Loading...
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