HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-12-08; City Council; 14968; JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18 SDP 98-10|CDP 98-43a 9 0 CC & 2
. - z 0
I- o a
5
I
J
z 3 0 0
, &TY OF CARLSBAB - AGE~A BILL 113
AB# 1qA96& TITLE: DEPT. HD.
MTG. 12/8/98 SDP 98-1OlCDP 98-43 CITY ATTY.
DEPT. PLN a? CITY MGR q
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That Council ADOPT Resolution No. 98 Oqfl(, , APPROVING the Site Development
Coastal Development Permit for the JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18 apartment development
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On November 4, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and reco
approval with a 7-0 vote of the Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit fo
apartment units located in a total of 16 buildings. The site also includes a common recre,
with a large clubhouse/leasing office. There is adequate pedestrian and automobile 1
throughout the project as well as many landscaped areas for passive recreation. The ar
conforms to the Mediterranean style required by the Aviara Master Plan and all buildings
required building height. The apartment units will be a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroc
some with lofts. Parking is provided through one-car garages, carports and open parking.
The proposed apartment development is consistent with all applicable rules, regulai
policies. The allowed land use and development standards were approved on January 6
the Carlsbad City Council and on June 9, 1998 by the California Coastal Commission tht
177(U)/GPA 97-06/LCPA 97-06. The proposed 288 unit development is 47 units t
maximum of 335 units allowed by the Aviara Master Plan. The only public testimony offe
Planning Commission hearing was a positive recommendation from a representative of Av
Associates, L.P.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impacts to the City are negligible since all development fees will be collected th
building permit processing. All public facilities necessary to serve the development are
being installed and will be in place prior to development.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The potential impacts of the proposed actions were already evaluated in four
environmental documents: the Negative Declaration/MEIR Addendum for the Aviara Phase
land use change, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Aviara Phase Ill Master Tenta
EIR 83-02(A) for the Aviara Master Plan and MElR 93-01 for the City’s 1994 General Plan
The proposal is, therefore, within the scope of the prior ElRs and Negative Declarations ar
environmental documentation nor Public Resources Code 21 081 findings are required. A
mitigation measures identified in the previous environmental documents which are appri
this proposal have been incorporated into the project. A Notice of Prior Environmental Cc
was issued and duly noticed on July 24, 1998 and no comments were received.
JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18
.L
Aviara Planning Area 18 apartment proposal, The proposed development would cons
9 0 PAGE 2 OF AGENDA ILL NO. )x qb 8
EXHIBITS:
1.
2. Location Map
3.
4.
5.
City Council Resolution No. 98 - Yo/
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 441 5 and 441 6
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated November 4, 1998
Draft Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated November 4, 1998.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 98~401
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 288 UNIT
APARTMENT COMPLEX ON COASTAL ZONE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF POINSETTIA
LANE AND AMBROSIA LANE IN THE SOUTHWEST
QUADRANT.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.: SDP 98-IOICDP 98-43
JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the
Commission did, on November 4, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribc
to consider a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 8th
December , 1998, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said Site Devi
Plan and Coastal Development Permit and at that time received recommendations, ot
protests, comments of all persons interested in or opposed to SDP 98-1 O/CDP 98-43; r
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council c
of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1.
2.
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the City Council APPROVES City Council Resolution No. 98-401
that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as se
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4415 and 4416 on file with the (
and made a part hereof by reference are the findings and conditions o
Counci I.
That the application for a Site Development Plan (SDP 98-10) to l
construction of a 288 unit apartment complex in Aviara Planning Area 11
on the southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia Lane, is apF
shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 441 5.
That the application for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP 98-43) to
construction of a 288 unit apartment complex on coastal zone propert
Planning Area 18), located on the southeast corner of Poinsettia 1
Ambrosia Lane, is approved as shown in Planning Commission Resol
441 6.
3.
4.
....
....
....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of ti
Carisbad on the 8th day of December 1998, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard, Kulchin ar
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
Q9 ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2-
0 0 E>
@
JPI APARTMENTS
AT AVIARA P. A. 18
SDP 98-IOICDP 98-43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Ill
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0 EX).
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4415
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDP 98-10 TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 288 UNIT APARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT IN AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18 ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF POINSETTIA LANE AND AMBROSIA LANE IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 19.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.: SDP 98-10
JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18
WHEREAS, JPI Westcoast Development L.P., “Developer”, has filec
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Aviara Land 1
L.P., “Owner”, described as
Lots 1 and 2 of Carlsbad Tract CT 92-3, Phase 111, Unit 1,
Recorder on June 23,1997, in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California
according to Map No. 13434, filed in the Office of the County
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site De
Plan as shown on Exhibits “A” - “BB”, dated November 4, 1998, on file in the
Department, JPI - AVIARA PA 18 - SDP 98-10 as provided by Chapter 21.06 of thc
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Cornmission did, on the 4th day of Noveml
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to the Site Development Plan
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 ' o
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct,
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the
Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of JPI - AVIARA PA
98-10 based on the following findings and subject to the following cond
Findings:
1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and env
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the are2
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroi
traffic circulation, in that the project is at the appropriate density, will p'
necessary facilities prior to or concurrent with construction, and maintain
adjacent open space areas.
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
that the proposed apartment buildings, with associated parking and 1
facilities, can fit within the existing property lines and graded area.
That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necess?
the requested use to existing 01- permitted future uses in the neighborhoo
provided and maintained, in that the proposed development meets or ex
development standards of the master plan, which were designed to inc
compatibility of the proposed apartment buildings with the adjacent sing
homes, open space and major arterial roadway.
That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle
generated by the proposed use, in that a) the project proposes 47 fewer unit5
288) than is allowed under the growth management dwelling unit allowanc
subject property (335 units) and the surrounding street system was master
to accommodate the traffic generated by the full growth management dwe
allowance, and b) the principal street which serves the project is Ambrosi
collector street with a traffic capacity that ranges between 1,200 and 10,001
daily trips and the project would generate only an estimated 1,728 trips.
2.
3.
4.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all c(
and modifications to the Site Development Plan document(s) necessary to m
internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Dev
shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed de\
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state,
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
2.
PC RES0 NO. 441 5 -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
0 0
3. The Developer shall provide the (City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar c(
Site Plan as approved by the final. decision making body. The Site Plan shall
conditions of approval by the City. The Plan copy shall be submitted to
Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or improver
submittal, whichever occurs first,
4. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit pla
reduced legible version of the approving resolutions on a 24” x 36” bluelint
Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any applicable Coastal De
Permit and signed approved site plan.
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property I
District Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of a
for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council o
1987, (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any deT
fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad :
Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or
and Improvement Plan and to fulfill the subdivider’s agreement to pay t
facilities fee dated June 1, 1998, a copy of which is on file with the City C11
incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application w
consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will be void.
The Developer shall provide prloof of payment of statutory school fees to
conditions of overcrowding as part of the building permit application. The a
these fees shall be determined by the fee schedule in effect at the time of buildi
application.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which arc
as part of the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendment,
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or thc
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this I
housing project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as prc
Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be in
approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project w
condition complies with all requirements of law.
Approval of SDP 98-10 is granted subject to the approval of CDP 98-43. SDE
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
CDP 98-43.
11. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the Citj
of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the si
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
j4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in intere
City of Carlsbad has issued a Site Development Plan and Coastal Developmei
by Resolutions No. 4415 and 4416 on the real property owned by the Develo.
complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any con
restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Di
the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which m’
terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or su(
interest.
Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high solid wall with gate?
to City standards. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the
Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors andor materials to the projt
satisfaction of the Planning Director.
