HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-10-19; City Council; 17849; Tabata residential subdivisionI MTG. 1011 9/04
Project application(s)
Environmental Review
GPA 04-1 3
LCPA 03-07
ZC 03-05
CT 03-06
CDP 03-24
HDP 04-02
DEPT. PLNd
Administrative Reviewed by and To be Reviewed -
Approvals Final at Planning Final at Council
Commission
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
TITLE:
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07EC 03-05
CITY MGRa
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. , APPROVING Zone Change 03-
05, and ADOPT Resolution No. , ADOPTING a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and APPROVING General Plan Amendment GPA
04-1 3 and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 03-07.
NS-729
2004-338
On September 1, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended to
the City Council approval (6-0 - Commissioner Cardosa did not participate due to a potential conflict
of interest) of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and
a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Zone Change to change the
General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use designations and the Citywide Zoning and Local
Coastal Program zoning designations on a 5.64 acre property generally located on the east side of
Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane, and immediately adjacent to the Twin 'ID" Reservoirs site.
At that same hearing, the Planning Commission also approved (6-0) a Tentative Tract Map, Coastal
Development Permit, and Hillside Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home
and subdivide and grade the site into 16 residential lots and 2 open space lots. The approval of the
Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development Permit, and Hillside Development Permit were final at the
Planning Commission.
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Zone Change
would change the General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use designations on the property
from Residential Low-Medium (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac)
and Open Space (OS) and change the Citywide Zoning and Local Coastal Program zoning
designations on the property from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open
Space (OS). The RLM land use designations and the R-1 zoning designations would apply to the 16
residential lots and the OS land use and zoning designations would apply to the 2 open space lots.
The proposed land use and zoning amendments are necessary to provide consistency between the
xoposed development and the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Citywide Zoning.
Except for a brief statement from the applicant's representative, no public testimony was offered at
the Planning Commission hearing. A full disclosure of the Planning Commission's actions and a
complete description and staff analysis of the proposed project are included in the attached minutes
and Planning Commission staff report. The Planning Commission and staff are recommending
approval of the proposed land use and zoning amendments.
I
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 17,849
Local Facilities Management Plan
Growth Control Point
Net Density
Special Facility Fee
ENVIRONMENTAL:
20
3.2 du/ac
3.0 dulac
None
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection
Ordinance of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 1 9), staff conducted an environmental impact
assessment to determine if the project could have any potentially significant impact on the
environment. The environmental impact assessment identified potentially significant impacts to biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials and noise. Mitigation
measures have been incorporated into the design of the project or have been placed as conditions of
approval for the project such that all potentially significant impacts have been mitigated to below a
level of significance. The Planning Director issued a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the project on June 21, 2004. One public comment was received via email (dated
July 19, 2004) during the 30-day public review period (June 21, 2004 to July 21, 2004), and one
comment was received via email after the 30-day public review period (dated August 19, 2004). The ’
two email comments were received as joint comments from the “Wildlife Agencies” (USFSW and CA
DF&G). Staff responded in writing to both Wildlife Agency comments (August 4, 2004 and August
23, 2004, respectively). No new significant environmental effects requiring mitigation by CEQA were
identified as a result of the Wildlife Agency comments and, therefore, the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were not revised nor re-circulated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All public infrastructure required for this project will be funded and/or constructed by the developer.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS:
I Facilities Zone I 20 I
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Ordinance No. NS-729
2. City Council Resolution No. 2004-338
3. Location Map
4.
5.
6.
Planning Commission Resolutions 571 8, 571 9, 5720, and 5721
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated September 1, 2004
Draft Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated September 1, 2004.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Gary T. Barberio, (760) 602-4606, gbarb @ci.carlsbad.ca.us
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
ORDINANCE NO. NS-729
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 FROM
AND OPEN SPACE (OS) ON A 5.64 ACRE SITE GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BLACK RAIL ROAD, SOUTH
OF POINSETTIA LANE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
LIMITED CONTROL (L-C) TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1)
CASE NO.: ZC 03-05
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 21.05.030 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, being the
City’s zoning map, is amended as shown on the map marked Exhibit “ZC 03-05 attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as
set forth in Planning Commission Resolution 5721 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. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be
effective until LCPA 03-07 is approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
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
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 19th day of October 2004, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 2004, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-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
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-338
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND APPROVING A GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT AND A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN AND LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FROM
RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4 DU/AC) TO
RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4 DU/AC) AND
OPEN SPACE (OS) AND TO CHANGE THE LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM ZONING DESIGNATION FROM LIMITED CONTROL
(OS) ON A 5.64 ACRE SITE GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF BLACK RAIL ROAD, SOUTH OF POINSETTIA
LANE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
(L-C) TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) AND OPEN SPACE
CASE NO.: GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, did on September 1, 2004, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as referenced in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 571 8, General Plan Amendment GPA 04-1 3, according to Exhibit “GPA 04-1 3’
attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 571 9 and incorporated herein by reference,
and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 03-07, according to Exhibit “LCPA 03-07”
attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 5720 and incorporated herein by reference to
change the General Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use designations from Residential
Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to Residential Low-Medium Density Residential (RLM, 0-
4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS) and to change the Local Coastal Program Zoning designation
from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS) and the
Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolutions No. 571 8, 571 9, and 5720
recommending to the City Council that they be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 19th day of October , 2004
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Mitigated Negative
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
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, and
Local Coastal Program Amendment 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, General Plan Amendment, and Local Coastal Program Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does
hereby resolved as follows:
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 and conditions of the Planning Commission in Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 571 8, 571 9, and 5720 for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment constitute the findings and conditions of the City Council in this matter.
3. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of
General Plan Amendment GPA 04-13 as shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5719
is hereby accepted, approved in concept, and shall be formally approved with GPA Batch No. 2
of 2004 comprised of GPA 02-05, GPA 03-05, GPA 03-08, GPA 03-13, GPA 04-01, GPA 04-
04, GPA 04-07, GPA 04-08 and GPA 04-1 1.
....
. . ..
....
....
....
. . ..
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 19th day Of October , 2004, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
-3- 8
EXHIBIT 3
SITE
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05 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
EXHIBIT 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5718
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, A
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT, AND A ZONE
CHANGE TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN AND LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
RLM, TO RLM AND OS AND TO CHANGE THE CITYWIDE
ZONING AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM ZONING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT, AND A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO
SUBDIVIDE AND GRADE A 5.64 ACRE SITE INTO 16
RESDENTIAL LOTS AND 2 OPEN SPACE LOTS,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BLACK
RAIL ROAD, SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE IN THE MELLO
11 SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
DESIGNATION FROM L-C, TO R-1 AND OS, AND A
DEMOLISH AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AND
CASE NO. : GPA 04- 13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-061
CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02
WHEREAS, Noboru & Evelyn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata,
“Developer/Owner,” has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property
described as
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, T12S, R4W, SBBM, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with
said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
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
reIating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Exhibit “ND”
according to “NOI” dated June 21, 2004 and “PII” dated May 20, 2004, attached
hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a.
b.
C.
d.
Conditions:
it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
05/CT 03-06ICDP 03-24/HDP 04-02, the environmental impacts therein
identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - GPA 04-13LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-
the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines
and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
1. The Developer shall implement or cause the implementation of the Tabata Residential
Subdivision Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 57 18 -2- ‘I 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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HObhfILLkk
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5718 -3-
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
PROJECTLOCATION: Generallv located on the east side of Black Rail Road, south of
CASE NO: GPA 04- 13LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02
Poinsettia Lane, Citv of Carlsbad. County of San Dierro
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal
Program Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Map, Coastal Development Permit, and Hillside
Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and grade a 5.64 acre
site into 16 residential lots and two open space lots.
DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above
described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) did not identify any potentially significant impacts on the
environment, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows:
IXI
0
0
Although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project.
The proposed project MAY have “potentially significant impact(s)” on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. (Negative Declaration applies only to the
effects that remained to be addressed).
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to s~ipport the Negative Declaration is on
file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008.
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
13
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-731 4 (760) 602-4600 - FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
- City of Carlsbad -
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: ZC 03-05/GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07iCT 03-061
CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02
PROJECT LOCATION: The eastside of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of a Zone Change, General Plan
Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Map, Coastal Development Permit,
and Hillside Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and
grade a 5.64 acre site into 16 residential lots and two open space lots
PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental
review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of
Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially
significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made
by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are
released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly
no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in
light of the whole record before the City that the project “as revised” may have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad
Planning Commission.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration are on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad,
California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to
the Planning Department within 30 days of the date of this notice.
The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and
approval/adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. Additional
public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any
questions, please call Gary T. Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD JUNE 21,2004 TO JULY 21,2004
PUBLISH DATE JUNE 2 1,2004
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
CASE NO: ZC 03-05/GPA 04-13 /LCPA 03-07/CT 03-06/CDP 03-244DP 04-02
DATE: May 20,2004
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad
CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Gary T. Barberio (760) 602-4606
PROJECT LOCATION: The eastside of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane
PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS: Noboru &.Evelyn Tabata and Isokazu
Tabata. c/o Greg Harrington, P.O. Box 679, Carlsbad, CA 92008
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Low-Medium Density (0 - 4 dwelling units per
_gross acre)
ZONING: Limited Control (L-C)
OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing
approval or participation agreements): California Coastal Commission (For LCPA)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
The project site is 5.64 acres in size and is located on the eastside of Black Rail Road, south of
Poinsettia Lane and immediately adjacent to the Twin “D” Reservoirs site. The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA 04-13), a Zone Change (ZC 03-05). and a Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 03-07) to change the General Plan land use designation
from Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM) to Residential Low-Medium Density (EM) and
Open Space (OS), and change the zoning designation from Limited Control (LC) to One-Family
Residential Zone (R-1) and Open Space (OS). The application also includes a Tentative Tract
Map (CT 03-06), a Coastal Development Permit (CDP 03-24), and a Hillside Development
Permit (HDP 04-02) to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and made the 5.64
acre site into 16 residential lots and two open space lots. The site is currently developed with one
single-family home and an a.qicultma1 field crop operation with a roadside sales stand.
Surrounding development includes the City of Carlsbad Twin “D” Reservoirs and future single-
family homes (Redeemer by the Sea residential lots) to the north. single-family residential
development to the south, open space (Aviara Master Plan) and single-family homes to the east,
and single-family residential development to the west.
