HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-11-02; City Council; 12458; Discretionary Applications Calavera Heights.
. U---Y OF CARLSBAD - AGEl --A BILL g$ig @
AB # ii?; cl 5 8 TITLE:
MTG 11/2/93 AFPROVALOFVARIOUSDISCRETIONARYAFPIJCATIONS
. NECJ%SARY TO APPROVE THE CALAVERA HEIGHTS
DEPT. CA PROJECT. EIR90-OS/GPA!WO4/MF 150(G)/ CTSQ-26/FUD!30-26/HDP90-33
I RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If Council concurs, your action is to adopt Resolution No.93-30( and Ordinance No. NS-255, approving the various discretionar; applications necessary to approve the Calavera Heights project.
I ITEM EXPLANATION
The City Council, at your meeting of October 26, 1993, directed our office to prepare documents approving various discretionary applications necessary to approve the Calavera Heights project. (EIR 90-05/GPA 90-04/MP lSO(G)/CT 90-26/PUD 90-26/HDP 90-33).
The Council adopted changes to Planning Commission Resolution No. 3517 (MP 150(A)), Planning Commission Resolution No. 3518 (CT 90-
26) t and Ordinance No. NS-255. Those changes are the consideration of a fee program to pay for construction and mitigation of sound attenuating walls, changes to conditions 91 A(4), 91 A(5), 91 A(5.1) and 91 A(7), and changes to the first paragraph of Section III of the Ordinance, respectively. Council should satisfy itself that the findings and conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission and as changed per your direction accurately reflect your intentions in the matter.
I EXHIBITS
Resolution No. 93-30/ Ordinance No. NS-255
1 RESOLUTION NO. 93-301 '
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT AND VARIOUS DISCRETIONARY APPLICATIONS FOR A PROJECT 'ON APPROXIMATELY 100 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT, SOUTH OF THE NORTHERN CITY LIMITS, EAST OF LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 1, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 7 APPLICANT: CALAVERA HEIGHTS CASE NO: EIR 90-05/GPA 90-04/MP lSO(G)/CT 90-26/ PUD 90-26/HDP 90-33
WHEREAS, on June 16, 1993 the Carlsbad Planning
Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider a
proposed Environmental Impact Report (EIR 90-05), General Plan
Amendment (GPA 90-04), Master Plan Amendment (MP 150(G)), Carlsbad
Tract (CT 90-26), Planned Unit Development (PUD 90-26) and Hillside
Development Permit (HDP 90-33) for project development on
approximately 100 acres of land and adopted Resolutions Nos. 3515,
3516, 3517, 3518, 3519 and 3520 respectively, recommending to the
City Council that they be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on
September 7, 1993, September 21, 1993 and October 26, 1993 held
public hearings to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to EIR 90005/GPA 90-04/MP
lSO(G)/CT 90026/PUD 90-26/HDP 90-33; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the Environmental Impact Report (EIR 90-05) on
the above referenced project is certified and that the findings and
1 conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No.
2 3515, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3. That the General Plan Amendment (GPA 90-04) is
approved and that the findings and conditions of the Planning
Commission contained in Resolution No. 3516, on file with the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and
conditions of the City Council.
4. That the Master Plan Amendment (MP (150(G)) of this
project is approved and that the findings and conditions of the
Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 3517, on file with
the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the
findings and conditions of the City Council with the addition of
the following condition:
nThe developer shall undertake and complete an acoustical study for noise impacts to residences adjacent to the proposed alignment of College Boulevard within the Master Plan in order to determine whether or not noise mitigation measures are necessary in order to reduce those impacts to a level of 60 db Cnel consistent with Planning Department Administrative Policy on Noise Mitigation Conditions Policy No. 17. The costs associated with any noise mitigation measures, if necessary, as recommended by the study shall be the responsibility of the appropriate homeowners@ association or other parties.@@
Ordinance No. NS-255 shall be contemporaneously adopted,
with the exception of the first paragraph of Section III, which is
amended to read as follows:
"One traffic analysis has already been completed that will require identified'improvements to be installed with Villages u, w, X or Y. The "Calavera Hills-College Boulevard Traffic AnalysisI' completed by the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department and dated February 24, 1993, indicates that the intersection of El Camino Real and Tamarack Avenue would fall below an acceptable level of service with the development of Villages Q and T. Therefore, with the development of Village U, W, X or Y, the extension of College Boulevard to Cannon Road to El Camino Real or College Boulevard continuing to El Camino Real must be constructed or guaranteed for construction consistent with Zone 7 Finance Plan."