All visitor parking spaces shall be clearly marked to differentiate them from the
resident parking spaces and shall be clearly marked as may be approved by the
Director.
An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be submitted for Planning
approval. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any in
adjacent homes or property.
Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file (
12.
13.
14.
15, No outdoor storage of materials shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire (
such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chie
Planning Director.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conform;
the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. 1
shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director pric
approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs f
Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved p
maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, t
debris.
The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompani
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
16.
17.
18. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a unif
program for this development prior to occupancy of any building.
Building identification andor addresses shall be placed on all new and existing 1
so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identificatic
addresses shall contrast to their background color.
19.
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
20. Prior to occupancy of any units, the Developer shall construct a directory si
entrance to the project. The design of this sign shall be approved by the
Director.
21. The Developer shall provide bus stops to service this development at locations
reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit Distric
Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall at a minimum include a b
from advertising, and a pole for the bus stop sign. The bench and pole shall be
to enhance or consistent with basic architectural theme of the project.
Prior to issuance of a building permit ffor this project, the applicant shall e!
process to notify, including but not limited to notification in all lease ag
and a posting in the rental office, to the satisfaction of the Planning Dirt
City Attorney, all tenants and users of this project that: 1) this area is ad
agricultural operations; 2) the area may be subject to dust, pesticides, a
associated with said adjacent agricultural operations; and 3) the tenants i
occupy this area at their own risk.
22.
Enpineerinf :
23. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the developer shall comply
requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and wh
program is formally established by the City.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed constn
within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all cond
requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operatio
The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intr
and driveways in accordance with Engineering Standards and shall in1
following statement on the Site Plan and Landscape Plans.
24.
25.
"No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inc
the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area
as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Stre
Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall mai
condition."
26.
27.
The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the Citj
regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure. 28.
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
29. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner
written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaric
subdivision plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and La1
District No. 1 on a form provided by the City.
Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown (
plan, a grading permit for this project is required. The developer must submit ai
approval for grading plans in accordance with city codes and standards prior tc
of a building permit for the project.
Upon completion of grading, the developer shall ensure that an "as-graded" geo
is submitted to the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology a
by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constr
must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grad
plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist.
shall be prepared on a 24" x 36" mylar or similar drafting film and shall 1
permanent record.
No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of the projec
grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owners of thc
properties and recorded. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading
easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case the devell
either amend the site plan or modify the plans so grading will not occur 01
project site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved sit1
determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be PI
the City Engineer.
30.
3 1.
32.
33.
installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as may be re
34. The owner shall apply to the City and fully process a quitclaim
relinquishment of access rights to Ambrosia Lane at the main entrance, :
waive the direct access rights to the project at the northerly end of Ambra
to reflect the access to the project shown on the site plan. Both to be rec
separate instruments to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The southerly driveway entrance across from Calliandra Road is a SI
entrance for residents only. Signs to this effect shall be installed. A turi
area shall be provided in front of the gate.
The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National
Discharge Elimination System ("DES) permit. The developer shall pro
management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Ma
Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to
to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City
35.
36.
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and
the following:
a. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or
established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose ol
hazardous waste products.
Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives,
such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or priv:
storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and d
pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and (
chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County
requirements as prescribed in their respective containers.
Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or redu
pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping ar
improvements.
b.
c.
37. The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic inde:
accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area an
with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle wa!
submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved b
as part of the building site plan review.
The design of all private streets and drainage systems shall be approved b!
Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform to City o
Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage system
inspected by the City. The standard improvement plan check and inspection fe
paid prior issuance of any building or grading permit for this project.
The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this
prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in a
with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer.
38.
39.
40. Some improvements shown on the site plan are located within the
easement. Prior to issuance of any building or grading permit for th
whichever occurs first, the owner shall obtain and submit to the City E
letter of permission from SDG&E to perform the work.
Fire Department:
41. Native vegetation which presents a fire hazard to structures shall be modified o
on accordance with the specifications contained in the City of Carlsbad .
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Manual. Applicant shall submit a Fire Suppression plan to the Fire Depar
approval.
Water District:
42. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges whic
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The :
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of appli
any meter application.
The Developer shall provide detail information to the District Engineer regarc
demand, irrigation demand, fire flow demand in gallons per minute, and pro:
flow in million gallons per day.
The entire potable water system, recycled water system and sewer systerr
evaluated in detail by Developer and District Engineer to ensure that adequatc
pressure and flow demands can be met.
All District pipelines, pump stations, pressure reducing stations and appi
easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad.
Sequentially, the Developer’s Engineer shall do the following:
a.
b.
43.
44.
45.
required for this project by the District shall be within public right-of-way
46.
Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirem
Prepare and submit a colored recycled water use area map and submit tl
the Planning Department for processing and approval by the District Engii
Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and recycled water improvement
Developer shall submit preliminary system layouts to the District En
review, comment and approval.
c.
47. The following note shall be placed upon the grading plan and building per:
(6 This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits F
issued for development of the subject property unless the District se
development has adequate water and sewer capacity available at the time devel
to occur, and that such water and sewer capacity will continue to be available
of occupancy.”
All potable water and recycled water meters shall be placed within public right- 48.
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -8-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
49. No more than 19 homes shall be served on a single potable water distributior
For those locations with more than 19 homes, a looped potable water pipeli
shall be designed.
General:
50. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their ter
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have th
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issus
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of (
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute li
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their vi0
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s a]
this (type of action, e.g. Site Development Plan).
Code Reminders:
5 1. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required 1
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issue
project within 18 months from the date of project approval.
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectil
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time o
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally intej
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
Directors of Community Development and Planning.
Prior to occupancy of the first dwelling unit the Developer shall provide a1
passive and active recreational areas per the approved plans, including landsc
recreational facilities.
All landscape and imgation plans shall be prepared to conform with the I
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the
Department.
Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in cor
with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the
Director prior to installation of such signs.
52.
53.
54.
substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfact
55.
56.
57.
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition’
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for conv
~ees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from November 4, 1998 to protest imposition of these feedexactio
protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government COC
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set asidt
annul their imposition.
YOU are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously t
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously
expired.
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the Ciiy M
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of thc
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of November, 199
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman.
Nielsen, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN: ..
-=%,J-. P3 (7 .; 5 <-. -.C>/<
Y
p,, LC 4 4‘ 6 ?/ *, .f, I .
\. -i r---ir*-, ,~ -
BAILEY NOgE, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
lM‘&FA. MICHAEL J. HO~MILLE~R
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 4415 -10-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4416
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT IN AVIARA PLANNING
AKA 18 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF POINSETTIA LANE AND
AMBROSIA LANE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 19.
CDP 98-43 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A288 UNIT
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.: CDP 98-43
JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18
WHEREAS, JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., “Developer”, ha
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Avir
Associates, L.P., “Owner”, described as
Lots 1 and 2 of Carlsbad Tract CT 92-3, Phase 111, Unit 1,
according to Map No. 13434, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder on June 23,1997, in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “BB” dated November 4, 1998, on f
Planning Department, JPI - AVIARA PA 18 - CDP 98-43 as provided by Chapter 2 1.21
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of Novemb
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tc
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a
relating to the CDP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 '*
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cc
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of JPI - AVIARA PA is - CDP 98
FindinEs:
1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Mello I segmc
Certified Local Coastal Program and all applicable policies in that no prime agi
lands exist on or near the site; all adjacent environmentally sensitive hat
remain in their undisturbed state; no coastal access is or will be needed tE
adjacent to the project site; erosion will be controlled by grading in con
with City Standards; and no significant visual panoramas exist on or near 1
The project site is not located in the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone, acc
Map X of the Land Use Plan, certified September 1980, and, therefore, is nl to the provisions of the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.2
Zoning Ordinance).