1 Rev. 07/03/02
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
0 Aesthetics [xi Geology/Soils [xi Noise
[7 Agricultural Resources [XI Hazards/Hazardous Materials c] Popu1ation and Housing u Air Quality 0 HydrologylWater Quality 0 Public Services
[xi Biological Resources 0 Land Use and Planning 0 Recreation
Cultural Resources 0 Mineral Resources 0 TransportatiodCirculation
Utilities & Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
2 Rev. 07103/02
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
la
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have “potentiaIIy significant impact(s)” on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
3 Rev. 07/03/02
ENVIRONMENTAL, IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment to deternine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental
Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical,
biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information
to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or
to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported
by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects ldce the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source
document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not
significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.”
The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly
adverse.
Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the
environment, but potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a
supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental
document is required.
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR
if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable
standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been made
pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment.
If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there
are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation
measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate “Potentially
Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration
may be prepared.
4 Rev. 07103102
e An EIR
the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or
mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation
measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding
Considerations” for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3)
proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the
EIA-Part I1 analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect,
or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a
level of significance.
be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited to
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant.
5 Rev. 07103J02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0
0
0
0 0 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic hghway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? 0 0
IXI d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
0
11. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would
the project:
0 0 a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
0
17
0 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
CI c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations.) Would the
project:
0
0 [XJ
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
0 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
6 Rev. 07103102 20
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
Expose sensitive receptors to Substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
Have a Substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a Substantial adverse effect on any riparian,
aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a Substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or nigratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Impact tributary areas that are environmentally
sensitive?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially Significant
Unless
Mitigation Incorporated
0
0
0
IXI
[XI
o
17
o
Less Than Significant
Impact
[x1
0
0
0
0
0
0
No
Impact
Ixl
Ixl
0
Ixl
[xi
7 671 Rev. 07i03102
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
El
0 0
0 0
0 0
Cause a Substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in 9 15064.5?
Cause a Substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of an archeological resource pursuant to 5 15064.5?
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologi-
cal resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
ow
1x10
wo
ow
Expose people or structures to potential Substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i.
11.
... 111.
1v.
0 0 ow Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
Substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 ow
0 0 ow Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
Landslides? 0 0 ow
0 0 ow Result in Substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? w on Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
0 OBI Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
8 d3a Rev. 07103102
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
environment?
For a project within an airport land use plan, or
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
For a project withm the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
Potentially
Significant Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially
Significant Unless
Mitigation Incorporated
El
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significant Impact
0
0
0
I?
0
0
0
0
0
0
NO Impact
IXI
0
[XI
El
Ixi
€3
[XI
I8
0
txl
9 a3 Rev, 07103l02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant. Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
0 0 ow b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with ground water recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local ground water table
level (Le., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Impacts to groundwater quality?
0 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
0 e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in
a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
o f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff!
0 g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
0 h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation
map?
0 i) Place within 1 00-year flood 'hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
0
0
k)
1)
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface
waters. o m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals,
pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics,
nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash)
into receiving surface waters or other alteration of
receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
El
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ow ow
ow
ow
ow ow
ow
ow
ow ow
ow
10 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
0
0 0
Less Than
Significant No Impact Impact
n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or
wetland waters) during or following construction? ow
ow 0) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired
water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list?
0 0 ow p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater
receiving water quality objectives or degradation of
beneficial uses?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0
0 0
ow ow b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
ow c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
0 0 a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State?
0 0 ow b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
XI. NOISE - Would the project result in:
0 1xi on a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of
other agencies?
0 0 nw b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbourne vibration or groundbouiiie noise
levels?
0 0 ow c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
0 0 nw d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
11 Rev. 07/03/02 d 3’
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) For a projec located within an airpor land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been-adopted, within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or worlung in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
MI. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, a
need for new or physically altered government
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
‘WV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Potentially
Significant Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 cl
0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No Impact
0
Ixi
5
IXI
IXI
El
Ixi w
Ixi
El
12 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
Exceed, either indwidually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Result in inadequate emergency access?
Result in insufficient parlung capacity?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn-
outs, bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which would
cause significant environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, os
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Potentially
Significant Impact
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigation
Incorporated
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than Significant
Impact
0
lzl
lzl
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No Impact
0
0
[xi
IXI
[xi
IXI
[XI
Ixi
[xi
5
13 G Rev. 07103102 27
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
El ow
0 Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumula-
tively considerable” means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects?)
0
Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
17
0
ow
ow
no
ow
ow
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program ELR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
CI Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,”
describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document
and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
14 Rev. 01103102
Earlier analysis of ths proposed residential project has been completed through the General Plan Update (GPA 94-
01) and related Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01). The MEIR is cited as source #1 in the source
list included in this document. This proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the General Plan and is
considered a project that was described in MEIR 93-01 as within its scope. All feasible mitigation measures
identified in MEIR 93-01 which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project.
- ~
The project site is also located in an area which is subject to the requirements of the Zone 20 Specific Plan approved
by City Council in 1994. A program EIR (PEIR) (EIR 90-03) was certified for the Zone 20 Specific Plan. The
Zone 20 PEIR identified, analyzed, and recommended mitigation to reduce potential significant impacts to
insignificant levels. The Zone 20 PEIR analyzed potential impacts to agriculture, air quality, biology, circulation,
land use, noise, pesticide residue, paleontology, public facilities financing, soils/geology, and visual aesthetics that
could result from the development of the Specific Plan area. The PEIR is intended to be used in the review of
subsequent projects within Zone 20. The project incorporates the required Zone 20 PEIR mitigation measures, and
through the analysis of the required additional biological resources, cultural resources, geotechnical, Phase 1
Environmental, hydrology, and noise studies a determination has been made that no additional significant impacts
beyond those identified and mitigated by the PEIR will result from this project. The following environmental
evaluation briefly explains the basis for this determination along with identifying the source documents that support
the environmental determination. The Zone 20 PEIR and additional technical studies are cited as source documents
for this environmental evaluation.
15 Rev. 07103102 a9
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. AESTHETICS - Less Than Significant Impact - The project is subject to the site design, architectural, and
landscaping standards contained in the Zone 20 Specific Plan and the City of Carlsbad Policy 66 regarding livable
neighborhoods, whch are designed to reduce visual impacts.
11. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - Less Than Significant Impact - The project site is shown as an area of
non-prime agricultural land in the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone of the Local Coastal Program (LCP). The
project site has been designated for residential development and agricultural uses are allowed as interim uses and
conversion of the property from agricultural to urban development shall be permitted subject to mitigation measures
as specified in the LCP, Policy 2-1. Mitigation measures were adopted with the EIR for the Zone 20 Specific Plan
to mitigate the impacts to a level of insignificance and these mitigation measures will be included as conditions of
approval for this project.
III. AIR QUALITY-Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-attainment area
for ozone (03), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter
(PMlo). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution
controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is
embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District
(APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-
mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having
serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by
the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly
regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996.
The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are
incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city’s and the
County’s general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project
presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that
the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact.
Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific
reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality
management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set
forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California
Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the
following:
Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area?
Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan?
The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being
implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City’s General Plan and the RAQS.
Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct
implementation of the regional plan.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of
Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site though April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality
violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in
2001 for the federal ,%hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates
16 Rev. 07103l02
in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. The project would involve
minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized
through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust
control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant
emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard
(comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine
particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net
increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the
proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project,
air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the
CEQA Guidelines Section 1.5 130 (a)(4), the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considered
de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
No Impact. As noted above, the proposed project would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or
concentrations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the
project. No impact is assessed.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction
equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or
transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated - A Report of
Biological Resources Survey was completed for the proposed project (Vincent N. Scheidt, October, 2003). The
report identified that most of the project site habitat (5.6 acres of the 5.64 acre project site) could be classified as
Extensive Agriculhire - Row Crops or Disturbed Habitat. A small (1,834 square feet or .04 acres), narrow strip of
the property at the lowest portion of the eastern slope and property line was classified as Southern Maritime
ChaDanal (SMC) habitat. The project has been designed to avoid the entire .04-acre SMC habitat and to preserve
the area in an open space habitat lot. In adchtion, the eastern slope above the SMC habitat is proposed to be
reconstructed as a naturalized, variable slope (2: 1 to 3: 1) and revegetated with indigenous, native plant species in
order to prevent invasivelnoxious species form invading the SMC habitat. The project design and the incorporation
of the above mitigation measures, together with the implementation of the additional mitigation measures identified
in the Report, reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. The project shall incorporate all mitigation measures
identified in the Report of Biological Resources Survey completed for the proposed project (Vincent N. Scheidt,
October, 2003).
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Less Than Significant Impact - A Culhiral Resources Survey and Evaluation
was completed for the proposed project (Brian F. Smith and Associates, August 28, 2003). The archaeological
survey and institutional records search identified cultural resources both within and near the project. A portion of
one archaeological site, SDI-6819, is located within the proposed project site. The investigation of Site SDI-6819
revealed a sparse shell and fire-affected rock scatter with no associated artifacts. In a broader perspective, the
various records for SDI-6819 that encompass the entire resource indicate that the site was a temporary camp.
However, the portion of the site on this project represents only the southern fringe of the site. Due to the lack of
artifacts and the sparse nature of the shell scatter, the research potential of this site has been exhausted with the
current investigation. Based on the information derived from the testing program, Site SDI-6819 within the
proposed project site has been determined to not be a significant resource as defined by CEQA (Section 15064.5)
and the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. No fiirther archaeological investigations are recommended
for this site.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated - A Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation Report was prepared for the project site (Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., May 22,
2003). Based upon the investigations, development of the project site as proposed is feasible. Much of the project
17 Rev. 07103102
site is underlain by dense and stable Terrace Deposits which are mantled by a thin section of loose to soft sandy to
clayey fillhopsoils. However, the eastern slope of the project site is underlain by thick undocumented fill deposits
placed over original canyon terrain in an over-steepened slope condition. This existing over-steepened loose fill
slope is potentially unstable and can undergo deep and surficial failures. The Report is recommending that the slope
should be removed and reconstructed as a properly compacted fill slope in accordance with the requirements
outlined withm the Report. Implementation of the geotechnical mitigation measures identified in the Report will
reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. The project shall incorporate all mitigation measures identified in the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared for the project site (Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc.,
May 22,2003).
-
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
- A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the project site (Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc.
May 14, 2003). Two areas of the site registered contaminate concentrations which exceed the recommended
remediation goal of the EPA for soil in a residential setting. It is estimated that 1,000 cubic yards of soil are
impacted with elevated levels of pesticides. It is recommended that the pesticide affected areas be excavated to a
depth of one foot below the surface and be incoiporated into the fill material utilized as a part of the re-compaction
of the eastern slope of the project site. Burial and placement of the approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil should
be placed a minimum of 5 feet below planned utility trenches, five feet inside of the proposed face of slope, and ten
feet below the surface to eliminate any potential for human exposure. It is hrther recommended that a qualified
engineering professional be present upon removal of pesticide-impacted soil to collect two representative soil
samples for laboratory analysis to confirm adequate removal of contaminated soil. Implementation of the mitigation
measures recommended in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment will reduce the identified impacts to a level
of insignificance and these mitigation measures shall be included as conditions of approval for this project.
