Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-07-06; City Council; 15298; Carnation Property ZC 98-11/LCPA 98-08- -. I 13 CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEhDA BILL MTG. CITY ATTY. '% ZC 98-11/LCPA 98-08 AB# ISAq8 DEPT. HD. TITLE: CARNATION PROPERTY DEPT. PLN & CITY MGR RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. NS- L( 9 9 , APPROVING Zone Change ZC 98-1 1 and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 98-08, and ADOPT Resolution No. w!/q APPROVING a Mitigated Negative Declaration, ZC 98-1 1 and LCPA 98-08. ITEM EXPLANATION: The project is a Zone Change from Limited Control (LC) to One Family Residential with a "Q" overlay (R-I-Q), and the subdivision of a 10 acre parcel into 32 single family lots.' The R-1-Q designation is consistent with the site's Residential Low Medium General Plan designation which allows up to four residential units per acre. The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposal on May 5, 1999. No members of the public spoke in opposition to the project. Two letters were submitted by adjacent property owners with requests to be considered. More detailed information regarding the Planning Commission's discussion of the project is provided in the attached Planning Commission staff report and the May 5, 1999, Planning Commission minutes. The requests were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission by a 7-0 vote. FISCAL IMPACT All private development costs will be borne by the developer. Approval of the proposal will not include any City fiscal obligation. ENVIRONMENTAL: The project is located within the Zone 20 Specific Plan. An Environmental Impact Report was found in the Zone 20 Specific Plan EIR as well as a current biological communities survey for the prepared during the review and adoption of that specific plan. This project relied on the information issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The subsequent biological communities survey determined that there are no significant onsite biological resources. However, since the site was previously used for agricultural production, the Mitigated Negative Declaration requires an onsite hazardous materials analysis prior to the issuance of a grading and/or building permit. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Ordinance No. N S- Y98 2. City Council Resolution No. 99- Lqy 4. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4531, 4532 and 4533 3. Location Map 5. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 5, 1999 6. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 5, 1999. I I 1( 1’ 1: 1: lr If 1t 1; 1E IS 2c 21 22 23 24 25 26 2: 21 A ZONE CH ORDINANCE NO. NS-498 ANGE AND LOCAL COAST AL PROGRAM AMENDMENT CHANGING THE PROPERTY’S ZONING FROM LIMITED CONTROL LC TO ONE FAMILY RESIDEN- TIAL R-I-Q ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD AND NORTH OF AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20. CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY CASE NO.: ZC 98-1 IILCPA 98-08 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That the zoning map is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit ZC 98-1 1 attached hereto. SECTION 2: When effective, this ordinance will also constitute an amendment to the Local Coastal Program Land Use Map as shown on Exhibit ZC 98-111LCPA 98-08 attached hereto. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be efective within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the California Coastal Commission.) INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council on the - day of 1999, and thereafter. Ill1 1/11 /Ill 1111 1/11 Ill/ a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1: 11 15 2( 21 2; 2: 21 2: 2t 2; 2f - - PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the - day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor ATTEST: ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk (SEAL) -2- 3 - EXHIBIT ZC 98-ll/LCPA 98-08 EXISTING L-C PROPOSED R-I CARNATION PROPERTY ZC 98-1 I/LCPA 98-08 1 2 ? 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 RESOLUTION NO. 99-244 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY CASE NO.: ZC 98-1 IlLCPA 98-08 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ZC 98-1 I/LCPA 98-08 follows: WHEREAS, on May 5, 1999, the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration relating to Zone Change (ZC 98-1 1) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 98-08). At the conclusion of the hearing the Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 4531 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 6 th day of July , 1999, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendations and to hear all persons interested in or opposed to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change (ZC 98-1 1) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 98-08) relating to the Carnation Property project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the City Council adopts and incorporates the findings of Planning Carnation Property Zone Change (ZC 98-1 1) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA Commission Resolution No. 4531 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 98-08). 3. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City Council's independent Judgement. 4. That Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6(d), all the materials that constitute the administrative record in this proceeding are in the custody of and can be found in the offices of the City Clerk and the Director of Planning in the City of Carlsbad. The administrative record includes, but is not limited to: the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all public comments thereon received during the public review period and responses thereto, and the proceedings of the Planning Commission and the City Council thereon. r Y .- 1 2 2 4 5 6 7 e 5 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Carlsb PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of lad on the day of July 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Finnila, Hall & Kulchin NOES: None ATTEST: 2” ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, city c~ern (SEAL) -2- 6 EXHIBIT 3 CARNATION PROPERTY ZC 98-1 I/LCPA 98-08 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 EXHIBIT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4531 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TO SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY INTO 32 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD AND NORTH OF AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20. CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY CASE NO.: ZC 98-1 l/LCPA 98-081CT 98-181CDP 98- 85/HDP 98-20 WHEREAS, Spectrum Communities, L.L.C., “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carnation Properties, “Owner”, described as The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 12 south, range 4 west, San Bernardino Base and meridian, in the City of Carlshad, County of San Diego, State of California. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, a CEQA document was prepared in conjunction with said project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of May, 1999, 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 testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 8 11 1 1: 1: 1, 1: 1( 1’ It l! 2( 2: 2: 2: 2r 2! 26 27 28 That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, according to Exhibit “ND” dated March 12,1999, and “PII” dated March 8,1999, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 1. 2. 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and considerec the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the environmental impacts therein identified for thi, project and said comments thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reportin! Program, on file in the Panning Department, prior to APPROVING the project. Base( on the EM Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that there is nc substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment an( hereby APPROVES the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring an( Reporting Program. The Planning does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigatior Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in accordance with requirement! of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmenta Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects tht independent judgement of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad. 1. The project is subject to the mitigation measures listed in the Environmental Impacl Assessment Part I1 for the Carnation Property project dated March 8,1999, and tht developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of the project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. ... ... ... ... ... . .. ... PC RES0 NO. 4531 -2- 1 ? 1 'I - 4 < - t 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of May 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L'Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: n CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4531 -3- - City of Carlsbad ATED DECLARATION Project AddressLocation: West of Black Rail Court south of Poinsettia Lane. Project Description: Subdivision of 32 single family residential lots on 10 acres. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Department at (760) 438-1 161, extension 4448. DATED: CASE NO: CASE NAME: PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 12,1999 CT 98-18KDP 98-85/HDP 98-20LCPA 98-08/ZC 98-1 1 CARNATION PROPERTY /1 /I A MARCH 12,1999 2075 La Palmas Dr. Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 @ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: CT 98-181CDP 98-85MDP 98-20lLCPA 98-0817.C 98-1 1 DATE: Februarv 23.1999 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Carnation Prouertv 2. APPLICANT: Spe ctnun lhnmmks L.L.C. 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 15375 Bamacleav. Suite B-211 .. m. California 92618 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 11. 1998 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION -1 lots on 10 acres SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Land Use and Planning TransportatiodCirculation 0 Public Services 0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems 0 Geological Problems 0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics 0 Water Hazards 0 Cultural Resources Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 /a DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. Date 2 13 Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fiom “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. 3 13 Rev. 03/28/96 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incolporated” may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. 