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 2 8 mwm yz- 3: t
13
wJj,- 14
;&H
9 '199 15 mt;g2 0 8Zd,- p 16
a82 iT2y.j l7 b 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
-
5. That the Carlsbad Tract Map (CT 90-26) is approved
and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission
contained in Resolution No. 3518, on file with the City Clerk and
incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions
of the City Council except that condition numbers 91A(4), 91A(5),
91 A(5.1) and 91 A(7) are amended to read as follows:
"91 At41 College Boulevard from the southern subdivision boundary'to the future Cannon Road shall be constructed or guaranteed for construction as follows: (a) Full width grading to major arterial standards. (b) Two 14 foot lanes, one in each direction, and median curbing. (cl Adequate surface and subsurface drainage improvements to serve the drainage needs of the road. The terms of the guarantee shall be consistent with the Zone 7 Local Facilities Financing Plan."
1131. A(5) Cannon Road from the proposed College Boulevard to El Cam&o Real should be constructed or guaranteed for construction as follows: (a) Full width grading to major arterial standards. (b) Two 14 foot lanes, one in each direction, and median curbing.
(cl Adequate surface and subsurface drainage improvements to serve the drainage needs of the. road. (d) A fully traffic actuated signal at Cannon Road and El Camino Real, to be constructed as directed by the City Engineer. ,The terms of the guarantee shall be consistent with the Zone 7 Local Facilities Financing Plan."
"91 A(5 1 As an alternative to Condition 91 A(5), College Boulevard'frLm the future Cannon Road to El Camino Real should be constructed or guaranteed for construction as follows: (a) Full width grading to major arterial standards. (b) Two 14 foot lanes, one in each direction, and median curbing.
(cl Adequate surface and 'subsurface drainage improvements to serve the drainage needs of the road. (d) A fully traffic actuated signal at College Boulevard and El Camino Real, to be constructed as directed by the City Engineer. (e) Any appropriate environmental mitigation."
,(91 Af7L. Interim improvements to Carlsbad Village Drive adjacent to Village "Hn as outlined in the Calavera Hills Master Plan and as shown on the tentative map for Village rlHIU, CT 90-19. The City shall enter into a reimbursement agreement for these facilities to provide reimbursement from the Traffic Impact Fees collected in Local Facilities Management Zone 7."
3
.
1
2
'3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6. That the Planned Unit Development (PUD 90-26) for
this project is approved and that the findings and conditions of
the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 3519, on file
with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the
findings and conditions of the City Council.
7. That the Hillside Development Permit (HDP 90-33) for
this project is approved and that the findings and conditions of
the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 3520, on file
with the City clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the
findings and conditions of the City Council.
8. This action is final the date this resolution is
adopted by the City Council. The provision of Chapter 1;16 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Reviewgg shall
apply:
"NOTICE TO APPLICANT"
"The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must.be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a'request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition .may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California'92008."
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EFFECTIVE DATE: This resolution shal,l be effective upon
its adoption, except as to the General Plan Amendment, which shall
be effective thirty (30) days following its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the
' City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 2nd day of NOVEMBER
1993, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Stanton, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member
ATTEST:
.
