HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-15; City Council; 16507; CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/B&TD #4 AND DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - EIR 98-02|GPA 99-03|MP 150H|LFMP 87-07A|ZC 01-01|CT 00-02|HDP 00-02CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# ~LI~O-) TITLE:
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE IIIBBTD #4 AND DETENTION
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)l
BASINS BJ AND BJB MTG. 1-15-oa
DEPT. PLN ZC Ol-OIICT 00-02/HDP 00-02 I
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 2Ood- 0/6 , CERTIFYING EIR 98-02, and
APPROVING the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, GPA 99-03/MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-011CT 00-OZHDP
00-02 as recommended for approval by the Planning Commission; and INTRODUCE Ordinances
No. NS - blb and hl S-bI7 , APPROVING MP 150(H) and ZC 01-01.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On December 19. 2001, and January 2,2002, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Calavera Hills Phase II and Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4 (B&TD) projects and flood control improvements to Calavera Creek. The Planning Commission by a vote of 6-0 (Baker absent)
recommended partial certification of the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approval of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program; General Plan Amendment; Calavera Hills Master Plan Amendment; Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7; Master Tentative Tract Map and Hillside Development Permit.
The project site is located in the northeastern quadrant of the City within Local Facilities
Management Zone 7.
The EIR addressed the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan as well as the improvements covered by the proposed Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4 and flood control improvements to the Calavera Creek. The balance of the actions being requested (i.e., GPA 99-03/MP150(H)/LFMP 87- 07(A)/ZC 01-01/CT 00-02/HDP 00-02) are necessary for the development and buildout of the
Calavera Hills Master Plan, including mass grading. No dwelling units are proposed with any of the subject entitlements; the Village-level maps will be processed pursuant to the pending master plan amendment of MP 150(H).
As explained in the attached Planning Commission staff report, the project involves two road segments (Cannon Road Reach 4 and College Blvd Reach A) along with one detention basin (Basin BJB) that are not necessary for the Calavera project; they are part of the City-initiated B&TD, Calavera Creek and flood control improvements which also underwent environmental review with EIR 98-02. As such, and in response to comments and letters received during the public review
process, the Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council eliminate from their certification of the EIR the easternmost portion of Cannon Road Reach 4. Specifically, that portion
of Cannon Road Reach 4 (now known as 48) beginning at the access point to the School District parcel and extending east to the Oceanside city limits is recommended for delayed Certification. The segment of Cannon Road Reach 4 from the future CollegelCannon intersection, extending east to the School District access point, is now known as Reach 4A and would be included in the certification of EIR 98-02. Attached Exhibit No. 9 graphically depicts Cannon Road Reach 4A
(recommended for certification with EIR 98-02), as well as Cannon Reach 48 (not recommended for certification at this time)
This action will not remove Cannon Road Reach 48 from the City's General Plan or Circulation Element; rather, it will delay Certification of environmental documentation for this roadway segment until final design issues can be worked out with the City of Oceanside and all affected stakeholders including the resource agencies. Since Cannon Road Reach 4 is not needed per Growth
I
PAGE2OFAGENDABlLLNO. id!50;7
Management until at least 5 years from now, and the College/Cannon intersection will be fixed at a
preferred location, eliminating certification of this reach is legally feasible and does not adversely
impact the Calavera project or its offsite road requirements as included in the B&TD.
One change presented to the Commission by the applicant was a new master plan provision that
requires a minimum development of single story units. The initial master plan text presented to the
Planning Commission had an optional allowance for single story units but did not mandate any
minimum amount. The proposed change is shown on Exhibit 8, and mandates a minimum of 10% of
the remaining single family units to be single story, there would still be a requirement of an additional
10% to 15% of either single story units or greatly reduced second floor units: The Planning
Commission and Staff endorse the proposed revision to the Master Plan, since it will ensure
architectural diversity by providing single story units.
Thirty people spoke during the public testimony portion of the Planning Commission Hearing on
December 19, 2001. The comments made were categorized into the following issue areas: land
use compatibility, open space and trails, master plan provisions for the transfer of dwelling units,
noise, biology/wildlife corridors, cultural resources, and general EIR comments. City staff,
consultants and the project applicant responded to the public comments at the January 2, 2002
Planning Commission hearing. Written comments were also received during the 60-day review and
comment period for the Draft Program EIR. A full record of comments and the response to
questions and comments from the public can be found in the Planning Commission Minutes dated
December 19, 2001, and January 2, 2002 in addition to the Final Program EIR dated November,
2001. A more detailed project description and analysis is contained in the attached Planning
Commission Staff Reports dated December 19,200l and January 2,2002.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
A Program Environmental Impact Report was processed addressing all necessary approvals needed
to develop the project. The report was found by staff and the Planning Commission to have been
prepared in compliance with City and State regulations. After the implementation of all proposed
mitigation measures, the project would result in a significant direct impact for landform alteration.
The project has all significant impacts outlined with corresponding mitigation measures established.
Overriding considerations are proposed for adoption for the significant unmitigated direct and
cumulative impacts and are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112 along with the
Candidate Findings of Fact.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All required improvements needed to serve the Calavera Hills project will be funded by the
developer. The Facility Financing Section of the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plans lists the
financing techniques used to guarantee the public facilities needed to serve development.
A report titled, “Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master Plan Amendment 150(H) and Related Documents,
dated December 20, 2000” evaluates the revenue generated by the project and the costs of
providing services to it. At buildout, estimated expenditures from the general fund to provide public
services to the project would exceed estimated revenues by approximately $254,800 per year. The
report was previously distributed and copies are on file in the Planning Department, both libraries, and at the Office of the City Clerk.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. ,;Loo 2 -0 1 b
2. Ordinance No. N 5 -L I b
3. Ordinance No. ti5-b 17
d
PAGE 3 OF AGENDA BILL NO. ! b I 50 7
4.
5.
6. 7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Location Map
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5112, 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, 5117, and 5118
Planning Commission Staff Reports, dated December 19,200l and January 2,2002
Planning Commission Minutes, dated December 19,200l and January 2,2002
Proposed changes to MP Architectural Standards
Exhibit depicting Cannon Road Reach 4A and 48
Correspondence and Petition received at Planning Commission
Final Program EIR for the Calavera Hills Master Plan, dated November, 2001 (previously
distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department)
Calavera Hills Master Plan Amendment MP 150(H) (previously distributed; copy on file in the
Planning Department)
Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan, dated October 2001 (previously distributed; copy
on file in the Planning Department)
Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master Plan Amendment 150(H) and Related Documents, dated
December 20, 2000 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) Master Tentative Map CT 00-02 - Full Size Exhibits “A” - “V”, dated December 19, 2001
(previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department)
Landscape Concept Plan CT 00-02 - Full Size Exhibits ‘VP - “LL”, dated December 19,200l
(previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department)
Hillside Development Permit HDP 00-02 - Full Size Exhibit “MM” - “W, dated December
19, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department).
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-016
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT, CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, STATEMENTS
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND APPROVING
A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, MASTER PLAN
AMENDMENT, ZONE 7 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, MASTER TENTATIVE
MAP AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WITHIN THE
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN ON PROPERTY
AND WEST OF LAKE CALAVERA IN THE NORHTEAST
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE
QUADRANT OF THE CITY.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE WBTD #4 AND BASINS
CASE NO.: EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-
07(A)/ZC 01-011CT 00-02/HDP 00-02
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on December 19, 2001, and January
2, 2002 hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider the land use actions
and entitlements outlined above to facilitate the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan and
the environmental review for the master plan as well as the roads and basins to be covered by
Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4 or similar financing mechanism. The Planning Commission
adopted Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5112 through 5118, recommending to the City
Council that the above listed items be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 15th day of January, 2002 hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the EIR, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, CEQA Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
General Plan Amendment, Master Plan Amendment, Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Master Tentative Map and Hillside Development Permit and;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors
relating to the above described project;
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
21
28
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad. California does hereby resolve as
follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the findings of the Planning Commission in Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 5112, 5113, 5114. 5115, 5116, 5117 and 5118 constitute the findings of the
City Council in this matter.
3. That the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission in Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 5112. 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, 5117 and 5118 constitute the
conditions of the City Council in this matter. Except that condition numbers 31. 38 and 39
imposed by the Planning Commission in Planning Commission Resolution No. 51 17 be revised
to read as follows:
“31. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Calavera Hills Phase II
project (“Project”), the applicant shall cause Owner to enter into a purchase option agreement
with the City of Carlsbad and the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association offering the City the
to provide a relocation site for facilities that will either be replaced by or have the access
option to purchase, at not more than fair market value, an approximately 5.7 acre parcel of land,
severed by the construction of College Boulevard Reach A or Detention Basis BJ (the “Facilities
Replacement Area”). The general location of the Facilities Replacement Area is shown on the
Rancho Carlsbad Exhibit as the location of the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association facilities.
including the community garden, RV parking lot. wash area and waste disposal area. The
purchase option agreement shall provide that if the City does not exercise its option to purchase
by January 1. 2010, the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association may exercise the option and
purchase the parcel. The agreement shall also provide that the Rancho Carlsbad Owners
Association, with agreement of Owner, may process any and all permits and applications with
the appropriate governmental agencies required for the implementation of these provisions
provided any such permits issued are conditioned upon the transfer of the parcel. Alternately,
the Owner may elect to process the necessary permits and applications to implement these
provisions itself.
“The agreement shall provide that if either the Owner or Rancho Carlsbad
Owners Association are denied by any approving governmental agency a requested permit
waste disposal area, then the purchase option agreement shall automatically terminate. The
necessary for use of the 5.7 acre parcel for a community garden, RV parking lot, wash area and
City shall provide the mechanism whereby the purchase by the Association shall be eligible for
credit and repayment from the appropriate funding source or sources established by the City
which include this purpose. Any such credit and repayment mechanism shall be implemented
prior to or concurrent with the transfer to the City by the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association
of the property rights required to install Basin BJ. If the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association
and Owner are unable to reach agreement with respect to the terms of the purchase option
agreement by May 1, 2002, the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association and Owner shall enter
into binding arbitration to resolve the terms of the agreement, subject to concurrence by the City
to resolve the terms of the agreement, subject to concurrence by the City to the extent the terms
Resolution No. 2002-016 page 2 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
impact the Cityk obligations under the agreement. Such arbitration to be paid for by Owner.
The City Manager and City Attorney. or their designees, shall be authorized to negotiate and
enter into the purchase option agreement on behalf of the City, provided it complies with the
terms of this condition, without further review of the City Council. The actual purchase or
acquisition of the property which is the subject of the option agreement will require City Council
review and approval.”
berm to run along the south side of Reach 3 of Cannon Road between El Camino Real and the
“38. The applicant shall construct a five-foot sound wall atop a three-foot earthen
intersection with College Boulevard (the “Berm”). The Berm and the slope shall be fully
landscaped, as shown on the Rancho Carlsbad Exhibit, on that portion of the Berm and slope
facing the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile home Park. The landscaping plans shall be approved prior
to the approval of the final map for CT 00-02 and such landscaping shall be installed at least 30
days prior to the opening of Cannon Road to public traffic. The sound wall shall be located a
wetlands or other sensitive habitats do not interfere.” minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the southern right-of-way of Cannon Road Reach 3, where
“39. The applicant shall cause the Owner to plant eucalyptus trees, or such other
trees as are comparable in price and availability, and native hydroseeding on an approximately
the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road, as shown on the Rancho Carlsbad
2.51 acre parcel of land generally located between Cannon Road Station 150 plus 80 feet and
between Cannon Road Station 151 and the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon
Exhibit as the grove parcel. Approximately 2.25 acre of this parcel of land, generally located
Road, shall be deeded or provided by permanent easement to the Rancho Carlsbad Owners
Association at no cost. Deeding or granting of the easement, and planting and irrigation of the
grove parcel shall occur at least 30 days prior to the opening of Cannon Road Reach 3.”
4. The recommendation of the Planning Commission for a General Plan
Amendment, GPA 99-03, as shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5113, is hereby
accepted, approved in concept and shall be formally approved in connection with General Plan
Amendments GPA 01-06 and GPA 01-15.
5. The City Council shall retain jurisdiction over uses proposed for Village H and
shall act as the final decision maker on such uses following a recommendation from the
Planning Commission.”
EFFECTIVE DATE: This resolution shall be effective upon its adoption, except as
to the General Plan Amendment, which shall be effective thirty (30) days following its adoption.
Ill
Ill
Ill
Resolution No. 2002-016 page 3 of 4
i
* 1
7 -
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 AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
! Carlsbad on the 15th day of JANUARY 2002, by the following vote, to
i
NOES: None i
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Finnila, Nygaard
CLAUDEX LEWIS, M&or I
@+" LOR INE M. OOD, City Clerk (SEAL)
II Resolution No. 2002-016 page 4 of 4
of the City 01
wit:
,, Hall
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. Ns-616
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CALAVERA HILLS
MASTER PLAN TO ESTABLISH WILDLIFE CORRIDORS,
UPDATE THE PLAN TO CURRENT CITY STANDARDS, AND
ALLOW FOR THE BUILD-OUT OF CALAVERA HILLS
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE
AND WEST OF LAKE CALAVERA
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO.: MP 150 (H)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, has reviewed and
considered a master plan amendment (MP 150-H) to allow for the buildout of this master plan
and the establishment of regionally significant wildlife corridors; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the day of 9
2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a master plan amendment
consistent with Chapter 21.38 of the municipal code as shown on Exhibit “MP 150(H),
incorporated herein by reference.
follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad does ordain as
SECTION I: That Master Plan Amendment MP 150 (H), on file in the Planning
Department, and incorporated herein by reference, is adopted. The amended Calavera Hills
Master Plan shall constitute the development plan for the property and all development within
the plan area shall conform to the plan.
SECTION II: That the’findings and conditions of the Planning Commission in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5114 shall also constitute the findings and conditions of
the City Council.
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.
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the of day 2002, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the of day 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Page 2 of 2 of Ordinance No. NS-616 -2- 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. NS-617
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 21.05.030 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN AMENDMENT TO
THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A ZONE CHANGE, ZC 01-01,
FROM L-C TO P-C ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ADJACENT TO THE EASTERN PERIMETER OF THE
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN, DIRECTLY SOUTH OF
LAKE CALAVERA IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE
14.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO.: zc 01-01
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 21.050.30 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, being the
zoning map, is amended as shown on the map marked Exhibit “ZC 01-01” attached hereto, and
marked Exhibit “ZC-A”.
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as set
forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5116, on file in the Planning Department,
constitute the findings and conditions of the City Council.
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.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the day of 2002, and thereafter.
ill
/if
/If
ill
ill
//I
l/i
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
22
2tI
2;
2t
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of , 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2- Page 2 of 2 of Ordinance No. NS-617 4
m
EXISTING: L-C
PROPOSED: P-C
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE Ii
zc 01-01
EXHIBIT 4
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BRIDGE
AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT #4
EIR 98-021GPA 99=03/MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/
ZC 0%Ol/CT 00=02/HDP 00-02
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 5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5112
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT, EIR 98-02, FOR THE CALAVER HILLS MASTER
PLAN (MP 150-H), BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE
DISTRICT #4, AND DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB;
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CANDIDATE FINDINGS
OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDER-
ATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, EAST OF
EL CAMINO REAL, WEST OF LAKE CALAVERA, AND
ALONG PORTIONS OF THE FUTURE ALIGNMENTS OF
CANNON ROAD AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD IN THE
NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY, PRIMARILY
WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONES 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BTD
#4/DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB
CASE NO.: EIR 98-02
WHEREAS, Calavera Hills II, L.L.C, “Developer”/“Owner,” has filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
A portion of Lots “B’, “D “, “E”, and “J” of Ran&o Aqua
Hedionda, according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County on
November 16,1896 all being in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in
conjunction with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of December, 2001
and on the 2nd day of January, 2002 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 EIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
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
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4
B)
Cl
D)
El
FindinPs:
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That the Final Program Environmental Impact Report consists of the Final
Environmental Impact Report, EIR 98-02, dated December 19, 2001,
appendices, written comments and responses to comments, as amended to
include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and
responses thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a
copy of the minutes of said public hearing into the report, all on file in the
Planning Department incorporated by this reference, and collecjively
referred to as the “Report”.
That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 98-02, as so amended and evaluated
is recommended for acceptance and certification as the final Environmental
Impact Report and that the final Environmental Impact Report as recommended is
adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable
and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of the Program
Environmental Impact Report, EIR 98-02; RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of
the Candidate Findings of Fact (“CEQA Findings”), and the Statement of
Overriding Considerations (L’Statement”), attached hereto as Exhibit “EIR-
A” and incorporated by this reference; and RECOMMENDS APPROVAL
of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“Program”), attached
hereto as Exhibit “EIR-BY’ and incorporated by this reference; based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
That the recommendation as contained in D) above eliminates the
certification of the easternmost portion of Cannon Road Reach 4, now known
as Reach 4B.
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find that the Final EIR
98-02, the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered Final EIR 98-02, the environmental impacts therein identified for this
PC RESO NO. 5112 -2- /3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
project; the Candidate Findings of Fact (“Findings” or “CEQA Findings”) and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit “EIR-A and the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“Program”) attached hereto as Exhibit
“EIR-B”, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of this project.
The Planning Commission finds that Final EIR 98-02 reflects the independent
judgment of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission does accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full
herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the CEQA Findings
(Exhibit “EIR-A”), including feasibility of mitigation measures pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21081 and CEQA Guidelines 15091, and infeasibility of project
alternatives.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
Although certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the
project will remain, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any
feasible alternatives, there are specific economic, social and other considerations that
render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable, as set forth
in the Statement.
The Record of Proceedings for this project consists of The Report, CEQA Findings,
Statement and Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and
other planning documents prepared by the planning consultant, the project
Applicant, the environmental consultant, and the City of Carlsbad that are before
the decision makers as determined by the City Clerk; all documents submitted by
members of the public and public agencies in connection with the EIR and the
Addendum thereto on the project; minutes of all public meetings and public
hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they
may consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad
Zoning Ordinance, and Local Facilities Management Plan which may be found at
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive in the custody of the City Clerk, and 1635 Faraday
Avenue in the custody of the Director of Planning.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the portion of Reach 4 of Cannon Road
beginning adjacent to the entrance of the proposed high school site, approximately
1200 feet east of the future proposed intersection with College Boulevard, and
extending easterly to the intersection with Leisure Village Drive within the City of
Oceanside, hereinafter referred to as Reach 4B of Cannon Road, is of substantial
length and operates between two logical terminal points.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that Reach 4B of Cannon Road has
independent utility and will serve important regional and local circulation needs.
PC RESO NO. 5112 -3- 14
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
10. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the length and geometry of Reach 4B of
Cannon Road is such that there will be adequate opportunity for consideration of
reasonable alternative alignments for Reach 4B of Cannon Road and that approval
of the EIR without Reach 4B does not irretrievably commit the City to a definite
course of action regarding Reach 4B of Cannon Road.
11. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the construction of Reach 4B of
Cannon Road does not have full funding nor is it required to serve the needs of the
Calavera Hills Phase II development or other land developments currently under
consideration by the City of Carlsbad.
Conditions:
1.
2.
3.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
The Developer and/or City, as appropriate, shall implement the mitigation measures
described in Exhibit “EIR-B”, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
for the mitigation measures and monitoring programs applicable to development of
the Calavera Hills Master Plan/BTD##4 /Detention Basins BJ and BJB Project. _
This approval is granted subject to the approval of GPA 99-03, MP 150(H), LFMP
87-07(A), ZC 01-01, CT 00-02 and HDP 00-02 and is subject to all conditions
contained in the Planning Commission Resolutions for those other approvals.
For Mitigation Measures relating to Archeological resources, replace any references
to the San Diego Museum of Man with the San Luis Rey Band of California Indians.
Any recovered artifacts are to reside with the San Luis Rey Band as opposed to the
currently designated San Diego Museum of Man.
PC RESO NO. 5112 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of January 2002, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
4
CARLSBAD PLklNG C:MMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESdNO. 5112 -5-
“EIR - A”
EIR 98-02
DRAFT
CITY OF CARLSBAD RESOLUTION
NO.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FINDING OF FACT
and
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
for the
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 98-02)
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PHASE II, BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE
DISTRICT NO. 4, AND DETENTION BASINS
(SCH No. 99111082)
INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code $02 1000-21177 (CEQA), and the
State CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code of Regs. $3 15000-l 5387 (CEQA Guidelines), require that no
public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has
been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects on the environment that
would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
(4 The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to
each significant effect, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each
finding (Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines):
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects on the environment as
identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have
been, or can and should be, adopted by such other agency.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 12/12/01
I?
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (CEQA $21081[a])
@> With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under
paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency may not approve or carry out the
project unless the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the
environment. (CEQA $2 108 1 [b])
CEQA also requires that the findings made pursuant to $1509 1 shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record (9 1509 1 [b] of the CEQA Guidelines). Under CEQA, substantial evidence
means enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair
argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.
Substantial evidence shall include facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert
opinion supported by facts (0 15384 of the CEQA Guidelines).
CEQA also requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental effects
when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, -
technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” (4 1509 1 [a] of the CEQA
Guidelines). When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened,
the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or
other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by
substantial evidence in the record and does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings
required pursuant to $15091 ($9 15091 [b] and [c] of the CEQA Guidelines).
The following Candidate Findings are made relative to the conclusions of the Environmental Impact
Report for the Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II, Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4, and
Detention Basins project and associated actions (“project”) (EIR No. 98-02/SCH No. 1999111082).
The EIR is herein incorporated by reference. These Findings have been prepared pursuant to $2 108 1
of the California Public Resources Code, the California Environmental Quality Act, and #15091 and
15093 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations have been submitted by the project
applicant as Candidate Findings to be made by the decision-making body. The Planning Department
does not recommend that the discretionary body either adopt or reject these Findings. The Findings are
attached to allow readers of this report an opportunity to review potential reasons for approving the
project despite the significant unmitigated effects identified in the final EIR.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE
The proposed project includes three components: (1) Phase II amendment of the Calavera Hills Master
Plan; (2) formation by the City of Carlsbad of Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 for the
extension and construction of College Boulevard (Reaches A, B, and C) and Cannon Road (Reaches 3
and 4); and (3) construction of two detention basins by the City of Carlsbad to provide flood control
within the Calavera Creek and Little Encinas Creek watersheds.
Project Components
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 2 lU12fO1
I8
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II: The proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II modifies
the existing land use designations and zoning for 10 villages (E-l, H, K, L-2, R, U, W, X, Y and Z)
occupying a patchwork of undeveloped property totaling 409.8 acres within the larger Master Plan
area. The proposal includes the following:
Maximum 78 1 dwelling units, distributed in nine village neighborhoods referred to as Phase II.
The proposed project would reduce the overall number of dwelling units by 14 from the maximum
795 units allowed under the existing adopted master plan. A breakdown of the Master Plan
Amendment for each Village is provided on Table 2-l in the EIR.
Conformance to the negotiated “hard line” configuration of an open space system negotiated by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and
the City of Carlsbad to support habitat/wildlife corridors reflected in the City of Carlsbad’s Draft
Habitat Management Plan (HMP) dated December 1999;
Modification to Village K to redistribute allowable dwelling units among several other remaining
Villages to provide an east-west habitat link to reduce impacts to the California gnatcatcher and
other species consistent with the City’s Draft HMP;
Incorporation of the adjacent 11 O-acre Calavera Nature Preserve (CNP) open space parcel,
dedicated by Calavera Hills II, LLC, in 1998, into the Calavera Hills Master Plan boundary and
elimination of the residential land use designation for this parcel. The project also rezones the
parcel from the existing Limited Control (L-C) to Planned Community (P-C) consistent with the
Master Plan. Within the Master Plan, this parcel would be designated Open Space (OS);
Allowance for the residential buildout of eight Phase II villages (E-l, K, L-2, R, U, W, X, and Y)
in accordance with the provisions of the proposed Phase II Master Plan Amendment;
Identification of Village Y as the affordable housing site;
Adjustment of the boundaries of Village Y in response to a proposed shift of the College
Boulevard alignment to the east to avoid a conflict with a high-voltage power transmission tower;
the shift will increase the acreage of Village Y by 3.5 acres;
Modification of development standards, residential design criteria, and architectural guidelines to
ensure functional and aesthetically pleasing design and compatible architectural styles for the
proposed residential products;
Modification of the designated location of signage, documentation, fencing, and other existing
community identification criteria for the buildout of the Master Plan;
Modification of the Zone 7 (Calavera Hills) Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) to update
buildout projections, address existing and titure public facility adequacy for parks, drainage
facilities, circulation roadways, fire stations, open space, schools, sewer collection lines, and water
distribution facilities, impacted by Phase II development.
Overall, the proposed amendment for Phase II of the Calavera Hills Master Plan is consistent with the
adopted Master Plan, but will modify existing land use designations and rearrange residential densities
to provide for the residential buildout of Villages E-l, K, L-2, R, U, W, X, and Y. Open space within
the current Master Plan boundaries will increase by approximately 20.5 acres (exclusive of the 1 lo-
acre CNP open space area denoted as Village Z). Total grading for the Master Plan Phase II Villages
(E-l, H, K, L-2, R, U, W, X, and Y) falls into the acceptable range of grading volume (929,000 cubic
yards/132.9 acres = 6,990 cubic yards/acre) pursuant to the Hillside Development Ordinance.
Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4/Detention Basins: The primary elements of this portion of
the project are:
Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4:
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 3 12/12/01 t9
l Formation of a Bridge and Thoroughfare District (City of Carlsbad BTD No. 4) or other financing
district to finance the acquisition, design, and construction of “core” improvements for the subject
roadways.
l Development, including grading, surface improvements, bridges, retaining walls, erosion control
and landscaping, drainage, and all other improvements associated with development of Reaches A,
B, and C for College Boulevard and Reaches 3 and 4 for Cannon Road.
l Realignment of Cannon Road within the Oceanside city limits, including the reconfiguration of an
existing church access and parking lot area. The project proposes 24 parking spaces as replacement
for an estimated 22 church parking spaces that will be lost (Fraser Engineering 1999). The City of
Carlsbad will coordinate with the church to obtain a Conditional Use Permit amendment prior to
proceeding with modification of the church parking lot.
Detention Basins:
l Construction of two detention basins by the City of Carlsbad to control flooding impacts within the
Calavera Creek and the Little Encinas Creek watersheds. The basins are part of a larger drainage
plan for the area and are consistent with the 1994 City of Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan. The two
basins are described as follows:
Basin 1 (referred to as Basin “BIB”):
Location - northeast of the College Boulevard/Cannon Road intersection
Inundation area - approximately 15 acres
Storage capacity - approximately 49 acre-feet
Basin 2 (referred to as Basin “BJ”):
Location - east of the College Boulevard/Cannon Road intersection
Inundation area - approximately 8 acres
Storage capacity - approximately 48 acre-feet
Implementation of the project road improvements are generally consistent with existing and planned
land uses, including the alignments shown in the City of Carlsbad’s General Plan and Calavera Hills
Master Plan. Replacement of lost recreational-vehicle (RV) parking reduces land use impacts from
construction of detention Basin “BJ” to below a level of significant. All other significant impacts are
reduced to a less than significant level by design or proposed mitigation.
Funding for long-term biological maintenance of the CNP (Village Z) is assured as a condition of the
1993 mitigation agreement included as Appendix G to the final EIR. Extensive landscaping is planned
for each of the component areas of the project and would be maintained by the homeowners
association for areas within the Master Plan Phase II area. Mitigation for impacts to sensitive
resources will be provided by a combination of replacement and collection of fees on a per-acre basis,
at an amount to be determined by the City Council.
ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE EIR
The final EIR evaluates the following environmental issues in relation to the project: land use, landform alteration/visual quality, traffic circulation, noise, agriculture, public facilities, biological
resources, archaeology/cultural resources, paleontology, hydrology, air quality, and geology. The final
EIR also addresses growth-inducing and cumulative impacts; other required considerations, which
include effects found not to be significant; and alternatives that would reduce or avoid significant
impacts of the proposed project. The City of Carlsbad Planning Department, located at 1635 Faraday
Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008, is the custodian of the documents and other material which
constitute the entire record and the proceedings upon which the decision is based (Administrative
Record).
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 4 12/12/01 20
The final EIR indicates that impacts to land use, agriculture, archaeological/cultural resources, and air
quality (except short-term direct impacts during construction) will be less than significant with
development of the first component, the proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II. All significant
direct short- or long-term impacts for all remaining issues can be reduced to a less than significant
level with implementation of proposed mitigation. The final EIR indicates that all direct impacts on the
remaining environmental issues can be substantially lessened or avoided if all the proposed mitigation
measures recommended in the final EIR are adopted. For the Master Plan Phase II portion, these
issues include landform alteration/visual quality, traffic circulation, noise, public facilities, biological
resources, paleontology, hydrology, air quality (short-term construction-induced), and geology/soils.
Direct impacts from development of the remaining components, including the Bridge and
Thoroughfare District No. 4 and detention basins, for the following environmental issues are less than
significant: traffic circulation, public facilities, and air quality (except short-term direct impacts during
construction). The final EIR indicates that all direct impacts on the remaining environmental issues
can be substantially lessened or avoided if all the proposed mitigation measures recommended in the
final EIR are adopted. These issues include land use, landform alteration/visual quality, traffic
circulation, noise, agriculture (detention basins only), public facilities, biological resources,
archaeology/cultural resources, paleontology, hydrology, air quality, and geology/soils.
In addition, the final EIR does not consider the project growth inducing.
The project’s cumulative impact on landform alteration/visual quality is considered significant and
unmitigable. For all other environmental issues, impacts can be substantially lessened or avoided if all
the proposed mitigation measures listed in the final EIR are implemented.
The following findings are made pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA and Title 14 of the California
Code of Regulations, Sections 15091 and 15093 (State CEQA Guidelines).
I. Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)
The City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR for the
project and the public record, finds (pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines) that changes or
alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen
the significant environmental effects as identified in the final EIR with respect to the areas of (1) land
use, (2) landform alteration/visual quality, (3) traffic circulation, (4) noise, (5) agriculture, (6) public
facilities, (7) biological resources, (8) archaeology/cultural resources, (9) paleontology,
(10) hydrology/water quality, (11) construction-induced air quality impacts, and (12) geology and
soils.
Implementation of the following recommendations will occur via the imposition of conditions of
approval for the project.
1) Land Use
ImDact: The Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance requires an RV storage lot for the Ranch0 Carlsbad
Mobile Home Park. Section 2 1.45.090 requires 20 square feet of RV storage for each of the
520 mobile home lots. This results in a required 10,400-square-foot (0.24-acre) minimum lot to
accommodate the park (exclusive of driveways). Allowing for aisles and driveways, the
estimated maximum RV storage area required is 0.5 acre. The existing lot (1.5 acres), located
in the area proposed for Basin “BJ,” exceeds the size required by the City’s zoning ordinance
by approximately 1.25 acres and is only partially used at this time. As a result, the elimination
of the RV storage area in excess of 0.24 acre in size (exclusive of driveways) is not considered
a significant impact, in that the excess acreage is not necessary for compliance with the City’s
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 5 12/12/01
aI
4
1.
zoning requirements. The loss of the required 0.24-acre of RV storage, however, is considered
a significant impact requiring mitigation.
Finding: In order to reduce the significant land use impact resulting from the loss of 0.24-acre
RV storage, the following measures shall be shown on the grading and improvement plans for
both the College Boulevard Reach A and detention Basin “BJ.”
Prior to elimination of access to the existing approximately 1.5-acre RV storage parking for
Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park (RCMHP) located within proposed detention Basin “BJ”
and commencement of construction of Reach A of College Boulevard or installation of
detention Basin “BJ,” the project applicant for Reach A shall secure a minimum 0.24-acre
replacement site (exclusive of access roads) for RV storage parking at one of the following
locations:
2)
a)
a)
l The Ranch0 Carlsbad Partners’ property between RCMHP and the future College
Boulevard Reach A;
l The Robertson Ranch immediately northwest of the mobile home park and south of
Cannon Road;
l Within an area surrounding detention Basin “BJ” on the RCMHP property; or
l Another site suitable and convenient to the RCMHP residents.
The selected site shall be approved by the Planning Director for the City of Carlsbad andshall
be installed prior to the beginning of construction for either Reach A of College Boulevard
(which will cut off resident access to the site) or installation of detention Basin “BJ” (which
will have the potential to inundate the lot with floodwaters).
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
Impact: The landform alteration/aesthetic impact from both within Calavera Hills and off-site
areas (e.g., El Camino Real and Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park) from the development of
the southern villages is considered a significant visual quality impact. As shown in the noise
section, noise walls up to 12 feet in height will be required. As an example, a noise wall
approximately 1,400 feet in length with a maximum height of 12 feet will be required at
Village U. The aesthetic impact associated with noise walls of this magnitude on both sides of
the roadway will be considered a significant visual quality impact.
Finding: Significant impacts are reduced to below a level of significance with implementation
of measures included in the EIR. These include the following:
The project applicant shall implement the proposed Master Landscape Concept Plan and
conform to the grading requirements contained in the proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan.
These requirements contained in the Master Plan include the following and shall be made
conditions of future tentative map approvals.
In order to reduce the direct landform alteration/visual quality impacts to below a level of significance,
all of the following mitigation measures shall be implemented by a Final landscape plan to be
approved by the Planning Director, with the approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final
Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs first:
1. Utilize slope contour grading, in conjunction with landform vegetation planting for slopes
adjacent to natural open space where visible from public roadways and public open spaces.
Application of landform planting to simulate contour grading shall be required to soften the
visual impact of manufactured slopes over 20 feet in height and 200 feet or more in length.
The planting will consist of a variety of drought-tolerant trees, shrubs, and g-round covers, with
similar sized plants undulating horizontally and vertically on the slope face. All the plantings
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 6 12/12/01
xi
2.
3.
4.
5.
W
b)
6.
3)
4
a)
1.
will conform to the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual. This measure is required to provide a
visual transition of slopes into the natural terrain in conformance to the City of Carlsbad
Hillside Development Ordinance Section 2 1.95.120(F)( 1).
Implement the Master Plan’s Landscape Guidelines and Landscape and Irrigation Standards for
manufactured slopes adjacent to the proposed draft HMP open space to reduce the contrast and
blend the visual appearance of the graded and developed site from natural off-site areas.
Implement the Master Plan’s Landscape and Irrigation Standards and Landform Planting to
simulate contour grading between development and native vegetation on visible manufactured
slopes and internal project landscaping to reduce the off-site aesthetic impact from the grading
proposed for residential development pads and roads.
Implement the Master Plan’s Landscape and Irrigation Standards and Fire Control guidelines
for perimeter slopes as a condition of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or
Grading Plan, whichever occurs first.
Implement the Master Plan’s design guidelines for noise walls (exterior treatment and
landscaping) to reduce aesthetic impacts. (See Figure 3B-16 of the EIR for compliance with the
Master Plan’s six-foot-high solid wall height limitation.) A combination of wall/glass/berm is
allowed if approved by the City and shall be landscaped to reduce the aesthetic impacts along
College Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive. This type of noise wall shall be shown on all
grading, tentative map, and landscaping exhibits as required with the approval of the individual
tentative’s map Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs first.
Impact: Both roadways in conjunction with the urbanization from existing, approved, and
planned development will contribute to the degradation in the aesthetic character of the larger
subregional area. This change in aesthetic rural character from the grading and construction of
the proposed alignments is considered a significant impact.
Finding: Project conformance to the Master Plan Landscape Guidelines and Landscape and
Irrigation Standards for grading and revegetation will simulate natural slope contours, reduce
the contrast between newly graded areas, soften the visual impact, and reduce landform
alteration/aesthetic impacts to below a level of significance. The following measure will be
shown on the grading and improvement plans for College Boulevard, Cannon Road, and the
detention Basin “BIB.”
Revegetate manufactured roadway slopes for College Boulevard, Cannon Road, and detention
Basin “BIB” with native species to provide a transition to the adjacent native habitat as shown
on the Landscape Plan approved by the Planning Director.
Traffic Circulation
Impact: No significant project-induced traffic impacts have been identified that warrant
mitigation. Measures listed as mitigation are project design measures.
Finding: The construction of traffic signals on Master Plan Phase II roadways and construction
of College Boulevard Reaches C and B (south of Carlsbad Village Drive to Cannon Road),
Cannon Road Reach 3 (College Boulevard to El Camino Real), and participation in the Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 for Cannon Road (Reach 4) and College Boulevard (Reach A)
avoid direct impacts to traffic circulation. The project design incorporates the following
measures into the project construction scheduling to avoid or reduce any potential impacts to
below a level of significance. These measures include the:
Construction of traffic signals at warranted locations within the Master Plan Phase II area;
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 7 12/12/01 OS3
2. Construction of College Boulevard Reaches C and B (south of Carlsbad Village Drive to
Cannon Road) and construction of Reach 3 of Cannon Road linking College Boulevard and El
Camino Real; and
3. Participation in the financing of the proposed Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 or other
financing mechanism for Cannon Road Reach 4 and College Boulevard Reach A.
The above provisions of the Calavera Hills Master Plan shall be accomplished through payment or
credits of Bridge and Thoroughfare District fees and/or construction of facilities as noted above.
b) Impact: The City of Carlsbad is proposing removal of an existing barricade on College
Boulevard south of Lake Boulevard. This action is not project dependent but is assumed to be
in place prior to implementation of the proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II and
Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 project.
b) Finding: Only in the event that the City of Carlsbad removes the existing barricade on College
Boulevard south of Lake Boulevard prior to the construction of College Boulevard and Cannon
Road, the interim mitigation measure listed below would be necessary. To avoid significant
impacts from this action to the intersections of El Camino Real/Palomar Airport Road and at El
Camino Real/Tamarack Avenue, it is anticipated that the City will complete the following
measure prior to removal of the barricade:
1. Restripe the westbound through lane of Tamarack Avenue to create a left-turn lane within the
existing roadway. This will improve the A.M. peak hour intersection operations to acceptable
LOS C and p.m. peak hour operations to an acceptable LOS B.
While the restriping of the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and El Camino Real, as proposed above,
will ensure an acceptable level of service for this intersection through buildout of the project, the
restriping measure should be considered an interim solution only. Restriping of the intersection as
proposed results in a non-standard lane configuration which reduces the through movement capacity
along Tamarack Avenue. In addition, due to the close proximity of the adjacent La Portalada Drive
intersection on Tamarack Avenue, there is inadequate queuing space to accommodate the expected
number of left-turn movements, which will result in reduced carrying capacity of the intersection. The
permanent solution to ensure the proper functioning of the Tamarack Avenue and El Camino Real
intersection is the completion of the College Boulevard and Cannon Road linkage from Carlsbad
Village Drive to El Camino Real.
4) Geology/Soils
4 Impact: The geotechnical reconnaissance study for the development of eight villages and the
construction of College Avenue from Carlsbad Village Drive south to Cannon Road indicates
that some remedial work may be required to address the presence of claystones/siltstones at or
near cut grades, including stabilization fills. Sedimentary and igneous bedrock materials were
found to be generally suitable for the support of fills and structures. Very dense exposures of
igneous bedrock will likely require drill and shoot blasting techniques in order to excavate.
This is considered a significant impact.
a) Finding: The following mitigation measures will be required to reduce impacts associated with grading and blasting activities:
As a condition of approval of the master tentative map’s Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs
first, the project applicant shall implement the following general and specific measures to reduce
impacts to a less than significant level. These include:
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II
1. Grading: Fill and cut slopes shall be stabilized consistent with recommendations included in
the geotechnical report. Site excavation and grading shall employ remedial earthwork for all
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 8 12/12/01
w
villages (including but not limited to, shear key construction for all fill slopes, removal and
recompaction of colluvial topsoils and overexcavation of transition pads or cut pads exposing
bedrock transitions or expansive soil. Buttresses and/or stabilization fills do not appear to be
necessary but may be required depending on future slope stability analyses or field experience.
Overexcavation may be required, below the depth of the lowest utility line for street areas
exposing hard rock. Conventional grading and drill and shoot excavation may be required
within all villages except Villages H and R where conventional grading equipment should be
sufficient. Grading and blasting activities (specifically, ripping and blasting of boulders) shall
conform to the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical study, City of Carlsbad Grading
Ordinance and San Diego County Blasting Ordinance as they apply.
2. Expansive Soils, Slopes, and Foundations: Post- tensioned foundations shall be employed for
areas with highly expansive soil conditions - including natural slopes within Village H and R
exposing earth materials belonging to the Santiago Formation and expansive clayey bedrock
materials.
3 * Slope Erosion: Subject to the approval of the City Public Works Director, the project
proponent shall remove topsoil to the recommended depth, depending on location and
recompaction requirements, as indicated in the geotechnical report prepared for the projest.
4. Foundations: Subject to the approval of the City Public Works Director, the project proponent
shall monitor settlement at locations identified in the geotechnical study. At a minimum, the
project applicant shall employ post-tensioned foundations for areas where structures overlay
compacted fills approximately 30 feet or more in thickness or where differential fill thickness
exceeds 3 : 1 across the lot.
5) Noise
Construction
a> Impact: Portions of existing residential developments (Villages C, D, L-l, 0, Pl, and Q) could
experience noise levels in excess of County standards during blasting activities. As indicated,
if blasting activities occur within 225 feet of existing residential areas for more than eight
hours, a significant noise impact could occur.
4 Finding: Blasting and disclosure requirements are mandated by ordinance. Title 3, Div. 5,
Chapter III, of the County Code of Regulatory Ordinances provides enforcement, application,
definitions, and requirements to be met prior to issuance of a blasting permit. Among these are
the requirement to show insurance and indemnification, permitted hours, notification
requirements, violations and penalties, and payment of fee requirements. Detailed information
can be obtained from the County of San Diego Sheriffs Department, License Division, 9621
Ridgehaven Court, P.O. Box 429000, San Diego, California 92142-9000. In addition to the
preceding, the following requirements will lessen potential noise impacts to existing residential
areas to below a level of significance and are required as a condition of approval for the master
tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs first. The following
summarizes the measures to be-incorporated in this project.
Prior to approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever
occurs first, the project developer shall implement the following measures to reduce potentially
significant noise impacts to portions of existing residential developments (Villages C, D, L-l, 0, P 1,
and Q) during blasting activities:
1. Prior to blasting, an overall blasting program and blasting schedule shall be approved by the
City Public Works Director and Planning Director.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 9 12/12/01
25
2.
3.
4.
5.
Prior to blasting, the contractor shall provide confirmation to the satisfaction of the City Public
Works Director that the Carlsbad Police Department and the County Sheriffs Department have
been notified that blasting activities are about to commence.
Prior to blasting, the property owner shall provide proof (e.g., copy of certified letter and mail
receipt) that a one-time notice in writing has been given to residences and businesses within
600 feet of a potential major blast location. The notice shall include the anticipated blasting
schedule and provide a contact phone number for the blasting contractor.
A pre-blast inspection of existing structures shall be conducted within 300 feet of any proposed
detonation by an inspector approved by the Carlsbad Police Department, the San Diego County
Sheriffs Department, and the City of Carlsbad Building Department.
The project shall conform to San Diego County Blasting Ordinance Title 3, Division 5, Chapter
III, County Code of Regulatory Ordinances Sections 35.377.101-104, 35.377.301(a),
35.377.306 and 35.377.307) to reduce the temporary noise impacts due to blasting and Section
8.48010 of the City’s Municipal Code limiting allowable hours of activities. The allowable
hours of activities associated with blasting will be from 9:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. or one-half hour
before sunset, whichever comes first, Monday through Friday. No blasting will be allowed on
weekends or on the holidays specified in Section 848.010 of the City’s Municipal Code. _
A blasting report shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad City Public Works Director prior to
any blasting activities. The report shall conform to the San Diego County Blasting Ordinance
(Division 5, Title 3, Section 35) and vibration standards promulgated by the U.S. Bureau of
Mines.
6.
b)
b)
1.
2.
3.
4
c)
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Impact: Portions of existing residential developments (Villages C, D, E-2, F, G, L-l, Q, and T)
and the Calavera Hills Community Park west of Village E-l could experience noise levels in
excess of County standards during grading activities.