0 An EIR be prepared if ‘Totentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR, (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part I1 analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under ~. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. 4 /d Rev. 03/28/96 . Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (EIR 90-03) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (EIR 90-03) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (EIR 90-03) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (EIR 90-03) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an minority community)? (EIR 90-03) established community (including a low-income or 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (EIR 90-03) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (EIR 90-03) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (EIR 90-03) 111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result a) Fault rupture? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary in or expose people to potential impacts involving: geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc b) Seismic ground shaking? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary dated December 1998) geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary geotechnical report d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (EIR 90-03) prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) e) Landslides or mudflows? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) r) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fdl? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary geotechnical report prepared by g) Subsidence of the land? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) h) Expansive soils? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Impact Mitigation Unless Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Significant Impact Less Than No Impact 0 [XI 0 IXI 0 [XI 0 IXI IXI 0 [XI 0 [XI 0 [XI 0 E! 0 E! 0 [XI 0 [XI 0 [XI 0 IXI 5 Rev. 03/28/96 /6 - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). i) Unique geologic or physical features? (EIR 90-03, Preliminary geotechnical report prepared by GeoSoils, Inc dated December 1998) IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface moft? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and b) Exposure of people or properly to water related Associates dated December 1998) hazards such as flooding? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any by Hunsaker and Associates dated December water body? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through through substantial loss of groundwater recharge interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or capability? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by Hunsaker and i) Substantial reduction in the amount of Associates dated December 1998) groundwater otherwise available for public water Hunsaker and Associates dated December 1998) supplies? (EIR 90-03, hydrology study prepared by 1998) V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01 ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (EIR 90- 03, MEIR 93-01) Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [XI 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Impact No [XI [XI IXI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI 0 [XI 6 Rev. 03/28/96 I7 - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01) d) Create objectionable odors? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93- 01) 0 0 VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCUL.ATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (EIR 90-03, MER 93- 01) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (EIR 90-03, MER 93-01) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (EIR 90-03, MEIR 93-01) g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (EIR 90- 03, MEIR 93-01) IXI 0 0 0 0 0 0 VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (EIR 90-03, Dudek and Associates dated December 1999) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (EIR 90-03, Dudek and Associates dated December 1999) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (EIR 90-03, Dudek and Associates dated December 1999) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? (EIR 90-03, Dudek and Associates dated December 1999) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (EIR 90- 03, Dudek and Associates dated December 1999) 0 0 0 0 0 VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and (EIR 90-03) 0 0 , inefficient manner? (EIR 90-03) Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Impact Incorporated Mitigation Unless Impact 0 0 IXI 0 0 0 0 0 0 IXI 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 El 0 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 Ixl 0 0' IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 IXI 0 0 €3 7 /8 Rev. 03/28/96 - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Potentially Significant Impact 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? (EIR 90- 03) 0 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)? (EIR 90-03) b) Possible interference with an emergency response c) The creation of any health hazard or potential plan or emergency evacuation plan? (EIR 90-03) health hazards? (EIR 90-03) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (EIR 90-03) e) Increase fue hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? (EIR 90-03) 0 0 0 0 0 X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (EIR 90-03) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (EIR o 0 90-03) 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? (EIR 90-03) b) Police protection? (EIR 90-03) c) Schools? (EIR 90-03) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other govemmental services? (EIR 90-03) (EIR 90-03) 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? (EIR 90-03) b) Communications systems? (EIR 90-03) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution d) Sewer or septic tanks? (EIR 90-03) e) Storm water drainage? (EIR 90-03) t) Solid waste disposal? (EIR 90-03) g) Local or regional water supplies? (EIR 90-03) facilities? (EIR 90-03) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Significant Significant Impact Potentially Less Than No Incorporated Mitigation Unless Impact 0 0 0 0 [XI 0 0 [XI 0 0 IXI 0 0 El 0 0 [XI 0 0 [XI 0 0 [XI 0 0 [XI 0 0 [XI 0 0 IXI 0 0 [XI 0 0 IXI 0 0 [XI 0 8 Rev. 03/28/96 I Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). XIII. XIV. xv. XVI. XVII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (EIR b) Have a demonstrated negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? (EIR 90-03) 90-03) (EIR 90-03) CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal a) Disturb paleontological resources? (EIR 90-03) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (EIR 90-03) c) Affect historical resources? (EIR 90-03) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (EIR 90-03) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (EIR 90-03) RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (EIR parks or other recreational facilities? (EIR 90-03) 90-03) MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fBh or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to elite 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 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually periods of California history or prehistory? limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? EARLIER ANALYSES. Potentially Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Impact No El El E! El El IXI El [XI ISI El 0 0 El [XI 0 0 0 0 0 [XI The Certified EIR 90-03 for Zone 20 was used as a reference in the analysis of this project. A copy can be found on file with the Carlsbad Planning Department. 9 Rev. 03/28/96 JO USSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AIR OUALITY: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin“, any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the Planning Department. CIRCULATION: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or 10 Rev. 03/28/96 dl Sate Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is required. HAZARDS: There are potential environmental issues regarding the property. These issues include the potential for restricted agricultural chemical residues to be encountered within the near-surface soils onsite from the use of the property for floriculture. It is likely that significantly high residue concentrations would not be detected onsite unless agncultural chemicals were stored onsite or were accidentally spilled, improperly applied, or illegally disposed of onsite. Although a majority of currently banned pesticides have not been used for at least 20 years, there remains a potential for historical fanning operations to have utilized currently restricted agricultural chemicals onsite. This application may have resulted in some chemical residue contamination of the subject property. Under normal conditions, most pesticidesherbicides currently used in California degrade, and are not overly persistent in nature. There are, however, certain restricted agricultural chemicals that were commonly used over 20 years ago throughout California that are known to be a persistent substance in nature. The overall potential for significant agricultural hazardous materials/waste and/or petroleum contamination onsite is low to moderate; however, the uncertainty of potential environmental concerns cannot be eliminated and mitigation measures are listed as follows: 1. A detailed agricultural chemical residue survey with recommended remediation shall be completed and comments received from the County of San Diego Environmental Health Services prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 2. All trash and debris within the property shall be disposed of offsite, in accordance with current local, state and federal disposal regulations. Any buried traslddebris encountered during grading of the site shall be evaluated by an experienced environmental consultant and shall be treated per the consultant’s recommendation prior to removal of the material. 3. An asbestos survey of the onsite buildings shall be performed and any applicable remediation completed prior to their demolition. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 a2 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. .. 