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects ca~
insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" an
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of tk DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
@ PRWm DESCRPTION e
-
UPDATED PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
.The Current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted by the City Council on June 1
1982. Since that date, many.changes have occurred within the City requiring an upda
of its Parks and Recreation Element. The principle changes necessitating a revision to c
current Element include development and population growth, contemporary parks a.
and the implementation of the Ciry's Growrh Management Program.
In April 1988, the Parks and Recreation Department began the process of updating 1
Parks and Recreation Element. A subcommittee, consisting of three Parks and Recreat! Commissioners and TWO staff members was formed to prepare a revised Element. 7
subcommittee met regularly for over a year. The Parks and Recreation Commission a
held numerous meetings where the Element update was an agenda item. All subcommit
meetings and Parks and Recreation Commission meetings were open for public commf
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element.is to plan, develop, and pro!
quality park facilities and recreational programs to ensure that the residents of Caris
are afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiences. The'goals, objecti
and policy and action programs of the Element deal with park development, recrea'
programs, and special resource and open space/Historical-Cultural uses. The Element addresses park standards and identifies anticipated park development projects.
recreation conceprs, revised priorities for furure park acquisition, budgetary consideratio
-2-
m e
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL D[RE(;TLY OR INDIRECTLY:
1.
2.
3.
4.
-
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards?
Appreciably change the topography or any
unique physical features?
Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
Result in substantial changes in air
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
Substantially change the course or flow of
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources?
YES YES
(si@ (insig)
- -
- -
- -
.- ..
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
N(
-
-
-
-
-
-
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
11. Alter a sigmficant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
- -
- -
-3-
e e
BIOLO(f1CAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
(nL)
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
exisring species?
I
-
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance? -
15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects? -
16. Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? -
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECnY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
(ru)
YES N
(mL)
- -
- -
-
-
-
YES
(ial)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
18. Substantially affcct publir utilities,
schools, police, lire, emergency' or other
public services?
- -
- -
-
4-
e
WlLL
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
23.
25.
26,
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
HUMANENVIRONMENT
THE PROPOSAL DIRECIlY OR INDIRECTLY:
Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
hcrease existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
Generate substantial additional traffic?
Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedesmans?
Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation pians?
Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically off& public view?
Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
- -5-
e
YES
(W
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
YES Nc
(irmtt
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
X -
m 0
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECIZY:
33. Does the project have the potential
to subsrantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
YES YES
(nL) (ilmL)
- -
34. Does the project have the potential
- to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
environment is one‘which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
goals? (A short-rem impact on rhe
. i .-
- -
35. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively con-
siderable” means that the incremental
effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other merit projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.) - -
36. Does the project hrvr environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - -
-6-
r
e a
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The Parks and Recreation Element is primarily a policy documenr intended to plan, develop, a1
quality park facilities and recreational programs for the residents of Carlsbad. The goals, obje,
policy and action programs of the Element deal with park development, recreation programs, a
Resources and Open Space/Historical-Cultural uses. The Element also addresses park standards m~
anricipated park development projects. No specific parkland development is proposed as part of thf
Recreation Element.
HL:?VIAN ENVIRONMENT
32. AFFECT THE QUALITY OR QUANTITY OF EXISTING RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES?
The Parks and Recreation Element is a policy document which establishes recreational OF
consistent with existing General Plan Policies and objectives for the siting, acquisition ar
park facilities and recreation programs.
The pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element emphasized more passive use concepts with the
of smaller neighborhood, mini, and vest pocket parks. Present park development
concentrates on providing larger community parks which incorporate a multitude of bot1
passive recreational amenities.
As the philosophy of parks has changes, future planned parks will conform to the new polic:
planned recreational areas will be effected by these new goals, objectives and policies. Tk
are recommended to improve park and recreation services to City residents. As such, th
should not constitute a significant impact to the use of recreational areas.
-7-
0 0
pNALYSIS OF VlABLE ALTERNA?TVES TO THE PROPOSED PROSECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future rime rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
N/A
. " ..
-
-8-
0 a
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initiai evaluation:
- X [ find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that although the proposed project could have a signrficant effect on the environmen
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an a
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
- I find the proposed project MAY have a sigdicant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRc IMPACT REPORT is required.
I[? :, ; i,’? .7 i j;G c: _.. \ ,, - n
I \\ !u ’. , Lwne,L
Date Signature
1 I /</w
Date Planning Director v U
m:km
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE1
N/A
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1
N/A
-
-9-
w e
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3259
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL, ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN
RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD.
CASE NAME: PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
AMENDMENT NO. 90-6, ADOPTING A REVISED PARKS AND
CASE NO: GPA 90-6
WHEREAS, the City Council directed the revision of the E
Recreation Element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Element has not been upd
June 1982; and
WHEW, pursuant to Government Code Section 65303, the
Recreation Element is an optional Element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has deemed the Parks and Recreatio
an essential Element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Element addresses park dev
recreation program and special resource and Open Space areas/cultural-histc
and
WHEREAS, the Element contains action programs consisting I
programs which the City intends to pursue in implementing the Parks and I
Element; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Element is internally consist
as integrated with the other Elements of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission, with the as:
staff, prepared a revised draft Parks and Recreation Element; and
.... 28
I/ w 0
I
.2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
-
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
WHEREAS, a Planning Commission subcommittee was formed t
all of the Elements of the General Plan, including the Parks and Recreation Ell
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Subcommittee reviewed th
Recreation Element to ensure that the format and content was consistent with
other Elements; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the
Recreation Element update finding that the approval of the Element update wi
significant adverse impacts on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 12th day of J
and on the 19th day of June, 1991, hold 'a duly noticed public "hearing as prt
law to 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 Commission con
factors relating to the General Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning C
as follows;
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) The initial study prepared for the Element shows that t
substantial evidence that the proposed amendment m
significant impact on the envbnment, and therefore, z
Declaration is appropriate.
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public he
Commission recommends APPROVAL of GPA 90-6, xcon
draft Parks and Recreation Element, dated April 22,
modified by the memorandum dated June 19, 1991
recommended as follows:
O Change Page VIII-5 to replace the words "these cun
"those".
28 PC RES0 NO. 3259 2
.' /I v m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
O Change Page VIII-5,6 and 7 to read, 'These are..." as
community Parks, special use Areas, special Resource
ActivePassive Areas.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tk
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of Junf
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
Savary, Erwin, Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None. I
10
11
12
13
ABSTAIN: None.
14
15
16 &
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
!'"
Planning Director
24
25
26
27
28 PC RES0 NO. 3259 3
c i EXHIBIT ''T M
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JUNE 12, 1991
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: GPA 90-6 - PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT - Request for
amendment to the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOET Planning Commission Resolution No. 32
recommending APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director 2
finding that there is no substantial evidence that the updated Parks and Recreation Elemc
will have a significant impact on the environment, and ADOPT Planning Commissj
Resolution No. 3259 recommending APPROVAL of GPA 90-6, based upon the findir
contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The City's present Parks and Recreation Element was adopted in 1982. In 1988, an upd
of the Element was prepared by the Parks and Recreation Commission with the assista
of staff. At that same time, a Council appointed Planning Commission subcommittee I
reformatting all of the Elements of the General Plan, in order to prepare a work
document to be used to start a comprehensive update of the entire General Plan. '
updated Parks and Recreation Element was referred to this subcommittee to ensure t
the format and content was consistent with that of the other elements.
About this same time, issues arose regarding open space in the City, and the processin
the updated Parks and Recreation Element was put on hold. The City Council appoi~
a Citizens Committee to Study Carlsbad's Open Space Plans and Programs. One of
tasks of the Open Space Committee was to review the existing Open Space
Conservation Element. The Open Space Committee completed its review in July of 1'
and, as part of its report to the City Council, it recommended changes to the Open SI
September 1989, and the new element was referred to staff for consideration.
After reviewing both the proposed updated Open Space and Conservation Element anc
proposed updated Parks and Recreation Element, staff determined that there were 5
minor inconsistencies between the two documents. As a result, the City Council de(
to defer processing of either Element until the inconsistencies could be reso
Resolution of the minor inconsistencies was made part of Phase I of the Work Pla~
implementing the recommendations of the Open Space Committee.
and Conservation Element. The Committee's report was accepted by the City Counc
GPA 90-6 - PARKS AND a, <REATION ELEMENT i
JUNE 12, 1991
PAGE 2
Phase I of the Open Space Work Program has now been completed and, in the process
inconsistencies between the two draft Elements have been resolved. The two docurr
have been amended so that they are consistent and are now ready for consideration. '
are being processed concurrently and both have the support' of the respe
Committees/Commissions which worked on them.
One additional item of background information needs to be noted. The City has St;
a comprehensive update of the entire General Plan. Once the new, updated Open S
and Conservation Element and Parks and Recreation Element are adopted, they will bet
part of the draft General-Plan document which will be presented to the public for re
and input as part of the comprehensive General Plan update process. Therefore, addit
amendments to the two Elements may also be proposed as part of the comprehe
update.
111. ANALYSIS
Pllanninn Issues
1. What were the primary changes made to the Parks and Recreation Element?
2. Is the draft Element consistent with the purpose and intent of Article 5, Sco
General Plans, of the California State Government Code?
3. Does the draft Element contain clear goals, objectives and policies? Does it
specific implementing programs?
4. Is the draft Element consistent with the other parts of the General Plan?
DISCUSSION
1. Primaw Changes to the Parks and Recreation Element
On October 15, 1990, the Parks and Recreation Commission approved the rc
Element. The major changes or revisions that were made to the Element in
the following:
A. The format of the 1990 Element was revised to be consistent with that
,.
other Elements of the General Plan.
B. The 1990 Element de-emphasizes the privatization approach to
development of the 1982 Element.
C. This revised Element strengthens and clarifies goals, objectives, and :
statements.
GPA 90-6 - PARKS AND a &FATION ELEMENT i
JUNE 12, 1991
PAGE 3
D. The revised Element incorporates past Council actions relating to t
following:
a. Northwest Quadrant Report, dated August 2, 1990;
b. Growth Management Issues and Policies;
c. Updated Matrix and Park Inventory.
E. The revised Element eliminatt>s inconsistent statements between the 19
Element and the proposed Open Space Element as it relates to open sp:
issues and the feasibility study for a citywide trail system.
F. The revised Element includes a specific objective which states "Develop 1
Implement Council direction based on feasibility studies to develop
municipal golf course."
Lake Calavera area with a rrvenue generating, visitor attraction ar
G. The revised Element establishes that school areas with joint use agreeme
between the City and respective school districts will be counted and can
used within the park inventory to meet the City's Park standard.
H. The revised Element updates the Park Master Plan map to be consistent w
all previous actions taken by the Parks and Recreation Commission and
City Council.
Since the Original Parks and Recreation Element draft, dated October 16, 19'
was originally circulated, some additional changes were made to it. These chan
were approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on April 22, 1991. 1
primary revisions were as follows:
I. The Park Inventory and Matrix was revised and approved by the Parks :
Recreation Commission on April 22,1991. The revisions currently reflect
exact acreage of the Senior Center and grounds exclusive of the portior
the facility occupied by Carlsbad Unified School District Administral
offices.
