The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-02-28; City Council; 20821; RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL AB# 20.821 RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 DEPT. DIRECTOR^ MTG. 2/28/12 RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 CITY ATTORNEY DEPT. CED RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 CITY MANAGER / JL/- RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. That the City Council hold a public hearing and: a. INTRODUCE Ordinance No. cs-i73 APPROVING a Zone Change to Prime Arterial on a 0.696 acre annexed road right-of-way; and ADOPT City Council Resolution No. 7ni7-n44 Negative Declaration ND 10-807, prepared and ADOPTING THE FINDINGS that the Final by the City of San Marcos, is approved adequate for the RSF Boundary Adjustment project; and c. ADOPT City Council Resolutions No. 2012-045 . 2012-046 and 2012-047 APPROVING General Plan Amendment (GPA 11-03), Annexation/Detachment of property (ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01), and a Tax Exchange Agreement, per Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99, for the RSF Boundary Adjustment project. ITEM EXPLANATION: In 2003 the cities of San Marcos and Carisbad entered into an agreement (City Council Resolution No. 2003-305) for the adjustment of the common city boundary to address the remnant right-of-way land for each city that resulted from the realigning and widening of an approximate 2.3 mile section of Rancho Santa Fe Road from north of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. The adjustment is proposed so the boundary reflects the street improvements. To complete local action on the boundary adjustment, the City Council must take the following actions: 1) Approve General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations for land being annexed to the city; 2) Adopt the Findings of the Final Negative Declaration (ND 10-807) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos as Lead Agency; 3) Approve the annexation and detachment of subject property; and 4) Approve a Property Tax Exchange Agreement with the City of San Marcos. One parcel is being detached from the City of San Marcos and annexed to the City of Carisbad (0.696 acre) and two parcels are being detached from the City of Carisbad (1.746 acres) and annexed to the City of San Marcos. Land coming into the City of Carisbad is presently road right-of-way, which is proposed to be designated as Prime Arterial per the city's Circulation Element of the General Plan. The parcel is proposed to have a Zoning designation (pre-zone) of Arterial Roadway. Land being detached to the City of San Marcos is both road right-of-way within the final alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road (Parcel "A") and potentially developable land (Parcel "B"); the latter could potentially be used by adjacent privately-owned lots for landscaping and parking (see Exhibit "10"). On July 6, 2011, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the RSF Boundary Adjustment project. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval ofthe project as follows: DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Pam Drew 760-602-4644 pam.drew(5^carisbadca.qov FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY. COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED X CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC • DENIED CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN • CONTINUED • RETURNED TO STAFF • WITHDRAWN • OTHER-SEE MINUTES • AMENDED • Page 2 Project Applications Planning Commission Action To be revievt^ed - final at City Council Negative Declaration Recommend Adoption X General Plan Amendment GPA 11-03 Recommend Approval X Zone Change ZC 11-02 Recommend Approval X Annexation/Detachment ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 Recommend Approval X Once the City Council has approved the above-described items, City of San Marcos staff, acting as the lead agency per the 2003 agreement, will file the boundary adjustment application with the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (SDLAFCO) for their review and final approval. The San Marcos City Council adopted their city required resolutions in April 2011. The prezone and General Plan designations will apply to the property, and become effective, with the final boundary adjustment approved by SDLAFCO. FISCAL IMPACT: The parcels are currently designated as roadway right-of-way. According to the County of San Diego Tax Assessor's Office these parcels have no tax assessment value as shown on Exhibit "A" attached to the City Council Resolution for the Tax Exchange Agreement. As such, there is no gain or loss to the city's property tax revenue. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: City of San Marcos staff conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. The assessment determined the project does not have any potentially significant impacts. The draft Negative Declaration (ND) was circulated for a 21-day public review period from December 20, 2010 to January 10, 2011. The final ND (ND 10-807), dated January 26, 2011, was approved by the City of San Marcos at its April 12, 2011 City Council meeting (Resolution No. 2011-7473 and Ordinance No. 2011- 1346). City of Carisbad staff has determined that the ND is adequate and that the project would not have a potentially significant effect on the environment. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Ordinance No. CS-173 (ZC) 2. City Council Resolution No. 2012-044(ND) 3. City Council Resolution No. 2012-045(GPA) 4. City Council Resolution No. 2012-046 (ANX/DTCH) 5. City Council Resolution No. 2012-047 (Tax Exchange Agreement for RSF Boundary Adjustment) 6. City Council Resolution No. 2003-305 with Attachments 7. Location Map 8. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6783, 6784, 6785 and 6786, dated July 6, 2011 9. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 6, 2011 10. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 6, 2011 11. Reduced Exhibit. '2^ 1 ORDINANCE NO. CS-173 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 21.050.030 3 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A ZONE CHANGE (PRE- 4 ZONE), ZC 11-02, OF ARTERIAL ROADWAY ON A 0.696 ACRE OF ANNEXED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY GENERALLY LOCATED 5 ON THE EAST SIDE OF RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND MELROSE 6 DRIVE, AND NORTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11 7 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASE NO.: ZC 11-02 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 2Q and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council considered all 2j factors relating to ZC 11-02 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT. 22 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does 23 ordain as follows: 24 SECTION I: That Section 21.050.03 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, being the 25 zoning map, is amended as shown on the map marked Exhibit "ZC 11-02," dated July 6, 2011 25 attached hereto and made a part thereof. 27 28 WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 28th dav of Februarv 2012, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change (pre-zone) as shown on Exhibit "ZC 11-02 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT," dated July 6, 2011, attached hereto and made a part hereof and as legally described as Parcel "C" in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the city may prezone unincorporated territory outside its limits for the purpose of determining zoning that will apply to such property, and become effective, with the final boundary adjustment approved by the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (SDLAFCO), per Government Code Section 65859; and Exhibit "ZC 11-02" July 6, 2011 ZC 11-02 RSF Boundary Adjustment o / % / ^ COSTA MEADOWS DR Annex to Carlsbad Detach to San Marcos EXISTING IO; ilUj !§ Of .'03 Prime Arterial u ^ Proposed poundar^- or ^p. COSTA MEADOWS DR Annex to Carlsbad Detach to San Marcos PROPOSED Related Case File No(s): GPA 11-03 / ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01 Zoning Designation Changes** Property From: To: A. Right-of-way Right-of-way (Currently in San Marcos) Arterial Roadway B. C. Applies to property to be annexed only. Co The City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: EXHIBIT 2 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-044 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FINDINGS THAT 3 THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND 10-807 (ND) APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS ADEQUATELY 4 ANALYZES THE ANNEXATION TO CARLSBAD OF 0.696 ACRE FROM THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, AND THE DETACHMENT 5 OF 1.746 ACRES FROM CARLSBAD TO THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS TO FACILITATE A BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 6 BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES ALONG RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF ROAD ' AND MELROSE DRIVE TO SOUTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11. ^ CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASE NO: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 7 10 11 j2 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on July 6, 2011, hold a dully noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider ND 10-807, and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783, recommending adoption of the Findings that the ND prepared and adopted by the City of San Marcos is adequate; and jy WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 28th day of February 2012, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendation and heard all persons interested in or opposed to the adequacy of the ND. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of 21 Carisbad, California, as follows that: 22 1. The above recitations are true and correct. 23 2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the adoption of the Findings that the ND prepared and adopted by the City of San Marcos is adequate as 24 adopted and that the findings of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the 25 findings of the City Council. 26 ^ 3. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, "Time 2q Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: 28 1 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 2 The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of 3 Carisbad by Carisbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which 4 this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost 5 or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either 6 personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, 7 City of Carisbad, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA. 92008. /// 9 /// 10 /// 11 /// 12 /// 13 /// 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 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 City Council of the City of Carisbad on the 28*^ day of February, 2012, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: Council Members Hall, Kulchin, Blackburn, Douglas and Packard. None. ABSENT: None. MATt HALL, Mayor ATTEST: INE M. WOOD, City Clerk EXHIBIT 3 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-045 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN 3 AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN 4 DESIGNATION OF PRIME ARTERIAL ON 0.696 ACRE OF ANNEXED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY GENERALLY LOCATED ON A PORTION OF THE EAST SIDE OF RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND ^ MELROSE DRIVE, AND NORTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11 ' CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT _ CASE NO: GPA 11-03 o The City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does hereby resolve as ^ follows: 10 5 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on July 6, 2011, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the General Plan Amendment GPA 11-03, according to Exhibit "GPA 11-03" attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 6784 and incorporated herein by reference to designate as Prime Arterial a 0.696 acre of annexed road right-of-way, and the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 6784 recommending to the City Council approval of GPA 11-03; and WHEREAS, the General Plan designation will apply to the property, and become effective, with the final boundary adjustment approved by the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (SDLAFCO); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carisbad, on the 28th day of February ^ 2012, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider adoption of a General Plan Amendment GPA 11-03; 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 adoption of a General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Carisbad as follows: 1 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2 2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of a General Plan Amendment GPA 11-03 is adopted and approved, and that the findings and 3 conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6784 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions 4 of the City Council. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3. That the approval of GPA 11-03 shall not become effective until the final boundary adjustment is approved by the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (SDLAFC). 5 6 7 4. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, "Time 8 Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: 9 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 10 The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of 11 Carisbad by Carisbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which 12 this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost 13 or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either 14 personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, 15 City of Carisbad, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA. 92008. 16 /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council 2 of the City of Carisbad on the 28*^ day of February, 2012, by the following vote to wit: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 AYES: . Council Members Hall, Kulchin, Blackburn, Douglas and Packard. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. M 11 MATt HALL, Mayor ^2 ATTEST: LCjRI^AINt M. WOOD, City Clerk (SEAL) 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT 4 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-046 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ANNEXATION OF 3 0.696 ACRE TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND DETACHMENT OF 1.746 ACRES TO THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS ON 4 PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND 5 MELROSE DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11. 6 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASE NO: ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 The City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the boundary adjustment is to address the remnant right-of-way land for each city that resulted from the realigning and widening of an approximate 2.3 mile section of RSF Road, north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive, as shown and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached to Resolution No. 6786; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on July 6, 2011, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Annexation/Detachment ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 of properties, according to Exhibit "ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01" attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 6786 and incorporated herein by reference to, and the Planning Commission adopted Planning 2Q Commission Resolution No. 6786 recommending to the City Council approval of ANX 11 02/DTCH 11-01; and 22 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carisbad, on the 28th day of 23 February , 2012, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider adoption of the 24 Annexation/Detachment ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 of properties; and 25 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 25 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors 27 relating to the adoption of the Annexation/Detachment for the RSF Boundary Adjustment, 28 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City 2 of Carisbad as follows: 3 1. The above recitations are true and correct. 4 2. That it supports the City of San Marcos submitting an application on ^ behalf of both cities to process the boundary adjustment with the County of San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) pursuant to the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local ^ Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code. 7 3. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, "Time 8 Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: 9 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 10 The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of 11 Carisbad by Carisbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which 12 this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost 13 or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either 14 personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, 15 City of Carisbad, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA. 92008. 