HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-03-05; City Council; 13536; Mar VistaCI-‘Y OF CARLSBAD - AGEMA BILL
MAR VISTA
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT City Council Resolution No. o/6 - 77 APPROVING
the Mitigated Negative Declaration with a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
and LCPA 94-04 as recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and
INTRODUCE Ordinance NO. &.S - ~S~APPROVING ZC 94-04.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On January 3, 1996 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Mar
Vista project. The project site is located directly north of the Poinsettia Community Park
and includes a residential subdivision of the 34.3 acre property into forty-nine (49)
single-family lots, and one 19.24 acre open space lot. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Local Coastal Program
Amendment (LCPA) and Zone Change (ZC). The Tentative Map, Planned Development
Permit, and Hillside Development Permit were all approved by the Planning Commission
subject to the City Council approving the other actions required for the project. The
commission’s vote on all the project actions was 6-O and no public testimony was
offered by citizens at the hearing.
The Planning Commission’s primary discussion focused on the project’s affordable
housing and the commission was very supportive of the proposal to provide 8 second-
dwelling units to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirements. The second-dwelling
units would have exterior access to the side yard, be incorporated into the second-story
of the primary home, and utilize a portion of the three-car garage for parking. City
regulations require that the maximum monthly rental rate for a second-dwelling unit shall
be affordable to low-income households.
The remaining discretionary actions to be decided by the City Council include a Local
Coastal Program Amendment and a Zone Change as follows:
1. A change in the zoning on the subject property from the Planned Community
Zone (PC) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Development
Overlay Zone (R-l -7500-Q); and,
2. A change in the zoning on the adjacent property to the east (MSP California LLC)
from the Residential Density Multiple Zone with a Qualified Overlay (RDM-Q) to
the One-Family Residential Zone with a Qualified Overlay (R-1-7500-Q). MSP
California LLC currently has two tentative map applications in process with the
City for single-family residential subdivisions on this property.
All the required findings can be made to support the Zone Change and Local Coastal
Program Amendment. More detailed information is included in the attached staff report
to the Planning Commission.
I
/4 -
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. / 3; 5 3 6
A Mitigated Negative Declaration was processed addressing all the necessary
discretionary approvals needed to develop the project. The environmental document
was found by staff and the Planning Commission to have been prepared in compliance
with State and City regulations. The Planning Commission has determined that the
project would have a significant effect on the environment, however, there will not be a
significant effect in this case since the mitigation measures described in Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3872 have been added to the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
As discussed in the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan, all necessary major
capital facilities will be provided concurrent with development and funded by the
Developer of the project. A financing plan that comprehensively addresses the
provisions of public facilities within the facility zone has been approved by the City
Council.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS
EXHIBITS
Facilities Zone I -I 20
Local Facilities Management Plan 1 - 1 20
Growth Control Point I I - 6 DU/ACRE
Net Density I -I 2.45
Special Facilities I -I C.F.D. NO. 1
1. City Council Resolution No. 91p - 7 7
2. City Council Ordinance No. /\/S - 35 Q
3. Location Map
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3872, 3873, and 3874
5. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 3, 1996
6. Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated January 3, 1996.
RESOLUTION NO. 9 6 - 7 7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT, AND A CHANGE TO THE CARLSBAD
ZONING MAP TO CHANGE A PORTION OF THE MAP
FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO ONE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE, AND FROM RESIDENTIALDENSITY
MULTIPLE WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
ZONE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST
OF PASEO DEL NORTE, SOUTH OF PALOMAR
AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 203 IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
CASE NO: LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-04
WHEREAS, on January 3, 1996 the Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration with a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program , Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 94-04),
and Zone Change (ZC 94-04) for project development on 90.6 acres of land and adopted
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3872, 3873, and 3874 respectively, recommending
approval to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on 5th day of
MARCH , 1996, held a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard
all persons interested in or opposed to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, LCPA 94-04
and ZC 94-04; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Carlsbad as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
1
E
2
4
5
e
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
4.
5.
. . . .
. ..-
h
That the Mitigated Negative Declaration with the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program on the above referenced project is approved, and that
the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3872, on file with the City Clerk and
incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City
Council.
That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of
the Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 94-04) is approved and that
the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3874, on file with the City Clerk and
incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City
Council.
That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of
the Zone Change (ZC 94-04) is approved and that the findings and
conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 3873, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by
reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council and Ordinance
NS-350 shall be contemporaneously adopted.
This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council.
The provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time
Limits for Judicial Review” 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 that the
nineteenth 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 deposit in an amount sufficient 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.”
2
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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the day of 5th MARCH , 1996, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Finnila, Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Kulchin
ABSTAIN: None
Al-TEST:
ALETHA L.
WAY
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
-
ORDINANCE NO. IS-350
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 21 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A
ZONE CHANGE, ZC 94-04 FROM PC TO R-1-7500-Q AND
FROM RDM-Q TO R-1-7500-Q, ON TWO PROPERTIES
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
CASE NO: zc 94-04
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by
the amendment of the zoning map as shown on the map, attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission
as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3873 constitutes the findings and
conditions of the City Council.
SECTION III: The Council further finds that this action is consistent with the
General Plan in that the One-Family Residential Zone (R-1-7500) is consistent with the
Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use Designation and the Qualified
Development Overlay Zone (Q) is consistent with the General Plan scenic corridor
designation for Palomar Airport Road.
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 a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad
within fifteen days after its adoption.
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
-
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting, of the Carlsbad
City Council on the day of , 1996, and thereafter
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad on the day of , 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEW
0
- EXHl6lT 3
0 1 EXISTING P-C
PROPOSED R-l-7500-Q
0 2 EXISTING RD-M-Q
PROPOSED R-l-7500-Q
MAR VISTA
ZC 94=04/LCPA 94-04
8
II EXHIBIT 4 I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3872
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A RECIRCULATED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CHANGE, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT,
TENTATIVE MAP, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, TO: (1) CHANGE
THE ZONING ON THE MCREYNOLDS PARCEL FROM
PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE (PC) TO THE ONE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITH THE QUALIFIED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE (R-1-7500-Q) AND
CHANGE THE ZONING ON THE MSP CALIFORNIA LLC
PARCEL FROM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY MULTIPLE
(RDM) TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1-7500); (2)
SUBDIVIDE THE MCREYNOLDS PROPERTY INTO 49
SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT;
AND, (3) PROPOSE 8 FUTURE SECOND-DWELLING
UNITS; ALL ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, NORTH OF CAMINO DE
LAS ONDAS, AND SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT
ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 203 AND LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
CASE NO: ZC 94-04/LCPA 94-04/CI’ 94-ll/SDP 94-
lO/HDP 94-09
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for approval of the project
more fully described as a Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Map,
Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development Permit, to: (1) change the zoning on the
McReynolds parcel from Planned Community Zone (PC) to the One-family Residential
Zone with the Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-1-7500-Q) and change the zoning
on the MSP California LLC parcel from Residential Density Multiple with the Qualified
Development Zone (RDM-Q) to One-family Residential with Qualified Development Overlay
Zone (R-1-7500); (2) subdivide the McReynolds property into 49 single-family lots and one
open space lot; and, (3) propose 8 future second-dwelling units, for certain property to wit:
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
-
Parcel C of Parcel Map No. 2949, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, August 9, 1974, as File No. 74-216632 of official records.
AND
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,103.91 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Offtce of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carisbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Offkial Records.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law and provided in Section 19.04 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Recirculated
Mitigated Negative Declaration according to Exhibit “ND”, dated October 3,
1995, “PII”, dated September 18, 1995, the addendum Exhibit “X”, dated
January 3,1996, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program on file in the Planning Department,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
PC RESO NO. 3872 -2-
.- -
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista project,
the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, on file in the
Planning Department, prior to recommending approval of the project. Based on the
EIA Part-II and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that there is no
substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and
hereby recommends approval of the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Recirculated Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Mar Vista project and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection
Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the Recirculated Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Mar Vista Project reflects the independent judgment of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad. (Note: Permits issued as part Sambi
Project).
4. The attached addendum to the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration, Exhibit
“X”, dated January 3, 1996, to change the project’s description to include the zone
change to R-1-7500 on the MSP California LLC Parcel will have no significant
adverse effect of the environment and can be considered a minor technical addition
to the project’s description per Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. Changing
from one type of residential zoning (RDM) to another type of residential zoning (R-
l-7500) effects the type of development standards that are applied to the future
residential development. In this case, the proposed R-1-7500 Zone is a more
restrictive residential zone than the existing RDM Zone.
Conditions:
1. Sewer/Stormdrain Alternative “A” - Implementation of Alternative “A” crosses
Encinas Creek. Prior to the issuance of a final map or grading permits, whichever
occurs first, the developer shall obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the
California Fish and Game Department, if required for any proposed alterations to
existing natural watercourses, and shall comply with any and all permit
requirements associated therewith, pursuant to Section 1601/1603 of the Fish and
Game Code. The developer, in conjunction with the Department of the Army Corp
of Engineers shall determine whether a 404 permit shall be required for alterations
to wetland areas.
2. .05 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat will be directly impacted by this
project. The impacted CSS habitat is regarded as low quality. Pursuant to the
Interim Take provisions of the 4d Rule for the California gnatcatcher, the project
PC RESO NO. 3872 -3- II
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
3.
4.
5.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
shall be required to mitigate this loss of .05 acres of CSS by acquiring for
preservation comparable quality habitat at a 1:l ratio. The developer proposes to
mitigate this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .05 acres of CSS habitat within
the high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation
bank. This proposal shall require the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), and the California Department of Fish and Game. Prior to the issuance
of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to consult with and obtain
necessary “take” permits from the USFWS, the California Department of Fish and
Game for impacts to the loss of .05 acres of CSS.
Prior to construction of Hidden Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road south to
Poinsettia Community Park, the developer shall comply with all California
Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service permits and the approved final biological mitigation plans dated July, 1995,
on file in the Planning Department. (Note: All permits for the grading of Hidden
Valley Road have been issued as part of the Sambi Project)
The CC&Rs for the project shall include a requirement, stating that flood lights
from the development shall not project/shine into the native habitat areas.
Approval of the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration is granted subject to
the approval of CT 94-11, ZC 94-04, LCPA 94-04, SDP 94-10, and HDP 94-09. The
Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873,3874, 3875, 3876, and 3877.
PC RF&O NO. 3872 -4-
h
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
2 Commission of the City of Car&bad, California, held on the 3rd day of January, 1996, by
3 the following vote, to wit:
4 AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Monroy, Nielsen, Noble,
5 Savary and Welshons
6 NOES: None
7 ABSENT: Commissioner Erwin
8 ABSTAIN: None 9
10
11 7
12 Jd$F%kw
13 WILLIAM COMPAS, khairperson
CARLSBADPLANNIN G COMMISSION
14 ATTEST:
15
16
17
18 Planning Director
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 3872 -5-
.
RECIRCULATED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: South of Palomar Airport Road, east of Paseo
De1 Norte, adjacent to and north of Poinsettia
Park.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A tentative map for 49 single-family residential lots
ranging in size from 7500 to 35,298 square feet, a 19.24
acre open space lot, and 8 second-dwelling units.
Project improvements include: (1) local public streets,
curbs, gutters, sidewalks and drainage facilities to serve
the lots; (2) sewer line and storm drain alignment “B”
and new alternative alignment “A” to an existing
east&vest sewer line along Canyon de las Encina; (3) the
construction of Hidden Valley Road from Camino de las
Ondas to Palomar Airport Road; (4) the construction of
a local public street from Hidden Valley Road to the
project site.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of-said
review, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a
significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification
for this action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative DecIaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 2075 Las Pahnas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from
the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department
within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any
Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension
DATED: OCIOBER 3, 1995
CASE NO: ZC 94-#/CT 94-ll/HDP 94-09/SDP 94-lO/LCPA 94-04
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 3,1995
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-l 576 l (619) 436-l 161 @
-
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART l-I
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. Cl’ 94-l l/HDP 94-091SDP 94-lO/ZC 94-04/LCPA 94-04
DATE: SEPTEMBER 18. 1995
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Mar Vista
2. APPLICANT: Christa McRevnolds
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 23 16 Calle Chiauita. La Jolla. California 92073,
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMI’ITED: November 7.1994
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A tentative map for 49 single-familv residential lots rangine in size from
7.500 to 35.353 sauare feet. a 19.25 acre ouen snace lot. and 8 seconddwellinP units. Proiect
imnrovements include: (1) local nublic streets. curbs. gutters. sidewalks and drainage facilities to serve
the lots: (21 two alternative sewer line/storm drain alignments (A&B) that connect from the nronertv to
an existing east/west sewer line alone Canyon de las Encina; (3) the construction of Hidden Vallev Road
from Camino de las Ondas to Palomar Airoort Road: and (4) the construction of a local Dublic street from
Hidden Valley Road east to the nroiect site.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact”, or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation
Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
- Land Use and Planning - Transportation/Circulation - Public Services
- Population and Housing X Biological Resources - Utilities and Service Systems
- Geological Problems - Energy and Mineral Resources X Aesthetics
X Water - Hazards X Cultural Resources
X Air Quality X Noise - Recreation
X Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 3/28/95 is..
* DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency).
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been
added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one
potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described
on attached sheets. A MITIGATED NEGATlVE DECLARATION is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice
of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
cl
cl
q
q
q
l Planner Hg natur 3 Date
2 Rev. 3/28/95 iI*
-
- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CBQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental
Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical,
biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information
to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration,
or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately
supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” _
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply
does not apply to projects like the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be explained when
there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards.
. “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact
is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
. “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant
Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant.
. Based on an “EIA-Part II“, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the
environment, but &I potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances
requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required
by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
. When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare
an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable
standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been
made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project
or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
3 Rev. 3/28/95
/I
.
. If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there
are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation
measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate
“Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration may be prepared.