Finding: Prior to approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading
Plan, whichever occurs first, the project developer shall implement the following measures to
reduce potentially significant noise impacts to portions of existing residential developments
(Villages C, D, E-2, F, G, L-l, Q, and T) and the Calavera Hills Community Park west of
Village E-l generated by grading activities. Implementation of the following measures will
avoid or reduce potentially significant noise impacts to below a level of significance:
Hours of grading shall be limited to the time period allowed in Carlsbad Municipal Code
(Section 8.48.010); 7:00 A.M. to sunset on weekdays and 8:00 A.M. to sunset on Saturdays. No
grading, except in the event of an emergency as determined by the City Manager per Municipal
Code Section 8.48.020, shall occur on Sundays and designated holidays.
If grading activities will occur within 150 feet of existing residential areas, those construction
activities shall be limited to an eight-hour period within the allowable time frame indicated
above.
Grading and construction equipment shall be properly maintained and fitted with standard
mufflers. Verification shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Planning Department Director
prior to the commencement of grading.
Impact: Although not significant, noise levels from the temporary materials processing centers
could be perceived as a nuisance to receivers in the surrounding existing residential areas
(Villages C, L-l, 0, P-l, and Q).
Finding: The following measures shall be implemented to reduce noise generated by activities
at the materials processing centers while in operation that could be perceived as a nuisance to
receivers in the surrounding existing residential areas (Villages C, L- 1 , 0, P- 1, and Q):
Statement of dverriding Considerations 10 12/12/01 36
1.
2.
Hours of operation of the materials processing centers shall be limited to the time period
allowed in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 8.48.010 for construction; 7:00 A.M. to sunset on
weekdays and 8:00 A.M. to sunset on Saturdays. No construction, except in the event of an
emergency as determined by the City Manager per Municipal Code Section 8.48.020, shall
occur on Sundays and designated holidays.
Prior to the commencement materials processing, construction equipment shall be properly
maintained and fitted with standard mufflers.
Future TraffbGenerated Noise - On-Site
4
d)
1.
2.
Impact: Portions of the proposed project could experience future exterior noise levels in excess
of the City’s 60 CNEL (community noise equivalent level) exterior noise standard. This is
considered a significant noise impact requiring noise barriers in appropriate locations.
Finding: Barrier heights specified below are relative to pad elevations where barriers are
constructed at the pad edge. Where barriers are constructed along the roadway edges; the
barrier height is relative to the roadway. Required barrier heights may be achieved through the
construction of walls, berms, or wall/berm combinations.
The effectiveness of a barrier is dependent upon the quality of construction and the barrier
material mass and acoustical properties. Barriers should be free of cracks and holes. The
transmission loss through a barrier should be at least 10 decibels greater than the estimated
barrier attenuation (Federal Highway Administration 1979:34). If a barrier attenuates noise
levels by 5 A-weighted decibels [dB(A)] at a receiver location, the barrier transmission loss
must be at least 15 dB(A) to prevent audible noise from traveling through the barrier and
adding to the acoustical environment. Examples of acceptable barrier materials include, but are
not limited to, masonry block, wood fiarne with stucco, 0.5-inch-thick Plexiglas, or 0.25-inch-
thick plate glass. If transparent barrier materials are used, no gaps should occur between the
panels.
Village H
a) The project applicant shall construct noise barriers varying from three to four feet in
height along the top of the pad slopes as shown in Figure 3D-5 of the EIR to ensure that
exterior ground-floor noise levels are reduced to 65 CNEL or less.
b) For those areas where ground- and/or second-floor exterior noise levels are projected to
exceed 60 CNEL, it will be necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that
interior noise levels meet the City’s 45 dB(A) hourly average sound level [L,,(h)]
standard for schools. Forced-air circulation or air conditioning shall be provided for all
buildings where it is necessary to keep windows closed in order to meet the City’s
interior noise standard.
Village E- 1
4 The project applicant shall construct noise barriers approximately 11 feet in height
along College Boulevard and 8 feet in height along Carlsbad Village Drive to ensure
that noise levels at all ground-floor usable areas within the village are reduced to a level
at or below 60 CNEL. Noise barriers shall comply with Figure 3B- 16, which describes
noise barrier specifications.
b) The project applicant shall perform a detailed acoustical study to refine the above-
required barrier heights and locations once detailed grading plans are completed as part
the Village’s entitlement process.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 11 12/12/01
J7
Interior Noise Levels for Residential Uses:
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation is
required:
a) At the time building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building perrnits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CNEL or greater will be required to demonstrate that interior noise levels due to
exterior sources will be below the 45 CNEL residential interior standard.
W The project developer shall provide forced-air circulation or air conditioning for
residential use areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL and it
will be necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels
meet the City’s residential interior standard of 45 CNEL.
3. Village K
Exterior Noise Levels:
The project applicant shall construct noise barriers varying from three to five feet in height along the
top of the pad slopes as shown in Figure 3D-7 of the EIR to reduce significant noise levels at all-
ground-floor usable areas within the village to 60 CNEL or below.
Interior Noise Levels:
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation
measures are required:
4 At the time building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building permits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CNEL or greater will be required to demonstrate that interior noise levels due to
exterior sources will be below the 45 CNEL interior standard.
b) For those areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, it will be
necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the
City’s interior standard of 45 CNEL and forced-air circulation or air conditioning is
required.
4. Village U
Exterior Noise Levels:
The project applicant shall construct noise barriers varying from five to twelve feet in height along the
edge of College Boulevard as shown in Figure 3D-9 of the EIR to reduce noise levels at all ground-
floor usable areas within Village U to 60 CNEL or below. Noise barriers shall comply with Figure
3B-16 in the EIR. Moreover, if additional points of access from College Boulevard and, as a
consequence, additional breaks are required, no usable exterior areas shall be placed adjacent to those
breaks.
Interior Noise Levels:
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation is
required:
4 At the time that building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building permits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 12 12/12/01
28
CNEL or greater will be required demonstrating that interior noise levels due to exterior
sources will be below the 45 CNEL interior standard.
W For those areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, it will be
necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the
City’s interior standard of 45 CNEL and forced-air circulation or air conditioning is
required.
5. Village W
Exterior Noise Levels:
To reduce significant exterior noise to residential uses, the project applicant shall construct noise
barriers varying from five to eleven feet in height along the edge of College Boulevard as shown in
Figure 3D-11 of the EIR to ensure that noise levels at all ground-floor usable areas within the village
would be at or below 60 CNEL. Noise barriers shall comply with EIR Figure 3B-16.
Interior Noise Levels:
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation is
required:
a) At the time building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building permits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CNEL or greater will be required demonstrating that interior noise levels due to exterior
sources will be at or below the 45 CNEL interior standard.
b) For those areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, it will be
necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the
City’s interior standard of 45 CNEL and forced-air circulation or air conditioning is
required.
6. Village X
Exterior Noise Levels:
To reduce significant ground-floor exterior noise levels for residential use areas, the project applicant
shall construct noise barriers varying from five to nine feet in height along the top of the slope as
shown in Figure 3D-11 in the EIR. This measure reduces noise levels at all ground-floor usable areas
within the village to a level at or below 60 CNEL. Noise barriers shall comply with EIR Figure 3B-
16.
Moreover, if additional points of access from College Boulevard and, as a consequence, additional
breaks are required, no usable exterior areas shall be placed adjacent to those breaks.
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation is
required.
Interior Noise Levels:
4 At the time building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building permits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CNEL or greater will be required demonstrating that interior noise levels due to exterior
sources will be at or below the 45 CNEL interior standard.
b) For those areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, it will be
necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 13 12/12/01 25
City’s interior standard of 45 CNEL and forced-air circulation or air conditioning is
required.
7. Village Y
Exterior Noise Levels:
To reduce significant ground-floor exterior noise levels that exceed the City’s 60 CNEL residential
standard, the project applicant shall construct noise barriers varying from six to ten feet in height along
the top of the slope as shown in Figure 3D-11 of the EIR. The noise barrier will reduce noise levels at
all ground-floor usable areas within the village to a level at or below 60 CNEL. Noise barriers shall
comply with EIR Figure 3B-16.
Moreover, if additional points of access from College Boulevard and, as a consequence, additional
breaks are required, no usable exterior areas shall be placed adjacent to those breaks.
Interior Noise Levels:
Even with the construction of noise barriers, noise levels at the second floors of the units adjacent to
the roadways could exceed 65 CNEL. Standard construction is not assumed to adequately reduce
interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL at these locations. Therefore, the following mitigation is
required:
a) At the time building plans are available for the units in this village, and prior to the
issuance of building permits, a detailed acoustical analysis for units exposed to 65
CNEL or greater will be required demonstrating that interior noise levels due to exterior
sources will be at or below the 45 CNEL interior standard.
b) For those areas where exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, it will be
necessary for the windows to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the
City’s interior standard of 45 CNEL and forced-air circulation or air conditioning is
required.
Future Traffic-Generated Noise - Off-Site
Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Park Home:
To reduce significant noise impacts to the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park for the proposed
Cannon Road Alignment (EIR Alternative 1 or Alternative 3), the project applicant shall construct
minimum four-foot-high noise barriers along the edge of the roadway as shown in Figure 3D-12 of the
EIR to reduce noise to a level at or below the City’s residential noise standard of 60 CNEL
Robertson Ranch House:
The project applicant shall construct noise barriers varying from seven to eight feet in height for the
proposed Cannon Road Alignment (Alternative 1) (EIR Figure 3D-12) or for Alternative 3, the
“Reduced Intersection Elevation” alternative as shown in Figure 3D-16 of the EIR to reduce exterior
noise levels at the ranch house to a level at or below the City’s 60 CNEL standard. Noise barriers shall
comply with Figure 3B-16 of the EIR.
Development of Future Sensitive Receivers:
To avoid significant impacts to future sensitive receivers that may be constructed within approximately
1,500 feet of the proposed Cannon Road or College Boulevard alignments, the City shall require all new development placed adjacent to these roadway alignments to prepare detailed acoustical studies
demonstrating that on-site noise levels will meet City standards if the road is built and require deed
restriction to be processed with village-level approvals to disclose adjacent noise source.
Existing Residents/The Cape:
To reduce significant noise levels at The Cape due to traffic on future segments of College Boulevard
where noise levels are projected to exceed 60 CNEL, the project applicant shall offer to construct noise
barriers varying from three to nine feet in height on private properties as shown in Figure 3D-18 in the
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 14 12/12/01
30
EIR. With implementation, exterior noise levels at The Cape are anticipated to remain at or below the
City’s 60 CNEL standard. Noise barriers shall comply with Figure 3B- 16 of the EIR.
Prior to grading or construction of College Boulevard Reach C, the project applicant shall make an
effort to gain permission from each of the affected private property owners prior to construction of
barriers on private property within the Cape. Permission to construct the barriers shall be voluntary
and owners may refuse the barrier construction. In the event that individual owners refuse barrier
construction, noise impacts at those locations would remain significant and unmitigated. The barriers
may be constructed of transparent materials (e.g., glass, Plexiglas). Where permission is granted,
actual construction of the wall shall occur concurrently with the construction of College Boulevard.
To obtain the permission of individual property owners, the project applicant shall:
4 Contact the homeowners and inquire as to the desirability of a barrier constructed on their
backyard.
W Obtain the necessary entrance and construction permits for building the barrier and the releases
for maintenance of the constructed wall for those units whose owners have given a positive
response.
cl Construct the wall.
For off-site properties subject to noise levels in excess of City noise standards and where permission is
required and granted to construct noise barriers (e.g., The Cape), the following mitigation is required
as a condition for approval of the Final Map or Grading Plans, whichever occurs first:
Prior to completion of College Boulevard Reach C:
a) The project proponent shall construct noise walls to conform to the design requirements
described in the Master Plan and this EIR (e.g., Figure 3B-16).
b) An acoustical study shall be prepared and submitted to the City demonstrating that barriers are
sufficient to reduce exterior noise levels to the City’s 60 CNEL standard or below.
c) Amended codes, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be reviewed by the City for barrier
maintenance.
5) Agriculture
a) Impact: Both College Boulevard and Cannon Road are adopted General Plan circulation
element roadways. Previous environmental analysis conducted for the final EIR for the
Calavera Hills Master Plan (1993) indicated that, prior to inclusion on the circulation element,
there is no possible rerouting of the Cannon Road and College Boulevard alignments that
allows these roads to function as planned while at the same time avoiding impacts to active
agricultural areas or prime agricultural soils. The project roads are required to connect already
urbanized and developing areas east of El Carnino Real with urbanized areas to the west, south,
and north. Given that earlier approvals acknowledged that avoidance of a significant impact to
prime agricultural soils is possible only with selection of the No Project alternative,
implementation will result in a significant impact.
a) Finding: To reduce significant direct and indirect impacts to prime agricultural soils and
ongoing agricultural operations affected by construction of project segments of College
Boulevard and Cannon Road, the following measure shall be shown on the grading and
improvement plans for all reaches of College Boulevard and Cannon Road and detention basins
“BJB” and “BJ.”
1. Proposed detention basins and project segments of College Boulevard and Cannon Road shall
maintain a site access throughout construction and subsequent operation of the roadways and
basins to ensure continued access to all remaining active agricultural areas.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 15 12/12/01 31
6) Public Facilities
The following measures regarding city administrative facilities, library, and wastewater treatment are
required as a condition of approval for the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading
Plan, whichever occurs first.
City Administrative Facilities
a> The proposed project reports a total of 6,004 persons, or 239 persons more than the Impact:
1989 analysis. The impact of increasing buildout population by 239 persons from the
development of Phase II does not significantly affect the results of the previous analysis, which
concluded that city administrative facilities will be adequate and in conformance with the
adopted performance standard through buildout of the zone.
With the 1991 formation of the City of Carlsbad Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 1,
funding for all Uure city administrative facilities is guaranteed to buildout of the city. Zone 7
property owners are participants in this CFD program. Significant impacts to City
administrative facilities will not occur.
4 Finding: Implementation of the following measure reduces or avoids the potential impact:
1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay public facilities fees, which
constitute the required financial guarantee and Zone 7 mitigation for city administrative
facilities.
Library Facilities
9 Impact: The approved 1989 Zone 7 LFMP requires that 800 square feet of library space be
scheduled for construction within a five-year period for every 1,000 population within the
zone. Implementation of the proposed project will significantly contribute to the impact to
library facilities.
b) Finding: Implementation of the following measure reduces or avoids the potential impact:
1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay public facilities fees, which
constitute the required financial guarantee and Zone 7 mitigation for library facilities.
Wastewater Treatment Capacity
cl Impact: The Zone 7 LFMP requires that adequate wastewater treatment capacity is available
for development for at least five years. In addition, all private development within Zone 7 is
required to pay Carlsbad Municipal Sewer fees prior to the issuance of building permits.
4 Finding: Implementation of the following measure reduces or avoids the potential impact:
1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay Carlsbad municipal sewer
fees. No additional mitigation is required.
Parks
4 Zone 7 has been determined to have a surplus supply of parks throughout anticipated Impact:
buildout of the zone (Planning Systems 1999) based on current City policy which recognizes
future Larwin Park as funded within the next five years. As a result, at buildout the additional
population associated with the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on
parks. In the event the City modifies their policy in the future regarding Larwin Park or
eliminates its funding and provides no replacement park activity areas within Park District 2,
this could become a significant impact due to its inconsistency with the Growth Management
Plan.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 16 12/12/01
34
d) Based on current City policy, sufficient parkland is available and funded to meet the Finding:
adopted performance standard for park requirements in Park District 2, and thus no mitigation
is required. The City of Carlsbad Public Works/Parks and Recreation city staff is required to
demonstrate annually that the project complies with Growth Management Plan for park
facilities in this park district. In the event City policy changes, or public funding for proposed
parkland is withdrawn or redirected to the degree that the performance standard of 3 acres of
parkland per 1,000 population is no longer attained, then the developer shall provide sufficient
funding for parkland to allow the proposed development to proceed prior to the issuance of
building permits.
Drainage
e) Figures 2-l and 3B-15 of the final EIR show the location and configuration of large- Impact:
scale detention basin improvements that will be constructed to retain storm water runoff in
conjunction with anticipated Zone 7 Phase II development (Basins“BJB”).
e) Finding: Project design and proposed drainage improvements detailed in the EIR reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level. These measures include the following:
Table 3F-2 shows the on-site drainage improvements that will be implemented in conjunction with
anticipated Zone 7 Phase II development. The following additional off-site improvements are required
to reduce or avoid the potential for flooding of downstream properties:
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall ensure that construction of
first phase improvements for the future Basin “BIB” are adequate to mitigate the flows from
the Calavera Hills development such that there is no increase to drainage flow discharged into
the Calavera Creek north and adjacent to the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park.
2. As a condition for approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading
Plan, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall show proof of payment or credit for
construction of facilities “BIB” of the existing Local Drainage Area Fee program and
participation in the financing of the expanded Master Drainage Plan improvements required to
mitigate existing flooding problems within the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park
downstream of the Calavera Hills Master Plan development.
Implementation of these measures mitigates the project impacts to below a level of significance.
Fire Facilities
f) Impact: Even if relocation of Fire Station No. 3 is delayed, implementation of the proposed
project will have a less than significant impact on accomplishing the City’s Fire Facilities
Performance Standard because the number of total dwelling units outside the five-minute
response time boundary will still not exceed the threshold standard of 1,500 dwelling units
0 If at some time in the future, the City of Carlsbad Finding: No mitigation is necessary.
determines that the Fire Service performance standard is no longer being met due to the fact
that the tire station has not been relocated to the comer of Carlsbad Village Drive and Glasgow
Drive, the City must adopt measures to ensure the adequate fire protection can be provided. If
such measures are not adopted, then development within the fire district will be restricted or
halted. Sewer Collection, Facilities
g) Impact: It is anticipated that all future Zone 7 Phase II development will utilize the
NAHISAHTI trunk system and that no additional sewage is projected to be directed toward
the VistaKarlsbad Interceptor Line from VC13 or below. Both the NAHI and SAHTI connect
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 17 12/12/01 33
to the Vista Carlsbad interceptor in the southernmost portion of the system at VC1 1 and VC14.
The draft Year 2000 study conducted by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) for
the NAHI sewer line evaluated the theoretical maximum flow rate that can be accommodated
with the existing NAHI line and the Foxes Landing Lift Station.
The earliest the SAHTI trunk line is expected to come on-line is mid to late 2002. When
completed, the line will accept all Zone 7C flow, which includes the vast majority of Phase II.
Phase II development occupancies may occur prior to installation of this line. This is
considered a significant impact requiring mitigation. In the event that development occupancies
occur and no permanent or acceptable temporary solution is proposed to resolve the
downstream regional SAHl sewer issue, the City or a developer will be required to install this
line, or an otherwise acceptable temporary solution, as a condition of development.
8) Finding: On-site sewage collection trunk line requirements for future Phase II development are
shown on Table 3F-3. In addition, subject to approval by the City Public Works Director,
significant direct and indirect long-term impacts to sewer collection facilities shall be reduced
to below a level of significance through implementation of the following measure:
The proposed development project shall participate in the existing fee program for financing the South
Agua Hedionda system. If South Agua Hedionda is not completed prior to the project’s need for
capacity, the project shall implement one of the following alternatives:
1) Divert flows to the North Agua Hedionda Interceptor as all flows are currently diverted.
2) If the North Agua Hedionda Interceptor is full, the project shall do one of the following:
4 Construct improvements on the North Agua Hedionda line to increase the capacity.
This could require construction of a temporary storage reservoir to regulate flows;
b) Construct an interim South Agua Hedionda Lift Station to meet the needs of the
proposed project;
C> Construct an interim lift station to pump into the Buena Vista Drainage Basin with all
required conveyance facilities to be constructed in road rights-of-way; or
4 Construct an interim lift station to pump flows into the Encinas Creek Basin.
All new conveyance facilities are to be constructed in road rights-of-way.
Water Distribution System
W
W 1.
7)
a)
a)
Impact: No distribution line changes to the water facility analysis and conclusions of the 1989
Zone 7 LFMP will be necessary as a result of the proposed land use redistribution in the
proposed project. The adopted Zone 7 LFMP indicates that, with mitigation, water facilities
will meet the adopted performance standard through buildout of the zone.
Finding: Implementation of the following measure reduces or avoids the potential impact:
The developer shall contribute to the construction of regional water facilities, funded by
CMWD through payment of water fees. On-site water distribution improvements to deliver
water to the new residences shall be in place prior to occupancy. Table 3F-4 of the EIR lists the
proposed on-site improvements to the water distribution system.
Biological Resources
Impact: The proposed project would impact listed species, sensitive plant communities,
including two non-sensitive plant communities listed as significant, habitat resources for
sensitive wildlife species in the City of Carlsbad’s draft HMP, (1999) and habitats considered
sensitive under CEQA, and wetlands.
Finding: Significant impacts to listed species, sensitive plant communities and habitats, and
wetlands can be mitigated to below a level of significance with mitigation measures listed
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 18 12/12lOl 34
below. This includes the plant communities identified as sensitive under CEQA and two non-
sensitive plant communities listed the City of Carlsbad’s draft HMP (City of Carlsbad 1999)
and classified as significant habitat resources for sensitive wildlife species: southern mixed and
chamise chaparral and non-native grassland. The Draft HMP provides mitigation guidelines for
impacts to these communities. These impacts are not considered significant under CEQA and,
if the Draft HMP is not approved or adopted by the City as currently published, these impacts
would not require mitigation. Additionally, all projects would be required to obtain applicable
permits for impacts to listed species as per Section 10(a) or Section 7 of the federal Endangered
Species Act.
The following measures are required as a condition of approval for the master tentative map’s (CT-OO-
02) Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs first.
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II
1) Sensitive Plant Communities
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to 80.8 acres Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) at a
ratio of 2: 1 through the on-and off-site site preservation of 161.6 acres of DCSS and restoration of 2.4
acres DCSS along manufactured slopes, for a total of 164 acres. Based on the Draft HMP “hard line”
open space areas, a portion of the manufactured fill slope on the southern side of Village K (see EIR
Figure 3G-4) would be located within the open space side of the “hard line,” but would be required to
be revegetated with coastal sage scrub. The project applicant shall ensure that no part of any fire
suppression zone shall be allowed within the Draft I-IMP “hard-line” open space areas except at
Village K and Village X. Mitigation for this impact will require a modified program for fire
suppression (which reduces the fire suppression horizontal distances of the zones) and a pull-back of
the structural development within these areas.
Southern Mixed and Chamise Chaparral:
Significant impacts to southern mixed and chamise chaparral shall be mitigated regardless of the
approval status of the Drawl HMP. The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to 27.5 acres of
southern mixed and chamise chaparral at a ratio greater than the required 1: 1 through preservation of
38.9 acres of like habitat.
Non-Native Grasslands:
Significant impacts to non-native grasslands shall be mitigated regardless of the status of the Draft
HMP. The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to 2.0 acres of non-native grasslands off-site at a
0.5: 1 ratio for a total of 1 .O acre. In total, the proposed project retains 18.2 acres of non-native
grasslands within the on-site open space preservation area.
Cismontane Alkali Marsh:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to 0.1 acre of cismontane alkali marsh (seasonal) at a
3: 1 ratio or 0.3 acre. This shall be accomplished through restoration of wetland habitat either on- or
off-site at a location acceptable to the resource agencies and City of Carlsbad.
Eucalyptus Woodlands/Disturbed Lands:
Impacts to eucalyptus woodland (1 acre) and disturbed lands (13.9 acres) shall be mitigated only if the
Draft HMP is approved. If the Draft HMP is not approved, impacts these lands would not be
considered significant under CEQA and would not require mitigation. If the Draft HMP is approved
and resources are determined to be subject to the City of Carlsbad “In-lieu Mitigation Fee,” the project
applicant shall pay for each acre of impact to eucalyptus woodland/disturbed lands at an amount to be
determined by the City Council.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 19 12/12/01 32-
Bridge and Thoroughfare District/Detention Basins
1) Sensitive Plant Communities
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to sensitive resources as follows:
l College Boulevard (Reach A). Impacts to 1.5 acres of DCSS shall be mitigated at a ratio of 2: 1
through the preservation of 3.0 acres at a location acceptable to the City of Carlsbad and
responsible agencies.
l College Boulevard (Reach B). Impacts to 3.2 acres of DCSS shall be mitigated at a ratio of 2: 1
through the preservation of 6.4 acres at a location acceptable to the City of Carlsbad and
responsible agencies.
l College Boulevard (Reach C). Impacts to 5.7 acres of DCSS have been previously mitigated as
part of Calavera Hills Phase I Mitigation Program for the development of Villages Q and T.
l Cannon Road (Reach 4). Impacts to 16 acres of DCSS at a ratio of 2:l through the on-site
preservation of 32 acres. Impacts shall be mitigated at a location acceptable to the City of Carlsbad
and responsible agencies.
Southern Mixed and Chamise Chaparral:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts to sensitive resources as follows:
l College Boulevard (Reach C). Impacts to 6.6 acres of southern mixed and chamise chaparral have
been previously mitigated as part of Calavera Hills Phase I Mitigation Program for the
development of Villages Q and T.
Non-native Grasslands:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts as follows:
l College Boulevard (Reach A). Impacts to 1 .O acre of non-native grasslands at a 0.5: 1 ratio for a
total of 0.5 acre of like habitat. Impacts to non-native grasslands shall be mitigated off-site, at a
location determined acceptable by the City of Carlsbad
l Cannon Road (Reach 3). Impacts to 0.7 acre of non-native grasslands at a 0.5: 1 ratio, for a total of
0.35 acre, of like habitat. Impacts to non-native grasslands shall be mitigated off-site, at a location
determined acceptable by the City of Carlsbad.
l Cannon Road (Reach 4). Impacts to 0.2 acre of non-native grasslands at a 0.5: 1 ratio, for a total of
0.1 acre, of like habitat. Impacts to non-native grasslands shall be mitigated off-site, at a location
determined acceptable by the City of Carlsbad.
Cismontane Alkali Marsh:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts as follows:
l Cannon Road (Reach 3). Impacts to 0.6 acre of cismontane alkali marsh shall be mitigated at a 3: 1
ratio for a total of 1.8 acres of like habitat. This shall be accomplished through restoration of
wetland habitat either on- or off-site at a location acceptable to the resource agencies and City of
Carlsbad.
l Cannon Road (Reach 4). Impacts to 0.1 acre of cismontane alkali marsh (seasonal) shall be
mitigated at a 3: 1 ratio for a total of 0.3 acres of like habitat. This shall.be accomplished through
restoration of wetland habitat either on- or off-site at a location acceptable to tl
and City of Carlsbad
Riparian Woodland:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts as follows:
l College Boulevard (Reach A), Impacts to 0.6 acre of riparian woodlands shall
ratio for a total of 1.8 acres of like habitat.
he resource agencies
be mitigated at a 3: 1
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 20 12/12/01
l College Boulevard (Reach B). Impacts to 0.7 acre of riparian woodlands shall be mitigated at a 3: 1
ratio for a total of 2.1 acres of like habitat.
l Cannon Road (Reach 3). Impacts to 0.6 acre of riparian woodland shall be mitigated at a 3:l ratio
for a total of 1.8 acres of like habitat. The replacement of five sycamores for every tree affected
will be required. Mitigation shall be at a location acceptable to the resource agencies and City of
Carlsbad.
Riparian Forest/Riparian Scrub:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts as follows:
l College Boulevard (Reach A). Impacts to 0.3 acre of riparian scrub shall be mitigated at a 3: 1 ratio
for a total of 0.9 acre of like habitat. Mitigation shall be at a location acceptable to the resource
agencies and City of Carlsbad.
l Cannon Road (Reach 3). Impacts to 0.2 acre of riparian scrub shall be mitigated at a 3,:l ratio for a
total of 0.6 acre of like habitat. Mitigation shall be at a location acceptable to the resource agencies
and City of Carlsbad.
l Cannon Road (Reach 4). Impacts to 0.1 acre of riparian scrub (Reach 4) shall be mitigated at a 3: 1
ratio for a total of 0.3 acre of like habitat. Mitigation shall be at a location acceptable to the
resource agencies and City of Carlsbad.
Eucalyptus Woodland, Agricultural, Disturbed Lands:
The project applicant shall mitigate for impacts as follows:
l College Boulevard/Cannon Road. If the draft HMP is adopted, the project applicant shall pay a
per-acre fee, at an amount to be determined by the City of Carlsbad City Council, to mitigate for
impacts to eucalyptus woodlands (1.5 acres), agricultural lands (30 acres), and disturbed lands (6.0
acres).
2) Sensitive Wildlife
Coastal California Gnatcatcher:
Construction impacts to active nests will be avoided by removing the DCSS within the project area
outside of the breeding season (February 15 to August 30) unless a qualified biologist determines that
there would be no impacts. A qualified biologist shall monitor all vegetation removal to ensure no
direct impacts occur to individual birds or nests.
Raptors:
Construction impacts to nesting raptors will be avoided by removal of any tree in the project area
between September and January, outside of the breeding season. If tree removal must be conducted
during the breeding season, a raptor nest survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any
removal to determine if any raptor nests are present. If an active nest is discovered, a buffer shall be
established around the tree until the young are independent of the nest site.
Least Bell’s Vireo:
All vegetation within the riparian scrub shall be removed outside of the breeding season (March 15 to
September 15) to ensure that no direct impacts occur to these species. Additionally, a biologist shall
monitor all vegetation removal to ensure no direct impacts occur to individual birds or nests.
3) Wetlands and Non-Wetland Jurisdictional Waters
For all the project components, impacts to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) wetlands and non-
wetland jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and CDFG jurisdictional wetlands require a 404 permit from
USACE, a 401 water quality certificate or waiver thereof from the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB), and a 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFG. All project components
shall be included in an individual 404 permit from USACE. The impacts to wetlands and non-wetland
jurisdictional waters are described in detail in the final EIR and total 3.3 acres. The habitats impacted
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 21 12/12/01 37
include riparian scrub (0.6 acre), riparian woodland (1.9 acres), alkali marsh (0.7 acre), and non-
wetland jurisdictional waters (0.1 acre).
Pursuant to pending wildlife agency permits (USACE 404, RWQCB 401, and CDFG 1603), the
wetland creation necessary to mitigate wetland impacts could occur in two locations at a ratio of 3: 1
for wetland habitats and a ratio of 1: 1 for non-wetland jurisdictional areas. The two locations are
adjacent to Basin “BJ” in Little Encinas Creek (3.6 acres) and within Calavera Creek north of Basin
“BIB” (7 acres). Approval of the wetland mitigation areas is required by the resource agencies as part
of the 404 and 1600 permitting process.
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II
Calavera Nature Preserve- Village Z:
To assure that funding is available for long-term maintenance of the Calavera Nature Preserve (Village
Z of the Calavera Hills Master Plan), the following mitigation is required and also included in the 1993
Mitigation Agreement (see final EIR Appendix G).
In order to provide for the cost of the long-term maintenance and biological monitoring program for
the preserve, following the end of the initial five-year management period (November 1998 to
November 2003), a long-term management program shall be defined and funded. The long-term
management program shall be defined through a line item scope of work description and associated
costs, to be prepared no earlier than the end of year two and no later than the end of year four, of the
initial five-year management period. The property owner/on-site environmental manager will initially
propose a scope of work for the long-term management program. The scope of work shall then be
subject to peer review by the City. Based upon the scope of work and associated costs, agreed to by
the developer or their successors and the City, a funding mechanism designed to finance preserve
maintenance into perpetuity shall be provided by the developer or their successors. The funding for
the long-term maintenance can be an annuity or other mechanism agreed to by the developer and the
City. Managing the long-term maintenance program may be a separate agreement between the City
and The Environmental Trust.
8) Archaeology/Cultural Resources
4 Impact: There are 14 unevaluated sites recorded within and immediately adjacent to the
proposed College Boulevard and Cannon Road alignments. These resources must be evaluated
to determine their eligibility criteria for the California Register of Historical Resources, as
required under CEQA and their significance under the Cultural Resource Guidelines. The
evaluations will include surface and subsurface testing investigations, updates of site records
for each evaluated resource, and a summary report and agreements for the long-term curation
of the archaeological collections. If significant sites will be impacted as a result of the
proposed improvements, then mitigation will be required.
a) Fourteen sites and one isolate are recorded within and immediately adjacent to the Finding:
proposed alignment and alternative alignments for the College Boulevard and Cannon Road
segments. Depending on the alignment selected, significant impacts could result. To avoid or
reduce potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources, the project includes the
following measures on the grading and improvement plans for College Boulevard and Cannon
Road.
1. As a condition of approval for the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading
Plan, whichever occurs first, and upon selection or approval of final roadway alignments by the
City Council: The project applicant shall provide a letter of verification to the City of Carlsbad
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 22 12/12/01 38
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
9)
4
a)
Planning Director that a qualified archaeologist/cultural resource specialist has been retained to
conduct a field investigation for the selected alignment(s).
Prior to any disturbance, a qualified archaeologist/cultural resource specialist shall conduct a
site investigation for resources located in the selected alignments of preferred College Avenue
alignment (Reach B) College Boulevard and Cannon Road to determine if any of the affected
sites meet the criteria for importance under CEQA and significance under the Cultural
Resource Guidelines. The project applicant shall submit the results of the full
archaeological/CEQA significance assessment and related mitigation to the City of Carlsbad
Planning Department prior to commencement of clearing, grubbing, or grading activities for
roadway or detention basin construction. The test program for each site shall consist of
mapping, a surface collection, surface scrapes, and subsurface test probes. If a subsurface
deposit is identified as a result of the subsurface test probes, up to three 1x1 -meter units shall
be hand excavated to provide a sample of site contents. Where bedrock milling is present, each
feature shall be measured, drawn to scale, and photographed.
Following site investigation, the qualified archaeologist/cultural resource specialist shall
analyze recovered cultural material and a summary report shall be prepared and submitted to
the City of Carlsbad Director of Planning, the client, the South Coastal Information Center
(SCIC), and the San Diego Museum of Man (SDMM). The summary report shall document the
significance assessment investigations, present discussions and supporting data concerning the
site’s ability to address applicable research issues, and make recommendations for future
treatment and impact mitigation.
The qualified archaeologist/cultural resource specialist, in cooperation with the responsible
agency, shall update or complete site records, submit them to the SCIC and the SDMM, and
make arrangements for the curation of the collections as needed following completion of the
site investigation and preparation of a summary report.
Prior to any disturbance and after release of the site investigation results, a treatment plan
detailing the mitigation of impacts to important sites will be prepared by a qualified
archaeologist and approved by the responsible agency. The qualified archaeologist/cultural
resource specialist shall develop mitigation for any eligible sites consisting of preservation of
significant resources in open space. If this is not feasible, a data recovery program shall be
carried out. This plan shall be implemented as a condition of the application for grading
permits.
Prior to approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map, Grading Plan approval,
or any other surface disturbance, and after release of the site investigation results, the project
applicant shall not proceed with plans to construct any College Boulevard or Cannon Road
alignment found to result in significant and unmitigated impacts to cultural/archaeological
resources without first circulating the results to the public and allowing comment during an
additional environmental review period.
Paleontology
Impact: Adverse impacts to paleontological resources could occur during grading for the
Master Plan and any of the proposed road extension alignments. Grading for these projects
could also impact paleontological resources in the “BJB” and “BJ” detention basins.
Finding: The following paleontological measures consistent with the city’s paleontological
mitigation program shall be required on the grading and improvement plans for College
Boulevard and Cannon Road and the detention basins. In addition to compliance with the
City’s adopted paleontological mitigation program, the following measures shall be made a
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 23 12/1UOl
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
10)
a)
a)
condition of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan approval,
whichever occurs first:
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of excavations and,
if necessary, salvage exposed fossils. The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of
excavations, the materials being excavated, and the abundance of fossils.
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an exposed fossil
to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage.
Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units, matrix samples should
be collected for processing through fine mesh screens.
Provisions for preparation and curation shall be made before the fossils are donated to their
final repository.
All fossils collected should be donated to a museum with a systematic paleontological
collection, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Hydrology/Water Quality
Impact: There is the potential for short-term erosion and sedimentation impacts due to grading
for development and the proposed project could have significant impacts on downstream water
quality.
Finding: The project will be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations as promulgated by the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board for the San Diego region. Current regulations require the control
of non-storm water discharges to the storm water conveyance system and development and
implementation of a monitoring and reporting program to assess the storm water pollution
prevention plan.
The RWQCB has developed new regulations for the NPDES permit (Tentative Order No. 2001-01).
The following mitigation measures shall be required on the grading and improvement plans for
College Boulevard and Cannon Road and the detention basins. In addition, the measures shall be made
a condition of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan approval, whichever
occurs first.
As a condition of approval of the master tentative map’s Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs
first, all project components the project will be required to adhere to applicable RWQCB the new
regulations and to control sedimentation and erosion, including installation of temporary detention
basins or other means of stabilization or impoundment required by the State Water Resources Control
Board. The following guidelines shall be used during design and implemented during construction to
reduce runoff and minimize erosion:
1. Comply with current drainage design policies set forth in the City of Carlsbad procedures.
2. Create desiltation basins where necessary to minimize erosion and prevent sediment transport,
until the storm drain system is in place and streets are paved.
3. Landscape all exposed, manufactured slopes per City of Carlsbad erosion control standards.
4. Phase grading operations and slope landscaping to reduce the susceptibility of slopes to
erosion.
5. Control sediment production from graded building pads with low perimeter berms, desiltation
basins, jute matting, sandbags, bladed ditches, or other appropriate methods.
11) Air Quality
a) Impact: The San Diego Air Basin is considered a nonattainment area for particular air
pollutants, and thus, all sources of emissions in the basin may be considered as contributing to
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 24 12/12/01 YO
4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
a significant air quality impact. Emission from construction activities could be significant
without the mitigation measures listed below.
Finding: Emission from construction activities, which are localized and short term, can be
mitigated using appropriate control measures. The construction mitigation measures listed
below should be included as conditions of approval of grading permits. Each
contractor/applicant is responsible for this task upon verification by the City of Carlsbad. The
phasing of the various construction projects is considered beneficial in terms of reducing
concurrent emissions from construction activities. All project construction activities (e.g.,
grading, blasting, materials processing) are subject to the City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance
and are required to implement the following Best Management Practices (BMPs) measures to
reduce impacts from fugitive dust and construction-related emissions. As conditions of the
master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map, Grading Plan, and the grading plans for College
Boulevard and Cannon Road (BTD No. 4) and detention basins, whichever occurs first, and to
be included as notes and exhibits on the grading plan and subsequent improvement plans, the
following mitigation measures will be required:
All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other dust control agents
acceptable to the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) during dust-generating
activities to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering or acceptable APCD dust control
agents shall be applied during dry weather or windy days until dust emissions are not visible.
Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be covered to reduce windblown dust and spills.
On dry days, dirt or debris spilled into paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to reduce
resuspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle moveme@. Approach routes to
construction sites shall be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt in dry weather.
On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered.
During on-site rock crushing, rock materials undergoing processing shall be watered at
sufficient frequency. The project shall install an automatic water, mist, or sprinkler system in
areas of rock crushing and conveyor belt systems.
The project shall abide by all conditions of approval for dust control required by the San Diego
APCD.
Low pollutant-emitting construction equipment shall be used.
Construction equipment shall be equipped with prechamber diesel engines (or equivalent) and
shall receive proper maintenance and operated so as to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide, to
the extent available and feasible.
9. Where feasible, electrical construction equipment shall be utilized.
Incorporation of these measures reduces construction-related air quality impacts to below a level of
significance.
12) Geology and Soils
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II
Impact: The presence of expansive/unstable soils presents a constraint to development where
any of the following occurs: highly expansive soils, compacted fills of 30 or more feet in
thickness, or differential fill where thickness conditions exceed 3: 1 across a given lot.
Finding: Implementation of standard engineering remedies, including post-tensioned or
conventional foundations systems, ensures that impacts associated with development on
expansive or compacted soils or soils of differential fill thickness are avoided or reduced to
below a level of significance. The following specific mitigation is proposed:
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 25 12/12/01 w
As a condition of approval of the master tentative map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan,
whichever occurs first, the project applicant shall implement the following general and specific
measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. These include:
1) Grading
Subject to the approval of the City Engineer Public Works Director, fill and cut slopes shall be
stabilized consistent with recommendations included in the geotechnical report. Site excavation and
grading shall employ remedial earthwork for all villages (including but not limited to shear key
construction for all fill slopes, removal and recompaction of colluvial topsoils, and overexcavation of
transition pads or cut pads exposing bedrock transitions or expansive soil). Buttresses and/or
stabilization tills do not appear to be necessary but may be required depending on future slope stability
analyses or field experience. Overexcavation may be required below the depth of the lowest utility line
for street areas exposing hard rock. Conventional grading and drill and shoot excavation may be
required within all villages except Villages H and R (Villages H, R, along with Village E-l which are
not part of master tentative map CT-00-02 and will receive separate grading approvals), where
conventional grading equipment should be sufficient. Grading and blasting activities (specifically,
ripping and blasting of boulders) shall conform to the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical
study, City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance, and San Diego County Blasting Ordinance, as they apply.
2) Expansive Soils, Slopes, and Foundations
Post-tensioned foundations shall be employed for areas with highly expansive soil conditions exposing
earth materials belonging to the Santiago Formation and expansive clayey bedrock materials.
3) Slope Erosion
Subject to the approval of the City Public Works Director, the project proponent shall remove topsoil
to the recommended depth, depending on location and recompaction requirements, as indicated in the
geotechnical report prepared for the project.
4) Foundations
Subject to the approval of the City Public Works Director, the project proponent shall monitor
settlement at locations identified in the geotechnical study. At a minimum, the project applicant shall
employ post-tensioned foundations for areas where structures overlay compacted fills approximately
30 feet or more in thickness or where differential fill thickness exceeds 3:1 across the lot.
Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4
Grading, Expansive Soils, Slopes, Foundations, Slope Erosion
b) The two alignments for each roadway have the same general soil conditions and, Impact:
therefore, share the same geologic concerns. Constraints include the potential for settlement
requiring monitoring where significant fills are proposed in alluvial areas that contain large
amounts of potentially compressible soils. Although these constraints represent a potentially
significant geological impact, the impact is easily mitigated with standard remedial grading and
road construction techniques. Very dense exposures of igneous bedrock will likely require drill
and shoot blasting techniques in order to excavate. This is considered a significant impact.
W Finding: In order to reduce impacts associated with grading and blasting activities, the
following measures will be required on the grading and improvement plans for College
Boulevard and Cannon Road and also made a condition of approval for the master tentative
map’s (CT-00-02) Final Map or Grading Plan, whichever occurs first, and upon selection or
approval of final roadway alignments by the City Council:
1. Subject to the approval of the City, the project applicant shall, depending on location and
recompaction requirements, remove topsoil to the recommended depth as indicated in the
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 26 12/12/01 44
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
II.
geotechnical report prepared for the proposed College Boulevard and Cannon Road
alignments.
Subject to the approval of the City, the project applicant shall stabilize fill and cut slopes
consistent with the recommendations included in the geotechnical report.
Subject to the approval of the City, the project applicant shall monitor settlement at intervals
and locations identified in the geotechnical study.
Subject to the approval of the City, the project applicant shall provide adequate subdrainage in
canyon areas consistent with recommendations in the geotechnical study.
Grading and blasting activities (specifically, ripping and blasting of boulders) shall conform to
the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical study and requirements of the City of
Carlsbad Grading Ordinance and San Diego County Blasting Ordinance as they apply.
Subject to the approval of the City, the project applicant shall ensure that toe keys are
constructed in side-hill fills consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical study.
Prior to construction, oversize rock shall be disposed of within the deeper fills. Rock in excess
of eight inches shall be placed a minimum of one foot below the lowest utility in road areas.
Final determination of rock disposal requirements shall be in compliance with the City of
Carlsbad Grading Ordinance.
Prior to grading of the proposed College Boulevard or Cannon Road alignments, a detailed
subsurface investigation shall be performed and additional measures identified if necessary to
remediate adverse geological conditions.
Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(2)
The City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR for the
project and the public record, finds there are no changes or alterations to the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts that are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency.
III. Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3)
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR to reduce the following significant
cumulative impacts to landform alteration/visual quality.
1) Infeasibility of Mitigation for the Significant Unmitigated Impacts
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
4 Impact: The proposed project, in combination with other cumulative projects in the area, will
contribute to the long-term alteration of the existing landforrn/visual setting from open space to
urban development.