XI. NOISE - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated - An Acoustical Site Assessment was
completed for the project site (Investigative Science and Engineering, Inc., June 30, 2003). The project site is in
close proximity to Poinsettia Lane and is subject to roadway noise at or below the 60 dBA CNEL threshold
established by the Noise Guidelines Manual, City of Carlsbad. Exterior noise mitigation in the form of noise
attenuation walls is not required to attenuate the noise from the roadway. However, the project site would have
second-story noise exposure levels exceeding the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 noise abatement
threshold. To mitigate this impact to a level of insignificance the Acoustical Site Assessment recommends that the
proposed project should complete an interior noise analysis compliant with the CCR, Title 24, Noise Insulation
Standards, prior to the issuance of building permits to demonstrate that the proposed architectural design would limit
interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL or less. In addition, prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall
prepare and record a notice that the property may be subject to noise impacts from Poinsettia Lane. The project site
is also located approximately 5,000 feet south of the Palomar Airport and is subject to over flight. The noise from
aircraft is below 60 (1BA CNEL. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall prepare and record a
notice that the property is subject to over flight, sight, and sound of aircraft from Palomar Airport. These noise
mitigation measures shall be included as conditions of approval for this project.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC-Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system?
Less Than Significant Impact. A Traffic Impact Analysis was completed for the proposed project (Linscott Law
& Greenspan Engineers, May 1,2003). The project will generate 160 Average Daily Trips (ADT) and 16 peak hour
trips. While the increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been
designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad.
The proposed project would not, therefore, cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the proposed project are, therefore, less than
significant.
b) congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county
Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated
three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad
as pait of the regional circulation system. The Existing and Buildout average daily traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS
on these designated roads and highways in Carlsbad is:
18 Rev. 07103102 3a
Rancho Santa Fe Road
El Camino Real
Palomar Airport Road
SR 78
1-5
Existing ADT* Los Buildout ADT*
15-32 “A-C” 28-43
21-50 “A-C” 32-65
10-52 “A-B” 29-77
120 (‘F” 144
183-198 “D” 219-249
*The numbers are in thousands of daily trips.
The Congestion Management Program’s (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is “E”, or LOS “F” if
that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS “F” in 1990). Accordingly, all designated
roads and highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS.
Note that the buildout ADT projections are based on the full implementation of the region’s general and community
plans. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan and, therefore, its traffic was used in modeling the
buildout projections. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) “E” standard assumes
implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacity(ies) of the designated roads and
highways and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short-
term and at buildout.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is consistent with the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Aqort. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air
traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. No impact assessed.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses?
No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed to City standards; and, therefore,
would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City’s general plan and zoning.
Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact assessed.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police
Departments. No impact assessed.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact. The proposed project is not requesting a parking variance. Additionally, the project would comply
with the City’s parking requirements to ensure an adequate parking supply. No impact assessed.
g) turnouts, bicycle racks, etc.)?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
No Impact. The project is in an area conducive to public transportation, being in close proximity to Poinsettia
Lane, a major circulation element roadway. No impact is assessed.
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICAiiCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important esaniples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated,
RESOURCES and Section V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
See discussion under Section IV. BIOLOGICAL
b) Does the project have inipacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
19 Rev. 07103102 33
No Impact. The proposed project has no impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
No Impact. The proposed project has no environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly.
EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of thls project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning
Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01)
City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994.
Final Program Environmental Imuact Report for the Zone 20 Specific Plan proiect, Carlsbad, California,
(EIR 90-03), City of Carlsbad, CA, June 1992 (SCH 90010134).
Acoustical Site Assessment, Tabata Tentative Map - Carlsbad, CA, Investigative Science and Engineering,
Inc., June 30,2003.
Report of a Biological Resources Survey for the Tabata Black Rail Road Project, Vincent N. Scheidt,
October, 2003.
A Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation for the Black Rail Project, City of Carlsbad, Brian F. Smith
and Associates, August 28, 2003.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, Black Rail Road, Vinge & Middleton Engineering, Inc., May 22,
2003.
Preliminary Hydrology Calculations Pre and Post DeveloDment Hydroloey Study, Black Rail Road, Pasco
Engineering, Inc., May 27,2003.
Tentative Map Hvdrolocv Study for Tabata - Black Rail Road, Pasco Engineering, Inc., Revised Date
February 6,2004.
Runoff Control Plan Preliminary Hydrology Calculations Pre and Post Development Hvdrologv Study,
Black Rail Road, Pasco Engineering, Inc., October 7, 2003.
10. Modified Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report, Tabata Property, Vinje & Middleton
Engineering, Inc., May 14,2003.
1 1. Traffic Impact Analysis, Black Rail Subdivision, Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers, May 1,2003.
12. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for Tabata - Black Rail Road, Pasco Engineering, Inc., Revised
February 10,2004.
20 Rev. 07/03/02 3Lf
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
-The project approval shall be conditioned to provide mitigation, consistent with Policy 2-l(3) of the City of
Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, Mello I1 Segment, for the conversion of non-prime coastal agricultural lands.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The project approval shall be conditioned as follows:
-Temporary habitat protection fencing shall be installed to protect the SMC habitat during grading and construction.
A sturdy chain-lmk fence shall be placed between the habitat and the bottom of the eastern slope. The lower four
feet of the fence shall be blocked with % inch or thicker plywood sheeting to prevent materials fiom spilling down
the slope into the habitat area. A City-approved biologist shall establish the limits of the SMC habitat in the field
prior to grading and the biologist shall verify in writing that the habitat protection fence has been appropriately
placed and is adequately functioning during site grading.
-Once grading and construction is completed, the temporary fence shall be removed and a permanent fence, to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director, shall be placed at the top of slope or in an approved location above the
sensitive habitat.
-The landscape plan shall utilize only indigenous, native species on the reconstructed eastern slope in order to
prevent invasivelnoxious species from invading the sensitive habitat. All project landscaping west of the eastern
slope area shall be filly compatible with native chaparral vegetation. No invasiveinoxious species shall be allowed
withn the project’s plant palette. The landscape plan plant palette shall be reviewed by the project biologist and the
project biologist shall certify in writing, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, that the plant palette is
appropriate and meets this standard prior to approval of the landscape plan by the City.
-All project lighting shall be directed away from and shall be shielded from the eastern slope area to prevent light
pollution on the sensitive habitat.
-Surface drainage from development-related hardscape surfaces shall be processed onsite, and no discharge of
materials (other than clean water) shall be directed into the sensitive habitat area.
-Construction noise that could affect migratory songbirds and other species associated with the sensitive habitat area
shall be avoided. In order to ensure compliance, grading shall be avoided during the bird-breeding season, defined
as between 1 March and 15 August of each year. This restriction can be waived by the City of Carlsbad, with
concurrence from the Wildlife Agencies (USF&W, CDF&G), upon completion of a nesting bird survey. If a nesting
bird survey is not completed, or if the survey is positive, “presence” will be assumed, and appropriate noise
restrictions or seasonal restrictions shall be required.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The project approval shall be conditioned as follows:
-The eastem slope shall be removed and reconstructed as a properly compacted fill slope in accordance with the
requirements outlined within the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report (Vinje & Middleton Engineering,
Inc., May 22, 2003). All other geotechnical mitigation measures identified in the Report shall be incorporated into
the final, approved project design.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The project approval shall be conditioned as follows:
-The pesticide-impacted areas identified in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Vinje & Middleton
Engineering, Inc., May 14, 2003) shall be excavated to a depth of one foot below the surface and be incorporated
into the fill material utilized as a part of the re-compaction of the eastern slope of the project site. Burial and
placement of the approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil should be placed a minimum of 5 feet below planned
utility trenches, five feet inside of the proposed face of slope, and ten feet below the surface to elinunate any
21 Rev. 07103102
potential for human exposure. A qualified engineering professional shall be present upon removal of pesticide-
impacted soil to collect two representative soil samples for laboratory analysis to confirm adequate removal of
contaminated soil. -
NOISE
The project approval shall be conditioned as follows:
-The project shall complete an interior noise analysis, compliant with the CCR, Title 24, Noise Insulation Standards,
prior to the issuance of building permits for future homes to demonstrate that the proposed architectural design
would limit interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL or less.
-Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the developer shall prepax-e and record a notice that this property may be
subject to noise impacts from Poinsettia Lane, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and City
Attorney.
-Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the developer shall prepare and record a notice that this property is
subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the
approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney.
22 Rev. 07103102 36
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR
WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. ?Ldc/- J4,GaZfz- /A&&,-. 1.22../4Z*+~
~w&&&y JALJ*ZP n
\C/J 7/d y
6ate ' Signature
23 Rev. Q7IQ3102 37
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 1 of I
a,
J
v) m a,
S 0
m m
L
I
.- .cI .- c1 .- I
L
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 2 of 2
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 3 of 3
0 S
S 8 m
.-
- a
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 4 of 4
II
a
S S m
r
i
m
C C
E
?
I
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 5 of 5
cn
S S m
r
i
L P a,
In c 0
In
- n
a
E
m- c m a -
t 0
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. 5719
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 CHANGE THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4 DU/AC)
TO RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4
DU/AC) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) ON A 5.64 ACRE SITE
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BLACK
RAIL ROAD, SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: GPA 04- 13
WHEREAS, Noboru & Evelyn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata,
“Developer/Owner,” has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property
described as
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, TlZS, R4W, SBBM, 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 04-13” dated September 1, 2004, attached hereto and
on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION -
GPA 04-13 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 1st day of September 2004,
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.
$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
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.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - GPA 04-13, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The proposed change in General Plan land use designation from Residential Low-
Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 ddac) to Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4
ddac) and Open Space (OS) is consistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal
Program, the Zoning Ordinance, the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203), and the
existing surrounding residential subdivisions in that the proposed designations of
(RLM) and (OS) reflect the boundaries of the area proposed for development of
single-family homes (Lots 1 - 16) at a density of 3.0 dwelling units per acre and the
areas of steep slopes and sensitive habitat (Lots 17 and 18) to be preserved as open
space. The proposed (RLM) and (OS) General Plan designations would be
implemented by the One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS) zoning
designations.
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program, LCPA 03-07, and ZC 03-05
and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5718,
5720, and 5721 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. ...