12 Rev. 03/28/96 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COM- RESOLUTION NO. 4532 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LIMITED CONTROL TO ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD AND NORTH OF AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20. CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY CASE NO: ZC 98-1 1 WHEREAS, Spectrum Communities, L.L.C., “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carnation Properties, “Owner”, described as The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 12 south, range 4 west, San Bernardino Base and meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request to change the zoning from Limited Control to One Family Residential; and WHEREAS, the amendment to the Zoning map is set forth in the draft City Council Ordinance, Exhibit “X”, dated May 5, 1999, attached hereto, CARNATION PROPERTIES ZC 98-11, as provided by Chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of May, 1999, 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 testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Zone Change; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: 23- 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 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission WCOMMENDS mROVGL of CARNATION PROPERTY ZC 98-11, based on the following findings: m: 1. That the proposed Zone Change fiom Limited Control to One Family Residential is consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the General Plan, in that the General Plan designates the property as suitable for single family residential development in the Land Use Element. 2. That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan and Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad General Plan Land Use Element, in that the General Plan designates the property as suitable for single family residential development in the Land Use Element. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 5th day of May 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L'Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , COURTNEY E Chaimerson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4532 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 E s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 It li 1E 1s 2c 21 22 22 24 2: 26 2; 2E PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4533 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO BRING THE DESIGNATIONS ON THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, GENERAL PLAN, AND ZONING MAP INTO CONFORMANCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD AND NORTH OF AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES ZONE 20. CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY CASE NO: LCPA 98-08 WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program, General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and WHEREAS, Spectrum Communities, L.L.C., “Developer”, has filed a verified application for an amendment to the Local Coastal Program designations regarding property owned by Carnation Properties, “Owner”, described as: The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 12 south, range 4 west, San Bernardino Base and meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “LCPA 98-08” dated May 5, 1999 attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 4532, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of May 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 27 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 ... PC RES0 NO. 4533 -2- WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment. WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on March 25, 1999, and ending on May 6,1999, staff shall present to the Planning Commission a summary of the comments received. C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARNATION PROPERTY LCPA 98-08 based on the following findings: Findings: 1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all applicable policies of the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, in that the proposed amendment is a change of zoning which will not conflict with the policies of the Coastal Program. 2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program is required to establish consistency between zoning and the General Plan. Condition: 1. Approval of LCPA 98-08 is granted subject to the approval of ZC 98-1 1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 5th day of May 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: n 1 COURTNEY E. H-, Chairperson CATUSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4533 -3- - - EXHIBIT 5 The City of CARLSBAD Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: May 5,1999 Project Planner: Christer Wesunan Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: P 98-20 CARNATIOW PROP- - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; a Zone Change and Local Coastal Program Amendment to designate the property for single family residential development; and approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development Permit and Hillside Development Permit, for the subdivision of the property for 32 single family residential lots on 10.05 acres in Local Facilities Management Zone 20. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4532, 4533 RECOMMENDING APPROVa of Zone Change ZC 98-11 and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 98-08 and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4531,4534,4535, 4536 APPROVING a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Tract Map, CT 98-18, Coastal Development Permit, CDP 98-85 and Hillside Development Permit, HDP 98-20 based on the findings and subject to the conditions found therein. 11. INTRODUCTION The project is a request to subdivide 10.05 acres into 32 single family residential lots. The site has a gentle level slope from east to west and has until recently been used for growing flowers. Currently there are several green houses onsite which will be removed. The project has been reviewed for environmental impacts and no unmitigable significant impacts were found. The subdivision complies with the requirements of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and is consistent with the General Plan and Local Coastal Program. No significant issues were identified. Staff recommends that the requests be approved. 111. GROUND Development of the site requires a change of zone from Limited Control to One Family Residential, approval of a tract map, Coastal Development Permit and Hillside Development Permit. No residential structures are being proposed at this time. The zone change includes a “Q’ overlay, therefore a subsequent review of architecture and site planning will be ZC 9s-1 IiLCPA 98-08k I 9&18/CDP 98-85MDP 9s-20 - CAR~ATION PROPERTI May 5, 1999 accomplished through a Site Development Plan. The site is currently zoned Limited Control (LC) with a General Plan designation of Residential Low Medium (RLM). zQusblw The intent and purpose of the Limited-Control (L-C) zone is to provide an interim zone for areas where planning for future land uses has not been completed or plans of development have not been formalized. After proper planning or plan approval has been completed, property zoned L- C may be rezoned in accord with Title 21. The adjacent areas have begun to develop according to the Zone 20 Specific Plan and thus it is appropriate to rezone the property at this time in conjunction with a development proposal. In this case, the proposal is for single family residential development within a Residential Low- Medium (RLM) General Plan designated area. The zone change request is for R-1-Q which is consistent with and implements the RLM General Plan land use designation. The Zone 20 Specific Plan states that the property shall be designated as R-1 when development is proposed. Local Coastal Pro~ramAmmhm The Local Coastal Program zoning designations are required to be consistent with the City’s zoning designations. Therefore, the request is to amend the Coastal Program Zoning Map to designate the property R-I-Q. Consistent with the City’s General Plan, the Coastal Program also identifies this site as Residential Low-Medium. d Tract A major subdivision (the subdivision of five or more lots) is required per Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Chapter 20.12 identifies the procedure for processing a major subdivisions and includes the required findings for approval of same. Chapter 20.16 identifies the requirements that must be met in the design of the subdivision. The proper procedure was followed regarding the submittal of the application for the requested subdivision including the provision of all of the required information on the map. The proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdivision as conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan, any applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in that the subdivision is proposed in an area designated for residential development which is not exposed to hazardous land uses. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since surrounding properties are designated for residential development on the General Plan. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the density proposed. ZC 98-1 l/LCPA 98-08iL r 98-18ICDP 98-85iHDP 98-10 - CARNATION PROPERTI‘ May 5. 1999 The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements required of the project will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment. or acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, in that dedications for Black Rail Road have been included as conditions of approval and the project does not otherwise propose building encroachment into any easement. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that the geographical disposition of the project site will allow for the design of structures to implement passive heating and cooling systems. The project is subject to the provisions of the Carlsbad Inclusionary Housing Ordinance which requires that 15% of the total residential units proposed be made affordable to lower income households. Consistent with the Zone 20 Specific Plan, the applicant has requested permission to satisfy their inclusionary housing need through the purchase of off-site credits in Villa Loma. Approval of such a request is required to be made through approval of an Affordable Housing Agreement. The Housing Policy Team has reviewed the request, and determined that Affordable Housing Credits are available in Villa Loma, and endorsed the proposal. The proposed lot sizes conform to the requirements of Chapter 20.16 which is a minimum of 7,500 square feet. Lots range in size from 7,534 to 17,405. All lots have access to a publicly dedicated street and conform to the dimension criteria established in Chapter 20.16 and Section 21.10.080 which requires a minimum of 60 feet in width. Typical lot frontage falls between 65 and 75 feet. The proposed lot sizes can potentially accommodate individual onsite storage of recreational vehicles. The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires that a minimum of 25% of the lots provide space for such storage. The 25% lot identification will occur with the subsequent review of a site Development Plan for the subdivision as required by the “Q zoning overlay. a1 Deve- The 10.05 acre Carlsbad Tract and associated development permits are- located within the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program. The development is also subject to the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone. The intent of the overlay zone is to supplement the underlying zoning by providing additional resource protective regulations within designated areas to preserve, protect and enhance the habitat resource values of Buena Vista Lagoon, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, Batiquitos Lagoon, and steep sloping hillsides; to provide regulations in areas which provide the best wildlife habitat characteristics; to encourage proper lagoon management; and to deter soil erosion by maintaining the vegetative cover on steep slopes. Development within the Coastal Zone requires the issuance of a Coastal Development Permit consistent with the Local Coastal Program, the underlying zoning and applicable overlay zones. The following table illustrates the applicable land use designations under the Local Coastal Program (LCP) if approved: ZC 98-1 l/LCPA 98-O~/L r 98-18ICDP 98-85/HDP 98-20 - CARnATION PROPERTI. May 5.1999 Discussion regarding the project’s compliance with the City’s Zoning is found in a previous section of this staff report. Discussion of the project’s compliance with the applicable LCP overlay zone follows: 1 Resource Protection Overlav Zsm The overlay zone identifies five areas of protection. They are 1) steep slopes and vegetation; 2) drainage, erosion, sedimentation, habitat; 3) landslides and slope instability; 4) seismic hazards: and 5) floodplain development. 