4 As discussed in Chapter 5 of the final EIR, the project is consistent with the adopted Finding:
land use plan and zoning, and the conversion of open space and agricultural lands in this area is
planned and anticipated. Development cannot proceed as anticipated without the alteration of
land to accommodate needed infrastructure and suitable building sites.
2) Infeasibility of Project Alternatives to Reduce or Avoid Significant Impacts
Several land use variations were considered in the EIR, including variations for development of
Village E- 1 (proposed for Residential Medium High), Village K (proposed for Residential Medium),
Village H (proposed for Open Space and Community Facility), Village U (proposed for Residential
Medium High), and Village Y (proposed for Residential High), in response to comments received
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 27 12/12/01 43
from the public on the Notice of Preparation and subsequent public scoping meetings. Although
significant environmental impacts have not been identified for the uses presently proposed, several of
the alternatives would result in significant impacts.
Mitigation measures identified for the project when applied to other development variations are
sufficient to reduce any potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. For the
following land use variations: community facility at Village E-l, multi-family residential uses on 2.0
acres in Village H, alternative/additional community facilities at Village Y entrance/College
Boulevard, and the reduced intersection elevation for College Boulevard/Cannon Road alternative
(Alternative 3), measures can either avoid or reduce significant impacts to below a level of
significance with only minor changes or adjustments to the proposed mitigation (e.g., mitigation ratios
for biological impacts).
Therefore, the following discusses only those alternatives considered infeasible because impacts
exceed those that would otherwise occur with implementation of the project or another alternative.
a. No Project Alternative
The No Project alternative retains the remaining villages within the Master Plan in their present
undeveloped condition. This alternative would not achieve the goals and objectives of the project and
the existing Calavera Hills Master Plan or the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The proposed residential
buildout of the Master Plan, extension of the College Boulevard and Cannon Road roadway links,
flood control facilities, receipt of fees for schools and public facilities, and permanent retention of
open space as proposed in the Draft HMP would not occur as proposed. The No Project alternative
typically implies no development of the project site. As a result, the identified impacts related to
biological resources, archaeology/cultural resources, visual quality, public facilities and services, air
quality, noise, water quality, and traffic congestion associated with the proposed project would be
eliminated.
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the No Project
alternative identified in the EIR. Implementation of the No Project alternative for Calavera Hills
Master Plan Phase II, Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4, and Detention Basins would lessen or
avoid the impacts identified in the EIR for the proposed project. However, this alternative is infeasible
in that it would not achieve the goals and objectives of the project, the adopted Calavera Hills Master
Plan, or the City of Carlsbad General Plan, including the circulation element. The General Plan
objectives of providing housing, public facility improvements, and roads would not be met for Zone 7.
Consequently, adoption of the No Project alternative would not be consistent with the need for new
residential uses and supporting regional serving facilities, services, and improvements.
b. Approved Calavera Hills Master Plan Alternative
This alternative is a variation of the No Project alternative that considers implementation of the current
Calavera Hills Master Plan as approved. The existing land use designations and zoning for the
remaining Villages would be retained. As shown in Figure 3A-1 and Table 3A-1 of the final EIR, the
adopted Master Plan would result in 795 residential units; a 14-unit increase over the proposed
amendment. In addition, the adopted Master Plan would result in the following:
l Village E- 1 would remain designated for community commercial use;
l The 1 lo-acre Calavera Nature Preserve parcel would not be added to the Master Plan, Although
the GDP would allow 44 additional units to be developed on this parcel, subsequent actions to
preserve the site prevent future development and require preservation (see Appendix G to the final
EIR);
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 28 12/12/01
w
l Draft HMP open space corridor would not be created through Village K;
l Overall open space acreage would be decreased;
l A designated community facility uses within the Master Plan (Village H and Y) would not occur;
and
l Village K would house up to a 4 16-unit apartment/condominium site and would remain as the
affordable housing site. Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the approved Calavera
Hills Master Plan alternative identified in the EIR.
The adopted Master Plan is not environmentally preferable to the proposed project primarily because
of the increased impacts to biological resources. Open space within the boundaries of the current
Master Plan area would be approximately 25 acres less than for the proposed project. Consequently,
the HMP hard line open space would not be modified to provide a wildlife corridor through Village K
and linking two biological core areas. The 1 lo-acre Calavera Nature Preserve adjacent and east of the
Master Plan boundary would not be added to the Master Plan but the requirement to fund and provide
long-term maintenance and biological monitoring for the CNP would be unaffected because this-
requirement was established as a mitigation agreement between the City and project proponent for the
adopted Master Plan in 1993 (Appendix G to the final EIR).
The overall traffic generation would be 9,864 average daily traffic (ADT) greater with the retention of
Village E- 1 as community commercial as compared to the multi-family residential use proposed.
C. Alternative Land Use Designations
Village E-l:
Three alternative land uses are considered for Village E-l. These include modifying the existing
community commercial designation to (1) Neighborhood Commercial (N), (2) Community Facility
(CF), or (3) Affordable Housing (RH). The affordable housing alternative is discussed separately
below with other affordable housing alternatives. The adopted Master Plan use for Village E-l
(Community Commercial (C) - 11.7 gross acres/g.0 net acres) is not entirely consistent with the
adopted General Plan land use element guideline because this designation is typically applied to sites
with a minimum of 10 to 30 acres.
Neighborhod CummerciaZ: The neighborhood commercial land use provides for more limited retail
businesses, typically as a group of smaller stores and service shops, than community commercial,
which typically offers a greater depth and range of merchandise, including “big box” retailers.
Neighborhood commercial centers are usually anchored by a grocery store, while a community
commercial center may be anchored by a department store or home improvement supply store. Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 (a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternative land use
designation to Neighborhood Commercial for Village E- 1.
Development under the alternative is rejected as infeasible because:
1. The alternative does not meet the project goals and objectives to the same degree as the
proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II amendment.
A study prepared for the project and alternatives (Feasibility of Developing a Retail-
Commercial Shopping Center, Village E-l, Calavera Hills-College Boulevard and Carlsbad
Village Drive, included as Appendix K to the EIR and on file at the City of Carlsbad) indicates
that the population base of the trade area for Village E-l is insufficient to provide the necessary
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 29 12/12/01
sales volume for a successful commercial center, even at buildout of the City. One existing
and two future commercial centers are adequate to properly serve the subject trade area. These
in include the existing 1 O-acre Von’s Center at El Camino Real/Matron Road, the approved 1 S-
acre Sunny Creek site at El Camino Real/College Boulevard, and the proposed 40-acre South
Coast commercial site on College Boulevard, south of Highway 78 in Oceanside.
The estimated daily traffic for a neighborhood commercial use at this location is 10,800 ADT
as compared to 912 ADT for the multi-family use proposed for the Master Plan amendment.
This use is considered compatible with adjacent land uses provided buffers and design
measures are implemented to protect nearby residential areas. However, the potential for traffic
conflicts between commercial and residential uses would be increased, especially at Glasgow
Drive. Glasgow Drive is a busy local residential street and primary access street that would
require widening if this alternative use were selected. Noise impacts to adjacent residential
2.
areas would also be increased but could be mitigated by construction of a sound wall and
buffer between the property and Village D (The Cape) to the south.
Affordable Housing Alternative Locations:
Alternative locations for affordable housing are considered for Villages K (9 acres of a total 1 &acre
site), E-l (9.3 acres), and U (9-acre northern half).
Village K
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the Village K affordable
housing alternative location. Development of affordable housing at Village K, the highest point in
Calavera Hills, would substantially increase land use, visual, and landform alteration impacts as
compared to development of eighty-six single-family homes for the proposed project in Village K and
affordable housing at Village Y.
Village E- 1
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 (a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the Village E-l
affordable housing alternative location. Development of affordable housing in Village E-l is a
compatible land use but would incrementally increase potential traffic conflicts on Glasgow Drive that
would not occur if Village E-l is developed at the lower density and affordable housing is developed
at Village Y as proposed by the project.
Village U
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 2 108 1 (a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the Village U affordable
housing alternative location. Affordable housing development at Village U is considered a compatible
land use but proximity to the hard line habitat preserve, steep slope, narrowness of the pad, need for
excessive grading, and other site constraints would not accommodate the large pads necessary to
construct multi-unit buildings. Grading impacts would be increased substantially as compared to the
proposed project, requiring internal manufactured slopes and potentially high retaining walls both
internally and along the perimeter.
Viiiage H Alternative Residential Development Land Use:
Two residential development uses are considered for Village H. These include the single-family
residential and multi-family residential development alternatives.
Single-family Residential Development: Twelve single-family homes on an approximate 6.5acre
multi-level pad would be constructed instead of the two-acre community facility use as proposed.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 30 12/12/01
44
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 (a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the Village H
alternative residential development land use. This alternative is not preferred because it does not meet
the project objectives to provide a community facility and does not increase the HMP hard line open
space area within Village H. In addition, grading impacts would be increased to 10.4 acres as
compared to 3.1 acres for the proposed project and encroachment into the eucalyptus grove would be
greater, thus providing a less rural experience. Traffic, noise, and visual impacts would be
incrementally less for the residential use than for the community facility, but neither the proposed
project nor alternative would result in significant impacts.
Alternative Community Facilities Site:
Although not yet adopted, the City Planning Department is in the process of recommending a series of
modifications to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, which would
articulate new requirements for community facility uses within master plans and residential specific
plans. Adoption of these requirements, expected in 2001, may result in additional community facility
requirements of Calavera Hills Phase II beyond those identified for the proposed project at the time
this draft EIR was prepared.
As presently proposed by the Planning Department, development through a master plan amends-ent
involving over 100 acres of land would be required to provide a minimum of “two (2) net developable
acres plus 1% of the total net developable acreage in the area included in the proposed amendment” for
community facilities. The Calavera Hills Phase II net developable acreage totals 104.85 acres. If
approved, the community facilities use area required for the project would total 3.0485 net acres. This
is 1.048 net acres more than the 2.0 net acres presently proposed for Village H. Therefore, if the
additional community facilities acreage requirement is adopted, the following two alternatives are
provided to assess impacts of the additional community facilities acreage.
Expanded ViZZage H Community FaciZity Alternative: This alternative would expand the proposed 2.0-
acre (3.2 gross acres) community facility area by 1.05 acres (1.9 gross acres). The additional area
would be located within Village H, north and across Carlsbad Village Drive from the proposed project
site. Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the development of
additional acres for the expanded Village H community facility alternative because it develops an
additional 1.9 gross acres (1.05 net acres) identified in the Draft HMP as hard line open space
conservation area and reduces the project’s proposed 18.5-acre net increase in hard line open space
acreage by 2.43 acres. As a result, take of open space will necessitate approval of an equivalency
determination by the City of Carlsbad, in conjunction with a consultation with the USFWS.
d. Circulation Alternatives for College Boulevard and Cannon Road Alignments
The following discussion compares the environmental impacts for the alternative alignments
(Alternatives 2 and 3) with the proposed project alignment (Alternative 1) discussed in the EIR.
Figure 2-l 0 in the EIR delineates the alignments for each of the alternatives. The primary variation in
impacts for each alternative below concerns grading and visual quality, biology, land use
compatibility, and noise.
The alternative alignments affect Reaches 3 and 4 of Cannon Road and Reaches B and C of College
Boulevard. Except for Alternative 3, alternative alignments for Reach A of College Boulevard (El
Camino Real to the intersection of College Boulevard with Cannon Road) are not included, as the
alignment has been previously dedicated to the City.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 31 12/12/01 47
Alternative 3 is considered the preferred alignment. This alternative has been developed to consider a
lowered vertical alignment for those portions of the roadways near the intersection of Cannon Road
and College Boulevard. Implementation of Alternative 3 would modify approximately 1,400 linear
feet along the approved horizontal approach to the intersection for Reaches 3 and 4 of Cannon Road,
approximately 1,700 feet south of the intersection on College Boulevard Reach A, and along Reach B
Ii-om approximately 800 feet north.
Alternative 2:
Alternative 2 realigns College Boulevard Reaches B and C and Cannon Road Reaches 3 and 4.
Realignment of College Boulevard east of the proposed Alternative 1 alignment has no effect on the
approved alignment for Reach A (extending south of Cannon Road). The Alternative 2 alignment for
College Boulevard Reaches B and C proceeds northerly up the west side of the Calavera Creek
drainage from the intersection with Cannon Road and then northwesterly up the steep slope in Villages
W and U to intersect with Carlsbad Village Drive.
Cannon Road Reach 3, between the intersections with El Camino Real and College Boulevard, is
aligned along a route northerly of the Alternative 1 alignment, bisecting a knoll top before descending
easterly to the College Boulevard/Cannon Road intersection. Reach 4 of Cannon Road (between
College Boulevard and the Carlsbad/Oceanside city limits) would intersect the existing roadbed of
Cannon Road approximately 600 feet closer to the City boundary and at a lower elevation, reducing
the road elevation profile as compared to the proposed alignment (Alternative 1). This in turn reduces
requirements for an extensive retaining wall at the eastern limits of the roadway and reduces impacts
adjacent to the riparian habitat in Little Encinas Creek at the eastern end of Reach 4. However,
implementation would result in a non-standard median width and elimination of sidewalks on the
south side of the roadway. Implementation of the non-standard design requires a reduction in the
roadway design speed to 40 miles per hour at the east end of the alignment, within the city of
Oceanside.
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 2108 l(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make selection of the Alternative 2
alignments for College Boulevard Reaches B and C and Cannon Road Reaches 3 and 4 infeasible
because implementation would require:
l a redesign of Villages W, U and X;
l grading of an additional 8.5 acres more than for the proposed project alignment and over 10.6 acres
more than for Alternative 3;
l significantly greater cut and fill quantities (more than double the import requirement for
Alternative 1 and more than triple the requirement for Alternative 3); and
l maximum manufactured slope heights in excess of 100 feet in some locations and construction of
Cannon Road Reach 3 across the prominent knoll top, exacerbating significant visual impacts.
Selection would also incrementally contribute to increased impacts to:
l biologically sensitive habitats including nearly 2 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub and 0.7 acre
wetland and non-wetland jurisdictional waters (see EIR Table 4-3); and
l agricultural lands (7 acres); and
l would not be consistent with the City’s Draft HMP “hard line” open space system established
along the eastern edge (i.e., Village W) of the Master Plan.
Impacts would be incrementally greater than for the proposed project (Alternative 1) alignment and
significantly greater than for Alternative 3.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 32 12/12/01
No Cannon Road/College Boulevard Intersection Alternative Alignment:
This alternative alignment eliminates the proposed intersection between Cannon Road and College
Boulevard. College Boulevard would extend southerly from Carlsbad Village Drive to connect with
the Cannon Road/El Camino Real intersection, while Cannon Road, at the Carlsbad/Oceanside city
limits, would extend southerly to connect with the College Boulevard/El Camino Real intersection.
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make selection of the No Cannon
Road/College Boulevard Intersection alternative infeasible because it would result in unacceptable
levels of service by the year 2020 at several intersections. Unacceptable levels of service at the
intersection of El Camino Real at Cannon Road could be mitigated to attain acceptable AM and PM
peak hour operations only by widening the northbound approach to this intersection to provide dual
right-turn lanes and possibly triple left-turn lanes westbound to southbound. Unacceptable levels of
service also occur at the intersection of El Camino Real with Plaza Drive and at Tamarack Avenue.
These impacts would be reduced or eliminated by selection of Alternative 1,2, or 3 alignments.
e. Carlsbad Village Drive Widening at Victoria Avenue
To enhance the transition to the existing Carlsbad Village Drive, an alternative is proposed to add a
left-turn lane for northbound traffic (see EIR Figure 4-6). The road segment would be widened at this
location to 46 feet for a distance of approximately 400 feet, tapering to the existing road width at either
end. Total impacts would be limited to an approximate 700-foot corridor length along the north side
of Carlsbad Village Drive, north and south of Victoria Avenue. When completed, the road segment
would be configured to provide a lo-foot-wide left-turn lane for northbound traffic and two 13-foot-
wide through travel lanes and two 5-foot-wide bike lanes in each direction, A till slope along the north
side of Carlsbad Village Drive would be approximately 40 feet.
Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make selection of the Carlsbad Village
Drive Widening at Victoria Avenue alternative infeasible because the proposed project increase in hard
line open space acreage would be reduced by 0.83 acre, from 18.5 to approximately 17.7 acres. Road
grading and improvement requirements would incrementally increase impacts to sensitive habitats
(Diegan coastal sage scrub, riparian scrub, wetland habitat, and non-native grassland).
f. Calavera Hills Master Plan Environmentally Superior Alternative
The Calavera Hills Master Plan Environmentally Superior Alternative would eliminate development in
the Village U area to expand the width of the wildlife corridor through the east-central portion of the
project. This would result in more open space than would occur in the proposed project. This
alternative was chosen because it is biologically superior, and biological habitat preservation
requirements are the primary driving force behind the proposed Master Plan amendment, and this EIR.
This environmentally superior alternative would eliminate up to 179 dwelling units from the project,
including grading and infrastructure associated with development of Village U. Incremental decreases
in traffic and air quality impacts would also result from this alternative. Finding: The City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 2108 l(a)(3), that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make selection of the Calavera Hills
Master Plan environmentally superior alternative infeasible because implementation would eliminate
23 percent of the remaining housing planned for the Master Plan and, as a result, would result in
significant impacts because implementation would not fulfil1 the provision of housing objectives of the
City of Carlsbad land use and housing elements of the General Plan. The elimination of these units,
which will contribute to the College Boulevard and Cannon Road Bridge and Thoroughfare District
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 33 12/12/01
No. 4 through the payment of building permit fees, would impact the funding feasibility of this
District. This could result in the lack of adequate funding for these regional roadway links, which
would not fulfil1 the City of Carlsbad circulation element goals. In light of the fact that the proposed
project already involves dedication of greater amounts of open space than the existing Master Plan,
elimination of 23 percent of the remaining potential development revenue renders the overall project
financially infeasible.
The environmentally superior alternative is not consistent with previous agreements between the City,
the resource agencies, and the property owner to design and implement the proposed project with a
balance between urban development and habitat preservation. Selection of this alternative would also
result in reduced mitigation to ensure the long-term preservation of sensitive habitats.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 34 12/12/01
5-Q
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE
PROPOSED CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PHASE II,
BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT NO. 4,
AND DETENTION BASINS
(EIR 9%02/SCH 99111082)
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental effects
when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” (9 15093[a]). CEQA further
requires that when the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant
effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency
shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other
information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record (9 15093[b] of the CEQA Guidelines). This statement does not substitute-for,
and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to $15091 and 0 15093[c] of the CEQA
Guidelines.
The City Council, pursuant to 5 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, has balanced the benefits of the
proposed Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II, Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4, and Detention
Basins and associated actions (project) against the following unavoidable impacts:
l Cumulative impacts to landform alteration/visual quality
The City Council has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to the significant
cumulative impact and has examined a range of alternatives. One alternative, Alternative 3 for the
Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4, was found to reduce the project’s contribution to significant
cumulative landformkisual quality impacts but not to below a level of significance. No other
alternatives were found to meet most of the basic project objectives, were feasible, or were
environmentally preferable to the project.
The City Council, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits
of the project against its unavoidable environmental impacts, determines that the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects are considered “acceptable” due to the following specific considerations, each of
which individually will be sufficient to outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of
the project:
1. Increased Revenues
General Fund. The approval of this project would result in an increased generation of real
property tax revenue for the City of Carlsbad. The City would receive real property tax
increment revenues attributable to the increased value of improved real property associated
with the dwelling units for the project. Based on the assessed value of the land with
implementation of the proposed improvements and standard tax rates, the project would
contribute substantial total property tax dollars. A portion of these property taxes would be
paid to the City. It should be noted that the estimated real estate values and the tax rate used to
calculate the property tax are subject to change. Additional revenue contributions would also
be generated by increased sales tax, vehicle license in-lieu fees, real property transfer taxes,
other state subventions, and business license taxes.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 35 12/12/01 L-/
2.
3.
4.
5.
Additional Public Infrastructure Capital Contributions. The City’s Growth Management
Program and land use ordinances provide a series of public facilities fees and exactions that are
charged to new development, which are generally payable at either time of final subdivision
map or issuance of individual building permits. Based on the project as proposed, these public
infrastructure capital contributions are estimated to be substantial for the construction of public
infrastructure and facilities on a citywide basis, including city administrative facilities, fire
stations, libraries, roads, and storm drainage systems as well as public water and sewer
facilities. These capital contributions are in addition to the infrastructure being constructed on-
site and represent the project’s share of citywide infrastructure. The proposed project’s Capital
public facilities contributions consist of the following components:
4
W
4
d)
e)
0
g)
Growth Management Local Facilities Fees estimated at $3 10 per equivalent dwelling
unit (EDU).
Citywide Community Facilities District No. 1 per EDU. The CFD funds major area and
Interstate 5 bridges/ramps, including the ramp at Palomar Airport Road.
Traffic Impact Fee estimated per EDU contributes to the funding of various road,
signal, intersection, and similar transportation impacts throughout the City.
Public Facilities Fees contribute to the financing of city administration and maintenance
facilities, parks, libraries, fire stations, police stations, and similar city infrastructure.
Drainage Fees estimated depending on location; this fund is used to construct master
storm drain facilities in addition to those proposed by the project.
Sewer Connection Fees per EDU within the CMWD service area; these fees represent
the facilities capacity and connection charges for sanitary sewers and treatment plants.
Water Capacity charges per EDU depending on the water district and additional meter
connection fees per meter; charges and fees represent facilities capacity and connection
charges for water facilities and distribution/storage systems.
The foregoing fees may be subject to periodic adjustment and escalations in accordance with
the underlying ordinance or laws applicable thereto. The total fees represents the public
facilities capital contributions only and does not include any school fees or mitigation as the
project’s impacts on school facilities are addressed directly with the affected school districts
and various city processing, application, and plan check charges for processing approvals.
These fees and exactions are necessary to construct and replace important public improvements
in order to fund the public facilities and infrastructure necessary to maintain our community’s
quality of life for existing and future residents of Carlsbad.
Job Creation. The project would generate new temporary construction-related jobs that would
enhance the economic base of the region.
Reduces Existing Housing Shortfall. The project would provide and make available a
maximum of 781 additional housing units in an area, which is experiencing a shortage of
housing units.
Consistent with Regional Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan, the City of Carlsbad Draft
HMP (1999), and 1993 Agreement Establishing the CNP. Project will acquire and preserve
an estimated 50 acres of sensitive habitats consistent with the regional habitat planning goals.
In addition, the HMP “hard line” open space boundary will be increased to accommodate a
wildlife corridor through Village K, linking two biological core areas.
Consistent with the City of Carlsbad General Plan and Policies. The project is consistent
with the General Plan and Policies in that it provides for residential development and necessary
infrastructure as envisioned by the plan. Proposed residential, community facilities, open
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 36 12/12/01
52
6.
7.
8.
9.
space, and other development features provide a range of uses that are compatible with the
existing neighborhoods in the area and are located so as to harmonize and largely complete the
residential neighborhoods and supporting amenities for that portion of the City until buildout.
Affordable Housing. The project will provide approximately 15 percent of all units as
workforce affordable housing within Village Y of the Master Plan Phase II boundary in full
compliance with the City’s affordable Housing Inclusionary Ordinance and policies. This
commitment represents about 120 units that will be owned and managed to provide workforce
housing to Carlsbad employees who meet the income limitations beginning at 80 percent of the
area median income levels. This represents the continuation of an existing successful policy
and is necessary to meet the City’s obligations and commitments to increased housing
opportunities in Carlsbad.
Citywide Road Network Improvements. The project will construct College Boulevard
(Reaches A, B, and C) and Cannon Road (Reaches 3 and 4), critical north/south and east/west
circulation element roadways. These road improvements are important elements of the overall
road network of the City supporting local as well as regional traffic.
Regional Flood Control Improvements. The project includes the construction of two
detention basins located within the Calavera Creek and Little Encinas Creek watersheds. The
basins are part of a larger conceptual drainage plan outlined in the Ranch0 Carlsbad Channel &
Basin Project (Rick Engineering 1998) and are intended to minimize the potential for
downstream inundation of the off-site Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park during the loo-year
storm event. The detention basins correspond to facilities “BJ” and “BJB” in the City of
Carlsbad’s 1994 Master Drainage Plan.
Open Space and Natural Habitat Protection. The project would formalize inclusion of the
CNP within the Master Plan boundary and would result in a net increase of 18.5 acres of “hard
line” preserved lands. The proposed changes to the hard line preserve would not decrease
conserved area habitat quality and is considered to be the functional equivalent of the Draft
HMP configuration.
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations 37 12/12/01 X-93
son “0 d .5 gC$g 3.2 g E d= 0 brl WCAE
o.eet; !z VI a0
X
s
g
5 E
8
3
* B X
E
E
z
f
j . I ,
I / . ~ I ~ -,
i
,
'i 6
d
8 .!
5 . . , i
t .e i T Y
i i; :
2
c
i E c
g
a-7
I
‘; ‘Z s , .I n
& 0: E 0 .B 0% 8P &C $ .e
8E 72%
2: 4s fz4
$2
2s s 2 %G :, Es 2-3 22% 0, $2 &a da
58
kl %n
I I c
h 2”a .- .- 8X ‘5 g
TJ & e ww m Q .E
=f 2 22 0 ‘2 w
.G,g .c V&V
5-9
p t: 8 &
2~2 ‘Z w 9’ ‘a w Or=: E
i
WC 8 72 .c! O - -,W9 E d ‘g
8 E
c 8 8 ‘E ow c ‘g g OW $ -42 sg ^- ..-
00 CO HZ
-2
08 g 00
- IN lm
- -
k? ‘C 3 5 5 0 %
s -gJ Do.2
8 a .E s O$;r ‘G 3 CUW FL St3
pj 2s -0 -08 *= wc/lU.E.s? 9 s-s- ow a@, P %Z”xS .a 8 ,v+ g 5” a a- d +.FJ’>;W+- ES 8 %.Sm ,$j P E a
% 2.2 8% 2:
W’bCW’ti 4 gJDEOufi$Z se; “W a III a ~~~+-ch eg es0 c “;Z$ es orJY&.~ O~~“Wrnrn g3 Zvc6G>zf WvlOOX~
26 .2 z SL
E I I E
m
3 g-25
B
*Tli M.Z
0.5 =
f,$S.
3 SJ m- *z * .I :: g8m .I ;a$$
ai?2 en P’;; 2s
5 p ‘ii& 2 v) $&4
c--as
6542
g E ‘= g
O* 2
E ‘= ow
g
..M
SB
00 6s
8 8 B 5
6
2:
s 8
‘C :: &O a 0 a0
ij 3
-OiZ
SE!, .a .I w
1 &w CI ws
GEl” WY 220 w v1- > i-.r= w
‘;;i 3” a,% a 3 ‘5
-;ijaa .2 p! L, z Do.9
g 6$
$j cl .E
22%
zv+j
W c(
8
/ %
.d .Z E
E
8 c ‘3 00 ..-
fg 00
CA
7 $ gJm . -3” 9 z’-” sd E’E 05 g.au*z *.Z.E gqj > .-
kz O6 8% 3 E E:
%8eg;
.y .8 s CI ,.2.2-o w
-Ea,
**.ci
2 a 3 w.2 “0
g.E* a -$CfJO=
u-0 0072
aZ;r;8c $ g.s * 8 a5 0 a
.B afJgs
3.” 9 e-c
a ‘5 A B 6 -
g .E 3 8.g 5
y+ = w.3
244.5
3 r;l~*S .2 = P
g.=@ E’a 0
g E .- g
0% c ‘- 0- w- za . 2
03 SE gB
08
71
3
gj%
g .gg
%y$ g-; H
2 $a ’ . .z n
LI a.* m EPm
2 - lza 15 a8 M P’E g”i;:
2 t; O-&d “0 a -
ma” MQW
3585 v>s’S
g c ‘;: O* 22 sg
=0 00
I
i3 g % g c ‘C *s q 0,2!
CO
sg
OU =0 00
7 :
F
-0 lz B 0
h&
E?DgPi ‘Z w
S’ ‘2 fz
Orf; E ofj-
WE
s ‘2
.s g b
-a w .s
Ed g
3 E
2
2
3
$ ‘C
% .I .z
2
8
Zd
42
s
8
gm g
% e ‘;: ow
8g
..-
CO 00 @ 00
*5 .? a$ * D .- 8 3r .5, a a,ga ,2 a.q wgo +I is: ti mB 8 u 3 -0 m-5 sga $ % 2 m.9 0 .g+i 1 v ez
78
)
I
3 E <
I ,
1 i I
a
ga 3$d w cd.2 2 .5 ‘, 3 2 g.5 2
388
!a 8 .= f3 8
O-2 fi ‘3 ow g ‘;:
gf
m-
$&
-2 s@ 00 08 CO 00
8 8 8 9 B 2M 9
.I? .g 2M .2 .g 2M
o’c) m .9 .E * r;: .* OQ v)
.E 3 E
OQ3 -72. 8 - z 5% .z 82 Is% iti 2: g w &OOd ‘Cb w &OSL
a;00
WC
B 2 W
.g 0 c
-,&S 3
E d ‘g 200
3 s
.Y .g
OQ rJJ + r= .z
82 E & &
I2 s .P MOti .s $4 gJ”o 2 03 8
83
3
1
84
111 e X
Q lz 9 0
+-E?
Q& ‘Z w
93
.a g
02 5: MO-
Wr:
s 32
.r! 0 b
-a 8 s
E d ‘g
6 E
86
e
I f t
l b
:
u
E
z
e
E
5
L
f3 E .- 0% “- ;B 08
C
, 1 I 1 8 .* I
c
! t
2
Z
s . 3 ; ; 2 :
8 ) * t; 2 E
i . .
9
1
N
87
---r
d
88
W
a9
8 2 % s E p “2 ow
ZF
n- Y.?@
08 CO 00
h
.@ M.E h
a GE .9 h Ef?z
m u .s a ae m -0 .z G afi
aI:5 thBt;
d Q .41
“0 .t: 2 2 sb8’,
Id%
% .z
a” K8
Id%
$ .z 2
k “a8
zE%
k iii.8
,o s
00.2 h
.E b Q a= $2
cd -0 .4! 3 ac
bgt; a -0 .3 sJ:z % .z 2 zE%
“o c -2
k &S d% $ KS
9f
h g en g>r”o 3
B$.8-g$
;E?zs 0 0 0 .s a--SE wsgao d 0 rE 0
2 g Y-,2 Ef O 0 EQ E 2 ‘Jz 0 g .s *a’42 w z2!Ez-, 0 0 0.n a-+-SE Waga dOb..CV
s +N
22 3 =I2 a-0 0 $ CJ ‘E % .z 2
t:h
k ii8
g “$ x= .* d E z 93
95
& E d \o .& z- E
I I
X
,
; 1
; 3’ ! a : 2 zc4
i
; .c e 10
IW.
jd
’ :
f
i
3
: ‘;:
6 ‘Z . .
2
! i I ; 3 : .
j
i 3 i
I
I
1 I
,
I
’ i
I
1
>
;
3
;
i
I , I ,
I
I
,
l
c c .s
0, s
@
08
3 2 &
-@ 8gz.H CSk hT 3 0 0 04x2 .I?‘;:u he a gJf& g 50 - ‘3 0 ww Ov,,%Sz w w-
g :; [.[ p
a, m.n M-.-y Gaamtik ;It;-o 0as a aB- $2 fg.2~ aO%OBw ” 0 m&Z5 8’W E lZa50wti a-EcZ;E~ e hZ;;‘“a&a 2 ;=:%w w w .2 a - .- a-0 EQ -~UEm~ hksazu
i- a .- r;l w z 2G.a B,o,uPWW CI a a2252 .QOOaww
&2i?U2arn - - O& E
4 % f3 2% ZE ‘S 5 s 8 a 1 ,-z Gs y -0 w 22
E E
%
g&T g o a 0 w .c
3
if?&5 4 &C i En 2 CWSG,oE: oc 0 c -4
W
a- EuF/)
3 gs.-sTl E n a cE
s 52 00 0 x as .- .- 8cWrSm an - !i E 3 5 2
$2zfzsz P a au 8
Z8 “- sg ““2 k- d gs zg 8 3.; 8% c2 CO 00 CO- 0 U’S =0 00 ?L- h ” ” $2 .5
SE g&- 8
E d ‘g
3 E
8 % 2
3 E
%
A
z
W
‘3 a
s
r%
/O(
c .- g 8 $2 ‘G B g ‘z
8
OZ ow c ‘a ow ..-
8s 8&
..-
OS
Z
8&
gi? 88
EC4,--
8 .5
ii5 1,e 1 E d ‘3
5 E
a
9 2.g
$2 e
3;; E .;ii
2.2 w -A&J
S@
$ 0 .p
-2 !GJ.g w $.a.= P-u-0.~ oect; E-2 Ma
W
21 ‘2 B
of2 E M- WC
p! a
E E ‘C EJ ‘C .CI E
E i x
MC2 .E 22
$X
‘g Yg
22
8’ ‘6 B 0r.c E *- 05 8 ‘I2 .5 O b -a & s E d ‘g s E
a .h mn 2:s S6 v 0 .u ,xs is2
h E?“a .- .I 8X .z !g
ET
ll0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5113
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE
ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO IMPLEMENT
VARIOUS CHANGES TO THE CALAVERA HILLS MASTER
PLAN ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF
THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, WEST OF LAKE CALAVERA
AND EAST OF EL CAMINO REAL, IN THE NORTHEAST
QUADRANT OF THE CITY IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVEIW HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO: GPA 99-03
WHEREAS, Calavera Hills II, L.L.C, “Developer”/“Owner,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
A portion of Lots “D “, “E”, “J” And “L” of Ranch0 Aqua Hedionda,
according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of said San Diego County on November 16, 1896.
All being in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a General Plan
Amendment as shown on Exhibit “GPA - A”, attached hereto and on tile in the Carlsbad
Planning Department CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - GPA 99-03 as provided in
Government Code Section 65350 et. seq. and Section 21.52.160 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of December 2001,
and on the 2nd day of January, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law
to consider said request;
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 General Plan Amendment.
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
4
W
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BTD
##4/DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - GPA 99-03, as shown on Exhibit
“GPA -A” based on the following findings and subject to the following
condition:
Findinps:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the facts set forth in
the staff report dated December 19,200l including, but not limited to the following:
a) Land Use Element
0
ii)
iii)
iv)
9
vi)
vii)
PC BESO NO. 5113
Overall Objective B.l - Create a distinctive sense of place and identity
for each community and neighborhood of the City through the
development and arrangement of various land use components.
Overall Objective B.2 - Create a visual form that is pleasing to the
eye, rich in variety, reflecting environmental values. The proposed
open space designations create large contiguous conservation areas
that are visually pleasing and reflect the environmental value of the
areas.
Overall Policy C.4 - Encourage clustering when it is compatible with
adjacent development. The general plan amendment provides for the
shift of dwelling units out of the conservation areas resulting in a
clustering of development.
Overall Policy C.7.(4) - Provide public and/or private usable open
space and/or pathways designated in the Open Space and Recreation
Elements of the General Plan.
Overall Policy C.7.(8) - Provide affordable housing to lower and/or
moderate income households. Village Y will satisfy the master plan’s
affordable housing requirement.
Overall Policy C.12 - Develop and retain open space in all categories of land use. The project includes open space for the preservation of
natural resources and open space for outdoor recreation.
Residential Objective B.4 - Ensure that master plan communities
contribute to a balanced community by providing, within the
development, adequate areas to meet some social/human service needs
-2- //a
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
such as sites for worship, daycare, youth and senior citizen activities.
The proposed master plan amendment will comply with the City’s
Community Facilities requirements.
viii) Residential Policy C.3 - Consider density and development right
transfers in instances where a property owner is preserving open space in excess of normal city requirements. The basis of this master
plan amendment was to provide regionally significant wildlife
corridors that were in excess of the normal city requirements and
determined by affected resource agencies. Associated with the wildlife
corridor creation was the allowance to transfer the dwelling unit
allowance remaining in the master plan to non-open space areas.
ix) Community Facilities Policy C.l - Require new master plan
developments to provide land for a child daycare use and other
community facilities uses. The proposed master plan amendment will
comply with the City’s Community Facilities (CF) requirements by
providing two CF sites, one as a part of Village Y and one in Village
H.
b) Circulation
0 Streets & Traffic Control Policy C.18 - Require new development to
dedicate and improve all public rights-of-way for circulation facilities
needed to serve development. Dedication and improvement of all circulation facilities needed for the project as well as citywide facilities
identified on the circulation plan will be completed. This project
assesses and/or implements various planned roadways of the Calavera
Hills Master Plan and the City’s Circulation Element of the General
Plan.
Cl Housing
0 Policy 3.6a - A minimum of fifteen percent of all units approved for
any master plan community shall be affordable to lower-income
households. Village Y of the Calavera Hills master plan is proposed
to be designated RMH to accommodate affordable housing
developments.
d) Open Space and Conservation
i.) Open Space Planning Policy C.4 - Identify existing open space for
protection, management, and potential enhancement and, if possible,
increase its value as wildlife habitat. This project will implement
regionally significant wildlife corridors out of existing open space areas as well as area previously designated for residential
development.
ii.) Obtaining Open Space Objective B.l - Develop and implement
financing programs for the acquisition and maintenance of open
PC RESONO. 5113 -3- //3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
space. This project proposes open space areas that will be managed
and financially maintained. In addition, this project includes, as an
environmental mitigation measure, the long-term financing by the
master plan developer of the Calavera Nature Preserve, which is a
llO-acre parcel known as Village Z in the proposed master plan
amendment.
4 Public Safety
i) Fire and Emergency Medical Services Policy C.2 - Review new
development proposals to consider emergency access, fire hydrant
locations, fire flow requirements and wildland fire hazards. This
project proposes fire protection areas and policies that have been
reviewed and approved by affected resource agencies, as well as the Carlsbad Fire Department, since native areas with fire potential
surround the master plan’s development areas.
Proposed project consistency with applicable environmental goals of each of the
eight General Plan elements is attachment No. 12 to the staff report dated December
19,200l and is incorporated herein by reference.
In order to adjust the boundaries of any open space shown on the “Ofiicial Open
Space and Conservation Map” dated September 1994 the findings listed in implementing policy C.20 of the Open Space Planning and Protection Section of the
General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element are required to be made. The
three required findings and affirmative justification for each are as follows:
0 The proposed open space area is equal to or greater than the area depicted on the
Official Open Space and Conservation Map.
Proiect Finding: The Official Open Space and Conservation Map defines
approximately 138.8 acres of Calavera Hills Phase II land as either
“Existing/Approved Open Space,” “Constrained Open Space,” or both. As depicted
on the project’s proposed open space equivalency exhibit in the Draft EIR (Fig. 3 B-
7), the proposed Phase II project designates 159.1 acres of Calavera Hills Phase II
land as open space. Because the proposed open space areas are a greater quantity of
acreage than the areas depicted on the City’s existing Official Open Space and
Conservation Map, the proposed project is consistent with this Finding.
ii) The proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or greater than
that depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map.
Proiect FindinP: The proposed revision to the Official Open Space and
Conservation Map would bring the City’s General Plan into conformance with the
Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP), inasmuch as it would provide for a habitat
link across Village K, which constitutes a biological link between open space Core
Area 2 and Core Area 3. As depicted on the project’s proposed open space
equivalency exhibit in the Draft EIR (Fig. 3 B-7), this link of coastal sage scrub
vegetation is considered biologically important in the multi-species planning effort,
PC RESO NO. 5113 -4- //4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and will protect 14.2 acres of coastal sage scrub vegetation that would not have been
protected under the existing Open Space and Conservation program. The proposed open space design will additionally serve to protect several important sensitive
animal species.
iii) The proposed adjustment to open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space
and Conservation Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as
shown on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map.
Proiect FindinP: The proposed adjustments to open space are within close
proximity to the open spaces presently shown on the Open Space and Conservation
Map. As depicted on the project’s proposed open space equivalency exhibit in the
Draft EIR (Fig. 3 B-7), the primary difference is the new provision of the Village K
conservation link, which provides a biological link between habitat core areas,
which had not previously existed. This link is a significant component of the
proposed revisions to the Open Space and Conservation Map.
4. The proposed land use changes to the General Plan, which will be reflected and
implemented via the proposed master plan amendment (MP 150-H) for Calavera
Hills, are consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan as outlined
below on a village-by-village basis:
a) Village Z: The proposal to remove the existing Residential-Low (RL)
designations from the Calavera Nature Preserve and replace them
with Open Space (OS) is in keeping with the requirements of a 1993
mitigation agreement that accompanied the development of a portion
of Calavera Hills Phase I (Villages Q and T). This entire llO-acre
village will remain in permanent open space to be managed into
perpetuity as a nature preserve under the terms of the previously
referenced agreement. No residential or other development will be
allowed on Village Z except for a trail system.
b) Villape E-l : The proposal to replace the existing Community
Commercial (C) designation with a residential designation (RMH) is
consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan since the
City Council has adopted a Commercial Land Use Study (March
2001) which locates the commercial centers within the city at buildout.
The subject site was determined to not be a commercial site per the
analysis and conclusions of the Council-adopted Study. Its
redesignation to a residential use, therefore, is consistent with the
General Plan since facilities and public service will be able to serve the
additional dwelling units, which will not exceed the master plan’s
remaining dwelling unit allowance for buildout.
4 Village H: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Low (RL)
designation with Community Facilities (CF) and Open Space (OS), is
consistent with the General Plan, and the city’s recent adoption of community facility regulations which applies to master plan’s
processing amendments. A two-acre CF site will be located on Village
PCRESONO. 5113
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
d)
e)
f)
g 1
h)
9
H with the balance of the site designated as Open Space. The master
plan requirement to provide community facility uses is approximately
three acres; two acres will be provided at Village H and one acre of
CF uses within Village Y, the master plan’s affordable housing site.
Village K: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Medium
High (RMH) designation with Residential-Medium (RM) and Open
Space (OS) is consistent with the General Plan because it implements
a regionally significant wildlife corridor by greatly reducing the
developable area of the site which currently allows up to 400+
dwelling units. The reduction in density from RMH to RM, and the
establishment of a large open space corridor with Open Space
General Plan designations, implements the concept of transferring
dwelling units from an environmentally sensitive portion of the
master plan to another location. The redesignation of Village K
establishes an important wildlife corridor that has been targeted by
various resource and wildlife agencies.
VillaPe L-2: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Medium
(RM) designation with Residential-Low Medium (RLM) is consistent
with the General Plan because it further implements the master plan
amendment’s objective of establishing wildlife corridors and
transferring residential densities.
VillarJe R: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Low
Medium (RLM) designation with Residential-Medium (RM) and
Open Space (OS) is consistent with the General Plan because it
further implements the master plan amendment’s objective of
establishing wildlife corridors and transferring residential densities.
Village U: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Low
Medium (RLM) designation with Residential-Medium (RM) and
Open Space (OS) is consistent with the General Plan because it
further implements the master plan amendment’s objective of
establishing wildlife corridors and transferring residential densities.
VillaPes W and X: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-
Low (RL) designations with Residential-Medium (RM) and Open
Space (OS) designations is consistent with the General Plan because it
further implements the master plan amendment’s objective of
establishing wildlife corridors and transferring residential densities.
Village Y: The proposal to replace the existing Residential-Low (RL)
designations with Residential-High (RH) and Community Facilities
(0’) designations is consistent with the General Plan because it
further implements the master plan amendment’s objective of
establishing wildlife corridors and transferring residential densities.
Specifically, Village Y is proposed to be the site of the master plan’s
affordable housing development. In addition, and as a compliment to
PC RESO NO. 5113 -6- /II,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
j)
Conditions:
the dense residential development, Village Y will also be the site of the
l-acre balance of the master plan’s three-acre community facilities
requirement.
Various minor and incidental General Plan clean-up corrections and
refinements have been made to the General Plan map due to
increased detail and resolution that is now available on current
mapping technology. These changes are incidental and consistent
with the General Plan since they will eliminate designation
inconsistencies and/or cartographic inaccuracies without materially
affecting a parcel’s land use designations or development potential.
1. Approval of GPA 99-03 is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, MP 150(H),
LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01, CT 00-02 and HDP 00-02. GPA 99-03 is subject to all
conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112 for EIR 98-02.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of January, 2002, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
XI*
SEENA TRIGAS, Chairpers&r
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. WLZM&LER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5113 -7-
“WA - A”
EXISTING
PROPOSED
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
GPA 99-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5114
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY
OF OCEANSIDE, EAST OF LAKE CALAVERA, NORTH OF
FUTURE CAN-NON ROAD ALIGNMENT AND STRADDLING
PORTIONS OF FUTURE COLLEGE BOULEVARD
ALIGNMENT IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE
7.