...
...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 5719 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: .
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5719 -3-
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA: 04-13
draft (XI final 0
September 1,2004
EXISTING
PROPOSED
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. 5721
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LIMITED
OPEN SPACE (OS) ON A 5.64 ACRE SITE GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE EASTSIDE OF BLACK RAIL ROAD,
SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CONTROL (L-C) TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) AND
CASE NO: ZC 03-05
WHEREAS, Noboru & Evelyn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata,
“Deve1oper/0wner,” has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property
described as
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, T12S, R4W, SBBM, 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 “X” dated September 1, 2004, attached hereto and on file in the Planning Department,
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - ZC 03-05 as provided by Chapter 21.52 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 1st day of September, 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Zone Change; and
‘NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
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
SUBDIVISION based on the following findings and subject to the following
conditions:
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ZC 03-05 - TABATA RESIDENTIAL
Findings:
1. That the proposed Zone Change from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family
Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS) is consistent with the goals and policies of the
various elements of the General Plan, in that the proposed zones replace the (L-C) zone
which is intended to be an interim zone designation. The proposed (R-1) and (OS)
zones are consistent with the Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac)
and Open Space (OS) General Plan designations and the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP
203) which was earlier found to be consistent with the General Plan.
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 zone designations shown on Exhibit “ZC 03-05” attached hereto,
implements the General Plan Land Use designations of RLM and OS.
3. That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity and general
welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that residential and open
space uses allowed by the proposed zone change are compatible with the adjacent
and future residential and open space uses.
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, GPA 04-13, and LCPA 03-07
and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5718,
5719, and 5720 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
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
PC RES0 NO. 5721 -2- #8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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 1st day of September 2004, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HO-R
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5721 -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. 5720
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO CHANGE THE LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4 DU/AC)
TO RESIDENTIAL LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY (RLM, 0-4
DU/AC) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) AND THE LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM ZONING DESIGNATION FROM
LIMITED CONTROL (L-C) TO ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(R-1) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) ON A 5.64 ACRE SITE
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BLACK
RAIL ROAD, SOUTH OF POINSETTIA LANE IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: LCPA 03-07
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and
WHEREAS, Noboru & Evelyn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata,
“Developer/Owner,” has filed a verified application for an amendment to the Local Coastal
Program designations regarding property described as
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, T12S, R4W, SBBM, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibits “LCPA 03-07” dated September 1, 2004, attached
hereto, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8,
Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California
Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 1st day of September, 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; 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
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on July 29,
2004 and ending on September 9, 2004, staff shall present to the City Council a
summary of the comments received.
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - LCPA 03-07 based on the following findings, and subject to the following
conditions :
Findings:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements of, and is
in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all applicable policies
of the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by
this amendment, in that the proposed Local Coastal Program (RLM) and (OS) land
use designations and (R-1) and (OS) zoning designations are consistent with the
Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 ddac) and Open Space (OS) General
Plan Land Use designations, the One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS)
Zoning designations, and the Zone 20 Specific Plan (203), and the project is
required to provide drainage and erosion control measures.
2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal
Program is required to bring the property’s Local Coastal Program Land Use and
Zoning designations into consistency with the General Plan Land Use designation,
Zoning designation, and the Zone 20 Specific Plan.
3. That the project is conditioned to provide the payment of an agricultural conversion
mitigation fee which will mitigate the loss of agricultural resources by preserving or
enhancing other important coastal resources.
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, GPA 04-13, and ZC 03-05 and
PC RES0 NO. 5720 57 -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
is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5718,
,5719, and 5721 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
ARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. H~LZMKLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5720 -3-
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LCPA: 03-07
draft final 0
LAND USE
September 1,2004
EXISTING
PROPOSED
Project Name: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION 1 Related Case File No(s):
ProDertvlLegal Description(s): GPA 04-131ZC 03-05/CT 03-061CDP 03-241HDP 04-
A portion ofthe southwest quarter of the southeast quarter
of Section 22, T12S, R4W, SBBM, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California
02
53
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
LCPA Map Designation Change
Property From: To :
A. 21 5-080-20 L-c R-1 &OS
B. 21 5-080-21 L-c R-I &OS
C. 215-080-28 L-c R- 1
Attach additional pages if necessary
LCPA: 03-07
Approvals
Council Approval Date:
Resolution No:
Effective Date:
Signature:
draft final 0
ZONING
September 1,2004
E
PROPOSED
:XISTING
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department
P.C. AGENDA OF: September 1,2004
EXHIBIT 5
Application complete date: April 20,2004
Project Planner: Gary T. Barberio
Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: GPA 04-13LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 -
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - Request for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan
Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Zone Change to change the
General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use designations from Residential
Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to Residential Low-Medium Density
(RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS) and to change the Citywide Zoning and
Local Coastal Program zoning designations from Limited Control (L-C) to One-
Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS), and a Tentative Tract Map,
Coastal Development Permit, and a Hillside Development Permit to demolish an
existing single-family home and subdivide and grade a 5.64 acre site into 16
residential lots and 2 open space lots on property generally located on the east
side of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane in the Mello II Segment of the
Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5718,
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5719,5720,
and 5721, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 04-13),
Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 03-07), and Zone Change (ZC 03-05), and ADOPT
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5722, 5723, and 5724, APPROVING a Tentative Tract
Map (CT 03-06), Coastal Development Permit (CDP 03-24), and mllside Development Permit
(HDP 04-02), based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
The proposed project is to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and grade the
5.64 acre site into 16 residential lots and 2 open space lots on property generally located on the
east side of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane, and immediately adjacent to the Twin
“D” Reservoir site. The 16 single-family lots range in size from 8,811 square feet to 11,911
square feet (10,506 square foot average) and the 2 open space lots are 24,396 square feet (Lot
17) and 1,838.65 square feet (Lot 18) in size. The two open space lots reflect the boundaries of
the areas of steep slopes (Lot 17) and sensitive southern maritime chaparral habitat (Lot 18) to be
preserved and maintained as open space. The density of the proposed single-family subdivision
is 3.0 du/ac. The applicant is requesting approval to purchase 3.0 affordable housing credits in
the Villa Loma housing project to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement. The
project requires a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Local Coastal Program Amendment
GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24KDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
(LCPA), and a Zone Change (ZC) to change the General Plan and Local Coastal Program land
use designations on the property from Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to
Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS) and to change the
Citywide Zoning and Local Coastal Program zoning designations on the property from Limited
Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS). The project also requires
a Tentative Tract Map (CT), Coastal Development Permit (CDP), and Hillside Development
Permit (HDP). The GPA, LCPA and the ZC require the approval of the City Council and the
California Coastal Commission. The approval of the CT, CDP, and HDP are final at the
Planning Commission. The project is not located within the Appeal Jurisdiction of the Local
Coastal Zone, and the Planning Commission’s decision on the CDP is not appealable to the
California Coastal Commission. The project is located in the Zone 20 Specific Plan area (SP
203) and the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The 5.64-acre project site is located within the Zone 20 Specific Plan area and Local Facilities
Management Zone 20. The site is located on the east side of Black Rail Road, south of
Poinsettia Lane, and immediately adjacent to the Twin “D” Reservoir site. The site is bordered
by the Twin “D” Reservoir site to the north, single-family residential to the south, habitat
preserved as open space to the east, and single-family residential to the west. Topographically
the site rises gently to the east from Black Rail Road (270 ft above msl) to about the center of the
property (280 ft above msl) and then falls rapidly to the eastern property line (220 ft above msl).
The far eastern portion of the site contains a manufactured steep slope of greater than 40% slope
gradient. This steep slope was artificially created over time by ongoing agricultural operations
on the site. The site is currently developed with one single-family home and an agricultural field
crop operation with a roadside sales stand.
At the bottom of the steep slope located in the far eastern portion of the site is a small area of
southern maritime chaparral habitat (1,838.65 square feet; 0.042 acres). This small area is
considered a “dual criteria” slope area (steep slopes with sensitive habitat) and, as such, is being
preserved in its entirety and will be biologically maintained, consistent with the City’s draft
Habitat Management Plan.
Grading for the project will require 15,900 cubic yards of cut, 2,700 cubic yards of fill, and
13,200 cubic yards of export. In addition, the project grading includes 17,500 cubic yards of
over-excavation and remedial grading, which is necessary to remove, reconstruct, and properly
compact the existing manufactured steep slope in the eastern portion of the site. This steep slope
was artificially created over time by ongoing agricultural operations and is unstable in its present
condition. Overall, the project grading follows the natural slope of the site, respects adjacent
residential project pad grades, incorporates contour grading and variable slope gradients into the
reconstructed eastern slope bank, and avoids all sensitive habitat.
The project site is located within Site I11 of the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program.
The proposed GPA,.LCPA, and ZC are necessary to change the land use designations on the
property from Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to Residential Low-Medium
Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS) and to change the Zoning designations on the
property from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-1) and Open Space (OS).
GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
All 16 residential lots are substantially greater than 7,500 square feet, and range in size from
8,811 square feet to 11,911 square feet (10,506 square foot average). Access to the project site is
from Black Rail Road via a new cul-de-sac public street designed to meet the City’s Livable
Streets standards. The 2 open space lots (Lots 17 and 18) reflect the boundaries of the steep
slopes and southern maritime chaparral habitat respectively.
IV. ANALYSIS
The project is
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
z mbject to the following plans, ordinances and standards:
Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS)
General Plan Land Use Designations;
R-1 One-Family Residential Zone and OS Open Space Zone (CMC Chapters
21.10 and 21.33);
Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203);
Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program, the Coastal Agricultural Overlay
Zone (CMC Chapter 21.202) and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone
(CMC Chapter 21.203);
Hillside Development Regulations (CMC Chapter 21.95);
Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20);
Inclusionary Housing (CMC Chapter 21.85); and
Growth Management Regulations (Local Facilities Management Zone 20).
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The project’s compliance with each of
the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below.
A. General Plan - RLM and OS Land Use Designations
The current General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is RLM (0-4 ddac). With the
approval of this project, the land use designations on the property will be RLM (0-4 ddac) and
OS. The surrounding properties in the Zone 20 Specific Plan area (SP 203) have a General Plan
Land Use designation of RLM (0-4 du/ac). These designations allow for single-family
residential development at a range of 0-4 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and open space, which
includes parks, constrained land, and natural resource areas. The RLM designation has a Growth
Control Point of 3.2 du/ac. The density of the proposed single-family subdivision is 3.0 du/ac.