1. The overlay policy states that up to 10% of the total slopes greater than 25% possessing endangered planthima1 species andor coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities may be disturbed plus steep slope areas that are required to access flatter developable areas. The site does not contain slopes greater than 25% with significant species. The project proposes disturbance of .013 acres of slopes greater than 25%. but this area does not contain significant species. Implementation of the project will not impact this segment of the overlay zone. 2. Special erosion control measures must be included as conditions of approval. These “special” measures are standard measures required by the City’s Grading Ordinance and are included as conditions of approval. 3. The geotechnical investigation prepared by Geosoils, Inc. did not indicate that there are soils onsite of the La Jolla group which are susceptible to accelerated erosion. Therefore, additional reports are not required. 4. Because of the soil types and topography, the site is not prone to liquefaction and therefore site-specific investigations are not required. 5. No part of the site is within the 100 year floodplain. The site is subject to a Coastal winter grading prohibition. Grading shall be prohibited during the rainy season, from October 1 to April 1 of each year. All graded areas must also be landscaped for erosion control prior to October 1 of each year. al Overlav a Conversion of the site from agricultural production to urban uses is allowed per the Coastal Program, however, mitigation is required as specified in Policy 2-1 of the Mello I1 segment of 33 .. ZC 9s-1 l/LCPA 9s-081~ I YS-lSICDP 98-85mDP 9s-20 - CAFhAI'ION PROPERTI. May 5, 1999 aoe - the Coastal Program. An Agricultural Conversion Mitigation Fee will be applied as a condition of approval. The proposed project is in compliance with the requirements of the Local Coastal Program. s~de Deve- Chapter 21.95 requires that a Hillside Development Permit accompany any development proposal which involves slopes of greater than 15 percent and an elevation differential greater than 15 feet in height. A Hillside Development Permit may only be approved if the six hillside findings can be made. The first hvo findings require that hillside and undevelopable areas have been properly identified. The proper identification of these circumstances are provided through the project submittal in the form of a hillside conditions exhibit and a constraints exhibit. Both exhibits were provided as required. Approximately 0.02 acres are comprised of slopes greater than 15 percent, however there is a slope differential of nearly 56 feet in height. The third criterion is that the development must be consistent with the purpose, intent and requirements of the Hillside Ordinance. The stated purpose and intent of the ordinance includes the avoidance of substantial damage or alteration of significant natural resource areas; preservation of the natural appearance of hillsides; consistency with the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan; prevention of erosion and protection of the lagoons from excessive siltation; and assurance that development is compatible with existing topography. Generally, the project site does not have any significant natural hillside resources. The proposed grading includes terraced pads which follow the site's natural slope progression from the low point at the south west to the high point at the north east. The project site is not located within a General Plan designated significant open space area and will therefore not have any impact on open space. Erosion control is a standard hnction of the grading permit process and compliance will be assured through conditions of approval. The project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Hillside Ordinance. Criterion number four requires that no development or grading will occur in those portions of the property which are undevelopable pursuant to the provisions of Section 21.53.230. The undevelopable lands include beaches, permanent bodies of water, floodways, slopes greater than 40%, significant wetlands, riparian or woodland habitats, land subject to major power line easements, land upon which other significant environmental features are located, and railroad track beds. The project site does not include any constrained undevelopable lands. The fifth and sixth criteria relate to the project's design. The project must be designed to minimize disturbance to hillside lands and substantially conform to the intent of the concepts illustrated in the hillside design guidelines manual. 34 ZC 98-1 IiLCPA 98-08/C 98-181CDP 98-85/HDP 98-20 - CARhQION PROPERTJ May 5, 1999 The majority of the project is proposed in areas that have been previously disturbed b! authorized grading. The proposed development substantially follows the slope of the site. therefore, all of the hillside findings can be made. The project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 20 in the City’s southwest quadrant and is subject to the conditions of the Zone 20 LFMP. The 32 units proposed are at the Growth Management control point allowance of 32 units for the 10.05 acre site. V. WIRONMENTBLBEVIEW The project is located within the Zone 20 Specific Plan which was reviewed for significant environmental impacts and published in the Zone 20 Environmental Impact Report. In addition, a subsequent biological communities survey was conducted onsite which determined that there would be no significant biological effects caused by the development of the site since there are no onsite significant resources. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning Director addressing the Zone 20 EIR requirement for an onsite hazardous materials analysis survey prior to the issuance of grading and/or building permits. The City has received its annual Growth Management Traffic Monitoring Report. The Report has recorded an unanticipated intersection “level of service” (LOS) failure at Palomar Airport Road (PAR) and El Camino Real (ECR) during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. This potentially creates a changed circumstance negating reliance on previous environmental documentation. Pursuant to $15162 of the CEQA Guidelines a lead agency must prepare a “Subsequent” environmental documentation if substantial evidence (ix., the recorded intersection failure) determines that a changed circumstance exists. However, case law has interpreted this section of the CEQA Guidelines to not require the preparation of a “Subsequent EIR’ if mitigation measures are adopted which reduce the identified impacts to a level of insignificance. A mitigation measure has been identified which, if implemented, will bring the peak hours LOS into the acceptable range. The mitigation measure involves construction of two dual right turn lanes-northbound to eastbound and westbound to northbound. This project has been conditioned to pay its fair share of the intersection “short-term improvements” thereby, guaranteeing mitigation to a level of insignificance 35- ZC 98-1 ILCPA 98-081~ 1 Y8-18ICDP 98-85lHDP 98-20 - CARDAIION PROPERTI‘ May 5, 1999 Paee 7 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 453 1(Mit Neg Dec) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4532(ZC) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4533(LCPA) 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4534(CT) 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4535(CDP) 6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4536(HDP) 7. Location Map 8. Background Data Sheet 9. Local Facilities Impact Analysis 10. Disclosure Statement 1 1. Exhibits “A” - “H dated April 1999 CWeh CASE NO: ZC 98-1 1/LCPA 98-08iCT 98-18ICDP 98-85NDP 98-20 CASE NAME: CARNATION EBaEERTY APPLICANT: -L.C. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Approval of a 37 lot slnglev subdlwon west of Black .. . .. Rail Road j V' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: rter of ty of the southwest r of Sectlon 27 Townsh 4 West. Base aubmda& fie Cltv of C APN: .. " Acres: 10.05 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 31 - - Land Use Designation: Low-Medium Density Allowed: 0-4 Density Proposed 0-4 Existing Zone: hn&d-Control Proposed Zone: -1 Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) .. ZQlUu Site L-C North L-C South L-C Est L-C West P-C Floriculture Floriculture Floriculture Residential/Agriculture Residential - School District: Water District: _Carlsbad Sewer District: Mad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 32 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued March 12. 