. An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited
to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or
mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to
mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding
Considerations” for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed
mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part
II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to
below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
4 Rev. 3f28p5 18
Issue (and suppating hlfamatiul solucesl:
POtt!tltidy Significant
impact
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a)
W
cl
d)
e)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #t(s): )
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project? ()
Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? ()
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)? ()
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? ()
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed offtcial regional or local
population projections? ()
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ()
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ()
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ()
b) Seismic ground shaking? ()
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ()
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ()
Potentially Significaut
utlless LessThan Mitigation Significant No Incorporated w=t m=t
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
5 Rev. 3/28/95
,q
Lsues (and support& rnfmtial smzces):
POWidlY Significant Impact
e> Landslides or mudflows? ()
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ()
g) Subsidence of the land? ()
h) Expansive soils? ()
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ()
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a)
b)
c>
4
d
f)
g)
h)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff? ()
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? ()
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? ()
Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? ()
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements? ()
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of g&.ndwater recharge
capability? ()
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
0
Impacts to groundwater quality? ()
POtentially Sigllifii unless Mitigation
hx4porated
LessThan Significant
Impact
x
x
NO
Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
6 Rev. 3/28/95
aa
4
Issues (and supprxting hfmmatim saurces):
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
0
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? ()
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ()
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? ()
d) Create objectionable odors? ()
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal
result in:
a)
W
cl
4
e>
f)
&!I
VII.
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
0
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. faint equipment)? ()
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses? ()
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ()
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ()
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)? ()
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ()
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
potenti& Significant
m=t
POttXltilllly Significant UdesS Mitigation Incorporated
LesTban Significant No
Impact Impact
x -
7 ,
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Rev. 3/28/95
3 1
Isues ml-l supporting Infamatiat suurcea):
a)
b)
cl
d)
4
VIII.
a)
b)
cl
POtUltidy Significant
m=t
Potmially Significant ULIleps Mitigation hmporated
LesTban Significant No
m=t Impact
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds? Q
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ()
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ()
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? 0
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ()
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
0
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ()
Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State? ()
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation? ()
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? ()
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? ()
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? ()
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x -
8 Rev. 3/28/95
a2
C -
Issues (and Suppating Information Sources):
Potentially Significant
mJ=t
Potentially Significant
Unless h4itigation Inmated
LesTllan Significant No
m=t @act
e> Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? () x -
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ()
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ()
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ()
b) Police protection? ()
c) Schools? ()
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
0
e) Other governmental services? ()
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ()
b) Communications systems? ()
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ()
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ()
e) Storm water drainage? ()
f) Solid waste disposal? ()
g) Local or regional water supplies? ()
x
x
x
x’
X
x
x
x
x
x
x -
x -
x
x
9 Rev. 3/18/%X
a3
rslm (and supporting Informatial sources):
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? () x
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ()
c) Create light or glare? ()
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ()
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ()
c) Affect historical resources? ()
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? ()
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? ()
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? ()
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ()
Potentially Significant Impact
Potentially Significant Utlk Mitigation Incorporated
LessTllan Sig,nificant No
Impact m=t
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x -
x
10 rev. 3nam
a+
Issues (and Supporting informatim Sources):
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Potentially Significant
bPt
Potentially Significant U&?SS Mitigation bmpofated
LessThan Significant No
hwt m=t
x
x
x
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following
on attached sheets:
Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for
review.
Impacts adequately addressid. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
11 Rev. 3/28/95
d$
.
A
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:
This Mitigated Negative Declaration was originally submitted for public review on February 1, 1995. The State
clearinghouse (SCH #95021007) public review period closed on March 6, 1995. The document is being revised
and recirculated for public review based on comments received by the State Coastal Commission and the Fish and
Game Department, a change in the project description, and an update to the project’s biological impact analysis
and the Initial Study Checklist. The developer has added an alternative sewer line and stormdrain alignment “A”
for the project from Vista De Olas, through Lot No. 19, and north to the existing east/west sewer line in Canyon
de las Encinas. In response to State resource agency comments regarding impacts and the level of analysis, an
updated Biological Survey and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey has been submitted with the project which
further analyzes the environmental impacts of the project, sewer and stormdrain alignment “B”, and the new sewer
and stormdrain alignment “A” as shown on the Mar Vista Tentative Map, (See the discussion under Biological
Environment).
Since the publishing and public review of the original Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, dated
February 1,1995, the California Department of Fish and Game, the California Coastal Commission, and the Army
Corps of Engineers in a Section 7 Consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service have all issued
permits or approvals for the construction of Hidden Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road to the northern
property boundary of the City’s Poinsettia Community Park. Hidden Valley Road would provide primary access
to the project from Palomar Airport Road, and it’s construction would not significantly impact the environment as
conditioned and mitigated through City, State and Federal permits.
The project is located south of Palomar Airport Road, east of Paseo De1 Norte, adjacent to future Hidden Valley
Road, and north of Camino de las Ondas, in the City of Carlsbad. The eastern half of the property is utilized for agriculture. The majority of the site contains very gently sloping topography that rises from west to east. The
western half of the property consists of a finger canyon which continues north and connects with Canyon de las
Encinas. The flat developable areas of the property are rimmed by steep slopes along the west and north.
Topographic elevations on the site range from approximately 52 feet in the canyon floor to 180 feet above mean
sea level on the gently sloping mesa. The site is underlain by the Eocene Dehnar Formation and Friars Formation,
which are both capped by Quatemary terrace deposits. These bedrock formations are mantled by alluvium, topsoil,
landslide deposits, and undocumented fill soils. Six vegetation types are present on the property: (1)
ruderal/agriculture on the mesa; (2) pampas grass, diegan coastal sage scrub, and southern mixed chaparral along
the steeper slopes, and; (3) riparian southern willow scrub, and baccharislmule fat in the canyon.
Vehicular access to the site would be provided by a local street leading from a future non-loaded collector street
named Hidden Valley Road. Hidden Valley Road would travel east of the property and intersect with Camino de
las Ondas to the south and intersect with Palomar Airport Road to the north. The project would sewer north and
connect with the existing east/west sewer line in Canyon de las Encinas (Alternative “A” or “B”). Due to an
elevation differential of 28 feet between the low end of the project site at elevation 142 feet (Lot 19) and the ridge
to the east of the site (Emerald Ridge - West) at elevation 170 feet, it is not physically possible to sewer the project
through the already approved sewer line in future Hidden Valley Road, therefore, another sewer line that flows
directly to the north of the site is required. The alignment of future Hidden Valley Road from Palomar Airport
Road to Camino de1 las Ondas has already been environmentally reviewed and approved by two previous projects;
the City’s Poinsettia Community Park project - (CUP 92-05), and the Sambi Vesting Tentative Map - (CT 92-02).
The environmental documents for these projects are on file in the Planning Department.
12 Rev. 3/28/95 ab
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640 acre Zone 20 Planning
Area. The certified Final Program EIR 90-03 for Specific Plan 203 addresses the potential environmental impacts
associated with the future buildout of the Zone 20 Specific Plan area and is on file in the Planning Department.
Use of a Program EIR enables the City to characterize the overall environmental impacts of the specific plan. The
Final Program EIR contains broad, general environmental analysis that serves as an information base to be
consulted when ultimately approving subsequent development projects (i.e. tentative maps, site development plans,
grading permits, etc...) within the specific plan area. The City can avoid having to “reinvent the wheel” with each
subsequent development project by analyzing, in the program EIR, the regional influences, secondary effects,
cumulative impacts, and broad alternatives associated with buildout of the planning area. The applicable and
recommended mitigation measures of Final EIR 90-03 will be included as conditions of approval for this project.
This subsequent expanded “Initial Study” is intended to supplement the Final EIR and provide more focused and
detailed project level analysis of site specific environmental impacts and, if applicable, provide more refmed project
level mitigation measures as required by Final EIR 90-03. Mitigation measures that are applicable to the project
and already included in Final EIR 90-03 will be added to the tentative map resolution and new mitigation measures
not evaluated in Final EIR 90-03 will be included in this Mitigated Negative Declaration. For example, additional
environmental impacts not addressed in Final EIR 90-03 include riparian impacts created by the offsite sewer alignment “B”.
In addition to the Final EIR for Specific Plan 203, more recently the City has certified a Final Master
Environmental Impact Report for an update of the 1994 General Plan. The certified Master EIR is on file in the
Planning Department. The Master EIR serves as the basis of environmental review and impact mitigation for
project’s that are consistent with the plan, including projects within Specific Plan 203. Projects covered under the
Master EIR for the General Plan include implementation activities such as rezoning of properties, specific plans,
and the approval of development plans, including tentative maps, conditional use permits, and other land use
permits.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT:
Touomanhv. Geotechnical. & Grading:
Development of the site would include 47,000 cubic yards of grading to accommodate building pads, lots, utilities,
drainage structures, and onsite local public roadways. The proposed grading conforms to the City’s Hillside
Development Ordinance and manufactured slopes would be landform/contour graded, screened with landscaping,
and not exceed 30 feet in height, therefore the alteration of the topography would not be considered a significant
physical impact. The Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Leighton and Associates Inc., dated July
18, 1989 states that; “Based on the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation of the site, it is our opinion
that the proposed residential development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations
of this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications”. A grading permit is required for the
project, therefore, the Ciy’s adopted grading permit standards, including required compliance with the geotechnical
study, would ensure that the project has proper erosion control measures including landscaping on manufactured
slopes, adequate drainage facilities, and proper soil compaction. These items are all required by the Engineering
Department prior to approval of the grading permit.
Water Oualitv:
Section 5.2 of Master EIR 93-01 discussed water quality and sedimentation impacts to Encinas Creek. Development
of the project would create impervious surfaces onsite which reduce absorption rates and increase surface runoff
and runoff velocities. In addition, drainage from the project’s roofs, streets, driveways, slopes, and yards would
13 Rev. 3/28/S 2527
. -
* constitute a potentially significant impact to water quality due to potential pollutants in the “non-point source”
urban runoff. Buildout of the General Plan, including residential development within Specific Plan 203, may
significantly impact hydrological resources, therefore, the appropriate, and recommended General Plan mitigation
measures will be added as a condition of this project - (Section 5.2.5, Page 5.2-8, Master EIR 93-01). Prior to
approval of a grading permit the applicant must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant would be required to provide the best management practices
to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive biological areas. Compliance with this requirement would reduce any water quality impacts to below a level of significance. Grading Permit
standards and the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan require adequate drainage facilities to service the site.
Hydrology standards of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program require that post development surface
run-off, from a lo-year/6 hour stotm event, must not carry any increased velocity at the property line. To meet
this standard, energy dissipation facilities (i.e. rip-rap) would be provided along the drainage course, in addition
to a permanent regional basin proposed west of future Hidden Valley Road, adjacent to Encinas Creek at the 67
foot elevation.
Air Oualitv:
Final ElR 90-03 for the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203) discussed air quality impacts, however, this discussion
has now been supplemented by the Air Quality Section 5.3 of the Master EIR. The implementation of projects
that are consistent with the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption
and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors
to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a “non-
attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued
development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the
air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation
measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection
improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the
implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative
modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site
design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project
or are included as conditions of project approval.
Section 3.3.2.2 of Final EIR 90-03 and Section 5.3.3 of the Master EIR both indicate that construction activities
associated with implementation of the Specific Plan and General Plan will produce short term air quality impacts
in the form of dust from grading and traffic on dirt roads, and emissions from construction equipment. To reduce
these short-term construction impacts to the lowest extent possible the project would be conditioned with mitigation
measures designed to reduce dust and construction emissions - (Final EIR 90-03, Section 3.3.3, Page III-33; and
Master EIR 93-01, Section 5.3.5, Page 5.3-11).
Short-term construction impacts for this project can be mitigated below a level of significance locally, but
operation-related emissions are still considered cumulatively significant because the area is located within a “non-
attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked ” YES - significant”. This project is not
required to prepare an EIR because the recent certification of the Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council
Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air quality impacts. This
14 Rev. 3/B/95 all
.
-
.
“Statement Gf Overriding Consideration” applies to all projects covered by the Master EIR, including residential
projects in Specific Plan 203, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required.
Cultural & Paleontolonical Resources:
Section 3.60 of Final EIR 90-03 identified no archaeological or historic sites within the project boundaries. Sdi-
9607 is identified as the closest resource site within the area and it is located approximately 100 to 300 meters east
of the property. The offsite public road that provides access to the property through Emerald Ridge - West could
potentially impact CA-SDI-9607, therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey of the site was prepared by Gallegos
8t Associates, Dated September 1994. The report concluded that due to the limited number or artifacts and the
disturbed nature of the deposit, site CA-SDI-9607(W-115) is identified as not important under CEQA and the City
of Carlsbad Guidelines, and no further study or mitigation is required.
Section 3.10 of Final EIR 90-03, identified the potential for the presence of significant paleontological resources
throughout the entire specific planning area, with a high potential for the discovery of fossils during future grading
and construction activities. To reduce this potential impact to below a level of significance the project would be
conditioned with mitigation measures designed to protect paleontological resources - (Section 3.10.0, Page III-107,
Final EIR 90-03).
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT:
Backmound:
The Biology Section (3.4) of Final EIR 90-03 provides baseline data at a gross scale due to the large size of the
specific plan area. Given the large number of property owners and their differing development horizons and the
inevitable change in biological conditions over the long-term buildout of the specific plan area, it is not possible
to mitigate biological impacts from the buildout of the entire specific plan under one comprehensive open space
easement that crosses property lines or a habitat revegetation/enhancement plan sponsored solely by the property
owners. The implementation of the biological section of the EIR is based on future site specific biological survey
studies that focus on the impacts created by individual subsequent development projects. These additional biological
studies are required to consider the baseline data and biological open space recommendations of Final EIR 90-03
and provide more detailed and current resource surveys plotted at the tentative map scale for each property. The
range of the future mitigation options may include preservation of sensitive habitat onsite in conjunction with
enhancement/revegetation plans, payment of fees into a regional conservation plan, or the purchase and protection
of similar habitat offsite.
Project Level Biological Reuorts:
To meet these EIR requirements a biological resources field survey was prepared for the project by RECON, dated
January 1995 and updated June 20, 1995. In addition, a Biological Survey Report for an adjacent property
(Emerald Ridge - West), prepared by Brian Mooney Associated, dated August 1995, evaluated impacts created by
the project’s local access road which leads from future Hidden Valley Road through Emerald Ridge - West to the
project site. These subsequent biological studies are intended to provide more focused, current, and detailed project
level analysis of site specific biological impacts and provide more refined project level mitigation measures as
required by Final EIR 90-03.
The project site was surveyed for sensitive plant and animal species and three (3) sensitive plant species were
identified onsite, and five (5) sensitive wildlife species were observed either onsite or within the sewer line
15 Rev.3/28/95 a9
-
alignment “B”. All three sensitive plant species would be preserved in the proposed 19.24 acre open space lot.