16 17 18 19 24 25 26 27 28 /// /// /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// /// /// /// -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 ofthe City Council of the City of Carisbad on the 28*^ day of February, 2012, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: Council Members Hall, Kulchin, Blackburn, Douglas and Packard. None. ABSENT: None. MATT HALL, Mayor ATTEST: RAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk (SEAL) ,.^^;y.v.SBAo"V "X" ^ EXHIBIT 5 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-047 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TAX EXCHANGE 3 AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS REGARDING THE ANNEXATION TO CARLSBAD OF 0.696 ACRE FROM THE 4 CITY OF SAN MARCOS, AND THE DETACHMENT OF 1.746 ACRES FROM CARLSBAD TO THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS TO 5 FACILITATE A BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES ALONG RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD NORTH 6 OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF ROAD AND MELROSE DRIVE TO SOUTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL 7 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11. CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 8 CASE NO: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 9 The City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: 11 WHEREAS, Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99 states that a Tax Exchange Agreement reflecting the identified tax amounts to be exchanged between the affected local governments must be adopted by both the detaching city and the annexing city; and 14 WHEREAS, the proposed "RSF Boundary Adjustment" consists of two parcels being detached from the City of San Marcos and annexed to the City of Carisbad (0.696 acre), and one parcel being detached from the City of Carisbad (1.746 acres) and annexed to the City of San Marcos, and legally described in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution No. 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part thereof by reference, the County of San Diego Tax Assessor's report has determined that the three parcels, which are roadway right-of-way without parcel numbers, have no assessment value; and WHEREAS, the City of Carisbad Finance Department has reviewed the documentation provided by the County of San Diego Tax Assessor's office and concurs with the report; and WHEREAS, the Adoption of this Resolution will constitute approval of the required Tax Exchange Agreement with the City of San Marcos. 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of 2 Carisbad, California, as follows that: 3 1. The above recitations are true and correct. 17 18 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. That it agrees with the County of San Diego Auditor's report that for the jurisdictional changes associated with the "RSF Boundary Adjustment," the annual property tax and the annual tax increment attributable to the cities from which the territories are being detached/attached have no assessed value. 7 3. That the Adoption of this Resolution will constitute approval of the required Tax Exchange Agreement with the City of San Marcos. 8 4. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, "Time 9 Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: 10 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 11 The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of 12 Carisbad by Carisbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which 13 this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost 14 or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either 1^ personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carisbad, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA 92008. /// 19 /// 20 /// /// /// /// /// /// /// n 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 City Council ofthe City of Carisbad on the 28*^ day of February, 2012, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: Council Members Hall, Kulchin, Blackburn, Douglas and Packard. None. ABSENT: None. MATT HALL, Mayor ATTEST: [^RRAI^4E M. WOOD, City Clerk (SEAL) Proposed Boundary Reorganization Between the City of Carisbad and the City of San Marcos rt A. Territory Within the City of Carisbad to be Annexed to the City of San Marcos TRA 09111 TRA 09112 TRA 09113 Annual Tax Annual Tax Annual Tax Taxina Jurisdiction Increment Factor Increment Factor Increment Factor County General 0.16762095 0.16358883 0.12487536 CSA No. 135 Regional 800 MHZ 0.00000000 0.00000000 0.00000000 San Marcos Unified School District 0.39172632 0.38227513 0.42606149 Palomar Community College 0.06721760 0.06558641 0.07296242 County Office of Education 0.02954878 0.02876977 0.03074668 Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) 0.15914189 0.15986866 0.13673141 City of Carlsbad 0.14132166 0.15750278 0.16193678 Greater San Diego County Consen/ation District 0.00008427 0.00009666 0.00000000 Vallecitos Water District 0.03948935 0.03856381 0.04259415 San Diego County Water Authority 0.00384918 0.00374795 0.00409171 Total 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 B. Territory Within the City of San Marcos to be Annexed to the City of Carisbad TRA 13066 Annual Tax Taxina Jurisdiction Increment Factor County General 0.25502925 County Library 0.04050890 CSA No. 135 Regional 800 MHZ 0.00000000 San Marcos Unified School District 0.39118852 Palomar Community College 0.06711318 County Office of Education 0.02937914 Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) 0.00000000 San Marcos Redevelopment Project No. 3 0.00000000 City of San Marcos 0.10213276 San Marcos Fire Protection District 0.06543730 Greater San Diego County Conservation District 0.00009127 Vallecitos Water District 0.04500165 San Diego County Water Authority 0.00411803 Total 