1999 0 Certified Environmental impact Report, dated Other, 37 - - CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: -PROPERTY zl: 98-1 l/LCPA 98-08 CT 98 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: -2Q GENERAL PLAN: fLL" ZONING: Med Control DEVELOPER'S NAME: -C. ADDRESS: 15375 Bamza Parkwav Suite B-211 Irvine Ca 92618 -18/CDP 98-8-P 98- 20 PHONE NO.: 949-753-840Q ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 215-070-06-00 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): J0.05 ac.137- DU A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 111 75 Library: Demand in Square Footage = 59.34 Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) N/A Park: Demand in Acreage = 0 73 Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A Identify Drainage Basin = D Circulation: Demand in ADT = 320 Fire: Served by = -on # 4 Open Space: Acreage Provided = N/A Schools: Students/School District = mad Sewer: Demands in EDU 32 Identify Sub Basin = N/A Water: Demand in GPD = 7.040 The projkct is equal to the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require] 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 cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as “Any- individual, firm, eo-parmenhip, .jciut venture, :association, social club, 6atcmal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in thiis.and any.othcr county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combiation acting as a unit.” Agenu may sign this document; however, the legal name.and entity of theapplicant and pmpeny owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant‘s agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a comoration or oartnershiu, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned cornoration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person David Salene Corp/Part Spectrum communities, LLC Title partner Title Address15375 Barranca Parkway, AddressIrvine, CA 92618 #B-2 11 -. 7 OWNER (Not the owner’s agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of persons having any ownership interes! in the property invnlved. A!ss, p:o*:id= the nardre of tilt. legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit. corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a coruoration or uartnershio, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (NlA) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv- owned coruoration, include the names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Victoria Fernandez Corplpart Carnation Properties Title Owner/president Title AddressP.0. Box 395 Addresscardiff, CA 92007 39 2075 LaS Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1 576 - (760) 438-71 61 - FAX (760) 438-0894 1 . >. NON-PROFIT OF r :ATION OR TRUST - If any person idem .J pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonvro.., organization or a trusl. list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profir organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non ProfitiTrust Non ProfitiTrust Title Title Address Address ” 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees andor Council within the past twelve (12) months? 17 Yes No If yes, please indicate penon(s): ~~ ~ ~ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certifv that all the above information is true and correct to the best of mv knowledge, - t. P a - Signature of ownerldate 3 Signature of applicantldate Print ortype name of owner Print or type name of applicant ~ Signature of ownedapplicant’s agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owndapplicant‘s agent $r., H:AOMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 %d EXHIBIT 6 2. CPA 98081CT 9848iCDP 98-851HDP 98 ” 20 CARNATION PROPFRTY - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting single family residential development; .and approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Program; a Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to designate the property for Development Permit, and Hillside Development Permit, for the subdivision of the property for 32 single family residential lots on 10.05 acres in Local Facilities Management Zone 20. Senior Management Analyst, Bobbie Hoder introduced the item and stated that the Commission’s action will be final on the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Tentative Tract Map, the Coastal Development Permit, and the Hillside Development Permit unless it is appealed within 10 calendar days, and the Commission’s action will not be final on the Zone Change and the Local Coastal Program which will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration. This is a request for a Zone change from limited control to R-I in the subdivision of the 10 acre property, Ms. Hoder introduced Associate Planner, Christer Westman. who presented the staff report as follows: to 32 single family lots. No homes are proposed at this time. A review of building architecture will be required subsequent to these actions by a Site Development Plan and a Coastal Development Permit. Typically, limited control is a zone which holds the land until development is imminent on the property. In this case the property has been designated as single family and that is the requested zone change. It is therefore consistent with that term, The number of lots proposed is consistent with the Growth Control Point of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. A single access to the property will be provided from Black Rail Road. The property has been used for the production of flowers and therefore does not contain any significant natural resources. Because of the previous floriculture, soils cleanup mitigation measures are required received regarding the proposed development of the site and those have been distributed to the prior to the development of the site. That is the extent of the mitigation required. Two letters have been Services will be constructed to the northern property line to accommodate this request. It has been Commissioners; the first requests that sewer and water connections be made to the northerly properties. discussed with the applicant and those services have been made a condition of approval. The second letter submitted reiterated the first request and in addition, asked that the westerly views (from Black Rail Road) be preserved. Currently the City does not have a view preservation ordinance or policy. In addition, in should be noted that the (Moore) property on the east side of Black Rail Road is approximately 2 to 3 feet above Black Rail Road and that the project has been designed with lots that range from 18 to 25 feet below that street grade on the northern end of the project. There is a proposal to construct a solid a wall, there would be obstruction of views from the street level. However it is staffs experience that from masonry wall along Black Rail Road and that is Mr: Moore’s major concern. With the construction of such the higher elevation of Mr. Moore’s property, a wall would not obstruct the ocean view. The Moore letter also suggests that Black Rail Road improvements be completed by a specified list of developers. The ownerideveloper of the property in question. The Carnation Property has been conditioned to complete City’s policy is that frontage improvements be constructed concurrent with development by the current the full width Black Rail Road improvements for the length of the project‘s frontage. consistent with City policies. During discussions with staff, regarding the wall, it has been suggested that the design of the Wall be deferred until the Site Development Plan review. A Site Development Plan is required for the architecture and siting of the homes on this property because there is a 0 overlay on the R-1 designation. PLANNING COMMISSION - - May 5, 1999 Page 5 Staff may be able to add a condition stipulating that the design of the wall will be reviewed at the time of the Site Development Plan. Commissioner Segall asked what the impact will be on the schools, 2 junior high school, and 4 high school students generated by this project. These figures are based upon Mr. Westman replied that the staff report identified that there would be approximately 9 elementary school, the Carlsbad Unified School District rates. Referring to Page 9. Resolution No. 4534, item no. 34. Commissioner Segall asked Mr. Westman to explain the first sentence of that item. Mr. Wojcik explained the item by stating that these properties will not be allowed to have any vehicular direct access to Black Rail Road and that they would front on the public streets on the west side of Black Rail Road. The City does have an ordinance that requires that one of the access rights, on through lots, be vacated. Referring to the exhibit distributed by Mr. Wojcik. Commissioner Segall asked if the purpose of the document is to show where other proposed developments have been approved and where others may be proposed in the future. along Black Rail Road. It was not intended to show what would be required of development. Such an Mr. Wojcik replied that the intent of that exhibit was to show the likely or possible intersection spacing exhibit is necessary for development coming in, in order to know what it is they are designing. It has not been City practice to put together an exhibit of existing approved and in-process projects to be given or presented to the Planning Commission. Chairperson Heineman asked Mr. Wojcik if such an exhibit might be useful in the future and how much extra work in would entail. Mr. Wojcik stated that such an exhibit could be useful and the amount of extra work in the preparation of the exhibit would depend upon how much detail the Commission would require. He added that he would envision something relatively simple. developed. Commissioner Segall asked what mitigation measures are taken when former agricultural land is Mr. Westman replied that there are terms that are established regarding the value of agricultural lands and prime agricultural lands are those which really should be preserved. There are coastal agricultural lands which relates back to the Coastal Program. This program is in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program. There are lands designated as Coastal Agricultural and although they are not prime agricultural, avenues that do allow the conversion of those agricultural lands. There are actually 3 different methods of it is encouraged that while agricultural is still feasible, they be used for production. However, there are conversion. In this case, there would be a payment of an agricultural mitigation fee and the typical fee is $10,000 per acre. Mr. Westman read from the coastal regulations as follows: “All mitigation fees collected under this section shall be deposited in the State Coastal Conservancy Fund and shall be expended by the State Coastal Conservancy in the following order of priority; 1) restoration of natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoon including but not limited to continued funding of any maintenance, operation, or enhancement costs necessary to implement any lagoon enhancement program approved by the City Council; 2) development of an interpretive center at Buena Vista Lagoon; 3) restoration of beaches managed for public use in the Coastal Zone in the City; 4) any other project or activity benefitting natural or agricultural resources in the Coastal Zone in the City that is provided for in the certified Local Coastal Program.” Mr. Westman went on to state that the intention was to allow development of some of the coastal agricultural lands but to collect a fee that will help preserve other natural resources and