The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource P
Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the prc
adhere to the City's Master Drainage and Storm Water Quality Managen
and Grading Ordinance to avoid increased runoff and soil erosion; no ste
exist on the property; and the site is not prone to landslides or susce
accelerated erosions, floods or liquefactions.
The project site is not located between the sea and first public road para1
sea and, therefore, is not subject to the provisions of the Coastal !
Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance).
The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Over
Mello I Segment Ordinance (Chapter 21.205 of the Zoning Ordinance) ir
additional mitigation, as contained in the certified EIR for the Aviara Ma!
(EIR 83-02(A)), is needed and all required drainage and desiltation structui
place and no grading is proposed.
2.
3.
4.
5,
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all c(
and modifications to the document(s) necessary to make them internally consistt
conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur substm
shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different f
approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The applicant shall apply for and be issued building permits for this pi
within two (2) years of approval or this Coastal Development Permit will e
unless extended per Section 21.201.210 of the Zoning Ordinance.
2.
PC RES0 NO. 4416 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6 ’
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
3. Approval of CDP 98-43 is granted subject to approval of SDP 98-10. CDP 91
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No
for SDP 98-10.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition’
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for conv
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from November 4,1998 to protest imposition of these feeslexactio
protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Coc
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City M
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set asidt
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously 1:
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously
expired.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4416 -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
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tht
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of November, 15
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Cornpas, Heinemar
Nielsen, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
1'. i .-- I-' ,p)
r
;". -3 c\ "/ x [;;-e j/
t3SE=f>< e+*' . 5
BAILEY -NO@k, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
+4 %-. , -6 67 1 t-* e
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J.
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 4416 -4-
0 0 EXh The City of CARLSBAD Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIOE
ItemNo. @
July 1, 1998 Application complete date:
Project Planner: Michael Grim fi Project Engineer: Frank Jimeno
SDP 98-10KDP 98-43 - JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18 - Request fc
Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit to allow the construct
of a 288 unit apartment development on a pregraded pad located in Avi
Planning Area 18, at the southeast corner of Ambrosia Lane and Poinsettia La
in Local Facilities Management Zone 19.
P.C. AGENDA OF: November 4,1998
SUBJECT:
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 441 5 and 44
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Site Development Plan SDP 98-10 and Coas
Development Permit CDP 98-43, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contair
therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
The proposal involves a 288 unit apartment development on a pregraded pad in Aviara Planni
Area 18, located on the southeast comer of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia Lane. The S
Development Plan is required prior to development of any Aviara Planning Area and the Coa:
Development Permit is required for any development in the Coastal Zone. The project confor.
to all applicable regulations and staff has no issue with the proposal.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant, JPI Westcoast Development L.P., is requesting approval of a Site Developmt
Plan and Coastal Development Permit to allow construction of a 288 unit apartment developmc
in Aviara Planning Area 18. The site is located on the southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane a
Ambrosia Lane in Phase 111 of the Aviara Master Plan. To the north, across Poinsettia Lane.
another multifamily planning area (PA 19), with the Zone 19 Community Park beyond. To I
south and west of the project site is Serenata (PA 17 and 21), two single-family developments
Brehm Communities. West of the northem portion of the site lies Planning Area 32B, the mas
plan’s future churcWdaycare site. The project site is bordered on the east by the master pl
boundary, with agriculture and native habitat on the adjacent properties. The site is curren
mass-graded in accordance with the Aviara Phase I11 Final Map and all facilities necessary
serve the site are already in place. The project would take access off of Ambrosia Lane at t7
entry points, with no access allowed onto Poinsettia Lane. Planning Area 18 in the Avi:
Master Plan is designated for uses in accordance with the RD-M (Residential Density - Multip
q
SDP 98-10/CDP 98-43 - @- AVIARA PA 18 0
November 4,1998
Page 2
Zone. Such uses must comply with the standards of the RD-M Zone, except as modified in
Aviara Master Plan. The General Plan designation on the property is RH (Residential H
Density) allowing from 15 to 23 dwellings per acre, with a Growth Control Point of 19 dwellii
per acre.
The JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18 proposal involves a total of 288 apartment units in
buildings. The site would gain access from Ambrosia Lane at two locations, matching 1
intersections of Docena Road and Calliandra Road in Planning Area 21 across the street. 2
buildings are grouped into pods, with circulation aisles, carports, surface parking, landscapi
one car garages built into the building. The proposed recreation facility/clubhouse would
located at the main project entry, at Docena Road and Ambrosia Lane, and would include bc
active and passive recreation opportunities. All buildings are separated by at least 20 feet and i
arranged in a non-uniform manner around the project site. The proposed site plan accommoda
adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation while providing landscaping and passive recreati
opportunities throughout the site.
As shown on Exhibits “A” - “BB”, dated November 4, 1998, there are three different buildi
types proposed, each with two stories of apartment units; two of the building types include lo
for four of the upstairs units. All residential buildings measure between 34 and 35 feet hi€
Each apartment building would include enclosed one-car garage, some with internal accei
measuring the minimum 12 feet by 20 feet inside dimension. The architectural theme for ,
structures would be Mediterranean, in keeping with the design criteria of the Aviara Master P1:
The JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18 project is subject to the following regulations:
and pedestrian walkways within each pod. Each building has both dedicated and non-dedicai
A. General Plan;
B. Local Coastal Program;
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Aviara Master Plan (MP 177 and its amendments);
Parking Ordinance (Chapter 21.44 of the Zoning Ordinance);
P-C - Planned Community Zone (Chapter 21.38 of the Zoning Ordinance);
Growth Management Ordinance (Chapter 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance);
Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan.
IV, ANALYSIS
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analys
section discusses compliance with each of these regulations/policies utilizing both text a~
tables.
ELEMENT
Land Use
Circulation
Housing
Public Safety
Open Space
and
Conservation
TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
USE CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, PROPOSED USES AND
OBJECTIVE OR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS CoMPLIAN(
Site is designated for residential land
use at a density of 15 to 19 ddac.
Proposed density of 16
du/ac is consistent with
land use designation.
All street improvements
will be completed prior to,
or concurrent with,
Project provides market
rate units within Aviara
while the master plan
sufficient units in the Villa
Lorna development to
cover PA 18's affordable
housing requirement.
All building will meet UBC
and State seismic
requirements.
Yes
Require new developments to
construct all roadways needed to
serve the development prior to or
concurrent with needs. development
Ensure that all master planned
communities and qualified
subdivisions provide a range of
housing for all economic income developer has constructed Yes
ranges.
Yes
Design all structures in accordance
with the seismic design standards of
the UBC and State building
requirements.
Yes
Provision of emergency water
systems and all weather access roads. All necessary water mains,
fire hydrants and Yes
appurtenances must be
installed prior to occupancy
of any unit and all weather
access roads will be
maintained throughout
construction.
Project maintains amount
of native habitat and
erosion control during
grading reduces Yes
sedimentation of the
lagoon.
Minimize environmental impacts to
sensitive resources in the City.
MASTER PLAN REQUIREMENT
Building Height:
35 feet maximum
50% units maximum of two stories
Easterly PA boundary setback!
Minimum of 50 feet
PROPOSED PLAN COMPLIANCE
All buildings range from 34 to 35
feet high.
Yes
All buildings have two stories, two
building types have small loft
areas.