The proposed density of the project is slightly below the Growth Management Control Point (3.2
du/ac) used for the purpose of calculating the City’s compliance with Government Code Section
65584. The Growth Management Control Point of 3.2 du/ac permits 17 residential lots on the
5.33 net acre site, and the project proposes 16 residential lots. However, consistent with
Program 3.8 of the City’s certified Housing Element, all of the dwelling units, which were
anticipated toward achieving the City’s share of the regional housing need that are not utilized by
developers in approved projects, are deposited into the City’s Excess Dwelling Unit Bank.
These excess dwelling units are available for allocation to other projects. Accordingly, there is
no net loss of residential unit capacity and there are adequate properties identified in the Housing
57
GPA 04-13LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
IMPROVEMENTS
16 single-family lots at 3.0
ddac and 2 open space lots
for steep slopes and sensitive
habitat.
Page 4
Yes
Element allowing residential development with a unit capacity, including second dwelling units,
adequate to satisfy the City’s share of the regional housing need.
hydrant.
Project will conform to all
The project complies with all elements of the General Plan as illustrated in Table A below:
Yes
ELEMENT
Land Use
Housing
Public Safety
Open Space &
Conservation
Noise
Circulation
PROPOSED USES & I COMPLY? USE, CLASSIFICATION,
GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR
PROGRAM
Site is designated for
Residential Low-Medium
Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) with
a Growth Control Point of 3.2
ddac and Open Space.
Provision of affordable
housing.
To require a minimum fire flow
of water for fire protection.
Utilize Best Management
Practices for control of storm
water and to protect water
quality. Preserve of natural
resources as Open Space.
Residential exterior noise
standard of 60 CNEL and
interior noise standard of 45
CNEL.
~~~~~~~ ~~~ Require new development to
construct roadway
improvements needed to serve
proposed development.
The purchase of 3.0
affordable housing credits in
Villa Loma.
The project includes a fire
Yes
Yes
NPDES requirements. Project
preserves steep slopes and
sensitive habitat as open
space.
Project is conditioned to
mitigate noise and disclose
noise generated by Poinsettia
Lane and Palomar Airport.
Yes
Project will provide roadway
improvements along Black
Rail Road and a new cul-de-
sac public street designed to
meet the City’s Livable
Streets standards.
Yes
B. R-1 One-Family Residential Zone and OS Open Space Zone Regulations
The project site, part of a County island annexed in 1987, is currently zoned Limited Control (L-
C). The L-C zone designation is given to annexed properties and is an interim zone for areas
where plans for development have not been formalized. Proposed as part of the project is a zone
change from L-C to R-1 and OS. This will result in the zoning for the site being consistent with
the General Plan Land Use designations of RLM and OS. The proposed zones are also
compatible with the existing surrounding residentially zoned properties and probable future
residential zones of the adjacent R-1, R-1-Q, and L-C zoned properties.
GPA 04-13lLCPA 03-07IZC 03-05/CT 03-06ICDP 03-24KDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
Standard
Min. Lot Size:
R-1: 7,500 Sq. ft.
upon proposed use.
Min. Lot Width:
R-1: 60 Feet
OS: No standard.
OS: No minimum. Dependent
The proposed project meets or exceeds all applicable requirements of the R-1 and OS Zones as
demonstrated in Table B below.
Proposed Compliance
R-1: Lots 1 - 16 - 8,811 sq. ft. min. to
11,911 sq. ft. max. (10,506 sq. ft. avg.)
1,838.65 sq. ft.
R-1: 60 foot minimum Yes
Yes
OS: Lot 17 - 24,396 Sq. ft.; Lot 18 -
Required Zoning
Local Coastal Program
Grading Requirements
LCP Agricultural Conversion
C. Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
R-1 and OS
Grading prohibited between
Oct. 1 and April 1
Three conversion options
R-1 and OS
Grading limitation included as
a condition of approval
Payment of Agricultural
The project is within an area subject to the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203). SP 203 provides a
framework for the development of the vacant properties within Zone 20 to ensure the logical and
efficient provision of public facilities and community amenities for the future residents of Zone
20. The project complies with the following requirements of the Specific Plan as demonstrated
in Table C below.
Dedications
Table C: ZONE 20 SPECIFIC PLAN REQUIREMENTS
STANDARD I REQUIRED I PROPOSED
permitted Conversion Mitigation Fee
All required land or easements
shall be dedicated to the City
Street right-of-way and
easement dedications
DroDosed
~~ Affordable Housing 15% of the units must be
provided as affordable units
Project will purchase 3.0
affordable housing credits in
the Villa Loma project
RV parking 25% of lots with adequate
sideyards to accommodate RV
parking
All 16 residential lots could
accommodate RV parking in
the sideyard (to be determined
with subsequent approval of
single-family homes)
D. Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program, the Coastal Agricultural Overlay
Zone, and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone
The project site is located within Site I11 of the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program.
Development of the project site is also subject to, and consistent with, the requirements of the
Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone. Approval
GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
Pane 6
.. .
of a CDP is required for the project. One of the primary requirements of the applicable coastal
regulations pertains to the conversion of agricultural land to urban use. The project has been
conditioned to ensure the payment of an agricultural conversion mitigation fee, which will
mitigate the loss of agricultural resources by preserving or enhancing other important coastal
resources.
All applicable coastal zone gradmg restrictions have been designed into the project or are
proposed as conditions of approval for the project, and include adherence to the City’s Master
Drainage and Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Grading Ordinance and restricting
grading between October 1 and April 1 of each year. The project site does contain a small area
of southern maritime chaparral (1,838.65 square feet; 0.042 acres). This small area is considered
a “dual criteria” slope area (steep slopes with sensitive habitat) and, as such, is being preserved
in its entirety as a deed-restricted open space lot which will be biologically maintained,
consistent with the City’s draft Habitat Management Plan. In addition, the project grading
includes 17,500 cubic yards of over-excavation and remedial grading, which is necessary to
remove, reconstruct, and properly compact the existing manufactured steep slope in the eastern
portion of the site. This steep slope was artificially created over time by ongoing agricultural
operations and is unstable in its present condition. Overall, the project grading follows the
natural slope of the site, respects adjacent residential project pad grades, incorporates contour
grading and variable slope gradients into the reconstructed eastern slope bank, and avoids all
sensitive habitat.
The development does not obstruct views of the coastline as seen from public lands or from the
public right-of-way. No part of the project site is located within the 100-year floodplain.
The proposed LCPA is necessary to change the LCP land use designation on the property from
RLM (0-4 du/ac) to RLM (0-4 du/ac) and OS and to change the LCP zoning designation on the
property from L-C to R-1 and OS. These proposed Local Coastal Program land use and zoning
changes are consistent with the project’s proposed General Plan Land Use and Citywide Zoning
designation changes.
E, Hillside Development Regulations
The project site has an elevation grade change greater than 15 feet and slopes greater than 15%
and therefore requires an HDP. Hillside conditions have been properly identified on the
constraints map which show existing and proposed conditions and slope percentages.
Undevelopable areas of the project, i.e., slopes over 40%, have been properly identified and are
within proposed open space Lots 17 and 18. The site contains a small area of “dual criteria”
slopes (1,838.65 square feet; 0.042 acres), which are defined as slopes greater than 25%
possessing endangered species and/or coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities within
the coastal zone. None of the dual criteria slopes will be impacted by the development proposal
and are being preserved in their entirety as a deed-restricted open space lot (Lot 18) which will
be biologically maintained, consistent with the City’s draft Habitat Management Plan. The
portion of the site proposed for development contains slopes with a gradient of 15% or less. This
slope area is considered developable per the Hillside Ordinance and Coastal Resource Protection
Overlay Zone.
GPA 04-13LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
Page 7
Grading for the project will require 15,900 cubic yards of cut, 2,700 cubic yards of fill, and
13,200 cubic yards of export. In addition, the project grading includes 17,500 cubic yards of
over-excavation and remedial grading, which is necessary to remove, reconstruct, and properly
compact the existing manufactured steep slope in the eastern portion of the site. This steep slope
was artificially created over time by ongoing agricultural operations and is unstable in its present
condition.
The development complies with the Hillside Ordinance and Guidelines by: grading within the
acceptable quantity range (less than 8,000 cubic yarddacre) with 6,866 cubic yarddacre (this
figure includes the grading quantities necessary for the remedial grading); no manufactured
slopes over 40 feet in height are being created as a result of the grading scheme; and all
manufactured slopes will be landscaped in accordance with the City’s Landscape Guidelines
Manual. Overall, the project grading follows the natural slope of the site, respects adjacent
residential project pad grades, minimizes grading quantities, incorporates contour grading and
variable slope gradients into the reconstructed eastern slope bank, and avoids all sensitive
habitat.
F. Subdivision Ordinance
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed project and has concluded that the
subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s
Subdivision Ordinance. All major subdivision design criteria have been complied with including
the minimum lot depth of 90 feet, provision of public access, required street frontage, and
minimum lot area.
The project is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan and Title 21. It
is also compatible with surrounding land uses. The proposed R-1 Zone requires a minimum
7,500 square foot lot size. Each of the proposed lots exceeds the minimum requirement.
The developer will be required to offer various dedications (e.g., drainage and sewer easements,
street right-of-way) and will be required to install street and utility improvements, including but
not limited to, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, sewer facilities, drainage facilities, fire hydrants, and
street lights. Grading for the project will require 15,900 cubic yards of cut, 2,700 cubic yards of
fill, and 13,200 cubic yards of export. In addition, the project grading includes 17,500 cubic
yards of over-excavation and remedial grading, which is necessary to remove, reconstruct, and
properly compact the existing manufactured steep slope in the eastern portion of the site.
G. Inclusionary Housing
The City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 21.85) requires that a minimum of 15% of
all approved units in any qualified residential subdivision be made affordable to lower income
households. The inclusionary housing requirement for this project would be 3.0 dwelling units.
The applicant is requesting to purchase 3.0 affordable housing credits in the Villa Loma housing
project to satisfy the project’s affordable housing requirements. The City’s Housing Committee
has approved the request to purchase affordable housing credits.
GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
STANDARD
Citv Administration
H. Growth Management
IMPACTS COMPLIANCE
55.6 sa. ft. Yes
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 20 in the southwest
quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance
with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in Table D below.