also to benefit prime agricultural lands in areas where they will continue to be used for agriculture. PLANNING COMMISSION - May 5, 1999 Page 6 Since there is no view ordinance in this City. Commissioner Segall asked if the Commission (at a future time) could look into the possibilities that there might be other ways to help preserve views for those that have resided at a particular location for quite a period of time. Finding No. 5, Resolution No. 4534, states that this property is noi subject to a contract entered into Referring to Cornmissioner Segall's question regarding agriculture, commissioner Welshons Stated that do with what Mr. Westman previously read or is it entirely different. pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), and asked if this finding has anything to Mr. Westman replied that they are two different items. Commissioner Welshons asked if the mitigation fees are written.anywhere in the resolutions or conditions, which is Resolution No. 4535, Condition No. 8. Mr. Westman replied that it is a condition and is actually in the Coastal Development Permit resolution Westman to assist her in making the necessary finding@). She asked what the housing needs are and Regarding the housing needs and the project's inclusionary housing, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. why this project should be allowed to buy credits into Villa Loma versus putting the inclusionary housing on this project site. state has identified that there is a certain fair share that the City of Carlsbad needs to provide. There are Mr. Westman replied that is appears to be a "big picture" discussion of the regional housing needs and the of the General Plan. Programs, within the General Plan, then identify different ways of how one can specifics regarding different avenues of how to provide that affordable housing and the Housing Element provide that affordable housing. There are projects that have been approved in the City which are intended to specifically provide housing for those with low and moderate income. Commissioner Welshons asked why this project, specifically, has been allowed to purchase credits in Villa Loma. Mr. Westman replied that it is specifically stated in the Zone 20 Specific Plan, that they may purchase credits in Villa Loma to satisfy their inclusionary housing requirement. For clarification, Commissioner Welshons pointed out that Finding No. 10E. Resolution No. 4534, states, "The project will satisfy its inclusionary housing requirements through the purchase of housing credits in Villa Loma" and Condition No. 12 gives the project the option of buying the credits or providing 6 affordable housing units within the project. Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Westman to explain. Mr. Westman replied that the project has chosen to purchase the credits in Villa Loma and Condition No, 12 could possibly be modified to say that they will, in fact, purchase the credits, Commissioner Welshons stated that she had asked Mr. Westman the above question before the meeting, in the presence of Assistant City Attorney Rich Rudolf, and that Mr. Westman had stated that Condition No. 12 is "boilerplate" language and now that we know that the project will purchase credits in Villa Loma, Condition No. 12 can be modified by removing the "or" aspect of the condition, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Wojcik what the standard intersection spacing is for this project and if there will be any traffic signals along this road Mr. Wojcik replied that the required intersection spacing is 300 feet and the only traffic signals will be at the intersections with Poinsettia, on the north, and Aviara Parkway on the south. Regarding Mr. Moore's letter, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Wojcik to explain the progression of the street improvements. PLANNING COMMISSION - - May 5, 1999 Page 7 Mr. Wojcik replied that the street improvements will be constructed as development occurs on each of the sure that drainage is controlled and that the various widths of the roads do not become a safety hazard. lots. Though it may appear that the streets are constructed in a piecemeal fashion, care is taken to make Mr. Wojcik added that this manner of streets construction, in this project, will not cause any traffic problems according to the Project Engineer and the Trafic Engineering Division. along this property. Commission Welshons asked if conditions could be added to require one or more Regarding Commissioner Segall's concern about the viewshed and the potential for a solid block wall the use and construction of masonry walls, so as to avoid the eventual possibility of having streets look houses on the eastem side (or somewhere on the.pmperty) to be one-story and also something to control like tunnels. Mr. Westman replied that he believes such conditions could be added. Commissioner Segall asked if Villa Loma is the only affordable housing project within the City of Carlsbad. Mr. Westman replied that Villa Loma is currently the only one that is available. Another project, Laurel Tree, also in the southwest quadrant, has credits available but has not yet been constructed. Jack Henthorn. 5375 Avenida Encinas. Carlsbad, representing applicant Spectrum Communities, stated their concurrence with the staff report, recommendations, and conditions of approval. Commissioner Segall asked what their plan (if any) is regarding the views from Mr. Moore's property. Mr. Henthorn replied that they would like to make that a part of the Site Development Plan. He added that that he would be surprised if Mr. Moore did not have an overview of the proposed wall around the project, Mr. Westman was correct in that the Moore property is above the elevation of Black Rail Road and stated with the Site Development Plan. He stated also that they would take a close look at this concern and come back with a specific response Chairperson Heineman opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak. Bob Todrank, 1394 Night Shade Road, Carlsbad. stated that his home is located immediately below this site and asked for clarification of on-site inclusionary housing and credit in Villa Loma. At Chairperson Heineman's direction, Mr. Westman explained the inclusionary housing requirement and the two ways that requirement can be satisfied. Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Heineman closed Public Testimony. ACTION: VOTE: AYES: ABSTAIN: NOES: Motion by Commissioner Welshons. and duly seconded, to adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4532 and 4533, recommending approval of Zone Change ZC 98-11 and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 9808 and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4531, 4534, 4535, and 4536 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Tract Map, CT 98-18. Coastal Development Permit CDP 98-85, and Hillside Development Permit, HDP 98-20. based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, including a revision to Condition No. 12. Resolution No. 4535, removing the "or" aspect of the inclusionary housing and confirming that it is at Villa Loma. 7-0 None Heineman, Compas. L'Heureux. Segall. Trigas. Welshons. Nielsen None MlNUTES 44 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 8 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen year; and not a party to or inlerested in lhe above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego. State of California, under the dates of June 30, 1989 (Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times- Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen) and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate) for the cities of Escondido. Oceanside. Carlsbad. Solana Beach and the North County Judicial District; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and enlire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: I certify (or declare) under penally of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at California, this STI Marcos 25th June, 1999 day of NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of Notice of Public HEZing """"""""""""" """"""""""""" 4PPLICANT Spectrum hmmunities, L.L.C. r 653 .egal63613 ~une 25, 199s CARNATION PROPERTy ZC 98-1 l/LCPA 98-08 TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE : PueLIc HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice zc gg-ll/LCPA 98-08 - CARNATION PROPERTY for a public hearlng before the Clty Council. Please notice the item for the council meeting of FIRST AVAILABLE HEARING Thank you. May 18, 1999 Date NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZC 98-llKCPA 98-08 CARh'ATION PROPERTY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m., on Tuesday July 6, 1999, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to designate the property for single family development for 32 single family residential lots on 10.05 acres in Local Facilities Management Zone 20 and more particularly described as: The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 12 south, range 4 west, San Bernardino Base and meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after July 2, 1999. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Christer Westman in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department at (760) 438-1161, extension 4448. If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change, and/or Local Coastal Program in court you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office, at, or prior to, the public hearing. APPLICANT Spectrum Communities, L.L.C. PUBLISH: June 25,1999 CARNATION PROPERTY ZC 98-1 I/LCPA 98-08 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, DATE, to consider a request for approval of a Zone Change and Local Coastal Program Amendment to designate the property for single family development for 32 single family residential lots on 10.05 acres in Local Facilities Management Zone 20 and more particularly described as: The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 12 south, range 4 west, San Bemardino Base and meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after DATE. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Department at (760) 438-1161, extension 4448. The time within which you may judicially challenge this Zone Change and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Zone Change and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: ZC 98-ll/LCPA 98-08 CASE NAME: CARNATION PROPERTY PUBLISH: DATE CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL FA COASTAL COMMISSION SD COUNTY PLANNING STE 200 STE B 31 11 CAMINO DEL RIO NO 5201 RUFFIN RD SAN DIEGO CA 92108-1725 I I SAN DIEGO CA 92123 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY BRD SANDAG STE B STE 800 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD 401 B ST SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 ~.