Yes
All structures setback a minimum Yes
MASTER PLAN REQUIREMENT
Building Separation:
Minimum 20 feet separation
Public Utility easement setback:
Minimum 30 foot setback
PROPOSED PLAN COMPLIANCE
of 50 feet from the easterly PA
boundary,
All buildings are a minimum of 20
feet apart.
Yes
All structures setback a minimum
of 30 feet from the SDG&E
easement.
Yes
Bedroom Mix by
Building Type
Building Type I
12 one-bedroom
units
6 two+ bedroom
units
Parking Calculations by Number Total Number of
Building Type of Spaces
Buildings
1.5 spaceshnit x 12 units = 18
spaces Building spacedbuilding x
2.0 spaceshit x 6 units = 12
spaces 180 spaces
Total parking per building = 30
spaces
Total of 6 30
Type 1 6 buildings =
Building Type I1
8 one-bedroom units
10 two+ bedroom
units
Building Type 111
4 one-bedroom units
14 two+ bedroom
units
1.5 spaces/unit x 8 units = 12
spaces Building spaces/building x
2.0 spacedunit x 10 units = 20
spaces 224 spaces
Total parking per building = 32
spaces
Total of 7 32
Type I1 7 buildings =
1.5 spaceshit x 4 units = 6 Total of3 34
spaces Building spacesbuilding x
2.0 spaceshit x 14 units = 28
spaces 102 spaces
Total parking per building = 34
Type 111 3 buildings =
spaces
Standard ImpactdStandard
City Administration 2,320.79 sq ft
Library 1,237.59 sq fi
Waste Water Treatment 288 EDU
Parks 4.64 acres
Drainage PLDA D
Circulation 1,728 ADT
Fire Station ## 4
Open Space N/A
Schools C.U.S.D.
Water 63,360 GPD
Compliance
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0 SDP 98- 1 O/CDP 98-43 - !!! - AVIARA PA 18
November 4, 1998
Page 8
and construction related to the development of Phase 111, including development of Plann
Area 18. The fourth previous environmental document is the Negative Declaration and ME
Addendum for the Aviara Phase I11 North Master Plan Amendment and General P
Amendment (MP 177(U)/GPA 97-06), which reviewed the potential environmental imp2
associated with development of the Aviara PA 18 with up to 335 residential units. The prop0
apartment complex involves only 288 units. Without exception, the proposed action has
additional impacts not previously analyzed in the earlier environmental review and no additio review or mitigation measures are necessary,
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
5. Location Map
6. Disclosure Statement
7.
8.
9.
10. Background Data Sheet
1 1.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4415
Planning Commission Resolution No. 441 6
Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance, dated July 24, 1998
Environmental Impact Assessment Form, dated July 20, 1998
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Exhibits “A” -“BB”, dated November 4, 1998
MG:kc:mh
w yx-q3
I nu,., CIIYIYIIY” dldlLI.l4 IUU dJIJI**
s.2 5g-10 Q U-UI ,JJU I -LCL~I-I
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will requirr
discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project canno
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any -individual, finn, co-p
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
municipality, district OT other politicalsubdivision or any 0th
Agents may sign this document: however, the legal name and entity. of fhe applicant and property owner must bc
ciation, social club, fratems
county, city and county, cit]
on ac%mg as a unit.”
provided below.
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having a financia
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a cornoration or Dartnershiu, include thc
names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NC
INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned cornoration, include thc
names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached i
necessary.)
Person J/k: NO &diidud corp/lpartPr Wah~f DeL.elO#
Title 0UIn6 r/MQ&q&W Title Ed- 6&eY t && Dr2i.l P&
Address 10% 06 sws Address 8910 ~fl~db5~~ a+& * n;eg., 49 -hW-
2. OWNER (Not the owner’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having any ownershi]
interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e
partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes :
corporation or partnershio, include the names, title. addresses of all individuals owning morc
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN IO% OF THE SHARES
PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (WA) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly
owned cormration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separatl
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person fi la
Title
Address Address 20 \ \ ?~LOWUL QGWT a
Corp/Part AdtaQ~ -LwD ~Y;~c~sT€
Tit1eW.E ?K!rQW/Gm. MhQ- B. L.
CA&*D, cfl q2-q
2075 Las Palmas Or - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161 - FAX (760) 438-0891
L!JC -\o-y '3 I ,\"I1 Lrn,","*,.U -I-,-..- r-- -2IJJrCre OM %$-\o
v V. ,--- . --, .
3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list th
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-prof
organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Noli ProfWTrust Non ProfWTrust
Title Title
Address Address
4 Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staf
Boards, Commissions, Committees andor Council within the past twelve (12) months? 0 Yes B No If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
1 certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature of owneridate Signzhure of applicantldate
3. L- CL&Jl&& Joho Ed G~sle\l
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant '
Signature of ownedapplicant's agent if applicableldate
Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent
H.ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of I
a
- Eity of Carlsba(
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Please Take Notice:
The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of
project described below have already been considered in conjunction n
previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additio
environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed.
k-
Project Title: JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18
Project Lo cat ion : Southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia La
Aviara Planning Area 18, in the City of Carlsbad, County
San Diego, State of California.
Project Description: Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit
allow construction of a 288-unit apartment complex or
pregraded pad.
Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 L
Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invitt
Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days
date of publication.
DATED: July 24, 1998
CASE NO: SDP 98-1O/CDP 98-43
CASE NAME: JPI - AVIARA PA 18
PUBLISH DATE: July 24, 1998
MICHAEL JYIOL~IGIILLER
Planning Director
2075 La Palmas Dr - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1 161 - FAX (760) 438-01
0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: SDP 98-1 OKDP 98-
DATE: July 20,1998
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
CASE NAME: JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18
APPLICANT: PI Westcoast Development, L.P.
ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 8910 Universitv Center Lane. ##l!
San Diego, CA 92122 (619) 458-1200
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: June 1.1998
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit to allc
construction of a 288-unit apartment complex on a megraded lot within Aviara Planning; Ar
18, located at the southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia Lane, Citv of Carlsbs
County of San Dieao.
4.
5.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this projec
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impa
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
0 Land Use and Planning IXI TransportationlCirculation 0 Public Services
0 Population and Housing
0 Geological Problems 0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
0 Water Hazards Cultural Resources
E Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation
0 Biological Resources Utilities & Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
a a
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on 1
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on 1
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigati
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earl
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigati
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An is requirt
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 t
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentia
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in earlier EIRs and a Negati
Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigat-
pursuant to that earlier EIRs and Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigatic
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Pri
Compliance has been prepared.
c]
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATJ'
0
0
[XI
7520 -%
Planner Signature Date
.
'IF-/zl/4@
Planning Directory Signfire Date
2 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the Ci
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significa
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the followii
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and hum
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project sand provides the City with information
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negati
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
a A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that a
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following ea
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced informati
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved.
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to,
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that t
general standards and policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporati1
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fiom “Potentially Significant Impact” tc
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and t
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce t
effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that
effect is significant.
Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significs
effect on the environment, but @l potentially significant effects (a) have been analyz
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicat
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigat
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed up
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the pri
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additioi
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily requiI
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier E
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence tl
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
a
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopt
0
a
0
0
3 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
0 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, a
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In tl
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporate
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and includii
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect h
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, a
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less th
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact h
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not redu
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part 11 analysis it is r
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect,
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significs
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end oft
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attentil
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determin
significant.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant lmpal
Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#I, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18; #2, pgs 4-1 -
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project? (#l, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18; #2, pgs 4-1 -
Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? (#l, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses? (#l, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18;
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (#l, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18; #2,
PgS 4-1 - 4-26, #3, PgS 13-14; #4, pg 5)
0 R w
0 0 0 Ixl
0 0 0 IXI
0 0 0 ixI
0 0 0 !XI
4-26, #3, PgS 11-12; #4, pg 5)
4-26, #3, PgS 11-12; #4, pg 5)
c)
26, #3, pgs 11-12; #4, pg 5)
#2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26, #3, pg 11; #4, pg 5)
e)
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (#I, pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6; #2, 0 0 0 Ix1
PgS 4- 1 - 4-26; #3, pg 13 ; #4, pg 5)
4 Rev. 03/28/96
0
Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impa
0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0 0 1x b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (eg through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? (#l, pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6; #2, pgs 4-1 -
4-26; #3, pg 13; #4, pg 5)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0 0 0 Ix housing? (#l, pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26;
#3, pg 13-14; #4, pg 5)
111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (#I, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #2, pgs 4-
b) Seismic ground shaking? (#l, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15;
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
0 0 1x
0 0 0 Ix
0 0 a Ix
0 0 a Ix
0 a 0 Ix
0 19
0 0 Ix
0. 0 0 Ix
0 a 0 !x
150 - 4-156; #3, pg 7; #4, pg 5)
#2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156; #3, pg 7; #4, pg 5)
(#l, PgS 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #2, PgS 4-150 - 4-156; #3,
pg7; #4,pg5)
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l, pgs 5.1-1
e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15;
- 5.1-15; #2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156; #3, pg 7; #4, pg 5)
#2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156; #3, PgS 7-8; #4, pg 5)
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
7-8; #4, pg 5)
0 conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#I,
pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #2, PgS 4-150 - 4-156; #3, pgs
g)
h)
i)
Subsidence of the land? (#l, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15;
Expansive soils? (#l, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #2, pgs 4-
Unique geologic or physical features? (#l, pgs 5.1-
#2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156; #3, pgs 7-8; #4, pg 5)
150 - 4-156; #3, pg 7; #4, pg 5)
1 - 5.1-15; #2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156; #3, PgS 7-8; #4,
Pg 5)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l, pgs
5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pg 8; #4,
Pg 5)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
0 0 0 Ix
0 cl nix
0 0 Ix
cl 17 0 [x
0 a 0 €I
hazards such as flooding? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11;
#2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pg 8; #4, pg 5)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (eg temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2,
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, pgs 4-1 10
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements? (#I, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, pgs
c)
pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pg 9; #4, pg 5)
- 4-1 18; #3, pg 9; #4, pg 6)
e)
4-1 10 - 4-118; #3, pg 8; #4, pg 6)
5 Rev. 03/28/96
0
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant lmpa
0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact Mitigation
lncorporated O 0 0 K f) Changes 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 groundwater recharge
capability? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, P~S 4-1 10 -
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
pg 8; #4, Pg 6)
4-1 18; #3, pg 9; #4, pg 6) o 0 0 E
0 0 IXI
0 0 0 Fx1
(#I, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-118; #3,
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 -
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies? (#l, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1; #2, pgs 4-1 IO -
5.2-11;#2,pg~4-110-4-118;#3,pg9; #4,pg6)
4-1 18; #3, pg 8; #4, pg 6)
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? (#l, pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-
d) Create objectionable odors? (#1, pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-
El
IXI 0 0 0 0 0 Ixl
0 0 0 Ix1
12;#2,pg~4-110-4-118;#3,pg8; #4,pg6)
12; #2, PgS 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pg 8; #4, pg 6)
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-
22; #2, PgS 4-63 - 4-80; #3, PES 14-15; #4, pg 6)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses? (#I, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-22; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80;
#3, pg 15; #4, pg 6)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
IE3 0 cl 0 0 IXI
0 0 0 Ix1
0 0 0 IXI
0 cl 0 (XI
o 0 0 [XI
0 0 0 [XI
(#l, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-22; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3, pg
14; #4,pg6)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(#I, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-22; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3,
pgs 14-15; #4, pg 6)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? (#l, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-22; #2, pgs 4-
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l, pgs
63 - 4-80; #3, pg 14; #4, pg 6)
5.7-1 - 5.7-22; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3, pg 14; #4,
Pg 6)
6 Rev. 03/28/96
0
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impac
0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact Mitigation
Incorporated
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to: 0 0 om
0 0 0 151
0 OB
0 0 0 151
0 0 0 El
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds? (#l, pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24;
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
#2, pgs 4-1 19 -4-149; #3, pgs 10-11; #4, pg 6)
(#l, pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24; #2, PgS 4-1 19 - 4-149; #3,
pgs 10-1 1; #4, pg 6)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#I, pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-
24; #2, PgS 4-119 - 4-149; #3, PgS 10-11; #4, pg
6) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? (#l, PgS 5.4-1 - 5.4-24; #2, PgS 4-119 - 4-
149; #3, pgs 10-1 1; #4, pg 6)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#I, pgs
5.4-1 - 5.4-24; #2, PgS 4-119 - 4-149; #3, pg 11;
#4, Pg 7)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 0 0 0 IE3
0 0 0 151
0 0 0 €4
(#l, PgS 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109;
#3, pg 9; #4, Pg 7)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (#l, pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5;
#2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 9; #4, pg 7)
c) 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? (#l, pgs
5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 9;
#4, Pg 7)
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)? (# 1, pgs
0 0 IXI
5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3; #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg
13; #4, Pg 7) 0 0 0 IXI
0 0 OM
0 0 0 €3
0 0 0 [XI
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#I, pgs
5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3; #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg
15; #4, Pg 7)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazards? (#I, pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3; #2,
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (#I, pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3; #2,
Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (#l, pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3; #2,
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12-13; #4, pg 7)
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12-13; #4, pg 7)
e)
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 13; #4, pg 7)
7 Rev. 03/28/96
e
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impac
e
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
0181
0 0 IXI
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l, pgs 5.94 -
7)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (# 1, pgs
5.9-1 - 5.9-15; #2, PgS 4-81 - 4-84; #3, pg 12-13;
5.9-15; #2, pgS 4-81 - 4-84; #3, pg 12-13; #4, pg
#4, Pg 7)
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? (#l, pgs 5.12.5-1 -5.12.5-6; #2,
b) Police protection? (#I, pgs 5.12.5-1 -5.12.5-6; #2,
0 0 cl €4
0 0 0 €4
0 0 El
0 0 0 IXI
0 0 0 (XI
PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7)
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12)
Schools? (#l, PgS 5.12.7-1 -5.12.7-5; #2, PgS 4-94
- 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7) C)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
(#l, pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.8-7; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109;
#3, pg 12; #4, pg 7) Other governmental services? (#l, pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg
7)
e)
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? (#l, pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5;
b) Communications systems? (#l, pgs 5.12.2-1 -
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (#l, pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7; #2, 4-94 -
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l, pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7;
0 0 [XI o 0 0 El
0 0 0 1x1
0 0 0 IXI
0 0 Ix1
cl 5 0 IXI
0 0 0 fxI
#2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 9; #4, pg 7)
5.12.8-7; #2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7
4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7)
#2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7)
e) Storm water drainage? (#l, pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3- 0 7; #2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 7)
#2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 8)
f) Solid waste disposal? (#l, pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3;
g) Local or regional water supplies? (# 1, pgs 5.12.2- 1 - 5.12.3-7; #2,4-94 - 4-109; #3, pg 12; #4, pg 8)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
0 0 0 IXI
o 0 0 IXI
a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l,
PgS 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5; #2, PgS 4-35 - 4-62; #3, pg 15;
#4, Pg 8)
#4, Pg 8)
b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#l,
PgS 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5; #2, PgS 4-35 - 4-62; #3, pg 15;
8 Rev. 03/28/96
0
Potentially Potentially Less Than No
0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Significant Significant Significant Impa
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0 Ixi c) Create light or glare? (#l, pgs 5.10.3-1 - 5.10.3-2;
#2, PgS 4-35 - 4-62; #3, pg 15; #4, pg 8)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? (#I, pgs 5.8-1 - 0 0 0 €9
0 0 €3
0 0 cl IXI
05
0 0 [x1
5.8-10; #2, pgs 4-157 - 4-167; #3, PgS 9-10; #4,
Pg 8)
Pg 8)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l, pgs 5.8-1 -
5.8-10; #2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 9-10; #4,
c) Affect historical resources? (# 1, pgs 5.8- 1 - 5.8-1 0;
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change
#2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3, PgS 9-10; #4, pg 8)
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
(#l, PgS 5.8-1 - 5.8-10; #2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3,
pgs 9- 10; MY pg 8)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l, pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10; #2,
pgs 4-157 -4-167; #3, PgS 9-10; #4, pg 8)
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
0 0 0 w
0 0 0 IXI
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l, pgs
5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7; #2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pg
15; #4, pg 8)
15; #4, pg 8)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (# 1 , pgs
5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7; #2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pg
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
0 0 0 Ix) a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife 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
0 o 0 !XI
0 0 IXI will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
9 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Referenced in the above checklist are the earlier environmental analysis that have bec
conducted for the project site. Source #1 is the Master Environmental Impact Report for ti.