CASE NAME: CALAVER HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO: MP 150(H)
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Hills II, L.L.C., “Developer”/“Owner,” has filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
A portion of Lots “D”, “E”, “J” and “L” of Ranch0 Aqua
Hedionda, according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County on
November 16,1896 all being in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Master Plan
Amendment as shown on Exhibit “MP 150(H)” dated December 19, 2001, on file in the
Planning Department, CALAVER HILLS PHASE II - MP 150 (H) as provided by MP 150
as amended, and Chapter 21.38 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and as shown on attached
Exhibit “X”; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of December, and
on the 2nd day of January, 2002, 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 Master Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CALAVERA HILLS - MP 150 (H) based
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance
with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the facts set forth in the staff
report dated December 19,200l.
2. That all necessary public facilities can be provided concurrent with need and adequate
provisions have been provided to implement those portions of the Capital Improvement
Program applicable to the subject property, in that the master plan property will be
subject to the requirements of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7.
3. That the residential and open space portions of the community will constitute an
environment of sustained desirability and stability, and that it will be in harmony with or
provide compatible variety to the character of the surrounding area, and that the sites
proposed for public facilities, such as schools, playgrounds and parks, or community
facilities are adequate to serve the anticipated population and appear acceptable to the
public authorities having jurisdiction thereof, in that proposed master plan amendment
builds out the remaining dwelling unit allowance of the Calavera Hills Master Plan
while providing regionally significant wildlife corridors, community facilities,
project open space areas and affordable housing.
4. That appropriate measures are proposed to mitigate any adverse environmental impact as
noted in the adopted Final Environmental Impact Report 98-02 for the project, and as
listed in the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Master Plan document(s) necessary to make them internally
consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur
substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different
from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
2. The approval of MP 150 (H)) is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, GPA 99-
03, LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01, CT 00-02 and HDP 00-02.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
PC RESO NO. 5114
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
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3:32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of January 2002, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
.
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5115
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 7 ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY
OF OCEANSIDE, EAST OF EL CAMINO REAL, AND ALONG
COLLEGE BOULEVARD WITHIN THE CALAVERA HILLS
MASTER PLAN IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE
CITY.
CASE NAME: CALAVER HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO.: LFMP 87-07(A)
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Hills II, L.L.C., has filed a verified application with the
City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 8797 adopting the 1986
Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishing facility zones and performance standards
for public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 9808 requiring the
processing of a Local Facilities Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8110 and 9829
implementing Proposition E approved on November 4, 1986, by the citizens of Carlsbad; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of December, 2001,
and on the 2nd day of January, 2002 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 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Zone 7.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
/a4
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
B)
Findings:
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Local Facilities Management Plan
Amendment - LFMP 7, LF’MP 87-07(A) on file in the Planning Department,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7 is consistent with Chapter 21.90 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Management), and with the Citywide Facilities
and Improvement Plan, in that it contains all matters required by Section 21.90.110
including special conditions for wastewater treatment capacity, parks, drainage,
circulation, schools, sewer and water. This ensures implementation of and consistency
with the General Plan and protects the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring that
public facilities and improvements will be installed to serve new development prior to or
concurrently with need.
Conditions:
1. Approval is granted for Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment - Zone 7 as
contained in the Plan titled Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 7, dated
DECEMBER 19, 2001, on file in the Planning Department, and incorporated herein by
reference.
2. This approval is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, GPA 99-03, MP 150 (II),
ZC 01-01, CT 00-02 and HDP 00-02.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of
the City of Carlsbad on the 2nd day of January 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZWLLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5115 -2- la3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5116
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LIMITED
CONTROL (L-C) TO PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) ON
PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE CALAVERA NATURE
PRESERVE/VILLAGE Z OF THE CALAVERA HILLS
MASTER PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF LAKE CALAVERA, IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO: zc 01-01
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Hills, L.L.C., “Developer”, has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by The Environmental Trust,
“Owner,” described as
A portion of Lots (‘D” and ((L” of Ranch0 Aqua Hedionda,
according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office
of the County Recorder of said San Diego County on
November 16,1896 ail being in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as shown on
Exhibit “ZC-A”, on file in the Planning Department, CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - ZC Ol-
01 as provided by Chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and as shown on attached
“Exhibit Y”; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of December, 2001
and on the 2nd day of January, 2002, 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
/a4
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - ZC Ol-
01 based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions:
FindinPs:
1. That the proposed Zone Change from Limited Control (L-C) to Planned Community
(P-C) is consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the General
Plan, in that the subject llO-acre parcel was acquired for coastal sage mitigation
purposes for an earlier phase of Calavera Hills development, in advance of the 1993
gnatcather listing by the federal government as a “threatened” species per
Endangered Species Act. The proposed zone change will formally add this nature
preserve to the Calavera Hills Master Plan, designated as Village Z. All residential
designations on the site have been removed and replaced with open space
designations per GPA 99-03 which accompanies this zone change request.
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 site’s General Plan designation will be entirely Open Space based
on GPA 99-03 as referenced above. The inclusion of the Calavera Nature Preserve
into the Calavera Hills Master Plan will also involve corresponding open space
designations within the Master Plan so that zoning and General Plan consistency
will be maintained.
3. That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity and general
welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that the Master Plan’s
earlier development necessitated the acquisition of this adjacent open space parcel,
and the nature preserve status of this site will be formalized and maintained via the
master plan.
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, GPA 99-03, MP 150(H),
LFMP 87-07(A), CT 00-02 and HDP 00-02
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
PC EESONO. 5116 -2- /as
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
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 2nd day of January, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
\ \ s,~&i+
SEENA TRIGAS, Chairper&
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5116 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5117
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 00-02 TO
MASS GRADE THE SITE AND SUBDIVIDE 2 17 ACRES INTO
6 LOTS FOR CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF
CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE AND COLLEGE AVENUE,
EAST OF EL CAMINO REAL, NORTH OF FUTURE CANNON
ROAD, AND WEST OF LAKE CALAVERA IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO.: CT 00-02
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Hills, L.L.C., “Developer”/“Owner,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as:
A portion of Lots “D”, “E”, and (‘J” of Ranch0 Aqua
Hedionda, according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County on
November 161896 all being in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative Tract
Map as shown on Exhibits “A” - “LL”, dated December 19, 2001, on file in the Planning
Department CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - CT 00-02 as provided by Title 20 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of December 2001
and on the 2nd day of January, 2002, 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 persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Tentative Tract Map.
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - CT OO-
02, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinm:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
That 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 lots
being created satisfy all minimum requirements of Title 20 governing lot sixes and
configuration and have been designed to comply with all other applicable
regulations including the Calavera Hills Master Plan (MP 150-H). The lots created
by this master tentative map will establish the village boundaries and configurations
which will be developed pursuant to the Calavera Hills Master Plan
That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for a variety of residential densities and non-
residential land uses as listed in the staff report which are compatible with the
master plan’s adjacent existing and planned development. An analysis of land use
compatibility is also contained in the project’s Final EIR (EIR 98-02).
That 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, in that the project site can accommodate the proposed mass grading.
Future residential development will comply with all development standards and
public facilities requirements of the master plan; buildout density of the master plan
will be less than the number of dwelling units that are currently permitted by the
existing master plan.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements 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 concurrent with recordation of the master tentative map’s final map, the
developer will vacate and adjust any easements that conflict with proposed
subdivisions and mass grading.
That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat, in that the project will implement all required mitigation measures contained
PCRESONO. 5117 -2- /a8
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
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
. . .
in the Final Program EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
that are applicable.
The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan and the Calavera Hills
Master Plan based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated December 19,200l and
as contained in the Planning Commission Resolution for GPA 99-03 which are
incorporated herein by reference.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7 and all City public facility policies and
ordinances.
The project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new
construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional
requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan prepared pursuant to
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability of
- public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project.
This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7.
That all necessary public facilities required by the Growth Management Ordinance will
be constructed or are guaranteed to be constructed concurrently with the need for them
created by this project and in compliance with adopted City standards, in that
improvements necessary to maintain compliance with the growth management
performance standards are contained in the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management
Plan and the project will comply with all conditions of the zone plan.
The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that as required by the amended
Calavera Hills Master Plan (MP 150-H), new residential development shall record a
notice concerning aircraft noise as the property is within the Noise Impact
Notiilcation Area (Figure 4 of the CLUP). The buildout of the Calavera Hills
Master Plan is subject to airport noise notification as outlined in the CLUP which
involves Noise Form 2, on file with the Carlsbad Planning Department, to be
recorded with each new residential unit; and Noise Form 3 which is a sales office
notice regarding the disclosure of airport noise.
That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -3- /29 I
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
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first.
If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Master Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-02).
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Master Tentative Tract Map documents, as necessary to-make
them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project.
Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed
development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project
are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code
Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be
invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies
with all requirements of law.
The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents,
and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising,
directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Master Tentative
Tract Map, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and
(c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation
survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City
approval is not validated.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Director a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar
copy of the Master Tentative Map reflecting the conditions approved by the final
decision making body.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -4- /30
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
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as part of the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
The Developer, and the City as related to College Blvd. Reaches B and C, Cannon
Road Reach 3 and Detention Basin BJB, shall implement, or cause the implementation
of, EIR 98-02’s Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, GPA 99-03, MP 150(H),
LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01, and HDP 00-02 and is subject to all conditions contained in
the Planning Commission Resolutions for those other approvals.
Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is not
being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for- any lots or units, the
Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to provide
and deed restrict the required 15 percent of the total dwelling units (including: Units
to be constructed within Village Y of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, depicted as Lot
3 of CT 00-02) as affordable to lower-income households for the useful life of the
dwelling units, in accordance with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter
21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall
be submitted to the Planning Director no later than 60 days prior to the request to final
the map. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future
owners and successors in interest.
The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
(Exhibits “W’‘-“LL”, on file with CT 00-02 at the Carlsbad Planning Department)
and the City’s Landscape Manual. The Developer shall construct and install all
landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a
healthy and thriving condition, fkee from weeds, trash, and debris. In addition, the
Developer, or the City as related to College Blvd. Reaches B and C, Cannon Road
Reach 3 and/or Detention Basin BJB, shall maintain all manufactured slopes and
natural open space areas to the satisfaction of the Planning Director consistent with
applicable provisions of the City’s Landscape Manual.
The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the
landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
This approval shall be null and void if the project site subject to this approval is not
annexed to City of Carlsbad CFD No. 1 within 60 days of the approval. The City shall
not issue any grading, building, or other permit, until the annexation is completed. The
City Manager is authorized to extend the 60 days, for a period deemed necessary, upon a
showing of good cause.
The Developer shall provide bus stops to service this development at locations and with
reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the Planning Director in consultation with the
North County Transit District where such facilities are requested along the project’s
street frontage. Said facilities, if required, shall be free from advertising and shall
PC RESO NO. 5117 -5- /3/
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15.
16.
17.
18.
include at a minimum include a bench and a pole for the bus stop sign. The facilities
shall be designed to enhance or be consistent with basic architectural theme of the
project.
Prior to approval of the final map, or issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall:
1) consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding the
impacts of the Project; and, 2) obtain any permits required by the USWFS.
Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy
#17, the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section
5.09.030, and CFD #l special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable
Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 7, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such
taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees are not paid, this
approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void.
Prior to the issuance of the grading permit or approval of the final map, Developer
shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County
Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested
parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Master Tentative
Map (CT 00-02) by Resolution No. 5117 on the real property owned by the Developer.
Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file
containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any
conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The
Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice
which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer
or successor in interest.
Consistent with the amended master plan (MP 150-H) a note shall be placed on the
final map approval of this master tentative map that will require that each
residential village prepare and record a Notice, prior to individual village final map
approval, disclosing that those villages may be subject to overflight, sight and sound of
aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the
Planning Director and the City Attorney (see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning
Department).
Open Space and Trails
19. On the final map, the Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the
City of Carlsbad for a trail easement for trail(s) shown on Figure 10 of the amended
Calavera Hills Master Plan (MP 150(H)). If the City of Carlsbad accepts dedication of
the trail easement, the trail shall be constructed as a public trail and will be the
maintenance and liability responsibility of the City of Carlsbad. If the City of Carlsbad
does not accept dedication of the trail easement, the trail shall still be constructed but it
shall be constructed as a private trail and shall be the maintenance and liability
responsibility of the Master Homeowners Association.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -6- /3a
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
20. Prior to approval of a final map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first,
the Developer shall prepare and submit an Open Space Maintenance Plan to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director which accomplishes at a minimum the following:
A. continued ownership of open space lot(s) by the Developer or its
successor in interest (such as HOA);
B. while in continued private ownership, active management to protect- and preserve
the quality of the habitat (including but not limited to trash removal and
reasonable prevention of trespass);
C. establishment of a non-wasting endowment fund to pay for management and
conservation of the open space in perpetuity. The endowment funds shall be
deposited in a secure investment paying a guaranteed rate of interest sufficient to
generate the amount needed for annual maintenance. (The cost of management
is currently estimated to be approximately $85 per acre per year). The
endowment funds shall not be commingled with other funds, and the proceeds
shall be used solely for the management of the conserved in accordance with
applicable permit conditions. Only the interest earnings can be withdrawn; the
principal must remain intact in perpetuity.
D. transfer of ownership and maintenance responsibility at some future date to the
City or its designee simultaneously with transfer of the endowment funds.
21. The Developer shall dedicate on the final map, an open space easement for those areas
which are depicted on Figure 9 of the amended Calavera Hills Master Plan (MP
150(H)) to prohibit any encroachment grading or development.
22. Prior to the initiation of grubbing or clearing the applicant shall install “silt”
fencing at project boundaries where grubbing or clearing is to occur in order to
minimize movement of rodents and snakes into the surrounding, existing
neighborhoods. Applicant shall ensure also that a biologist is on site during these
activities to capture and remove snakes. Additionally, the applicant shall initiate
grubbing or clearing from the perimeter of the site inward to the site when such
activity will occur adjacent to existing homes.
Enpineering Conditions:
Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering conditions
upon the approval of this proposed major subdivision must be met prior to approval of a
final map or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
General
23. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval fi-om, the City Engineer
for the proposed haul route.
24. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means, CC&Rs or/and other
PC BESO NO. 5117 -7- /33
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
recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all
the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain facilities
located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner
among the owners of the properties within the subdivision.
25.
26.
There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project.
Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance
with Engineering Standards. A statement shall be included in the Final Map (see Final
Map Notes) and in the CC&Rs, if any.
The limits of these sight distance corridors shall be reflected on any improvement,
grading, or landscape plan prepared in association with this development.
Fees/Agreements
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Developer shall agree to abide by any fee increase (or decrease) adopted for the
Local Drainage Area Fee by the City Council prior to payment or credit for that fee.
Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer
for recordation, the City’s standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless
Agreement.
Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer
for recordation the City’s standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement
regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall
cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area
shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street
Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer. ,
Prior to approval by the City Council of this Resolution, the applicant shall cause
Owner to enter into a purchase option agreement with the City of Carlsbad offering
the City the option to purchase, at not more than fair market value, an
approximately 5.7 acre parcel of land (Parcel B, Exhibit l), the general location of
which is shown on Exhibit 1 as the community garden, RV parking lot, wash area
and waste disposal (the “facilities replacement area”). The agreement shall provide
that if the City does not exercise its option to purchase by January 1, 2010, the
Ranch0 Carlsbad Homeowners’ Association may exercise the option and purchase
the parcel. The City shall provide the mechanism whereby the purchase by the
Association shall be eligible for credit and repayment from the appropriate funding
source or sources established by the City for this purpose. Any such credit and
repayment mechanism shall be implemented concurrent with or after transfer to the
City by the Association of the property rights required to install Basin BJ.
Grading
32. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the
PC RESO NO. 5117 -8- i3Lf
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
!O
!I
!2
!3
!4
!5
!6
!7
!8
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and
obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to further development of any of
the lots created by this tentative map.
Developer may apply for, and City Engineer may issue, a grading permit for
clearing only of vegetation, subject to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
issuance of a biological opinion supporting such clearing, and subject to approval of
an erosion control plan by the City Engineer and the Planning Director.
The grading permit required as condition of approval of this tentative map is for a
mass grading operation. Additional grading will be required prior to any
development of each of the lots created by this tentative map. An additional grading
permit will be required prior to further development of the lots. A construction
revision to the mass-grading plan will not be permitted to fulfil1 this requirement.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the-start
of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board.
Upon completion of grading, Developer shall file an “as-graded” geologic plan with the
City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading
operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on
a contour map, which represents both the pre and post site grading. The plan shall be
signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist, and shall be submitted on
a 24” x 36” mylar or similar drafting film format suitable for a permanent record.
This project requires off site grading. No grading for private improvements shall occur
outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a
recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the
owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope
easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must
either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading
will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial
conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.
Dedications/Improvements
38. The Developer shall construct a five-foot sound wall atop a three-foot earthen berm
to run along the south side of Reach 3 of Cannon Road between El Camino Real and
the intersection with College Boulevard. The berm shall be fully landscaped on that
portion of the berm facing the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobilehome Park which will not
otherwise be blocked by future development. The landscaping plans shall be
approved prior to the approval of the final map for CT 00-02 and such landscaping
shall be installed prior to or concurrent with the opening of the road to public
traffic. The sound wall shall be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the
southern right-of-way of Cannon Road Reach 3, where wetlands or other sensitive
habitats do not interfere.
39. The applicant shall cause the owner to plant eucalyptus trees and native shrubs on
PC RESO NO. 5117 -9- /35
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
40.
41.
42.
43.
an approximate 2.25acre parcel of land generally located between Cannon Road
Station 151 and the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. This
property shall be deeded or provided by permanent easement to the Ranch0
Carlsbad Homeowners’Association at no cost. Deeding or granting of the easement,
and planting and irrigation of this parcel shall occur prior to completion of Cannon
Road Reach 3.
Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City
and/or other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements as listed below
and as shown on the tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final
map and/or separate recorded document. All land so offered shall be offered free and
clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that already public are not
required to be rededicated.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
College Boulevard to major arterial right-of-way width of 102 feet with-in
the project boundary.
College Boulevard and Cannon Road to major arterial right-of-way width of
102 feet from the southerly project boundary off-site to El Camino Real,
together with temporary slope and construction easements as needed to
facilitate the streets construction.
Water easement for a future pressure reducing station between future 490
HG and 446 HG water mains near southerly boundary of Lot 2, to the
satisfaction of the District Engineer.
Reclaimed water easement for future 384 HG reclaimed water main and
future pump station at the terminus of the project’s 550 HG reclaimed water
main with-in Lot 1, to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
Water easement for existing water facilities in the vicinity of the water
reservoir by Lot 6 to the satisfaction the District Engineer.
Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or
install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent
with any grading or building permit.
Developer shall provide the design of all private streets and drainage systems to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall
conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and
drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the standard
improvement plancheck and inspection fees.
Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement
to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements
shown on the tentative map and the following improvements including, but not limited to
paving, base, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, signing and striping, traffic
control, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer,
water, fire hydrants, street lights, retaining walls and reclaimed water), to City Standards
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -lO- /3b
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.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
College Boulevard full width improvements to major arterial standards from
its existing terminus at Carlsbad Village Drive to the project’s southern
boundary.
College Boulevard full major arterial right-of-way width grading, median
curbs, one l&foot travel lane at each side of the median, asphalt curbs at the
edge of paving with transitions to drainage structures and full width
improvements at arterial to arterial street intersections, from the project’s
southern boundary to its intersection with Cannon Road.
Cannon Road full major arterial right-of-way width grading, median curbs,
one l&foot travel lane at each side of the median, asphalt curbs at the edge of
paving with transitions to drainage structures and full width improvements
at arterial to arterial street intersections, from its intersection with College
Boulevard to El Camino Real.
Transition improvements to Carlsbad Village Drive from Chatham Road to
Victoria Avenue, including a left turn lane onto Victoria Avenue.
Tamarack Avenue half width improvements to local street standards from
Carlsbad Village Drive northerly the full length of Lot 5 frontage. In lieu of
sidewalk, the Developer or the City may request the construction of a
pedestrian trail.
Glasgow Drive from Carlsbad Village Drive northerly to Harwich Drive, and
Harwich Drive northwesterly to its current terminus full width
improvements to local street standards. In lieu of sidewalk on one side of
each street, the Developer or the City may request the construction of a
pedestrian trail.
Basin BJB near the northeast corner of the intersection of College Boulevard
and Cannon Road as shown in the city’s Master Drainage and Storm Water
Quality Management Plan. Basin design shall be based on its’ ultimate
capacity to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Developer may request
that a reimbursement agreement for this facility be processed based on
provisions of the city’s Master Drainage and Storm Water Quality
Management Plan and city codes. If a reimbursement agreement is requested
it shall be approved prior to or concurrent with approval of the final map for
this subdivision.
A sewer trunk line within College Boulevard from the project’s southerly
boundary to the existing South Agua Hedionda Trunk Interceptor reach 2C
(SAHT2C).
Extend existing 580 HG water main to serve the portions of Lots 3 and 4 with
future pad elevations above 300-foot elevation. Prior to development of Lot 4
(Village U) or Lot 3 (Village Y), the 580 HG water main shall be looped to the
Cape Subdivision adjacent to Lot 3 (Village Y).
PC RESO NO. 5117 -ll- 137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
J. Extend existing 446 HG water main from its current terminus at College
Boulevard and Car&bad Village Drive southerly to serve future development
with pad elevations below 300-foot elevation.
K. Extend existing 550 HG reclaimed water main from its terminus at Carlsbad
Village Drive southerly on College Boulevard to a future pump station within
Lot 1. The Developer may request that a reimbursement agreement be
processed for the cost of upsizing the reclaimed water main from an g-inch
line to a 1Zinch line at the request of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
(CMWD). If a reimbursement is requested, it shall be approved prior to or
concurrent with the approval of the final map for this subdivision.
L. Construct only, from design drawings provided by CMWD, an extension of
the existing 384 HG reclaimed water main from its current location, at El
Camino Real, easterly on Cannon Road to College Boulevard and along
College Boulevard northerly to a pump station by Lot 1, and construct the
reclaimed water pump station to boost pressure for the project’s 550- HG
reclaimed water main. The Developer may request that a reimbursement
agreement for the cost of these facilities be processed. If a reimbursement
agreement is requested, it shall be approved prior to or concurrent with
approval of the final map for this subdivision.
M. Construct only, from design drawings provided by CMWD all future potable
water facilities through all arterial-to-arterial street intersections. The
Developer may request that a reimbursement agreement for these facilities
be processed for a full reimbursement. If a reimbursement agreement is
requested it shall be approved prior to or concurrent with approval of the
final map for this subdivision.
N. Construct only, from design drawings provided by CMWD the future 255
HG water main crossing under College Boulevard at the Robertson Ranch
near Cannon Road and along College Boulevard within Reach B. The
Developer may request that a reimbursement agreement for these facilities
be processed for a full reimbursement. If a reimbursement agreement is
requested it shall be approved prior to or concurrent with approval of the
final map for this subdivision.
A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map per the
provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above
shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development
improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
44. Developer shall execute and record a City standard Basin Maintenance Agreement prior
to the approval of grading, building permit or final map, whichever occurs first for this
Project.
45. Developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit, latest version. Developer shall provide
improvements constructed pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the
PC RESO NO. 5117 -12- )38
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
“California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook” to reduce surface
pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such
improvements shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of
the following:
A.
B.
C.
All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with
established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit for City
approval a “Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).” The SWPPP shall
be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San
Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP
shall address measures to reduce to the maximum extent possible storm water
pollutant runoff at both construction and post-construction phases of the project.
At a minimum, the Plan shall:
1)
2)
Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants.
Recommend source control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter said
pollutants.
3) Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special
considerations and effort shall be applied to employee and resident education
on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants.
46.
4) Ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in perpetuity.
Developer shall install street lights along all public and private street frontages abutting
and/or within the subdivision boundary in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
47. Developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the subdivision in
conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
48. Developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public street comers abutting the
subdivision in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -13- /39
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
49. Developer shall incorporate into the grading/improvement plans the design for the project
drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct access road for
maintenance purposes is not practical. These end treatments shall be designed so as to
prevent vegetation growth from obstructing the pipe outfall. Designs could consist of a
modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended concrete spillway section with
longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed riprap, or other means deemed appropriate,
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet with the Fire
Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations) are
required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be considered public
improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the District
Engineer.
The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public right-of-way or
within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the City of CarTsbad.
At the discretion of the District Engineer, wider easements may be required for adequate
maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes.
Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges
for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Diego County Water
Authority capacity charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits.
As part of the Landscape and Irrigation Plan submittal to the Planning Director, the
Developer shall prepare and include in the submittal a colored recycled water use map for
processing and approval by the District Engineer. The approved reclaimed water use
concept shall be incorporated in the landscape and irrigation design.
The Developer shall install potable water and recycled water services and meters at
locations approved by the District Engineer. The locations of said services shall be
reflected on public improvement plans.
The Developer shall install sewer laterals and clean-outs at locations approved by the
District Engineer. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on public
improvement plans.
The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and recycled water
facilities substantially as shown on the Tentative Map to the satisfaction of the District
Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans.
This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be
issued for the development of the subject property, unless the District Engineer has
determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of
occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map, as non-mapping data.
Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever is first, the entire
potable water, recycled water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that
adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the satisfaction of the
District Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -14- 140
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
59. The Developer shall coordinate with the District Engineer regarding looped systems and
easements.
60. The Developer shall submit a detailed sewer study, if changes to district’s sewer
master plan are proposed, prepared by a Registered Engineer, that identifies the
peak flows of the project, required pipe sizes, depth of flow in pipe, velocity in the
main lines, and the capacity of the existing infrastructure. Said study shall be
submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study
shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
61. The Developer shall submit a detailed potable water study, if changes to district’s
water master plan are proposed, prepared by a Registered Engineer that identifies
the peak demands of the project (including tire flow demands). The study shall
identify velocity in the main lines, pressure zones, and the required pipe sizes. Said
study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project
and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
62. The Developer shall submit a detailed recycled water study, if changes to district’s
reclaimed water master plan are proposed, prepared by a Registered Engineer that
identifies the peak demands of the project. The study shall identify velocity in the
main lines and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently
with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the District Engineer.
Final Map Notes
63. Developer shall show on Final Map the.net developable acres for each parcel.
64. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-mapping data:
A. All improvements within the subdivision are privately owned and are to be
privately maintained with the exception of the following:
(1.) College Boulevard
(2.) Carlsbad Village Drive
(3.) Tamarack Avenue _
(4.) Glasgow Drive
(5.) Harwich Drive (6.) Water lines, reclaimed water lines, and reclaimed water pump
B.
station.
(7.) Sewers
(8.) Storm Drains
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property
unless the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are
available.
C. Geotechnical Caution:
(1.) Slopes steeper than two parts horizontal to one part vertical exist within
PC RESO NO. 5117 -15- )4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the boundaries of this subdivision.
(2.) The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in
interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad
from any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground
water seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur
on, or adjacent to, this subdivision due to its construction, operation or
maintenance.
D. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object shall be placed or
permitted to encroach within the area identified as intersection sight distance
in accordance with city standards’ Public Street - Design Criteria, Section
8.B.l. and 2. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.
E. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above
the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified
as sight distance corridors in accordance with city standards’ Public Street -
Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain
this condition.
Standard Code Reminders:
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final
map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to
prevent offsite siltation. Planning and erosion control shall be provided in accordance
with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Some improvements shown on the tentative map and/or required by these conditions are
located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or
interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of title or interest.
The Developer shall immediately initiate negotiations to acquire such property. The
Developer shall use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If unsuccessful,
Developer shall demonstrate to the City Engineer its best efforts, and comply with the
requirements of the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 20.16.095 to notify and enable the
City to successfully acquire said property by condemnation.
PC RESO NO. 5117 -16- /4a
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
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you
protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of January 2002, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLtiILLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5117 -17- lLj3
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
I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5118
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY
NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE AND COLLEGE AVENUE, EAST OF EL CAMINO
REAL, NORTH OF FUTURE CANNON ROAD, AND WEST
OF LAKE CALAVERA IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVER HILLS PHASE II
CASE NO: HDP 00-02
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Hills II L.L.C., “Developer”/“Owner,” has filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
A portion of Lots “D”, “E”, and “J” of Ranch0 Aqua
Hedionda, according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County on
November 16,1?396 all being in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “MM” - 7W” dated December 19,2001, on file
in the Carlsbad Planning Department, CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BTD #4 - HDP 00-02,
as provided by Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of December and on
the 2nd day of January, 2002, consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said 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 Hillside Development Permit; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
lLfLf
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
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CALAVERA HILLS PHASE IUBTD #4 -
HDP 00-02 based on the following findings and subject to the following
conditions:
Findinps:
1. That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints map which show
existing and proposed conditions and slope percentages;
2. That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%, have been properly
identified on the constraints map;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and requirements of
the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that proposed grading has been designed to
relate to the slope of the land, grading has been minimized to the extent possible
while working with the other constraints to the project design, and contour grading
of slopes which are highly visible from public locations is included.
4. That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the undevelopable portions
of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 21.53.230 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code,
in that impacts to natural slopes with an inclination of greater than 40 percent either
do not meet all of the criteria of Section 21.95.120(B) to require preservation; or
they qualify for an exclusion pursuant to Section 21.95130 in that they are impacts
related to a Circulation Element Road, or a modification to the development and
design standards pursuant to Section 21.95.140 in that they are impacts that are
supported specifically for the precise locations depicted on the exhibits for HDP OO-
02 and the related mass-grading of CT 00-02 for the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
5. That the project design substantially conforms to the intent of the concepts illustrated in
the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that all native, non-excluded slope
areas are to remain preserved, contour grading will occur for areas visible from
public locations, runoff control will be accomplished as required by the manual
through the construction of onsite catchment basins, detention basins, and energy
dissipators, and adequate landscaping will be installed to provide screening of
graded slopes and to reduce potential erosion.
6. That the project design and lot configuration minimizes disturbance of hillside lands, in
that approximately 36.6 acres are comprised of natural slopes having gradients
above 40 percent. Grading proposed on the master tentative map will encroach
into 14.6 acres of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. Of these 14.6
acres, approximately 1.4 acres would be graded for proposed development and 13.2
acres would qualify as an exclusion from the Hillside Development Ordinance, per
Section 21.95.130 (A)(2) or areas that do not meet all four of the criteria of Section
21.95.120 (B). The areas do not equal the 10,000 square foot minimum and the
remainder are slopes that do not comprise a prominent land form feature.
7. That the site has unusual- geotechnical or soil conditions that necessitate corrective work
that may require significant amounts of grading, in that the rocky substrate of Calavera
PC RESO NO. 5118 -2- /+-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Hills will require rock blasting as assessed in the related EIR for this project (EIR
98-02) and addressed in the Mitigation and Monitoring Program.
That the site requires extensive grading to accommodate a circulation-element roadway,
in that the extension of College Boulevard will go through the project site.
That the proposed modification will result in significantly more open space or
undisturbed area than would a strict adherence to the requirements of the- ordinance, in
that the mass grading accommodates residential development that has been
transferred within the master plan area while also providing regionally significant
wildlife corridors supported by affected wildlife and resource agencies and
consistent with the City’s Draft Habitat Management Plan.
The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan and Calavera Hills Master
Plan based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated December 19, 2001 and as
contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 5113 for GPA 99-03 which
are incorporated herein by reference.
This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 7.
That all necessary public facilities required by the Growth Management Ordinance will
be constructed or are guaranteed to be constructed concurrently with the need for them
created by this project and in compliance with adopted City standards, in that
improvements necessary to maintain compliance with the growth management
performance standards are contained in the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management
Plan and the project will comply with the general and special conditions of the zone
plan.
That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
Note:. Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to recordation of
a final map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first.
1 If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
fiture building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to
PCRESONO. 5118 -3- 146
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
i.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-02).
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Hillside Development Permit documents, as necessary to make
them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project.
Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed
development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project
are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code
Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be
invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies
with all requirements of law.
The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmIess the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents,
and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising,
directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Hillside Development
Permit, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or
non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c)
Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation
survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City
approval is not validated.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Director a reproducible 24” x 36”,,mylar
copy of the Hillside Development Permit Exhibits reflecting the conditions approved
by the final decision making body.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as part of the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-02, GPA 99-03, MP 150 @I),
LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01 and CT 00-02 and is subject to all conditions contained in
the Planning Commission Resolutions for those other approvals.
This approval shall become null and void if a final map is not recorded within 24
months from the date of project approval.
Prior to the issuance of the grading permit or approval of the final map, Developer
shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County
PC RESO NO. 5118 -4- H7
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
Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested
parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a(n) Hillside
Development Permit by Resolution No. 5118 on the real property owned by the
Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the
file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any
conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The
Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice
which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer
or successor in interest.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
. . .
. . .
PC RESO NO. 5118 -5- /LfS
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of January, 2002, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners Compas, Dominguez,
Heineman, Nielsen, and Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN: None
SEENA TRIGAS, Chairper&
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5 118 -6- )49
Carl&ad Planning Department EXHIBIT 6
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 0 5
P.C. AGENDA OF: December 19,200l
SUBJECT: EIR 98-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/-BRIDGE AND THOROUGH-
FARE DISTRICT #4 AND DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - Request
for a recommendation of approval for certification of an Environmental Impact
Report including Candidate Findings of Fact, Statements of Overriding
Consideration, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the
environmental review of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, the City’s Bridge and
Thoroughfare District (BTD) #/4 and Detention Basins BJ and BJB of the City’s
Master Drainage Plan, located in the northeast quadrant of the City.
GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC Ol-Ol/CT OO-02/HDP 00-02 -
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - Request for a recommendation of approval
for: (1) a General Plan Amendment; (2) an amendment to the Calavera Hills
Master Plan; (3) an amendment to the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan;
(4) a Zone Change; (5) a Master Tentative Map, and; (6) a Hillside Development
Permit. These actions are being requested to allow for the land use changes and
mass grading proposed for the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112
RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION of ElR 98-02 and RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions
No. 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, 5117, 5118, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of GPA 99-03,
MP 150(H), LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01, CT 00-02, and HDP 00-02, based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The subject environmental impact report (EIR 98-02) is a joint public/private EIR whereby the
Calavera Hills Master Plan buildout is proposed by a private developer (a partnership of
McMillin Companies and Brookfield Homes); and the College Boulevard and Cannon Road
segments associated with BTD #4, as well as Detention Basins BJ and BJB of the city’s Master
Drainage Plan, are proposed by the City of Carlsbad. EIR 98-02 assesses all three noted project
components. A Location Map is attached. The balance of the requests are specific to the
amendment and buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
Originally approved in 1974, the Calavera Hills Master Plan is in the northeast quadrant of the
City, west of Lake Calavera and south of the City of Oceanside. The master plan has an existing
Community Park (Calavera Hills), an existing community RV storage site, an established future
fire station location, Hope Elementary School, Calavera Hills School (K-8 - currently under
EIR 9%02/GPA 99-03MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
construction), a variety of existing residential housing types separated by a network of open
space areas and canyons, portions of Circulation Element roadways (College Boulevard,
Tamarack Avenue and Carlsbad Village Drive) and nine remaining Villages to be developed.
The current Calavera Hills Master Plan development (including Villages Q and T which are
presently completing construction) has 1,619 existing dwelling units, and an allowance of 795
remaining dwelling units to be developed in the final phase of Calavera Hills. This proposed
master plan amendment will establish a maximum allowance of 781 dwelling units for the final
phase. The required percentage of affordable housing units will be included as part of the 781
unit maximum.
The remaining Villages to be developed are referred to as the Phase II Villages, and include: E-
l, H, K, L-2, R, U, W, X and Y (shown on the attached exhibit from MP 150 (H), Calavera Hills
Phase II Villages). The changes to the current master plan are intended to establish regionally
significant open space and biologically significant habitat corridors while also providing ”
affordable housing and community facilities requirements in the master plan. The current master
plan designates Village K as the affordable housing site with high density. It also has relatively
flat terrain for grading and development. To accommodate the needed wildlife corridors, Village
K will instead be primarily preserved as open space, and developed with clustered single-family
homes, and Village Y will be designated as the affordable housing site.
The master plan buildout will also provide or initiate the development of various infrastructure
improvements, citywide Master Drainage Plan facilities (Detention Basin BJB) and Circulation
Element roads including Reach B and C of College Boulevard and Reach 3 of Cannon Road.
Therefore, the primary objectives of this master plan amendment are: to accommodate the
creation of a biological habitat corridor through the central portion of the master plan area by
adjusting the land uses and transferring densities for clustered development and related mass
grading; and, to update the master plan to current citywide codes and objectives.
Current and proposed master plan land uses are reviewed on a village-by-village basis under
Project Description and Background.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Proiect Description
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II
The project proposes to build out the Calavera Hills Master Plan as follows:
Village E-l : is currently designated for community commercial development on 9 acres. This
amendment proposes to delete the commercial designation consistent with recent City Council policy action on a citywide commercial land use study. It concluded that this site could be
considered for a non-commercial land use. Therefore, in order to achieve some of the residential
density transferred from the Village K site to provide open space, E-l is being proposed for the
development of 117 multi-family residential units.
/a-i .
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03iMP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Pane 3
Village H: is currently designated for residential development and the master plan allows up to
42 dwelling units (previous proposals have shown 13 custom homes) on 42 net acres. In order to
meet Community Facility (CF) requirements imposed on the master plan amendment by current
city codes, this project has a total community facilities requirement of 3 acres; two of which will
be provided in Village H (Village Y will provide the balance). The two-acre site would be
designated CF within the master plan as well as the City’s General Plan. The balance of Village
H would be designated open space.
Village K: is currently designated for multi-family, medium-high density housing up to 416
units. It is also the designated affordable housing site within the master plan. In order to
accommodate the biological habitat link required across the central portion of the master plan
area, an approximately 900 foot swath of General Plan designated open space extending
northward from existing Carlsbad Village within the south/central portion of Village K is
proposed as natural open space. The amendment proposes the development of up to 88 single
family clustered units on the balance of the site.
Village L-2: is currently designated for medium density housing up to 119 units; the master plan
amendment proposes 15 single-family dwelling units for Village L-2.
Village R: is currently designated for the development of up to 6 single-family units on this
small site of two developable acres adjacent to Lake Calavera. This amendment proposes 4
single-family units with a medium density residential designation; the balance of the site will be
open space.
Village U: is currently designated for low-medium density, multi-family development up to 139
dwelling units. To recapture and transfer units removed from Village K, this amendment
proposes medium-high density up to 179 multi-family dwelling units. The balance of the site
will be open space.
Village W: is currently designated for low-density residential development up to 32 single-
family homes. To recapture and transfer units removed from Village K, this amendment
proposes medium density up to 121 single-family units. The balance of the site will be open
space.
Village X: is currently designated for low-density residential development up to 36 single-
family homes. To recapture and transfer units removed from Village K, this amendment
proposes medium density up to 117 single-family units. The balance of the site will be open
space.
VillaPe Y: is currently designated for low-density residential development up to 5 single-family
homes. This amendment proposes to designate Village Y as the master plan’s affordable
housing site with high-density residential development up to a maximum of 140 units. The
actual number of affordable housing units to be developed within Village Y will be calculated as
15% of the total units approved pursuant to MP 150(H). In addition, a one acre CF (Community
Facility) will be located within Village Y to meet master plan obligations for community
facilities and to augment and be compatible with the proposed affordable housing land use.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03h4P 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVEIU HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 4
Village Z: is currently outside of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, but is proposed for formal
inclusion via the master plan amendment (MP 150-H) and zone change (ZC 01-01) associated
with this project. The 1 IO-acre site is currently designated for open space and low-density
residential development up to approximately 50 single-family homes. Since this site is now
designated as the Calavera Nature Preserve as part of the mitigation for habitat loss associated
with the development of Villages Q and T within the Master Plan, the residential designations
will be removed, leaving only open space designations. This is one component of General Plan
Amendment GPA 99-03.
Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4 - College Boulevard and Cannon Road
The second major component of the project proposes the formation of a Bridge and
Thoroughfare District or other financing mechanism to finance the acquisition, design and
construction of roadway improvements to Cannon Road from El Camino Real easterly to the
Oceanside City boundary, and College Boulevard from El Camino Real northerly through the ‘.
Calavera Hills Master Plan boundary to the intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive. A new
intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road will be constructed to implement the
General Plan’s network of circulation element roadways planned for this area.
Specifically, the following road segments are involved:
College Boulevard - from its current northern terminus within Calavera Hills at Carlsbad Village
Dr. south to the boundary of the master plan property (Reach C); from the master plan boundary
southeast to the future intersection with Cannon Road (Reach B), and; from the College/Cannon
intersection south to the current terminus just north of El Camino Real in Sunny Creek (Reach
A). Only Reaches B and C of College Boulevard are proposed for construction with this project,
although EIR 98-02 covers the environmental review for all reaches of College Boulevard. The
College Boulevard (Reach A) improvements additionally include an approximately 125-foot
long bridge structure across the Agua Hedionda Creek
Cannon Road - from El Camino Real east to the future intersection with College Boulevard
(Reach 3), and from this intersection easterly to tie into the existing terminus of Cannon Road at
the Carlsbad city boundary (Reach 4) adjacent to the Ocean Hills community in the city of
Oceanside. Only Reach 3 is proposed for construction with this project, although EIR 98-02
covers the environmental review for both reaches of Cannon Road.
The design concept to connect with the existing Cannon Road segment in Oceanside includes the
realignment of Cannon Road from the Oceanside city boundary east to Mystra Drive in Oceanside, reconfiguration of an existing church site parking lot and access road, and installation
of approximately 400 feet of retaining wall with a maximum height of approximately 20 feet.
The City of Carlsbad will be required to process a conditional use permit or permit amendment
for the church site to modify the parking and accommodate the new road segment. The need to
modify the Cannon Road Reach 4 alignment and its future connection with the existing west-
facing terminus of Cannon Road within Oceanside is because the current alignment is located
within a biologically significant area. Since the development of the original alignment, which
determined the location of the Cannon roadway within Oceanside, the habitat and wildlife
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Pane 5
adjacent to Reach 4 is now regulated by resource agencies that are seeking a more
environmentally sensitive alignment.
The improvements for each roadway include full width grading to City of Carlsbad major arterial
standards within a 102-foot right-of-way, road surface improvements, erosion control and
landscaping, drainage and other appurtenant improvements for major arterial roadways.
Detention Basins BJ and BJB - City’s Master Drainage Plan
The project proposes construction of two detention basins to control flooding impacts within the
Calavera and Little Encinas Creek watersheds. Basin BJB located at the northeast comer of the
College Boulevard/Cannon Road intersection will have an inundation area of approximately 15
acres and a storage capacity of 49 acre-feet.
Basin BJ is located on the east side of College Boulevard approximately 350 feet south of _
Cannon Road in the approximate area of the existing recreational vehicle storage area and
maintenance facilities for the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park. Basin BJ will have an
inundation area of approximately 8 acres and a storage capacity of 48 acre-feet. Both basins are
part of a larger drainage and flood control plan for the area and are consistent with the City of
Carlsbad’s Master Drainage Plan.
Site Description
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II:
The Calavera Hills Master Plan is approximately 900 total acres in the northeast quadrant of the
city. Existing Phase I development accounts for about 500 acres (and 1,619 dwelling units)
leaving approximately 400 acres left (and 781 maximum dwelling units) to build out the master
plan. The master plan area is surrounded by Lake Calavera to the east, the City of Oceanside to
the north, existing residential development to the west and the currently undeveloped area of
Robertson Ranch and its agricultural operations to the south.
The Calavera Hills Master Plan is characterized by diverse topography and rocky rolling hills
with distant views. Vegetation includes high quality Diegan coastal sage scrub, chaparral and
non-native grasslands. The general area is noted for having some of the highest quality, multi-
species habitat in the City. Therefore, the establishment of resource-agency desired wildlife
corridors is a major component of this master plan amendment, in addition to facilitating master
plan buildout.
Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4:
The extensions of College Boulevard and Cannon Road are located primarily on vacant,
undeveloped land, including some existing agricultural operations.