J. The Park Inventory, specifically the "Use in Recreation Area Matrix", T
revised and updated to more accurately reflect uses and the intended 1:
within future Community Parks, Special Use and Special Resource Area:
K. Typographical errors were corrected throughout the document.
GPA 90-6 - PARKS AN l!k CREATION ELEMENT i
JUNE 12, 1991
PAGE 4
2. Consistency with the Purpose, Intent and Specific Requirements of Article 5, S
of General Plans, of the California State Government Code
The Parks and Recreation Element is consistent with the intent of Article 5 (Sc
of General Plans), in particular:
A. Optional Elements. The Parks and Recreation Element is an opti
Element of the General Plan as provided for in Section 65303 of
Government Code. The State law allows cities and counties to inc
optional elements in their General Plan which, in the City COUI
has determined that the planning and development of Parks and Recre:
is an integral part of the physical development of the City which mus
included as part of its General Plan.
judgement, relate to the physical development of the City, The City COI
- B. Public Involvement. Consistent with Government Code * Section 65:
opportunities for public participation have been provided 'during the up
of the Element. In April 1988, the Parks and Recreation Department bt
the process of updating the Parks and Recreation Element. A subcornmi
consisting of three Parks and Recreation Commissioners and two
members, was formed to prepare the revised Element. The subcomm
held public meetings regularly for over a year. The Parks and Recres.
Commission also held numerous meetings where the Element update wa
agenda item. All subcommittee meetings and the Parks and Recrea
Commission meetings were open to the public.
.i
C. Internal Consistency. Consistent with Section 65300.5 of the Govern
Code, this Element is internally consistent as well as integrated with
other Elements of the General Plan.
3. Goals, Obiectives, Policies, and Specific Imdementinz Promams
The draft Parks and Recreation Element contains clear goals, objectives,
policies. Consistent with Government Code Section 65103(C), the Parks
Recreation Element provides implementation measures that have been tailorec
operate effectively in the City. Specific implementing policies have been formuk
for park development, recreation programs, and special resource and open SI
areas/cultural-historical areas. The measures or programs selected to implen
each of these areas of the Element are consistent with the General Plan.
4. Consistency with other Elements of the General Plan
AS stated above, the draft Parks and Recreation Element is internally consisten
well as integrated with the other Elements of the General Plan, in accordance v
State Government Code Section 65300.5.
GPA 90-6 - PARKS AN ALmTION ELEMENT i
JUNE 12, 1991
PAGE 5
w. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration for the proposed,update of the Pa
and Recreation Element, finding that it would not have significant, adverse impacts on
environment. During the public comment period, one objection to the approval c
Negative Declaration was received. After reviewing and thoroughly analyzing
objection, staff still believes a Negative Declaration is appropriate and adequate for
updated Parks and Recreation Element. The detailed reasons for staff's determination
contained in the attached environmental documents. Specifically, a response to
objection is attached as Exhibit "A". The Planning Commission needs to consider
Negative Declaration prepared by staff and adopt a resolution approving the Nega
Declaration finding that there is no substantial evidence that the project will haw
significant, adverse effect on the environment.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3258
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3259
3. Exhibit "A", Response to comments of the proposed Negative Declaration
4. Parks and Recreation Element (previously distributed)
May 20, 1991
TW:rvo:lh
, June 19, 1991 0 0 EXHIE
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
VIA: Parks and Recreation P lrector and Planning Director
FROM: Senior Management Analyst
1991 PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT REVISION
During the June 12th 1991, Planning Commission meeting, the proposed Parks ~
Recreation Element revision was presented. Several concerns were raised primarily by
Northwest Quadrant Citizens Group. Additional concerns were also raised by Pro
Future, Hoffman Planning Associates represented by Mike Howes, and Mr, Daugherty. r
following is a response to those concerns.
Northwest Quadrant Citizens Group
1. Concerns have arisen regarding the abundance of park acreage in the Special 1
Area classification as used to meet the park standard (3 acres/1000 population)
Response: Under the Park Performance Standards of the Grol
Management Program, it specifically states "three acres
community park a special use area per 1,000 population wit:
the Park District must be scheduled for construction withi1
five-year period." Within the Parks and Recreation Eleme
the general guideline is to provide three acres of parkland I
each 1,000 population at a ratio of 2.5 acres commur
parkland and .5 acres special use areas in an effort to meet 1
overall standard of three acres per 1,000.
Not unlike other cities throughout California and the Unit
States, it is often difficult, if not impossible, to acquire la1
park sites (which would qualify as community park sites unc
the 1991 Element) within the older built out sections of t
City. Accordingly, in an effort to reach an overall park standz
of three acres per 1,000, it is essential to provide more spec
use areas which do not necessarily meet the present commun
park acreage requirements (typically over 20 acres).
Regardless, the overall park acreage standard of three acres F
1,000 population is being provided for within the Northwc
Quadrant of the City.
2. Future parkland in the Northwest Quadrant should not be grandfathered into t
community parks classification in advance.
Page 2 0 0
Response: As stated previously in paragraph 2 of response #1, it is oft
impossible to locate contiguous park parcels which would mt
the community park acreage requirement of 20+ acres in t
older built out sections of the City. If large areas can
secured which may not necessarily meet the acrea
requirement of a community park but would allow for the ty~
and quality of amenities constructed within other commun
recommended to list the site as a community park.
park sites in other quadrants of the City, it would
3. The Citizens Group does not believe that using the total acreage of any school s
as a Special Use Area to offset parkland deficiencies is an accurate representati
of parkland availability in Carlsbad.
Response: Currently, the total acreage of school sites listed as special 1
areas within the Park Inventory is not used. Only the acre:
consisting of athletic fields and/or hard court surfaces is coun
within the Park Inventory.
In the report of the Citizens Committee to Study Groj
delivered and received by the City Council in January of 19
a recommendation concerning parks was as follows, "that
park districts 2, 3 and 4, (the Northeast, Southwest, 2
Southeast Quadrants) that the City not count joint
agreements or lease agreements towards meeting the Ci
Growth Management Performance Standard for parl
However, no official Council action was taken at that time v
regards to this recommendation.
As part of the Northwest Quadrant Park Enhancement Rep1
presented to the City Council in August of 1990, the issue
counting school sites toward meeting the Park Standard 7
reaffirmed by the City Council, as long as facility
agreements between the City and school district(s) exist.
With the exception of the Aviara School in the Southv
Quadrant (Park District 2), no further school sites are schedL
nor necessary to meet the Park Performance Stand:
However, should opportunities for use agreements with fut
school sites present themselves, the acreage would only sew(
enhance the existing inventory.
4. The Citizens Group objects to counting the parking area adjacent to the Carls
Unified School District (CUSD) administrative facility/Senior Center.
Response: The parking area was included within the overall acreage of
site not unlike other parking areas are included within the t
acreage of all park sites. Parking is a necessary sup]
amenity, and in this instance, provides for additional parl
(after 5 pm and on weekends) during peak use periods of
Senior Center facility.
-
.. .
Page 3 e 0
5. Leased areas should not be utilized in their entirety to meet open space standal
i.e. Cannon Park, Duck Feeding area, and Rotary Park.
Response: Defer to the Planning Department.
6. Areas beneath powerline easements should not be used to meet open space standal
i.e. Lanvin Park, Lake Calavera golf course, and Veterans' Memorial Park.
Response: Defer to the Planning Department.
7. One-hundred percent (100%) of school ground acreage should not be utilized to tr
open space standards (in conflict with the Open Space Element).
Response: Defer to the Planning Department.
8. Although the Open Space Element states, "An annual review of the methods E
programs for acquiring open space and parks in the City of Carlsbad shall
conducted and should include, specifically, but not bedlimited to, the Quimby i
Standards and the Park-In-Lieu Fees," it .also states, "The Open Space Advisl
Committee shall recommend priorities for acquisition, use and maintenal
programs on at least an annual basis." The Citizens Group believes park ar
should be reviewed annually for acquisition, lease, trade, sale or rehabilitation.
Response: The Quimby Act Standards and the Park-in-Lieu Fees hav
mandatory review of once a year. The priorities for acquisit,
of park sites are also reviewed on an annual basis during 1
review of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Bud@
From a Planning standpoint, the department encourages put
input and is not opposed to general public workshops to obt;
feedback relating to future park sites.
In an effort to address the Northwest Quadrant Citizr
Group's interest in the possibilities of lease, trade, sale,
rehabilitation of sites relative to parkland applications, a rep
was presented and approved by the City Council in August
1990 which addressed this issue. Additionally, this subject
addressed under topic # 1 policy C-11, "Periodically evalul
existing Park Inventory to determine best use of park si1
including, but not limited to, lease, trade, sale, or rehabilitatio
9. The Citizens Group believes the dedication of parkland (versus payment of pa
fees), particularly in the Northwest Quadrant, should be considered first choice.
Response: Staff has been directed to make the acquisition of propel
required under the Quimby Ordinance as their first priority
the Northwest Quadrant. In an effort to accomplish
satisfactory park development program for the Northwc
Quadrant, staff is consistently reviewing opportunities that le.
themselves to appropriate park development.
rage 4 0 0
Under topic $1, objective El-2 states, "Determine park acre
requirements on a quadrant basis, maintain and deve
recreational facilities accordingly. Due to the near build
situation of the Northwest Quadrant, priority for park\:
acquisition should be implemented."
10. The Citizens Group urges the inclusion of second priority or standby projects
which immediate action could be undertaken for acquisition and/or developrr
should first priority projects become unavailable.
Response: As stated above, in an effort to accomplish a satisfactory F
development program for the Northwest Quadrant, staf
consistently reviewing opportunities that lend themselve:
appropriate park development. Staff is currently analyzir
number of alternative sites for park development within
Northwest Quadrant and will soon be reporting to COUI
Should Council action authorize development of tl
alternatives, they will be incorporated within the Elem
Should periodic evaluation (topic #1, C-11) result in furl
Council action, those sites will also be included within
Element as the Element may be revised up to four times
year.
11. The Citizens Group urges public involvement that includes general public worksh
to provide information and obtain feedback. (Policies and actions to implen
these objectives should reflect this addition.)
Response: Staff believes this issue is addressed under topic #1, objec
B-6 which states, "Encourage public involvement in the sigh1
acquisition and design development of park facilities
recreation programming to insure community needs are n
In addition, staff believes the objective is well supportec
policies C-11 and C-12 which state, "Periodically evall
existing park inventory to determine best use of park 1
including, but not limited to lease, trade, sale or rehabilitati
and "Under utilized recreation facilities shall be rehabilitate
meet the needs of a changing and growing population."
Proiect Future
1. This 36-page purported element is basically an outline of what should be conta
within a Park and Recreation Element for a city the size of Carlsbad. The goals
policies set forth therein are so general in nature as to be meaningless.
Response: It was the intent of the Parks and Recreation Subcomm:
members who were initially involved in the formation of
document to make an effective Element that is straightfom
succinct, streamlined, and non-cumbersome in an effort to
4 rage 5 e e
produce a document which could be easily understood by
average layperson. Staff believes this document does exac
that.
2. It is not clear if land once dedicated for park purposes not deemed suitable for p
development is still counted towards the 3 acres per 1,000 residents standard.
Response: No, it is not. An area in question was specifically Lanvin P:
and in order to determine suitability for park developmen
feasibility study was performed. The results of that st1
indicate recreational opportunities within the site can
developed.
Another area in question was the 12-acre Alta Mira Park !
which by itself was considered undevelopable. However,
acquisition of a 30-acre parcel immediately adjacent to
existing 12-acre site created development opportunities for t
site.
3. The Park Master Plan map (and quadrant maps) are not adequate.
Response: Staff does not agree. We feel the maps are adequate as tl
list current and future Special Use Areas and Community P:
sites, and provide a working document and a visual aid wk
discussing park operations, future development, and p;
service ratios.
4. The Element does not show how much park development will be required by futl
population increases, where it will be located, and how it will be acquir
Anticipated future park development projects do not reflect any of the ab( information. No present developed parkland deficit or overage, and what it will
at buildout.