City’s 1994 General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01) that reviewed the potential impacts of buildo
of the City’s General Plan, including transportation and air quality impacts. Source #2 is tl
Environmental Impact Report for the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort (EIR 83-02(A) f
CT 85-35MP 177) certified on December 8, 1987, that analyzed all of the potential impacts f
the development and occupation of the over 2,000 units residential master plan (now known
Aviara) with its associated 18 hole golf course, 550 room hotel, sports club and neighborhoc
commercial site, including development of Planning Area 18 with residential uses. Source #3
the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Aviara Phase 111 Master Plan Amendment (CT 9:
03MP 177(G)), approved January 25, 1994, which reviewed the grading and construction relatc
to the development of Phase 111, including development of Planning Area 18 with multi-fami
residential uses. Source #4 is the Mitigated Negative Declaration and MEIR Addendum for tl
Aviara Phase I11 North Land Use Proposal (MP 177(U)/GPA 97-06LCPA 97-06), approvr
January 6, 1998, that evaluated the impacts of up to 3 15 multi-family units, either apartments 4
condominiums, for Planning Area 18. Without exception, the proposed action has no addition
impacts not previously analyzed in the earlier environmental review and no additional review t
mitigation measures are necessary.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The proposal involves the construction of a 288-unit apartment complex on a pregraded pa
within Aviara Planning Area 18. The proposed development meets all applicable standards an
policies, including setbacks, building height and architectural style. No environmentall
sensitive resources exist on the previously graded site and no significant adverse impacts to th
environment are anticipated.
AIR QUALITY:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the update
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle mile
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactiv
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are th
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since th
San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considere
cumulatively significant; therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in th
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 variet-
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provision
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measure
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demanc
Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mas
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable anc
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into th
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project
located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is mark
“Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, t
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-0 1, by C
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for
quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequc
projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore,
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at t
Planning Department,
CIRCULATION:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updat
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequ;
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severr
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. The
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsb
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersectio
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, numero
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
develop alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewall
pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulati
strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate
State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City
control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation-mitigation measures have eith
been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approva
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of t
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefoi
the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because tl
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, includt
a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement (
Overriding Considerations~’ applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulatic
impacts is required.
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
11 Rev. 03/28/96
0 CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
0
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO; SDP 98- 1 OKDP 98-43 - JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 19 GENERAL PLAN: RH
ZONING: P-C - Planned Community
DEVELOPER’S NAME: JPI Westcoast Development
ADDRESS: 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150, San Diego. CA 92122
PHONE NO.: (619) 458-1200 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 215-840-011215-841-01
QUANTITY OF LAND USELDEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 288 units
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: August, 1999
A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 2,320.79
B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = 1,237.59
C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 288 EDU
D. Park: Demand in Acreage = 4.64
E. Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin = PLDA D
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
F. Circulation: Demand in ADT = 1.728
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = No. 4
H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = NIA
I. Schools: Carlsbad Unified
(Demands to be determined by staff)
J. Sewer: Demands in EDU 288
Identify Sub Basin =
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
K. Water: Demand in GPD = 63,360
L. The project is 47 units below the Growth Management dwelling unit allowance.
0 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET 0
CASE NO: SDP 98-10/CDP 98-43
CASE NAME: JPI - Aviara Planning Area 18
APPLICANT: PI Westcoast Development
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit
allow construction of a 288 unit apartment development on a pregraded site in Aviara Planni
Area 18. located at the southeast comer of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia Lane.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
according; to Map No. 13434, filed in the Office of the County Recorder on June 23, 1997, in tl
City of Carlsbad. County of San Diego, State of California.
APN: 215-840-01/215-841-01 Acres: 18.1 1 Proposed No. of LotsAJnits: 288
Lots 1 and 2 of Carlsbad Tract CT 92-3, Phase 111, Unit
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: Residential High Density (RH)
Density Allowed: 15 - 19 ddac Density Proposed: 16.0 ddac
Existing Zone: P-C Proposed Zone: P-C
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoni
Requirements)
Zoning Land Use
Site P-c Vacant multifamily
North P-C Vacant multifamily
South P-C Vacant single-family
East L-C Vacant & agriculture
West P-C Vacant single-family
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 288 EDU
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: June 1, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
0 Negative Declaration, issued
E
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Prior Environmental ComDliance, dated July 24, 1998
0 0 DRA!
4. SDP 98-1OlCDP 98-43 - JPI - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 18 - Request for a Site Deveiopmeni
development on a pregraded pad located in Aviara Planning Area 18, at the southeast corner 01 Plan and Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of a 288 unit apartmeni
MINUTES
November 4,1998 0 Page 0 PLANNING COMMISSION
Ambrosia Lane and Poinsettia Lane, in Local Facilities Management Zone 19.
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne, introduced this item and stated that Associate Planner, Micha
Grim, would present the staff report.
Project Planner, Michael Grim, presented the staff report and described the project as follows: This is
Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit to allow development, on Aviara Planning Art
18, of a 288-unit apartment complex. The project site is located at the southeast corner of Ambrosia Lar
and Poinsettia Lane. Directly north of the project area is a future multi-family development called Brend
and the future Zone 19 park. Directly west, is the site for the future Community Center for the Avia Master Plan. The lots to the west and south are part of the existing Serenata development by Breh
Communities. The area to the east remains undeveloped and some of the area is being used f
agriculture. This site was the topic of a Master Plan Amendment (Master Plan 177-U) which condenst
two planning areas into one, changed the number of allowed units to 335, and also allowed the provisic
of eitber Gondominiums or apartments by making the underlying zoning R-DM, rather than P-D whi'
requires a condominium permit. The applicant is requesting approval of an apartment complex.
Using the exhibits, Mr. Grim explained the layout of the complex and it's architecture. He pointed out tt-
there will be open parking and carports as well as enclosed garages.
Mr. Grim stated that staff has reviewed all of the landscaping, building heights, and locations, and h
determined that the circulation and landscaping are adequate. As for the neighboring agricultural arc
staff has placed a condition on the map to ensure the notification of the tenants of the apartment complc
that there are agricultural activities in the area and that they may be subject to odors or pesticides.