College Boulevard (Reach A) will be extended northeast from El Camino Real across the Agua Hedionda Creek past the Ranch0 Carlsbad Golf Course along a series of small ridgelines to the
intersection with Cannon Road. The northerly segment of College Boulevard Reach A bisects the
/3-d
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 6
easterly portion of the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park (RCMHP) property just south of
Cannon Road. The right-of-way for College Boulevard across the RCMHP property has been
irrevocably offered to the City of Carlsbad by the property owners. North of the College/Cannon
intersection, College Boulevard Reach B crosses the broad Robertson Ranch agricultural
floodplain northward to the Calavera Hills master plan boundary. At that point, College
Boulevard Reach C is aligned northwesterly across sage scrub and chaparral hillsides to the
existing intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive within Calavera Hills.
Cannon Road (Reach 3) extends easterly from El Camino Real across gently rolling terrain just
north of and generally parallel to the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park and the Calavera
Creek channel through agricultural fields to the intersection with College Boulevard. Proceeding
east along Cannon Road (Reach 4), the topographic features change dramatically as the proposed
alignment traverses steep slopes covered with native vegetation and significant coastal sage
scrub located on the north side of the Little Encinas Creek. Approximately 2500 feet of the
eastern portion of Cannon Road Reach 4 crosses the existing Carlsbad Highlands Habitat I
Preserve.
Detention Basins BJ and BJB:
Detention Basin BJB (the larger of the two basins) is located primarily within the existing
floodplain area for the Calavera Creek watershed. Basin BJB includes a small graded berm
extending for several hundred feet from the College Boulevard road fill along the western edge
of the Calavera Creek. The area within proposed Basin BJB is currently used for agricultural
purposes and includes the existing Calavera creek bed.
Basin BJ is located along the Little Encinas creek bed. The area within the proposed Basin BJ is
currently used for recreational vehicle storage, and several small maintenance sheds. A
community garden area, as well as some native habitat, is situated adjacent to the basin area.
Overview of the Proiect
The following entitlements and approvals have been requested
EIR 98-02
l Certification of the EIR for Calavera Hills Phase II and BTD #/4 and Basins BJ and BJB.
General Plan Amendment 99-03
l Adjust General Plan land use designations per Village as outlined above in Project Description to reconfigure open space areas and redistribute and cluster allowed densities
into the least environmentally sensitive portions of the property.
l Add Community Facility (CF) uses to the master plan (Villages H and Y).
l Delete commercial use/designation on E- 1, replace with RMH residential.
l Delete RL residential designations on Village Z and replace with Open Space.
l Perform minor cartographic and mapping clean-up items to correct longstanding General
Plan mapping inaccuracies that will not affect land uses or development potential.
/55-
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-011
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Master Plan Amendment 150 (Hj
l Accommodate necessary land use changes to implement reconfigured open space
corridors, and transfer allowable development densities within master plan as outlined in
the Project Description for each Village.
l Provide land uses, development standards and process for balance of the Master Plan
given its objectives and vision of clustering development to maximize quality open space.
l Provide architectural design standards for the balance of the remaining villages.
l Formally integrate the 1 lo-acre nature preserve of Village Z into the master plan.
Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment 87-07(A)
l Amendment to Zone 7 LFMP to reflect the land use changes proposed by the Calavera
Hills master plan amendment.
l Compliance with Growth Management and the delivery of necessary public
improvements and infrastructure given citywide code criteria and adjusted master plan
land uses.
Zone Change 01-01
l Zone change from Limited Control (L-C) to Planned Community (P-C) for Village Z, the
Calavera Nature Preserve. This allows formal integration of the 1 lo-acre nature preserve
into the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
Master Tentative Map CT 00-02
Calavera Hills:
l Subdivision into large lots to create the master plan’s Village areas into separate master
lots.
l Allow mass grading of the site in a single grading operation as shown on the tentative
map exhibits.
BTD #4/Financing Plan for College Blvd./Cannon Road:
l Construction of College Blvd Reach B and C.
l Construction of Cannon Road Reach 3.
Detention Basin:
l Construction of Detention Basin BIB.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03iMP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 8
Hillside Development Permit 00-02
l Hillside Development Permit is necessary to accompany mass grading of CT 00-02 since
hillside topography is involved.
IV. ANALYSIS
Given the entitlements being requested as outlined above, the project is subject to the following
plans, ordinances, standards and policies; Each entitlement will be assessed against the
ordinances or standards that apply.
Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) and the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA);
Carlsbad General Plan;
Draft Habitat Management Plan;
Calavera Hills Master Plan;
Planned Community (P-C) Zone, Chapter 21.38 of the Municipal Code;
Growth Management, Chapter 21.90 of the Municipal Code;
Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20 of the Municipal Code; and
Hillside Development Regulations, Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal Code.
Environmental ProtectionKEQA: EIR 98-02 (see Section V. of this staff report)
Carlsbad General Plan: GPA 99-03
1. Adiustment of General Plan land use designations:
To accomplish the goals of establishing an important biological wildlife corridor and building
out the master plan consistent with current citywide goals and standards, the following General
Plan amendments are proposed. Individually and collectively, they achieve the stated General
Plan and Master Plan goals and are therefore supported as components of the proposed General
Plan amendment. Attached Resolution No. 5113, for GPA 99-03, makes findings for the
changes proposed.
VILLAGE EXISTING
GENERAL PLAN
PROPOSED
GENERAL PLAN
E-l
H
Community Commercial
RL/os
RMH
CF/OS t K RMH RIWOS
L-2 RLM
R RLM RMIOS
U RLM RMHIOS
W RL Rlwos
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03h4P 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02kIDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 9
VILLAGE EXISTING PROPOSED
GENERAL PLAN GENERAL PLAN
X RL RMIOS
Y RL RHKF
Z RL/os OS
In addition, various General Plan map clean-ups and mapping corrections within the existing
Phase I portion of the Calavera Hills Master Plan will be made with GPA 99-03, due to increased
detail and resolution that is now available on current mapping technology. These changes are
incidental and consistent with the General Plan since they will eliminate designation
inconsistencies and/or cartographic inaccuracies without materially affecting a parcel’s land use
designations or development potential.
2. Establishment of Wildlife Corridors:
The project is consistent with the City’s Draft Habitat Management Plan @MP), identifies a
“hardline” through the master plan property to delineate areas of development and areas of open
space. While not formally approved, the Draft HMP reflects the regionally significant habitat
areas and corridors desired for establishment within the City of Carlsbad. Some minor
adjustment and encroachment of the designated open space is being requested. There is an open
space equivalency/adjustment process, as described below, whereby proposals for
encroachments can be supported if they are minor and when combined with areas of added open
space, provide an overall increase in the amount and quality of open space. The HMP was
drafted in conjunction with consultation and input from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the
California Department of Fish and Game.
As previously mentioned, the Draft HMP proposes areas for preservation on the entire project.
These areas were established several years ago based on preliminary biological information
independent of any grading or project proposal. This proposed Calavera Hills master plan
amendment will designate the preservation areas as open space on the General Plan Land Use
Map. Also associated with this amendment is the shifting of allowable density from the areas to
be designated as open space to where development can more appropriately be accommodated. In
order to adjust the boundaries of any open space shown on the “Official Open Space and
Conservation Map” dated September 1994 the findings listed in implementing policy C.20 of the
Open Space Planning and Protection Section of the General Plan Open Space and Conservation
Element are required to be made. The three required findings and affirmative justification for
each are listed in the EIR, in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 113 for GPA 99-03, and are
re-stated below:
(A) The proposed open space area is equal to or greater than depicted on the Official
Open Space and Conservation Map.
Proiect Finding: The Official Open Space and Conservation Map defines
approximately 138.8 acres of Calavera Hills Phase II land as either
“Existing/Approved Open Space,” “Constrained Open Space,” or both. As depicted on the project’s proposed open space equivalency exhibit in the Draft EIR (Fig. 3B-
)S
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/h@ lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 10
7), the proposed project designates 159.1 acres of Calavera Hills Phase II land as
open space. Because the proposed open space acres are a greater quantity of acreage
than the areas depicted on the City’s Official Open Space and Conservation Map, the
proposed project is consistent with this Finding.
(B) The proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or greater than that
depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map.
Proiect Finding: The proposed revision to the Official Open Space and Conservation
Map would bring the City’s General Plan into conformance with the Draft HMP
inasmuch as it would provide for a habitat link across Village K, which constitutes a
critical biological link between open space Core Area 2 and Core Area 3. As
depicted on the project’s proposed open space equivalency exhibit in the Draft EIR
(Fig. 3B-7), this link of coastal sage scrub vegetation is considered biologically
important in the multi-species planning effort, and will protect 14.2 acres of coastal -
sage scrub vegetation that would not have been protected under the existing Open
Space and Conservation program. The proposed open space design will additionally
serve to protect several important sensitive animal species.
(C) The proposed adjustment to open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as shown on
the Official Open Space and Conservation Map.
Project Finding: The proposed adjustments to open space are within close proximity
to the open spaces presently shown on the Open Space and Conservation Map. As
depicted on the project’s proposed open space equivalency exhibit in the Draft EIR (Fig. 3B-7), the primary difference is the new provision of the Village K conservation
link, which provides a biological link between habitat core areas which had not
previously existed. This link is a significant component of the proposed revisions to
the Open Space and Conservation Map.
3. General Plan Consistency
The General Plan is divided into eight elements. Proposed project consistency with applicable
environmental goals of each of the eight elements is contained in the EIR. The proposed
amendment is also in compliance with the additional General Plan Goals, Objectives or Policies
depicted in the following table:
General Plan Compliance Table
Element Goal, Objective or Policy Project Consistency
Land Use/Overall Objective Objective B. 1 - Create a Land uses and design standards to
sense of place and identity achieve this objective apply to
for each community within specific Villages in the master a master plan area. plan.
w-9
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVER HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 11
Element Goal, Objective or Policy Project Consistency
Land Use/Overall Objective Objective B.2 - Create a Proposed Open Space de-
visual form that is pleasing s&nations create large contiguous
to the eye, rich in variety, conservation areas that are
reflecting environmental visually pleasing and reflect the
values. environmental values of the areas.
Hillside grading and future
architecture will also reflect
environmental values.
Land Use/Overall Policy Policy C.4 - Encourage The general plan amendment
clustering when it is provides for the shift of dwelling
compatible with adjacent units out of the conservation areas
development. resulting in compatible, clustered
development.
Land Use/Overall Policy Policy C.7.(4) - Provide The proposal implements open
public and/or private usable space as prescribed in the General
open space designated in Plan and modifies it to provide
the General Plan. more, high quality open space.
Land Use/Overall Policy Policy C.7.(8) - Provide Affordable housing requirements
affordable housing to lower will be satisfied within Village Y.
and/or moderate income
households.
Land Use/Overall Policy Policy C.12 - Develop and The project includes open space
retain open space in all for the preservation of natural categories of land use. resources and open space for
outdoor recreation.
Land Use - Objective B.4 - Ensure that The master plan proposes to Residential Objective master plans contribute to a comply with the City’s
balanced community by Community Facilities require-
providing social and/or ments for new or amended master
human service needs and plan amendments.
land uses.
Land Use - Policy C.3 - Consider In order to provide high quality
Residential Policy density and development open space in excess of normal
right transfers where open city requirements, density trans-
space is preserved in excess fers are proposed by this plan
of city normal requirements. amendment.
Land Use - Policy C.1 - Require land This master plan amendment will
Community Facilities for child care and other provide such uses per city codes in
community facilities. Villages H and Y.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT OO-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 12
Element
Circulation
Housing
Open Space and Conservation
Open Space and
Conservation
Public Safety
Goal, Objective or Policy Project Consistency
Streets & Traffic Control Dedication and improvement of
Policy C. 18 - Require new all circulation facilities needed for
development to dedicate the project as well as citywide
and improve all public facilities identified on the
rights-of-way for circulation circulation plan will be completed.
facilities needed to serve
development.
Policy 3.6.a - A minimum Village Y is proposed to be
of fifteen percent of all designated RMH to accommodate
units approved for any the master plan’s required
master Plan community affordable housing units.
shall be affordable to lower
income-households.
Policy C.4 - Identify The project will establish and
existing open space for maintain regionally significant,
protection and management multi-species wildlife corridors.
to increase wildlife value.
Objective B.1 - Develop This project proposes open space
financing programs for the areas that will be managed and
acquisition and maintenance maintained, including the
of open space areas. Calavera Nature Preserve (Z).
Fire and Emergency Policy Fire Department and resource
C.2 - Review development agency review has resulted in
proposals to consider fire customized fire suppression
issues including wildland provisions for Village K and X;
tire hazards. the balance of the Villages will
comply with standard, citywide
fire suppression rules.
Draft Habitat Management Plan: EIR 98-02 and MP 150 (H)
While not formally adopted, the City’s Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP) was the basis for
determining the significance of various biological impacts. The mitigation measures prescribed
in the Draft I-IMP have been applied to this project’s EIR and will be implemented via the
project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. In addition, the configuration of
wildlife corridors as depicted in the Draft HMP are implemented by the proposed Calavera Hills
master plan amendment.
The BTD portion of the project regarding College Boulevard and Cannon Road is consistent with
the goals and provisions of the Draft HMP. Circulation element roadways are specifically
permitted by the habitat plan, if alternative alignments are assessed to arrive at an
environmentally sensitive alignment, and mitigation impacts per the Draft HMP are
implemented. These I-IMP requirements are met by the proposed project.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVEKA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 13
Calavera Hills Master Plan/PC Zone of Municipal Code: MP 150 (H)
Compliance with 2 1.38 - Planned Connnunitv Zone
Chapter 21.38 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, Planned Community Zone, contains the
requirements for the contents of a master plan. The amended Calavera Hills Master Plan
contains all the information required by the code. The Plan consists of nine chapters to guide the
development of Villages and the buildout of Calavera Hills consistent with current city codes and
goals.
The following is an outline of the master plan by chapter:
Chanter I - Introduction - The introduction includes information such as the organization and
scope of the plan, a project description, master applications, master plan goals, and introduces
the vision for buildout of Calavera Hills with open space corridors and clustered development ‘-
areas.
Chanter II - Land Uses - This chapter covers the proposed General Plan Land Use Designations
assigned to each Village, provides a Zoning Description, a legal description for the area subject
to the plan, land use summary tables and general provisions.
Chanter III - Traffic Circulation - Provides an overview of the Master Plan’s circulation system
emphasizing College Boulevard.
Chanter IV - Open Space - Provides an overview of the Master Plan’s open space system
emphasizing the wildlife corridor across Village K and the master plan’s trail system.
Chanter V - Grading/Hillside Development - Provides an overview of the Master Plan’s grading
and hillside development provisions including blasting and rock crushing procedures.
Chanter VI - Public Facilities - Provides an overview of the Public Facilities associated with the
Master Plan and compliance with the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan.
Chanter VII - Citv Permits/Master Plan Amendments - Outlines the City permits and
entitlements necessary to develop each Village, and the process for future amendments to the
master plan consistent with City codes.
Chanter VIII - Architectural and Design Standards - Contains the architectural and design
standards that regulate the development of the single and multi-family residential villages. These
new design standards update the ones currently in the master plan. They reflect current and
proposed citywide design regulations and objectives, and propose slight modification for
clustered development on topographically constrained properties which have been allowed for
limited development in exchange for the provision of high-quality open space wildlife corridors.
Chapter IX - Phase II Development Standards - Provides development standards, approval
processes, development review criteria and environmental mitigation measures on a village-by-
village basis.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200 1
Page 14
Calavera Hills Phase II Buildout - Summarv Land Use Table
The existing and proposed land uses for the remaining Phase II Villages is described above in the
Project Description. Below is a simplified Summary Table for the Phase II Villages (excluding
Village Z, the Nature Preserve) remaining within the Calavera Hills Master Plan. After the
Table, the abbreviated designations are provided in full.
Calavera Hills Phase II - Summary Table
& MASTER PLAN MAXIMUM
Current Unit Max: 795 Proposed Unit Max:
Land Use Designations
c: Community Commercial
RL: Residential-Low (O-l dwelling units (du)/per acre)
RLM: Residential-Low Medium (l-4 du/acre)
RM: Residential-Medium (4-8 du/acre)
RMH: Residential-Medium High (8- 15 du/acre)
RH: Residential-High (15-2 1 du/acre)
OS: Open Space
CF: Community Facilities
n/a: not applicable; no dwelling units
Also attached to the staff report is a Fiscal Impact Analysis, dated December 20, 2000, as
required by Section 21.38.060(2)(B).
Zone Change: ZC 01-01
A Zone Change is proposed to formally include the Calavera Nature Preserve (Village Z) into
the Calavera Hills Master Plan. Currently, the 1 lo-acre parcel is zoned (Limited Control) L-C.
The proposal for P-C zoning designation, to match the Calavera Hills Master Plan, will ensure
the site’s status as a Nature Preserve per the terms of a 1993 Agreement that binds the current
and any future master plan property owner. This Agreement secured the acquisition and long-
term maintenance of the Preserve as mitigation for Calavera Phase I Villages Q and T. This zone
lb 3
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
change is related to one component of GPA 99-03 which removes all of the RL residential
designation currently on the Preserve site and replaces them with Open Space.
Growth Management: Zone 7 - LFMP 87-07(A)
An amendment is proposed to the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 7 to
reflect the proposed changes in land use. The plan has been prepared in accordance with Chapter
21.90 of the Carlsbad municipal code. The proposed document is the first amendment to the
Zone 7 LFMP. The proposed land use changes do not result in any change in public facility
requirements, compared with the existing Zone 7 LFMP. The LFMP Amendment indicates that
the total number of dwelling units projected for buildout is 2,400 dwelling units, with a
maximum of 78 1 dwelling units remaining for development.
The proposed zone plan covers the entire zone and analyzes the requirements for the eleven -
public facilities and services included within the growth management program outlined in
Chapter 21.90. For each of the eleven public facilities, the plan lists the required performance
standard, provides a facility planning and adequacy analysis, required mitigation and financing
sources for any required mitigation. The zone will be in compliance with the required
performance standards by implementing and/or satisfying the conditions listed within the
amended Zone 7 LFMP.
The impacts of the development of the Calavera Hills Master Plan pursuant to the Zone 7 LFMP
will be further assessed at the village-level approvals where dwelling units and development
construction is involved. At this time, only subdivision and mass grading is proposed, including
College Blvd. Reaches B and C, Cannon Road Reach 3 and Detention Basin BIB.
The amended Zone 7 LFMP provides for the delivery of major roadways via development of the
Calavera portion of the project.
Subdivision Ordinance: Master Tentative Map - CT 00-02
A single master tentative map is proposed to create the villages, and for the mass grading of
portions of Calavera Hills Phase II, portions of BTD #4 (College Boulevard Reaches B and C
and Cannon Road Reach 3), and Detention Basin BIB, as shown on CT 00-02 Exhibits “A’‘-“V”.
Mass grading landscaping is depicted on Exhibits “w” - “LL”. The master tentative map would
create 6 lots on approximately 217 acres. The lots being created correspond with the Village
boundaries for K, L-2, U, W, X and Y. Villages H, E-l, and R are currently legal lots which will be regulated by the amended master plan’s provisions.
No residential development or dwelling units are proposed with this master tentative map.
Future subdivision and entitlement approvals for each Village will be consistent with the
requirements of the amended master plan (Chapters VII and IX of MP 150-H).
Grading volumes will total approximately 1,410,OOO cubic yards of cut and 1,324,OOO cubic
yards of fill, including Calavera Phase II and College Blvd. (Reaches B and C) and Cannon Road
(Reach 3). The mass grading will be followed by subsequent Village-level grading to provide
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Pane 16
development pads. As reviewed in the EIR, rock blasting and crushing will be required with this
mass grading operation, similar to the efforts carried out with the previous grading and
development of Village Q within the master plan,
The infrastructure improvements include roads such as College Boulevard Reaches B and C and
Cannon Road Reach 3. Water, sewer, reclaimed water, storm drains, street lights and other
utilities will be included in the roadways shown on the master tentative map.
Since hillside topography is involved with proposed mass grading of CT 00-02, a hillside
development (HDP) is required. HDP 00-02 accompanies the master tentative map and is
reviewed below.
Hillside Development Regulations: HDP 00-02 for the Master Tentative Map
A Hillside Development Permit is required for the mass grading associated with the master ,_
tentative map, CT 00-02, since the property contains slopes of 15 percent and greater and has an
elevation differential greater than 15 feet. The Hillside Development Permit is needed to review
the proposed development shown on the master tentative map for conformance with the Hillside
Development Regulations, Chapter 2 1.95 of the Municipal Code. The proposed development is
in conformance with the intent and the regulations contained within the Municipal Code. Some
flexibility in applying the hillside development ordinance is warranted to achieve the density
transfer and clustering objectives of the master plan amendment as discussed below. HDP 00-02
Exhibits “MM’‘-VV” dated December 19,2001, depict the site’s constraints and slope categories, provide three cross-sections of the proposed grading, and outline the slopes with heights over 40
feet.
Development of Natural Slopes Over Fortv Percent Gradient
Depicted on the constraints map (Exhibits “MM’-“ 00”) are the hillside slope conditions and
undevelopable areas. Approximately 23.4 acres of the Calavera Hills Phase II property are
comprised of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. The proposed project disturbs
1.54 acres of these natural slopes affected by a circulation element roadway (College Blvd.), and
small slopes that are excluded from the Hillside Development Ordinance.
Vohune of Grading
One of the standards of the Hillside Development Regulations is directed at minimizing the
volume of grading proposed. The relative acceptability of hillside grading volume is determined
as 0 - 7,999 cubic yards per graded acre (cy/ac) is acceptable, 8,000 - 10,000 cy/ac is potentially
acceptable and greater than 10,000 cy/ac is unacceptable. This project proposes a grading
volume of 9,660 cy/ac, which is within the acceptable range, after adjustments are made to
exclude grading associated with circulation element roads and collector streets pursuant to
Section 21.95.130 (A)(2) which is within the acceptable range.
EIR 9802/GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC Ol-Ol/
CT 0+02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Slope Height
Manufactured slopes shall not be greater than 40 feet in height unless an exclusion is provided
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.95.130 or a modification is granted pursuant to Section
21.95140. Seven permanent manufactured slopes would exceed a height of 40 feet as depicted
on Exhibit “VV”.
Exclusions are permitted for the majority of these slopes because they meet one or more of the
following: 1) Hillside areas where a circulation element roadway or a collector street must be
located provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with
all other city standards; 2) Grading volumes, slope heights and graded areas which are directly
associated with circulation element roadways or collector streets, provided that the proposed
alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other City standards; or 3)
Hillside areas that have unusual geotechnical or soil conditions that necessitate corrective work
that may require significant amounts of grading. The seven slopes over 40’ in height facilitate a -
grading concept that provides for the construction of College Blvd., and mostly adheres to the
draft I-IMP hardline which defines developable versus non-developable areas of a project.
Furthermore, some canyons, and steep slopes over 40% are preserved even though they are
located within the “developable” portion of the HMP hardline.
The remainder of the slopes qualify for a standards modification pursuant to Section 21.95.140
(A) as the modification will result in more overall open space or undisturbed area than would a
strict adherence to the regulation. By not providing certain overheight slopes, the grading
concept would have encroached further into adjacent open space areas. Plus, the overheight
slopes on the eastern edge of the project help to provide positive drainage westerly to College
Blvd. consistent with City standards. These considerations and slope height exclusions and
modifications are based on the support of creating wildlife corridors and redistributing the master
plan’s remaining dwelling unit allowance. They are also supported as modifications for the
Calavera Hills Master Plan in that they will provide adequate developable areas and building
pads to allow for the future clustered residential development envisioned by this master plan
amendment.
Contour Grading
The Hillside Development Regulations require that all manufactured slopes which are greater
than twenty feet in height and two hundred feet in length and which are located adjacent to or
substantially visible from a circulation element road, collector street or useable public open space
area shall be contour graded. The remaining areas are curve-linear and contour graded. The
grading on the east edge of the project will be designed to transition to the varied and near
vertical terrain of the adjacent natural open space through contour grading, undulations, and
native landscaping. The granting of hillside grading standards modifications pursuant to Section
2 1.95140 (A) will result in significantly more high quality open space.
Future village development will not necessitate individual Hillside Development Permit
approvals except for Villages H and R. However, the residential Villages of K, L-2, U, W and X
have a requirement within their respective sections of Chapter 9 of the master plan to determine
EIR 9%02/GPA 99-03MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02HDP 00-02 - CALAVER HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 18
and implement adequate slope top setbacks given proposed architectural designs at the time of
individual village entitlement.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental
Protection Procedures (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
The EIR addresses the environmental impacts associated with all discretionary applications for
the proposed project including buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, and all segments of
Cannon Road and College Boulevard of the City’s BTD ##4. To determine the areas of potential
impact, city staff prepared an initial study and issued a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) on
November 12, 1999 (State Clearinghouse No. 99111082), distributing it to all Responsible and
Trustee Agencies, as well as other agencies and members of the public. A number of written I
responses were received and city staff scheduled public scoping meetings in order to facilitate
public input. Although not required by CEQA, notices of scoping meetings were sent to a
generalized area encompassing El Camino Real from the west to the master plan in the east; and
from Carlsbad Village Drive from the north to Tamarack Avenue in the south. Notices were also
published in the newspaper and requests for meetings granted and presentations were made with
various community groups.
Four public scoping sessions took place at the City’s Faraday Center. Scoping meetings were
held in September 1999, and January, March, and April 2000. At the scoping sessions, the
public was presented with a project description, and was invited to provide written comments on
the scope and content of the EIR. After consideration of the comments received and based on
the project description, city staff directed the initiation of the Draft EIR document.
The EIR analyzed the following areas of potential environmental impact:
1) Land Use
2) Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
3) Biological Resources
4) Archaeological Resources
5) Paleontological Resources
6) Traffic Circulation
7) Noise
8) Air Quality
9) Geology
10) Hydrology
11) Public Facilities
Additionally, the Draft EIR includes other sections required by CEQA such as an Executive
Summary, Project Description, Cumulative Effects, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, Growth
Inducing Effects and Project Alternatives.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200 1
Pane 19
On February 2, 2001, the Draft EIR was published and the City notified interested Responsible
and Trustee Agencies, as well as other interested agencies. “Notices of Completion of a Draft
Program Environmental Impact Report for the Calavera Hills Phase WBTD #4 Project” were
sent to all members of the public who had signed the interested party list at the scoping sessions
or otherwise requested notification. The ‘Notice of Completion” commenced an initial 45-day
public review and comment period initially expiring March 19, 2001. On February 8, 2001, at
the request of various community groups within the public, the City extended the public review
and comment period to a total of 60 days, expiring April 2, 2001 in order to give the public
additional opportunity to review and comment in writing. This extension provided the maximum
amount of review time allowed by CEQA for typical projects. The “Notice of Completion”
advised that the Draft EIR was available for review at four locations: the City of Carlsbad
Planning Department; the City Clerk’s Office; the Carlsbad Main Public Library and the
Georgina Cole Public Library. Complete copies were also available through the Planning
Department.
The analysis contained in the EIR concluded that all significant impacts would be mitigated to
below a level of significance with the exception of landform alteration (direct), visual
quality/aesthetics (cumulative), transportation (cumulative), noise (cumulative), air quality
(cumulative) and hydrology/water quality/drainage (cumulative), which would be considered
cumulatively significant and unmitigatible. Direct impacts, also referred to as primary effects,
are those caused by the project and that occur at the same time and place. In contrast cumulative
impacts refer to two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable
or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact of several
projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project
when added to other, closely related past, present, or reasonably foreseeable, probable future
projects. The cumulative impacts all arise from the marginal contribution the proposed project
will make, when combined with the impacts from existing and other future projects, to pre-
existing conditions that fail to meet applicable standards currently.
A total of 34 comment letters were submitted prior to the close of the review period. Responses
were prepared and mailed for each of the letters. Response letters also provided notice of the
availability of the Final EIR. Included as a part of the Final EIR is a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP is attached to Planning Commission Resolution No.
5 112 for EIR 98-02.
By the completion of the public scoping process, and after considering subsequent input by
affected resource agencies, the Calavera Hills and BTD #4 elements of the EIR’s project
description were modified in manners that either had no environmental effect; or had an
environmental benefit. In any case, the assessment of environmental impacts in the DEIR is
unchanged or reduced, so no additional mitigation measures are initiated or necessary by the
project description changes being identified.
As shown on the attached Errata to EIR 98-02 Project Description, certain items are
clarifications, the addition of required land uses, and the clarification that a bridge and
thoroughfare district is not the only city option to finance the College and Cannon roadways.
Other changes include a developer-initiated reduction on the maximum height of structures
within the affordable housing site of Village Y from three to two stories; and a revision to the
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 0 1-O l/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Page 20
mass grading concept presented and assessed in the DEIR. The reduced grading is more
sensitive to 40% slope encroachments and preserves more canyon heads and natural undulations.
The CT 00-02 exhibits reflect the revised grading concept. Other items reflect the most current
input by resource agencies regarding mitigation details and roadway designs. All items will be
implemented as appropriate through the Final EIR 98-02.
Prior to any clearing or mass grading associated with the master tentative map, CT 00-02, all
resource agency approvals will be required including the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the
California Department of Fish and Game, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the
Corps of Engineers.
The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan’s Environmental Goals, as
summarized in the attachment to this report.
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program reduces most identified impacts to ”
insignificance, and is attached to the EIR Resolution (No. 5112). The balance of the impacts are
addressed by the project’s Statement of Overriding Considerations, discussed below.
Under CEQA, before a project which is determined to have significant, unmitigated
environmental effects can be approved, the public agency must consider and adopt a “statement
of overriding considerations” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15043 and 15093. CEQA
recognizes and authorizes the approval of projects where not all adverse impacts can be fully
lessened or avoided. However, the agency must explain and justify its conclusion to approve
such a project through the statement of overriding considerations setting forth the Proposed
Project’s general social, economic, policy or other public benefits which support the agency’s
informed conclusion to approve the project. The CEQA Findings of Fact, Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are attached to
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112 for EIR 98-02.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 112 (EIR 98-02)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 113 (GPA 99-03)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 114 (MP 150(H))
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 115 (LFMP 87-07(A))
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 116 (ZC 01-01)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 117 (CT 00-02)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 118 (HDP 00-02)
Location Map
Calavera Hills Phase II Villages (Exhibit 2 of MP 150-H)
Disclosure Statements
Errata to EIR 98-02 Project Description
Consistency with General Plan Environmental Goals
Final EIR for Calavera Hills Phase II/Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4/Detentions
Basins BJ and BJB, dated December 19, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the
Planning Department)
169.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01-011
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
December 19,200l
Pane 21
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Calavera Hills Master Plan Amendment MP 150(H) (previously distributed; copy on file
in the Planning Department)
Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment, dated December 19, 2001
(previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department)
Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master Plan Amendment 150(H), dated December 20, 2000,
(previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department)
CT 00-02 - Master Tentative Map for Calavera Hills Phase II - Full Size Exhibits “A” -
“V”, dated December 19, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning
Department)
CT 00-02 - Landscape Concept Plan for Calavera Hills Phase II - Full Size Exhibits “W”
- “LL”, dated December 19, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning
Department)
Hillside Development Ordinance Exhibits for Calavera Hills Phase II - Full Size Exhibits
“I$M” - “VV”, dated December 19, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the
Planning Department)
EM:mh
AlTACHMENT 9
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications w,hich will require
discretionary action on the pan of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. J’our project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
h’ote:
Person is defmed as “Any individual. fum, co-parmership, joint venture, association, social club. fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, uust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and counv. tit!
municipali@, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and propeq owner mlist 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 corporation or pannershio. 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 corporation. include the
names, titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessat& 1 avera Hills II, LLC,
Person a California limited Carp/Part
Title liability company Title 2127 Hoover Avenue Address2 g 5 0 Address
2. . * OWNER (Not the owner’s agent) .
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of m persons having any ownership
interest in the property involved. Also. provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e,
partnership. tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a
corooration or pattnershie, 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 corporation. include the names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person McMillin Companies, LLC -. ., ~ d IJelmaLr II1LL.L Lt=U ; ’ abil=&yp or /Part ‘Tamarack Properties, Inc.
Title company Title a California corporation
2727 Hoover Avenue c/o Firm
Address Na+inn;rl pi+v. (A 91 . 9 5 0 Address
2075 Las Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-11610 FAX (760) 438-0894 %
-I 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonorofit oreanization or a trust. list the
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit
orpanization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profit/Trust N/A Non Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of Ci!\. staff.
Boards. Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months?
cl Yes I% No If yes. please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
- Signature of owner/dde
n.4 drw-ecc
Print or type name of owner
D OaJ f+chv‘C
Print or type name of applicant
Signature of owner/applicant’s agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of owner/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page2of2/73
of Carlsbad
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require 1
discretionan, action on the part of the Cip Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Comminee.
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, fum, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organisation, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and count!*, cir\,
municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agents may sign this dpcument; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property 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 corooration or oartnership. include the
names. title. addresses of all individuals ownins 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 corooration. include the
names, titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.) .
Person &A-d 3: Mrud
Title 5 L(fl
Carp/Pan QGk%wGl LLL-
Title + JYc&uk La- Ltc-
3 -.
Address 2?2? Address 2127 tbaQ aJE .
uek- Gy 9/w ~*-hJcx CIT-4 CA 4rpso
OWNER (Not the owner’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALI, persons having any ownership
interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e.
partnership. tenants in common. non-profit. corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a
corporation or oarrnership. inctude the names. title. addresses of all individuals owning more
than IO% of the shares. IF NO JNDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES.
PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a pubiiclv-
owned corooration. include the names, titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Carp/Part x= g NYI tUlUbu!!WTAL rti q
Title PM,,&,, Title
Address 7 8’?9 St- w,\Or/ BLVD Address 7 87 q EL US OIJ fsLdD
djz m=skccA - LA PW-SA CA
2075 Las Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad. CA 92009-l 576 l (760) 438-71610 FAX (760) 438-0894 l7P
3.
4.
NOK-PROFIT ORGANZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit oreanization or a trust. list thr
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 ProWTrust%% Dhti dti u~az Non Profit/Trust
Title p-1 berv’i- Title
Address 54 M ~5 Address
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of Gin, staff.
Boards. Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months?
0 Yes BNo If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional’ sheets if necessary.
I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. /
JL . p~sowr
Signature of owner/date +C/Z.Ol Sig&ure of applicant/date
.
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Signature of owner/appl,icant’s agent if applicable/date Q .
l . , -
Print or type name of owner/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 /75
ATTACHMENT 12
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH
GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS ANALYSIS
The Carlsbad General Plan is divided into eight primary elements. Proposed Project
consistency with applicable goals contained in each of the eight elements is provided
below. Goals selected for the consistency analysis relate only to environmental issues.
General Plan goals that are not related to environmental issues or that are repetitive to
a goal previously discussed, are not included in the analysis.
1. Land Use Element
The Land Use Element describes and graphically depicts the desirable arrangement of
different land uses in the City. Land Use Element goals related to an environmental
issue are listed below, each followed by a discussion of goal consistency with the
proposed Calavera Hills Phase II project.
Overall Land Use Pattern Goal A. f: A City which preserves and enhances the
environment, character and image of itself as a desirable residential, beach and
open space oriented community.
Istencv, The proposed project involves a primarily residential and
open space project, which would enhance the urban environment by preserving
over 55% of the project acreage as open space, and an additional 38 acres of
adjacent off-site biological mitigation land, while still providing for a mixture of
residential densities and community facilities. The proposed project would
preserve a total of 159.1 acres (55% of the proposed project site) within the
City’s Draft HMP area. As a result, since the proposed project involves primarily
residential and open space uses, the project is considered consistent with Goal
A.l.
Overall Land Use Pattern Goal A.2: A City which provides for an orderly
balance of both public and ptivate /and uses within convenient and compatible
locations throughout the community and ensures that all such uses, type,
amount, design and arrangement serve to protect and enhance the environment,
character and image of the City.
Project Consistency, The proposed project is the final phase of a master
planned community. This community provides for for a balance of compatible
land uses in a manner that would complement the character and image of the
City. The project proposes a variety of residential dwelling units, and two
community facilities sites, which complement the existing nearby elementary and
K-8 schools, and the public community park. This balance of urban land uses, in
conjunction with the 159.1 acres of undisturbed open space proposed, provides
for an orderly balance of both public and private land uses within the Calavera
Hills Master Plan area.
Growfh Management and Public Facilities Goals A.7 and A.2. A City which
ensures the timely provisions of adequate public faciiities and services to
preserve the quality of life of residents (A. 1). A City which maintains a system of
public facilities adequate for the projected population (A.2).
Proiect Consistency The proposed Zone 7 LFMP Amendment contain detailed
development phasing programs for eleven public facilities covered by the
Citywide Public Facility Plan. These plans ensure that public facilities will be in
place when they are demanded by the projected growth. Compliance with all
public facility performance standards identified in the Zone 7 LFMP must be
demonstrated continuously as the proposed project develops.
Growth Management and Public Facilities Goal A.3: A City that reasonably
deals with the disposal of solid and liquid waste.
Project Consistency, The proposed project would generate wastewater flows
that would be treated by the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The Encina
outfall system has sufficient capacity to dispose of the estimated peak flows
associated with the proposed project. Solid waste generated by the proposed
project would be collected by the City of Carlsbad’s franchise hauler (currently,
Coast Waste Management) that disposes of collected waste at four County-
owned landfills. The proposed project will be required to participate in the City’s
curbside recycling program to reduce potentially significant landfill capacity
impacts to below a level of significance.
Residential Goal A: A City which provides for a variety of housing types and
density ranges . . . while retaining the present predominance of single famiiy
residences.
I77
Project The proposed project would develop a maximum of 781
residential dwelling units, in neighborhoods of varying densities. The project
proposes over 325 single family units, over 250 multi family condominiums, and
104 apartments. Minimum lot sizes within the single-family neighborhoods would
range from 4,000 square feet to 8,000 square feet and the multifamily
condominium and apartment areas would range in density from approximately 9
du/ac. to 19 du/ac. Lot sizes and densities would be compatible with many of
the existing single-family and multi-family neighborhoods located within the
Master Plan area. As a result, the proposed project will provide for a variety of
housing types and density ranges, while retaining a predominance of single
family residences.
industrial Goal A: A City which develops an industrial base of light, pollution-
free industries of such magnitude as will provide a reasonable tax base and a
balance of opporfunifies for employment of local residents.
Project Consistency, Consistent with the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, the project does not propose industrial uses. However it will provide a
significant amount of residential uses for potential industrial workers in the
Palomar Airport industrial corridor of the city. In addition, the proposed project
provides the College Blvd. and Cannon Rd. links to El Camino Real, which will
provide greater efficiency in traffic circulation accessing the industrial
employment area from the proposed project and points north.
Agricultural Goal A: A City which prevents the premature elimination of
agricultural land and preserves said lands wherever possible.
Project Consistency, The proposed project site is not in agricultural use, nor
has it been used for agricultural activities in the past. In addition, most of the
project site does not contain soils suitable for cultivation of crops. Thus, the
proposed project would not prematurely eliminate agricultural land.
Environmental Goal A: A City which protects and conserves natural resources,
fragile ecological areas, unique natural assets and historically significant features
of the community.
Project Consistency, The proposed project would preserve environmental
resources and implement the Draft HMP in accordance with all local, state and
federal laws, regulations and policies. The project would permanently protect
159.1 acres of natural open space on-site, plus an additional 38.0 acres on the
Calavera Nature Preserved, all vegetated largely with sensitive coastal sage
scrub and chaparral plant communities.
Special Planning Considerations - Airport Goal A: A City which maintains
land use compatibility between McClellan-Palomar Airport and surrounding land
uses.
Project Consistency. The proposed project is not geographically located within
the influence area of McClellan-Palomar Airport, and thus no compatibility issues
with the airport land use will occur.
2. Circulation Element
The Circulation Element provides a comprehensive plan for the safe and efficient
circulation. Circulation Element goals related to an environmental issue are listed
below, each followed by a discussion of Proposed Project consistency.
Streets and Traffic Con&o/ Goals A. 1, A.2 and A.3 A City with an integrated
transportation network serving local and regional needs which accommodates a
balance of different travel modes based on safety, convenience, a&activeness,
costs, environmental and social impacts (A. f). A Cify with an adequate
circulation infrastructure to serve the projected population (A.2). A City with a
comprehensive network of roads which provides appropriate access to all land
uses (A.3)
Project Consistency, The proposed project will provide both on-site and off-site
roadways in order to achieve consistency with this goal. On-site residential
roadways are proposed in conjunction with development of the residential
villages. The off-site link of College Blvd. to Cannon Rd. and Cannon Rd. to El
Camino Real is also proposed. This is an important link in the buildout of the
Circulation Element. College Blvd., including this College/Cannon link will be
utilized as a bus route for public transit facilities. Bikeways are proposed on the
arterial roadways. Additionally, a pedestrian travel modes program would be
179
provided through the creation of a proposed pedestrian trail system. This overall
program provides for a balance of different travel modes resulting from
development of the project.
Streets and Traffic Control Goal A.4: A city with properly maintained, smooth
functioning and safe traffic control systems.
m The roadway classifications and right-of-way widths and
design have been planned to ensure that traffic control systems will operate
smoothly, safely and effectively. Traffic signals are proposed at intersections
wherein warrants will be met. Traffic signals would be owned and operated by
the City to ensure that they are property and consistently maintained. Stop signs
are proposed at locations where traffic signals are not warranted. The proposed
project is considered consistent with this goal.
Akernative Modes of Transportation Goal A: A City which promotes,
encourages, and accommodates a variety of transportation modes as
alternatives to the automobile.
Project Consistency, Bicycle, pedestrian and public transit opportunities would
be provided in conjunction with the proposed project. Bike lanes will be provided
on arterial roadways College Blvd., Carlsbad Village Dr., and Cannon Rd. Public
community trails are proposed, which meander throughout the open spaces,
interconnecting the proposed villages. Sidewalks are proposed along all public
streets. Public transit is accommodated through transit customer pick-up centers
along College Blvd. at Villages U and Y. Thus, the proposed project is
considered consistent with this goal.
Public Utility and Storm Drainage Facilities Goal A. 1: A City with a
comprehensive network of utilities and storm drainage facilities which provide
appropriate public utility and r7ood control services to all land uses.
Pro-iect Consistency, A comprehensive network of drainage and water and
sewer systems that provide appropriate service to the proposed project will be
provided in conjunction with the proposed project. The adequacy of these utility
systems has been addressed in the Zone 7 LFMP analysis, which results in the
proposed system design and phasing. Compliance with the Zone 7 LFMP will
ensure consistency with this goal.
Scenic Roadways Goal A: A City which preserves and enhances the visual,
environmental and historical characteristics of the local community through
sensitive planning and design of transportation and utility corridors.
Proiect Consistency. Sensitive design of land uses adjacent to transportation
corridors has been addressed through the use of extensive and highly
landscaped structural and noise wall setbacks from transportation corridors, as
directed by City planned development policy. No identifiable historical
characteristics of the site exist. However, the setbacks will serve to preserve
and enhance the visual and environmental characteristics of these areas, and
thus, provide consistency with this goal.
3. Noise Element
The Noise Element sets forth goals, objectives and policies necessary to achieve and
maintain an environment which is free from objectionable, excessive or harmful noise.
Applicable Noise Element goals are listed below, each followed by a discussion of
Proposed Project consistency.
Land Use Goals A.1 and A.3: A City where land uses are not significantly
impacted by noise (A. 1). A City which controls mobile sources of noise to help
assure that mobile sources do not significantly contribute to the noise
environment (A.3).
Proiect Consistency. The proposed project is projected to generate
pproximately 7,500 ADT at buildout. These vehicle trips would contribute to
traffic noise along planned project roadways and existing and planned off-site
roadways. Within the Proposed Project site, noise attenuation features,
including berming and walls will be constructed along planned roadways where
needed to reduce vehicular noise impacts to a level equal to or below the City
noise policy levels. As a result, these barriers will serve to reduce vehicular
roadway contribution to the noise environment.
Land Use Goal A.2: A City with industrial and commercial land uses which do
not produce significantly adverse noise impacts.
Project Consistency. No industrial uses are proposed in conjunction with the
proposed project. Community facility uses are proposed in Villages H and Y,
which will not produce significant noise generation.