The “threatened” coastal California gnatcatcher was observed in the Diegan coastal sage scrub and the mule fat
scrub along the west side of the site. The least Bell’s vireo and the willow flycatcher occur in riparian habitat, however, they were not observed on the site. The potential for these species to occur in the area is considered low
because of the small size and extent of the riparian habitat. The property was also surveyed for the burrowing owl
and the bird was not observed on the site.
Offsite Roadwav and Utility Imuacts and Alternatives:
The RECON Biological Report indicates that implementation of the project’s off-site sewer and stormdrain
alignment “B” would create additional significant impacts to riparian habitat not discussed in Final EIR 90-03,
therefore, mitigation measures designed to reduce biological impacts to below a level of significance will be
required as part of the project. Alignment “B” may have a Potentially significant impact on sensitive biological
habitat which is under the jurisdiction of two (2) “Responsible” public resource agencies, the California Coastal
Commission and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The construction of the project’s sewer
may be considered an alteration to a streambed and require a permit from the CDFG and the Army Corp of
Engineers. If feasible, the Alternative “B” sewer line should be tunneled under Encinas Creek to avoid impacts
to the wetlands. To reduce riparian impacts to below a level of significance, and contingent on the approval of
the appropriate resources agencies, any areas of riparian habitat disturbed by construction of the sewer line shall
be replanted/enhanced with native riparian species at a 3:l ratio so there is no “net loss” of habitat, and impacts
are temporary. The project will be required to obtain all necessary or applicable resources agency permits prior
to approval of a fmal map or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
Based on comments from the California Coastal Commission during the last public review period for the project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration, the developer has proposed a more environmentally sensitive sewer and stormdrain
alignment “A. If the newly proposed and environmentally preferred alternative sewer and stormdrain alignment
“A” is implemented, then no native habitat would be impacted and habitat mitigation is not required, per the
analysis provided in the updated Biological Survey Report, prepared by RECON, dated June 20, 1995.
The Mooney & Associates Biological Report, dated August 1995, indicates that the project’s main access road
leading from future Hidden Valley Road, through Emerald Ridge-West, to the project site would impact
approximately 0.05 acres of disturbed coastal sage scrub habitat (CSS). Because the off-site CSS habitat is
regarded as disturbed and the remaining high quality CSS habitat in this area would be preserved, the project shall
be conditioned to mitigate the 0.05 acre CSS impact by acquiring, for preservation, comparable quality habitat at
a ratio of 1: 1. The developer is proposing to mitigate this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .05 acres of
Coastal Sage Scrub habitat within the high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands
mitigation bank (subject to the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of
Fish). 1
City’s Habitat Management Plan. NCCP. and 4d Rule Determination:
The construction of the local access road in this area is the least environmentally damaging access alternative, it
provides primary access to an otherwise landlocked area that is surrounded by steep slopes and high quality CSS,
and it would result in the loss of 0.05 acres of disturbed CSS habitat, therefore, prior to the issuance of a grading
permit the City may have to authorize this project to draw from the City’s 167.5 acre (5%) CSS take allowance.
The take of 0.05 acres of CSS habitat from the Emerald Ridge-West property site will not impair the ability of the
City to implement it’s draft Habitat Management Plan (subregional NCCP). Prior to completion of a subregional
NCCP/Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), interim approval must be secured for losses of coastal sage
16 Rev.3/28/95
30
scrub habitat. A procedure has been established which allows the local jurisdiction to benefit from the 4(d) rule.
This procedure includes: establishment of the base number of acres of coastal sage scrub habitat in the subregion,
calculate 5% for the interim habitat loss, and keep a cumulative record of all interim habitat losses. The City of
Carlsbad has calculated that 5% of the base acreage of coastal sage scrub is 165.70 acres. As of March, 1995,3.96
acres have been taken. The loss of coastal sage scrub due to the Mar Vista project (0.05 acres) would result in
a cumulative habitat loss of 4.01 acres for the HMP area once all the approved loses have been taken. This loss
does not exceed the 5 % guideline of 165.70 acres. The 0.05 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve
Planning Areas. The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat values since this area
is not included as a part of a Linkage Planning Area (LPA). The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the
preparation of the Carlsbad HMP in that the area is not a part of a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution
to the overall preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat patches as archipelago or stepping
stones to surrounding PPAs.
The habitat loss has been reduced or mitigated by the design of the project, in that this access alignment is the most
sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact. Mitigation for the loss of the 0.05 acres of CSS will be in the form
of the acquisition of habitat credits as discussed above. The loss of habitat on the Emerald Ridge-West property
will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher. The habitat loss is
located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent to future Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community
Park, therefore, large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not occur. The habitat area being
impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be
more important.
The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The development of the Mar Vista property is a legal
development and all required permits will be obtained. Mitigation for impacts to the CSS habitat will be
accomplished in the form of purchase of equal or better habitat credits at an off-site location. This mitigation area
has been identified as the Carlsbad Highlands Mitigation Bank site which has previously been accepted by the
California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Noise and Light Irnuacts to Gnatcatchers:
Since coastal California gnatcatchers are known to occur in the area to the west and north of the property per the
RECON surveys, there may be an indirect impact to the gnatcatcher from the project’s lights. These impacts can
be avoided by directing construction and project lighting away from the native habitats. The development will be
conditioned to prohibit any flood lights from projecting into native habitat areas, The RECON report was also
determined that noise from the construction of the project would not significantly impact gnatcatchers in the area.
Future Hidden Valley Road Irnnacts:
An offsite access requirement for this project includes the construction of future Hidden Valley Road from Camino
de las Gndas to Palomar Airport Road. The Initial Study and adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Sambi Project - (CT 92-02), identified significant biological impacts associated with the construction of the
northern segment of Hidden Valley Road from Poinsettia Community Park north to Palomar Airport Road. As
part of the Sambi project a preliminary biological mitigation program was also adopted to reduce significant
biological impacts associated with the roadway. As of the date of preparation of this Initial Study all required
Local, State, and Federal permits have been obtained for the construction of Hidden Valley Road. Since CT 94-l 1
(Mar Vista) is dependent on this offsite roadway for access, compliance with all approved biological mitigation
as part of all local and resource agency permits will become a condition of approval for this project. If the
developer constructs the roadway as part of this project, then that developer must comply with the terms and
17 Rev. qzaps
3,
conditions of the applicable permits.
Agriculture:
The relatively level portions of the site are currently being utilized for agricultural purposes. The site’s soil (Marina
Loamy Coarse Sand (MK) & Chesterson Fine Sandy Loam (CfR)) is not considered prime, Class I or II, agricultural soil. The site is located in the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site II) of the Mello II Segment
of the Local Coastal Program. Section 3.0 of Final EIR 90-03 evaluated impacts created by the conversion of
agricultural land use to urban land use in the overlay zone. The EIR concluded that the cumulative loss of
agricultural land could be offset with the mitigation measures established and required by Mello II Segment of
the LCP, therefore, the appropriate condition will be added to the project - (Section 3.1.3, Page III-20, EIR 90-03).
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT:
Planned Land Use And Density:
The project would not alter the planned land use of the site and is consistent with the Residential Medium (RM)
land use designation and density established by the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan. The RM designation allows up to 8 dwelling units per net acre with a Growth Control Point of 6 dwelling units per net acre.
The project’s proposed density is 2.45 dwelling units per net acre.
Hazardous Substances:
The site has been farmed and cultivated for a number of years and there may be a potential for significant impacts
to future residents from accumulations of hazardous chemicals in the soil. To evaluate this potential impact a
Preliminary Pesticide Residue Survey was prepared by Geo Soils Inc., dated June 1994. The survey report
indicates that very low level concentrations of three pesticides (3); 4,4’-DDE, 4,4’-DDT, and toxaphene were
detected in soil samples taken from the site. The report concluded that the pesticide levels in the random soil
samples were sufficiently below regulatory levels to not warrant additional testing or assessment. The report made
a similar conclusion for two Dioxin isomers found at very low levels in the soil on the site, therefore, the potential
hazard is considered less than significant, and no further analysis is required.
Section 3.9.2.3 of Final EIR 90-03 analyzed land use incompatibilities caused by the ongoing use of agricultural
chemicals and the future development of residential land uses. As phased development proceeds within the specific
plan area, interface conflicts associated with pesticide spraying, irrigation runoff, and odor impacts may arise
between agricultural operations and residential uses. To reduce such impacts to below a level of significance, the
appropriate EIR recommended mitigation measures will be made a condition of the project - (Section 3.9.3, Page
III-103, Final EIR 90-03). Mitigation will include walls, drainage control, and a notification to all future residential
land owners that this area is subject to dust, pesticide, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations.
Light and Glare:
The property is surrounded by open space to the west and north, a future public park with several lighted sports
fields to the south, and similar residentially zoned property to the east, therefore, the light generated from the
vehicles, street lights, and homes in this single-family project will not significantly impact the surrounding land
uses.
18 Rev. 3/28495
3s
Circulation:
The project would increase local traffic in the area, however, a Traffic Study prepared for the project by WPA
Traffic Engineering, Inc., dated October 1994, and a Traffic Impact Analysis conducted as part of the Zone 20
Specific Plan indicates that compliance with the circulation requirements of the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203),
Final Program EIR 90-03, and the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 20 would mitigate any significant
local traffic impacts - (Section 3.5, Page III-58, Final EIR 90-03). Final EIR 90-03 for the Zone 20 Specific Plan
(SP 203) evaluated circulation impacts, however, this discussion has now been supplemented by the Circulation
Section 5.7 of Final Master EIR 93-01.
Public Facilities:
The project is located within the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan. Public facility impacts and financing
have been accounted for in this plan to accommodate the residential development. The residential land use would
be consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the project would not significantly impact public facilities and
planned land uses. In addition, a condition will be added to the project to require that the developer enter into an
agreement with the appropriate school district to ensure that there are adequate school facilities available to serve
the residential subdivision - (Section 3.11, Page III-1 12, Final EIR 90-03).
Noise:
Section 3.8 of Final EIR 90-03 evaluated potential noise impacts for future projects located in Specific Plan 203
and recommended that noise studies be prepared for projects impacted by traffic and airport noise. A portion of
the site is located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL contour, therefore, noise from existing Palomar Airport Road,
Paseo De1 Norte, and the airport would create a significant impact on the homes in this project. A Noise Technical
Report was prepared for the project by RECON, dated December 1994. Noise levels on the project site will exceed
the Noise Element’s exterior traffic noise standard of 60 CNEL and the interior noise standard of 45 CNEL,
therefore, mitigation measures are required to reduce the noise levels to the adopted standard. The project will be
conditioned to comply with all the appropriate mitigation recommendations of Section 3.8.3 of Final EIR 90-03
and the recommendations of the project’s noise report. Noise mitigation will include perimeter sound attenuation
walls and the utilization of construction techniques and materials designed to provide adequate sound attenuation.
Visual Aesthetics:
Section 3.13 of Final EIR 90-03 analyzed potentially visual impacts created by development within Specific Plan
203, including this property. It was determined that visual impacts to the Palomar Airport Road Viewshed
(Vantage Point 7, Figure 3.16-6) could be potentially significant. To reduce these potential impacts to below a
level significance the EIR recommended mitigation measures, including additional visual analysis - (Section 3.13.3,
Page I&49, Final EIR 90-03).
The proposed project is a residential lot subdivision, and at this point in time, no residential structures are being
planned. Due to the visual sensitivity of the site and it’s location adjacent to a future public park, the Planning
Department is recommending that the Qualified Overlay Zone be placed on the property. This will ensure that a
Site Development Plan (SDP), in compliance with the standards of the Qualified Overlay Zone, is processed for
the placement and design of the future homes. This future SDP will evaluate visual impacts created by the building
height, building facades, roof lines, and colors of homes along the northern and western edge of the mesa. The
SDP will also evaluate the placement of homes on the individual lots in relationship to setbacks, and the visual
street scene from internal public streets. As part of the development of future homes on the site, the project will
19 Rev. 3/28195
3 3
. be conditioned to require additional visual analysis. This analysis shall consist, at a minimum, of computer-
enhanced photo modifications showing development conditions proposed by the project.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
As discussed in the Biological Section of this EIA, the implementation of sewer alignment “B” will impact riparian
resources and the construction of a local public access road will impact .05 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat.
However, mitigation measures included as part of this EIA and the project will adequately mitigate impacts to
biological resources.
The implementation of projects that are consistent with the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased
traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2
partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional
control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard.
Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City’s
adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation
measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures to ensure the provision of
circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alternative modes of transportation such as
trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in
regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or
State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The
applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Local traffic impacts for this project can be mitigated below a level of significance, but regional related impacts
are still considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan
due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “YES - significant”. This project
is not required to prepare an EIR because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council
Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This
“Statement Of Overriding Consideration” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the Master EIR, including
residential projects in Specific Plan 203, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is
required.
As previously discussed within this document, this project will not create environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Alternatives:
Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the project will have a significant adverse impact on
the environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse impacts. Public Resources Code Section
21002 forbids the approval of projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or mitigation
measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A “significant effect” is defmed as one which has a substantial
adverse impact. Given the attached mitigation conditions, this project has “NO” significant physical environmental
impacts, therefore, there is no substantial adverse impact and no justification for requiring a discussion of alternatives, (an alternative would not lessen an impact if there is no substantial adverse impact).
20 Rev. 3/28/95
34
. sources:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Brian Mooney Associates, Biological Survey and Report for Emerald Ridge - West, August 1995;
Fiil EIR 90-03 - Zone 20 Specific Plan;
Gallegos & Associates, Historical/Archaeological Survey of the Kelly Property (Now referred to as Emerald
Ridge - West) and Test of Site CA-SDI-9607 (W-115), September 1994;
GeoSoils, Inc., Preliminary Pesticide Residue Survey, McReynolds Property, June 15, 1994;
Leighton and Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Investigation, July 18, 1989, and Supplemental Geotechnical
Investigation of Suspect Landslide Area, February 19, 1990;
MEIR - 1994 Update Date of the Carlsbad General Plan;
RECON Biological Surveys and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Surveys for the McReynolds Property, January
13, 1995;
RECON Updated Biological Surveys and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Surveys for the McReynolds Property,
June 20, 1995;
RECON McReynolds Property, Technical Noise Report, December 1994;
WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc., Traffic Study for the McReynolds Property, October 27, 1994.