Mr. Grim pointed out that the architect has followed the Aviara Master Plan's architectural criteria. T
buildings (all two-story) meet the maximum building height requirement of 35 feet. All of the apartmer
below).
Commissioner Welshons asked if there is an alternative way to exit this project, rather than to have t
. occupants of this project exit onto Ambrosia Lane to get to Aviara Parkway.
Mr. Grim replied that, currently, the only way to get to Aviara Parkway is through Ambrosia Lanc
However, he continued, there are other ways to exit the Master Plan Area, one of which is Poinset
Lane. Hopefully, Poinsettia Lane will soon extend further to the west to connect with Blackrail Road a
down to Aviara Parkway.
Commissioner Welshons asked if the southerly entrance to the project is also an exit.
Mr. Grim replied that it is also an exit but that it will be gated and for the exclusive use of the residents.
Mr. Grim stated that there is an errata sheet with some minor changes and revisions, involving Conditio
No. 22, 35, 34, and 4 and that staff has reviewed this project and found it to be consistent with t
General Plan, the Local Coastal Program, the Aviara Master Plan, and all applicable zoning ordinanc
as well as the Growth Management Ordinance and the Zone 19 LFMP. With regard to environmen
reviewed the Aviara Master Plan Development as well as the Master Environmental Impact Report for t
General Plan update. Therefore, staff has issued a notice of prior compliance for Environmental Revit
and has received no comments from that notice.
Commissioner Monroy asked how this project fits with the rest of the Aviara project.
Mr. Grim replied that by going to apartments, this project has probably augmented the intent of almost a
residential or combined use Master Plan, in the City. Aviara is a fairly balanced in the mix of multi-fam
and single-family residences and this project provides another housing opportunity in Aviara.
are two-stories, vaulted ceilings, and some units have a loft (covers less than 50% of the floor ari
review, staff found this project is less dense than previously allowed by environmental documents tl
MINUTI
November 4,1998 a Page PLAN N I NG COM M ISS IO N
Commissioner Monroy asked Mr. Grim to comment as to Homeowner’s Association fees, after the projec
is finished.
Mr. Grim stated that he could not comment regarding the HOA fees but that a representative from Aviar
Chairperson Noble asked if the issues regarding HOA fees, etc., have been solved.
Mr. Grim replied that he had spoken with Diane Scott, president of the Master Home Owners Associatioi
and that she did not represent that there are any outstanding issues connected with this project.
Commissioner Savary asked if any of the units will be for sale.
Mr. Grim replied that it is unlikely that any of them will be sold as it would be necessary to condominiun
ize the entire project. He pointed out that the inclusion of both open and carport parking, as well E
garage parking, does not meet the City standard for Condominiums.
Lynn Hittle, Attorney for applicant, J. P. I. Development West, stated that they have reviewed each of tt
58 conditions of approval and find them all to be acceptable.
Heidi Mather, 8910 University Center Lane, San Diego, representing the applicant, presented a short slic show and explained the J. P. I. product as follows: J. P. I. develops, constructs, and manages apartmei
communities all across the United States. They are the largest luxury apartment developer in the natior
Since 1976, J. P. I. has constructed a total of 108 apartment communities for a total of nearly 38,OC
units. In 1997, J. P. I. started 20 apartment communities, across the nation, including two in San Diegc
There are four basic things that set J. P. I. apart from other developers; 1) quality of development; 2) 01
site amenities; 3) quality of interior development; and, 4) quality of service to tenants. J. P. I. renters ai
renters by choice, even though the rent is not cheap.
Commissioner Nielsen asked what type of leasing is done.
Ms. Mather replied that they typically do a 7 month or 13 month lease but, here is California, they ai
being asked to consider longer leases. The reason for the 7 and 13 month leases is because thc
sometimes offer concessions in which the tenant is given a month’s free rent.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if any of the apartments will be rented as furnished apartments.
Ms. Mather replied that they do not expect to furnish any of the apartments.
Commissioner Compas asked when they expect to start, if this project is approved, and when they expe it’s completion.
0
Land Associates is present and perhaps will be able to better answer Commissioner Monroy’s question.
Ms. Mather replied that they would begin immediately and they expect all of the units to be completed 1
August, 2000. However, they expect to open the Club House and have the first units occupied
September, 1999.
Commissioner Compas asked for approximate prices for the units.
Ms. Mather stated that currently, J. P. I. is expecting the rents to range from $1200 to $2100 per month.
Commissioner Nielsen asked what sizes the apartments will be.
Ms. Mather replied that there will be 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units, the smallest being approximately 6:
square feet and the largest being approximately 1,400 square feet.
Commissioner Heineman stated that, in his opinion, it would be an anomaly to refer to these apartmer
as luxury apartments, with the rents stated, when there is not a garage for every apartment. He thc
MINUTE
November 4, 1998 * Pagt PLANNING COMMISSION
asked if this is customary.
Ms. Mather replied that it is customary. She added that apartments, in general, do not have enclos
garages and have open or carport parking only.
Chairperson Noble opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak.
Larry Clemens, Hillman Properties, Aviara Land Associates, 201 1 Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, stat1
that this is the type of project they have been looking for to fulfill the Aviara Master Plan. He further stat
that they are very pleased with the entire proposed project and that they feel that J. P. I. is the very bc
apartment builder and the very best for the project.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Clemens for his assessment of the resolution of the Aviara Mas
Association problem.
Mr. Clemens replied that the problem is under mediation and many of the problems that have bet
brought forth have been resolved as a result of the mediation.
Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Noble closed the Public Testimony.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Heineman, and duly seconded, to adopt Plannii
Commission Resolutions No. 441 5 and 441 6, recommending approval of SI
Development Plan SDP 98-1 0 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 98-4
based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, includir
the errata sheet as introduced by Mr. Grim.
VOTE: 7-0
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Noble, Heineman, Savary, Monroy, Welshons, Compas, and Nielsen
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS:
None
PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS :
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne, stated that there will be no meeting on November 1 8, 1998.
MINUTES
I 0 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
I
I
I
I
1
I
STEZPHE?NSONWORLEYGARRA~SCHW~ZHEIDH,&~
A LIMIlED LIABILITY PARR.~LSHE
TELEPHC LAWYERS
401 “B STREET, SUITE 2400 (619) 696-3‘
TIMOTHY K GARFIELD
GREWRY C M GARRATT LY~L HEIDEL SANDEGO, CALIFORNIA 921014200
MICHAELW PRAIRIE FACSIM
AMY ROSEN OF COUNSEL (619) 696-31
WILLIAM J SCHWARTZ, JR
GARY J STEPHENSON KEmH FOSTER E-M
DONALD R WORLEY
EUUNEL Cm
JE~WIFER TREESE WILSON SDLAW@SWGSHP c
WRITER’S EXT
December 1, 1998 I VIA COURIERMESSENGER
Mayor Bud Lewis and Members of the
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
City Council
Re: JPI Aviara Planning Area 18 - Site Development Permit No. 98-10 and
Coastal Development Permit No. 98-43
Agenda of December 8, 1998
Dear Mayor Lewis and Members of the City Council:
We represent JPI Westcoast Development, Inc. (“PI”), owners of the property located
the southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane and Ambrosia Lane in the Aviara Master Plan (“Masrc
Plan”). (See Tab
Development Plan.) PI applied for a Site Development Permit (“SDB”) and a Coast
Development Permit (“CDP”) to construct 288 apartment units with recreation facilities, whic
is consistent with the Master Plan and the underlying zone. On November 4, 1998, the Plannir
Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project. We request that y3
review and approve the project as recommended.