Circulation Goal A: To provide a roadway system that does not subject
surrounding /and uses to significantly adverse noise levels.
Project Consistency, The proposed project has been designed with noise
barriers of walls and wall/berm combination which will ensure that surrounding
land uses are not subject to significantly adverse noise levels. With installation
of these barriers, the proposed project is consistent with this goal.
Airport Goal A: A City that achieves long-tern, compatibility between the airport
and surrounding land uses.
Project Consistency, The proposed project is not within the McClellan Palomar -
Airport influence area. However, in an abundance of caution, future residents
through CC&Rs that the proposed reject area is outside the airport’s noise
impact area, but still subject to intermittent occasional single-event noise
occurrences.
4. Housing Element
The Housing Element provides an inventory of City housing, a housing needs analysis,
demographic information, and opportunities and constraints for housing production in
the City of Carlsbad. A revised Housing Element has been prepared by the City of
I Carlsbad, but has not yet been approved by the State of California, Department of
Housing and Community Development. Because the update is not yet approved, the
analysis of consistency with the applicable environmental goals of the Housing Element
is based on the approved Element.
Quantity and Diversity of Housing Stock Goal 2: New housing developed with
a diversity of types, prices, tenures, densities and locations and in sufficient
quantity to meet the demand of anticipated City and regional growth.
ProiectConsistencv. The Proposed Project is situated in the Northeast
Quadrant of the City, as identified in the City’s General Plan. Pursuant to the
Land Use Element of the General Plan, the City has adopted a cap for the
maximum number of future dwelling units permitted in the Southeast Quadrant.
Implementation of the Proposed Project would contribute up to 781 units in
within this quadrant, and would be within the specified dwelling unit cap. In
addition, according to the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG),
the city of Carlsbad had a total population of 77,550 persons as of January 1,
1999. This population is expected to increase to 109,332 persons in 2010 and to
132,232 persons in 2020. To accommodate this rapidly growing population, the
City will require 45,789 dwelling units by 2010 and 55,123 units by 2020
(SANDAG, February 1999 estimates). The proposed project will provide some
housing to accommodate the City’s projected population growth.
The Proposed Project would assure or provide for construction of a variety of
housing types with varying densities, ranging from single-family detached homes
to multi-family attached dwellings and affordable housing apartment units.
Design guidelines and development standards are included in the proposed
Master Plan which ensure that diversity of housing style constructed is achieved.
According to estimates by SANDAG, the average persons per household for the
City of Carlsbad was 2.58 as of January 1,1999. Using SANDAG’s average
persons per household estimate, the Proposed Project would assure or provide
housing for up to approximately 2,015 residents at project buildout. The
proposed project is consistent with this goal.
Groups with Special Needs Goal 3: Suficient new, affordable housing
opportunities in all quadrants of the City to meet the needs of groups, with
special requirements, and, in particular the needs of current lower and moderate
income households and a fair share proporfion of future lower and moderate
income households.
Project Consistem& The proposed amendment to the Calavera Hills Master
Plan anticipated up to 781 new dwelling units to be located in the Northwest
Quadrant of the City by virtue of development of the proposed project. At least
15% of the proposed units are provided for at affordable rates within Village Y of
the proposed project as required by the Housing Element of the City’s General
Plan and all applicable ordinances that implement the policies and programs of
the Housing Element. The provision of these units would meet the City’s
I
I
inclusionary housing requirement. With the on-site provision of affordable
housing, the proposed project would not result in an inconsistency or conflict with
this goal; thus, no land use impact would occur.
Housing, Jobs, Work Force Balance Goal 4: Maintenance of a high quality of
life and a strong local economy through a balance of residential and non-
residential development, in particular, a balance of the skills desired and wages
offered by local employers; the skills and education possessed and wages
earned by the local work force; and the cost of local housing.
Pm, The Proposed Project involves development of the final
phase of an existing master plan community consisting primarily of residential. A
majority of the Calavera Hills Phase II project will be developed with housing
units ranging from single-family detached homes to multi-family affordable
housing, generating residents that will contribute to the local work force. Non-
residential uses on-site that would contribute to job creation include a total of 3.0
acres devoted to community facilities such as daycare centers, places of
worship, etc. Since the proposed project would generate housing opportunities
for the local work force in a variety of income levels, no conflict or inconsistency
with this goal would occur.
Resource Conservation Goal 5: New and redeveloped housing which
conserves natural resources, in particular energy and water.
Project Consisteu In accordance with the proposed amendment to the
Calavera Hills Master Plan, the Uniform Building Code, and other code
requirements, the Proposed Project would be constructed with the following
elements for the purpose of conserving natural resources: a) Use of low-water
requirement vegetation in public street rights-of-way, parks and open space, and
on manufactured slopes; b) Low flow shower heads and toilets: c) Pedestrian
orientation -would allow residents to travel between uses without using
automobiles; d) Double pane windows for insulation; e) Well-insulated building
materials and pipes; and f) Appropriate “R” value in wall insulation. With
adherence to these specifications, the proposed project would be consistent with
this goal.
5. Open Space and Conservation Element
The Open Space and Conservation Element provides the framework for a
comprehensive open space system in the City. The goals of the Open Space and
Conservation Element are aimed at preserving and protecting identified open space
areas and maintaining or improving environmental quality. Because the goals of this
Element are too numerous to list and analyze in this section, please refer to the
remainder of this EIR for an analysis of the potentially significant environmental impacts
that would be created by the Proposed Project.
Open Space Planning and Protection Goal A.1, and Obtaining Open Space
Goal A.2: An open space system of aesthetic value that maintains community
identity, achieves a sense of natural spaciousness, and provides visual relief in
the cityscape f (A. 1). A city where new developments provide for the open space
needs of their residents (A.2)
Proiect Consrstency, The proposed project has addressed this goal by
maintaining extensive open space within each village. Overall, in excess of 55% .-
of the proposed project area will consist of natural open space. Extensive
setbacks, pocket parks and other open space features will also contribute to the
open space feel of the project, thus rendering it consistent with this goal.
Special Resource Protection Goal A.1: Activity that protects environmentally
sensitive land and buffer areas.
Project Consistency, The proposed project protects environmentally sensitive
lands by setting aside for permanent open space protection, over 55% of the
project acreage, and an additional 38 acres of adjacent off-site biological
mitigation land. The proposed project would preserve a total of 159.1 acres
(55% of the proposed project site) within the City’s Draft HMP area. The project
is considered consistent with the Draft HMP, the basic foundation of which is to
protect environmentally sensitive land and buffer areas. As a result, since the
proposed project involves primarily residential and open space uses, the project
is considered consistent with this goal.
TraiVGreenway System Goal A.2: A city with a Carlsbad Trail System.
Proiect Consistenq The proposed project includes a comprehensive trail
program which will allow for development of pedestrian nature trails which
meander throughout the open spaces and provide pedestrian interconnection of
internal villages and offsite neighborhoods. These trail systems will provide
connection to other off-site trails and contribute to the City’s trail system.
Fire Risk Management Goal A: A city in which fire risk presented by native
wildland open space is mitigated in a manner that provides a reasonable level of
fire protection with sensitivity toward the preservation of natural resources.
Project Consistency, In an effort to reduce the potential impact of wildfire risk,
and in compliance with this goal, the Calavera Hills Master Plan includes
guidelines for fuel management. Also, a Fire Suppression Plan shall be approved
by the City of Carlsbad Fire Department for any areas designated as a Fire
Protection Zone on the proposed project’s Landscape Concept Plans, and for
structures located either adjacent to any natural open space area or adjacent to
a manufactured slope that transitions to natural open space.
Air Quality Preservation Goal A: A city with clean air.
Project Consistency. The Proposed Project site is located in the San Diego Air
Basin, which already experiences air quality problems. Implementation of the
proposed project would contribute to the inability of the San Diego Air Basin to
meet air quality standards, resulting in a cumulatively significant and unmitigable
air quality impact.
Water Qualify Protection Goal A: A city with high quality of water resources.
Proiect Consrstency, Grading of the proposed project site as proposed by the
tentative master subdivision map would not create uncontrolled runoff and would
not substantially modify existing drainage patterns; thus, drainage impacts would
be not significant. Development of the proposed project site would result in an
increase in the cumulative amounts of urban pollutants entering Agua Hedionda
Creek and Agua Hedionda Lagoon over existing conditions, however compliance
with water quality standards will reduce this impact to insignificance. The
cumulative contribution to urban runoff would be minimal and would not result in
water pollution and/or contamination that would significantly impact human
health and safety or biological communities.
Historical and Cultural Preservation Goal A.1: A city in which its existing and
continuing heritage is being protected, preserved, recognized and enhanced.
Project Consistency, All identified archaeological sites impacted by
development of the proposed project will be mitigated through a program of
archaeological monitoring and data recovery, prior to construction. No other
significant historical sites are identified within the project area.
6. Public Safety Element
Goals of the Public Safety Element are set forth to alleviate the risks associated with
identified geologic, seismic, flood, airport safety, electromagnetic field and fire hazards.
Proposed Project consistency with the general Public Safety Element goal is discussed
below.
General Goal A: A city which minimizes injuty, loss of life and damage to
property resulting from tire, flood, crime, hazardous material, or seismic disaster
occurrence.
Project Consistenu The Calavera Hills Master Plan is amended through the
proposed project to incorporate a fire suppression program, incorporating fuel
modification zones and fire protection standards into the proposed project. Fuel
modification zones (i.e., thinning of existing vegetation) would be utilized
wherever development is proposed adjacent to high fire hazard areas such as
natural open space. The project is designed to reduce the potential risk of injury
and damage to individuals and structures from fire through incorporation of
various mitigation measures. The measures are expected to include: the use of
fire retardant building materials, increased building setbacks from natural open
space areas, fuel modification zones, utilization of plant materials with high heat
and fire tolerance, etc. In select cases where homes or other structures are
located on long cul-de-sacs that exceed City Fire Department fire safety
standards, buildings may incorporate built-in sprinkler systems. No structure
would be developed in a floodway. Appropriate mitigation measures, if
necessary, would be implemented to reduce or eliminate any known potential for
seismic disaster.
7. Parks and Recreation Element
The Parks and Recreation Element represents the City’s commitment to develop park
facilities and recreation programs for the use and enjoyment of its residents, tourists
and employees. The Open Space and Conservation Element requires that 3.0 acres of
public parkland be provided for each 1,000 residents. Consistency with this requirement
is discussed below.
Park Development Goal A. 7: A City that provides a diversified, comprehensive
park system utilizing contemporary concepts and planning strategies.
The Proposed Project has contributed to the provision of Project Consistency,
the existing Calavera Hills Community Park, which is a state-of-the-art design,
utilizing contemporary concepts and planning strategies.
8. Arts Element
The Arts Element recognizes that an aesthetic environment is an essential community
characteristic. The goal of the Arts Element is not related to an environmental issue
area.
J-28
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
item No. 1 0
Application complete date:
PC. AGENDA OF: January 2,2002
Project Engineers:
SUBJECT: EIR 98-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BRIDGE AND THOROUGH-
FARE DISTRICT ##4 AND DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - Request
for a recommendation of approval for certification of an Environmental Impact
Report including Candidate Findings of Fact, Statements of Overriding
Consideration, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the
environmental review of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, the City’s Bridge and
Thoroughfare District (BTD) #4 and Detention Basins BJ and BJB of the City’s
Master Drainage Plan, located in the northeast quadrant of the City.
GPA 99-03/MP lSO(H)/LFMP 87-07fAYZC Ol-Ol/CT OO-02/HDP 00-02 -
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II - Request for a recommendation of approval
for: (1) a General Plan Amendment; (2) an amendment to the Calavera Hills
Master Plan; (3) an amendment to the Zone 7 Local Facilities Management Plan;
(4) a Zone Change; (5) a Master Tentative Map, and; (6) a Hillside Development
Permit. These actions are being requested to allow for the land use changes and
mass grading proposed for the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112
RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION of EIR 98-02 and RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions
No. 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, 5117, 5118, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of GPA 99-03,
MP 150(H), LFMP 87-07(A), ZC 01-01, CT 00-02, and HDP 00-02, based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. BACKGROUND
At the December 19, 2001 meeting of the Planning Commission, the Commission heard Staffs
presentation, opened the public hearing and heard the applicant’s presentation, took public
testimony and closed the public testimony. Due to the lateness of the hour the Planning
Commission discussion and vote were continued to the meeting of January 2,2002.
EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP 1 SO(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 01 -Ol/
CT 00-02/HDP 00-02 - CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II
January 2,2002
Page 2
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 112 (EIR 98-02)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 113 (GPA 99-03)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 114 (MP 150(H))
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 115 (LFMp 87-07(A))
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 116 (ZC 01-01)
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 117 (CT 00-02)
7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5 118 (HDP 00-02)
8. Staff Report with attachments (previously distributed)
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l EXmSe ’
5. EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP ISOtHYLFMP 8797tAYZC Ol-011CT OO-021HDP 00-02 -
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BRIDGE AND THOROUGH-FARE DISTRICT #I4 AND
DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - Request for a recommendation of approval for certification
of an Environmental Impact Report including Candidate Findings of Fact, Statements of Overriding Consideration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the environmental
review of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, the City’s Bridge and Thoroughfare District (BTD) #4
and Detention Basins BJ and BJB of the City’s Master Drainage Plan, located in the northeast quadrant of the City.
Mr. Rideout introduced agenda item #5 stating that Eric Munoz, Project Planner, would give the presentation; assisted by David Hauser, Deputy City Engineer; and Lee Sherwood from ReCon, the
Environmental Consultant to the project
Chairperson Segall opened the public hearing.
Eric Munoz, Senior Planner, stated that Calavera Hills is a combined project, half is a development
project for the Calavera Hills Master Plan and half is the City’s Bridge and Thoroughfare District #I4
relating to College and Cannon roadways and detention basins. He said there are several entitlements
specific to Calavera Hills up for consideration and the whole package will go to City Council after Commission’s recommendation action.
Mr. Munoz showed the area that pertains to the combined project EIR 98-02 and pointed out the Calavera
Hills Master Plan area and the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park for reference. He stated the EIR
looks at the buildout of the Master Plan and the two roadways, Cannon Road and College Boulevard, and
pointed out where the new intersections and extensions are planned. He also stated that the EIR includes Detention Basins BJ and BJB. The Calavera Hills project has an offsite requirement which is
College Boulevard to the Master Plan boundary to the intersection with Cannon, and Cannon Road west to El Camino Real. It also needs to build Detention Basin BJB. Three elements of the Bridge and
Thoroughfare District that are not required for the Calavera Hills project include Cannon Road Reach 4, College Boulevard Reach A, and Detention Basin BJ. He added that the Calavera Hills Master Plan and
its buildout has four primary functions: It sets up wildlife corridors, transfers allowed density internal to the
master plan, provides affordable housing, and provides community facilities.
Mr. Munoz showed photographs of the 10 villages included in the Master Plan Amendment and briefly
described the existing and proposed land uses for each village. He described the topography of the
villages and explained the reasons for the changes to density and open space designations. He stated
that Village Z is not currently in the Master Plan; it is an open space reserve, it involves the elimination of the currently allowed residential density on the site and they are including it in the Calavera Hills Master
Plan. Village Z is the singular subject of the Zone Change proposal from Limited Control Zone to Planned
Community Zone to formally include it in the Calavera Hills Master Plan. This IlO-acre site is now a
fundamental piece of the regional and city habitat planning efforts.
Mr. Munoz explained that the EIR is the only item before the Commission that covers all elements of the
project, both City and private projects. The items for the Commission’s action that are exclusive to the
Calavera Hills project are the General Plan Amendment, Master Plan Amendment, Local Facilities
Management Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Master Tentative Map, and Hillside Development Permit.
Mr. Munoz described each of the items. The General Plan Amendment makes designation changes that
affect the General Plan that correspond with the residential increases and decreases throughout the
Master Plan. The Master Plan Amendment sets up the new standards for the buildout of the Master Plan.
The Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment is a growth management document that amends the facilities that are required for this zone. The Zone Change is specifically to the mitigation parcel changing
the zone to include it in the Master Plan. The Master Tentative Map is for the mass grading portion of the
Calavera Hills grading and the Hillside Development Permit accompanies the grading covered on the
Master Tentative Map. He showed the existing and proposed general plan maps indicating their land use
designations.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 2
Mr. Munoz said the Master Plan Amendment provides architectural standards for the buildout and also provides village by village development standards and updates the Master Plan with current City
standards such as affordable housing, trails, open space maintenance, livable streets, and community
facilities.
Regarding Calavera Hills Phase 2 traffic, Mr. Munoz stated that some time ago the whole city was
modeled with all of these major projects as well as the road systems being in place and indicated that
Calavera Hills would generate 7,534 ADT. The road segments included in the EIR are part of the 2020
buildout configuration. The traffic analysis findings result in offsite arterial improvements such as College
Boulevard would have improvements from Carlsbad Village Drive to Cannon Road and Cannon Road
would have some improvements from College Boulevard to El Camino Real. There would be onsite
transition improvements around the Village H area and Victoria Avenue and Carlsbad Village Drive.
There would be compliance with the Growth Management Plan and Congestion Management Plan level
of service requirements, and no project mitigation is required beyond the required offsite and onsite
improvements. Cannon Road Reach 4, College Boulevard Reach A, and Basin BJ are not required by
Calavera Hills.
Mr. Munoz showed College Boulevard and Cannon Road on the map indicating the proposed alignment,
extensions, and intersections of the various reaches, and emphasized that Cannon Road Reach 4 is not
required for the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan. He said it is not currently funded or prioritized
by the City of Carlsbad. CEQA and an Environmental Impact Report are being done now for feasibility
only and to allow a funding mechanism to be developed. The City of Carlsbad and City of Oceanside as -
well as any other stakeholders will be looking at the final design of the road. He said the City of Carlsbad
Staff met with Oceanside citizens three times and integrated some of their comments into the preferred
alignment, however the alignment is not final and needs City of Oceanside approval. He said a lot of future interaction and dialogue is expected before settling on a final alignment that is supported by all
concerned parties. He added that only a General Plan Amendment can remove Cannon Road Reach 4 from the City’s General Plan. An EIR analysis of one potential alignment is what is before the
Commission. The final alignment will be subject to City of Oceanside approval and City of Carlsbad
review. The CEQA and Environmental Review will get reassessed once there is a final alignment and it
may be that the environmental review has to be augmented, redone, or modified once there is an
alignment that all parties support. Mr. Munoz turned the presentation over to David Hauser to present the Bridge and Thoroughfare portion.
David Hauser, Deputy City Engineer, pointed out on the map the proposed improvements and extensions
to College Boulevard and Cannon Road. He stated they are calling it Bridge and Thoroughfare District
&I, however, the environmental document allows other financing districts as well so if it results in being an assessment, Mello Roos, or other type of district, it is currently allowed under the environmental
document.
Mr. Hauser stated the financing district approval process includes the following items:
Identify Need for Improvement - this is typically done when doing the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) or a Master Plan as is being done with the Zone 7 amendment. It was done with the
older Zone 7 LFMP, the Zone 14 LFMP, and the Zone 15 LFMP. Each of these plans required financing to occur for certain portions of these major roads. The City looked to put together a larger
financing district due to the overlapping financing requirements and construction responsibilities of these roads. The Calavera Hills project is part of this larger financing district that includes roads that
are not going to be built by Calavera Hills.
Establish Boundary of Proposed District - The boundary of the proposed district was established
based on the LFMP requirements.
Preliminary Engineering Studies - initial cost spreads and develop cost estimates for the proposed
district.
Environmental Approval for the District.
Council Approval for the Fee Study Report and to accept the public hearing.
Council Public Hearing to Establish a District.
Final Engineering Plans and Obtain Permits - resource agency permits as well as permits from the
City of Oceanside for the right-of-way and grading permits to allow Cannon to be constructed in the
City of Oceanside.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 3
0 Construction of Improvements.
Mr. Hauser stated the only item for action at this meeting is the environmental approval of the district.
Mr. Hauser stated the construction phasing of College/Cannon includes College Reaches B and C and
Cannon Reach 3. This is a requirement of the Calavera Hills Master Plan and will be a requirement
placed upon their Master Tentative Map, which is a subject of review and recommendation before the
Planning Commission at this meeting. They would be required to initiate construction prior to the first
building permit in Calavera Hills Phase 2 project. The road connection of College and Cannon would be
up front with the first permit issued in the master planned project. The road opening would be required
prior to exceeding 2,500 ADT. He said a road of this size would typically take about l-l% years to
construct. The developer has the ability to construct some of the units during that time and would like to
final some of those units during that time so they can develop the money to finance the roadway. College Reach A is required to be constructed with future development in Zone 15. Cannon Road Reach 4 is
essentially needed before buildout of the city and will be built after obtaining the permits from Oceanside
and after a funding mechanism to support the construction of the road is developed.
Mr. Hauser discussed the following road alignment issues they dealt with in preparing the EIR:
Calavera Creek crossing location - the City did an extensive review of the alternative alignments for both
College and Cannon. The outcome of the study is that the proposed alignment of College and Cannon is the least environmentally damaging alternative of building these two roads in accordance with the ‘-
General Plan requirements.
Loss of access to Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park amenities - the College Reach 3 portion cuts
across some parcels of the park and will close the current access to their recreational vehicle storage area, their maintenance facilities, and their community gardens as well as other facilities in that location.
Mr. Hauser stated that the developer and the City had extensive negotiation and he believes there is a
resolution to this issue. An errata sheet adds three additional conditions: construction of a sound wall, additional landscaping, and an option to purchase a piece of the McMillin property immediately north of
the mobile home area. He said that the park’s homeowners association indicated they would support the
project with those additions.
Proximity to existing homes at the Cape at Calavera, Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park, and Ocean
Hills - He pointed out the developments on the map and explained alternatives considered and measures
taken to mitigate the concerns and needs of the residents as well as the resource agencies.
Need for Reach 4 of Cannon Road - Several requests were made to have it removed from the EIR. Two reasons for that request are that it crosses the habitat preserve and subsequent to issuing the EIR, there
was a proposal by Vista to drop a portion of Cannon Road that extends from Melrose Drive to Highway
78. After a general review to see if it would make a difference to the overall environmental analysis, staff
felt that that it didn’t really change the need for Cannon Road Reach 4.
Mr. Hauser stated an analysis was done to see what would happen if Cannon Road was taken out, which
would require a General Plan Amendment. Essentially it showed that increases in buildout levels of traffic that would occur on surrounding road networks in the city would be quite heavy. College Boulevard in the
master planned area would have an additional 6,000 vehicles going up to Highway 78, Highway 78 would get anywhere from 1,000 to 4,000 additional vehicles per day, Melrose Drive from Cannon to
Shadowridge 2,000 additional vehicles, Shadowridge down to Palomar Airport Road 5,000 additional
vehicles per day, Faraday Avenue and Palomar Airport Road would each receive 3,000 vehicles per day.
There would also be increases in traffic on l-5 and El Camino Real. In terms of impacts, the increases in
traffic would result in failing levels of service at the intersections of Shadowridge/Melrose,
FaradaylMelrose, Melrose/Palomar Airport Road, Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real, MarronlEl
Camino Real. The two on-ramps to the freeways would also go to failing levels of service, one going from EtoF.
Mr. Hauser stated that tonight’s action provides for the following: an environmental approval to establish a financing district for College Boulevard and Cannon Road, an approval for the preferred alignments for
/93
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 4
College and Cannon, approval to construct College from Carlsbad Village Drive to Cannon Road, and
approval to construct Cannon Road from College Boulevard to El Camino Real.
Mr. Hauser described the follow-on actions that would need to occur:
l Obtain permits from the City of Oceanside (right-of-way, grading, and potentially some discretionary
permits). This may require some community outreach and discussions with resource agencies to get
an alignment that is satisfactory to all parties. It could potentially require supplemental environmental information if an alignment is chosen that has different impacts.
l Finalize relocation plans for Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park recreational vehicle storage area,
maintenance access, and community garden. This would require an amendment to the Ranch0
Carlsbad Mobile Home Park Conditional Use Permit. It would include community involvement,
require supplemental environmental documentation, and establishment of a financing plan to pay for
the improvements.
Mr. Hauser briefly went over the project descriptions of floodwater retention basins BJ and BJB. Basin
BJB is located at the northeast corner of College and Cannon Road intersection and will have an
inundation area of approximately 15 acres and a storage capacity of 49 acre-feet. All impacts can be
mitigated. Basin BJ is located on the east side of College Boulevard approximately 350 feet south of
Cannon Road at the current location of the recreational vehicle storage lot and maintenance facilities.
The inundation area would be approximately 8 acres with a storage capacity of 48 acre-feet. The impacts - to the mobile home park’s recreational vehicle storage and maintenance facilities are identified as a
mitigation within the EIR. He said the EIR talks about relocation of a smaller RV site but the larger existing RV site is something that must be dealt with during the property acquisition phase of the project
and will be part of the settlement that is being worked on with the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park
owners.
Mr. Hauser stated that the reasons for including these basins into the overall EIR are that they mitigate
potential flooding impacts from the Calavera Hills project, the major roads project, and the future development; they are an implementation of the Master Drainage Plan; and part of a larger program to
mitigate flooding at the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park property.
Mr. Hauser stated that Basin BJB is required prior to or concurrent with the mass grading of Calavera
Hills Master Plan and also with the extension of College Boulevard Reaches B and C and Cannon Road
Reach 3. Basin BJ is required prior to or concurrent with construction of Reach A of College Boulevard.
Mr. Hauser turned the presentation over to Lee Sherwood, Environmental Consultant from ReCon.
Mr. Sherwood stated that the Final EIR for the Calavera Hills project addresses all three project
components: Phase 2 of the Master Plan, the various reaches of College Boulevard and Cannon Road, as well as the detention basins. He stated it was a lengthy process getting to this point, involving the
public as well as the wildlife agencies. He briefly went over the steps taken. Beginning in 1999 the applicant and the City conducted several meetings with the resource agencies to try to determine what
the hardline preserve open space system should be and in August 1999 a consensus was reached on how the open space should be configured. In the fall of 1999, the City decided to prepare a joint EIR that
included both the roadways as well as the Calavera Hills Master Plan, and a Notice of Preparation for a draft EIR was issued in November. Starting in September of 1999 the public became involved and Staff
conducted four public meetings between September of 1999 and April of 2000. Between April of 2000 and February of 2001 the draft EIR was prepared. It was released for a 45-day public review period in
February of 2001. The applicant is proceeding along with the City trying to secure state and federal
resource agency permits.
Mr. Sherwood stated the final EIR includes an errata sheet that indicates changes and revisions made to
the project as a result of this interactive process, and corrections made to the document. He said there
were about 38 letters of comment from state and federal agencies, local conservation groups, and concerned individuals. Responses were provided to the letters. He added that the mitigation monitoring
reporting program, which provides the detail on how the mitigation measures will be implemented, is
included as Appendix L in the final EIR.
194
.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 5
Mr. Sherwood said examples of some of the revisions made to the project include the change in Village K
to accommodate the wildlife corridor and reducing the height of the buildings in Village Y from 3 stories to
2 stories.
He briefly discussed the following four major issues addressed by the EIR:
l Significant Land Use Impact - College Boulevard Reach A and Detention Basin BJ would affect the
Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobile Home Park RV storage area. This was identified as a significant impact and
there are mitigation requirements to ensure the loss of that storage area would be replaced.
. Traffic Circulation - it was indicated that approximately 7,500 trips would be generated by Phase 2 of
the Master Plan. The traffic analysis that was prepared for the’ project looked at short-term and long-
term impacts (2005, 2020 at buildout), intersections, and street segments. It concluded that there
were no direct impacts associated with the buildout of the master plan, and the mitigation measures
onsite are signalization and construction of the reaches of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. There is a significant cumulative impact that this project would contribute to at the intersection of
State Route 78 at the El Camino Real ramps, however, there is no mitigation required for the project itself.
l Biology - There is a variety of habitat types in both the Master Plan as well as the habitats the roadways traverse. The sensitive habitats are coastal sage scrub, a variety of riparian habitats, the ”
California Gnatcatcher occurs in the coastal sage scrub and the Least Bell’s Vireo occurs at the
intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. The project would be consistent with the
resource agency requirements in terms of habitat linkages. Mitigation for these impacts is outlined in
the EIR. Ongoing are the 404 and 1603 permitting processes for the riparian impacts. The applicant
and City hope that those can be resolved soon.
l Noise - There would be significant impacts from traffic-generated noise. A model was done based on
the mass grading plan to determine what the noise levels would be and what the barrier heights
would need to be. As each one of the individual tentative maps come forward there may need to be
more refined noise studies done to better define what the noise walls need to be.
Mr. Sherwood reiterated that Staffs recommendation to the Commission is to certify the final EIR and
recommend to the Council the adoption of the CEQA findings and overriding considerations.
Mr. Munoz wanted to clarify that due to some public requests the public review period was extended to 60
days, the maximum allowed by CEQA. All letters were responded to. He then described the four
changes to the master plan listed in the errata sheet.
Mr. Hauser stated that the developer agreed to three additional conditions to the tentative map resolution listed in the errata sheet that go beyond the scope of the requirements for the project. He said these
conditions were agreed to as a result of meetings with the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobilehome Park. He described the conditions and stated that he would like to add the words “should there be one established”
to the last sentence of the errata sheet but would have to first get agreement from the Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobilehome Park representative.
In summary, Mr. Munoz stated that the City is about 50 years old, the Calavera Hills Master Plan is about
30 years old, and in many ways the buildout of the Calavera Hills Master Plan parallels the buildout of the City. There is about a third left to build out the City and about a third left to build out Calavera Hills. He
said the Master Plan is being amended to bring up to current City standards items such as open space,
open space management, regionally significant resource agency mandated wildlife corridors, affordable housing, community facilities, trail systems, and livable streets within the Master Plan document. He
stated that this is what is before the Commission in addition to the EIR that goes beyond Calavera Hills for the infrastructure.
Commissioner Compas asked Staff to comment on letters that were received prior to the meeting that the
Commission did not have time to review. Mr. Munoz replied they would start with the EIR letters.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 6
Mr. Sherwood replied that he received two letters today, one from the California Indian Legal Services,
bringing up issues regarding the archeology work being done on the site. He said it’s his understanding
that there will be an agreement in place with the Luiseno Native American group to ensure there is a pre-
excavation agreement and there will be Native American monitoring going on while the grading is taking
place. It was his understanding that they wanted to mirror the agreement that occurred with the Villages
of La Costa and mentioned that perhaps the applicant could speak in more detail on this issue.
Mr. Sherwood stated the second letter from the Law Offices of Everett DeLano had to do with the possible recirculation of the draft EIR. He said the letter is correct in that there is an errata that goes with
the document. The errata was prepared to correct changes that occurred in the draft EIR as well as
reflect changes that have occurred to the project itself. He stated that the information presented in the
final EIR does not trigger substantial new information or new impacts and it does not reach the level that
warrants recirculating the document.
Mr. Hauser stated the letter from Sue Loftin, representing Ranch0 Carlsbad Mobilehome Park, indicated that the association was willing to support the project provided that the City implement the additional
conditions discussed previously and that the City Staff is agreeing to pursue a course of action that will essentially effect the relocation of the facilities to the McMillin site. In his opinion the letter from Staff
dated December 19th should cancel out the letter from Ms. Loftin dated December 5th provided they
come to a conclusion on the issue with the financing.
Mr. Hauser stated the letter from Lighthouse Ventures indicated the Robertson family is objecting to being -
included in the Bridge and Thoroughfare District ##I for the financing of College and Cannon Roads. The
basis of their objection appears to be that as they proceeded with laying out their project plans and
discussions with the agencies there is a wildlife corridor that cuts the parcel. The eastern half of the
Robertson property has been purchased by McMilllin which has direct access onto College and Cannon,
but the western portion retained by the Robertson’s does not have direct access onto the streets so they
are asking for some sort of relief from their inclusion in the district. He said this is not an item for the Commission at this time, it is a follow-on item that would be taken to the City Council after some of the
details of the formation of the district are completed. It is not yet at that stage and should have no impact
on the approval of the Environmental Impact Report.
Mr. Munoz stated four letters addressed Cannon Road Reach 4. The McNeese letter basically states
opposition to the raised roadway stating that it would be unsightly, noisy, and disturbing to a lovely native
habitat. Mr. Munoz said it is because of the lovely native habitat at the end of the current alignment down in the canyon that the resource agencies won’t allow the road to go in its current alignment and that’s why
it got adjusted to go up the slope. Another issue is related to the City of Vista not connecting Cannon all
the way to 78. He said that’s a regional dimension to the issue that goes outside the City and may have to be looked at from a regional context. Another letter opposing Cannon Road Reach 4 from Audrey
Sargisson states that people have purchased homes there in the belief that the extension would not be
built. Mr. Munoz said whether the road gets built or not is outside the City of Carlsbad and it was nothing
Staff ever said since it has been on Oceanside’s and the City of Carlsbad General Plan for approximately
30 years. A letter from Ms. Bowles is in direct support of Cannon Road Reach 4. Another letter was from
all the Oceanside City Council members. They support the at-grade alignment of Cannon Road, which
has some resource agency and federal issues that need to be dealt with. He stated that the letter highly
recommends that Cannon Road Reach 4 be further discussed and analyzed by Carlsbad and Oceanside
staffs to find a compromise position that may better serve our mutual concerns. Mr. Munoz said that is
the Staffs intent as well, and the alignment is far from being finalized and it needs to have stakeholders, both city and resource agency folks settle on what actually can be permitted. He added that is not
precluded by any action tonight or by the EIR.
Chairperson Segall stated there were also letters from the Department of Army, Preserve Calavera,
Sierra Club. Mr. Munoz said he could not respond to those letters because he had not yet read them. Mr. Munoz said there was also a letter from Mayor Terry Johnson with comments similar to the balance of his
council urging coordination and interaction between the cities to set an alignment that is mutually
acceptable to everyone.
Commissioner Compas asked when the mass grading is supposed to start for Calavera Hills if everything gets approved. Mr. Hauser replied that the developers want to be in a position where they can clear the
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 7
site this grading season. The nesting season for the California Gnatcatcher begins February 14th or 15th
and they are trying to get through this process and get to the City Council and complete their resource
agency permits and get to a stage where they can clear.
Commissioner Compas asked what has to be in place on the detention basin before they can start and wanted to know if the district has to be set. Mr. Hauser replied the two basins are not part of the financing
district; they are financed out of the master drainage plan fee program
Commissioner Baker asked for clarification on restriping the intersection of Tamarack and El Camino Real
and removing the barrier as mentioned in the Staff report. Mr. Hauser replied that the traffic study done
for the project indicated that by keeping the barrier in place they could develop out the project and not negatively impact the roadways or the growth management standards. The City said no development
would be allowed without the requirement that the barrier be removed and connect the College/Cannon
roads. Therefore, there was an inclusion that if the project does not go forward, there would still be a
resolution that could occur. At the time, the Council was looking for alternatives in case the
College/Cannon connection didn’t go through and wanted to recognize that alternative within the EIR.
That alternative in the EIR was not addressed in great detail because it was not part of the project.
Subsequently, a traffic analysis was done for the issue of removal of the barricade by itself and it was
discovered that to remove the barricade without the road extension would require completion of the construction of Cannon Road Reach 2B which is the portion from El Camino Real to the freeway. The
alternative would also require restriping of Tamarack at El Camino Real intersection limiting it to one
through lane westbound and turn the other through lane into a left turn pocket to clear more cars through - the intersection. There would also be the requirement of doing improvements to Carlsbad Village Drive at
the place where there’s the safety issue because there would be more traffic going on that section of the
road without College/Cannon connection. Other improvements were to put in a couple of traffic signals.
If this project builds College/Cannon there would be no need to do the restriping.
Commissioner Baker referenced language in the Master Plan Amendment stating that College/Cannon have to be under construction at the time of issuing building permits and wanted to know how it plays out
in terms of when the road actually has to be completed and those housing units are occupied. Mr.
Hauser responded that with finaling of the Master Tentative Map, they will prepare all the plans, secure all the right-of-way, secure the agency permits and enter into a secured agreement with the City for the
construction of that road. The road will be guaranteed for construction before they grade the site. Then
they will start the construction of the road which will take about 1 to 1% years to complete, and they can complete the grading and initiate construction of homes in about 6 months and complete a home in about
3-4 months. The road could still be under construction when they’re ready to offer occupancy for the
homes, so Staff said they would issue permits up to an allowable 2,500 vehicles a day, which is roughly 250 homes, but could be more or less if they go with the community sites first.
Commissioner Baker asked what the overriding document is because it says in the Master Plan that the road only needs to be under construction in mitigation for each of the villages. Mr. Hauser replied that it
is mitigation for each of the villages but in advance of getting to that they are doing the Master Tentative
Map so the condition is placed upon the Master Tentative Map that they will initiate construction with the
mass grading operations.
Commissioner Trigas wanted to clarify that the road alignment that is preferred on Reach 4 needs to be
discussed with the parties involved and the specific alignment can be changed and does not have to be held to the preferred. Mr. Hauser replied that is correct, and it is not unusual to get environmental
approval for a project and then during review with the resource agencies something is spotted in the field that they feel needs protection and the agency asks the alignment to be moved. In their area of study he
said they did a 500-foot swath of biological, archaeological, and other studies to determine the impacts.
The 500 feet is centered approximately on the preferred alignment so the road could horizontally move within that 500-foot area, but there is no limitation vertically.
Chairperson Segall asked to see the map for Reach 4 and asked for a show of hands from the audience
how many were present because of Reach 4. Due to the number of people concerned with Reach 4 he said he would like to focus questions in terms of Reach 4 on what we’re doing tonight, what the
implications are, and what the impact is in the future. Chairperson Segall referenced the letter from the City of Oceanside City Council which states, “It is our position that the wetlands impacts of an “at existing
19’7
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 8
grade” alignment should be mitigated rather than exposing residents to increased impacts and the
resulting measures necessary to reduce these impacts.” He asked Mr. Hauser if he knew what that would
mean in terms of mitigation because what he’s hearing is that while the wildlife agencies are saying you can’t go through here, the City of Oceanside is indicating they should be mitigated. He wanted to know
how would they be mitigated and is it possible by going back and studying this issue further with the
agencies that they would allow it to be mitigated and have the road go through where the residents would
like it.
Mr. Hauser responded that the applicant and the City are currently going through the approval and
permitting process with the Army Corps and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. One of the steps in that
process is to identify the least environmentally damaging preferable alternative. He said if you can’t
demonstrate that Reach 4 going through the bottom of that canyon is the only preferable alternative, he
didn’t think they could make that argument. He said he didn’t think the federal agencies would let them
even attempt to build that because it can be shown there is another alternative that misses that habitat.
He added that is the process that they’re going through right now on the rest of the project.
Chairperson Segall asked Mr. Hauser if he’s saying it’s preferable to the wildlife agencies, not to the
community. Mr. Hauser stated you have to demonstrate that the alignment that you’re trying to approve
is the least environmentally damaging alternative and he does not think that could be done with an
alignment going straight down the canyon into the riparian habitat.
Chairperson Segall asked Mr. Hauser if he looked at it from all angles and is convinced that you can’t go ~
through it and the best alternative is going around it, backing up onto Cannon Road and going around it.
Mr. Hauser replied that there are other alternatives that also avoid the habitat and could be found
environmentally acceptable but that the preferred alternative provides a bigger buffer from the wetland
habitat itself as requested by the resource agencies.
Mr. Munoz said that as they go into an interactive process with the City of Oceanside to finalize this
alignment, we may end up somewhere totally different and will have to adjust the environmental review at
that time. He said he thinks that’s the time, to be fair to Oceanside, when they have a chance to make a
pitch to the resource agencies for the concerns of their stakeholders adjacent to that road segment given
the environmental impacts that are federally regulated, not regulated by the City of Carlsbad. He said
they have the opportunity ahead of them and we would support any efforts to do that. If we did not
include Cannon Road Reach 4 in the current EIR, this intersection might have been in a school site or a
mitigation area. We were forced to look at the big picture but this last link of Reach 4 has a lot of time to
let the dust settle. He said he thinks Oceanside wants to get a fair shot with the resource agencies
because they were not involved in discussions to get to this point. He thinks if we all get on board and move forward that’s reflective of the letters received from the Mayor and his Council, and that’s how the
Staff is prepared to go forward.
Chairperson Segall wanted to confirm that all the Commission is approving tonight is the EIR for Reach 4
and coming up with a viable alternative, but there is a lot of work ahead before it is really determined. If
the City of Oceanside says they will not allow the road to be done that way, then it’s back to the drawing
board until a compromise is reached. Mr. Munoz replied that is correct and stated that it’s also a similar
situation for College Reach A going south to El Camino Real and Detention BJ. The only difference with
Cannon Road Reach 4 is that there is another city to deal with. The other improvements are internal to
Carlsbad.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that one of the confusing aspects is the time span that exists between the original alignment at the end of the Ocean Hills development, almost 20 years ago, and the
requirements of 2001, are like night and day. In order to move ahead we have to have something that
considers all the differences and changes on environmental requirements that have taken place over the years. He said he thinks eventually this can be settled and mitigated so it works and thinks some of the
fears that have become obvious in some of the local newspapers have really fermented fears that shouldn’t exist at all.
Commissioner Trigas wanted to clarify if the City of Oceanside made efforts to talk to or approach the
agencies to communicate their concerns or has it just been the letter received from the Council. Mr. Hauser replied that to his knowledge the City of Oceanside did not talk to the resource agencies. He said
198
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 9
Staff had some discussions with them but didn’t get into details of alternative alignments, Some were
presented to the Oceanside Staff fairly late in the process. He said they did not comment on the draft EIR during the comment period. They received comments later on as the process was concluding and getting
to the stage of presentation to the Commission. He said they showed 3 alternatives and there are
probably 40 or 50. Essentially what Staff is trying to do is to set up for an environmental approval to allow the formation of the bridge and thoroughfare district. To do a formation of a district you do not necessarily
have to have the final design plans together to go forward with it. You’re looking for a level of effort so
that you can establish that you do have some environmental approved alignment that can work and that
you can prepare adequate cost estimates that include the mitigation measures. The reality of the
situation is mitigation measures are now becoming a major component of the cost of a project. They
used to be 5 percent of the cost and now they’re upwards to 30 or 40 percent of the construction cost of the road. He said they’re required by CEQA to go forward with the environmental review process for the
roads. In a normal project they would be following on with the design plans and refining these issues and
moving forward to solve all these kinds of problems. However, it wasn’t done on this one because they
were looking strictly for a feasibility study that allowed them to move forward with the financing plan.
Commissioner Trigas wanted to clarify that it would take a General Plan’ Amendment to remove Reach 4 so that is not an issue tonight. Mr. Munoz reaffirmed and stated that no application has been made for a
General Plan Amendment.
Chairperson Segall asked if approval was received from the church for Cannon Reach 4 that goes
through its property. Mr. Hauser replied that the church is one of the stakeholders and was talked to early ” on because alignment 3 impacts their site. With the revised alternative of it being lowered they haven’t
had the time to show them the impacts. He said if they are not on board and willing to go along with this
there would have to be a condemnation action, which would be the City of Oceanside lending their
powers of condemnation, to assist in getting the road through there and they would have to do that at a public hearing and have a statement that there is a public necessity for the construction of this road.
There are a lot of issues that have to be resolved and stakeholders that have to be satisfied to get a final product.
Chairperson Segall asked if there would be opportunities for the City of Oceanside to participate in mitigation fees if they’re able to go through the riparian area. Mr. Hauser said they’re always willing to
take money from anyone wanting to put money into the project.
Commissioner Compas said there appears to be no single story homes in Phase 2 of Calavera Hills and
there are fairly long streets and asked why there are no single story homes. Mr. Munoz responded that the Calavera Hills Master Plan Amendment is a vehicle where customized standards can be made for
that particular master plan area. It would allow Calavera Hills to establish the wildlife corridors and develop their residential neighborhoods in a clustered development context. They have some
architectural standards in their master plan that address a good street scene with the option of not providing single story houses and units. There are other tradeoffs throughout the architectural program
that they have such as no three-in-a-row car garage. Looking at the whole mix, it had enough staff
support to put it to the Commission, but the developer is prepared to present the street scene and
architectural provisions and standards in a more comprehensive manner.