Response: The Parks and Recreation Element contains several maps a
matrices which provide the above information, specifically pa)
VIII-18 through VIII-31. Although the Element may I
specifically state how each future park site will be acquired tl
specific information is provided within the City’s CIP Budge
5. Project Future does not believe the Element is adequate.
Response: This Element revision was prepared by a Subcommittee of 1
Parks and Recreation Commission and City staff. It has be
approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission during D
public review periods in both the north and south sections
the City. It has been reviewed and recommended for continu
processing by the Planning Commission’s General Plan Revic
Subcommittee. Obviously, the aforementioned groups feel tf
the Element is adequate.
# :age o 0 e
Hoffman Planning Associates
1. Requests revision on page VIII-11, policy B7 in an effort to address or reduce
impact that homeowner fees would have, particularly by the statement made, 9
shall encourage developers to provide recreation areas (parks) . . . 'I
Response: Based upon discussion regarding this policy at the Planr
Commission meeting of June 12, 1991, staff is recommenc the following revision. (Continued)
"B7. Encourage developers to provide smaller, active recreal
areas in developments including standard single far
subdivisions where appropriate. These smaller recreation a1
will be maintained by a homeowners' association or throug
property owners' tax maintenance district unless the are;
specifically designated as a public use area."
Mr. Daugherty
1. Requests that the Carrillo Ranch be identified as a Special Resource Area and li!
as such within the Parks Inventory.
Response: Under the 1982 Element, based upon a proposed concept 4
highly privatization approach to the Carrillo Ranch, it
recommended as a Special Resource Area. For a numbe
reasons, in the 1991 Element, the Carrillo Ranch has b
classified as a Community Park site.
1. The Carrillo Ranch site (10 acres) was dedicated to
City under the Quimby Ordinance to meet F
dedication requirements of future residen
development. As such, the site should be used to TT
park standards. If the Carrillo Ranch is classified :
Special Resource Area, the park acreage would no1
used to meet the Park Standard. Only Community F
sites and Special Use Areas are counted towards
Park Standard.
2. Accordingly in August of 1987, as part of the F
Carrillo Ranch was listed as a Special Use P
primarily because the acreage amount (10 acres) w(
not meet the acreage qualification for Community Pa
This classification was approved by Council actio1
August of 1987.
Inventory, for the Growth Management Program,
L rage I e a
3. Subsequently, an additional park dedication requiren
of 8.5 acres within the Southeast Quadrant of the
had been identified in order to meet the E
Program at buildout. The Parks and Recrea
Commission recommended that additional acreage
acres) be provided immediately adjacent to the Car
Ranch. This action would have increased the overall
of the Carrillo Ranch to 18.5 acres.
Performance Standard of the Growth Managen
4. During the formation of the 1991 Element, Subcommittee recommended to classify this site :
Community Park.
In very recent discussions relating to the Master Plan
of Zone 18 and the Carrillo Ranch, proposals have t
made regarding the dedication of the additional 1
property immediately adjacent to the Carrillo Ra
Preliminary proposals are suggesting the dedicatio
parkland which would far exceed the required 8.5 a
and consequently, the total acreage of the Carrillo R;
would exceed 20+ acres. Given this scenario,
Carrillo Ranch would then meet all the qualificat
associated with the Community Park classification.
&Jq KEITH BEVER Y
dm
c: Assistant City Manager
Associate Planner, Terri Woods
0' 0
RESPONSE TO ORJECXON TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION/OPEN SPACE
RECRF.ATION ELEMENT
AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT AND PARKS AND
During the public review period for the Negative Declaration which was prepared for
proposed, updated Open Space and Conservation Element and the proposed, updated P
and Recreation Element, one objection to the preparation of a Negative Declaration
received. The objection was made by Terrell Watt representing Project Future. Althc
a separate Negative Declaration and environmental documents were prepared for t
element, Ms. Watt's objection to the Negative Declaration on each element
consolidated into one letter of objection. Therefore, staff has consolidated the respc
and it will become part of the environmental record for both of the proposed, upd
elements. Staff has the following responses:
1) An initial point of objection is a general one relating to the processing of
elements at this time rather than processing them as part of a comprehensive up'
to the entire General Plan. Although the City has started the proces:
comprehensively update all the elements of the General Plan, a decision was n
by the City Council to allow these two elements to be updated independently.
was because the Citizens Committees that worked on the two updated elem
were ensured that they would be processed as soon as they were ready
consideration and would not have to wait for the entire General Plan update.
decision to process these two elements at this time was not done to tr
l'submergett, "segment" or "mask" the environmental consequences of updating
the entire General Plan is updated. There is nothing in state law that prohibits
City from considering updates or amendments to individual elements of the Ger
Plan. As a matter of law, it is specifically allowed.
elements. The decision was based solely on an agreement to not hold them up 1
2) Staff believes that the environmental impact assessment documents used by sta
prepare the negative declarations contain adequate information to support
finding that the approval of the updated Elements will not have significant adv
impacts on the environment. The environmental checklist used by staff contain
explanation regarding each and every item checked on the list.
3) The projects, an update of the Open Space and Conservation Element and an up
of the Parks and Recreation Element, are described in full detail in the upd
elements. The environmental impact assessment contains a brief description 0:
proposed updated elements but it also refers to and incorporates by reference
text and graphics of both elements.
0 e
4) The policy contained in the Parks and Recreation Element of emphasizing la1
community-wide parks rather than smaller, pocket parks was adopted as part o
policy direction being proposed as part of the present update. The 1982 Rev
went through comprehensive environmental review including the preparation
complete Environmental Impact Report.
1982 Comprehensive Revision of the Parks and Recreation Element. It is not a
5) As was indicated in the environmental impact assessment prepared by staff
Parks and Recreation Element does not approve the physical construction oj
park project. The element is a policy document and as such will not result ir
physical change in the environment. Although the park inventory has idenr
several areas for future park development, the timing for acquisition
development is not indicated at this time. The actual construction of any o
individual park facilities will be required to go through its own separate re
when the design of the park is prepared. At that time, the site-specific, pote
environmental impacts of park development will be addressed, including impac
sensitive resources, traffic and circulation, parking, noise, public facilities, lanc
compatibility and growth inducement. ,
The Negative Declaration indicates that the construction of all future park prc
will require complete, individual environmental review. It is legally proper for i
to issue a negative declaration where the environmental review of a sp(
development is deferred to later discretionary stages when the impacts are cle
The project, which in this case is the adoption of a policy document, "leads the
not one step closer to an ecological point of no return" (Schaeffer Land Trust v Jose (1989) 215 Cal.App. 3d 612) since the actual construction of park faci
themselves will be subject to further and more specific environmental review I
they are proposed and subsequently reviewed.
This same analysis applies to the Open Space and Conservation Element in tl
is also a policy document and does not address the timing of open space acqui!
or development.
. .d .. -
6) Staff believes that the adoption of the updated Parks and Recreation Elemen
the updated Open Space and Conservation Element will not have significant ad
impacts on the environment. After a thorough review of the updated docun
an analysis of the environmental impacts, and a detailed review of the corn
submitted by Ms. Watt, staff does not believe that there is any substantial evic
to indicate that the updated elements will significantly impact the environmen
a Negative Declaration is appropriate and supportable.
MJE
0 0
TERRELL WATT, AICP
PLANNING CONSULTANT
1728 UNION 9T., SUITE 208
SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94123
(415) 563-0543
-
December 11, 1990
Bv Federal ExDress
Michael J. Holzmiller
Planning Director
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-48591
Re: Comments on Proposed Negative Declarations for t Amendments to the Parks and Recreation, Open Space E Conservation Elements of the Carlsbad General Plan
Dear Mr. Holzmiller:
The following comments on the proposed Negative Declarations 1 the proposed amendments to the Parks and Recreation, Open Spt and Conservation Elements of the Carlsbad General Plan i submitted on behalf of Project Future. These comments have bc
prepared in conjunction with Roy Gorman, Project Futurc
attorney. As you are aware, Project Future supports '
Notwithstanding this support, Project Future has increas concerns regarding the apparent piecemeal approach to the updi process, as well as the environmental review of the upda. planning documents.
The subject element updates exemplify the piecemeal approach the General Plan update. Not only are the elements be
developed and reviewed independently, but the elements themsel,
appear to being completed in segments. Specifically, the negat declaration for the Open Space and Conservation element amendme. states in pertinent part at page 10:
completion of a comprehensive General Plan upda.
"The City is currently embarking on a major update of its General Plan. This update will include work on all of the General Plan Elements, including the Open Space and Conservation Elements. The Open Space and Conservation Elements, as proposed, are not intended to be the final documents. They are
however, the policy portion of the Elements. As
the City proceeds with the update process, the Open Space and Conservation Elements will be further revised to include a complete open space inventory and a complete resource management plan, to ensure implementation of the programs, goals and policies. It is anticipated that as part of the overall General Plan update a more thorough environmental
e e
Michael J. Holzmiller City of Carlsbad December 11, 1990
Page 2
review will be completed.t1
tfProject11, according to the CEQA Guidelines, is defined as t
"whole of the action, which has a potential for resulting in
physical change in the environmental, directly or ultimately..
CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (a). The Guidelines give t example of a general plan in the accompanying explanation follows:
"With some activities carried out by government, the plan, control, or regulation being adopted may need to be regarded as the project event though the plan, etc., is being adopted to control activities to be initiated later by other people. For example, in approving a new general plan for a city, the city council would properly regard the general plan itself as the project. The EIR would examine the environmental changes that would
probably result from adopting the new general plan. In this situation, the governmental plan would not be proposed in conjunction with a proposal for a specific development project, and the EIR on the plan would need to examine the range of possible effects of the plan.. . tt
CEQA Guidelines section 15378, Discussion.
Project Future is puzzled as to why the City would segment overall project, the General Plan update, and further segment
elements themselves for purposes of environmental review, unl to mask the significant effects of the larger project. Pursu to CEQA, each project must be fully analyzed in a sin environmental review document. An agency may not split a proj into two or more segments thereby submerging the t environmental consequences of the whole project.
In addition, by splitting the project into segments, the Gene
inconsistent. No analysis has been done by the City to determ the specific inconsistencies between the proposed elem amendments and the existing General Plan. However, it appe that some of the proposed amendments would force additio amendments to the land use map for the City. For example, wh the land use map currently shows development on lands identif as unsuitable for development in proposed Open Space Conservation element provisions, the Land Use and Open Space Conservation elements are internally inconsistent. Indeed,
text of the negative declaration states that "future land USE
Plan at each stage of the update process is rendered intern3
e 0
Michael J. Holzmiller
City of Carlsbad
Page 3
planned under the existing General Plan, may be changed by th
proposal". Negative Declaration at page 8. The
inconsistencies should be dealt with by completing the update
all General Plan elements simultaneously with a sinq environmental review document (EIR).
Project Future has already conveyed its concerns in this rege to the City in their letter of January 9, 1990, attached here
as Exhibit 1. We refer the City to the contents of that lett in requesting again that a single EIR be prepared on t comprehensive General Plan update. Set forth below are t specific reasons why the negative declaration for the prop05 element amendments is inadequate.
December 11, 1990
A. THE PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS INADEQUATE 2
INSUFFICIENT
A negative declaration may be prepared when the initial st1 shows either that there is no substantial evidence that I project may have a significant effect on the environment or tl potentially significant effects have been substantially reduc or eliminated by revisions to the project or mitigation measurc CEQA Guidelines section 15070. Where a negative declaration fi~
that a project will not have a significant effect, the init. study must provide the factual basis for such a finding.