Drainage
Circulation
Table D: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE
Basin D Yes
160 ADT Yes
Fire
ODen &ace
I 29.7 sq. ft. I Yes I
Station No. 4 Yes
.6 acres Yes
I Yes I
Schools Carlsbad Unified Yes
4 elementary students
2 iunior high students
Sewer Collection System
3 high school students
16 EDU Yes I Water I3520GPD I Yes
The project is proposed as 16 residential lots at a density of 3.0 dwelling units per acre. The
allowable number of lots and density at the Growth Management Control Point is 17 residential
lots at a density of 3.2 dwelling units per acre.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection
Ordinance of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 19), staff has conducted an environmental
impact assessment to determine if the project could have any potentially significant impact on
the environment. The environmental impact assessment identified potentially significant impacts
to biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise, and
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the project or have been placed as
conditions of approval for the project such that all potentially significant impacts have now been
mitigated to below a level of significance. Consequently, a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper and sent to the State Clearinghouse for
public agency review. One public comment was received via email (dated July 19,2004) during
the 30-day public review and comment period (June 21, 2004 to July 21, 2004), and one
comment was received via email after the 30-day public review and comment period (dated
August 19, 2004). The email comments were received as joint comments from the “Wildlife
Agencies” (USF&W and CA DF&G) and are included in this report, along with staffs response
to the comments, as a part of Attachment 1.
GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24KDP 04-02 - TABATA RESIDEN-
TIAL SUBDIVISION
September 1,2004
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5718 (Mit. Neg. Dec.)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 57 19 (GPA)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5720 (LCPA)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 572 1 (ZC)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5722 (CT)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5723 (CDP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5724 (HDP)
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Disclosure Statement
Reduced Exhibits
Full Size Exhibits “A” - “K”, dated September 1,2004
Page 1 I I I Gary Barberio - Tabata Residential Subdivision MND Comments
From: <Benjamin-Fraterarl .fws.gov>
To: Cgbarbaci .carlsbad .ca .us>
Date: 711 9/04 12:25PM
Subject: Tabata Residential Subdivision MND Comments
Dear Mr. Barberio,
The California Department of Fish and Game (Department) and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) (collectively, "Wildlife Agencies")
have reviewed the above-referenced draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND), received by the Wildlife Agencies on June 17, 2004. The Wildlife
Agencies have some concerns regarding the potential effects of this
project on biological resources. The comments provided herein are based
on the information provided in the draft MND; the Wildlife Agencies'
knowledge of sensitive and declining vegetation communities in San Diego
County; and our participation in regional conservation planning efforts.
We offer our recommendations and comments to assist the County of San
Diego in minimizing and mitigating future project impacts to biological
resources on the Tabata Residential Subdivision site.
1. Because the project site is adjacent to an existing hardline
conservation area, development should be consistent with the adjacency
standards in the City's Multiple Habitat Conservation Program Habitat
Management Plan (HMP).
2. The project should be consistent with the HMP standards for Zone
20.
3. The breeding season for nesting birds occurs approximately February
15 through August 31, however raptors may begin breeding as early as
January. Because several bird species may nest in the habitat on the
project site, we recommend that all clearing and grubbing occur outside
the bird breeding season. If project construction is necessary during
the bird breeding season, we recommend that final MND incorporate the
following mitigation measure:
Work may occur during the bird breeding season (February 15th to August
31 th) if a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds
within three days prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nesting
birds shall be impacted by the project. If an active nest is
identified, a buffer shall be established between the construction
activities and the nest so that nesting activities are not interrupted.
The buffer shall be a minimum width of 300 feet (500 feet for raptors),
shall be delineated by temporary fencing, and shall remain in effect as
long as construction is occurring or until the nest is no longer active.
No habitat removal or any other work shall occur within the fenced nest
zone, until the young have fledged, are no longer being fed by the
parents, have left the nest, and will no longer be impacted by the
project. The mapped survey results will be submitted to the Wildlife
Agencies for review and approval prior to vegetation removal to ensure
full avoidance measures are in place.
If you have any questions concerning the contents of this email, please
contact Nancy Frost (Department) at 858-637-551 1 or Ben Frater (Service)
at 760-431 -9440.
- City of Carlsbad
August 4,2004
Ben Frater
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
601 0 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Nancy Frost
California Department of Fish L? Game
South Coast Regional Office
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123
SUBJECT: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - GPA 04-13lLCPA 03-071ZC 03-
05/CDP 03-241HDP 04-02 - DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
In response to the “Wildlife Agencies” joint email comments of July 19, 2004, on the above
referenced draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, please consider the following:
1. The project as designed and conditioned is entirely consistent with the adjacency
standards contained in the draft City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. Specifically,
the project is designed and conditioned such that the required 60-foot Fire Protection
Zones are located outside of the boundaries of both the identified southern maritime
chaparral habitat and the limits of development, erosion control and slope stabilization
measures have been incorporated, including adherence to the City’s Master Drainage
and Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Grading Ordinance and restricting
grading between October 1 and April 1 of each year, habitat protection fencing, both
temporary during grading and permanent, will be installed, and the landscape plan
utilizes only indigenous, native species in close proximity to the preserved habitat area
and the proposed plant palette must be reviewed by the project biologist and the City of
Carlsbad prior to approval of the final landscape plan.
2. The project as designed and conditioned is entirely consistent with the draft City of
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan Zone 20 Standards. Specifically, the area of
southern maritime chaparral habitat (1,838.65 square feet; 0.04 acres) located on-site is
being preserved in its entirety as a deed-restricted open space lot and will be biologically
maintained, consistent with the City’s draft Habitat Management Plan. This small area is
contiguous to a larger, existing conservation area, and, while quite small, will contribute
incrementally to the biological value of the area.
3, The project has been conditioned as follows:
“All construction activities shall be planned so that grading will not occur during the bird
breeding season (February 1 !jth to August 31 st) of each year. Work may occur during the
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
bird breeding season if a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds within
three days prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nesting birds will be impacted by
the work. If an active nest is identified, a buffer shall be established between the
construction activities and the nest so that nesting activities are not interrupted. The
buffer distance shall be as recommended by a qualified biologist and as reviewed and
approved by the City of Carlsbad and the Wildlife Agencies, The buffer shall be
delineated by temporary fencing, and shall remain in effect as long as work is occurring
or until the nest is no longer active. No work shall occur within the fenced nest zone, until
the young have fledged, are no longer being fed by the parents, have left the nest, and
will no longer be impacted by the project. The mapped survey results and the
recommended buffer distances will be submitted to the City of Carlsbad and the Wildlife
Agencies for review and approval prior to any work to ensure full avoidance measures
are in place.”
Should you have any questions regarding these responses to your joint email comments on the
draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tabata Residential Subdivision, please do not
hesitate to contact me at (760) 602-4606.
‘ GARY T. BARBER10
Principal Planner
GTB:bd
~- Gary Barberio - Tabata Residential Subdivision mitigated negative declaration Page I ~
From: <Benjamin-Frater@rl .fws.gov>
To: <gbarb@ci.carlsbad.ca.us>
Date: 8/19/04 3:44PM
Subject: Tabata Residential Subdivision mitigated negative declaration
Dear Mr. Barberio,
Thank you for responding to our July 19, 2004, email comments on the
Tabata Residential Subdivision mitigated negative declaration (MND).
Response 3 says that the project has been conditioned as follows: "All
construction activities shall be planned so that grading will not occur
during the bird breeding season (February 15th to August 31 st) of each
year." However, response 1 indicates that grading will be restricted to
October 1 through April 1 of each year. Please be sure that the
mitigation measures in the final MND limit grading to outside of the
bird breeding season (Le., September 1 to February 14th).
If you have any questions concerning the contents of this email, please
contact Nancy Frost (Department) at 858-637-551 1 or Ben Frater (Service)
at 760-431 -9440.
-cc: <N Frost@dfg . ca.gov>
- City of Carlsbad
August 23,2004
Ben Frater
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
601 0 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Nancy Frost
California Department of Fish & Game
South Coast Regional Office
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego CA 92123
SUBJECT: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - GPA 04-131LCPA 03-071 ZC 03-051 CDP
03-241HDP 04-02 - DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
In response to the ''Wildlife Agencies" second joint email comments of August 19, 2004, on the above
referenced draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, please consider the following clarification:
Our response to comment No. 1 of the Wildlife Agencies July 19, 2004 email specifically addressed
the issue of the project's consistency with the adjacency standards of the City of Carlsbad draft HMP.
Specifically, the identified grading restriction prohibiting grading between October I and April 1 of
each year and limiting grading to the "dry season" (April 1'' to October I") is a standard grading
ordinance and coastal zone restriction intended to reduce the potential of erosion during grading. It is
an erosion control measure that, combined with the other items listed in our previous response to
comment No. 1, will ensure compliance with the draft HMP erosion control adjacency standards.
Our response to comment No. 3 of the Wildlife Agencies July 19, 2004 email specifically addressed
the issue of project grading during the breeding season for nesting birds (February 15* to August
31"). Grading cannot occur during the bird breeding season unless a qualified biologist conducts a
survey for nesting birds and ensures that no nesting birds will be impacted by the work.
These two responses, and the conditions they refer to, are independent of each other. They do not
conflict, as the project must strictly comply with both conditions. In no case can grading occur outside
of the "dry season" (April 1" to October I") (response to comment No. 1). However, grading may
occur between April 1" and August 31" if a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds and
ensures that no nesting birds will be impacted by the work (response to comment No. 3).
I hope that this clarifies the City of Carlsbad's response to the Wildlife Agencies joint email comments
on the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tabata Residential Subdivision. Should you have
any questions regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 602-4606.
Sincerely,
Principal Planner
GTB:vd
6g
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-04/HDP 04-02
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
APPLICANT: Nobm & Evelvn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Local
Coastal Program Amendment, Zone Change Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development Permit,
and Hillside Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and
grade a 5.64 acre site into 16 residential lots and 2 open space lots on property generally located
on the east side of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane.
LEGALDESCRIPTION: A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, T12S, R4W, SBBM, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
APN: 215-080-20, -21, & -28 Acres: 5.64 Proposed No. of LotsKJnits: 16 residential; 2 OS lots
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 dulac)
Density Allowed: 3.2 du/ac
Existing Zone: Limited Control (L-C)
Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use:
Density Proposed: 3 .O du/ac
Proposed Zone: One-Family Residential IR- 1)
Zoning General Plan
Site L-c RLM
North L-C RLM
South R-1-Q RLM
East R- 1 -Q RLM
West R- 1 -Q RLM
Current Land Use
1 SFD, agricultural field crops,
roadside stand
Twin “D” Reservoir Site
Single-family homes
Single-family homes and open space
Single-family homes
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 16
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Negative Declaration, issued
0 Other,
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - GPA 04-13/LCPA 03-
07/ZC 03-05/CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/ HDP 04-02
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 20 GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: Limited Control (L-C); proposed as R-1
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Nobuni & Evelvn Tabata and Isokazu Tabata
ADDRESS: C/o Greg Harrison. P.0 Box 679, Carlsbad, CA 92008
QUANTITY OF LAND USEDEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 5.64 acres
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: ASAP
PHONE NO.: (76) 754-1900 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 215-080-20, -21, & -28
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities:
Library:
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage =
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Demand in Square Footage =
Demand in Square Footage =
Identify Drainage Basin =
Circulation: Demand in ADT =
Fire: . Served by Fire Station No. =
Open Space: Acreage Provided =
Schools:
55.6
29.7
16 EDU
.ll
10.5
Basin D
160
4
.6 acres
Carlsbad I 4 Elementary students I 2 Junior High students I 3 High School students
Sewer: Demands in EDU 16
Identify Sub Basin = 20B (BuenaNallecitos)
Water: Demand in GPD = 3520 GPD
The project is 1 dwelling unit below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
(3.2 du/ac x 5.33 acres net = 17.05 dwelling units allowed)
- City of Carlsbad .