21 Rev. 3/28/95
+iH 3-4
’ LIST MITIGATING MEASURES CIF APPLICABLE1
1. SewerlStormdrain Alternative ‘B” - Implementation of Alternative “B” as it crosses En&as Creek,
would impact .02 acres of riparian vegetation. Mitigation for this impact will require tbe replacement
of this riparian vegetation at a 3:l ratio so there is no “net loss” of habitat, and if feasible, the sewer line
should be tunneled under Encinas Creek to avoid impacts to the streambed and surrounding wetlands.
AM riparian areas impacted along the proposed sewer/stormdrain alignment shall be replanted/enhanced,
Prior to the issuance of a final map or grading permits, wbicbever occurs first, the developer shall be
required to: consult with the California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding specific permits and mitigation for impacts to .02 acres of
riparian vegetation.
OR
Sewer/Stormdrain Alternative “A” - Implementation of Alternative “A” crosses Encinas Creek. Prior
to the issuance of a final map or grading permits, whichever occurs first, the developer shall obtain a
Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Fish and Game Department, if required for any
proposed alterations to existing natural watercourses, and shall comply with any and all permit
requirements associated therewith, pursuant to Section 1601/1603 of the Fish and Game Code. Tbe
developer, in conjunction with the Department of the Army Corp of Engineers shall determine whether
a 404 permit shall be required for alterations to wetland areas.
2. .OS acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat will be directly impacted by this project. The impacted
CSS habitat is regarded as low quality. Pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of the 4d Rule for the
California guatcatcber, the project shall be required to mitigate this loss of .05 acres of CSS by
acquiring for preservation comparable quality habitat at a 1:l ratio. The developer proposes to mitigate
this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .05 acres of CSS habitat within the high quality, coastal
sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank. This proposal hall require the
approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the California Department of Fish and
Game. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to consult with
and obtain necessary “take” permits from the USFWS, the California Department of Fish and Game for
impacts to the loss of .05 acres of CSS.
3. Prior to construction of Hidden Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road sout b to Poinsettia Community
Park, the developer shall comply with all California Department of Fib and Game, Army Corps of
Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permits and the approved final biological mitigation plans
dated July, 1995, on Ne in the Planning Department.
4. The CC&Rs for tbe project shall include a requirement, stating that flood lights from the development
shall not project/shine into the native habitat areas.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (TF APPLICABLE)
See Attached Sheet
22 Rev. 3l28/95
36
.
. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date
23 Rev. 3/28/!25
31
u Y 6 ‘J .I E .”
A EXHBIT “X”
ADDENDUM TO RECIRCULATED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
After the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration was sent out for public review the
project’s zone change request was expanded to include the 56 acre MSP California LLC
parcels located directly east (APN 212-040-32, and 36). In accordance with Section 15164
of the CEQA Guidelines this addendum has been added to the Recirculated Mitigated
Negative Declaration to consider this minor addition to the project’s description.
The project description has been expanded to include the zone change. The requested zone
change covers the McReynolds property and tbe adjacent property to tbe east, owned by
MSP California LLC. Tbe zoning on the MSP California parcel would be changed from
Residential Density Multiple with the Qualified Overlay Zone (RDM-Q) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Overlay Zone (R-1-7500-Q). MSP California currently
has tentative map applications in process with the City for single-family residential
subdivisions on this property (APN 212-040-32, and 36). The zoning on the McReynolds
property would be changed from the Planned Community Zone (PC) to One-Family
Residential with the Qualified Overlay Zone (R-1-7500-Q).
Both properties currently contain the Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use designation and are topographically isolated from surrounding land uses to the west, north,
and east. The two requested zone change are considered minor because the changes do not
affect the General Plan residential (RM) land uses on the properties. Changing from one
type of residential zoning (PC & RDM) to another type of residential zoning (R-1-7500)
only affects the type of development standards that are eventually applied to the future
residential development. In this case, tbe proposed R-1-7500 Zone is a more restrictive
residential zone than the existing PC and RDM Zones, therefore, the zone changes have no
significant adverse affect of the environment and can be considered a minor technical
change to the project’s description.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3873
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNIN G COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TWO ZONE
CHANGES FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC)TOTHE
ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITH THE
QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE (R-l-
7500-Q) AND FROM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY -
MULTIPLE WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE (RDM-Q) TO ONE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE (R-1-7500-Q) ON TWO PROPERTIES
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
CASE NO: zc 94-04
WHEREAS, McReynolds and MSP California LLC have filed a verified
application for certain property to wit:
Parcel C of Parcel Map No. 2949, in the City of Carisbad, County of San
Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, August 9,1974, as File No. 74216632 of official records.
AND
Ail that certain parcel of iand delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,10391 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19,1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
IS%, a portion of which lies within the City of Carisbad, ail being in the
County of San Dlego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” of Parcei No. 2993 in the City of
Carisbad, County of San Diego, State of Caiifornia, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74230326
of Official Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Zone Change
as provided by Section 2152 of the CarIsbad Municipal Code; and
1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of January, 19%
2 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
3 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
4 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
5
6 factors relating to the Zone Change.
7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
6 Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
9 Al That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
10 W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the commission
11 RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of ZC 94-04, according to Exhibit “Y”, dated
January 3, 199S, attached hereto and made a part thereof, based on the
12 following findings and subject to the following conditions.
13 Findinps:
14
15
16
17
18
1. That the proposed Zone Change from (PC) to (R-l-7SOO-Q) and from (RDM-Q) to
(R-1-7500-Q) is consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the
General Plan, in that the One-Family Residential Zone (R-1-7500) allows residential
development which is compatible and consistent with the underiying Generai Plan
Land Use Designation of Residential Medium (RM) for both properties, which
allows 4 to 8 residential dwelling units per acre with a Growth Control Point of 6
dwelling units per acre.
19 2. That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan and
20 Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad General Plan
Land Use Element, in that the One-Family Residential Zone (R-l-7500) is consistent
21 with the Residential Medium (RM) Generai Plan Land Use Designation.
22 Conditiong:
23 1. Approval of ZC 94-04 is granted subject to the approval of the Recirculated
24 Mitigated Negative Declaration, LCPA 94-04, CT 94-11, SDP 94-10, and HDP 94-09.
ZC 94-04 is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission No. 3872,
25 3874,3875,3876, and 3877.
26
27
28
. . . .
PC RBSO NO. 3873 -2-
.
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2:
24
21
2f
2;
2t
h
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day of January,
1996, by the following vote, to wit:
ATTEST:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Monroy, Nielsen, Noble,
Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Erwin
ABSTAIN: None
WILLIAM COMPAS, @hairperson
CARLSBADPLANNIN G COMMISSION
Planning Director
PC RESO NO.3873 -3-
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
-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3874
A RESOLUTION OF THE P LANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOFANAMENDMENTTO
THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON
TWO PROPERTIES FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC)
TO THE ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITH THE
QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE (R-l-
7500-Q) AND FROM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY -
MULTIPLE WlTH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE (RDM-Q) TO ONE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL WITH THE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY ZONE(R-1-7500-Q) ON TWO PROPERTIES
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203 AND THE COASTAL ZONE, IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
CASE NO: LCPA 94-04
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in
conformance;
WHEREA!$ McReynoids and MSP California LLC have filed a verified
application for certain property described as:
Parcel C of Parcei Map No. 2949, in the City of Carisbad, County of San
Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, August 9,1974, as Pile NO. 74216632 of official IVCOITJS.
AND
Ail that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,103.91 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, illed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carisbad, ail being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels “A”, ” ” ” B , C” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carisbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as Pile No. 74230326
of OfRciai Records.
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
located, as shown on Exhibit “Z” , dated January 3,1996, attached and incorporated herein,
has been filed with the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for amendment as
provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter
2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal
Commission Administrative Regulations, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the proposed Local
Coastal Plan Amendments shown on Exhibit “Z”, and;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a sixweek public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on
November 30,1995, and ending on January 11,1996, staff shall present to the
City Council a summary of the comments received.
c) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of LCPA 94-04 as shown on Exhibit “Z”, dated
January 3, 1996, attached hereto and made a part hereof based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Progr& Amendment is consistent with all
applicable policies of the Meilo II segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program
PC RF230 NO.3874 -2- 44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
, i
in that the zone change will maintain and provide consistency between the General
Plan and Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad
General Plan Land Use Element, in that the One-Family Residential Zone (R-l-
7500) is consistent with the Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use
Designation.
2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad Local
Coastal Program is required when rezoning related to land use regulations within the
Coastal Zone occurs after the certification of a local government’s Local Coastal
Program.
Conditions:
1. Approval of LCPA 94-04 is granted subject to the approval of the Recirculated
Mitigated Negative Declaration, ZC 94-04, CT 94-11, SDP 94-10, and HDP 94-09.
LCPA 94-04 is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission No. 3872,
3873,3875,3876, and 3877.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 3rd day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Monroy, Nielsen, Noble,
Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT Commissioner Erwin
ABSTAIN: None
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson
CARLSBADPUNNIN G CCMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC FIESO NO. 3874 -3-
EXHBIT ‘2”
January a,1996
0 1 EXISTING P-C
PROPOSED R-l-7500-Q
0 2 EXISTING RD-M-Q
PROPOSED R-1-7500-Q
MAR VISTA
ZC 94:04/LCPA 94-04
. , ,,. _
MAR VISTA
ZC 94-04/LCPA 94=04/CT 94-l l/
SDP 94-1 O/HDP 94-09
- EXHWT 5
Item No.: 2 0
P.C. AGENDA OF: JANUARY 3,1996
Application complete date: December 7,1994
Project Planner: Jeff Gibson
Project Engineer: Mike Shitey
SUBJEm LCPA 9444ZC 94-04KT 94lVSDP 94=lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA -
Request for recommendation of approval for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative
Map, Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development Permit, to: (1)
change the zoning from Planned Community Zone (PC) and Residential
Density Multiple (RDM) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the
Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-1-7500-Q); (2) subdivide the
property into 49 single-family lots and one open space lot; and (3) allow 8
future second-dwelling units; all on property generally located east of Paseo
de1 Norte, north of Camino de las Qndas, and south of Palomar Airport
Road, within Specific Plan 203 and Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3872,
RJXOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued by the
Planning Director, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874, 3875,
3876,3877 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 94-11, SDP 94-
10, and HDP 94-09, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The developer proposes to change zoning on two properties to single-family residential,
subdivide the 34.3 acre McReynolds parcel into 49 single-family lots, and provide second
dwelling units to satisr) inclusionary housing requirements. Architectural elevations and
floor plans are provided for the second dwelling units and the project is consistent with all
City codes, policies, and ordinances as well as Specific Plan 203. There are no unresolved
issues associated with this residential subdivision.
The 34.3 acre McReynold’s parcel is located within the Coastal Zone, Specific Plan 203, and
has Residential Medium (RM) and Qpen Space (OS) General Plan Land Use designations.
The proposed project would include the following major features:
.
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04/X 94-ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
1. A change in the McReynold parcel’s zoning from the Planned Community Zone (PC)
to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Development Overlay Zone
(R-1-7500-Q);
2. A change in the zoning on the adjacent property to the east (MSP California LLC)
from the Residential Density Multiple Zone with the Qualified Overlay Zone (RDM-
Q) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Overlay Zone (R-1-7500- Q);
3. A residential subdivision of the 34.3 acre McReynold’s property into forty-nine (49)
single-family lots, and one 19.24 acre open space lot; and,
4. The designation of 8 lots for future second-dwelling units to satisfy the City’s
inclusionary housing requirements. The second-dwelling units would have exterior
access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary home, and utilize a
portion of the three-car garage for parking.
The major project improvements would include the following:
1. The construction of local public streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and drainage
facilities necessary to service the new lots;
2. A northern sewer line that connects from the property to an existing sewer line
located along En&as Creek and Palomar Airport Road; and,
3. The construction of a local off-site public street named Cherry Blossom Road from
Hidden Valley Road west to the project site.
Currently the eastern half of the McReynolds property is being used for agricultural purposes. It is also surrounded by open space to the west and north, Poinsettia Community
Park to the south, and similar residentially designated (RM) property to the east. The
majority of the site contains very gently sloping topography that rises from west to east. The
western half of the property consists of a finger canyon which continues north and connects with Canyon de las Encinas. The flat buildable areas within the eastern half of the property
are rimmed by steep slopes along the west and north. Topographic elevations on the site
range from approximately 52 feet in the canyon floor to 180 feet above mean sea level on
the gently sloping mesa.
The following vegetation types are present on the property:
1. Ruderal/agriculture on the gently sloping mesa;
2. Pampas grass, diegan coastal sage scrub, and southern mixed chaparral along the
steeper slopes surrounding the mesa to the north and west; and
3. Riparian southern willow scrub, and baccharis/mule fat in the bottom of the western
finger canyon.
h
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04/CT 94-ll/SDP 940lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
Vehicular acce58 to the site would be provided by future Cherry Blossom Road which
connects to Hidden Valley Road. Hidden Valley Road is east of the property and intersects
with Camino de las Qndas to the south and Palomar Airport Road to the north.
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640
acre Zone 20 Planning Area. Specific Plan 203 was approved by the Planning Commission
and sty Council in 1993. The specific plan provides a framework for the development of
the vacant properties within Zone 20 to ensure the logical and efficient provision of public
facilities and community amenities for the future residents of the planning area.
The proposed project is subject to the following adopted land use plans and regulations:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
IV.
General Plan with RM and OS Land Use Designations;
specific Plan 203;
Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance), including:
1. Chapter 21.52 Zone Change;
2. Chapter 21.10 One-family Residential Zone;
3. Chapter 21.06 Qualified Development Overlay Zone;
4. Chapter 21.85 Inclusionary Housing, and Chapter 21.53, Site Development
Plan required for affordable housing project; and,
5. Chapter 21.95 Hillside Development Regulations.
Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP);
Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 20 (Subdivision ordinance);
Habitat Management Plan: (in process)
Growth Management Qrdinance, (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20); and,
Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) and the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
ANALYSIS
Staff is recommending approval of this project for the reasons stated in the staff report.