The negative declaration prepared for the proposed Open Space l
Conservation element, and Park and Recreation element amendme: is deficient in at least the following respects. First, document does not contain any evidence to support environmental checklist findings of no significant impacts rela to the project. For example, the project calls for a grea emphasis on active parks and larger parks. The prior elem
potential to create numerous significant impacts including but limited to parking problems, traffic in residential areas, impa to natural resources due to grading for active park improvemen impacts due to night lighting and noise from activities. checklist is silent on these likely significant effects
increasing the number and size of active recreatio opportunities in the community.
For an effect to be significant, the projected physical cha need not be forthcoming immediately. Thus, the amendment o general plan will produce significant effects ultimately, if
immediately. Inasmuch as the element will designate speci areas for these uses, the environmental review document n
analyze the effects of the element's site speci recommendations. Similarly, the proposed amendments to the C
emphasized more passive use concepts. Large active parks have
0 0
-
Michael J. Holzmiller City of Carlsbad December 11, 1990 Page 4
Space and Conservation elements are likely to result in chang
to future land uses. Negative Declaration at page 8. The effec
of such likely changes must be analyzed in the environment review document. For example, there is no evidence th enforcing proposed Open Space and Conservation provisions will n
displace housing or result in higher densities of housing
commercial uses with commensurate visual and other impac
associated with dense development.
Second, the proposed negative declarations fail to adequate
CEQA purposes, is the whole General Plan update. Second, t negative declarations fail to adequately describe the propos element amendments. It is impossible to assess the consequenc
of a project which is neither described cjr availa-ble in i entirety for review.
Third, the negative declarations fail to describe the like significant adverse impacts of the project. Exhibit 1, at pa(
3 and 4 describes the likely significant effects of the Gene1 Plan update. In addition, we believe that the impacts of 1 proposed amendments include, but are not limited to, I following:
describe the projects in two respects. First, the "project" f
1. Impacts of proposed active park uses on sensit:
environmental resources. Since no habitat or spec. survey has yet been completed, it is not possible evaluate the likely effects of developing active u: on these resources.
2. Impacts of the two proposed elements on fut' development, and in turn, the effects of those chant to future development patterns.
3. Impacts such as increased traffic and noise as a res
of creating accessible active and passive recreatio and open space areas.
4. Impacts due to possible shortage of parking to se newly created recreational and open space areas public use.
5. The need for additional public services, includ
police, sewer and water, to accommodate park users.
There is an opportunity for the Open Space and Conservat elements to mitigate impacts of the land use element upda
However, in the absence of a camplete project description, (i the General Plan update document in entirety), there is no
e e
Michael J. Holzmiller city of Carlsbad
December 11, 1990 Page 5
basis for determining whether the proposed amendm,ents serve mitigation or create additional adverse effects.
B. AN EIR SHOULD BE PREPARED
CEQA requires that all projects which may result in one or mc significant adverse environmental impact be the subject of
environmental impact report. In the instant case there substantial empirical evidence that the proposed project mic have a significant impact on the environment and no evidence the contrary. Even the most cursory review of the type , scale i location of development authorized by the existing general p: provisions, including recent amendments, makes clear that general plan update would have significant effects on t environment.
Independent of the whole General Plan update, the subjc amendments have the potential for generating significant advel effects. As such these amendments alone warrant the preparat: of an EIR.
.- ..
-
CONCJ'USION
For the foregoing reasons, Project Future requests the City
take the following actions:
1. Reject the approach to the General Plan update i environmental review process as currently proposed (i the segmented project and negative declarations), ai
2. To call for the completion of the General Plan Updi and a single EIR on the total update package.
We appreciate this opportunity to comment on the proposed negat declarations. Please keep this office informed of all upcom hearings in this matter.
Very truly yours, -luy war Terrel Watt, AICP
@ MINUTE Q Y
June 12, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 COMMISSIONERS
MO' ion was duly made, seconded, and carried to change Erwin \ VII- 2, C.l, to read, "If determined by the City Council
mainten ce, liability, and other considerations, the
Holmes to he easible from the standpoint of funding, acquisition,
Hall
Savary City shal . . .'I.
Noble
Schlehuber
\ Schraxm
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to change Erwin
VII-25, Trails, t\o list each use as a separate line Hall
item and in the reference to bicycling, skate-boarding,
and roller-skating, hdicate the words "where feasible"
Holmes
after each of those uses
Noble
Savary Schlehuber
Schrm
\
\
\ \
"\ '.
Commissioner Hall asked staff\to notify the Northwest
Quadrant Citizens Group, Hofmany and Carltas about the
meeting to be held on June 19, 1991, although the public
testimony period has been closed. \Gary Wayne, Assistant
Planning Director, replied that staf\f would make the necessary contacts. \
RECESS ,\
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:24 p.m.:\ and reconvened
at 8:29 p.m.
2) GPA 90-6 - PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT - Request for an
amendment to the Parks and Recreation Element of the
General Plan.
'.,,
'\
Terri Woods, Associate Planner, reviewed the background of
the request and stated that the City's present Parks and
Recreation Element was adopted in 1982. In 1988, an update
of the Element was prepared by the Parks and Recreation Commission. At that same time, a Council appointed Planning Commission subcommittee was reformatting all of the elements
of the General Plan. The updated Parks and Recreation
Element was referred to this subcommittee to ensure that the
format and content was consistent with that of the other
elements. After reviewing the draft of the updated Open Space and Conservation Element, and the draft of the updated
Parks and Recreation Element, staff determined that there
were minor inconsistencies between the two documents. The
two documents have been amended so that they are now
consistent and ready for consideration. They are being
processed concurrently and both have the support of their
respective Committees/Commissions which worked on them. Once
these two Elements have been adopted, they will be
incorporated into the comprehensive General Plan update now I in process* Keith Beverly, Senior Management Analyst, presented the major
changes to the Parks and Recreation Element as follows:
* Reformatted for consistency with other elements of the General Plan.
* De-emphasizes privatization approach to park development. - Strengthens and clarifies goals, objectives, and policy
statements. - Incorporates City Council action: growth management
issues and policies; updated matrix and park inventory; Northwest Quadrant Report of 8/28/90.
e e MINUTES Y
June 12, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 COMMISSIONERS
Eliminates inconsistent statements relative to open space
issues and Citywide trail systems. - Specifically identifies the objective to develop a
municipal golf course at the Lake Calavera site.
* Reaffirms that school areas with Joint Use Agreements will
be included within the park inventory.
* Updates the Park Master Plan map.
Terri Woods, Associate Planner, concluded the staff
presentation by stating that when the Negative Declaration
was submitted for public input and review, only one comment was received.
Comissioner Erwin stated that the Growth Management
Committee had discussed the issue of counting school sites
for parks; this practice is limited to the northwest
quadrant.
David Bradstreet, Parks and Recreation Director, replied that
the City Council has reaffirmed that all schools with Joint
Use Agreements may be counted; however, it should be
understood that only the exact acreage of the joint use area
is used to meet the standard.
Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director, stated that this was
needed because the northwest quadrant was highly developed prior to growth management. As new areas are developed,
adequate parks are planned so that, in most cases, Joint Use Agreements are not needed.
Mr. Bradstreet added that the only other quadrant with a
Joint Use Agreement will be the southwest quadrant with
Aviara Oaks School.
Comissioner Hall inquired how the beaches in the northwest
quadrant are counted. Mr. Bradstreet replied that they are
not counted when it comes to.growth management because they
are designated as Special Use Areas. Each quadrant has an
equal share of the beaches allotted to it, or about 28 acres,
Commissioner Hall inquired if they are counted towards the
15% requirement. Mr. Bradstreet replied that they are not.
Chairman Holmes inquired what other areas would fall into the category of Special Use. Mr. Bradstreet replied that the
Veteran's Memorial Park and Lake Calavera are other Special
Use Areas. SDG&E also has 92 acres in Hub Park which are
counted. I Chairman Holmes opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
Bill Dougherty, 2600 La Goladrina, Carlsbad, addressed the
Commission and stated that his wife had hoped to be here
tonight but since she was unable to come, he would be
presenting her material. He is very concerned about the high majority of active recreation areas which are in the Element.
The State of California has recently done a massive survey of
the citizens regarding passive vs. active recreation.
Active recreation received the lowest percentages while
passive recreation received the highest. He would like the
erroneous statement on page VIII-5, paragraph three, stating
a shift in trends to more active recreation, removed from the
e MINUTE Q \
June 12, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 COMMISSIONERS 1
Element. A copy of the survey results has been given to
staff .
I
Mr. Dougherty is also against the Carrillo Ranch being
classified as a community park. It was deeded to the City in
1981 and has always been classified as a Special Resource
Area. He does not feel it meets the definition of community
park because of the riparian habitat nearby which would be
destroyed by active recreation.
Commissioner Schramm inquired if the Carrillo Ranch could be
classified as a "passive" cornunity park. Keith Beverly,
Senior Management Analyst, replied that the Master Plan has
yet to be developed. However, he stated that staff is very
concerned about preserving the historical significance of the Carrillo Ranch. Mr. Beverly added that there is a ball field
approximately one mile from the Carrillo Ranch which can be
used for active recreation.
David Bradstreet, Parks and Recreation Director, stated that
community parks can be passive, active, or both. Staff
currently does not envision the Carrillo Ranch as being
active, although it could change in the future. He noted that it was designated a Special Resource Area in 1982
because someone wanted to place a restaurant there; however, Byron White deeded the ranch to the City through the Quimby
Act and the Quimby Act is for parks. The ranch is currently only about 8 acres but there has been discussion about
reclassifying some of the adjoining area to increase the size of the park to 18 acres. Keith Beverly added that he was the
caretaker of the Carrillo Ranch for six years and he, especially, has the best interests of the Carrillo Ranch at
heart.
Commissioner Schramm likes the concept of the Carrillo Ranch
being passive recreation since the Alga Norte Park will be
classified as active and it is 1.5 miles away.
Mignon Bowen, 2290 Nob Hill, Carlsbad, representing the
Northwest Quadrant Citizen's Group, addressed the Commission
and read portions of a prepared statement. A copy of the
statement was were presented to the Commissioners and the
Minutes Clerk in writing and will be on file in the Planning
Department. Her comments were mostly directed to internal
inconsistencies in the Element.
Mike Howes, Hofman Planning Associates, 2386 Faraday Avenue,
Suite 120, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that
the Element seemed to be easy to read and understand. He
requested that the words "where appropriate" be added to the end of the first sentence of item B.7 on Page VIII-11 since
most individuals (or developers) do not want to get involved
with a homeowner's association.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman Holmes declared the public
testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the
Commission members.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels that staff should study the
public comments and return at the June 19th meeting prepared for discussion.
David Bradstreet, Parks and Recreation Director, responded to
a portion of the public comments and stated that:
e MINUTE 8
\
June 12, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 COMMISSIONERS
~~ I ~~
* Parking areas at parks are counted towards the park standard; parking areas at schools with Joint Use
Agreements are not counted toward the performance
standard. The Northwest Quadrant Citizen's Group
mentioned the parking at the Senior Center which is not
counted.
* The duck pond is considered a park because the City maintains it and it is used by the public.
* In some cases, improved powerline easements have been counted towards the parks performance standard, but they cannot be counted both as parks and as open space.
* Land versus park fees. Staff would far prefer land over
use fees when it comes to park areas.
* Future park sites. This has already been.addzessed in the .
Northwest Quadrant Report of 8/28/90. The CIP (Capital
Improvement Plan) needs to be considered.
* Page VIII-8, B.7. The word "encourage" has already been
used; staff cannot dictate what a developer builds inside
his development.
* Project Future letter dated June 12, 1991. The parks have
already been mapped out so he does not believe the comments are relevant.