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. NS-255
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY IN THE CAlJiVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 7 CASE NAME: CALAVERA HEIGHTS CASE NO: MP 150(G)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
California has reviewed and considered a Master Plan Amendment for
future development of the site; and
WHEREAS, after procedures in accordance with the
requirements of law, the City Council has determined that the
public interest indicates that said plan be approved.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That the Calavera Hills -Master Plan
Amendment, MP 150(G), dated June 16, 1993, on file in the Planning
Department and incorporated by reference herein, is approved. The
Master Plan Amendment shall constitute the zoning for this property
and all development of the property shall conform to the plan.
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the
Planning Commission in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3517
shall also constitu e the findings and conditions of the City
Council.
SECTION I I: The following text shall be added to the
Master Plan Amendm t following the last paragraph on page 49
discussing circulat'on, as follows:
c ..
Page 1 of 3 of Ordi ante No. NS-255
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"One traffic analysis has already been completed that will require identified improvements to be’ installed with Villages U, W, X, or Y. The "Calavera Hills-College Boulevard Traffic Analysisgg completed by the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department and dated February 24, 1993, indicates that the intersection of El Camino Real and Tamarack Avenue would fall below an acceptable level of service with the development of Villages Q and T. Therefore, with the development of Village U, W, X, or Y, the extension of College Boulevard to Cannon Road to El Camino Real or college Boulevard continuing to El Camino Real must be constructed consistent with Zone 7 Finance Plan.
"The alternative mitigation identified in the Environmental Impact Report to install dual left-turn lanes on Tamarack Avenue at El Camino Real is not allowed. This is because of the City Council adoption of the ggCirculation Implementation Program and Traffic Impact Fee Study" dated April 1991. In that study, is a policy that states: "No interim mitigation improvements beyond those identified for construction at buildout of the City will be allowed.gg Because the dual left-turn lanes are not required at buildout, they may not be used as interim improvements.
#'An' interim improvement has been identified to be constructed with the development of any villages beyond Q and T. That improvement is to Carlsbad Village Drive from approximately Chatham Road northerly to a point east of Pontiac Drive. These improvements are necessary due to potential safety problems involving sidewalks, a left-turn lane, and pavement transition. The interim improvements will construct a left-turn lane at Victoria Avenue, install sidewalk on the easterly side of Carlsbad Village Drive, and improve the transition of pavement widths at both ends of the improvements. This work will enhance the pedestrian.circulation and improve the traffic safety to the Master Plan area."
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty
days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the
adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least
once in the Carlsbad Sun within fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the
Carlsbad City Council on the 25th day. of OCTOBER ,
1993, and thereafter
. . .
Page 2 of 3 of Ordinance No. NS-255
.
1
2
'3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
la
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 2nd day of NOVEMBER
-I 1993, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Stanton, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Kulchin
ABSTAIN: None
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
ATTEST:
(24!nzLkL ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cl&k
(SEAL)
Page 3 of 3 of Ordinance No. NS-255
November 5, 1993
Lyon Communities, Inc. 4330 La Jolla Village Drive, #130 San Diego, CA 92122
RE: Calavera Heights Project - EIR 90-5/GPA 9004/MP 150(G)/
CT 90-26/PUD 90026/HDP 90-33
The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of November 2, 1993,
adopted Resolution No. 93-301 and adopted Ordinance No. NS-255,
approving the various discretionary applications necessary to
approve the Calavera Heights Project.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 93-301 and a copy of Ordinance
No. NS-255 for your files.
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, CMC
City Clerk
ALR:ijp
Enclosures
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 - (619) 434-2808 a3
1 .
-_
i
.