Consequently, this analysis section was developed by analyzing the project’s consistency with
the applicable plans, policies, regulations, and standards listed above and presented through
the use of the following tables and text.
- -
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04/CI’ 940ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
A. carlsbad General plan:
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The
table below indicates how the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan which
are particularly relevant to this proposal.
Land Use
Housing
Qpen Space
Circulation
Noise
Parks & Ret
Public Safety
1.
2.
Proposed residential density of 2.45 dus/net acre is below the
GP designation of RM 4-8 du/net acre and growth control point
of 6 dus/net acre; and,
Zone changes from PC and RDM to R-1-7500-Q are consistent
with the underlying GP designation of Residential Medium
Provide 8 dwelling units as second dwelling units and payment of a fee
to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement.
1.
2.
GP constrained lands are (steep slopes and riparian habitat)
protected in 19.24 acre open space lot; and,
City Wide Trail Link No. 29 to be aligned off-site to the east to
minim& California gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian
impacts in the western finger canyon.
Required roadway and intersection improvements, including Hidden
Valley Road from Camino de las Qndas to Palomar Airport Road, are
shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval.
Exterior noise levels mitigated to 60 dBA CNEL with 4 foot
high walls,
Interior noise levels mitigated to 45 dBA CNEL with standard
building construction techniques and materials; and,
Residential land use is conditionally compatible with land uses
designated within the 60-65 dBA CNEL noise contours of the
airport land use plan (CLUP).
Proposed project is required to pay Park-in-lieu fees.
Proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and
fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions
B. specific Plan 203:
The proposed project is consistent with the policies of Specific Plan 203. The table below
indicates how the project complies with the relevant requirements of the specific plan:
LCPA 94-04/Z 94-04/(X 940ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
PAGE 5
Land Use
Compatibility
Circulation
Landscaping
Building
Elevations
Affordable
Housing
Site Design
Qpen space is provided along the western and northern slopes,
proposed low density residential is compatible with future residential
(RM) to the east, and there is a roadway and 40 foot buffer between
the residential building pads and the community park to the south.
See General Plan Discussion under Circulation. In addition, Hidden
Valley Road would have pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes.
70% of the lots have three (3) street trees in the front yard, and 30%
of the lots have one (1) tree. All manufactured slopes have
landscaping to prevent-erosion and to provide visual screening.
The building elevations of future single-family homes would be
reviewed by the Planning Commission under a Site Development
Plan.
Provide 8 second dwelling units; or
Have option to participate in off-site combined project or
purchase credits in Villa Loma and amend SP 203 to designate
off-site location.
The layout of the subdivision does not impact steep slopes, the streets
are curvilinear, and there are adequate buffer areas from the open
Zoning Ordinance:
1. Zone Change:
The requested Zone Change covers the McReynolds property and the adjacent
property to the east, owned by MSP California LLC. MSP California LLC currently
has tentative map applications in process with the City for single-family residential
subdivisions on this property (APN 212-040-32, and 36).
The zoning on the McReynolds property would be changed from the Planned
Community Zone (PC) to One-Family Residential with the Qualified Overlay Zone
(R-1-7500-Q). The zoning on the MSP California parcel would be changed from
Residential Density Multiple with the Qualified Overlay Zone (RDM-Q) to the Qne-
Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Overlay Zone (R-1-7500-Q). Both
properties contain the Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use designation
and are topographically isolated from surrounding land uses to the west, north, and
east.
The proposed zone change on both properties does not affect the potential range of
residential land use types that would be allowed, since the PC, RDM, and R-1-7500
Zones all permit single and multi-family residential development. However, the
,-
LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-04/CI’ 94-ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
change in zoning to R-1-7500 does affect the type of development standards applied
to the future residential development. In addition, the proposed single-family land
uses are consistent with the underlying RM General Plan density range of 4 to 8
du/acre for both properties.
Changing the zoning to R-1-7500 on both properties would ensure the following:
i. That single-family development on the two properties is consistent with
R-1-7500 single-family residential development standards (i.e. setbacks
and building height);, and,
ii. One zone change for both properties would consolidate the number of
necessary Local Coastal Program Amendments (LCPA). Rezoning
related to land use regulations within the coastal zone which occur
after the certification of a local government’s local coastal program
require an LCPA in order to become effective.
2. One-Family Residential Zone (R-1-7500):
The developer (McReynolds) is proposing to subdivide their property into single-
family lots, therefore, the following table summarizes the project’s compliance with
the standards of the R-1-7500 Zone:
Lot size (Min.)
Lot Width
7,500 Square Feet
60 Feet
7,570-35,298 SF
60-100 Feet
Second Dwelling Unit
Size
640 Square Feet
I
640 Square Feet
Garage Size & 2nd Unit Two Car Garage - 20’X Two & Three-Car Garages
Parking 20
One Additional Space
Lot Coverage
I
40 Percent
I
To Be Determined with
Future SDP
Building Height
I
30 Feet & Two-Story To be Determined with
Future SDP
Panhandle Lot:
AccessLength -
Access Width -
Buildable Area -
150 Feet Max.
20 Feet Min.
8,000-10,000 SF
70-140 Feet
20 Feet
23,100~34,000 SF
LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-O&T 940ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
To Be Determined with
10% of Lot Width
The developer is also proposing Lots No. 19 and 31 as panhandle type lots. The two
lots are justified based on the irregular configuration of the buildable area of the
overall parcel. The lots are located along the northern edge of the bluff and take
advantage of the curving topography in this area of the property. The panhandle lots
are located along the perimeter of the site and at the end of cul-de-sac streets and
would not adversely affect public street access to surrounding properties. The project
has been appropriately conditioned to ensure that the panhandle lots comply with the
access, parking, setback, and drainage provisions of the code.
3. Qualified Development Overlay Zone:
The Q-Overlay Zone has been added to the McReynold’s zone change request due
to the property’s location adjacent to the Poinsettia Community Park to the south,
the existing Qualified Development Overlay zoning on the property directly east
(MSP California LLC), and the fact that portions of this site are visible from Palomar
Airport Road which is listed as a potential scenic corridor in the General Plan. At
this point in time the developer is not planning to construct homes on the lots,
therefore, the Q-Overlay Zone would require that a Site Development Plan (SDP)
be approved by the Planning Commission prior to approval and issuance of building
permits for the homes. The SDP would show the floor plans, placement of the
homes on the lots, building height, and the architectural elevations of the homes.
4. Chapter 21.85 Inclusionary Housing, and Chapter 2153, Site Development
Plan:
The project would have 49 single-family lots and an inclusionaxy housing requirement
of 8.647 dwelling units which must be affordable to lower income households. The
developer is proposing to satisfy this housing requirement by designating, onsite, 8
lots for future second-dwelling units. The second-dwelling units would have exterior
access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary home, and utilize a
portion of the three-car garage for parking. The remaining 647 fraction of an
inclusionary dwelling unit would be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction (.647) times the average subsidy needed to make affordable to a lower-
income household, one newly constructed typical housing unit. The applicant has
also requested the option to purchase credits in Villa Loma or participate in an off-
site combined affordable project, and the project has been conditioned to require
compliance with Council Policies 57 and 58 prior to City Council approval of an
Affordable Housing Agreement to allow the off-site option.
-
LCPA 94-04/X 94-#/LT 94.11jSDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - G VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
PAGE 8
The Carl&ad Municipal Code requires a Site Development Plan for any affordable
housing project of any size!. The Site Development Plan for this project indicates
which 8 lots would be designated and deed restricted for second-dwelling units. The
plans also include prototypical preliminary floor plans and building elevations to
illustrate the parking arrangement and how the second-dwelling units integrate into
the primary homes. If, at a later date, the developer desires to build a different type
of primary home/second-dwelling unit or change the designated lots, a Site
Development Plan Amendment must be approved by the Planning Director.
The project has been conditioned to require an Affordable Housing Agreement that
would be submitted for review and approval by the City prior to final map approval.
The Affordable Housing Agreement is a legally binding agreement between the
developer and the City which provides the specific details regarding the phasing and
implementation of the affordable housing requirements of Specific Plan 203 and
subsequent conformance with the City’s Housing Element.
5. Hillside Development Regulations:
The project site contains slopes of 15% or greater and an elevation differential
greater than 15 feet, therefore, a Hillside Development Permit is required. The table
below indicates how the project complies with the requirements of the Hillside
Development Regulations- - -
Contour Grading Variety of Slope Direction
& Undulation
Manufactured Slopes
Follow the Edge of the
D. Meiio II Segment of the Locai Coastal Program:
The project is located in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and
complies with the plan as follows:
- -
. LCPA 94-04/Z 94-04&T 94ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
1.
2.
The requested zone change for both properties would consolidate the number
of necessary LocaI Coastal Program Amendments (LCPA). Rezoning related
to land use regulations within the coastal zone which occur after the certification of a local government’s local coastal program require an LCPA
in order to become effective. The proposed Local Coastal Program
Amendment is consistent with all applicable policies of the Mello II segment
of the Carlsbad Iocal Coastal Program. The zone change would maintain
consistency between the General Plan and zoning as mandated by California
State law and the City of Carl&ad General Plan Land Use Element, in that
the One-Family Residential Zone (R-1-7500) is consistent with the Residential
Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use Designation.
The project is located within the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone.
Currently there are two proposed alternative alignments for the construction
of the off- site sewer line (as shown on Exhibit “B”). Alignment “B” would
impact riparian habitat and 25% + slopes containing coastal sage scrub habitat
located in the small drainage that flows to the north. Sewer Alignment “A”
would impact steep slopes and disturbed habitat. One of these sewer
alignments to the north and down the slope would be required because the
District Engineer has determined that it is not desirable or practical to sewer
the northwest portion of this property via a sewer line to Hidden Valley Road.
The elevation in this comer of the site is substantial lower than the eastern
portion of the property, therefore, a 43+ foot deep sewer line would be required in order to connect with the already approved sewer line in Hidden
Valley Road.
Due to the site’s topographic constraints, a sewer line to the north is the only
feasible alternative, therefore, Alternative “A” is the least environmentally
damaging alternative. The Overlay Zone permits development and grading
on slopes over 25% in order to provide utilities and access to developable areas of the project site if there is a no less environmentally damaging
alternative. The project satisfies this criteria, and in all cases, biological
mitigation is proposed to of&et any impacts to sensitive habitat, (See
discussion under Section F, “Habitat Management Plan”).
3. The project will be conditioned to provide adequate drainage, siltation, and
erosion control facilities as part of the approved grading permit. The grading
operation would be limited to the summer construction season, April 1 to
October 1.
4. The project contains vacant non-prime agricultural land containing Class III
and IV soils and is located in the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site II).
The Mello II LCP requires mitigation when non-prime coastal agricultural
land is converted to urban land uses. The project would be conditioned to
comply with the LCP mitigation option provided when projects are located in
Site II, which requires the payment of an “Agricultural Conversion Mitigation
Fee” to the California Coastal Conservancy.
.
h
LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-04/CT 940ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
E. Subdivision Ordinances
The proposed tentative map would comply with all the requirements of the City’s
Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20. Currently there are no public roads or intersections to
serve the project site, therefore, the developer must extend public off-site street
improvements to connect to the existing circulation network. Primary access to the property
would be provided by future Cherry Blossom road which connects to Hidden Valley Road.
In order to comply with the City’s cul-de-sac policy the developer is also required to
construct a second off-site road connection for emergency access purposes to the parking
lot of Poinsettia Community Park to the south (see Exhibit “B”).
To mitigate drainage impacts from the project site, the developer is required to provide
adequate drainage, erosion control, and urban pollutant basins. To comply with Water
Quality standards, City grading and erosion control requirements, and the requirements of
the Mello II segment of the Local Coastal Program, the developer is required to install
permanent and or temporary siltation/retention basins at the downstream end of all
proposed storm drain pipes.
F. Habitat Management Plan: (in process)
Future Cherry Blossom Road which would lead from Hidden Valley Road, through the MSP
California LLC property, to the project site would impact approximately 0.05 acres of
disturbed coastal sage scrub habitat (CSS). Because the off-site Css habitat is regarded as
disturbed and the remaining high quality CSS habitat in this area would be preserved, the
project is conditioned to mitigate the 0.05 acre Css impact by acquiring, for preservation,
comparable quality habitat at a ratio of 1:l. The developer is proposing to mitigate this
impact by purchasing, for preservation, .05 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat within the
high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank
(subject to the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department
of Fish).
The construction of Cherry Blossom Road in this area is the least environmentally damaging
access alternative. It provides primary access to an otherwise landlocked area that is
surrounded by steep slopes and high quality CSS. It would result in the loss of 0.05 acres
of disturbed CSS habitat, therefore, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City may
have to authorize this project to draw from the City’s 165.70 acre (5%) CSS interim take
allowance. The take of 0.05 acres of CSS habitat from the MSP California LLC property
wiIl not impair the ability of the City to implement it’s draft Habitat Management Plan
(subregional NCCP). Interim CSS habitat losses that are incurred before completion and
approval of a subregional NCCP/Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan @IMP), must be
approved by the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. A procedure has been established which allows the City to benefit from the 4(d) rule. This procedure
includes: establishment of the base number of acres of coastal sage scrub habitat in the
subregion, calculation of the 5% for the interim habitat loss, and cumulative record keeping
of all interim habitat losses. The City has calculated that 5% of the base acreage of coastal
sage scrub in Carlsbad is 165.70 acres. As of August, 1995, 19.38 acres have been taken.
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04/(X. 94H/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
The loss of coastal sage scrub due to the Mar Vista project (0.05 acres) would result in a
cumulative habitat loss of 19.43 acres for the HMP area once all the approved loses have
been taken. This loss does not exceed the 5% guideline of 165.70 acres.
The habitat loss has been reduced or mitigated by the design of the project, in that the
Cherry Blossom Road alignment is the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact
as follows:
1. The 0.05 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning Areas
@‘PA);
2. The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat
values since this area is not included as a part of a J.&&age Planning Area
(LPA);
3. The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the Carlsbad
HMP in that the area is not a part of a LPA, makes no contribution to the
overall preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
4. Mitigation for the loss of the 0.05 acres of CSS will be in the form of the
acquisition of habitat credits as discussed above. The loss of habitat on the
MSP California LLC property will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of
the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
5. The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent to
Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore, large
blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not occur; an,;
6. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS habitat
area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be more
inqmant.