Commissioner Trigas stated that in her opinion page 52 of the Master Plan Amendment says that there
would be single story homes and there seems to be a contradiction between Section 28 and Section 2D. Mr. Munoz responded that Section 2B sets up an allowance for an option of single story or reduced
second story homes and when you get to architectural variety it says that it’s the intent to have some kind
of variety. Further in that section it talks about a prefiling submittal where before they actually submit their village they need to get some kind of support from the Planning Director that they have an architectural
variety in their plan. It could potentially be architectural variety that is achieved without the single story.
Commissioner Trigas said when she reads Section D it defines architectural variety and it is not an
either/or; it is clearly that these 3 types would be part of the architectural variety. Mr. Munoz suggested that she ask the applicant how he proposes to clarify that. Mr. Munoz said one element of the errata
sheet is to strike out the phrase of dormer two story, that is something that is not proposed with this
master plan. The errata sheet does not strike out single story.
199
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 10
Commissioner Baker asked if the Master Plan is approved as written, could there be villages with no single story homes. Mr. Munoz replied that could potentially be the case, and if that is an issue the
Commission should address it.
Commissioner Baker stated that the multi-family villages can have a maximum height of 34 feet and
asked if it is typical that multi-family can be higher than single family homes. Mr. Munoz replied that in
fact it is lower than the citywide allowance of 35 feet.
Commissioner Baker said she did not see livable streets language anywhere in the Master Plan. Mr.
Munoz told her to ask the developer where it is and how it would be implemented, but he said it’s
basically having the parkway next to the street internally.
Chairperson Segall asked how Phase 2 architectural design compares to Phase 1 architectural design. Mr. Munoz said it actually meets a fair amount of the old PD ordinance while at the same time meeting
the new PD ordinance. In one sense it goes in the direction of the new citywide standards for
architectural variety in not having a street scene dominated by garages, and livability. Chairperson stated it’s also proposing styles and different design elements within communities. Mr. Munoz replied that the
styles would be best described by the applicant.
Chairperson Segall asked what is meant by recreational areas for each villages. Mr. Munoz said that
would be part of the applicant’s presentation, but basically there is an A list and a B list. The A list is a swimming pool, a tennis court, a spa. The B list has other items. The idea is to spread out some of the -
bigger active amenities throughout Phase 2.
Chairperson Segall asked if the Commission would have future opportunities to review architectural styles and the site development plans and be able to see layouts and orientations as in every other project. Mr.
Munoz replied that the Planning Commission will review all aspects of all future projects within the
Calavera Hills Master Plan. Projects that have over 50 units will go on to City Council for final approval.
He said all of the provisions and architectural and development standards that the Commission will
approve on subsequent maps are being established now with this Master Plan Amendment.
Chairperson Segall asked Mr. Munoz to address trails because of concern from the community regarding
hooking up to the trail system. Mr. Munoz stated that this project has an exhibit in the Master Plan that
sets up the trail system master plan wide that will be implemented as the tentative maps come in. If the
citywide trail system is at a point where it can take over these master plan and individual trail segments
throughout the city, that will be done in a comprehensive manner.
Applicant Brian Milich, representing the Corky McMillin Companies, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City,
stated that after almost 4 years and countless meetings with the public, community groups, individuals, the City of Carlsbad, and resource agencies it was a pleasure to be able to present the Calavera Hills
Master Plan Amendment as well as the College Boulevard, Cannon Road, and Detention Basin projects. He recognized City Staff members Don Rideout, Eric Munoz, Dave Hauser, and Frank Jimeno for the
countless hours they spent working on the project. He stated there are three distinct project components before the Commission: The Calavera Hills Master Plan Amendment, the College Boulevard Reaches B
and C and Cannon Road Reach 3, and Detention Basin BJ projects which will be constructed by the Calavera Hills project. He stated the Cannon Road Reach 4, College Boulevard Reach A, and Detention
Basin BJ projects will not be built by the Calavera Hills projects. He said they want to avoid issues on roads and detention basins that they are not constructing that would slow down or stop, not only the
Calavera Hills project, but also the roads the City wants to get built. The reason for the Master Plan Amendment is that the resource agencies wanted a major habitat corridor through the central portion of
the project. A habitat was put through Village K and significantly reduced the density of that village. The
Master Plan Amendment redistributes density and simultaneously significantly increases the open space. Mr. Milich said they will have over 60 percent open space in this final phase of the Master Plan and will
also bring the overall Master Plan to almost 46 percent of permanently preserved open space. It clusters development and allows them to bring the community up to current standards in terms of community
facilities, design guidelines, and provides a more balanced range in housing opportunities in the community. He stated that with the Master Plan comes some significant public benefits - the College
Boulevard and Cannon Road connection, the permanently preserved open space. They are also
purchasing 35 acres of open space offsite. He said they are providing diversity of housing, affordable
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 11
housing to satisfy the City requirements, and setting aside over 3 acres for community facilities, which
was not required by the original Master Plan.
Regarding circulation improvements, Mr. Milich said they are building only College Boulevard Reaches B
and C and Cannon Road Reach 3. Construction of those roadways offers the City the ability to remove
the existing barricade at College Boulevard, which has been a controversial item over the last several
years. This will allow a connection all the way from 78 to l-5 with the completion of the Cannon Road link
on the west side of El Camino Real. He said they would be providing approximately $19 million of public benefit to the City which includes roads, detention basins and a lot of public improvements, which is over
$30,000 per market rate unit.
Mr. Milich described the additional open space that will be provided with the project. He stated there
would be a significant corridor through the heart of the project that will provide linkages in the north
portion of the county important to the City’s habitat management plan and the overall North County
MHCP. He said part of the open space includes three miles of additional trails as well as enhancement of
existing natural trails.
Mr. Milich stated they will be providing an affordable housing site, subsidized housing that will not exceed
50-60 percent of the average median income, which is actually below the City requirement of 70 percent.
He said they have been very careful to design Village Y to minimize any impacts to neighbors. They will
be providing some attached housing opportunities to provide an intermediary range of housing, and single
family homes that will be similar in style and design to the existing Calavera Hills project.
Mr. Milich stated that because it is a master planned community they have the ability to prepare their own
design guidelines. He said a new PD ordinance was established during the process and it was made
clear to them early on that they needed to adhere as closely as possible to the new PD standards. He
said they have been working with Staff to address those standards as well as the livable streets.
In terms of the single story issue, Mr. Milich state they have come up with what they think is a good solution to the issue of single story homes on the lots in Calavera Hills. He said they have a reduced
second story option to provide a home that lives like a single story home with the master bedroom and all the living functions on the first floor and provides an opportunity to have a second level, but a much
reduced second level. It allows people to live on the first floor and have the flexibility to have a second floor. The PD ordinance currently requires 15 percent of the homes to be single story and they are
providing 20 percent of the homes as this partial second story unit.
Mr. Milich said there was a requirement during the process that said they had to provide community
facilities such as day care centers and churches. As a result, they set aside a total of 3 acres in the final
phase of the master plan for these uses one on Village H (2 acres) and one on Village Y (1 acre) and
already have some interest in those sites from both a church and a day care operator.
Mr. Milich said the project is compliant with all terms of the Growth Management Plan. He added that probably the greatest benefit they’re providing to the City is the construction of College Boulevard and
Cannon Road. He said it’s been a long planning process and for the most part has been an extremely good and beneficial process. They haven’t always agreed but have always been able to reach a solution
and move forward.
Mr. Milich asked that the Commission recognize that the Cannon Road Reach 4 issue is separate and
apart from their project. He did not want that to be the one thing to hold up the Calavera Hills project and
the College Boulevard Reaches B and C and Cannon Road Reach 3.
Mr. Milich stated they spent quite a bit of time with the Ranch0 Carlsbad homeowners and worked with
them at length on addressing their concerns. While it wasn’t necessarily a requirement because they weren’t building Reach A and the detention basin that ultimately impacts their uses, they wanted to be
part of the solution. He said they’re providing them almost 2 % acres of property and heavily landscape it as a buffer between the road and their project, they’re going to accommodate their future RV parking and
their garden uses on McMillin’s Robertson Ranch property should they decide to go ahead and purchase that property. Mr. Milich said they are also going to increase the height of the wall and berm along
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 12
Cannon Road at their cost to provide an even greater buffer. He added he thinks they have changed the
Ranch0 Carlsbad homeowners from project opponents to project proponents.
Mr. Milich said they have had a number of discussions with the California Indian Legal Services. He said
that although it is not a condition of the project it is anticipated that they will be entering into some type of pre-excavation agreement with them so they can come onsite and monitor the grading operations. He
said they have no problem with that.
Mr. Milich stated they have been working with resource agencies and still have permits to receive from
the Army Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Department of Fish and Game, and Regional
Water Quality Control Board. He said they submitted applications to these agencies well over a year ago
and expect to have those permits within the next month.
Mr. Milich added that he was glad to be before the Commission and thinks the project provides significant
benefits. He requested their consideration and approval of the project.
Commissioner Compas asked what the timing and construction sequence would be if approval is received. Mr. Milich replied that the project and the roads are interlinked and the grading for the project
provides the dirt for the roads so the two have to go hand in hand. Assuming they go forward tonight and to the City Council in January they would begin clearing operations as soon as they can. He said it will
probably be a year to 14 months to actually construct the roads. He said they are tied in terms of the
number of units that can be built while the road is under construction. He said the road also provides a I
great marketing entrance to the project so they are highly motivated to get the roads built as soon as we
can.
Commissioner Compas asked which villages would be built first. Mr. Milich replied that they would most
likely start in the upper portion of the project with Villages K, L-2, and E-l. Villages U, Y, W, and X are
dependent upon when they can bring the infrastructure to those neighborhoods.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Milich what his position is on livable streets. Mr. Milich said they are going to be adhering to the livable streets.
Commissioner Compas asked what his position would be if the Commission decided they wanted 10
percent single story and 10 percent partial two stories in order to approve the project. Mr. Milich replied
that they believe the solution they came up with is better all the way around for the person buying the
home as well as the City. He said they have talked with Staff, and if the Commission is adamant in terms
of having some single story they would like the ability to decide what villages they would be in and where
they would go. He said one of the things in their design guidelines is that on streets that are 550 feet or
greater there is a requirement that 25 percent of the units are the partial single story plan.
Commissioner Trigas asked that single story homes remain an option in the language. Mr. Milich replied
that it was their intent to allow single story homes as an option but they did not want to have an obligation to provide them if the market wanted the partial two story homes. He said he would have no problem with
a requirement that they allow an option for single story but have asked it to be worded that it is not a requirement. Commissioner Trigas said she would like it to be an option when it is presented for final
submittal. Mr. Milich reiterated that it was not their intent to preclude single story homes and thought that
option was in there and they are fine with the option of having single story in there.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if McMillin purchased the Cannon Road Reach 4 portion of the Robertson
Ranch. Mr. Milich replied they did not purchase that area, they purchased the portion of the ranch that includes the right-of-way for College Boulevard Reaches B and C and Cannon Road Reach 3.
RECESS
Chairperson Segall called a recess at 8:20 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Chairperson Segall called the meeting back to order at 8:34 p.m. and opened public testimony.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 13
Mayor Terry Johnson, 169 Mayfair Street, Oceanside 92054, stated that he and Council Member
Sanchez were present on behalf of the entire Oceanside City Council to express their concerns. He had a petition signed by over 1,400 people protesting the realignment and elevation of Cannon Road as
proposed in the EIR by the City of Carlsbad. He said this roadway presents a threat to the health, safety, security, and environment of the Ocean Hills community. He then read for the record the letter from the
Oceanside City Council.
Commissioner Baker asked Mayor Johnson if he was aware that the Planning Commission was not going
to be making a decision on the alignment of Reach 4 this evening. Mayor Johnson replied that he was
aware of that.
Chairperson Segall asked him if he was okay with the idea that the City of Carlsbad will be meeting with
the City of Oceanside and the stakeholders at a future date to try to iron out all these issues. Mayor
Johnson stated he was okay with that. He added that at the last regional traffic seminar, which no one
from the Carlsbad Council attended, everyone from Darrell lssa to Bill Horn to local elected officials
agreed that this is very important regional issue and everyone has to work cooperatively and in collaboration to find the funding sources necessary to mitigate the impacts that will greatly affect residents
in both communities.
Bill Arnold, Chairman of the Negotiating Committee for the Ranch0 Carlsbad Owners Association, 3379
Don Pablo Drive, Carlsbad, stated that when the EIR came out in March of 2001, they realized things I
were going to change for them. The two issues they were concerned with were the proximity of Cannon
Reach 3 along their northern border and the loss of access to their RV parking, garden, and maintenance
facilities when College Reach A goes through. Their committee had many discussions with City Staff and Mr. Milich of McMillin and they reached an accommodation with McMillin and the City. McMillin will build
an 8-foot high sound wall along the entire length of Cannon and plant a dense forest of trees along the eastern end where it gets fairly close to residents’ back yards. McMillin is also going to give the Ranch0
Carlsbad Owners the ability to purchase some property on the Robertson land below Cannon to replace
the RV park, garden, and maintenance facilities when College Reach A goes through. Mr. Arnold stated
that overall they are pleased with the outcome assuming everything goes as planned, and they have no objection.
Sue Loftin, of Loftin & Ward, 4330 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 330, San Diego, 92122, General Counsel
to the Ranch0 Carlsbad Owners Association, echoed Mr. Arnold’s comments with regard to the
cooperation they received from City Staff and the McMillin team. She stated they provided a letter dated
December 19th that withdraws their request to vote no sent in on a letter dated December 5th, and they
now request a yes vote to move this matter forward. The request is conditioned specifically upon the finalization of the agreements that Staff has outlined. She stated they concur with the conditions of the
errata and agreed with Staff that the following language may be added after the third condition, substituting the last word “fund” for “funding” and it would read as follows: “funding source or sources
established by the City for this purpose. Any such credit and repayment mechanism shall be implemented concurrent with or after the transfer to the City by the Association of the property rights
required to install Basin BJ.”
Tom Flanagan, 3331 Donna Drive, Carlsbad, stated he previously lived in Calavera Hills and headed a group in Calavera Hills who filed letters in support of rezoning E-l to residential. He expressed his support for the project and thinks that everything being done is very favorable to Calavera Hills, property
values, and the City. He stated there is an urgent need for College Boulevard to go in. He pointed out a few concerns he had, stating that when the habitat link is put in there should be sidewalks on both sides of the habitat area where Tamarack crosses Glasgow into the next subdivision. It was his understanding
that the developer wants to put it in but the City does not. He said there should be serious meetings with
the school board on the intersection of Tamarack and College Boulevard where children have to cross the road. He stated he did not think signal lights only would be adequate and suggested an enhancement for
the children’s protection such as things that light up on roadway when children are in the intersection. He stated that overall it is a tremendous project and should be supported and he thought it had the support of
everyone in Calavera Hills.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 14
Heather Bost, 7216 Durango Circle, Carlsbad, 92009, stated she was the first of five speakers
representing Preserve Calavera, a grass roots organization dedicated to preserving the integrity of the open space in Carlsbad. They would address five key issues: the wildlife corridors, Village H, the trails,
Cannon Road, and the management plan. She stated she was born in Carlsbad and one of the best
things about growing up in Carlsbad was the easy access to open space and the opportunity to
experience wildlife creatures first hand. She felt it is their responsibility to ensure future generations have
the same opportunity. Ms. Bost stated the green areas shown in some of the maps to represent the open
space and wildlife corridors in the Calavera Hills region appear to be very extensive, but the
representation is very deceiving. She stated the wildlife corridors are fairly fragmented and will not be
viable for use by a broad range of species the way they are currently planned. She said planning viable
wildlife corridors is going to be especially critical to preserve the functioning of the core open space when the development of surrounding areas is taken into consideration. She said roadway construction needs
to be planned with those eventualities in mind and that means incorporating wildlife crossings into the
roadway plans. She said there are several locations where necessary crossings are not incorporated into
the current development plans as discussed in the EIR. She said the major problem area will be College
Boulevard and an undercrossing needs to be incorporated in the area where College will be extended between Reaches B and C. She said they would like the City to consider alternative options, such as an
overcrossing, at the existing section of College, Reach D, the intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive,
which would allow animals and humans a safe passage. She showed an example of a poor
undercrossing currently located where Melrose dead ends. She showed the type of undercrossing they
would like to see incorporated into the plan that is located at South Melrose. That undercrossing has a
bridge, natural lighting, and normal vegetation and passage for a full range of animals. Her -
recommendations are to consider designing the new section of College to accommodate a wildlife crossing, retrofit the existing College Boulevard so that the wildlife corridor will be viable, and design
crossings that will support a full range of animals. She added they should also consider removing the
barriers underneath Tamarack.
Stan Katz, 4906 Neblina Drive, Carlsbad, stated Calavera Hills Phase 2 proposes to place community
commercial land use into the area referred to as Village H, their current intent is a day care center. He
voiced objection to placing a daycare center or public center in this location stating that Village H has served as a community gathering place and dog walking path for 30 years. He said Village H is an
important alternative wildlife corridor connecting Calavera Nature Preserve Core Area 3 and Core Area 2,
and any construction in the south end of Village H will destroy its function as a wildlife corridor. He said
numerous studies show reduced traffic impacts when day care centers locate near major employers. He
stated that Village H is already located on a dangerous curve and development would create further traffic
problems during commute hours. He said a daycare center is not compatible with the existing park use
for dog walking; pets and young children would be entering and leaving the area at the same times and
safety could be an issue. He said noise and traffic from the daycare center would negatively impact the
animals that live in this habitat and the natural forest wilderness charm would be irreversibly damaged. He said if further planting of native plants and trees was done in this section of Village H instead of
developing it, this would become a wonderful park for future generations to ,enjoy. He said their proposal is to retain this area as part of community open space and they need help with the following: Direct Staff
to explore flexibility in the new community facilities ordinance as it applies to this site. He said City Staff
said they are willing to do this. Second, require developer to delay grading or dumping on this site to allow time to explore options for community acquisition. He said he was told the developer is willing to do
this.
Gigi Orlowski, 3729 Bennington Court, Carlsbad, stated she has been leading nature hikes on the
Calavera Nature Trails for the Preserve Calavera Organization. She said she was present to speak on two community trail issues that were not addressed in the EIR or during the meeting. The first is the need
for Carlsbad resident public access points to the Calavera Nature Preserve system that is currently very
difficult to access. She said there is currently no provision in the Calavera Phase 2 development plans to create any good access points. A good public area would include public parking and connecting trails to
the Calavera Nature Trails in the citywide system and establishing good public access would discourage people from creating their own pathways to the system. She stated the second item is a need for
community trails in the Calavera Phase 2 development that would link to the Calavera Nature Preserve trails and other trails in the citywide trail system. She said Phase 2 area already has several existing
beautiful trails with views of the ocean, Robertson Ranch, and Mount Calavera. College Boulevard Reaches B, C, and A are also proposed to cut through this area and they would like to encourage
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 15
Carlsbad to include major trails on at least one side of these reaches of College Boulevard before they
are built. She said they would also like to see some of the current trails in this area integrated into the
Phase 2 development plans, particularly the trail on the eastern slope of the proposed Village W. They also propose community participation in the development of this Phase 2 community trail planning and
management process with the developer and the City. In summary their recommendations are: Provide
for trail parking access from the end of Tamarack and at Calavera Park. Integrate the trail access from residential neighborhoods to the citywide trail system. Develop trail plan in the management process that
would include community participation, and include nature trails alongside College Reaches C, B, and A.
Jeremy Jerome, 3512 Hastings Drive, Carlsbad, stated he would like to address Cannon Road concerns.
He said Reach 4 is a major concern because it will essentially bisect the Calavera Preserve, that has
been identified as a core habitat on Carlsbad’s HMP. He said one of the basic tenets of wildlife biology is that bigger is better and a large contiguous preserve will support a much healthier ecosystem than two
smaller preserves. Putting a 102-foot roadway through the center of the preserve will essentially make it
two smaller preserves with significant habitat impacts. Most of the destroyed habitat will be high quality
coastal sage scrub. In addition, there would also be air pollution, noise, and visual impacts from 30,000
cars a day on the adjacent plants and animals. The wetlands impacts include Little Encinas, Calavera,
and Agua Hedionda Creeks all flowing out to Agua Hedionda Lagoon. He said the public will bear the cost
for all this destruction and will pay for it in four ways: Outright cost of the construction of the segment, the
reduced value of the nature preserve, the cost to acquire hardline preserve core land, and mitigation of 4
to 1 ratio as required by the wildlife agencies. He said they ask for two things: remove Cannon Road
Reach 4 from the EIR and would also like you to update the Carlsbad circulation element. He said - Carlsbad’s plan is outdated. He suggested coordinating with the neighboring cities and come up with a
plan that saves the Calavera Preserve but still addresses regional traffic concerns.
Diane Nygaard, 5020 Nighthawk Way, Oceanside, stated she would talk about management of preserved
open space. She said we’re all responsible for protecting this land and we’re not doing a very good job
protecting it. She showed some examples of areas damaged due to not protecting the land. She stated
that Phase 1 mitigation is in place on paper but the examples clearly show we are failing at protecting this
land. She said there are about 10 different management plans for what is really a single contiguous open
space area and there will be more as more developments come on line. She said they need an integrated management plan for protected open space that’s included in the HMP, one that would
combine Phase 1 and Phase 2 and eventually be incorporated into an overall plan. She said they need
language in the interim agreements that allow for transfer to a single management entity, similar to the
language proposed with Kelly Ranch. She said they also need status reporting on Phase 1 mitigation and accountability.
Esther Sanchez, 1415 Poole Street, Oceanside, stated she is on the Oceanside City Council and was
present in two capacities, first to support Preserve Calavera and as a City Council member of Oceanside.
She stated she wanted to clarify that the position of Oceanside City Council is to oppose the plan as
proposed and to urge the Commission not to certify the EIR and not to adopt the findings. She said there
were a number of things presented about Cannon Road Reach 4 - that it is not required for the buildout of Calavera Hills Master Plan so it’s something that doesn’t have to be addressed tonight and that part of
the EIR doesn’t have to be certified. Secondly it was said that Reach 4 is not currently funded or a
priority of the City Council so she questioned why it was before the Commission tonight. She said she
had a chance to meet with members of the homeowners association of Ocean Hills, and not everyone
wants this road, she’s not sure the Council wants this road. She said if it was presented to the Oceanside
City Council, they would say no. She emphasized to the Commission that this is something they did not have to address tonight and urged them not to do that and not to adopt the findings as to Cannon Reach 4.
Chairperson Segall said it appears that this is very important to the City of Oceanside and asked Ms.
Sanchez why the City of Oceanside did not comment when the EIR was circulated. Ms. Sanchez replied that it was not at the request of the City Council; it was not presented to the City Council. She added that
she was urged as early as August about this and she constantly asked their City Manager when this was going to get before them because it’s something very important to their city.
Commissioner Baker asked Ms. Sanchez if she is opposed to Cannon Reach 4 in any form whatsoever, and unwilling to work with some kind of alignment that may be more sensitive to the Ocean Hills
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l
neighborhood. Councilwoman Sanchez replied that she has not heard a reason to build this road and at this time does not see a good reason to build this road.
Commissioner Baker asked Councilwoman Sanchez if that is the feeling of the entire Council.
Councilwoman Sanchez replied they have not discussed it entirely as a council because she thought the
feeling was that they were being invited by the City of Carlsbad to discuss this at the table. At this time
they are looking forward to discussing it, but at this point she said, “I would say you’re in a pickle, what we
have said on paper is “at grade” and we know you can’t do that”. Commissioner Baker asked her why
that was put in the letter and why not be more forthright. Councilwoman Sanchez replied that Staff was
directed to write the letter and thought it was a polite way of telling you not to do this because we’re not
supporting this.
Commissioner Heineman said to Councilwoman Sanchez that you’re asking us to be very considerate of
Oceanside but you’re saying you misled us and played us for fools. Councilwoman Sanchez said 30 years ago there was a different time and if you didn’t read it to understand that, I’m sorry you didn’t
understand it.
Keith Hendrickson, 3745 Cavern Place, Carlsbad, said he was pleased to hear about Village K, and L-2,
but was not happy about the quantity of residents being planned for E-l. He said the plans show there is
only one way in and one way out off of Glasgow where there is already a loft of traffic because of the park district. He said he was concerned that no one has taken into consideration that there is an elementary
school being built at Tamarack and College. He voiced concern about the relief that McMillin is asking for _ specific to Reach C, Reach B, and Reach 3 and there is no definitive timeframe for them to complete
those reaches, but they still want to be able to build the houses. He said it will only add additional traffic and a lot more headaches to the people already living there. He was also concerned that McMilllin may
have a problem telling the truth. He referred to a meeting where Mr. Milich gave a presentation and when
asked if he came to the meeting specifically to ask for relief in order to build homes in areas K, L2, and El
in parallel of completing those roads, it took about a half hour for him to answer the question. Mr.
Hendrickson said that appeared deceptive to him. He said they need to come to the residents and provide a plan to them and stick to it, and the Planning Commission are the only people that can hold
them to it. He said he doesn’t think they should get what they’re asking for tonight, thinks it should be
tabled and reviewed until they come up with a plan that’s acceptable to everyone, and include the
homeowners.
Ruth Gans, 4918 Delos Way, Ocean Hills, stated when she moved to Ocean Hills in 1991 she knew that Cannon Road was to be built and expected it to be built but she never expected it to be an elevated road
that would literally destroy the homes and their community. She said the solutions (sound barriers,
cutting a road through a beautiful habitat to save another) are not really solutions. When planning the
extension of Cannon Road Reach 4, the cities of Oceanside, Vista, and Carlsbad must join together. She
said Assemblyman Mark Wyland and Congressman Darrell lssa at the May 14th Transportation Summit Meeting made a similar comment in regards to funding - that cities must work together before funding will
come forth. She said they have serious concerns about protecting their homes, the habitat, physical.
safety getting in and out of their communities, and pollution. She asked who is going to fund the road; you’re going to expect government funds to fund a road that doesn’t serve the communities well. She
said existing environmental and biological problems relating to Cannon Road Reach 4 would need to be resolved before getting permits. She said they are asking to keep the alignment at the present grade.
Remove Reach 4 from the circulation and come up with a better solution.
Diana Aaron, 2747 Via Tulipan, Carlsbad, Executive Director of the Carlsbad Educational Foundation and
the Kids Are Worth A Million Campaign stated she was present to show support for the Calavera Hills project and the proposed changes for the master planned community. She expressed appreciation for
the support McMillin and Brookfield have given to the Carlsbad Educational Foundation and the Kids Are
Worth A Million campaign. She briefly described the Kids Are Worth A Million campaign and how they were able to reach, achieve, and broaden their goals with support from McMillin and Brookfield. She
stated a $15,000 donation from McMillin and Brookfield has been designated for the new Calavera Hills School and was presented to Kids Are Worth A Million at the groundbreaking ceremony. In addition,
McMillin and Brookfield have agreed to continue their financial support and partnership with Kids Are
Worth A Million by donating $50 from every home that is sold in the final phase of Calavera Hills project.
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 17
She encouraged the Commission to approve this project so that their Foundation and campaign can
continue to receive donations from the sale of the Calavera Hills homes.
Chairperson Segall stated for the record that he serves on the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad
Educational Foundation and had no knowledge of this nor was part of any discussion on whatever action
was taken by the organization.
Commissioner Baker also stated for the record she is also on the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad
Educational Foundation and had no knowledge of this.
Gordon Sieler, 5082 Dassia Way, Oceanside, stated he would like to add some statistics to the packet Mayor Johnson gave to the Commission. He said there are 1,437 signatures from Ocean Hills Country
Club stating that they’re opposed to the planned elevated Cannon, Road in the City of Oceanside. There
are 2,640 residents in the community and a vast majority is against the elevated Cannon Road that is in the EIR. He recommended Reach 4 be taken out of the EIR, set aside, and look at it from a three-city
standpoint, and get the road that satisfies the needs and residents of all three cities
Mark Mojado, P.O. Box I, Pala, stated he is Luiseno and their territory consists of Encinitas to San Juan
Capistrano and Hemet. The San Luis Rey Band is one of seven tribes in this area. His concern is the
cultural resource part of the project and the well being and respect for some of the sites that would be
impacted in this process. He said Brian Milich had contacted them in the past few months regarding pre- excavation agreement. He expressed concern regarding the lack of effort from the archaeology firm ‘-
doing the testing in getting back to him to evaluate the significance of some of the sites. He stated to
date the firm is still not finished with their evaluation or technical work. He stated it’s best to have them
involved early with the developers to get everything worked out in a respectable manner. He said the EIR
mitigation is a good thing but would like to have it more comprehensive on some of the more significant sites that may have a lot of impacts. They would like to be part of the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Trigas said she was led to believe there were discussions to deal with his concerns. Mr.
Mojado said there are ongoing discussions but there is nothing definite regarding the process.
Commissioner Dominguez asked Mr. Mojado if they have reached a pre-excavation agreement at all. Mr.
Mojado replied they have a sample pre-excavation agreement but it is not concluded yet.
Art Mandelbaum, 4130 Andros Way, Oceanside, wanted to emphasize that they have always accepted
Cannon as a road that at some time would be built, but the problem is the elevated road. He said some
of their homes will be eye level with it and the resulting pollution, noise, and aesthetic problems will affect
their community. They have elderly people on oxygen in their community and their problems will be
exacerbated with the additional pollution. They would accept it if it were to be built at the previous planned level but all the alternatives have been elevated and this is unacceptable.
Chairperson Segall asked him what he meant by “we” when he stated “we would accept it at ground
level.” Mr. Mandelbaum replied that was the official position of the Ocean Hills Country Club.
Deb Schmidt, 1948 Willow Ridge Drive, Vista, stated she was present to represent the North County
Coastal Sierra Club and they have two major concerns with this project: the wetlands and habitat impacts
from the roadway extensions and the lack of an effective management plan for the open space. She said
San Diego County has lost over 99 percent of its historical wetlands and we all recognize the importance of preserving the remaining one percent. The proposed roadway extensions will cause the destruction of
3.2 acres of wetlands. Twenty alternatives were evaluated as part of the EIR process, but only one, the
no build alternative, avoided these wetland impacts. She said they do not believe this meets the requirements of CEQA, the MHCP guidelines, or those of Carlsbad’ s own habitat plan. The Sierra Club
is opposed to these wetland impacts and to the extension of Reach 4 of Cannon Road through the
hardline preserve. She said the Army Corps of Engineers has already informed the City that the proposed design is not acceptable and recently found out they have extended the time period for the Fish
and Game’s biological opinions to February 20th, so the Corps permits will not be issued until after this
date. She said they submitted a letter last April identifying concerns with the City’s failure to implement
the 1993 mitigation management plan for Mount Calavera. Although they had a couple of conversations
with Staff, eight months later the City still has not addressed these concerns. She said existing plans for
6107
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 18
protecting these habitats are not working and they need consistent integrated management and
monitoring with public accountability. She urged the Commission to redo the alternatives analysis in the EIR in order to avoid the wetlands impacts, remove Reach 4 of Cannon Road from the plans and develop
a viable plan for the protection of this habitat. She submitted a copy of the Army Corps of Engineers
letter and their prior correspondence in April.
Jan Sobel stated she is the CEO of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, representing more than 1,700
businesses that employ more than 35,000 employees in Carlsbad. She said the Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors as well as the Carlsbad Business Environment Committee reviewed this project and
wholeheartedly suggest and request the Commission’s support of the Calavera Hills Master Plan. Ms.
Sobel stated that when the Chamber looks at approving projects we look at several issues: quality of life
versus economic development, circulation, amenities, open space, trails, and the variety of houses. She
commended Brookfield and McMillin for their plans to build affordable attached homes because
companies complain all the time that there are no homes their families can afford to buy. She added that not only affordable housing, but the variety of housing is important to the future of Carlsbad and being
able to attract good employers. She said the Chamber wholeheartedly believes that childcare should be
close to housing, not close to work. The open space, circulation, and the trails are very important to the city. She said the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce urges the Commission to support this project in the
best interests of Carlsbad.
Chairperson Segall disclosed for the record that he is on the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, however, he did not participate in this discussion and was not a party to any vote.
Chairperson Segall stated for the record there are 17 individuals from Ocean Hills who could not or did
not want to speak tonight but have registered their opposition to the project.
Jack Gearhart, 4170 Andros Way, Oceanside, stated he knew that Cannon some day was going to go
through, but it was at the existing grade. He doesn’t think anyone has proven there is a reason to build
this road, Reach 4. He doesn’t buy the traffic studies; if the developer says only two percent of their
residents will use that road there’s no reason to build that road. He emphasized that efforts be made to get the three cities to work together to build Cannon Road at some point. He urged the Commission not
to approve the EIR, because despite what is said, it’s sure to be cast in the proverbial concrete.
Denise Douglas-Baird, Attorney with California Indian Legal Services, 609 S. Escondido Blvd, Escondido
92025, stated she was present on behalf of the San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Indians, a local San Diego
County tribe, whose ancestral territory includes the City of Carlsbad. She stated the San Luis Rey Band
are recognized as the most likely descendant for this area. She said the band believes that any cultural artifacts discovered during development are the property of their ancestors. The tribe’s main concern
with this development is the effect on cultural resources. She said they have been unable to fully
evaluate the effects because the complete technical report with the significance evaluations has not yet
been available for review. They would like the opportunity to review it, to comment on it, and consult with
the development. She stated that the tribe is not opposed to the development but wants to ensure that,
consistent with the spirit of the City’s own cultural resources guidelines, they are consulted during the
development and they have the opportunity to monitor any groundbreaking activity to ensure the appropriate treatment of any Native American human remains and any cultural resources. They would
also like any cultural artifacts discovered returned to them and not to the San Diego Museum of Man.
She requested that the City require the developer, as a condition of approval and a mitigation measure, to
enter a pre-excavation agreement with them addressing these concerns. She said they have begun
discussions but have not gotten very far and would like assurance that this is actually going to be signed
and a document that they can work with and enforce. The tribe is opposed to the cultural resources
mitigation measure number 4 as it is currently drafted because it provides for return of cultural artifacts to the San Diego Museum of Man for curation and they prefer they be returned to them. She said in the
future we would like to work with the City of Carlsbad earlier in the process to ensure that cultural
resources are protected.
Commissioner Baker asked what the tribe does with the artifacts returned to them. Ms. Douglas-Baird replied they work with the Pechanga Band returning them to the museum. Mr. Mojado said depending upon the spirituality or sacredness of them, they would re-inter them. They are working with Pechanga
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 19
and they are in the process of building a museum and cultural center and things could also be put in
there.
Commissioner Trigas asked what the process is when the organization hears about large projects that
possibly have artifacts. Ms. Douglas-Baird replied that sometimes the problem is finding out about
projects. Some of the cities actually notify the tribes they know will be affected and ask for their input. She said part of the problem in Carlsbad is that they’re not always included in the early notifications.
Commissioner Trigas asked if they were not noticed in the past on any of the larger projects and has it
been communicated to the City that there is a desire for noticing. Ms. Douglas-Baird replied that
California Indian Legal Services had not been directly noticed by the City of Carlsbad on any projects. She said they did not directly communicate to the City that they would like to be notified. She added that
the Carlsbad’s Cultural Resources Guidelines talk about working with affected and interested Native American Groups and being that the San Luis Rey Band is the most likely descendant for this territory
they are the band that should be notified early when significant projects are under consideration.
Chairperson Segall commented that they did reply to the Environmental Impact Report so it was known at
that time. Ms. Douglas-Baird said their office was aware of this project about a month ago and Mr.
Mojado was trying to obtain more information from ReCon regarding the testing of these sites and still
does have the actual complete technical reports for the 14 sites that were tested. Without those reports
it’s hard to comment on the significance of the sites and their concerns.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if the Museum of Man carbon date human remains when they receive
them and asked if it is correct that it’s the preference of the local bands that they be the recipients of the
remains. Ms. Douglas-Baird said she believes their policy is to ensure that they are re-interred back in
the ground; it’s actually state law. She said the local band would like to be consulted in the treatment of
how they are disposed of, but they would like to receive the cultural artifacts.
Chairperson Segall asked for a motion to extend the meeting to 11:00 or until the last speaker.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Compas and duly seconded that the Planning
Commission continue hearing public testimony until 10:50.
VOTE:
AYES:
7-o-o
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Dominguez, Heineman, Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES: ABSTAIN: None None
Louis Sat-fin, 4013 Arcadia Way, Oceanside, stated he would like to add his “NIMBY” reasons that he
urges the Commission to delete Cannon Road Reach 4 from the EIR. He said his backyard directly
overlooks the proposed extension of Cannon Road Reach 4. If the road is built 35 or 40 feet high as now projected and a couple hundred feet farther north than the current location we would experience the
following impacts: We would be looking eye level at the construction activity and then at the projected flow of 24,000 - 30,000 cars a day (view impact), the projected sound level according to the EIR would be
about 62 decibels (noise equivalent to what you would hear at the airport with planes coming and going). The fumes and air pollution from the construction and then the traffic would introduce unmitigated discomfort and health hazards. Property values in the community would go down substantially. Cannon
Road Reach 4 would cause permanent degradation to an established community, would be harmful to the environment, is not needed, would not significantly help the traffic situation, and would be very costly to
the City of Carlsbad. He urged that it be deleted. from the EIR before making any approvals, and hopefully from the City’s Master Plan circulation element eventually.
Clayton Robins, 3945 Foothill Avenue, Carlsbad 92008, expressed concern of not having single story homes and wondered whether or not ADA or other federal or state laws would be impacted by not having
single story homes. He was concerned that there is a credibility issue with McMillin due to delays in
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 20
responding to questions and changes in answers he experienced. He read the following statement from
a newsletter he received from McMillin. “The final links of College Boulevard and Cannon Road will be
built in concert with the final phase of Calavera Hills, allowing for the removal of existing barricades on
College Boulevard and providing easy access to both Highway 78 and Interstate 5 from eastern
Carlsbad.” He asked what happens if they’re in the middle of building the roads and they say they have
to get another variance so they can put up more houses. He said that Mr. Milich told him that the City of
Carlsbad was not going to build a fire station that was planned for Glasgow and Carlsbad Village Drive
and did not know why or what was going in there. He said he talked to Mr. Munoz and he told him that the Fire Chief thought the fire station was going in. Mr. Robins stated he didn’t think McMillin should be
given the 250 house variance; they should go with the original plan and build the two roads and then build
the houses. He thinks the city is already overbuilt for the infrastructure.
Ron Sipiora, 3606 Florida, San Diego, stated he is the Chief Professional Officer of the Boys and Girts
Club of Carlsbad and was present on behalf of the club basically to offer his support to the McMillin
Companies. He stated McMillin Companies have been a long time supporter of the Boys and Girls Clubs,
not only offering help with the program but also significant dollars. He said community based
organizations such as theirs simply can’t offer the programs to a community that is in dire need of them
without the support of organizations like the McMillin Companies and he wanted everyone to be aware of that.
Everett DeLano, 220 West Grand Avenue, Escondido, stated he was present on behalf of the Ocean Hills
Country Club Homeowners Association. He stated that there may be a misimpression going on and -
stated that it is not the case that simply approving the EIR is a small deal. He said he thinks serious
consideration must be given to taking Cannon Road Reach 4 out of the EIR. He referenced Planning
Commission Resolution 5112, page 2, paragraph C and read the second half of it: “the final
Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the
project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project.” He said that is entirely incorrect as to Cannon Road Reach 4. First of all you don’t know what the project is, there has been
discussion between Commission members and Staff tonight that it could be anywhere in this area, it
could be as high or as low - we don’t know what it is eventually going to be. He stated he thought Mr.
Munoz went so far as to say, “We are far from the final alignment.” Mr. DeLano said it’s a long way from a project. Just as CEQA requires that you don’t decide what a project is and then do the environmental,
you also don’t do an environmental review and then later decide what the project is. He said there is no project to consider right now and it is not an appropriate time to consider the environmental review
associated with it. Secondly, he begged to differ that it provides reasonable information on the project.
He said there are numerous examples how it doesn’t but one that is very telling is in regard to noise. The
EIR acknowledged that there would be significant noise impacts for homes within 1,500 feet. There are
431 homes in the Ocean Hills Country Club currently within 1,500 feet of the road, yet there is no
acknowledgement in the EIR of the significant noise impacts on those residences or additional residences
as a result of the construction of the road. He referenced another section - acknowledgement of reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. There is no discussion in the EIR
about the no project alternative for the Cannon Road Reach 4. He stated that he was concerned about being misled because in the presentation by City Staff he saw a series of E’s if Cannon Road Reach 4
didn’t go through. What it didn’t show is that another analysis showed a series of A’s if Cannon Road Reach 4 didn’t go through. He asked why that analysis wasn’t shown, which is in the EIR, and why are
there two different analyses. He said it’s simply not possible to have an intersection be an E and a
roadway be an A. He said you can set aside this EIR and he would be happy to talk with City Staff to
discuss the language to amend it.
Phyllis Hoag, 4610 Cyrus Way, Oceanside, read a statement that questioned the civility of an elevated
Cannon Road that would have complete disregard for the children and elderly. She urged the Commission to remove Reach 4 from the plan until the cities of Vista, Carlsbad, and Oceanside can come
up with an intelligent regional plan for Cannon Road that has positive impact for traffic circulation while preventing negative impact on children, the elderly, and the environment.
Jacqueline Cotton, 464 Cordoba, Oceanside 92056, stated that as a former teacher, she opposes the
extension of Cannon Road. She said two schools are just yards from Cannon Road on Lake and the
excessive pollution from the increased traffic can affect young children with respiratory problems. She
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l Page 21
c
stated it’s been medically documented that more children suffer with asthma when they’re near polluted
areas.
Andre Brackens, 3930 Shenandoah Drive, Oceanside, stated he represents New Venture Christian
Fellowship as assistant pastor and project manager. He read and submitted a letter dated December 19,
2001 to Mayor Lewis and the City Council stating their position on Cannon Road Reach 4. He stated that
they are in full support of the road going through in the most expedient manner and are willing to consider options that simultaneously protect the interest of New Venture Christian Fellowship and that are
sensitive to the needs of the community. However, they were somewhat surprised by the lack of
correspondence or contact from the City of Carlsbad.
Commissioner Dominguez asked Mr. Brackens if anyone from Carlsbad Staff contacted him or any New
Venture staff directly. Mr. Brackens responded that no one was contacted by City Staff, his only contact was with the contracted engineering firm. He added that in his letter of January 19, 2000 he specifically
mentioned an official request from the City of Carlsbad regarding this issue would be appropriate in order to get New Venture’s position and response.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if New Venture was provided with copies of the sections of the EIR that
pertain specifically to New Venture. Mr. Brackens said no.
John Burke, 5246 La Jolla Hermosa Avenue, La Jolla, stated he is the Natural Resources Program
Director for The Environmental Trust (TET), which is the current fee title owner of the 11 O-acre site known -
as Village C which was set aside for mitigation. He said he was present to address that site in particular.
He commended the City for having the foresight back in 1993 to make a requirement to set aside the 1 lo-
acre area as a mitigation for the California Gnatcatcher prior to the listing of that species. He stated that
once they took over the site in 1996 McMillin came up with the responsibility to fund the Habitat
Management Plan and has been very cooperative working with them and funding projects with their
volunteers. He said the EIR states that McMillin will fund the long-term management of the 110 acres
and we commend them for that. He said TET has a very active volunteer program and school programs
come up to the site for projects. TET has been very active working with surrounding property owners to
help control the off road vehicle problem. TET is pleased with the City and McMillin for their ongoing
efforts to preserve open space in the Calavera Nature Preserve area. He said one thing TET would like to request and see included in the language of the EIR and the Habitat Management Plan is that they would
like to be identified as potential managers for the open space for Phase 2. He said this would take care of comments heard this evening about having consistent management in the areas.
Tony Gulotta, 3744 Cavern Place, Carlsbad, stated he lives in Calavera Hills Phase 1. He stated he
thinks what has been sold to a lot of the people in the community is that everything will be more convenient but what has not been told is the amount of increased traffic that will be generated by
removing the barriers between Oceanside and Carlsbad. If Reach 4 is removed from the plan there
would be even more traffic. He stated there is a school on College Boulevard that would be directly
impacted, everything would become more dangerous and property values would plummet. He stated that typical commuter traffic in North County goes south so more people from Oceanside would be using the
roads and questioned what the return on investment is for the people in the city of Carlsbad. He urged
the Commission not to take out Reach 4 and urged them not to take out anything. He urged them to try to delay opening that barrier until all of these things are addressed including l-5 and 78 interchange as
well as Melrose. He said all those things should be done before removing the barriers because it really affects the quality of life of the Carlsbad residents first. He urged the Commission to take special
consideration for their own people and think of the effects its going to have. He said he hasn’t seen a
plan that will add more barriers to his area because he’s in Phase 1 and it’s already built out and thinks
that needs to be addressed (schools, speed limits). He added that he is opposed to an overcrossing over the intersection of Carlsbad Village Drive and College because it would just be a big barrier in his face all
the time.