Mr. Bud Lewis, Mayor City Council Offices 1200 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008 ALL RECEIVED
Dear Mr. Lewis:
* am ~mg~ym’ti*~mt ~“--- “* -* about a de&ion that was made at the*Iast City Council meeting (10/26/93). I am making an appeal to you about the Calavera Hills i)roject, and more specifically, the College Blvd. extension with respect to “Zone C”, or The Cape Townhomes. I” b
My wife and I live in The Cape on a court which is very near the property line where the College extension is proposed to be built. We have been attending Council meetings and trying to learn as much information as possible about the proposed project. Up until the last meeting, it seemed as if the Council members were being understanding and sympathetic to the situation of the current homeowners in the neighborhoods adjacent to the new project. But last Tuesday night my wife and I sat stunned in front of the TV (we couldn’t come to the meeting this time). We were amazed to see how cold and callous some council members and city staff had become toward the plight of the current residents, who, I might add, they are supposed to serve and
represent. The message from two. of the four members pizsc?nti seemed.to.be: “Tough luck for those ~whc&~ ~~,.They’~~have-knoure,wIia‘t they:weS getting into, so they’ll have to live with thenoise”, .I%-. i ‘7-, . . $ -., 1 h- ‘ ‘P
It secrlK&~~~~ you all being held hostage- by the developers “~~~t.ing the people. Are ?~Furthermorqheredoesno%‘seimtHeany willingness to compro&se @.‘K ctige> the plan; ,I. donrt-understand all the “Cityspcak” jargon with respe& ba the College Blvd. extension, but the bottom-lii’%eems to be that because someone drew the road 20-30 feet from our townhome property line back in 1982, and because
until approved that plan back then, nothing can change ‘t there be any changes to a bad plan? I wonder ti&urtlQz ti out-to t&proper@ li&+lately
caster lZo@ ti s&fir& h&d how &se the’ road
wili Herally pass underneath mqresidence windows!
Two council members had the insensitivity to say that people should have known what they were getting into when they bought their homes. I can only tell you what we experienced ourselves and what we have observed in the neighborhood. We were vaguely aware that College was going to go through eventually when we bought our home two years ago.
City Council - Page 2:
My wife and I are intelligent and cautious people. We asked around, studied the hard-to-read map that was attached to our deed/loan papers, and even went down to the City Planning Office to look at their maps. It was m clear or evident at that time how close the road was going to be to the property. Furthermore, our realtor, who is also a homeowner in The Cape, assured us that the road would be far enough away so that it would not be a noise problem. After we were living in our home for awhile and the road issue came before the City Council, we took an informal poll of our neighbors and found that very few people were aware of the proposed extension of College Blvd., let alone how close it was planned to our property line. So, I think it is ridiculous to assume the “buyer beware” principle in this case. There are plenty of intelligent homeowners in The Cape (some of whom have been here since it was built in the
early 1980’s) who were unaware of the proximity of the proposed road. Besides, the planning staff and ultimately the council members should take most of the responsibility for a poor plan and designing the road so close to existing homes. With all the space in Calavera Hills, why
in the world would you draw a street 20-30 feet from existing homes?
The last point I would like to discuss is that of noise abatement. For reasons I also don’t understand (because of the jargon used in the last meeting), Council members decided not to make the developer put in walls or other sound proofing. Why not? Why shouldn’t they be responsible for assuring that the quality of life is maintained for current residents? rpUarant%
that ou qualitv of life. and most likely our home values are goin? to suffer greatly as result of this nr&ct. Instead of a beautiful, peaceful canyon view, we will have a road to look at. Instead of hearing wildlife (e.g. coyotes), we will have to listen to cars and trucks going by.
I am not a sound engineer and I don’t know what options thereare for abatement, but studies
and action should be taken. It was mentioned during the meeting that a wall was going to be
built on the m side of the proposed College Blvd. I stronely urge the council to reconsider
this, especially if no sound abatement is planned for the west side of the road. If you build a wall on the east side without any sound proofing on the west side, it will compound the noise
problem for our neighborhood because of reflecting sound. Not only will we hear the original
traffic noise, we will also hear the echo effect.
Mr. Lewis, I hope that you and-the other Council members will revisit and reconsider the issues
I have mentioned. For my wife, myself and my neighbors, I sure hope it is not too late!
We feel that it is the City Council’s duty to look out for the needs of existing Carlsbad residents.
Please show us that you do care.
Ron Baker
2968 Lancaster Rd. Carlsbad, CA 92008 H 434-9151 W 967-2894