G. GrowthManagement:
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20 in the
Southwest Quadrant of the City. The impacts created by this development on public
facilities and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summarized as
follows:
CITY ADh4INIsTRATION 198.17 SQuare feet
II LIBRARY I 105.69 square feet I YeS I I WASTE WATER TREATMENT I 57 EDU I Yea I
s-9
,A
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04/CI 94-H/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
PAGE 12
PARKS
DRAINAGE
.39 acres
Basin 3
Yes
YeS
CIRCULATION
FIRE
538 ADT
Station No. 4
Yes
YeS
OPEN SPACE
SCHOOLS
5.14 acres
CUSD
SEWER COLLEKTION SYSTEM
WATER
57 EDUS
12340 GPD
The project is 63.48 dwelling units below the Growth Management Dwelling Unit allowance
of 120 dwelling units for the property as permitted by the Growth Management Ordinance.
Surplus dwelling units (63.48) that are not used by the developer are placed into a City bank
of excess dwelling units. The City can allocate these dwelling units to residential projects
that exceed the growth control point (Density Bonus) in order to provide affordable housing.
H. Environmental Review:
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan SP 203 which covers the
640 acre Zone 20 planning area. The certified Final Program EIR 90-03 for Specific Plan
203 addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with the future buildout of the
Zone 20 Specific Plan area and is on file in the Planning Department. Use of a Program
EIR enables the City to characterize the overall environmental impacts of the specific plan.
The Final Program EIR contains broad, general environmental analysis that seIyes as an
information base to be consulted when ultimately approving subsequent development
projects (i.e. tentative maps, site development plans, grading permits, etc...) within the
specific plan area. The City can avoid having to “reinvent the wheel” with each subsequent
development project by analyzing, in the program EIR, the regional influences, secondary
effects, cumulative impacts, and broad alternatives associated with buildout of the planning
area. The recommended and applicable mitigation measures of Final EIR 90-03 are
included as conditions of approval for this project. Per the requirements of Final EIR 90-03
additional project specific environmental studies, including biological analysis, have been
prepared. These studies provide more focused and detailed project level analysis and
indicate that additional environmental impacts beyond what was analyxed in Final EIR 90-03
would result from implementation of the project.
In addition to the Final EIR for Specific Plan 203, more recently the City has certified a
Final Master Environmental Impact Report for an update of the 1994 General Plan. The
Master EIR serves as the basis of environmental review and impact mitigation for projects
that are consistent with the plan, including projects within Specific Plan 203.
.
LCPA 94-04/X 94-04&T 94lI/SDP 94IO/HDP 94-09 - MKR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996
Per the recommendations of Final EIR 90-03, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued
for this project to evaluate the additional environmental impacts created by the two off-site
sewer lines and the access road from Hidden Valley Road. The Planning Director has
determined that the project could have a significant effect on the environment, however,
there would not be a significant effect in this case since the mitigation measures described
in the attached E&Part II have been added to the project. This decision was based on
findings of the E&Part II, an evaluation of Final EIR 90-03 and Master EIR 94-01, a
biological survey and impact study, a geotechnical report, soiIs report, acoustical study,
traffic report, and field surveys by staff.
The project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration was originally submitted for public review on
February 1,1995. The State Clearinghouse (SCH #95021007) public review period closed
on March 6,1995. The document was revised and recirculated for public review based on
comments received from the State Coastal Commission and the Fish and Game Department,
a change in the project description, and an update to the project’s biological impact analysis
and the Initial Study Checklist. The developer has added an alternative sewer line and
stormdrain alignment “A” for the project from Vista las Qndas, through Lot No. 19, and
north to the existing east/west sewer line in Canyon de las Encinas. In response to State
resource agency comments regarding impacts and the level of analysis, an updated Biological
Survey and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey has been submitted with the project which
further anaIyzes the environmental impacts of the project, sewer and stormdrain alignment
“B”, and the new sewer and stormdrain alignment “A” as shown on the Mar Vista Tentative
Map.
The recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration was again sent to the State Clearinghouse,
Coastal Commission, Department of Fish and Game, and US Fish and Wildlife Service for
public agency review, and no comments were received. The project has been conditioned
such that prior to approval of a final map, all applicable state and federal resource agencies
must be consulted, applicable permits must be obtained, and a final biological mitigation
program must be approved.
After the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration was sent out for public review the
project’s zone change request was expanded to include the 56 acre MSP California LLC
parcels located directly east (APN 212-040-32, and 36). In accordance with Section 15164
of the CEQA Guidelines an addendum has been added to the Recirculated Mitigated
Negative Declaration to consider this minor addition to the project’s description. The two
requested zone changes are considered minor because the changes do not affect the General
Plan residential (RM) land uses on the properties. Changing from one type of residential
zoning (PC & RDM) to another type of residential zoning (R-I-7500) affects the type of
development standards that are applied to the future residential development. In this case,
the proposed R-1-7500 Zone is a more restrictive residential zone than the existing PC and
RDM Zones, therefore, the zone changes have no significant adverse effect on the
environment and can be considered a minor technical change to the project’s description.
-
LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-041CI’ 94-ll/SDP 94-lO/HDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA
JANUARY 3,1996 PAGE 14
ATI’ACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3872
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3873
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3874
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3875
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3876
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3877
7. Location Map
8. Background Data Sheet
9. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
10. Disclosure Form
11. Full size Exhibits “A” - “J”, dated January 3, 1996.
- BACKGROUND DATA WEE-‘-
CASE NO: ZC 9404LCPA 9404/CT 94ll/SDP 94lO/HDP 94-09
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
APPLICANT: CHRISTA MCREYNOLDS
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Zone Change to R-1-7500-Q. 49 Sinple-Familv Lots. 8 Second Dwelling
Units, & one 19 acre Onen Snace Lot
LEGAL DE!3CRIPTION: Parcel C of Parcel Man No. 2949, in the Citv of Carisbad, Countv of San
Diego. State of California, filed in the office of the Countv Recorder of San Dieeo Countv. Aurmst 9.1974,
as File No. 74-216632 of official records
APN: 211-040-14 Acres 34.3 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 50 Lots & 57 Units
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation Residential Medium
Density Allowed 6 Du/Acre Density Proposed 2.83
Existing Zone pC Proposed Zone R-1-7500-Q
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning Requirements)
Zoning Land Use
Site PC Agriculture
North OS Vacant
South PC Park
East RD-M-Q Agriculture
West OS Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 57 EDU
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated November 7.1994
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
X Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued October 3, 1995
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
- -
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT’ ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: COSTA DO SOL - CT 92-Ol(A)/PUD 92-Ol(A)/SDP 93-04(A)/SP 203(A)
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 20 GENERAL PLAN: RM ZONING: pC
DEVELOPER’S NAME: GREYSTONE HOMES INC.
ADDRESS: 495 EAST RINCON. SUITE 115, CORONA CA 91719
PHONE NO.: (714) 273-9494 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO: 214-140-40
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 29.2 GROSS ACRES/119
DUS
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: N/A
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 413.7
Library: Demand in Square Footage = 220.6
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) N/A
Park: Demand in Acreage = 0.83
Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A
Identify Drainage Basin = N/A
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs = 1190
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = NO. 4
Open Space: Acreage Provided - 4.3
Schools:
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demand in EDUs - 120
Identify Sub Basin - N/A
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD - 26.400
The project is 53.3 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPUCANl-S STATEMENT Of DlSCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON AU APPLlCATlONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE
DlSCRETlONARY ACTION ON THE PART’ OF THE CllY COUNCIL OR ANY APPOINTED BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMmEE.
(Plefm Print)
The following information must be disclosed:
I. Armlicant
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
ChLe 2316 Calle Chiquita La Jolla, California 92037
3 Owner -.
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
MrRovnnl ds Fami 1 v Trust Alan MrF&ynolds - Trustee dated February 21, 1989 20 Rock Port Lane c/o Christa M. McReynolds - Trustee Los Altos, California 94024 2316 Calle Chiauita La Jolla, California 9ZUJ/
i. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names and addresses
of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the
partnership.
4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names and
addresses of any person sewing as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary
of the trust.
FRM0007 4/91 4
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-1576 -0 (619) 438-l 161 @
a
isclosure Statement
(Over)
Page 2
Have you had mofe than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards,
Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes - No )( If yes., please indicate person(s)
Person ir dofined U: ‘Any Individual. firm. copwtnomhlp, jolti vonturo. aswciaUo6. oocW club, fratrmal organizatlon. corporation, e&to, trust,
receiver, yndicato, thir and any other county, city and county, city municipality, dktrkt or- political rubdivirion. or any other group or combination
acting a3 a unit’
(NOTE: Anach additional pages a3 necessary.)
c&&&-g (&, .p&&&&? 9, ‘rni (C api% tz4z.A. cc ‘ 4id%ya, mz!g K!f&~*
Signature of Owner/date J Signature of applicant/daie
Christa M. McReynolds - Trustee
Print or type name of owner
Christa M. McReynolds - Trustee
Print or type name of applicant
iMOO 4/91
DISCLOSURE ST'ATEMEXT
I
/ ~?ol,!CANTS Strr~HE~T ;F ):f” - +-SUE OF CEmAW OWNERSHIP ImRESTS ON AU. APOtJCAf;CkS &wlCh NI~L :~r,~,az
26’3~CNA;lY ACflCN CN :+i: ?Am CF mfi can CCLNCL OR ANY APPOINTEO SOARO, ~CMMlSSlCN 0~ C~MM~E~.
I .e*
:P!ease Pnnr) -*_- _ - \,
The folIowIng information must be disclosed:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Aopiicanf
MY 2 6 35
-- . List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the appliCatiOn.
MSP CALIFORNIA. L.L.C. MSP CALIFORNIA. L.L.C.
Marcus S. Palkowitsh David M. Bentley
650 South Cherry Street, Suite 435 (!JJSunrisee 221 357 Denver, Colorado 80222 Tucson. Arizona 85718
Ownor
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
MSP CALIFORNIA. L.L.C.
Marcus S. Palkowitsh
MSP CALIFORNIA, Lb.
David M. Bentley
650'South Cherry Street, Suite 435 iEast
Denver, Colorado 80222 Tucson, Arizona 85718
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names ant
addresses of all individual3 owning mom than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannersnlp
interest in the partnership.
If any perSOn iduNifbd pureuMt to (1) of (2) abow is a non-profft orgmization or a trust, list ?h@ names and
addresses of any person sming as OMCW or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficlaq
of the trust.
FRMm13 8490 Lb
2075 Las Palma Drive - Cartsbad. Californta 920094859 l (619) 438-l 161
.
OiscloSufO Statwnmt
(Over)
Page 2
5. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Scar::
Commlsslons. CommIttees and Council within the Past twelve months?
Yes - NO% If yes, please indicate person(s) ’
w 10 defined U: ‘Any mawdud. firm. co@UVIwsk~p. ~otm vrnturr. UIociaBon. socd club. huun8l otgmu~bon. co~ocatton. *stat.. :rLst. I WCotvW. ¶yndiUto. tha ana ry 0th~ couny. city Uld coumy. city munlc~pdny. &UJlcl 01 emu po~bc~ ~&&J~~~, 0, sly orn., grobo CJ,
commnatlon l ctmg u l unn’ I
I
(NO-: Attach additional pages as necessary.)
Si&ature of Owner/date
s- a3-d I Si@laturo ot appucant/date
Marcus S. Palkowitsh
Print of type nun0 of owner -.
Marcus S. Pm
Pm of type nama at appkaric
*
k..
.
C EXHIBIT 6
PLANNING COMMISSION January 3,1996 Page 7
2. LCPA 94-04IZC 94-04/CT 94-l l/SDP 94-l OMDP 94-09 - MAR VISTA - Request for recommendation of approval for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Local Coastal Program
Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Map, Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development
Permit, to: (1) change the zoning from Planned Community Zone (PC) and Residential Density
Multiple (RDM) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Development Overlay Zone
(R-l-7500-Q); (2) subdivide the property into 49 single family lots and one open space lot; and
(3) allow eight future second dwelling units; all on property generally located east of Paseo del
Norte, north of Camino de las Ondas, and south of Palomar Airport Road, within Specific Plan 203
and Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
Chairman Compas advised the applicant that they have the right to be heard before a full Commission. He
inquired if they would like to be continued or heard tonight. Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design, 703 Palomar
Airport Road, Suite 300, Carlsbad, representing the applicant, stated that he would like to proceed with the
hearing tonight.
Chairman Compas advised the public that if the Planning Commission recommends approval, the
application will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Jeff Gibson, Associate Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the Mar Vista
project is located directly north of the Poinsettia Community Park and south of Palomar Airport Road, on a
34 acre parcel within Specific Plan 203. This project includes:
1. A change in the McReynolds parcel zoning from Planned Community (PC) One-Family Residential
Zone with a Qualified Development Overlay (R-1-7500-Q);
2. A change in the zoning on the adjacent property to the east owned by MSP California LLC from
Residential Density Multiple with a Qualified Overlay (RDM-Q) to One-Family Resident with a Qualified
Overlay (R-l-7500-Q);
3. A residential subdivision of lots only on the 34 acre McReynolds property into 49 single-family lots and
one 19.24 acre open space lot; and
4. A designation of eight lots for future second dwelling units to satisfy the City’s inclusionary housing
requirements. The second dwelling units would have exterior access along the side yard, be
incorporated into the second-story of the primary home, and utilize a portion of the three-car garage for
parking.
Mr. Gibson stated that the Q overlay has been added to the McReynolds zone change request due to the
propedy’s location of being adjacent to the Poinsettia Community Park, existing Q overlay zone on the
property directly east, and its proximity to Palomar Airport Road which is listed as a potential scenic corridor
in the General Plan. At this time the owner is not planning to construct homes on the lots, therefore the Q
overlay wouid require a site development plan (SDP) to be approved by the Planning Commission prior to
issuance of building permits for the homes. The SDP would show the floor plans, placement of the homes
on the lots, building heights, setbacks, architectural amenities, etc. The code also requires a SDP for any
affordable housing project of any size. The SDP for this project indicates which eight lots would be
designated and deed-restricted for second dwelling units and they have been disbursed throughout the
project. Plans also include prom-typical preliminary floor plans and building elevations showing how the
homes fit on the lots, parking arrangements, and the second dwelling units are integrated into the primary
StIlJCtU~.