Commissioner Hall commented on a 35-home development which
recently came to the Planning Commission in which the homeowners were required to maintain a public trail system.
He has difficulty accepting this concept and feels that if
the public has use of the trail, then the City should be
responsible for the maintenance. Mr. Bradstreet replied that
he was not familiar with the project.
Commissioner Schlehuber does not like the idea of every homeowner being required to participate in a homeowner's
association due to the turmoil and high costs involved. Keith Beverly suggested that Page VIII-11, B.7, could read,
"If such parks are provided, they should be maintained by a
homeowner's association...".
Commissioner Noble doesn't think it is right for homeowner
associations to maintain parks and trail systems. Mr.
Bradstreet replied that a park should be maintained by the
homeowner's association if it is restricted solely to the
residents of a development.
Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, commented that there are
conflicting goals being discussed. Many times a developer
will provide a park area in order to get off the hook for
park fees; he can then turn the maintenance over to the homeowner's association. He agrees that private groups should not be required to maintain public land and feels that
the word "parks" should be eliminated from Page VIII-11, B.7.
Commissioner Erwin would like to discuss the Carrillo Ranch
designation in more detail on June 19th.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to continue Erwin
further discussion on the draft Parks and Recreation Hall
Element at the Planning Commission meeting to be held at
6:OO p.m. on June 19, 1991 at the City Council Chambers.
Holmes Noble
Savary Schlehuber
Cmhrr.mm
c, 0 MINUTES
\
June 19, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 COMMISSIONERS
I RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:15 p.m. and reconvened
at 7:26 p.m.
2) GPA 90-6 - PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT - Request for an amendment to the Parks and Recreation Element of the
General Plan.
Keith Beverly, Senior Management Analyst, gave a synopsis of
the public comments made at the meeting of June 12, 1991. He
reviewed the staff memo dated June 19, 1991 which addressed
specific concerns, followed by a staff response.
The following specific change to the Parks and Recreation Element, as recommended by the staff memo dated June 19,
1991, is set forth below.
* Modify Page VIII-11, Policy B.7, as follows: encourage '
developers to provide smaller, active recreational area,s ,
(parks) in developments where appropriate iddlddidd
These smaller parks will be maintained by a homeowners
association or through a property owners tax maintenance
district unless the area is specifically designated as a
public use area.
~isdd8fdl~idflBligrfii~~lBd16di~i~~~d~l~dkt~ls~~t~~tisik.
Mr. Beverly concluded his presentation by reviewing the Carrillo Ranch classification to Community Park status. He
stated that the Carrillo Ranch was dedicated under the Quimby Ordinance to meet park dedication requirements of future
residential development. If the Carrillo Ranch is classified
as a Special Resource Area, the acreage could not be used to
meet the park standard. In the 1987 park inventory for the
Growth Management Program, the Carrillo Ranch was listed as a
Special Use Area because the 10 acre parcel did not meet the
acreage qualification for a Community Park. An 8.5 acre
parcel adjacent to Carrillo Ranch was subsequently dedicated,
which increased the overall size of the Carrillo Ranch to
18.5 acres. Recent proposals have been made to dedicate
additional acreage contiguous to Carrillo Ranch which would
increase the total acreage to 20+ acres. The ranch would then qualify for the Community Park classification.
Commissioner Hall inquired if the staff recommendation is
that the Carrillo Ranch remain as a Community Park. Mr.
Beverly replied to the affirmative.
Commissioner Noble commented on the changing trend from
active to passive recreation and feels that the Carrillo
Ranch could qualify as a passive Community Park. Mr. Beverly replied that staff is working to meet the needs of Carlsbad
and they may or may not follow the same trends that Mr.
Dougherty referred to in his comments at the public hearing.
Commissioner Erwin stated that he had spoken on the telephone
with Kathryn Dougherty. She is concerned about the statement
on page VIII-5, paragraph 3, which conveys a shift to active
recreation. She would like the sentence deleted because she
feels it is inaccurate. Commissioner Erwin could accept retaining the first two lines and changing the next line to
read, ". . .in order to accommodate fdd$k/d$ffkdf those
trends. . . . 'I
Commissioner Erwin feels that the Daughertys are not adamant
that the Carrillo Ranch be a Special Resource Area but,
rather, that it be designated something other than a
c, 0
MINUTES
\
June 19, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 COMMISSIONERS
I
Community Park. He feels they would be satisfied if the
Ranch were classified as a Special Use Area and it could then
be used towards the park standard. He inquired if there would be a detriment in doing this. Mr. Beverly replied that
the only detriment would be one of inconsistency. A Special
Use Area is typically a parcel of 1-5 acres which has one or two recreational amenities. A Community Park is typically
categorized as 20-50 acres in size, having a number of
recreational amenities which could be active, passive, or
active/passive.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if there is a future pledge of
land. Mr. Beverly replied there is no pledge; however,
there is a Master Plan proposal to create an open space
buffer around the Carrillo Ranch parcel which would add
another 4.5 acres of usable park land. This would bring the
ranch to 21-22 acres in size. It is the staff intention to
preserve the historical significance of the Carrillo Ranch.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if an arboretum is part of the future plan for the Carrillo Ranch. Mr. Beverly replied that
Commission. While the Commission agrees in concept, they do not want to give up the ranch site or restrict it to an
arboretum because they want it open to the public.
David Bradstreet, Parks and Recreation Director, stated that he agrees with Mr. Beverly's comments. Special Use Areas are
small, 1-5 acre parcels which could contain a swimming pool,
community center, or other similar use. The larger areas are
better suited as a Community Park. The Daughertys are afraid
that the classification of Community Park implies active
recreation. Staff is careful to create a blend of active and
passive uses.
this proposal has been made to the Parks and Recreation
Commissioner Erwin questioned if the Carrillo Ranch could be
classified as a Special Use Area. Mr. Bradstreet replied
that it could, as long as it meets the intent of the Quimby Ordinance in meeting the park standard.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if the designation in the
Park and Recreation Element will have any real bearing on the
actual uses of the Ranch. Mr. Bradstreet replied that the
the recreational uses.
Carrillo Ranch will have its own public hearing to determine
Commissioner Schramm inquired if there is any way to
designate the Carrillo Ranch as a Passive Community Park in
the Element. Mr. Bradstreet replied that the Planning
Commission is only one voice; there are others who will also
be making input. Staff cannot predict what uses the majority
would prefer.
Commissioner Schramm hopes it will be kept passive in order
to preserve the historical significance of the Ranch. Mr.
Bradstreet replied that he understands the desires of the Commission but people and ideas also change over time.
Chairman Holmes inquired if Mr. Bradstreet was familiar with
the letter received from Judy Mueller, dated June 7, 1991, regarding Larwin Park. Chairman Holmes read the letter for
the benefit of the gallery. It will be on file with the Minutes in the Planning Department. Ms. Mueller is concerned
about safety at Larwin Park, specifically heavy traffic
adjacent to the park site, insufficient parking, and
staff has received many letters regarding Larwin Park and all electromagnetic fields (EMF), Mr, Bradstreet replied that
.I e MINUTES
\
June 19, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 COMMISSIONERS
concerns will be considered. This project will be coming to
the Commission in the near future. As far as the FNF issue,
there has been no proof that EMF is harmful. Mr. Bradstreet
added that staff will not propose a park with an adverse
health effect.
Commissioner Savary inquired what plans are underway to
acquire access to the Carrillo Ranch. Mr. Beverly replied
that the Master Plan proposal for Zone 18 identifies access
to the Ranch via Carrillo Way which will intersect with Alga
Road.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the northwest quadrant was the
only quadrant which needed to use schools to meet the park
standard. Mr. Beverly replied that the City currently
utilizes several school sites in the southeast quadrant, i.e.
Fuerte School, Levante School, La Costa Heights, and La Costa
Meadows.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the City owns any land on Levante since it was a park at one time. Mr. Beverly replied
that the land is owned by the Encinitas School District.
Since the original proposal was to use schools to meet the park standard in the northwest quadrant only, Commissioner
Erwin does not understand why schools in other than the northwest quadrant are being counted toward the park
standard. Mr. Bradstreet replied that the park matrix shows there will be 3.67 acres of park land per 1,000 at buildout.
The current school acreage in the southeast quadrant is
almost 9 acres. The City has always needed the school
acreage in the southwest quadrant to meet the park standard.
Using the schools, there will ultimately be 3.6+ acres per
1,000. Although it may not be necessary to count future
school sites, they will be counted if there is a Use
Agreement. The City pays for maintenance at schools where
there is a Use Agreement so staff feels it is equitable to
count the acreage toward the park standard.
Mr. Bradstreet replied that the northwest quadrant is
deficient in Community Parks but not in Special Use Areas.
They did not have to use school sites in other quadrants but
they did if there was a Use Agreement, because it was the policy to do so. When the Aviara Jr. High School is built,
it will have a Use Agreement so it, too, will be counted
towards meeting the park standard.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if Aviara had dedicated sufficient park land to meet the standard. Mr. Bradstreet
replied that Aviara had dedicated 30 acres of park land, with
a net acreage of 24 acres.
If Aviara dedicated sufficient park acreage, Commissioner
Erwin would like to know why it is necessary to count the
school site towards the park standard. Mr. Bradstreet
replied that if it is not counted, the City will not meet the park performance standard at buildout. Counting the school
site, we will have a 2+ acre surplus.
Commissioner Schlehuber replied that he, too, was at the
counted in the northwest quadrant. However, there was no
input from the Parks Department at that meeting. Mr.
Bradstreet replied that he recalls reading the minutes of
that meeting and that Phil Carter was making the staff
presentation. Parks was not represented at the meeting.
meeting where it was stated that school sites would only be
I m e MINUTES \
June 19, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 COMMISSIONERS
I
Commissioner Hall doesn't feel we should be deciding the
Carrillo Ranch arboretum issue tonight. He can support the
staff recommendation tonight but he would like to keep all
options open and see the whole Master Plan in its entirety.
Commissioner Schlehuber agrees with Commissioner Hall. The
practice of counting school sites towards the park standard
is a hotly debated issue. He does not think it is
unreasonable to count the school sites because the
playgrounds and fields are used extensively, especially on the weekends. He can accept the staff recommendation.
Commissioners Schramm and Savary can accept the staff
recommendation.
Commissioner Erwin can accept the staff recommendation,
although he has a problem in counting schools when they are not available full time and when we don't own them or have
full control of them.
Commissioner Erwin requested a change on Page VIII-5 to
replace the words Yhese current" with "those" if staff can accept the modification. Mr. Beverly replied that staff can
accept the change.
Mr. Beverly also noted that Pages VIII-5, 6, and 7 contained
grammatical errors which should be corrected. He recommended
that paragraphs be changed to read, "...these are" as it refers to Community Parks and Special Use Areas.
Commissioner Noble can support the staff recommendation. He
agrees with Commissioner Hall regarding the arboretum issue
and would like to keep all options open to see if the project
will be funded.
Commissioner Hall requested that the minutes indicate the
Planning Commission would like to keep all options open in
reference to the Carrillo Ranch.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3258 recommending approval
of the Negative Declaration and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3259 recommending approval of the Parks and
Recreation Element as amended by recommendations contained
in staff memorandum dated June 19, 1991, and as recommended
by Commissioner Erwin and comments by Keith Beverly.
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Noble
Savary
Schlehuber
Schrarmn
MINUTES : I The Planning Commission approved the minutes of
May 29, 1991 as presented.
The Planning Commission approved the minutes of June 5, 1991 as presented.