Dana Stewart, 7007 San Bartolo and 6555F Via Frontera, Carlsbad stated she lived in the area for over 25 years and it’s only recently that she’s noticed a real cavalier disregard for public opinion. She says the
developers work hard because they’re working for the money. She complained that they’re allowed to drone on for hours while the public stands for 4 or 5 hours to be heard, and asked when they would get a
larger venue. She said she represents over 800 in the community she lives in as well as quite a few
Planning Commission Minutes December 19,200l .Page 22
people in the condo complex. She said the people are elderly and can’t attend these meetings and wait 4 or 5 hours to talk, and they depend on her. She stated she feels the Commissioners tend to favor the
developers by leading them to reiterate their propaganda and their paid for proponents. She said there
are many members of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce that are against this project altogether and
she takes extreme exception to the inference that all 1,400 members and 35,000 employees support this
project. She asked the Commission if they must build out the last third of the master plan and leave nothing for future generations or boards to do. She said that as a local resident for all these years,
besides the cavalier disregard for public opinion on these matters, there has been an unshakeable acquiescence to the developers. There is never a provision for water resources or electrical power, major
crises throughout this state. She said perhaps there should be a moratorium on building altogether until
you get some of these answers. Once again there is a travesty of the public trust being perpetuated to
and by this board. She said the City slogan, “It’s Your City”, is a complete untruth - you listen nicely and
then go out and do precisely what you want. She said once again we are here en masse to see if this
board again ignores strong local protest and capitulates to builders. Preserves are meant to be
preserved, not developed nor roads running through it. She asked when will you understand, and
demonstrate that you understand, that residents want to keep open spaces, not every square inch has to have a building on it. Development equals destruction here. There would be no mitigation plans
necessary if there was nothing to mitigate. She said she wants real answers to environmental and
infrastructure concerns before you go any further. She ended by saying, “Right makes might. Try to do
the right thing.”
Chairperson Segall stated that Andrew Chapman wanted to oppose the proposal and in particular is -
concerned about wildlife corridors for mammals and asked that be read into the record.
Chairperson Segall closed public testimony at lo:45 p.m. and thanked everyone for coming out and
participating in the process. He stated that the applicant and Staff would present answers to all questions
on January 2,2002,
Mr. Milich requested an early January hearing in order to get the project to go forward with the roads that the City wants.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Heineman and duly seconded that the Planning
Commission continue the public hearing for Item No. 5 (EIR 98-02/GPA 99-
03/MP 150(H)/LFMP 87-07(A)/ZC 0-Ol/CT OO-02/HDP 00-02) to January 2,
2002.
VOTE:
AYES:
7-o-o
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Dominguez, Heineman, Nielsen and Trigas
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
None
None
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Election of Officers
ACTION: Motion by Chairperson Segall and duly seconded to nominate Vice-Chairperson
Trigas as Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2002.
VOTE:
AYES:
7-o-o
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Dominguez, Heineman,
Nielsen and Trigas
Planning Commission Minutes
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
MOTION
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
None
None
December 19,200l Page 23
Motion by Commissioner Trigas and duly seconded to nominate Commissioner
Baker as Vice-Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2002.
7-o-o
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Dominguez, Heineman,
Nielsen and Trigas
None
None
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 DRAFT page 1
1. EIR 98-02/GPA 99-03/MP ISOfHIILFMP 87-07tA)IZC Ol-Oll~T OO-02/HDP 00-02 -
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE II/BRIDGE AND THOROUGH-FARE DISTRICT #4 AND
DETENTION BASINS BJ AND BJB - Request for a recommendation of approval for certification
of an Environmental Impact Report including Candidate Findings of Fact, Statements of Overriding Consideration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the environmental
review of the Calavera Hills Master Plan, the City’s Bridge and Thoroughfare District (B&TD) #I4 and Detention Basins BJ and BJB of the City’s Master Drainage Plan, located in the northeast
quadrant of the City.
Mr. Wayne introduced the next agenda item; a continued public hearing for numerous actions for the
Calavera Hills Project. He stated that that public testimony was heard on this item at the last meeting and
Staff members and their consultant would respond to questions that were raised during public testimony
at the last meeting.
Chairperson Trigas asked the applicant if he would like to request a continuance of the item due to the absence of Commissioner Baker. Brian Milich of McMillin Companies replied they would prefer to
proceed with the hearing.
Staffs presentation consisted of responses to concerns raised during public testimony at the December
19, 2001 meeting. These concerns, as summarized below, were addressed by Eric Munoz, Senior
Planner; David Hauser, Deputy City Engineer; Frank Jimeno, Associate Engineer; and Lee Sherwood,
Environmental Consultant from ReCon. They also reviewed the Planning and Engineering Errata Sheets,
four letters received since the last Planning Commission meeting, and introduced a staff memo regarding
Reach 4.
Cannon Road Reach 4 Concerns
In regard to the opposition received for the elevated roadway for Cannon Road Reach 4 and for more
coordination between the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad, Mr. Munoz stated that the process is currently structured for that to occur and that Staff is in favor of a coordinated effort. He said they
need the City of Oceanside’s coordination and involvement as well as their approval for the portion within Oceanside’s city limits.
Removal of Cannon Road Reach 4 - Mr. Munoz stated that only a General Plan Amendment can
remove Cannon Road Reach 4. He said no General Plan Amendment has been submitted by
Oceanside or any other entity at this time.
Regarding the issue that the City’s Draft Habitat Management Plan does not accommodate Cannon Road Reach 4 and other road segments, Mr. Munoz stated that is incorrect. For clarification he
referenced the draft HMP and read excerpts from it that indicate it accommodates and accounts for Cannon Road Reach 4.
Carlsbad has not properly integrated planning for the Cannon Road elevation with the adjacent city of
Oceanside - Mr. Munoz stated this is an incorrect statement as the City of Carlsbad has followed
every legal protocol mandated by CEQA to inform adjacent cities and invite public testimony. City
Staff, in absence of City of Oceanside representation, met with Oceanside citizens 2 or 3 times in
their neighborhoods and feels their concerns were addressed.
Why is Cannon before us when it is not a priority - Mr. Hauser explained that Cannon Road Reach 4
was part of the Bridge and Thoroughfare District and it needed to be shown that an environmental solution to the overall roadway system was available so that when the intersection of Reach 3
(Cannon Road with College Boulevard) was set that there would not be a greater environmental
impact for the extension of Reach 4 into the Preserve area and across a creek bed and water channels. He said they believed it was prudent to include all of Reach 4 in the environmental review
at the time and have satisfied the CEQA requirements in doing so.
Vista’s proposal to delete Cannon Road extension from Melrose to Highway 78 - Mr. Hauser said he
talked with John Connelly, a Senior Planner with Vista regarding this issue. Mr. Hauser stated that
when Staff reviewed the draft EIR from the City of Vista they were not aware of a proposal to delete
tad
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 2
the Cannon Road segment from Melrose to 78. He said the requirement under CEQA is to do traffic
studies based upon our General Plan as well as surrounding General Plans in place for any projects they’re aware of. Since they were not aware of the proposal to delete that road their analysis was
based upon the fact that Cannon Road would be extended all the way to 78. After they were made
aware of it they met with the traffic consultant and believe the removal of the segment from Melrose
to 78 would not materially change the need for Cannon Road Reach 4. He said there is still a
connection provided from Melrose to 78 via Sunset and Escondido Avenue. The 24,000 ADT shown
on the Reach 4 segment is primarily generated from the people in the Ocean Hills and Shadowridge
areas, so they don’t believe there would be a marked change in the numbers. When they received
the EIR there was some confusion as to whether or not it was being officially deleted, because the map provided in the draft EIR document showed a future map with Cannon Road extended all the
way to 78. John Connelly of Vista said that map was in error and they were intending to delete the
section of Cannon Road from Melrose to 78 from their circulation element. However, Mr. Hauser noted that the County of San Diego has not deleted that section from the County’s circulation plan, so
there are still opportunities for the Cities of Carlsbad, Vista, Oceanside, San Marcos and the County
of San Diego to get together to try to work out solutions and a unified position as to what is exactly
being proposed.
Chairperson Trigas said it’s her understanding road systems need to be looked at regionally and was
concerned that the City of Carlsbad was not aware of the deletion and wanted to know if this was just a
proposal and not officially accepted by the City of Vista. Mr. Hauser said at this time it’s the City of Vista
Staffs current intent to take a recommendation for a proposal to delete that segment of Cannon Road
from their General Plan. However, due to some issues and concerns raised by citizens and agencies,
they may be changing their recommendation. Mr. Hauser stated the City of Carlsbad staff will be
commenting on their EIR and thinks it has some deficiencies. He said they did not include intersection analysis in their traffic study and intersections are always considered to be the constrained points of a
roadway.
Chairperson Trigas wanted to confirm that as far as Vista is concerned, Cannon Road is currently a big question and no assumptions can be made. Mr. Hauser replied that we would have to go on the basis
that it was not under consideration for removal at the time the EIR was prepared and the proposal occurred after Carlsbad was through its environmental review process.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he read an article that Supervisor Pam Slater was spearheading a
program to try to get the North County municipalities to implement their surface road elements at a
quicker pace based on a study from CalTrans that states that part of the failure of the freeway systems is the fact that some of the North County municipalities have been slow to complete their circulation
elements.
Commissioner Segall said he is more concerned at this point about Reach 4 as it impacts Oceanside. He referred to comments made by Councilperson Sanchez at the last meeting when she stated that not
everyone wants Reach 4, she’s not sure the Council wants the road, and if it was presented to the City Council they would say no. He said since a Councilperson stated they don’t want the road he wanted
Staff to elaborate on what the Oceanside Staffs position is on that.
Mr. Munoz responded that Oceanside’s official position was communicated to him directly by Mayor
Johnson. He stated they are not opposed to the road or the road segment going in. They are opposed to
the current alignment that has it elevated. The elevation is a source of current efforts to design it and it is not finalized at this point. He said the statements made by the council member apparently do not reflect the official City of Oceanside position. Mr. Munoz added for clarification that the letter submitted by the City of Oceanside stated the formal Council unified position was not in opposition to the Cannon Road Reach 4 roadway; it was speaking to the elevated nature of the current alignment and asked for future
coordination along those lines. The Oceanside letter was signed by all Councilmembers.
l Elevation of the road - noise pollution, and visual impacts - Mr. Hauser stated these issues have
been dealt with in the environmental review and believe they have been adequately mitigated.
l Why put in the road when only 2% of Calavera traffic will be going on this road - Mr. Hauser stated
that is one of the misconceptions that occurred. Two percent of Calavera Phase II project traffic is expected to be generated and occur on Cannon Road Reach 4, but the actual projections are that
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 3
there will be 24,000 ADT which means they will have about two percent of that amount of traffic.
That’s one of the reasons why the Phase II project of Calavera Hills does not have responsibility for
this road; the majority of traffic generated is regional and not specific to this project.
l Recommendation to certify the EIR without Cannon Road Reach 4 - Mr. Hauser stated that Staff is not making that recommendation, but wanted to address the issue, and prepared a memo for the
Commission dated December 31, 2001. The memo basically indicates that after researching the
issue and meeting with Staff and the City Attorney’s Office, that certifying the EIR without Cannon
Road Reach 4 is an option that the Planning Commission can move forward on if they choose to do
so. Mr. Hauser said Staff believes the EIR as presented was properly prepared and meets the needs
of CEQA and is valid. However, they recognize the issues raised by Oceanside and residents of
Ocean Hills, as well as the matter of City of Vista proposing to drop the Cannon Road extension to 78. If the Planning Commission decides to recommend the EIR without Cannon Road Reach 4, Mr.
Hauser said there would have to be some findings to make it more valid. He explained the findings and justification as outlined in the memo and pointed out on the map how Cannon Road Reach 4
would be divided into two segments, Reach 4A and Reach 4B.
Commissioner Segall asked if the reason for dividing it that way is to provide access to the high school
site. Mr. Hauser said it would provide access to the high school site, but more importantly, the Bridge and
Thoroughfare District’s environmental review is currently before the Commission and the high school
property is within the boundaries of the proposed district. He said it would be very difficult to include the high school in a district that builds College and Cannon if we don’t provide that portion of Cannon Road
that accesses their property. The school district was told that we would include that portion within the district and it makes a logical point for the westerly terminus of a segment that might be removed from
certification under the EIR, and therefore able to make a finding that there’s logical terminus points for the removal. Since that portion of Cannon Road from the high school site to Oceanside is not under
consideration for funding as part of the Bridge and Thoroughfare District, it really doesn’t have bearing on
the approval for the district. It was included in the overall environmental because under CEQA you’re not
supposed to piecemeal projects so that a future Commission would be forced to approve an
environmental decisions that puts the road in a worse position. He said they’re trying to establish the
alignment that shows an environmentally acceptable alignment can be set up that goes all the way into
Oceanside even though it’s not planned to be funded at this time.
Commissioner Segall stated that he thought part of the issue with the alignment at Ocean Hills was that Reach 4 may have to be adjusted if it doesn’t go in the way it’s proposed and it might cut through the
middle of the high school site. Mr. Hauser replied that the other finding that would have to be made is
that by not certifying this the Commission is not predetermining an alignment for Cannon Road Reach 48
which would preclude looking at reasonable alternatives. He said the terminus point selected at the access point to the high school site is the same point in all alternatives that have been reviewed in the
EIR, and also the ones that were reviewed for our initial alignment study which included the one that connects up with the existing terminus in Oceanside. They all came to the same point at the eastern
edge of the high school site property. Since there is still a one mile section of road from the high school
access point to the Ocean Hills project there’s adequate room to look at these alternatives, whether it be
an extension of the existing road or a revised alternative 3, which is currently the preferred alignment in
the EIR. This selection of terminus points provides future ability to look at the full range of alternatives
and not preclude anything, and not set a situation where we can’t satisfy the needs of Oceanside or the
Ocean Hills residents.
Commissioner Segall asked if he said earlier that Reach 4B would be needed in at least five years plus.
Mr. Hauser said that would be another one of the findings that it is not needed now nor is it needed for
any of the projects we currently have under review during the next five years.
Commissioner Segall asked if they decided to keep it in, would another EIR have to be done when they
build it in 5 or 10 years. Mr. Hauser replied that they could potentially use the same EIR in 5 years
provided there has been no change in circumstance. Any time there is a change in circumstance, such
as a listing of a new bird, a supplemental environmental review would have to be done. A new
environmental analysis would most likely have to be done in 10 years. .
Commissioner Segall asked if the road is approved, even though there is no funding mechanism now, if the federal government came up with a program to fund it, would we be able to move faster to build it.
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 4
Mr. Hauser replied that they would be able to move faster, however, if they got federal funding for the
project they would likely have to go through the federal NEPA process, which is the federal environmental
review process, and would still be in the position of looking at alternatives.
Commissioner Nielsen asked Mr. Hauser to clarify Staffs position on the issue. Mr. Hauser replied that
Staff would be comfortable if the Commission wants to recommend to Council to certify the EIR and drop
Reach 48 from the certification, provided that they make the findings incorporated in the letter. He said
they are falling short of saying that this is Staffs recommendation at this time because they believe the
environmental document they prepared meets the requirements of CEQA and addresses the concerns
initially stated by the Ocean Hills property owners.
Chairperson Trigas asked legal counsel what their position is and if it would be okay to drop Reach 48. Ms. McMahon replied that, assuming that the Commission has the information and can make the findings
specified in the memo, she believed they could defend that position if they had to.
Commissioner Segall wanted to know if they decided not to certify Reach 4B tonight, how long it would take to come back for recertification in the event all affected cities and residents reached an agreement in
6 months and what the process would be. Mr. Hauser responded that if it came back as a separate
project and they took it forward as a capital improvement project it would likely go straight to Council
because there would be no discretionary actions required to bring it to the Commission. If they tried to
incorporate as an amendment to this EIR, then it would probably have to come back before the
Commission. He said he wanted to make it clear that this is not a removal of Cannon Road Reach 48
from the City’s General Plan or circulation element, it is simply a deferral of the environmental review of
that road segment.
Commissioner Dominguez wanted to know if there is a substantial downside to not approving Reach 4. Mr. Hauser replied that the longer an environmental approval for a project is delayed the more opportunity
the federal government has to add some additional requirements, or additional listings and items may be
found. It also provides more time to develop more solidified opposition. In addition, it currently is an
extremely high priority for the City to complete the College Boulevard/Cannon Road connection and be
able to remove the barricade on College Boulevard at the Carlsbad/Oceanside boundary. He said they received a lot of input from homeowners and their attorney that they would file a legal challenge to the
EIR if Reach 4 is maintained. This could tie up the entire project, even though it doesn’t have to do with
the Calavera Hills project or the extension of College/Cannon. The other down side is that the agencies
initially indicated that if Reach 4 was removed they would like to see the Cannon/College intersection
location moved farther north which would run it through the middle of the high school site and preclude
development of the high school there. It would also cut the developable portion of the Robertson Ranch that is now under the ownership of McMillin and make it more problematic to develop. He said by making
the cutoff point on the east side of the College/Cannon intersection they believe they can deal with the resource agencies and can convince them that the current location is the best location overall.
Ms. McMahon stated that the she wanted to clarify that the legal analysis reflected in the memo in no way took into consideration that the City would be threatened with a lawsuit. That could happen at any time
with any decision made by the City. The fact of the matter is that Mr. DeLano and others made a proposal that the City Attorney’s office looked at and it was a potentially doable option.
l Lack of correspondence or contact from the City with New Venture Christian Fellowship - Mr. Hauser stated that one of their consultants met with Mr. Brackens early on in the environmental process and
showed him the plans. Since this initially was strictly an environmental review for a financing program
and not for moving forward with the project, they had not met with him but were planning to meet with him, as well as the City of Oceanside, at the time they would actually be moving forward with the
project to seek their approval and get the appropriate permits.
Wildlife I Preserve Calavera Concerns
l Calavera Nature Preserve Maintenance Agreement - Mr. Munoz stated at this time they are within
the last one-year period of the agreement for the management of that site and are working out a long term scope of activity for that site for long term management from year 6 into perpetuity. That long
term management will be funded by the developer by posting an annuity amount and that long term scope of work can be reviewed by some members of the community including Preserve Calavera.
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 5
He said they can contact him within the next 30 days so they can share the plans for that long-term
maintenance. He said a long-term maintenance activity is something that can be reviewed by the
community because it will be funded and is part of the agreement, so the City would welcome that.
Opposition for Reach 4 going through the preserve - Mr. Munoz stated there may be confusion as to
which preserve is in question. They may have been referencing Village 2 of the Master Plan, also
known as the Calavera Nature Preserve, however, Village 2 does not have Cannon Road alignment
located near it. The Highlands Preserve to the east is the preserve that has Cannon Road going
through it. He said the basic response is that the original Highlands mitigation agreement of April 1995 accommodated for the alignment of Cannon Road up to 20 acres as shown in the General Plan.
Therefore, the feeling that this mitigation area did not accommodate Cannon Road Reach 4 as a circulation element roadway can now be clarified and corrected.
Calavera Nature Preserve and statements that the City failed to follow through on the 1993
agreement - Mr. Munoz stated that Staff met with Preserve Calavera, a representative from the Sierra
Club, Deb Schmidt, and Joan Jackson. A claim was made repeatedly at this meeting that the
environmental degradation of the mitigation site needed to be addressed by the City. In response
Staff asked them to submit documentation to verify that so Staff could look into it. Such documentation was never received. Regarding the comment stating that Staff did nothing for 8
months, he said Staff had asked 8 months prior for some kind of documentation to correspond to the
verbal claims but it was never submitted. Mr. Munoz reiterated that not one public penny was spent on this Preserve’s acquisition ($1.4M) or short or long-term maintenance costs.
Letter submitted by Preserve Calavera requesting consideration of an exemption to the Community
Facilities Ordinance - Mr. Munoz stated this was discussed at a meeting and Staff requested a written request be made to the Assistant Planning Director for evaluation, but the request was never
received. To clarify the situation, Mr. Munoz said the Community Facilities Ordinance is in effect
citywide; it is also in effect for the PC zone which regulates master plans, and at this point, a Zone
Code Amendment would be needed to readjust the community facilities requirement. The bottom line
is that the community facilities is a codified effective ordinance in the city and it does go into the PC
zone and master plans and requires community facilities in new and amended master plans, so the
ability to do something new at the master plan level is not an option.
Degradation around Village K - Mr. Munoz stated that area was looked at by the resource agencies as a primary wildlife corridor and they have not heard from the wildlife agencies that it has degraded
to a point that the City needed to take action.
Blasting analysis needs to be responsive to the changing conditions with improved mitigation and
should include advanced notification, a hotline for problems, and onsite monitoring. Mr. Munoz stated
there’s a noise mitigation measure that was in the published mitigation program and the items in the
letter are already addressed in the project.
Loss of remaining active farmland in the area - Mr. Munoz said the General Plan designates some
development on the Robertson Ranch area and the property ownership is planning development of
that area. Regarding the statement about Carlsbad being a regional leader in using cheap illegal labor and then going in and bulldozing migrant worker camps, Mr. Munoz stated some of the
comments go beyond CEQA and get into issues the City is not involved in.
Remove community facilities from Village H - Mr. Munoz stated it is not possible to remove the community facilities requirement because the ordinance is in effect citywide. Trails and access will
get attention on two fronts, from long-term maintenance of the Calavera Preserve site and the current citywide trail effort will be interfacing on this site.
One ownership for open space management plan - Mr. Munoz stated there will be fragmented ownership in the short term but that doesn’t mean there has to be inconsistent management
practices. Regarding the status report on Phase 1 mitigation, Mr. Munoz stated The Environmental Trust has a good outreach program and feels that Preserve Calavera or members of the public can
contact them directly.
ar8
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 6
l Wetland impacts from the roadway extension - Mr. Munoz stated that Cannon Road cannot go
forward with its current alignment into the canyon due to these wetland impacts.
l Opposition to Reach 4 and failure to implement the 1993 agreement for the Calavera Nature
Preserve. Mr. Munoz emphasized that one of the General Plan Amendment items that the City
Council will act on after the Commission’s recommendation is to remove all the RL on that mitigation
parcel, allowing a public trail system and securing its short and long-term maintenance.
l Preserve Calavera concern with mosquito problem - Mr. Hauser stated concerns were raised
regarding localized flooding that occurred after the grading of the Q and T projects that created a mosquito problem. Mr. Hauser stated that it is something that is not normally an issue and is
something they would deal with because it’s not in conformance with the grading plan. There was
also a concern about the requirements for the basins and that some of the official basins tend to
retain some water and create a mosquito problem. Mr. Hauser said this is a concern of the City as
well but it’s also one of those things we basically have to live with. He said they are setting up some
permanent as well as temporary erosion control basins to deal with grading projects in the City.
However, the Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued us a permit that requires all projects
constructed within the City of Carlsbad, as well as anywhere in the County, do on site retention of drainage, and that means there will be more and more of these little basins. Typically standards are
set for these basins so that the water will drain out of them within a 48-hour period because it’s
usually a 7-day period for mosquitoes to breed and hatch. However, sometimes plants grow up in the basin and siltation occurs and then there are ponded areas that create mosquito problems. He said
when that happens the County needs to come out and deal with the vector problem. Regarding the concern about the big basins with the overflow structure, Mr. Hauser stated that the design feature of
the basin is to have an overflow structure. That is within an*easement that the City procures and
permitted by the agencies, and is a requirement of the City ordinances as well as the Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
l Wildlife Corridor Undercrossing on existing Reach D - Mr. Hauser stated that at this point it is primarily an avian corridor and that’s what the resource agencies were looking for. Since no
additional justification was provided for such an undercrossing within any of the environmental studies done for this project, Staff would not be able to add such a condition on to the development.
Regarding the further extensions of the roads, he said they have had discussions with the developer and the resource agencies and will be providing undercrossings, however, it will not be the full bridge
crossing as shown in the presentation by Preserve Calavera at the last meeting. This type would not be proposed because of the dollar value and the actual use of it, unless the agencies would request
it. It is potentially feasible to put a crossing under Reach D, but it is not a condition of the project nor
it is a condition of the environmental analysis for the project.
Chairperson Trigas asked if the agencies have required anything other than an avian corridor. Mr. Hauser responded that the agencies requested some additional crossings on the new road segments, but
not on the existing road segment. Reach D of College Boulevard currently exists and they did not ask for a retrofit of an undercrossing to enhance the corridor because it was basically described as an avian
corridor. He added that they would be incorporating undercrossings in some of the new roads. They will be upsizing some of the culverts so they meet the requirements of the resource agencies. This will be
done on Segment C as well as Cannon Road Reach 3 and Reach 4. On Cannon Road Reach A, a bridge crossing at the creek will act as a corridor.
l Village H function as a wildlife corridor - Lee Sherwood, Environmental Consultant from ReCon, stated that part of the final EIR has a 1999 agreement from the resource agencies indicating that
Village H is not part of any defined wildlife corridor. They were focusing on the coastal sage scrub
and the avian linkage through Calavera Hills and it was not a corridor that they required as part of the open space of Calavera Hills.
Ranch0 Carlsbad Homeowners Concerns
l David Hauser, Deputy City Engineer, addressed concerns of the Ranch0 Carlsbad homeowners
regarding the proximity of Cannon Road and the noise levels that may be generated. He said the EIR indicated the mitigation measures would bring the noise levels into conformance with city standards,
however, they still had concerns with the project. The developer met with the homeowners and they
ad
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 7
negotiated an agreement which is included in the Errata Sheet. He explained the changes in the
revised Errata Sheet dated December 27, 2001 and clarified that Item # 2 Engineering condition from the December 19, 2001 Errata Sheet remains the same and should have been included in the revised
Errata Sheet of December 27,200l. He said that wording should be included in the motion.
Commissioner Segall asked Mr. Hauser to clarify who he meant by “they” want the condition eliminated. Mr. Hauser explained “they” referred to the developer. After the developer met with the Ranch0 Carlsbad
homeowners, the developer indicated they would be willing to accept these conditions that go beyond the
standard requirements the City would be able to impose on the developer. Mr. Hauser stated the developer is in agreement with the conditions of the December 27, 2001 Errata Sheet as well as the
unchanged Item 2 Engineering condition of the December 19, 2001 Errata Sheet. He also added that the
applicant would be talking about an additional last minute change they requested to the revised errata
and Staff has no problem with that change.
San Luis Rev Band Concerns
l Early involvement to assess resource impacts to the San Luis Rey Band. Mr. Munoz said Mark
Mojado’s letter was dated April, 2001 and the California Indian Attorney letter was dated November, 2001. Mr. Munoz said he could not address the issue of the length of time between the client and
attorney, but said the applicant is committed to working with this group and is comfortable that the
City and San Luis Rey Band will reach a pre-excavation agreement, although the project does not require it as a condition as currently formatted. It is compliant with CEQA and mitigation measures
will be adequate.
l Communication on Cultural Resource Information - Mr. Sherwood stated that since the last Planning
Commission hearing the archaeology report has been transmitted to Ms. Douglas-Baird and she is
currently reviewing it. She also asked if the artifacts could be interred or given to the Native American
group and Mr. Sherwood said he believes both the City and McMillin are willing to do that. There are
ongoing meetings regarding a pre-excavation agreement that should bring that to fruition next week.
Other Concerns
l Conversion of E.I to residential - Mr. Munoz stated that Staff supports the change to residential primarily because the City Council did a citywide commercial study that looked at the City’s buildout
relative to commercial locations, and this site was designated for support of a noncommercial use, so this implements City Council policy.
l Regarding the fire station planned for Glasgow and Carlsbad Village Drive, Mr. Munoz stated that the
fire station is still on the books and when the growth of the area reaches its necessary threshold the
construction will occur. Fire Staff monitors this.
l Opposition to development of open space areas - Mr. Munoz stated there seems to be a perception
in the community that if an area is currently undeveloped that it is meant to be open space. However,
many of these spaces have long been slated for development. He stated this may be a discovery of the General Plan and its function in the City and how people can use it to visualize the development
of the city around them and find out what areas are designated as permanent open space.
l Phasing of units / 2,500 ADT - Mr. Hauser stated that the condition was established so they would
not violate the growth management standards. He said they actually could have more traffic there
and still not violate the growth management standards as long as the barricades remained. They
wanted to move the barricades and still provide the developer with enough development potential so they could fund their construction of the roadway and make all the financial things work. He said they
will be monitoring the situation; they do traffic monitoring twice a year and can do additional monitoring if necessary where they will be looking at the levels of service on these roads to see if there is a problem developing. They will also be monitoring the progress of construction on
Cannon/College. If the developer stalls out on the construction of Cannon/College they wouldn’t issue any more permits until they saw that moving forward. He said the concern about running out of
money is not really a problem because before the developer gets the first final map on this project they will be required to bond for these improvements.
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 8
Premature removal of barricade - In light of the fact that it was stated in the EIR traffic study if we
don’t get College Boulevard Reach 4 the traffic along College Boulevard between Carlsbad Village Drive and Lake Boulevard would go from 39,000 ADT to 45,000 ADT - Mr. Hauser stated that is a
buildout projection, and if all the projects that are in the EIR traffic analysis as being imminent are built and all road segments, except Reach 4, the ADT on that street would only be 31,000.
Completing improvements on Glasgow and Harwich Drive in Village K - Frank Jimeno, Associate Planner, stated there is a condition that requires the completion of improvements to local street
standards which includes sidewalks on both streets with the option of either the developer or the City requiring one of the sidewalks to be a trail because it is an open space area. Regarding the issue of
safety in the school crossings, Mr. Jimeno stated the Transportation Department cooperates with the
school district to ensure that all the necessary safety measures are taken care of and will be
addressed when the need arises.
Access to Village H - Mr. Jimeno stated that Village H is a future community facility site and the
actual land use is not determined at this time. The Master Plan provides a requirement that access
be from Victoria rather than Carlsbad Village Drive. The City improvements on Carlsbad Village Drive
include a traffic signal at Victoria with access to Village H with a potential emergency access if
required.
Access to Village E-l - Mr. Jimeno stated the Master Plan provides access from Glasgow and an emergency access to be determined when the actual design of the development comes in. There is
no proposed development there at this time.
Commissioner Segall asked if the City or applicant establishes where the community facility zone is in
Village H. Mr. Jimeno said the Master Plan indicates specifically where it is supposed to be located. Mr. Wayne added that the applicant proposes it, the Staff reviews it, and it has to meet certain criteria. In this
instance it met the criteria, so the Staff is recommending that Village H be one of the community facility
sites. There is nothing to preclude having Village H be something else with an acceptable alternate
proposal, but that would have to be fully reviewed at the time. The community facilities area cannot be
eliminated; it would have to be relocated.
Mr. Munoz pointed out that the Errata Sheet of December 19, 2001 was split so that there is now an
Errata Sheet for the Planning items as well as one for the Engineering items and indicated the changes.
Mr. Munoz addressed the following issues in a letter received from Jack Gorzeman:
l Concerning the density increase proposed for Village U affecting him in Village T. Mr. Munoz stated
that the first home sale was in June 1999 and the first scoping meeting for the EIR was in September 1999, and indicated that the word was out at the time he was buying his home and it was unfortunate
that he did not realize there was a major master plan amendment impending at that time.
l Regarding the structural height in Village U - Village U will come back before the Commission for approval and adjacent residents will be noticed and he will have an opportunity to comment on the
final design.
l Regarding being noticed of the draft EIR - Mr. Munoz said he would be provided with a copy of the
mailing list. Village T had a noise study done and it was compliant with current noise standards.
Mr. Sherwood addressed the following issues brought up in the letter from Mr. Gorzeman:
l No mitigation in the final EIR for aesthetics impacts - Mr. Sherwood stated that is not the case, there is landscaping contour grading in the final EIR to address visual quality impacts. He said he is correct in his statement in that there are cumulative visual quality impacts that would occur that would not be
mitigated from all the development of this project as well as others in the region.
l The issue of nuisance noise in Village T from the development of Village U - Mr. Sherwood stated that nuisance noise is not an issue that is addressed in CEQA documents. The City’s Noise
Ordinance addresses impacts from adjacent residents and he and Staff feel that the EIR is adequate in addressing Village U.
Mr. Munoz stated he received an email from N. Staehr in support of Cannon Road and asking them not to delay the project based on threats from environmental groups. Mr. Munoz clarified that if the Commission
and Council decide not to certify Cannon Road Reach 4, it does not effectively delay that roadway
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 9
because it is not needed in the next five years. Commissioner Segall pointed out that N. Staehr is a
former Oceanside Planning Commissioner and Ocean Hills resident.
Mr. Munoz stated a letter was received from Tony Gullotta, a Carlsbad resident, expressing support for
Cannon Road Reach 4.
Mr. Munoz said a letter received from Everett DeLano, representing Ocean Hills, basically states that if
the Planning Commission does not recommend certification of Reach 4 in the EIR, they will not oppose the balance of the project.
Mr. Munoz introduced a memo to the Planning Commission stating that if they would like to consider
making a recommendation to the City Council exempting Reach 4 from the EIR that it is legally possible
per CEQA. He outlined the findings that the Commission would need to integrate into the City Council recommendation, however, he stated it is not Staffs recommendation.
RECESS
Chairperson Trigas called a recess at 8:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Chairperson Trigas called the meeting back to order at 8:15 p.m.
Applicant Brian Milich of Corky McMillin Companies, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, thanked Staff for all the time they spent working on the project over the holidays. Mr. Milich briefly addressed the
following concerns raised at the December 19, 2001 meeting:
Ranch0 Carlsbad Homeowners - Mr. Milich stated they have worked out an agreement that addresses
their concerns for a buffer and moving their RV parking and their garden area to an area on the
Robertson Ranch owned by McMillin. These issues have been addressed in a condition of approval and
they have continued to work with them to further clarify those conditions. Mr. Milich stated there is a slight
modification to one of the conditions that adds language to describe how the berm on the Ranch0
Carlsbad side of Cannon will be landscaped.
San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Indians Pre-excavation Agreement - Mr. Milich stated they had met and
talked with them a number of times and have a meeting scheduled with them on January 17th to go over
drafts of the pre-excavation agreement. They should have a final agreement within the next several
weeks.
Village H Requirements - Mr. Milich stated that originally the 66-acre Village H site was to have 42 units
on it under the current Master Plan. There was then a tentative map that mapped 13 units on that site on
7-8 acres of developable land. With the amendment before the Commission that will be reduced to two
net acres (three gross acres) of community facilities use, so the balance of 63 acres of that site will be
permanently preserved open space. He said although they understand the concerns, they think that site
will be predominantly open space and will be enhancing trails that will still allow public use for the majority
of that site and respectfully requested they be allowed to put the community facilities on that site.
Single-Story Requirement - Mr. Milich said they are proposing to add a condition to the master plan text
addressing that issue. He referred to the handout given to the Commission and said that it states in
addition to 20 percent of the units being either a single story or reduced two story plan, that no fewer than 10 percent of the total single family units remaining in the master plan be single story.
Commissioner Compas asked if he had discussed this with Staff and how they responded. Mr. Munoz
replied that if the Commission really would like to see single story units in the Master Plan, Staff would support the revised wording to incorporate single story units at the ratio proposed.
Cannon Road Reach 4 - Mr. Milich stated that even though that is not an obligation of the Calavera Hills
project they again find themselves in the crossfire and have worked with Staff to address the issues with
those parties having an interest in that road. He said they believe the right course of action for this evening is to remove Reach 4B from the EIR for the following reasons: It is not going to be required for 5-
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 10
10 years, it is not part of the Calavera Hills project, and would only potentially serve to delay the other
more important roads needed today.
Commissioner Segall asked him to address comment e. on the Errata Sheet he distributed. Mr. Milich said when they came up with the reduced second story alternative, Staff was concerned that there not be
any predominance of one particular plan or another in any village, so there was a minimum requirement that at least a certain number of homes be committed to a certain plan. Because of the requirement for
10 percent to be single story, they didn’t want the requirement to suddenly become 25 percent in a 3-plan program or 20 percent in a 4-plan program, so language was added stating that this minimum plan variety
percentage shall not apply to a single story plan.
Commissioner Segall asked if that means that some communities may not have any single story and
others may have a larger number. Mr. Milich replied that is correct and the intent was to make sure they
had variety in the street scene and that there be either single story or reduced two story plans, and it would give them more flexibility in terms of where they would put them.
Commissioner Segall asked if there would be more than one style for the single story. Mr. Milich said
they generally have three elevations per plan and would do the same with the single story and would be
glad to commit to that.
Commissioner Segall said the question has been raised about the phasing of College Reaches B, C, and
Cannon, Reach 3 and asked if he had a time period right now on when he plans to start and how it’s going to work. Mr. Milich replied that their goal is to build those roads as quickly as they can. They are
motivated to see them built because it provides a much better marketing window to their project, they are bonded for the roads and want to get off the bonds at some point, and they are capped at the number of
units that they can build prior to the roads being completed. He said they would start all three reaches
just as soon as they can; the end of this month or early February would be their goal.
Commissioner Segall stated he would support removing Reach 48 because he didn’t think he could make
a legitimate finding since they don’t know where the road is going to connect. He said he finds it very
awkward to make a finding of where a road would terminate when it’s literally up in the air. He said he thinks discussions need to take place with the City of Oceanside and it’s to their advantage as well as
Carlsbad’s to do that as soon as possible so that they know exactly how the roads will align. He said he would support the EIR coming back to the Commission if that’s the sequence that needs to take place. He
said he likes the project and thinks the applicant did a lot in terms of the sense of communities in Phase
2. He said he appreciates the inclusion of one story for individuals desiring a one story and who want to
live in the community. He said he thinks that overall it’s a good project. He added there are a lot of
concerns with the habitat and open space issues, but thinks the project has a lot that is being preserved
and supports that as well.
Commissioner Compas said he hopes they all agreed on livable streets and said the compromise on
single family homes is acceptable to him. He said looking at the situation as objectively as he can, he
thinks Cannon Road Reach 4 will be needed eventually and the location will probably be close to what
the federal agencies want. He said he believes Calavera Phase 2, Cannon Road Reaches 3 and 4A, and College Blvd. should go forward now, and supports going forward without Cannon Reach 4B.
Commissioner Dominguez said he supports the compromises presented by Staff and it’s unfortunate that
Calavera Hills was caught up in the crossfire. He stated he believes some of the peripheral issues are
just as important. The possible destruction of a Carlsbad Unified School District property site that has been bought and paid for by further assaults on the EIR. He said personally he would have liked to see
the entire Reach 4 approved but realizes that could be counterproductive. Therefore he said he’s willing
to support the deletion of Reach 48 and moving ahead with the certification of the EIR with the findings and reasons as presented by Staff.
Commissioner Heineman said he feels the proposed product appears to be very good and likes the idea
of the reduced second story plan as an alternative to some one story homes, but is also happy there will
be at least 10 percent of one story plans. He said he thinks the construction of College and Cannon is
almost as important as the construction of the houses, although he would support the amendment to eliminate Reach 48 at this time.
aa
Planning Commission Minutes January 2,2002 Page 11
Commissioner Nielsen said that since everyone says it doesn’t matter what they do on 4B, they should
vote it in. If there’s no route determined it just means the EIR will have to be brought back again. He said
he could support 48.
Chairperson Trigas said she agrees with the other members of the Commission. She added that she
feels it’s important that things are looked at from a regional perspective and this shows some of the
weaknesses in a number of North County cities where we’re not seeing what the mutual needs are. She
hopes there is an honest effort for all the cities to communicate and give input to one another’s projects.
Commissioner Segall disclosed that he, along with Chairperson Trigas, met with the applicant with Staff
present. He said he also personally had a discussion with Mr. Hafley with the Ocean Hills Homeowners
Association and with Ms. Nygaard with Preserve Calavera, without Staff present.
Commissioner Dominguez wanted to add that that he hopes the Commission is not sending a message that it’s okay to drop certain portions of circulation plans from EIR’s because if this happens peripherally
we’ll all be in more hot water than ever imagined with traffic increasing at the rate it has been.
Chairperson Trigas added that the roads are not Carlsbad’s, Oceanside’s, or Vista’s roads; they are
regional roads and it’s very foolish to not look at it as a regional road system.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Heineman and duly seconded that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 5112 recommending
certification of EIR 98-02 incorporating the proposal in the December 31, 2001
memo to restrict the EIR to Reach 4A and without Reach 48 and recommending
approval of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding
Consideration, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program incorporating
Errata Sheets from Senior Planner Munoz referring to Page 41, E., Page, 49,
Page 52, d. and Page 84,6., and also revised Errata Conditions dated December
27, 2001 for Planning Commission Resolution 5117, CT 00-02, and incorporating a third condition to add Item #2 from the December 19, 2001 Errata Sheet that
was missing from the Revised Errata Sheet of December 27, 2001, and incorporating the proposed changes to pages 51 and 52 of the architectural
standards as proposed by the developer. Also recommending on the Mitigation Monitoring Program to allow the artifacts to be located with the American Indian
San Luis Band as opposed to the San Diego Museum of Man. Recommending approval of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding
Consideration, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and adoption
of Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, 5117, and 5118 recommending approval of GPA 99-03, MP 150(H), LFMP 87-07(A), ZC Ol-
01, CT 00-02, and HDP 00-02 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Segall wanted to ensure that all documents were included in the motion. The Commission reviewed all the documents to clarify that everything was included.
VOTE:
AYES:
6-O-O
Chairperson Trigas, Commissioners, Compaq Dominguez, Heineman, Nielsen,
and Segall
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
None
None
Chairperson Trigas thanked the applicant for his cooperation and thanked the audience for attending.
EXHBlT 8
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN MP 1500-I)
PROPOSED CHANGES TO PG. 51 AND 52 ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS:
(Changes in double-underline and eress+&)
b. Single story or Reduced-second story homes. A minimum of 25% of the total number of units along a single side of the street of any street exceeding 550-feet in length shall be single story or conform to the requirements of the following Reduced-second story criteria below. A minimum of 20% of the
total number of single family detached units within any particular Phase II
single family village (Villages K, L-2, W and X) shall be single story, or
Reduced-second story. In addition, at least 10% of the total number of Phase
II single familv detached units shall be single storyas-&kws
Reduced-second story. To qualify as a Reduced-second story home, the structure must comply with the following criteria; A minimum of 60% of the roofline shall be single story. A two-story element may be added in the central portion of the front and rear elevation. The second-story element may be no greater than 25% of the floor area of the first floor of the house (including garage).
The single story or Reduced-second story units are intended to be strategically located in the lotting scheme, and distributed throughout the village.
C. Two story homes. A maximum of 33% of the units in a particular single family village may be a maximum of 30 feet in height. The balance of the proposed two story homes in any particular village shall not exceed 26 feet in height.
d. Architectural varietv. It is the intent of this Master Plan that architectural variety of single story, dormer two story and reduced-second story homes exist from one single family Phase II village to another. To this end the site
development plan applicant must demonstrate architectural variety both internal to the subject village, and external to the other villages. The applicant sha.U file a pre-filing submittal and shall follow the submittal requirements in accordance with the Planning Department’s preliminary
review process. In this pre-filing submittal, the applicant shall demonstrate
compliance with this section of the Master Plan to the satisfaction of the
Planning Director. Upon completion of the pre-filing submittal and review, the applicant may file a formal application for a planned development permit pursuant to this Master Plan.
e. Plan varietv. An overwhelming dominance of a particular floor plan is not allowed. A minimum of 25% of the units in any 3-plan village shall be of any single particular approved plan. A minimum of 20% of the units in any 4 plan village shall be of any single particular approved plan. This minimum
Plan variety percentantage shall not apply to a single story plan.
-.I-. ”
LOCATION MAP
UNIFIED SCHOOL
PROJECT NAME EXHIBIT
CANNON ROAD REACHES 4A AND 46 1 4b’ BY: SCOTT EVANS, CARLSSAD ENGlNERlNG DEPT. 12/31/U C \pREsENTA~~S\HAUYR\CANNoN4A48-EXST.Dffi -- 1