Mr. Gibson stated that there are currently no roads or intersections to serve the project site. Therefore, the
developer must extend public street improvements to connect to the existing circulation network. Primary
access to the property is provided by the future Cherry Blossom Road which connects to Hidden Valley
MINUTES
January 3,1998 Page 8
Road which connects to Palomar Airport Road to the north and Camino de las Ondas to the south. In order
to comply with the City’s cul-de-sac policy, the developer is also required to construct a second offsite road
connection for emergency access to the driveway to Poinsettia Community Park to the south.
Mr. Gibson stated that in the memo to the Planning Commission dated January 3,1998, staff recommends
that Sewer and Storm Drain Alignment B be eliminated from consideration and the tentative map be revised
accordingly. Alignment A is clearly an environmentally superior alignment and has the support of the
District Engineer and the Coastal Commission staff. Given the elevated status of Alignment A at this point,
staff no longer supports this option of having two potential options and recommends that Alignment B be
withdrawn. The developer is also proposing Lots #19 and #31 as panhandle lots. The two lots are justified based on irregular configuration of the buildable area of the overall parcel and the topography in
the area, mainly steep slopes to the north and to the west. The lots are located along the northern edge of
the bluff and take advantage of the curving topography in the area of the property and are located such that
they are on the perimeter and at the end of the cul-de-sac and will not adversely affect public street access
to surrounding properties. Based on the projects compliance with the General Plan and all applicable City
standards and policies, staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Savary referred to Resolution No. 3872, page 4, Condition #4, and inquired where the
floodlights would be used and for what purpose. Mr. Gibson replied that many of the rear lots are along the
western and northern perimeter of the bluff. This bluff contains sensitive coastal sage habitat and
gnatcatchers. When the biological analysis was being performed, the biologists stated that there could be a
potential impact of bright lights on the rear of these properties.
Commissioner Savary asked how the second dwelling units will be paid for. Does the homeowner pay for
this or would it be subsidized? Mr. Gibson stated that if the homeowner buys a house with a second
dwelling unit, he would have the option of using it or not. If he chooses to rent the unit, it must be rented to
someone who qualifies as low income.
Commissioner Savaty commented that if the second dwelling unit is not rented, it defeats the purpose of
affordable housing. Do we have any protection that it will be used as an affordable unit? Mr. Gibson
replied that there are no guarantees.
Commissioner Nielsen referred to Resolution No, 3875, page 9, Condition #18, and inquired how we will
know which units will have recreational vehicle storage and which will not. Mr. Gibson replied that this will
be determined when the site development plan wmes forward.
Commissioner Nielsen inquired if the second dwelling units are counted as affordable units under the
lnclusionary Housing Ordinance. Mr. Gibson replied yes.
Commissioner Savary referred to Resolution No. 3875, page 13, Condition #43, and stated that she was
surprised about the agricultural land. She thought there was no active agricultural land in this area. Mr. Gibson replied that this land is now active as agriculture and in the past has contained flower and tomato
crops.
Chairman Compas invited the applicant to speak.
Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design, 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300, Carlsbad, representing the applicant,
addressed the Commission and stated that he supports the staff recommendation with the exception of the
elimination of Sewer/Stormdrain Alternative ‘B.” He would like to have that left in. He understands that
Alternate “A” is ready to be built but until it is in the ground, he would like to have Alternative ‘B” as a fall
back. He, too, prefers Alternative -A’ but wants some safeguard.
MINUTES
*
,- -
PLANNING COMMISSION January 3,1998 Page 9
Commissioner Nielsen inquired if he intends to go forward with the second dwelling units and not wme
back later for offsite credits. Mr. Ladwig replied that he has the option of coming back and would like to
retain that option. He does think the second dwelling units will be built but he is not positive. If the
Commission wishes, they could ask Ms. McReynolds who is present tonight along with her engineer.
Chairman Compas inquired if everyone is in agreement on this issue. Mr. Ladwig replied yes.
Chairman Compas opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Compas declared
the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:37 p.m. and reconvened at 7:44 p.m.
Mr. Gibson stated that during the recess, staff discussed the sewer option and they would still like to delete Alternative “B.” It is not environmentally sensitive and since Alternative “A” has been approved by the
Coastal Commission, staff would like ‘B’ totally eliminated.
Commissioner Monroy inquired why it could not be left in to save the applicant from coming back if there is
a problem with Alternative ‘A.” Gary Wayne, Assistant Planning Director, replied that due to the
environmental problem it creates, they would still have to wme back. The wildlife agencies have looked at
this option and do not like it. If something happens to “A” they could wme back with a new option, let’s call
it Option ‘C,” which would have a chance of agency approval.
Mr. Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney, commented that Condition #l, page 3, Resolution No. 3872, requires
staff to make a finding that the sewer connection is feasible. The findings have been written that the
Planning Commission finds that the environmental document is adequate and you are imposing items that
have been determined to be feasible. In the case of Alternative ‘B” the Commission cannot make that
finding because it is not yet known whether a tunnel would be feasible.
Commissioner Welshons commented that she personally likes the second dwelling units and the options
that they provide. They can be used for many purposes and it keeps the affordable units on site. She just
hopes that the developer will stay with them. She supports the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Monroy commended the developer on the project. He stated that this is the first project to
wme forward with second dwelling units. He, too, hopes they will build them as they have proposed to do.
It provides another housing choice for low income person. He will support the project.
Commissioner Noble is also in favor of the second dwelling units and will vote in favor of the project.
Mr. Rudolf commented that there is a technical correction to Resolution No. 3872 on page 2. In Action B),
the following needs to be added: “... In Action B), the following needs to be added: ‘...Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program on file in the Planning Department...“. Mr. Gibson noted that this is attached but
Mr. Rudolf wants it called out in the resolution.
Mr. Rudolf continued that there are five actions taking place. With regard to the Local Coastal Program
Amendment and the Zone Code Amendment, the Commission has the authority to grant approval when
there are 50 or fewer units involved. Therefore, approvals for the Tentative Map, the Site Development
Plan, and the Hillside Development Permit, would be within the Commission’s authority and should be
approved subject to appeal. The resolutions already contain language that their approval is contingent
upon approval of the Local Coastal Program Amendment and Zone Code Amendment.
MINUTES
w
PLANNING COMMISSION January 3,1999 Page 10
ACTION:
VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN:
Motion by Commissioner Nielsen, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 3875, 3878, and 3877 approving CT 94-11, SDP 94-l 0, and HDP
94-09, and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3872,3873, and 3874
recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued by the Planning
Director, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, LCPA 94-04 and ZC 94-04, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein,
including the changes contained in staff memo dated January 3, 1996.
8-O
Compas, Monroy, Nielsen, Noble, Savary, Welshons
None
None
March 12, 1996
Greystone Homes Inc. 495 East Rincon, Suite 115 Corona, CA 91719
Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration - Mar Vista
The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of March 5, 1996, adopted Resolution No. 96-77, approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration with a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As a courtesy, enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 96-77 for your records.
City Clerk
ALR:ijp
Enclosure
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 - (619) 434-2808 a9
.
PROOF OF Ptit3LlCATlON
(2010 & 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citiien of the United States and a resident of
the County afomsaid: I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diegq, State of
California, under the dates of June 30, 198$I
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blat ,:
and case number 172171 (The Times ; for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside i Solana Beach and the North County u * District; that the notice of which the ar ; printed copy (set in type not smaller tt- : nonpareil), has been published in eacl : entire issue of said newspaper and no
supplement thereof on the following dz .,;
Proof of Publication of
Public Hearing --------L-----------------
----a------- --------------
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that *h- rim romtl( Council. Chambers. I2M) Csrkbpd ‘. ..-o_ - consider approval of a Mitigated Negative DC ngc the zoning for Planned Community Zone (Pr’ a**’ n’ Qualified Devr’------’ l\.lDr1..1 Tnnr 112.1.
NOTICE 7 ’ - MARU jf the City of Carl&d v&l hdid a public hearing at ihe City ~%~&~~e~&&.ad, California, et 6:00 p.m.. on Tuesday, March 5, 1996. to &stioo, s 20ne Chwge, sod II ~ocrl Cosstsl Plan Amendment to: (I ) &jential Density Multiple (RDMI to the One-Family Residemkl Zone
s,oy,,wnv.....‘3, I”.,_ ,.. . .%&& (2) sutditide the property into 49 single-family lots and one open Space
inure second-dwelling units all on propetty geoemlly located east of Psseo Del NOI% north of Csmmo de lss
Lnmnr ~i-rt Road. within &cific Plsn 203, snd Local Facilities Management Zone 20 sod more pU+cUk~y outh of Pa ._ . .._. . . . . r-.. .__-._ .
Parcel C of’hrcel Map No. 2949, in the City of Carlsbad. County of Sso Diego. State Of fikd in the OfSee of the County Recorder of San Diego County. August 9. 1974. as File No
w No. 1,103.91 ACXS”O” Recordof ember19.1960,
Feb. 24, 1996
n Ofticial Records: w ‘. AND * All that certain parcel of knd~delineated and designated as “Dewi ptil
Swwy Map No.57 15. filed in the Offtce of the County Recorder of ‘SE
being a portiob of Lot G of.Rurho Agtts Hediondr. WCOShn$ to Ma
of the Coumy Recorder of San Diego County. November 16. 1896. s portion of which li$s within the City of Carlabad @I bc(og in the County of San Diego. State of CdifOmk: OXcept/o$ th~efrom th@ portrotTlying wi(hin Pst’ccls “A”. “B”. “C”, UI! D
of heel No. 2993 in the City of CarlsW. County of San Diego. State of Cslifomir. filed in the Office of the County RWO&X of San Diem, County. An@ 23. 1914. 81s File N&74-221)326 of
I certify (or declare) under penalty of pe
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at California, this 26
Feb. 1996
This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Official &ords. z::
if ym &e my questions wgwding thii matter. pkase call Jeff Glk in the p\aming Department at (619) 438-I 161. CXt~ti 4455.
If yoo challenge the Mitigstcd Negative Dcckntiott, Zone chsn~! and/~r ‘I&II Cosstal Program Amendment in court. you may be limIted to r?~stng onI? “*ho& issues raised by you or someooe else st the public heuing&scrtbed III th,S II&C. or in written comspondcnce delivered to the City of Culsbsd Cdy ,Ckk’s Oilice at. or prior to. the public htiog.
Califomla. 89 ,74-216632 Of
MAR VISTA ZC 94-&lLCPA 94-04 Qlis :APPLICANT: Chrism McReynolds ‘CAIWBAD ctti COUNCIL .
.fegal45935 February 24. 1996 F 1 ,
-w--w cc------------,- ------- Signature I-
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LCPA 94-4/X 94-4 - MAR VISTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 CarlsbadVillage Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, March 5, 1996, to consider approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Zone Change, and a Local Coastal Plan Amendment to: (1) change the zoning from Planned Community Zone (PC) and Residential Density Multiple (RDM) to the One-Family Residential Zone with the Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-l- 7500-Q); (2) subdivide the property into 49 single-family lots and one open space lot, and (3) propose 8 future second-dwelling units; all on property generally located east of Paseo De1 Norte, north of Camino de las Ondas, and south of Palomar Airport Road, within Specific Plan 203, and Local Facilities Management Zone 20 and more particularly described as:
Parcel C of Parcel Map No. 2949, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, as filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 9, 1974, as File No. 74-216632 of Official Records; AND All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as "Description No. 1,103.91 AcresI on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad all being in the County of San Diego, State of California; excepting therefrom that portion lying within Parcels
'IA" I’BII 'ICI'
of barlsbad, , and IlD~~ of Parcel No. 2993 in the City County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23, 1974, as File No. 74-230326 of Official Records.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Jeff Gibson, in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4455.
If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change, and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Christa McReynolds PUBLISH: February 24, 1996
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
- mti 12-19
Nn!~ctj&~ G IN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Car&bad will
hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad village Drive, Carl&ad,
California, at 600 p.m. on Wednesday, January 3, 1996, to consider a request for
recommendation of approval for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change, Local . . Coastal Plan Amendment, Tentative-&lap- Sic
DevelopmentPmto: (1) change the zoning from Planned Community’Zone (PC) and
Residential Density Multiple (ROM) to the OneFamily Residential Zone with the Qualified
Development Overlay Zone (R+75O@Q); (2) subdivide the property into 49 singlefamily
lots and one open space lot, and; (3) propose 8 future second-dwelling units; all on
property generally located east of Paseo del None, north of Camino de las Ondas, and
south of Palomar Airport Road, within Specific Plan 203 and Local Facilities Management
Zone 20 and more particularly described as:
Parcel C of Parcel Map No. 2949, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, August 9, 1974, as File No. 74216632 of official records.
AND
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as ‘Description No.
1 ,103.91 Acres” on Record of Surrey Map No. 5715, filed in the office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a
portion of Lot G of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No.
823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County,
November 18,1896, a portion of whiih lies within the City of Car&bad, all
being in the County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom
that portion lying within Parcels “A”, ‘B, “C” and “0’ of Parcel No. 2993 in
the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the
OiVice of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23, 1974 as
File No. 74230326 of Official Records.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after December 28, 1995. If
you have any questions, please call Jeff Gibson in the Planning Department at (619) 438-
1161, ext. 4455.
If you challenge the Local Coastal Program Amendment, Zone Change,GhWdw+& . . kbQp,P in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in thii notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carl&ad
at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: LCPA 94=04/ZC 94-04
CASE NAME: MAR VISTA
PUBUSH: DECEMBER 22,199!5
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAR VISTA
ZC 94004/LCPA 94-04r
A
(F0r.m A)
TO: C1T.Y CLERK’S OFFICE
FROH: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE :. PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
LCPA 94-04/ZC 94-04 - Mar Vista
for a public hearing before the Clty Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
.
Thank you.
January 22, 1996
Date
.