Erwin
Hall
Holmes Noble
Savary
Schlehuber Schrannn
Erwin
Hall Holmes
Noble
Savary
Schlehuber
Schramm I
& FRIENDS OF &RILL0 ww, INc. e && e” 6
2622 EL ACUILA LANE, CARLSBAD, EA 92009 <> t
8/20/91
PREPARED STATEMENT FOR PUBLIC HEARING RE: PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
“Mayor, Council, Staff, good evening. My name is Alan
Kindle, 2622 El Aguila Lane, Carlsbad. I wish to make a brief
statement on behalf of the Friends of Carrillo Ranch, Inc.
Acting upon the recommendation of the Historic Preservati
Commission, on December 22, 1986 - nearly five years ago - Cit
Council approved Resolution #8922 granting official recognitia
to Carrillo‘Ranch as a designated historic site.
This important, far-sighted action was overlooked during
recent discussions about the Ranch’s future before the Plannir
Commission and it is not mentioned in the supporting documents
for tonight‘s Negative Declaration.
We encourage Council and staff to be certain this very
significant information is made a part of the Parks and
Recreation Element of the General Plan. Thank you. If
q-L a A *
e e
PROYEC!!l! FUTURE
carlsbnd, Cn., 92018
P.O. BOX 4650
By FAX August 20, 1
TO: city Council
City of Carlsbad
RE: Geheral Plan Update - Parks & Recreation Element - GPA 90-
Agenda Bill 11,303
Dear City Councilmembers,
We include. by reference our previous camments on the Neyatj
DeclaratiDn and the all too brief Elemeht, as well ~LS the commen
made by others.
We do not believa that adequate coverage of the subject as per t guidelines set forth by the Of fjlce of Planning and Research h been done. Nor ha3 the element as written been done by a conunitt created from representatives of a CSORIZ~ section of the City.
If the objective was to make it simple and straight forward EO
could be easily understood by the layman, then the citizens shou have had a greater hand in writing it.
The requirement of IXVieWihg other documents such as the City Capital Improvements Budget { CIP) , etc. in order to Un~krStal future implementation of the element's goals and policies does nl
lend itself to the stated objective (simplification).
The adoption of the Parks and Recreation Element at this time see1 to be Gimply 2p holding aetien . . . . until a Comprehensive Gsnert Plan ReviEion is done, This seems a waste of both resources a
manpower.
We do not believe the document is adequate €or the reasons SE
forth in the variaur; comments made before. Staff's responses wer essentially nOh-reSpOIISiVe.
Sincerely,
&. h"
Anne Mauch, Pro j ect Future
~.~ "."."" ~-~ "
P
-
e e
OR4Fr
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GENERAL PLAN
. " ..
PARKS & RECREATION ELEMENT .
SECTION REVISED APRlL 22,
r 0 e
t
111. PARKS AND RECREATION DEVELOPMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . VI1
Illustrations:
Citywide Parks & Recreation Element Map
Northwest Quadrant Map
Uses/In Recreation .Areas Matrix
Northeast Quadrant Map
Uses/In Recreation Areas Matrix
Southwest Quadrant Map
Usesfln Recreation Areas Matrix
Southeast Quadrant Map
Uses/In Recreation Areas Matrix
w
VII
VIT
w
VII
Park Inventory Matrix VII
Exhibits:
A. Miscellaneous Landscape and Open Space Areas VII
B. Facility Standards VII
IV. GLOSSARY OF TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . VII'
VIII-ii
0 0
Additionally, goals, policies, and action plans have been formulated to be consi!
with the objectives established in the Local Coastal Plan.
The Parks and Recreation Element is most affected by the Land Use Elemen
that each particular classification of recreational facility has been located wit1
compatible land use area. This Element does not dictate specific locations
recreational facilities, with the exception of special resource areas, but ra
recommends general areas and site criteria for future recreational fa(
development.
The Parks and Recreation Element relates to the Historic Preservation and the
Elements in that, where feasible, historic structures and works of public art
encouraged to be combined with park development.
The Parks and Recreation and Open Space Elements have a strong relations
The Open Space/Conservation Element identifies areas desirable for open sp
These areas are geographically shown on the land use diagram and may be suit,
for recreational activities. The Parks and Recreation Element proposes recreatil
use in some of these areas when they are compatible to land use and potent
appropriate to public recreational needs. The intent of this Element, however, is
to establish land use policies for these areas, but rather to provide recreatil
opportunity within the context of the existing General Plan policies.
The Circulation Element contains designated routes and bicycle pedestrian ac
provisions so it bears a relationship with the Parks and Recreation Element.
Finally, because parks are considered an essential public facility which need tc
provided as growth occurs in the City, the Parks and Recreation Elemen
supported by the Public Facilities Element.
Because the classification of parks (size, location, recreational amenities) relate
the amount of location of the population, the Parks and Recreation Elemer
related to the Housing Element.
D. OUIMBY ACT
The principle authority for parkland dedication ordinances is the Subdivision h
Act, the Quimby Act (Government Code 66477). The Quimby Act was establis
by the California Legislature in 1965 in response to California's increased ratt
growing communities.
"Quimby" provides local government with the authority to place into law an ordina
requiring developers to provide land/or fees to acquire and develop parks i
recreation facilities.
urbanization and the need to preserve open space and provide parks for Califorr
VIII-2
t
-
e 0
F. LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
Park and Recreational Needs Generated by Industrial Uses
Although the Quimby Act itself does not apply to industrial or comme subdivisions, a local agency is permitted to impose fees or exactions as a cond
of approval of a proposed development provided those fees and exactions do
exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service or facility. Since t
is a substantial impact on existing recreation facilities from an increasing indu:
employment base, a need to impose and implement a park mitigation fee
industrial development was recognized and created. In November 1987, the
Council adopted its first park mitigation fee for the Zone 5 Local Faci
Management Plan. The purpose of a fee is to ensure adequate recreational faci
to accommodate the demand created for them by the daily influx of the indu!
work force and population as industrial development grows throughout the Cit
In addition to the implementation of this mitigation fee for Zone -5, whose el
development is of an industrial nature,. Council drrected staff to review
implementation of a park mitigation fee for any additional industrial developme1
it occurs within other zones throughout the City.
G. PARK INVENTORY INTRODUCTION
Presently, the City of Carlsbad’s Parkland‘ Inventory is composed of three prin
park classifications:
Community Parks . Special Use Areas
Special Resource Areas
These classifications are the basis for the City’s standards to assure optimum I
and recreational facilities. The standards for each park classification are as follc
Community Parks
Special Use Areas
2.5 acres/1,000 population
.5 acres/1,000 population
(Collectable Park Standard) 3.0 acres/1,000 population
Special Resource Areas 2.5 acres/1,000 population
OVERALL PARK AC. STANDARD: 5.5 ACRES/1,000 POPULATION
The pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element emphasized more passive use conct
with the acquisition and development of smaller neighborhood, mini, and vest poc
parks. Additionally, natural open space areas, meant to serve as connective corric
and greenbelts throughout the City, were accepted as park requirements dedicar
VI114
e 0
h
Typically, Community Parks are designed to serve the recreational nee<
several neighborhoods. The nature of this type of facility encourages
attracts family unit populations from a nearby vicinity on a daily frequc
Community Parks generally provide active and passive use amenities; howc
they are not limited to the exclusive use of either.
Minimum facilities should include:
b
b
b
b
a
a
Family-oriented picnic areas
Group picnic areas
Turfed open space areas for free play
Multi-purpose playfield(s) (lighted when appropriate)
Tot lot areas
Structures for lectures, meetings, skills, instructions, etc.
Buffer areas
Special use facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, horses1
handball and racquetball courts, bicycle paths, etc. as per spc
community demand may be located within these parks if approp
to the interest and need of the community in which the park is loci
The service radius for community park sites is approximately two n
The primary access orientation is vehicular. It is therefore establi
that community parks should be located adjacent to a secon
arterial or circulation route of greater hierarchy as defined withir
Circulation Element.
2. Special Use Areas - These are typically local facilities that meet the nee1
only one or two activity type uses, either passive or active in nature. The:
between one to five acres in size and generally provide the basic unive1 accepted facilities found in a community park site. Facilities of this type
but not limited to, swim, tennis or racquetball complexes, meeting 1
athletic complexes, play lots, picnic and interpretive walk areas.
Based on City Council action in August 1987, and confirmed in Novembl
1990, community school activity fields can be incorporated within the Sp
Use Area classification and included within the Park Area Inven
However, only those school sites which operate under "joint-use'' fa
agreements between the City of Carlsbad and the corresponding school di
are, in fact, incorporated within the Parks Inventory.
The pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element included mini and
pocket parks. The revised 1982 Parks and Recreation Elemen1
incorporated these parks into the special use category which typi
defines the nature of these areas.
Location of special use area sites should be based upon adec
access to its supporting community population.
VIII-6
0 e
*
J, FUTURE RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Several areas have been earmarked for future park development and identified i
current park inventory. Although the timing for acquisition and develop
depends primarily on the requirements of the Growth Management progra
development occurs, the City Council ultimately approves the financing methoc
acquisition, construction, and ongoing maintenance and operation costs.
Typically, parkland acquisition is provided under the Quimby Ordinance and/or
in-lieu fees, while development funds are provided by the Public Facilities
Future park acquisition and development projects are, for the most part, iden,
in the Capital Improvement Program Budget. However, actual development m;
subject to delay based upon demand and a prioritization for the constructic
additional public facilities and the cost associated with ongoing maintenance
operation.
Additional funding sources for acquisition, development, maintenance and operz
and Federal Park Bond Acts, and Assessment Districts.
Prior to acceptance, all future parkland acquisition is subject to a stril
environmental review process to identify and eliminate constraints in an effc
maximize site potential in terms of park development. Public review durinl
master planning process of all future park sites will guarantee the recreational n
of the community are being addressed.
- or rehabilitation may be provided by general obligation bonds, special taxes,
VIII-8
I 0 0
L
11. PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT GOALS
OVERALL:
To plan, develop and provide quality park facilities and recreational programs to ensure
the residents of Carlsbad are afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiel
both active and passive.
TOPIC #1- PARK DEVELOPMENT
A, GOALS
AI - To provide a diversified, comprehensive park system for the City of Carls
utilizing contemporary concepts and planning strategies.
A2- To encourage development of park and recreational facilities and activitit
private industry, the residential development community, and specialized
groups to augment existing public facilities.
A3- Develop a privatization approach for the development, maintenance an
operation of appropriate City owned park facilities.
TOPIC #2 - RECREATION PROGRAMS
A. GOALS
A1 - Offer a wide variety of recreational activities and park facilities designel
encourage participation by users of all ages and interest.
A2- Provide and promote a financially self-supportive system of recreatic
facilities and programs.
TOPIC #3 -SPECIAL RESOURCE AND OPEN SPACE
AREAS/CULTURAL-HISTORICAL
A. GOALS
A1 - To coordinate the planning of park facilities with other recreational orier
land uses such as open space.
A2- Enhance the availability of special resource and/or open space areas
promote awareness of educational benefits and passive or active
opportunities associated with them.
A3- Acknowledge and/or preserve areas of scenic, historic, and cultural value
VIII-10
e e
B.8 Adopt a neighborhood park policy allowing individual communities with
City to acquire, develop and maintain a private neighborhood park sq
The funding for the system will be accomplished by special assessment di:
development shall occur adjacent to school grounds.
approved by the voters within the area of benefit. Where PO$
B.9 Work cooperatively with and encourage specialized user groups includin
not limited to Little League, Bobby Sox, and Pop Warner to identify, ac
and develop sites for their exclusive use on private land when feasible.
B. 10 Monitor and update the Industrial Park Mitigation Fee3 on an annual bz
ensure development of adequate recreational amenities for the curren
future industrial base population.