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require
discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city
municipality, 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 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 comoration or uartnershiu, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned comoration, include the
names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.)
Person Noboru Tabata CorpPart c/o Greg Harrinuton
Title Evelyn Tataba Title
Address Isokazu Tabata Address Carlsbad, CA 92008
INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE T” 10% OF THE SHAFES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-
P.O.Box 679
2. OWNER (Not the owner’s agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of 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
comoration or Dartnershiu, 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 @/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-
owned comoration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Same CorpPart
Title Title
Address Address
Pi- np
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (76 d.ca.us @
3. NON-PROFIT 01 LNIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonixofit organization or a trust, list the
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profiflrust Non Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
-
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? 0 Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature of owner/date ,Signature of applicantldate
S// &/&3
Noboru Tabata AdeAe ufiba
Print or type name of owner Pnnt or type name of applicant
Evelyn Tabata z-dr- &A-
Isokazu Tabata &&LA& @‘/k
Signature of owner/applicant’s agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of ow:ier/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2
I I 1gij I
I
E
a r
1
E j
i E
t 2
U n 5
0 B R
I I
I
/ / I'
-
3
t
c-__ i
. I..,.,
-*-
--I
I
i ie c-__ / j , i
I
4-
i t-- ___---
aaa B aaa a
I$# ' I45 I 5:: PPP P
9
I I
83
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 DRAFT 6:!ABIT
3. GPA 04-1 3lLCPA 03-07lZC 03-05lCT 03-06lCDP 03-24lHDP 04-02 - TABATA
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION - Request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal
Program Amendment, and Zone Change to change the General Plan and Local Coastal
Program land use designations from Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac)
to Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and Open Space (OS) and to
change the Citywide Zoning and Local Coastal Program zoning designations from
Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-I) and Open Space (OS), and a
Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development Permit, and a Hillside Development Permit to
demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and grade a 5.64 acre site into 16
residential lots and 2 open space lots on property generally located on the east side of
Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal
Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
Mr. Neu introduced Item 3 and stated Principal Planner Gary Barberio would make the staff presentation.
Commissioner Cardosa stated that he lives within the 600-foot radius of the Tabata Property and will
have to remove himself from the dias.
Chairperson Whitton opened the Public Hearing on Item 3.
Mr. Barberio stated the project site is on the east side of Black Rail Road north of the Twin D reservoir
site. The site has existing single-family homes to the south and west. Existing uses on the site include
one single-family dwelling, an agricultural field operation and a roadside agricultural stand. This project is
a subdivision of a 5.64-acre site which does not involve architecture or homes at this point in time. The
subdivision would create 16 residential lots (Lots 1 through 16) and 2 open space lots (Lots 17 and 18).
The project density is 3.0 dwelling units per acre which is just under the growth control point of 3.2
dwelling units per acre. The subdivision meets all the R-I and Open Space standards and is compliant
with the Zone 20 Specific Plan. The R-I lots (Lots 1 through 16) will be a minimum of 8,811 square feet
to a maximum of 11,911 square feet, with the average lot size being 10,506 square feet, and each lot
meets the 60 feet minimum lot width. The subdivision will be served by a new cul-de-sac public street off
of Black Rail Road, which meets the City’s Livable Streets standards. There will also be improvements to
Black Rail Road as well as the undergrounding of utilities. This project is consistent with the Coastal
Agricultural and Resource Protection Overlay Zones and has been conditioned to pay an Agricultural
Conversion Mitigation fee. There is also a restriction on wet season grading which is applicable to the
coastal zone. The project is also consistent with the City’s Master Drainage and Storm Water plan. The
Southern Maritime Chaparral habitat on the site will also be preserved. The project is consistent with the
hillside development regulations. All “dual criteria” slopes (steep slopes with habitat on them) will be
preserved. From a grading volume standpoint, approximately 6,866 cubic yards of dirt per acre will
graded, which is under the “acceptable” grading volume limit of 8,000 cubic yards per acre. There will not
be any manufactured slopes over 40 feet in height. The topography that is proposed under the grading
plan will follow the natural contours of the site and it respects adjacent grades of the residential
development to the south. Approximately 17,500 cubic yards of over-excavation and remedial grading
will need to occur on the eastern steep slope, which was artificially created over time from the previous
agricultural operation. The slope will need to be removed, reconstructed, properly compacted and will be
revegetated. The project is conditioned to purchase 3 affordable housing credits within the Villa Lorna
project.
Mr. Barberio concluded his presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Whitton asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Segall asked how many opportunities are left for developers to purchase credits in the
Villa Loma project. Mr. Barberio stated he was not sure of the exact number, but there were less than 50
credits remaining. Commissioner Segall also asked how many lots are left along Black Rail Road within
the Zone 20 Specific Plan for development. Mr. Barberio stated there are approximately 3 lots left.
Commissioner Segall inquired how the applicant planned on mitigating the views regarding the lots with
backyards facing the water towers. Mr. Barberio responded that there are 3 lots that will be most affected
which are slightly lower than the elevation of the water tanks. There will be landscaping added on this
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 Page 7
site and there is also a small area of landscaping on the City property; however, since the tanks are so
large, the lots will have the tanks in their viewshed.
Commissioner Baker asked if the wall which exists between the homes to the south of the site will be the
new property line. Mr. Barberio stated that was correct. He further stated that there would be future
opportunity to review the fencing plans once the architecture and building plans for the new homes come
forward for approval.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if the excavation process would remove the agricultural debris. Mr.
Barberio stated that the entire slope needs to be removed and replaced which will most likely include
some debris.
Chairperson Whitton asked the applicant if he wished to continue, having only 6 Commissioners present.
The applicant stated he would. Chairperson Whitton asked the applicant if he wished to make a
presentation.
Wayne Pasco, Pasco Engineering, 535 North Highway 101, Solana Beach, gave a brief presentation
regarding project.
Chairperson Whitton asked if there were any questions of staff or if anyone in the public wished to speak
on the item. Seeing none, he opened and closed the public testimony on the item.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Baker, and duly seconded, that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 571 8, recommending
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 571 9, 5720,
and 5721, recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 04-1 3),
Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 03-07), and Zone Change (ZC 03-
05), and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5722, 5723, and 5724,
approving a Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-06), Coastal Development Permit (CDP
03-24), and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 04-02), based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery complimented the owner and engineer on the design of this project. The
edge conditions on the north, south, and west meet the topography and are not necessarily changing the
landform. He stated how the Planning Commission saw a project similar to this one about a year and a
half ago, which was just a little south of this project site. When the architecture for the project came in
after the map, existing homeowners to the north wondered why the grades where being raised 20 to 30
feet higher. In this particular case, he thinks the owner and engineer have done a great job in the grading
design. They are not trying to force the creation of views for future homes by raising pad elevations and
the remedial situation with the eastern slope needs correcting. Commissioner Montgomery reiterated
how the owner and engineer did a great job in designing the grading for the project.
Commissioner Heineman concurred with his fellow Commissioner. He stated that the applicant did a
remarkable job of matching-up the elevations of the existing lots with the proposed new lots. It makes a
huge difference in our approach to the project.
VOTE: 6-0
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, Heineman,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Cardosa
Montgomery and Segall
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: April 20, 2004
Request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Zone Change to change the General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use designations from Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) to
Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 dulac) and Open Space (OS) and to change the Citywide Zoning and Local Coastal Program zoning designations from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential (R-I) and Open Space (OS), and a Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development Permit, and a Hillside Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home and subdivide and grade a 5.64 acre site into 16 residential lots and 2 open space lots.
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone on the east side of Black Rail Road, south of Poinsettia Lane in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management
Zone 20.
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION :
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
21 5-080-20, 21 5-080-21, 21 5-080-28
Noboru and Evelyn Tabata and lsokazu Tabata
PO Box 679 Carlsbad CA 92008
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on October 19, 2004 at 6:OO p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after October
15, 2004.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Gary T. Barberio at the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 530 p.m., Friday 8:OO a.m. to 500 p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008, (760) 602-4606.
APPEALS
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and/or Zone Change, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and/or Zone Change in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, prior to the public hearing.
Coastal Commission Appealable Project: This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (IO) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, California 921 08-4402.
CASE FILE: GPA 04-1 3lLCPA 03-07EC 03-05lCT 03-06/CDP 03-24IHDP 04-02
CASE NAME: TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
PUBLISH: October 8, 2004
SITE
TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
GPA 04-1 3/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05/
CT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 & 2011 C.C.P.)