SIDNEY KYSER LIVING TRUST
APT I
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PHILIP/ADELE ANDERSON
1428 INDIAN OAKS TRAIL
SAINT PAUL MN 55112
ROBERT/MARGART SCHNIEDER
APT J
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/WANDA RECHSTEINER
408 E TEMPLE STREET
LENOX IA 50851
WILLIAM/GAIL GILBERT
2805 PENASCO
SAN CLEENTE CA 92673
ROBERT ETNIRE TRUST
PO BOX 1907
LA JOLIA CA 92038
JOHN/PATRICIA NETH TRUST
APT A
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NANCY STAHL SMITH TRUST
APT B
901 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ELMER/PHYLLIS REITZEL
7142 STEWARD & GRAY RD
DOWNEY CA 90241
STRAFACI/SELBY
APT B
903 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RANDALL BIGGS TRUST
2421 PRIMROSE AVENUE
VISTA CA 92083
RANDALL BIGGS TRUST
APT J
906 CAMINITO, MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PHILIP/ADELE ANDERSON
APT I
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBERT/MARGART SCHNEIDER
291 TORREY PINES TERRACE
’ DEL MAR CA 92014 I
RICHARD/MARGUERIT BOBLIT
6381 PARK RIDGE BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92120
RICHARD/MARGUERIT BOBLIT
APT G
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/WANDA RECHSTEINER MARIAN ROGERS
APT H APT F
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE 6575 PASEO DEL NORTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/GAIL GILBERT
APT D
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HELEN RIOS
APT E
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBERT ETNIRE TRUST
APT C
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOHN/PATRICIA NETH TRUST
PO BOX 1042
GUALALA CA 95445
FRANCES GUTHRIE TRUST
APT B
6575 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RICHARD/SHARON MARTIN
APT A
901 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LB/KM LEE TRUST
APT C
901 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DEAN/SHIRLEY NEGAARD
APT D
901 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ELMER/PHYLLIS REITZEL
901 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LUCILLE McKELVEY
APT A
903 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPECTOR FAMILY TRUST
6755 RUSSELIA COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPECTOR FAMILY TRUST
APT C
903 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
.
HILDEGARD BEHAN TRUST
APT D
/ 903 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JEAN WALLACE
APT A
905 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FRED SPECTOR CHRISTOPHER CHEN
APT B APT C
. 905 CAMINITO MADRIGAL 905 CAMINITOMADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHARLES/LA VONN BULES
APT E
905 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FAYE WELDON
APT F
905 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBERT/MARYLIN HOWARD/NANCY DOROS VANWASSENHOVE, APT B 4973 POSEIDON WAY 907 CAMINITO MADRIGAL OCEANSIDE CA 92056 CARLSBAD CA 92009
BASS FAMILY TRUST
APT D
907 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PAUL/SHARON LAMPE TRUST
12019 JULIUS AVENUE
DOWNEY CA 90242
ZIEGLER FAMILY TRUST
3482 SIT10 BORDE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ZIEGLER FAMILY TRUST
APT A
909 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RUDOLPH PETER
3610 HAVERHILL STREET
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RILEY LlVlNG TRUST
19008 CECELIA PLACE
CERRITOS CA 90701
RADCLlFFE/SIMIN
6829 SAVANNAH LANE
FORT WORTH TX 76132
JOAN WILSON
808 EAST ARROUES DRIVE
FULLERTON CA 92635
GORDON/NANCY MAHAFFEY
APT C
911 CAMINTIO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RADCLlFFE/SIMIN
APT D
909 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOAN WILSON
APT B
911 CAMINTIO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROCCO/SONJA BARILIA FAMILY
4158 ANDROS WAY
OCEANSIDE CA 92056
FRED SPECTOR
6755 RUSSELIA COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBERT JOHNSON
APT D
905 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KATHERINE CONAN
APT A
907 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HOWARD/NANCY DOROS
APT C
907 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PAUL/SHARON LAMPE TRUST
907 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RUDOLPH PETER
APT B
909 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RILEY LIVING TRUST
APT C
909 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GARY/MARY CANE
APT A
911 CAMINTIO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GORDON/NANCY MAHAFFEY
11720 BEVERLY BLVD
WHITTER CA 90601
ROCCO/SANJA BARlilA FAMILY
APT D
911 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
.
CARLSBAD RANCH COMPANY
SUITE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
THE PRICE COMPANY
951 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
3255 WEST MARCH LANE
STOCKTON CA 95219
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
SUITE 940-l
940 SHORE CREST ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
900 WIND DRIFT DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
900 SEA WIND COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RICHARD/ROBERT KELLY
2770 SUNNY CREEK ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RAYMOND/HELEN JORDAN
3474 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RAYMOND/RITA MARRS
1504 LAUREL STREET SOUTH
PASADENA CA 91030
DONALD/DONNA LYKE
APT C
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHRISTA McREYNOLDS
3216 CALLE CHIQUITA
LA JOLM CA 92037
CARLBUS ASSOCIATES
SUITE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
902 MARINER STREET
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULIT FAMILY ASSOCIATES
960 BEACH CREST COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
900 SHORE CREST ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
900 SAILFISH PLACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MSP CALIFORNIA LLC
SUITE 435
650 SOUTH CHERRY STREET
DENVER CO 80222
RAYMOND/HELEN JORDAN
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RAYMOND/RITA MARRS
APT D
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
VOSSfGOMEZ
SUITE A
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
THE PRICE COMPANY
PO BOX 97077
KIRKLAND WA 98083
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
PO BOX 7576
STOCKTON CA 95267
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
940 MARINER STREET
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
901 WIND DRIFT DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
APT 200A
2291 WEST MARCH IANE
STOCKTON CA 95207
MULTI FAMILY ASSOCIATES
922 TIDE COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBERT/VICTORIA GOLLINGS
APT F
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DONALD/DONNA LYKE
1000 PAU HANA DRIVE
SOQUEL CA 95073
FREDRICK THORNBURGH
SUITE B
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MARIE BEAL
APT 8105
1088 IAGUNA DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HORST BRYTSCHE
SUITE J
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
TURNER FAMILY TRUST
APT E
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LAUZON/REINER
APT C
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BADSTUBNER
APT B
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MANDEL/ROS
APT G
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SANDRA OSBORN
APT D
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DONALD/CAROL McCOMAS
PO BOX 805
WORLAND WY 82401
HORNING TURST
APT A
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHARLES/JEANNE GRIMES
APT F
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MARIE BEAL HORST BRYTSCHE
APT I SUITE PHlF
6675 PASEO DEL NORTE 5950 PELICAN BAY PLAZA
CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAINT PETERSBURG FL 33707
EPPERSON FAMILY TRUST HAROLD/ARLENE SLATTER
SUITE G j SUITE H
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE 6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
MORTON/MARIE SWEET lAUZON/REINER
SUITE F 28246 WESTBROOK COURT
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE FARMINGTON HILLS Ml 48334
CARLSBAD CA 92009
COLLEEN HOLLOWAY TRUST
APT D
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOHN SCHUELE
APT A
6673 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MATTHEW/GLORIA LANGUS
14402 MIDDLETON LANE
WESTMINISTER CA 92683
MATTHEW/GLORIA LANGUS
APT F
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MANDEL/ROS
7373 ALICANTE ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SANDRAOSBORN
PO BOX 2638
RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067
CHARLOTTE HUTCHINSON CHARLOTTE HUTCHINSON
1239 LA CASA DRIVE 6677 PASEO DEL NOPTE
SAN MARCOS CA 92069 CARLSBAD CA 92009
DONALD/CAROL McCOMAS
APT C
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HORNING TRUST
4811 WINDJAMMER WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ROBERT GARTNER TRUST
APT B
6677 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHARLES/JEANNE GRIMES
25233 CALLE DEL TRES AMIGOS
MURRIETA CA 92563
MARY/DONNA CALI
APT D
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GERTRUDE BRONG
APT E
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
s
DAVID/CAROL GANGLOFF
APT B
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DAVID/CAROL GANGLOFF
10723 ELGERS STREET
CERRITOS CA 90701
CHARLES/EVANGELINE CHRIST
APT C
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MORIS RIENZI
APT F
918 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ELIZABETH SHNABLE
APT A
6679 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DAVID/JULIE HERR
APT E
918 CAMINITO ESRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NOBUKO ISHIBASHI
1150 ARDEN DRIVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
NOBUKO ISHIBASHI
APT A
918 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOHN LESLIE
APT D
918 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHARLES WHALEN
APT B
918 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SUSAN JOHNS
1699 SAMAR DRIVE
COSTA MESA CA 92626
SUSAN JOHNS
APT I
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DONALD/PATRICIA MAYNARD
6029 DEERFORD STREET
LAKEWOOD CA 90713
DONALD/PATRICIA MAYNARD
APT J
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WARMAN FAMILY TRUST
69525 MORNINGSIDE DRIVE
DESERT HOT SPRINGS CA 92241
FREDRICK/DIANE BRANDT
13687 DONNYBROOK LANE
MOORPARK CA 93021
FREDRlCK/DIANE BRANDT
APT F
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WARMAN FAMILY TRUST
APT H
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOSEPH MROZOWSKI
3193 LINDENWOOD DRIVE
DEARBORN Ml 48120
JOSEPH MROZOWSKI
APT G
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
AUGUST RUSS0
APT E
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LUND FAMILY TRUST
APT C
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DONALD/MARGARET MOOTE
APT D
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HAL KAISER
APT A
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ALTAMIRA UNIT #4
PO BOX 612
CARLSBAD CA 92018
DANIEUHELEN ROUSE
APT B
916 CAMINITO ESTRADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DANIEL/HELEN ROUSE
PO BOX 45117
PHEONIX AZ 85064
RICHARD YOUNGBERG
APT B
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BARBARA STANSELL
6843 FASHION HILLS BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92111
MARY CUEVA
APT A
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BARBARA STANSELL KOON FAMILY TRUST
APT C APT D
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL 912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
TU-MING CHANG TRUST
4419 EAST EMBERWOOD LN
ANAHEIM CA 92807
ISABEL NAJERA
3002 SOUTH THORNTON ST
SANTA ANA CA 92704
GODSIN FAMILY TRUST
2360 NICKLAUS DRIVE
OCEANSIDE CA 92056
LEONARD/DEBORA ELIAS
APT A
914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JEFFERY ANDERSON
APT D
914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SUSAN ROEMER
APT F
914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CRANDALL TRUST
APT A
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GARY/SANDRA MILLER
7112 BORREGO WAY
CARMICHAEL CA 95608
SYLVIA SUDIA
13 CARLTON AVENUE
JERSEY CITY NJ 07307
KOO FAMILY TRUST
102 EAST VOLTAIRE AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85022
TU-MING CHANG TRUST
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MARY OCONNER
APT G
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ISABEL NAJERA
APT H
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PATRICK/JULIE LEONE
APT I
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GODSIN FAMILY TRUST
APT J
912 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
’ LEONARD/DEBORA ELIAS
7209 DAFFODIL PLACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ELlSSA/CORTNEY STONE
APT B
914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MARTIN SHIMEK
APT C
914 CAMINIOT MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MAUREEN FLOOD MAUREEN FLOOD
10325 WALNUT AVE 914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
SOUTH GATE CA 90280 CARLSBAD CA 92009
SALVATORE/MARIE CERBONE
PO BOX 3356
GRASS VALLEY CA 95945
SALVATORE/MARIE CERBONE
APT G
914 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DOROTHY ZIEGLER
APT B
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GARY/SANDRA MILLER
APT C
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOE MORENO
APT D
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DAVID MILLER
APT E
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SYLVIA SUDIA
APT F
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PAUL/DIXON BORGFELD
PO BOX 212
BLUE JAY CA 92317
.
PAUL/DIXON BORGFELD
APT G
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JAMES/CAROLYN COUGHLIN
APT I
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DOROTHEE GALLIAND
APT A
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ALBERT/MARGARET SCHINSKY
APT C
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
THOMAS SMYKAL
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/JEAN FITZGERALD
6932 STARSTONE DRIVE
RANCH PALOS VERDES CA 90274
NORDREHAUG FAMILY TRUST
APT C
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
QUINLAN FAMILY TRUST
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FRANK/SUZANNE ERICKSON
5914 INTERVALE DRIVE
RIVERSIDE CA 92506
JAMES NETTINGA TRUST
APT H
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
JOHN MCCONNELL
APT H
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/HELEN HOSHAR
4102 AVENIDA SEVlLLA
CYPRESS CA 90630
EDWARD/UlA PYLE TRUST
6536 FIREBRAND STREET
LOS ANGELES CA 90045
SIDNEY HARRIS
APT D
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SWANSON FAMILY TRUST
APT F
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILLIAM/JEAN FITZGERALD
APT B
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JANET SUTTON
APT D
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
STEPHEN/MARGUERITE HAND
4304 SEA BRIGHT DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FRANK/SUZANNE ERlCKiON
APT G
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SIDNEY KYSER TRUST
2615 TREELANE AVE
ARCADIA CA 91006
JAMES/CAROLYN COUGHLIN
51 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD
ARCADIA CA 91006;
WILLIAM/HELEN HOSHAR
APT J
908 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
EDWARD/UlA PYLE TRUST
APT B
910 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
THOMAS SMYKAL
933 AVENIDA PRESIDIO
SAN CLEMENTE CA 92672
PATRICIA ROENFELDT
APT A
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NORDREHAUG FAMILY TRUST
24855 IA VIDA DRIVE
LAGUNA NIGUEL CA 92677
QUlNlAN FAMILY TRUST
23942 AMUNDSEN BAY
DANA POINT CA 92629
STEPHEN/MARGUERITE HAND
APT F
906 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JAMES NETTINGA TRUST
1704 BELLE MEADE ROAD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
DONALD/MARGARET BRYANT
APT E
911 CAMINITO MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
.
VIOLA DRAPER
APT F
911 tCAMINIT0 MADRIGAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JAMES UKEGAWA
4218 SKYLINE ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAMBI SEASIDE HEIGHTS LLC
8649 FIRESTONE BLVD
DOWNEY CA 90241
CARLTAS ASSOCIATES
SUITE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PACWEST LTD
SUITE 1750
550 WEST C STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
JAMES UKEGAWA
6145 LAUREL TREE ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SIM USA INC
1400 FLAME TREE LANE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
FACILITIES FOR CITY CLERK
MAR VISTA - LCPA 94-04/X 94-04
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
80 1 PINE AVENUE
CARLSBAD CA ,92008
CALIF DEFT OF FISH & GAME
330 GOLDENSHORE #50
LONG BEACH CA 90802
SAN DIEGO COUNTY PLANNING 5201 RUFFIN RD STE “B”
SAN DIEGO CA 92 123
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JEFF GIBSON