B.ll Identify current and future park facilities or amenities within the
inventory which lend themselves to the privatization concept.
B. 12 Evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of park facilities which coul
developed, operated or maintained under contractual and/or lease agreerr
B. 13 To encourage private owners and public agencies to sell, dedicate, dona lease at minimal costs surplus land to provide land suitable for recreat.
use.
C. POLICIES
c. 1 Any and all parkland dedication as required of the residential develop^
community shall be developable and useable for park purposes4, and
conform to all local, State and/or Federal laws [reference Carlsbad Munic
Code - 20.44, 21.38.060(5)].
C.2 All park-in-lieu fees collected from residential development under the QUI
Ordinance will be channeled to Community Parks or Special Use 1
acquisition, development or rehabilitation.
c.3 Utilize the provisions of the Quimby Act, Growth Management Plan
Planned Community Zone to ensure the timely construction of parks so
they are provided concurrent with need.
c.4 Park areas shall be acquired and developed in accordance with the C
Growth Management Program. The use of Public Facility Fees for 1
development and acquisition shall be at the discretion of the City Councj
identified in the Capital Improvement Program.
VIII-12
e 0
-
TOPIC #2 - RECREATION PROGRAMS
A. GOALS
A1 - Offer a wide variety of recreational activities and park facilities designe
encourage participation by users of all ages and interests.
A2- Provide and promote a financially self-supportive system of recreati
facilities and programs.
B. OBJECTIVES
B. 1 Provide balanced active and/or passive recreational opportunities in exi
parks and in the development of future park sites. (Also identified u
Topic #1 - Objective B.5.)
B.2 Encourage public involvement in the sightitlg, acquisition and dt
development of park facilities and recreation programming to ic
community needs are met. (Also identified under Topic #1 - Objective ,
B.3 Analyze park development and recreational programming for
effectiveness prior to implementation.
B.4 Provide and maintain recreational and aquatic programming on a
sustaining basis when feasible.
B.5 Provide for safe recreational use at the Agua Hedionda Lagoon on a
sustaining basis.
B.6 Provide, maintain and/or encourage recreation facilities, programs or e7
which will attract and generate tourist and non-tax payer revenues. I
development of an accounting method to track revenues should be pursl
c. POLICIES
c. 1 Recreational program development should be encouraged on various 1(
of public involvement to insure optimum performance of current and ft
parks as effective recreational facilities including but not limited to:
0 Traditional public facilities . Trend oriented interests
8 Cultural and nature oriented facilities
c.2 Recreational programming shall be evaluated based upon community dem
individual and group participation, ability to provide, and cost effective1
VIII- 14
e 0
B.5 Enter into and maintain agreements with SDG&E to establish connec
access between Veterans Memorial Park and the Hub Park.
8.6 Pursue opportunities for limited public access to the wetlands of the A
Hedionda Lagoon for the purpose of visitor attractions such as interprc
centers, boardwalks, etc.
B.7 Work cooperatively with the Historical Preservation Commission and Cult
Arts Commission to effectively sustain and promote awareness of historic
and/or culturally significant facilities and programs.
C. POLICIES
c. 1 Offers to dedicate or requests to enhance and/or develop open space area:,
recreation purposes shall be reviewed by both the Parks and Recrea.
Commission and Planning Commission, and if deemed appropriate, shal.
recommended to the City Council for their discretionary approval.
c.2 Enhancement or improvement of Special Resource Areas will req
approvals and shall conform to the requirements of all regulatory agen
involved.
c.3 The City shall acknowledge and attempt to preserve the environme
c.4 The City should promote expansion of educational use opportunities in ar of significant ecological value where discretionary use of the resource allc
C.5 Historically significant sites shall be combined with recreational learr
sensitivity and ecology within appropriate Special Resource Areas.
opportunities where possible.
C.6 Opportunities for cultural arts shall be promoted, maintained and provil
through a "Joint-Use" agreement with the Carlsbad Unified School District
use of the Carlsbad Cultural Arts Center.
c.7 Community Parks shall be utilized in support of historical and cultt
programs and facilities when feasible and appropriate.
C.8 Coordination with the Historic Element will insure the sighting and care
historic ruins within a park.
VIII-16
0 e
-
PA RECR
)uITI CIIIT1:l) auu~~~
zowc 19 WURA)
LEGENU *cauunr- *""[
0 SpCQKm-
0 RcnRsrrcuL"
8"- -- em "
OCtObER la, l¶H
Vlll-18
0 e
2-8
2- %<x0 am uo7a-v, i
aar
-0- c """""""""-+-~-*-~ 4
u-4 v <-
""~.""""~""".".".".
~~I~YC~UJOO~~P- 8
0 " """ -"" """""""""" p ' 48 2 =emmwv)=ou uezlcrctn """""""""_ i """""_
=-x-=u 4
u-v)=-zo
"""""""_ """"""""
~o>aa mo<--zu
"" "_ """""_ - """""_
zoz,aoxwa mo<c-zcf
"""" """""""""""~
ouu~cn-*w aeax-tu 4
""""""_ ""_ ~ """"""
84 """- """""""" """"
~z~rn-cw o<ax-=u
uaoxa xw~uc--ru a00r8
8 4. _""" """"""" """""
8
aww- axoorv,
"""""""""_ """"""
w 44
""" - """""_ d """ """
w-wxz-v) uo3cr-u) v)
v) """-""" """"""""" 3 4 d
U*~Z<V)-~L
""""""""" "-"""""
EJ.I~- ~aaaourio ucvl -I
""""~"""""" """"_ ~
@
- -aau xad--*av,w - """ - """""_ ~ """" ""
mz-xx-~u a004
aa<* <oa<a<-=v)
oowt-wu~a aawmwa>w
44.8 a<mm->w <aw<
o-uz-u <au<
4 4
"" "- ""_ - """ """"""
""""""""" """"""_ a a U 4u """"""""_ """""""
"""""" - "" """""""
" "" """""""-""""""
oatwaur=-a U u u,u
"""-""""-"""""-I"-
urud<urur-u-u<l"oz v) 8898 5
""""""""""""."""
1 """""""""""""""-
ij
U
W-NW .31nqsq &rUNg cy
c ii 2 g Ez E! P L
d
* Y L ur .-
d
a <
W*S~QU c
a e E i g .; 1 i!t
.-
a - .-
*
.OYU Z8- g.z"a*
z YylY
**'d E" w
.- r E 2 ,g i gg -
o t g - =ox UWL
6!33"3"$" :at - LaLa Smd81;+:
4 335 "";f ,,r$4,g$ WBKlaa -.-"YLY 2 5 i 'tp cua =umY)aa LLUV)urYY 2
i! tL.-
-x-
m=Y) wc<
-m c m ----------* n n 2 Y u Y u Y =f w I n Y u = Y
CNW-
L- - ".".
"""
4
"""
w
"""
"""
"""
"""
4
48
"""
"""
8
w.
"""
"""
4
"""
a*
"""
4w
""-
"""
"""
44
"""
84
"""
88
"""
4
"""
U
"""
884
i
m
I ----"
00
"""
92 R
v\ln N:g
J J * - 2
e
a
a 3 W
0
u <
Ln N "!!
5. a-
J ii a
&7i-: i ,E I
cN
u) 2
a
N
h
? .-
d - a Y 0 Y s .- .- Y
VI - g - 8 5
t ur
.- a
0 *. - L
a
4
VI 11-20
0 e
e-
0-
n-
n8
wR
-+-----------------*-+-+
2-
v)(sa sm uoa=cr-vl """""""""."."..
a .z ~=auu-rwmoeaam ""- "" "--""""""- """""_"__ "_
tor(~~wcnxow uo>a+vl P < """"""""""
=-x-=u
n-vl=-rw -"""""""""-
ot~~)--w o<ax-=u
- """"""~"""_"""""" """"""" . O~n'ln--w a<=Ly-=o
- - """""""""_""""" """""""
zox'aoxwe mo<e--t~
aoxwm mo<--xw
- """"""""__"_ --"----"""""-"""
"" """""_"""""
-4 *. *. ---------""~""~""~ " """"""""""_ oaoao L~w--=o uoox
ewvl- eootvl """""""""~"~""""""~ """""""_
-"-""--""- ""_ t """_
"-""""-"""..CI.- ".___"_""__"_"
**
UI wcwxx-v) vo3eLcUI
"~"""""""~~""""""""""""""" . 3 """""""""" - """. - """"""" - ""_
U*tP<v)-3L
t34c- a3aaomw u-vl
a-vx-v *awe
** ad<- <aa<a--aln
vl=-tx-t~ aoo-r
-=en ILJ~---.~v~w
4 4 4
""""""""""""""""""""""""~
"""""""""~""""""""""""""" *. -1
~"""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""-"""""""""""
"""""~"""""~"""""""""".""" ** **
P<vlV)->w <Ew<
""""~""""""""""""""""""""
"""""""-""""""""""""""""" *. *.
OOW=\WUOA nawlnwa>w
""""""""""""""""""""" Y"""" v) c oaxwpIv)+-o QBuuSIuu*,~a
"""""""""" """.""""""""" ""
mudc#v)-u-ucc-Or v)
."""""""""""""""
Y) H33333333;
# """"c----"-----
U 5 ""- - """"- - """""""""""" """-""( ?~~~sz++qqR ;Ji (II-NW ..
N-t rI- om-0
c i 3 Y x3 c z q z X a x < a f
3; m*Srvu yp gn 2 ru * 'E 5
u x= 2- gizg * YBU 3 -:3 ,:j : 3
"2 5 f 2- -= I.: 1.: Y .- - 8 $
8 2 z -8 ez t - r
< f &&-,-, y 0
.. :;e 8: :Yr '"5 3 J:.jj &sf= ww p s z sti ' 5KK;; -.-yrLw rL.- gi n3g;ggE;
u ;2333EE23EE 8 a 3 + : g " 8 ti Q -1 f 4 $ """"" ~ """ -"""-"-"--
.- vl ua
*x ru aw t
fn W A. Q - .- =-.e w
UWOYY
knn ~n~mnn nwwan
OrBZ tu" IUV)Y)OA VI """""~""""""""""
-~z2~szs~z
VI 11-22
-
e e
. -. & .- C71
'. % '.. . A$l
'. '.\.,,"?a ~~871 caMTrrr 4 s'L'[\
-4 .... - -.a ..'
VI 11-24
@ 0
.
I,\ x <I
-”.
VI 11-26
@ e
! ! ”-.- __.
CAnRILLO A0Ul)lTlOM
I I I i
9.
-
VI 11-28
e e
Q-
Y% - """"_"""" * "- +-+-+ Or
OD- @(IO wm vo>a-*
I:, 1 U "- """" "-" """"""_
U a- IAZ~~U-~UJOO<~O~ a- "" """" ""- """"""_
< roamnuvlnrow uoaa-m
s-x-zcl
"" """"- ""_ """"""
n"vlY=-xu
- """""_ - """"""""_
""""""""""""" _"
c~oxua moa--tu
=ox~aoxw~~ mo<c-zu
ouu!ul--w aaax-zu e e
""""""""" - """"""
ottw-ew o<a:y-zu
""""""""" - """"""
"- " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"""". """""""""."-
""""""- _""""""""- u~oaa LW~--ZU aoox
" - - - - - -
""""""""" ~ """""_
... .
PL"C PLoos- 4
vl
vl wcwtz-rn u0za-m
3 - 4 - - - - - - - - - " - -" - - - - - -" - - - - - -
u-LI<v)-~)L
sade- aaaoomw ucvl
"""-"""""" """ """ """"""""_""" """"_ ~"~~~~~~~~~"~~"""
- """_
w3-tt-t~) a002 "~"""_""""""""" "-
&de- <aa<a<caw
a-vz-v <awe
c - - "_ " - - - - - - - - " - - - - - - - - - - - - -
""""""""""~"""
&<vIv)->Y <aw<
""
"" "~""""""""""""
VUSISI oatwam~-a
- """"""""""""""""
- """" - """"""""""_
oawz~wvo-1 aawvlwa~w
4.