The property is identified in the Master Plan as Planning Area 18.
In January 1998, the City Council approved an Amendment to the Master Plan and LO(;;
Coastal Program to revise planning area boundaries, development standards, and densil
allotments for the multi-family Planning Areas 18, 19 and 20. One of the amendments combine
Planning Areas 18 and 20 into one planning area, now identified as Planning Area 18. TI
amendments also provided for an improved balance of housing within the Aviara community k
allowing development of apartment units within Planning Area 18. The amendments were late
approved by the California Coastal Commission. The project proposed by PI would implemc:~
the Master Plan and Local Coastal Program Amendments approved earlier this year.
I 0 0
I
I
I
R
I
I
8
1
I
I
I
1
i
I
STEPHENSON WORLEY GARRATT SCHWARTZ HEIDEL & PRAIRIE, LLP
Mayor Lewis and Members of the City Council
December 1, 1998 i Page 2
I.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PI is a development company that specializes in building luxury apartment communitic
throughout the country. Behind Tab 2 is an introductory brochure about PI that illustrates th
types of communities the company builds. The proposed project is consistent with the quality c 1 PI’S other projects.
The 18.3 gross acre site was previously graded in accordance with the Aviara Phase I1
Final Map. Although all necessary public facilities have been constructed for the site, tb
property is vacant. The one-, two-, and three-bedroom units will be located in 16 two-st01
buildings designed in a Mediterranean style that is consistent with the Master Plan. Low-pitch(
tile roof forms emphasize individual units rather than buildings. Window and door details a
enhanced by subtle color changes, while building features such as iron grillwork, custo
lighting, and site hardscape present a unified Mediterranean style. (See Tab 3, Apartme I Building Elevations.)
The buildings are clustered around cul-de-sacs, surrounded by lush landscape a1
connected with enhanced walkways. Approximately 277,000 square-feet of open space ar
recreation areas are provided, including a clubhouse, pool, and spa. All of PI’S communitir
have unique recreation facilities that create a focal point for the development. The recreatic
facilities for this project include a clubhouse with a full kitchen, game room, small movie theatc
exercise facility, and a conference/entertaining center. (See Tab 4, Clubhouse Buildii
Elevation.) The clubhouse is adjacent to a resort style pool and spa area that includes commi I barbecue facilities.
The apartment units access the clubhouse via paved pathways that wind though the s
and separate the pedestrians from the vehicular traffic. Vehicular circulation is provided by
main drive that connects to four cul-de-sacs. Five hundred and eighty-one parking spaces will
provided on site in garages, carports, and surface spaces. Some of the garages will have dirt
interior access to units.
The surrounding properties include single-family homes, a vacant church and day c;
site, a vacant site designated for multi-family use, and the Master Plan boundary. The .
project has been designed to complement these existing and proposed uses while helping
create a more diverse mix of housing in the community.
1 e 0
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
B
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
STEPHENSON WORLEY GARRATT SCHWARTZ HEIDEL & PRAIRIE, LLP
December 1, 1998
Mayor Lewis and Members of the City Council I Page 3
11.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL APPLICABLE
LAND USE DOCUMENTS AND ZONING REGULATIONS
General Plan
The subject property is designated in the General Plan for Residential - High Densii
(“RH”) uses. The RH designation allows a density of 15 to 23 dwelling units per acre, with
Growth Management Control Point of 19 dwelling units per acre. The project achieves a dens;.
of 18 dwelling units per developable acre, which is consistent with the designated density rani
and below the Growth Management Control Point, as identified in the Land Use Element of tl
General Plan. The General Plan also contains specific policies and programs relative .
circulation, noise, housing, public safety, and open space and conservation. I
The Circulation, Noise, Housing, Public Safety, and Open Space and Conservatic
Elements provide policies and goals for new development. The proposed project is consiste
with the applicable policies and goals of each element, as indicated in the General P1i
Consistency Chart behind Tab 5.
Local Coastal Program
The project site is identified in the Mello I segment of the Coastal Zone. The Master PIi
contains the land use policies for properties in the Mello I segment that are also located in tl
and environmentally sensitive resources, and preventing geologic instability and erosion. TI
proposed project complies with the land use policies, as indicated in the Local Coastal Progri
Consistency Chart behind Tab 6.
Master Plan
Master Plan area. The policies include preserving scenic resources, shoreline access, agricultur
As stated previously, the project site is located in Planning Area 18 of the Master Pli
Although the site is zoned P-C (Planned Community), there are no development standards in tl
zone. Development standards are addressed in the Master Plan, which identifies this site
being subject to the RD-M (Residential Density Multiple) Zone. The Master Plan provides s
development standards relative to height, setbacks, and parking.
The proposed project is consistent with all of the development standards of the Mas
Plan and the RD-M zone. The Master Plan restricts height to 35 feet and does not permit mc
I a e
R
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
STEPHENSON WORLEY GARRATT SCHWARTZ HEIDEL & PPZAIRIE, LLP
Mayor Lewis and Members of the City Council
December 1, 1998 1 Page 4
than 50 percent of the proposed buildings to exceed two-stories. The project proposes 1
apartment buildings and one clubhouse building. All of the buildings have two-stories, and all (
the buildings are below 35 feet in height. The Master Plan requires all structures to be setback i
least 50 feet from the easterly Planning Area boundary and 30 feet &om the public utdh
easement. In addition, all buildings are required to be separated by at least 20 feet. Th
proposed buildings are located 30 feet from the SDG&E easement and 50 feet from the Plannin
Area boundary and are a minimum of 20 feet apart. The Master Plan refers to Municipal Cod
Chapter 21.44, Parking, for parking standards. The project provides 581 parking spaces i
required. I Planned Community Zone
As stated in the previous section, the underlying zone is P-C which does not contain a1
development standards. TI
Master Plan has specific zone requirements which apply to the subject property. The proje
complies with those requirements, therefore, the project compiies with the intent ofthe P-C zon
V.
CONCLUSION
This zone was intended to be implemented by a master plan.
In summary, the project is consistent with the General Plan, the Local Coasl
Program, the Master Plan, and the findings to approve a Site Development Permit and Coasl
Development Permit can be made. The project has received support from the City staff and
recommendation of approval fkom the Planning Commission; therefore, we respecthlly reque
that you accept the staff and Planning Commission recommendations and approve the project I proposed.
Very truly your , i I *+$LK& I Lynne L. Meidel
I
D
1
I
I 0 0
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I JPI INTRODUCTORY BROCHURE
I .1LII L‘lll‘ p”p’”Lu’J I”0”LUl.I “ULU
and thorough market knowledge, JPI
has been successful in identifying ‘niche’
markets that provide prime investment
opportunities.”
Dave Henry G.E. Capital Corporation Jefferson at Cheyenne Mountain
Colorado
Jefferson on the Plaza
Houston, Texas Dallas, Texas
Jefferson Common5 communities are truly a new concept
in 5tudent housing JPI designs and develops these
apartment communities to meet the increasing demands
of students by combining the benefits of on campus
living with off campus housing
Convenience, location and service set the5e
apartments uniquely apart from any other student
communities in the nation These I, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom
apartments are fully turnished and leased to each student
on a per bedroom basis with parental guarantees University of Texas - Auutin, TexaF
(Phase I & 11)
Jefferson Commons at Fort Collins
Fort Collin5 Colorado
Jefferson Commons
PI@ 600 East Las Colinas Boulevard, Suite 1800 Irving, Texas 75039 972-556-170(
JPI has provided varied real atate services for the properties dirpluyed in marketing materials