Those persons wishing to speak on this pro osal are cordially invited to attend the ublic hearin o ies of the a enda bill will be availahe on and a?te!&tober 15, 2804. If you have any questions. please call Gar T. Barberlo in the Planning Department at (76J; 6 0 2 - 4 6 0 6
If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaratlon and Miti ation Monitorlng and Re orting Program GeneralsIan Amendment. Local Eoastal Program Amendment and/or the Zone Change in court you may be limiked to raising on1 those issues ou o someone else raised at the pubic heartng descrged ir: this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad Cit Clerks Office 1200 Carlsbad VtI- lage Drive, CarlsbadlCA 92008. at br prior tothe public hearing.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter.
printer of
I am the principal clerk of
North County Times
This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of San Diego,
State of California, for the City of Oceanside and
the City of Escondido, Court Decree number
171349, for the County of San Diego, that the
notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
the following dates, to-wit:
October OSth, 2004
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
the
Proof of Publication of
Dated at SAN MARCOS California
This 8th Day of October, 2004
CASE FILE GPA 04-13LCPA 03-07iZC 03-05
CASE NAME TABATA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
Signature
Jane Olson
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
a c
Use template for 5160@
CARLSBAD UNlF SCHOOL DlST
6225 EL CAMlNO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AVE
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054 VISTA CA 92085
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE STE 100
SAN DIEGO CA 92123 9174 SKY PARK CT
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SANDIEGO CA 92123
U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009 7575 METROPOLITAN DR
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
NOBORU & EVELYN TABATA &
ISOKAZU TABATA
PO BOX 679
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
RECREATION ADMIN
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS
STREETS - OAK
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
1.P. U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
ATTN TED ANASIS
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC W 0 RKWENG IN EERl NG
DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER GARY BARBER10
CLYDE WICKHAM
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS
WATER - BILL PLUMMER
A SMITH
6619 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
A PIPER
1660 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
C JONES
1643 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
D DRESSLER
1607 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
D TORRES
9234 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
D DEMORO
1640 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
D NGUYEN
6648 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
F KROELLIAN
PO BOX 9991 1
SAN DIEGO CA 92169-1911
G BOLTON
65 19 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2804
G BOLTON
6583 BLACK RAIL RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2602
G CALDWELL
158 1 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
H KURSHENBAUM
6650 CABELA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
J JAMEEL
1603 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
J D ANDREA
66 15 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
J RICHARDSON
6646 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
J BAI
1635 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
L STEPHENS
6642 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
M KARADSHEH
1672 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
M DERYCKERE
1663 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
M ABERNATHY
1655 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
N GRAUER
6607 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
S SAMSAMSHARIAT
6635 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
P DIMECH
6608 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
R BARRIOS-HAUNSCHILD
1680 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
S THOMAS
6624 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
ANDREWS
7074 LEEWARD ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
AURIGEMMA
6620 SITIO CEDFCELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3 504
COOKE
6614 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
FINK
1604 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
FORD
APT 300
12760 HIGH BLUFF DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92130-2019
HOLMSTROM
843 3RD ST
ENCINITAS CA 92024
MUROYA
PO BOX 131016
CARLSBAD CA 92013-1016
TUCKER
1593 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
MR & MRS HAMELYNCH
6645 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS RIENDEAU
661 1 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS ROBERTS
66 12 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS AXE
1628 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS HO
6650 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS CASTILLO
1652 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
MARTINEZ
16 15 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
OSGOOD
1667 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
MR & MRS MOHSENI
6549 ELEGANS PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS KAGAN
6658 CABELA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS REYNOSO
6603 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS HOLT
6641 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS SECREST
6637 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS HOMER
6608 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
MR & MRS SHIKIYA
16 12 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS MONACO
6600 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MUCK
6621 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
SASS
5680 GARLAND LN
GREENDALE WI 53129-1507
MR & MRS VODVARKA
1577 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
MR & MRS CHANDLER
1668 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
MR&MRSKAO
1620 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS WELLS
6625 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS LITTLE
1573 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
MR & MRS GANADEN
1659 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
MR & MRS LYNN
1623 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
MR & MRS POST
1636 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS STOCK
16 19 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
MR & MRS SHE1
6618 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS ERICKSON
163 1 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
MR & MRS GOLDMAN
1616 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS RYAN
6613 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
MR & MRS OSULLIVAN
6639 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
MR & MRS READ
6623 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3 504
MR & MRS THORNE
6644 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
MR & MRS HOLMES
6636 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
MR & MRS RONS
1644 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS KLARER
1673 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
MR & MRS BRYAN
1676 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
MR & MRS BILSKY
6617 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS GIRARD
16 1 1 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064
MR & MRS CARDOSA
6579 BLACK RAIL RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2602
MR & MRS WELLS
1608 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS SUNDSTROM
1632 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
MR & MRS BARBOSA
6604 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS HSIA
1656 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4065
MR & MRS MCKESSON
66 10 SITIO CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
MR & MRS SWICK
1671 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
MR & MRS HARDY
6628 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS COLLINS
158 1 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
MR & MRS MULLEN
6643 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
MR & MRS STIPE
6638 ELEGANT TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MR & MRS HOWARD
165 1 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4066
MR & MRS PECHTER
6629 SITIO SAGO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3505
MR & MRS REMSBERG
133 1 INDEPENDENCE WAY
VISTA CA 92084
MR & MRS UMMEL
6640 THRASHER PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2639
MR & MRS RHEE
1589 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3503
MR & MRS HOLSTEN
1627 CORTE ORCHIDIA
MR & MRS LEWIS
1648 CORTE ORCHIDIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4064 CARLSBAD CA 92009-4063
AVL4R4 PREMIER
APT 203
630 ALTA VISTA DR
VISTA CA 92084-5506
BLACKRAIL RIDGE
APT 312
3443 CAMIN0 DEL RIO S
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
CARLSBAD WATER DISTRIC
PUBLIC AGENCY
CRAFTSMAN CARLSBAD
APT G
11495 LINDA VISTA DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
DAYBREAK CHURCH
APT M
2270 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-1 503
MR & MRS DPAOLO
6618 SIT10 CEDRELA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3504
CANTERINA LLC
APT 200
1935 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
CARLSBAD CA 92008-65 13
RYLAND HOMES
APT 200
5740 FLEET ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008-4704
Smooth Feed SheetsTM
BROOKS
P 0 BOX 1041
CARLSBAD CA 92018-1041
JOHN BURHAM & CO
RETAIL COMM
STE 1
1901 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MAR BRISAS HOA
GRG MGMT INC
P 0 BOX 1186
CARLSBAD CA 9201 8-1 186
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
TED OWEN
5934 PRIESTLY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CALTRANS DISTRICT 11
BILL FIGGE
MAIL ST 50
P 0 BOX 85406
SAN DIEGO CA 92186-5406
STANDARD PACIFIC
GREGG LINOFF
9335 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-101
BLUE LAGOON HOA
TRANSCONTINENTAL MGMT
STE 111
3355 MISSION AV
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
RANCHO CARLSBAD HOA
RUSS KOHL
5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ANTHONY & DICKY BONS .
25709 HILLCREST AV
ESCONDIDO CA 92026-8650
REG WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD
STE 100
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
Smooth Feed SheetsTM
U S FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE
LEE ANN CARRANZA
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
RONALD M JAEGER
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK
SUPERINTENDENT
1901 SPINNAKER DR
SAN BUENA VENTURA CA 93001
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
STE 400
611 RYAN PLAZA DR
ARLINGTON TX 7601 1-4005
DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIV
P 0 BOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN WESTERN REG
PO BOX 92007
LOSANGELES CA 90009
BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY
PATRICIA W NEAL DEPUTY SEC HOUSING
STE 2450
980 NINTH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LOS ANGELES DlST ENGINEER
PO BOX 271 1
LOSANGELES CA 90053
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIR
STE 350
901 MARKETST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD &AGRICULTURE
STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
RM 100
1220 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
Smooth feed SheetsTM Use template for 5163@
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIR COORD
P 0 BOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460 1
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
RM 700
110 WESTA ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, SPR
STE J
4665 LAMPSON AVE
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90720-51 39
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION 23
DEVMT COMMISSION
BILL TRAVIS
STE 2600
50 CALIFORNIA ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 941 11-4704
U S BUREAU OF LAND MGMT
STE RM W1834
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVE
DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REG ADMIN
450 GOLDEN GATE AV
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RM 5504
1120 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
OFFICE OF PLANNING & RESEARCH
OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
PO BOX 3044
SACRAMENTO CA 9581 2-3044
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
STE 1005
100 HOW E AV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
U S BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
MID-PACIFIC REGION
Smsoth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5163@
U S FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE
2800 COTTAGE WAY
STE W-2605
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-1 888
USDA - RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPT 41 69
430 "G" ST
DAVIS CA 95616
CITY OF ENClNlTAS
COMDEV DEPT
505 S VULCAN AV
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
SANDAG-EXEC DIRECTOR
GARY GALLEGOS
STE 800
IST INT'L PLAZA 401 "B" ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
CYRIUMARY GIBSON
12142 ARGYLE DR
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702
U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
LILY ALY EA
STE 702
333 MARKET ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-2197
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BD
PO BOX 100
SACRAMENTO CA 95801
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338
CARLSBAD CA 92018-1338
LESLIE ESPOSITO
1893 AMELFI DR
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
LAKESHORE GARDENS
TOM BENSON
7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
Smooth Feed SheetsTM
LANlKAl LANE PARK
SHARP SPACE3
6550 PONTO DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
BEVERLY BLESSANT
8315 CENTURY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-
COUNTY OF SD SUPERVISOR BILL HORN
ART DANELL
RM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
S D CO PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT
JAON VOKAC
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
STE 8-5
FLOYD ASHBY
P 0 BOX 232580
ENClNlTAS CA 92023-2580
JOHN LAMB
1446 DEVLIN DR
LOSANGELES CA 90069
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
MARY GRIGGS
STE 100 S
100 HOWE AV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
PERRY A LAMB
890 MERE POINT RD
BRUNSWICK ME 04011
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
RICHARD RETECKI
STE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DALEIDONNA SCHREIBER
7163 ARGONAUTA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
Smooth Feed SheetsTM
GEORGE BOLTON
6583 BLACKRAIL RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SANDAG-LAND USE COMMISS
NAN VALERIO
STE 800
401 “B” STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCIES
STE 1311
1416 9TH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
LENNAR HOMES
CLEMENS LARRY
STE 300
1525 FARADAY AV
CARLSBAD CA 92008-7319
BATIQUITOS LAGOON FOUNDATION
JOHN BURNS
P 0 BOX 130491
CARLSBAD CA 92009-
TabataResidential SubdivisionGPA 04-13/LCPA 03-07/ZC 03-05
Location MapPOINSETTIA LNBLACK RAIL RD SITECORTEORCHIDIASONGBIRD AVEMARITIME DRAMBROSIA L N
SITIO CEDRELLASITIO SAGODOCENA RDFISHERMANDRCABELA PLTwin “D”Reservoir
POINSETTIA LNBLACK RAIL RD
Looking North
Looking Southeast
Looking East
Looking West
Planning CommissionFinal ActionsCT 03-06/CDP 03-24/HDP 04-02•16 single family residential lots (1-16)–8,811 sq. ft. min.; 11,911 sq. ft. max.; 10,506 sq. ft. avg.•2 open space lots (17 & 18)–Lot 17: 24,396 sq. ft. –steep slopes–Lot 18: 1,838.65 sq. ft. –Southern Maritime Chaparral
City Council Legislative Actions•GPA: RLM (0-4 du/ac) to RLM & OS•LCPA Land Use: RLM (0-4 du/ac) to RLM & OS•LCPA Zoning: Limited Control (L-C) to R-1 & OS•ZC: Limited Control (L-C) to R-1 & OS
Inclusionary Housing•Purchase of 3 affordable housing credits within the Villa Loma project
Mitigated Negative Declaration/ Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program•Agricultural resources•Biological resources•Geology and soils•Hazardous materials•Noise
Recommendation•That the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve GPA 04-13, LCPA 03-07 and ZC 03-05