"
.... c3au x=)-1c-,3Cnw
. e.
.
m
E4 >c E ,: i J 55 u 5 ! BE
!! 5 4 f::
<xe &
xzs a
# """ - """""""""_"""
*. SS8S8 vl-NYI
23328 mv-1<vlvl-u-v<c-oz
2
runcumc)
""-""< ""e _.""""""""_I u
c 2 3
5 * % .- - .L
"
vl
W < -us
< a -.!!
vl
3 v Lt z
L- auI W af ,,,,z3::s mrsaYu 1.: 2 L-v ;';x
f3;f
Sm$g2%+:
~""-"----- It Y I I R I I( d v) I( I( n w # ; I
.?.E;;
zz"z"-Y"-?" bumoa :%e
Y
4 VW~L
,8248, 3 9 3 hP %$g :&qq "zZZ&r W sU E&.; -x- -1
2%!4 I I
V xw w
"mu
I"+-4 .
"""
"""
a.
"""
""" .
"""
"""
""" . .. """
"""
"""
e.
"""
"""
"""
""- -
"""
"""
.e
"""
8.
"""
a.
"""
a \ cv vl
"""
""" ! "" "1
229 *.
%Si
" -- $
3z
"
9
JE
.aE 9
L-z
U-l
jzs
:i
<v W - SSy
a%
8%
""" t;
ve a x
!Qg"2" -
% Y-2
2
I
cN
Y x J * c I c: P
9 2
> c
II 8 V
2 - c ul
x W
m W LI
-
Y
0
w <
W a
a
Y e
* L - B
3 I c
X w
'A
VI 11-30
a e - 4!m2sih
\ MISCEmOUS LANDScAPE/OPEN SPACE GREAS
1. City H.1vL'brary (adjoining properry)
2, Safcry Center 18.0
4.3
3. Poinsettia Bridge .S
4. Bienvenida Circle
5. 405 Oak
6. Fire Stations (6)
7. R, R. Depot
8. Carol Place
.2
.1
2.5
43
.l
9. Polly Lane
10. Beach Accesses (4)
11. P & R Officeflard
12. Calavera Treatment Plant
13. Santa Fe Comdon
.1
.S
2.2
4.0
.2
14. Tamarack Cnb Wall
15. Elm Cn'bwall & Banks
.1
1.2
16. Elm Banh (east of ECR) 2J
ammala
1. woodbiP,ILnk
TOW 3&7
14.0
2. spil!m&rHiltEnty 10.0
3. Cadencia (rear lot) 3.0
4. Levante canyon
5. HaapGrove
13.0
70.0
6. SanMarcoscaayOn 20.0
7. Macario Canyon (Veterans) - amintaiaed/serviad a0+
VI 11-32
-
u, Q
9 9
3 I-
2
u) E
s
Ib e
I 1 I I
'8 9 8 i: 8a 28
I a& t g;?& Ira
e i[ 3 Ud
! :: i
\.* ua '& 1;; ad a c)cI
I8 la
c( :s ~ is I ,
J 8 !a i 0 1s ,.
.r( >
LO Dir
ai *a '(01.'08 i PI 3':s
:!A* 4 ji)ii[ u NU
~ /LOO
0 .* 4 9 L
am
L)
bU a
~ 44 j "9 b4
01 -rl
127: i id
I I
I
U 0
a $ 2
I
!
!
1
I I
! I I
Ob a ha bd jl.L..LtL f.PP5?t; 4.b
ib 3 : 9 L Yoib a4
00.
ut'r((4 4 a
OD
4L. OD <: a uU.UaLtu. ar(u0 -IOU UUauahu. aduo 4.u artu
au 8
..
4k a00.a 04 4L a0080
I2 '14 L+ 3sSzotto >a-amam~ 3rhutz1 sm-aaam~ PiPo +
8
9
w >
I
I. i; e)
0
I
I Y k
B a I, 3.,i ?I lii Y8
P4 04 GtZ6
I e I 41%
8 3::
-4a 1: b 0
I +,&M
il nl
-1 a
E f 4 3g A8 fsO I
! 3 3 iYi *&a I" ii : I !i
i d a 0 w. I
i3 vi
4 B
:t ! ! a +, t 8 sj f: :ii 1 ! i $1 igf 4l 3 4 a %
(I
u 'I 8r
pa IC If 1
44: a : k n
U
+, 1 1:: ar( 3 iij i
hn f[
VI 11-34
1 B .Y ! 1
d $i
la a% is
:.I 1 1; B
\!!! i 6H !!
"5 1 a iii
i' 1
-3
4B *3
83 ;- 1
la 18
rC( a.
r , il
t
a e
that need to be planned for in advance of development but may be pro
over time (parks, libraries, administrative facilities). The adequacy star
for parks will vary depending upon population created by new develop
(initial occupancy). The standard is considered a "timing" standard. The
facility must be scheduled, the funding committed, and the constrl
guaranteed within five years after initial development in the area (
Facilities Management Plan Zones relative to the park quadrant in whic
zones are located). This means that development in the zone or
district/quadrant would be conditioned upon the facility (park site) me
the standard and scheduled to be constructed as part of an adopted ci
program.
VIII-36
""'."Up&ym UL" o- " "_ 1 ""_ .."
' .:. G~~~O~~AAUW-- .tion:max,
.hllles raise the ptIppiejr as articipant is $45.-:Thrae free ners -am11 wear In- paraat- ouu future guide dogs. Information: 726 are available as well. This ~Varlons ci@-functions. Information: W or 726-6939. -Workshop is repeated on the second 43433W.
", Saturday of each month. Informa-
*
XI. .. . ... .- - ~. . "I ' - - 3- . . , .- .
~~ .- t. . Towti esim anmum& are
. . " i , CARLS3AD -'Aiilerican Asso- st. - -:. Be-happy .- . ktindedfw not$orqm$t and eom- I dation of University Women, Ms- - ~ ' .. edotganuatums topl4bl.i- :bad, Oceanside, Vista branch invite. :- 80LANA BEACH ~ -- Explo- &e their aeeluities. *sub- Mccalaureate degree graduates to' iatioos, sponsored by the Ship-; missiuw must be *=dags 1 a neighbo-rhood coffee 10 a.m. Sat- mates Christian~singles group, is prim- to the event. Mad them Eo: The ! :urday at 3439 Don Juan Drive. The holding a speaker meeting at 6 p.m. Blade- ATTN: !him (Xer edd zathering is to acquaint prospee- Sunday at SolanaBeachPresbyteri-- tor, PO Bm 90, owmtde, CA 92054. ' Stive members with AAUW-goals"an Church, 120 Stevens-Ave. This Itenas-will be.usid based on space ' bd opportunities. Branch mem- week% 8peaker will be author Bar- QW~~IQ~~&&-FW nkcire infoir?aation, j bers are also invited.. Information: bara Johnson, Who will speak abut call- Jean GilZette ut 433-7333;Ezt. I 4384mor&6250. 3er newest book,"Put a Geranium 436. - . -. . , .<. .",! - ~.
.. .
..
.. -. .i '1 ey@ . - . 1. ,. _. . " -- - '_ , . :- bgcathJ;&w j 1 ,
i' - ~ 3r. "
Tu .
-- __ i ..
_i.
I. ', I " , -,
-0- P*@ : .~~=
I l C ES ~.~:=
-YOUR- RIGHT TO ,KNOW '. I
.--. I ., -..call ~- -75~i-g :1 27 ..:; ... t ,
.~ -. ..-~. -: -3 "I -. - ..=. ';. -._. ._ .1 .' , ~ ; -: -. . ~ -2 -2.. -.
i I
1
I !
1 L
,: I? j 1 ;;
,.
-!
"." I
. -/ -1 - 1. ! -1 i
. .. !
1,
.I
INTHEOFFhXOF OouPrrY CLERK. tF
BUSINESS UNDER THIS
..
- ., ...- I:
L ! I
!1i1 - !i ~ : : 11: ; It-. m "% L . -
- .- i -
4. c c.+ 0 e ,.
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice -
GPA 90-6 - AN AMENDMENT TO THE PARKS E RECREATION ELEME
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD'S GENERAL PLAN
for a public hearing before the City Council.
f
Please notice the item for the council meeting of k&A
P'Z
Thank you.
MARTY ORENYAK 7/3/91
Assistant City Manager Date
*. * L e a
+
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
GPA 90-6
AMENDMENT TO PARKS & RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carl sbad will
a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village 0 (formerly Elm Avenue), at 6:OO P.M. , on Tuesday, August 20, 1991, to considc amendment to the Parks and Recreation Element of the City of Carlsbad’s Gen P1 an.
The Current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted by the City Council on
15, 1982. Since that date, many changes have occurred within the City requi an update of the Parks and Recreation Element, The principal cha
necessitating a revision to the current Element include development
popul ation growth , contemporary parks and recreation concepts , revised priori
for future park acquisition, budgetary considerations, and the implementatic the City’s Growth Management Program.
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element is to pl an , develop, provide qual i ty park facil i ties and recreation programs to ensure that residents of Carlsbad are afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum lei experiences. The goals, objectives and policy and action programs of the Ele
deal with park development, recreation programs, and special resource and space/Hi storical -Cultural uses. The Element a1 so addresses park standards
identifies anticipated park development projects.
Copies of the amendment to the Element are avail ab1 e at the Community Develop counter at 2075 Las Palmas, Carl sbad, CA 92009. If you have any quest regarding this matter, please call Terri Woods in the Planning Department 438-1161, extension 4447.
If you challenge the amendment to the Parks and Recreation Element in court, may be 1 imited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else in public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivl to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk‘s Office at or prior to the public hear
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL PUBLISH: August 8, 1991
4. .c. +
r ' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING *
NOTICE IS HEREBY GlVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will
a public hearing at the Safety Center, 2560 Orion Way, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO
on Wednesday, June 12, 1991, to consider an amendment to the Parks and Recrez
Element of the City of Carlsbad's General Plan.
The Current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted by the City Council on Junc
1982. Since that date, many changes have occurred within the City requiring an UF
of its Parks and Recreation Element. The principle changes necessitating a revision tc
current Element include development and population growth, contemporary parks
recreation concepts, revised priorities for future park acquisition, budgetary considerat: and the implementation of the City's Growth Management Program.
The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation Element is to plan, develop, and prc
quality park facilities and recreational programs to ensure that the residents of Carl
are afforded the opportunity to enjoy optimum leisure experiences. The goals, object
and policy and action programs of the Element deal with park development, recre:
programs, and special resource and open space/Historical-Cultural uses. The Element
addresses park standards and identifies anticipated park develogment projects.
Those persons wishing t pkak on this proposal are cordihly invited to attend the p
hearing. Copies of th lement are now availabledd the staff report will be availab:
and after June 6, 1991. If you have any questions, please call Terri Woods in the Plar!
Department at 438-1161? ext. 4447. : ".":: -..-'X
If you challenge th arks and Recreation Element in court, you may be limited to ra
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this n
or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the p hearing.
0 : 1,: I A r. I, A'' .<f I/, <. ' " .'< ,/ i #' !!, !,?~ /. ,-
B/fiY ,*&+'<\j~.: .-. i -" ~ - j,, 1'. , (
6 ..
CASE FILE: GPA 90-6
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLISH: MAY 30, 1991
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
W:vd