~~. . . AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST 91 50 CHESAPEAKE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92123 NED GOOD STE 600 70 S LAKE AVE PASADENA CA 91 101-2601 CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPT ! CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DlST I 801 PINE ST I CARLSBAD CA 92008 DIANE SCOTT AVIARA MASTER HOA 7243 SPOONBILL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ! CA DEPT OF FISH & GAME STE 50 330 GOLDENSHORE DR LONG BEACH CA 90802 i LAFCO ' SAN DIEGO CA 92101 1600 PACIFIC HWY 2851 TORRY CT JANET MASS i CARLSBAD CA 92009 ~. I I SPECTRUM COMMUNITIES ~ 15375 BARRANCA PKY ' STE 6-21 1 IRVINE CA 92618 I CITY OF CARLSBAD WATER DISTRICT CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKSlENGlNEERlNG DEPT CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER 1 CHRISTER WESTMAN I .ROBERT & LINDA AMORSEN 6606 TOWHEE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 DEBRA J ROBERTS CARLSBAD CA 92009 1391 NIGHTSHADE RD JOHN W & BEVERLY B DICK CARLSBAD CA 92009 1390 NIGHTSHADE RD I PAUL & LINDA NEIDHARDT CARLSBAD CA 92009 1374 NIGHTSHADE RD I . ~ ~ JEFF & GABRIELLE STAFFORD 1370 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 SHAWN & TERESA RODGERS CARLSBAD CA 92009 1378 NIGHTSHADE RD AVIARA MASTER ASSN 201 1 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARK & SWJT SOLOMON GOUGH ~ 1385 NIGHTSHADE RD ! CARLSBAD CA 92009 ~ LEOPOLDO RODRIGUEZ ~ 1389 NIGHTSHADE RD ~ CARLSBAD CA 92009 NORMAN & FRANCES MUNK CARLSBAD CA 92009 1398 NIGHTSHADE RD ROBERT L TODRANK CARLSBAD CA 92009 1394 NIGHTSHADE RD DAVID & MOYRA MILLER. 1386 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 RAYMOND L NlSKl 6614 TOWHEE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 GEORGE T CHRISTIAN CARLSBAD CA 92009 6610 TOWHEE LN JEFFREY & NANCY HARlG CARLSBAD CA 92009 1384 NIGHTSHADE RD JOHN J KACHOREK ' CARLSBAD CA 92009 1386 SPARROW RD I MICHAEL & JOAN BUC CARLSBAD CA 92009 1378 SPARROW RD I EUGENE & ROBIN VURBEFF ' 1382 SPARROW RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOSEPH R INCANDELA 1379 NIGHTSHADE RD I CARLSBAD CA 92009 BECKY C YlANlLOS 1364 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT L MARSHALL CARLSBAD CA 92009 1362 NIGHTSHADE RD IGOR & ELLEN KRUPNICK 1363 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 GREG & JOANNE COLEMAN 1 1373 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 ' JASON R & SUSAN G BROWN 1367 NIGHTSHADE RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARTIN R AUGER CARLSBAD CA 92009 1363 NIGHTSHADE RD AKlRA & TOSHIKO MUROYA PO BOX 9000-602 ! , CARLSBAD CA 92018 BREHM-AVIARA GROUP 2835 CAMINO DEL RIO S 22 SAN DIEGO CA 92108 YUJIRO T YAMAMOTO PO BOX 372 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 AVELINA & ERNEST HIDALGO 651 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GEORGE R BOLTON 6519 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOSEPH & BARBARA RUDVALIS 651 7 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM R LYNN 6505 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ~~ . PO BOX 12727 PAUL & PEGGY HADLEY PALM DESERT CA 92255 I CARNATION PROPERTIES PO BOX 395 CARDIFF BY THE SEA CA 92007 NORMAN G GALLAGHER ESCONDIDO CA 92025 1252 PALMA V STA CT GUY S MOORE JR 6503 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 MICHAEL J CORDOSA 6491 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 18552 ERW N ST RESEDA CA 91335 ' WILLIAM & DONNA BAKER I I1 I NOBORU & EVELYN T TABATA PO BOX 943 CARLSBAD CA 92018 KAISER LIFE INSURANCE TRUST 1443 CAMlNlTO BATEA HUNTON FAMILY 1991 TRUST LA JOLLA CA 92037 6620 TOWHEE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 PHILIP E ROBINSON 6618 TOWHE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 LABELS - 5 163 1 SANDAG (SAN DIEGO COUNTY) LCPA MAILING LIST (GOVERNMENT AGENCIES) ! SUITE 8oo WELLS FARGO PLAZA APPENDIX A (LIST IS REQUIRED BY COASTAL , sAN DIEGO CA 92101 COMMISSION) 401 B STREET DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DEPUTYATTORNEYGENERAL ROOM 700 110 WEST A STREET SANDIEGO CA 92101 OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERIWENT AFFAIRS PO BOX 3044 I i SACRAMENTO CA 95812-3044 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION i DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 350 McALLISTER STREET STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103 ~ ROOM 100 1220 N STREET SACRAMENTO CA 95814 BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WILLIAM G. BRENNAN ROOM 5504 DEPUTY SECRETARY AND SPECIAL COUNCIL 1120 N STREET SUITE 2450 SACRAMENTO CA 95814 980 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO CA 95814 DISTRICT 11 CALTRANS RESOURCES AGENCY TIM VASQUEZ, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING RM 1311 2829 SAN JUAN ST 1416 NINTH STREET SANDIEGO CA 92138 SACRAMENTO CA 95812 U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ' COASTAL CONSERVANCY SUITE 130 SUITE 1100 33 10 EL CAMINO AVENUE 1330 BROADWAY SACRAMENTO CA 95821 I OAKLAND CA 94612 ENERGY RESOURCES, CONSERVATION DEPARTh4ENT OF FISH AND GAME AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ~ GAIL PRESLEY, CHIEF CHUCKNAJARIAN ' ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DMSION 15 16 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO CA 95814 I 1416 NINTH STREET I ~ RM 1341 ! SACRAMENTO CA 95814 MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G , DEPARTMENT OF .FORESTRY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR I DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIROMENTAL COORD 350 GOLDEN SHORE ' RM 1516-2 LONGBEACH CA 90802 1416 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SOUTHERN REGION JOHN WALSTROM, TECHNICAL. SERVICES 8885 RIO SAN DIEGO DRIVE SAND DIEGO CA 92108 STATE LANDS COMMISSION DWIGHT SANDERS SUITE 1005 100 HOWE AVE SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202 SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BILL TRAVIS 30 VAN NESS AVENUE SANFRANCISCO CA 95814 WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD PO BOX 100 SACARAMENTO CA 95801 .REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8 SUITE B FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD WESTERN REGION SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 I PO BOX 92007 ~ LOS ANGELES CA 90009 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ATTN: GARY RESOURCE CONSERVATIONIST SUITE 102 2121-C SECOND STREET DAVIS CA 95616 ~ USDA - RURAL DEVLOPMENT ~ 430 ST DEPT 4169 ~ DAVIS CA 95616 PACIFIC REGIONAL MANAGER ~ COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC 1 CHAIRMAN ADMIN - OCRM, 55MC4 722 JACKSON PLACE NORTH WEST N/ORM - 3 WASHINGTON DC 2006 1305 EAST-WEST HIGHWAY SILVERSPRING MD 20910 US. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 333 MARKET STREET LILY ALYEA - SUITE 702 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-2197 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 61 1 RYAN PLAZA DR STE 400 ARLINGTON TX 7601 1-4005 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ENGINEER PO BOX 271 1 LOS ANGELES CA 90053 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMMANDANT, ELEVENTH NAVAL DISTRICT DISTRICT CIVIL ENGINEER SAN DIEGO CA 92132 .U. S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ' DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2 135 BUTANO DRIVE ' CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIRECTOR SACRAMENTO CA 95825 i ' SUITE350 901 MARKET STREET I SANFRANCISCO CA 94103 U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION LOWER COLORADO REGION PO BOX 427 BOULDERCITY CO 89005 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE ~ DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REGIONAL ADMIN : SANFRANCISCO CA 94102 1 ' 450 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE SUPERINTENDENT U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK MID-PACIFIC REGION 1901 SPINNAKER DRIVE ~ , 2800 COTTAGE WAY SANBUENAVENTURA CA 93001 I SACRAMENTO CA 95825 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS RONALD M. JAEGER 2800 COTTAGE WAY SACRAMENTO CA 95825 DOUGLAS WARNOCK, SUPERINTENDENT REDWOOD NATIONAL PARK DRAWERN 1111 2ND STREET ' CRESCENTCITY CA 95531 CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SUITE 200 3 1 1 1 CAh4INO DEL RIO NORTH SANDIEGO CA 92108 H:\ADMINUABELSU.CP INTERESTED PARTIES UPDATED 3-99 OLIVENHAIN M.W.D. 1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD ENClNlTAS CA 92024 ~~ ~~ ~ CRAIG ADAMS SIERRA CLUB SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 3820 RAY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 LESLIE ESPOSITO 1893 AMELFI DRIVE ENClNlTAS CA 92024 ~~ LANlKAl LANE PARK SHARP; SPACE 3 6550 PONTO DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ~ ~~~~~ ~ KIM SEIBLY SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC PO BOX 1831 SAN DIEGO CA 92112 ~~~~ PERRY A LAMB 890 MERE POINT ROAD BRUNSWICK MAINE 0401 1 ~ ~~~ ~ RICHARD RETECKI COASTAL CONSERVANCY SUITE 1100 1330 BROADWAY OAKLAND CA 94612 DALElDONNA SCHREIBER 7163 ARGONAURA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 ~~ ~~ CITY OF ENClNlTAS COM DEV DEPARTMENT 505 S VULCAN AVE ENClNlTAS CA 92024 REGIONAL WATER QUAL. BD EXECUTIVE OFFICER SUITE B 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92124 GUY MOORE JR ' CARLSBAD CA 92009 6503 EL CAMINO REAL .. . ~~~~ ~. I CYRIL AND MARY GIBSON 12142 ARGYLE DRIVE LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702 ! JOHN LAMB 1446 DEVLIN DRIVE LOSANGELES CA 90069 MARY GRIGGS , STATE LANDS COMMISSSION ! SUITE 100 SOUTH 100 HOWE AVE ' SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202 ~ SAN DIEGO COUNTY 1 PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT ' JOAN VOKAC - SUITE 8-5 5201 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 ! ANTHONY BONS ' 25709 HILLCREST AVE ' ESCONDIDO CA 92026 MWMRS MICHAEL CARDOSA 6491 EL CAMINO REAL I CARLSBAD CA 92008 I , TABATA FARMS PO BOX 1338 CARLSBAD CA 9201 8 i KENNETH E SULZER SANDAG - EXEC DIRECTOR IST INT'L PLAZA, SUITE 800 401 B STREET I SAN DIEGO CA 92101 , JAN SOBEL 1 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PO BOX 1605 CARLSBAD CA 92008 BILL McLEAN c/o LAKESHORE GARDENS 7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS ~ CARLSBAD CA 92009 ~~ SPIERS ENTERPRISES DWIGHT SPIERS SUITE 139 ~ 23 CORPORATE PLAZA ~ NEWPORTBEACH CA 92660 1 SUPERVISOR BILL HORN , ATN: ART DANELL COUNTY OF SD. ROOM 335 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 ~ ~~ LEE ANDERSON CRA PRESIDENT ~ 5200 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 i I FLOYD ASHBY ENClNlTAS CA 92024 416 LA COSTA AVE GEORGE BOLTON 6583 BLACKRAIL ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92009 ,. . .~ .... ~~ ~~ , U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICES I 2730 LOKER AVE WEST + BWNCH kIBRBFW CARLSBAD CA 92008 + WmeR ,@!@&@T' e&wL- July 6, 1999 Carlsbad City Council Carlsbad, CA 92008 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Re: ZC 98--11- LCPA 98- 08-CT-98-18 CDP 08-18 ICDP 98-85 H-D-P. 98-20 Dear Sirs: The undersigned takes exception to the Hillside development permit constraints map in the following issues. 1. The easement notes X4 & 8 dont mention these documents as a "Pro-Quid-Quo" convenant wherein the Grantor exchanged Rights of Way for construction and dedication of a collector Public Road. (Please see Exhibits 1.2.3 attached) The costs for conversion of Black Rail Road from a secondary to collector road should be entirely born by the developers and no further assessments made against existing owners. 2. This issue is the construction of a 6 foot high masonry wall along the cas+ property line of the sub- division. (The west edge of Black Rail Road.) This wall would block the view of the Pacific Ocean to the west and is contrary to the Hillside development parameters. City staff managed to convince the planning commission that the City had no ordinances regarding viev sheds. WRONG !!! The Hillside ordinance protects any natural resources and view sheds as shown and high lighted in exhibits 4 and 5, on page 2 of Hunsaker and ASSOC. Hillside constraint maps the vertical scale has been so compressed (1"=50*) that it apppears as flat as a billard table when in reality the slope is quite substantial. See exhibit 6. z, I find it difficult to understand vhy a fastfooted developer from Irvine, CA can come to Carlsbad and build a replica of the Berlin Wall along a quarter mile of Black Rail Road vhich obstructs the view of the Ocean not only those living easterly but the public in general, vhile in nearby Del Mar to plant a single tree that obscures the Pacific Ocean is a capital offense . .. .. . i RJci;.:.. '.,,!...-.::6ei I . : ., I. GORUON I). OLTON and WRY JANE OLTON, his wife. do - hrrcb? grant tn FRANK H. AYRES L SON, a corporation, an 0s.c- mcnt for roadray purposes and right-of-way for in8tall8tion or public ~~III~I,~ and piprlincs over property situated in .. .I I ,. .... . .i.. .." . ._ T .. :'..'>:, . '..c , ;..I,_ - .- .- ..... " .... , .... !.. .. .T ... ...... .. ... I. ... ...... ., ..j .. I.. ,. .. ... I ! , t ... i ... -. ! .. ! !' . I . Sheet A o I i ! r i ! i ! ! i I ! i . .. " - . as Grantor. for and in considera- tion of the SL-( Of One Dollar and other valuable consideration paid by CARLSBAO MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. a municipal water dis- trict organized and existing under the Municipal Hater District Act Of 1911. as amended. as Grantee, receipt hereof is hereby acknow- ledged. do hereby grant to said CARLSBAO HUHlClPAL WATER OISTR CT its successors and assigns, an easement of right of way Sixty 1601 feet in width in. upon, over, under. and across the lants hereln- after described. to erect. construct. reconstruct. replace. repair, maintain and use a pipeline or pipelines for any and all purposes. together with their necessary fixtures and appurtenances including but not limited to conduits and cables for power transmission and communication purposes. at such locations and elevations. upon. JlOng. over and under.the hereinafter described right of way as Grantee may now or hereafter deem convenient and necessary from time to. time. together with the right of ingress thereto and egress therefrom. to and along said right of way by a practical route or routes. in upon. over and across the hereinafter described lands, together with the right to clear and keep clear said right of way from explosives. buildings and structures. . The center line of said easment of right of way is particularly described as follows: Beginning at the South Quarter Corner of Section 22. Township 12 South. Range 4 West. San Bernrrdino Meridian. according to United States Government Survey approved April 21. 1890; thence Northerly along the North-South centerline of said Section 22. a0 feet. more or less. to the Northwest corner of the Southw6st Quarter (SW 1/41 of the Northwest Quarter (NU 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SY 1/41 of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/41 of said Section 22. said point being the TRUE POINT 0F.BEGlNNlNG; thence Southerly retracing the North-South centerline of said Section 22. to the intersectfon with the Northerly line o Section 27. Township pps feet more or less. United States Government Survey approved April 21. 1890: thence 12 South. Range 4 West. San Bernardino Meridian. according to continuing Southerly along tbe North-South centerline of said Section 27. 1.320 feet. .... ..... . .. .I ....... ............... .. .... -: ............ ,.,L.<-*+.:,.AL.. ..... >;...:-~:, .............. .. ::. . I.'. . 2. ! .. , ... /. ' ::- , . , .. .. .. ., .. ...... .. , . . , '.. ; . 0 . .:.:r: ... 6 .a i: . ............ .: ... Sheet Right + o ay of lo. & The eaieaent'herein. granted Is' subject .ta . ' . ;"?. . :. 6-108 :.. .. - .. ...... :_ I, .. .... ................. ..... ........ ... .- .... excepted rights to construct. pave and iatntaia:a street or hi over the surface of same and.'to ~i.nstall~~aad uintatn.other utlflties, hway -' :-:: ';. therain.and to grant. thr right,.to otheir.:to.~lay~pipelines. or..: .:: :?. .;:: dedicate such easeaent or right of~wey.to~any.~public,body as a install'public utilitiei Over Said propertyIandlor to grant or -public street.'sich.grants or dedications, to^. be~ardr~subJect:-~'.;. . -:;PW+ ...... to-the herein gra,nted easeacnt. -. I ::. . :. ': . ,, _i ,,-L ...... .- -. ... -,. .... G... .. "" . ~ .. .. ~. . Grantor agrees that no other caseaent or iiscments. except the hereinbefore sprcifically designated easements or grants shall be granfed~ on. under..or over said strip of.land by .6rJntor..uithout:-~.r, the previous- written..,consenf-of Grantee.:.;iz' ....... *> M;.i ~;.,,, ......... ..... ;j?> ........ . ...... f,,.; ..+::y. . ............ .... ., Ci .:.I, .I: Grantor ani their successors in estate shall not erect or con'struct. an building or other . within the liaiiT-oC3aid right of way. -drifl any7611 or wells. ,i in a11 fences which now cross or shall hereafter cross said route whenever in its judgment the same shall be necessary for thr con- or routes, and to.trim and cut and clear away any trees and brush venient and safe exercise of the rights hereby granted. the right to transfer and asslgn this easearnt. in whole or ingaxt being hereby granted to the Grantee.""""-." .... .I ~, Grantor and their successors or assigns.' shall.not increase or It is also understood and agreed by the parties hrreto that the ground .eIe-f way. existing decrease. thr existing e at the timr this document is executed. without the previous written -consent of the Grantee. . - .. ... -. grantre re shall have the right to erect. aalntiin and use gates .. this Yd day of mvder IN UlTNESS YHEREOF.' the Grantor his rxecuted these presents ........ Executed in the Presence of: .. Yitness Yltness ... -.,< . .rii. .,... i. ii .. .c.l .- ..... ... -. . ... . .-. .". -;; . f E. Vier preservation and enhancrarnt: One of the major focuses of Carlsbad's Hillside Development Regulations is to assure development sensitivity sonsiders the !&w the City will have of the Hillside DeveVpzeX There ah almost as many ways to do this as there are hillsides. The fO1lOUing illUStratlOnS show Some standard design solutions. Other designs can also creatively and sensitively assure the views of hillsides and from hillsides are aesthetically pleasing. Sometimes the best way to get an understanding of view preservation/ enchancement is to view from the hillside and write down what areas of the City you can see. Then go to those places and look up at the How can. development be designed to assure the view to the hillside area. Yhat is good about the view to the hillside? hillside is enhanced and attractively blends into or is hidden within the natural hillside environment? . rt VIEW ENHANCED FROM HILLSIDE SITE ZC 98-1 1iLCPA 98- CT 98-18ICDP 98-85HDP 98-20 - C. NATION PROPERTY - " May 5,1999 Paw 5 the Coastal Program. An Agricultural Conversion Mitigation Fee will be applied as a condition of approval. The proposed project is in compliance with the requirements of the Local Coastal Program. Hillside Devev Chapter 21.95 requires that a Hillside Development Permit accompany any development proposal which involves slopes of greater than 15 percent and an elevation differential greater than 15 feet in height. A Hillside Development Permit may only be approved if the six hillside findings can be made. _." ". . The first two findings require that hillside and undevelopable areas have been properly identified. The proper identification of these circumstances are provided through the project submittal in the form of a hillside conditions exhibit and a constraints exhibit. Both exhibits were provided as required. Approximately 0.02 acres are comprised of slopes greater than 15 percent, however there is a slope.di&e-ee- The third criterion is that the development must be consistent with the purpose, intent and requirements of the Hillside Ordinance. The stated purpose and intent of the ordinance includes the avoidance of etantial damage or alteration of significant natural resource areas: preseni.ati,o.n- _of,.t~e..na~u~-~~p~~anc~ II_~" of hillsidks; '~consis<eicy with the Open Space and C-o-nservg!y Element of the General Plan; prevention of erosion and protection of the lagoons from excessive siltation; and assurance that development is compatible with existing topography. Generally, the project site does not have any significant natural hillside resources. The proposed grading includes terraced pads which follow the site's natural slope progression from the low point at the south west to the high point at the north east. The project site is not located within a General Plan designated significant open space area and will therefore not have any impact on open space. Erosion control is a standard function of the grading permit process and compliance \vi11 be assured through conditions of approval. The project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Hillside Ordinance. . . . . .. , . Criterion number four requires that no development or grading will occur in those portions of the property \vhich are undevelopable pursuant to the provisions of Section 21.53.230. The undevelopable lands include beaches, permanent bodies'of water, floodways, slopes greater than 10",,. Significant wetlands. riparian or woodland habitats, land subject to major power line easements. land upon which other significant environmental features are located, and railroad track beds. The project site does not include any constrained undevelopable lands. The fifth and sixth criteria relate to the project's design. The project must be desienedlo minimize disturbance to hillside lands and substantially conform to the in(entafrhe-so.ncepts illustrxed in the hillside desien eu e u - ~ ." " ._-_I."- - ~ "_ . id lines man al