1.00000000 Note: The assessed value of the properties within the proposed reorganization is zero. 9 EXHIBIT 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 RESOLUTION NO. 2003-305 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND ADJUSTMENT TO THE COMMON CITY BOUNDARY. WHEREAS, the City of San Marcos ("San Marcos") is constructing the realignment and widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road from Melrose Drive northerly into San Marcos to join the portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road currently widened to four lanes with Improved median; and WHEREAS, the City of Cartsbad ("Carisbad") is preparing to construct the Rancho Santa Fe Road North, Phase 2 project; and WHEREAS, the construction of these two road projects Is important to the traffic flow within San Marcos and Carisbad; and WHEREAS, staff from San Marcos and Carlsbad have met numerous times over the past several years to coordinate the design and construction details of the two road projects; and WHEREAS, it was found necessary for San Marcos to not construct the median improvements from Meadowlark Ranch Road to Melrose Drive to allow construction phasing traffic for the Carisbad Phase 2 project; and WHEREAS, Carlsbad will construct the median improvements for San Marcos from Meadowlark Ranch Road to Melrose Drive; and WHEREAS, San Marcos will construct portions of roadway within the City of Carisbad; and WHEREAS, an analysis of the construction cost for the portion of roadway San Marcos will construct in Carlsbad and the median work Carisbad will construct in San Marcos results in Carisbad paying San Marcos the sum of $184,000; and WHEREAS, there is a need to adjust the common city boundary between Carisbad and San Marcos along a portion of the new alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road; and WHEREAS, there is a need to establish mutual agreement on ownership and maintenance responsibility for the newly constmcted improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Coundl of the City of Carisbad, Califomia, as follows: 1. That the above 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 2. That In the best interest of cooperation between Carlsbad and San Marcos, the City Council of the City of Carisbad hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement between the City of Carisbad and the City of San Marcos for the construction of a portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road and adjustment to the common city boundary. 3. That in the attached agreement Carisbad and San Marcos mutually agree to pursue jurisdictional boundary adjustments through the San Diego County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) upon compietion of the above-described roadway improvements. The precise location of the boundary adjustment will be determined by staff from both cities and mutually agreed upon by the City Council of both cities. 4. That the Finance Director is directed to issue a check payable to the City of San Marcos in the amount of $184,000 from the CFD #2 Fund consistent with the terms of the above-described agreemenL PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carisbad City Council held on the 2nd. day of December 2003, by the following vote, to wit; AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard NOES: None ABSENT: ATTEST: INE WOOD, City Cle AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CiTY OF CARLSBAD AND THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND ADJUSTMENT TO THE COMMON CITY BOUNDARY THIS AGREEMENT, executed the day of Oec^mbf^ 2003, is by and between the CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation, ("Carlsbad"), and the CITY OF SAN MARCOS, a municipal corporation, ("San Marcos") (collectively the "Parties"). I. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Parties desire to cooperate in the design and construction of the Rancho Santa Fe Road widening and realignment projects (the "Project") within the jurisdiction of both Cities; and WHEREAS, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Melrose Drive, Melrose Drive East and Sparrow Way (the "Roads") are integral to the Circulation Element Plans for Carisbad, San Marcos and the North County Region in general; and WHEREAS, traffic impacts from development along and adjacent to the Roads within Carisbad and San Marcos will adversely impact the proper functioning and level of service of the Roads unless certain major street infrastructure improvements are installed prior to or concurrent with the needs created by said development; and WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge the importance of maintaining established minimum level of service standards on the Roads for the proper functioning of the local and regional circulation network; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to establish mutually agreed upon responsibilities for the funding, design, construction and maintenance of the Roads necessary to maintain the established minimum level of service standards on the Roads; and WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge that after construction of the Project there will exist a need to adjust the common boundary between the two Cities. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the Parties do hereby mutually and jointly agree to participate in the funding, design, construction and maintenance of the Project and to support the City boundary adjustment as follows: (1) 10/07/03 SAN MARCOS RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD PROJECT A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. The City of San Marcos Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ("San Marcos Road Project") referenced in this section is shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and is more particulariy described as follows: a. The widening and improvement of Rancho Santa Fe Road (RSF) from the future alignment of the Melrose Drive intersection northeriy to Island Drive to four-lane major arterial standards including two through lanes in each direction, bike lanesi raised landscaped median, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic signals, storm drain, water, sewer^ dry utility undergrounding, streetlights and a eight foot sound wall along the west side of the right-of-way southeriy of Meadowlark Ranch Road. b. The construction of a new intersection of RSF with Melrose Drive at the northwesterty comer of the existing La Costa Meadows Industrial Park. The intersection is to be designed with a new traffic signal system to current City of San Marcos standards for three through lanes for RSF in each direction, two left tum lanes from northbound RSF to westbound Melrose Drive, two left tum lanes from eastbound Melrose Drive to northbound Rancho Santa Fe Road, two right tum lanes from southbound RSF to westbound Melrose Drive, and two right turn lanes from eastbound Melrose Drive to southbound RSF. c. The construction of Melrose Drive East from the new RSF/Melrose Drive intersection easteriy to Sparrow Way. d. The construction of Sparrow Way from La Costa Meadows Drive to Melrose Drive East. e. The closing of the most northeriy driveway access from the La Costa Meadows Industrial Park and the construction of a new access point from Melrose Drive East approximately 600 feet east of RSF. (2) 10/07/03 f. Ail environmental mitigation measures and permits, utility and drainage improvements necessary to construct the aforementioned improvements. B. SAN MARCOS AGREES: 1. To act as the lead agency for the preparation of plans and specifications for the San Marcos Road Project, described in Section l.A. above, prior to construction, bidding the project, construction administration and inspection, and constmction of the project, act as lead agency for the purposes of CEQA. as well as act as the lead agency to ensure completion of the project pursuant to the approved plans and specifications. 2. To make the following revisions to the San Marcos Road Project: a. Delete ail median improvements, except sleeves for irrigation lines and controller wires, in the section of Rancho Santa Fe Road between Melrose Drive and Meadowlark Ranch Road. b. Constmct AC pavement and Class tl base material in iieu of the median improvements referenced in Section I.B.2.a. above. c. Not construct the top 1.5-Inch lift of Asphalt Concrete paving on the section of Rancho Santa Fe Road between Melrose Drive and Meadowlark Ranch Road. d. Delete the 24-inch Recycled Water Main, Bid Item No. 118, from the project. 3. To provide Carisbad the opportunity to review the plans and specifications on an ongoing basis as they may pertain to Carlsbad. 4. To construct and complete the improvements to the RSF/Melrose Drive intersection Melrose Drive East and Sparrow Way prior to completing the remainder of the San Marcos Project. 5. To pay any and ail constmction claims directly relating to the inability of the contractor for the Carisbad Rancho Santa Fe Road, (3) 10/07/03 7^ Phase 2 Project ("Carisbad Road Project"), described in Section II of this Agreement, to pursue his work should the improvements to the RSF/Melrose Drive intersection, Melrose Drive East and Spanrow Way not be completed and ready for traffic by the date that is eight months after the date that construction begins on the Cartsbad Road Project. 6. Upon completion of the San Marcos Road Project to operate and maintain the traffic signal at the RSF/Melrose Drive intersection. 7. Except for the sole negligent and willful misconduct of Carisbad, to bear all responsibility pursuant to Section VII of this Agreement for any liability arising out of the activities described in this Section I. 8. To accept payment from Carisbad in the amount of $184,000 as full and final payment for ali work constmcted within the existing Carisbad corporate boundary as detailed on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The amount of $184,000 includes the cost of work performed by San Marcos within the City of Carisbad current city limits, plus the cost to place asphalt paving and base material in the median area, in lieu of median improvements, in the section of Rancho Santa Fe Road from Melrose Drive to Meadowlark Ranch Road, minus the cost of the median improvements in this same section of road. CARLSBAD AGREES: 1. To review and approve the pians and specifications as they relate to Carlsbad. 2. To pay San Marcos, within 60 days of the execution of this agreement by the Parties, the sum of $184,000 as full and final payment for the cost of constmction of the portion of the RSF/Melrose Drive intersection improvements constmcted within the existing Carisbad corporate boundary as itemized on Exhibit "B", 3. To assist San Marcos in obtaining any permits needed from Carisbad. 4. To construct, as part of the Carisbad Road Project, the median curbs, median hardscape, landscape and irrigation, top asphalt pavement lift (4) 10/07/03 of 1.5-inches, and final pavement striping in the portion of the San Marcos Road Project from Melrose Drive to Meadowlark Ranch Road to conform to the design shown on the approved plans for the San Marcos Road Project. II. CARLSBAD RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD PROJECT A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. The Carisbad Road Project referenced in this section is shown on Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and is more particulariy described as follows: a. Realignment and widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road (RSF) from La Costa Avenue northeriy to Melrose Drive with construction including full width grading, prime arterial road improvements of three through lanes with bike lanes, median curbs, outside curb and gutter, sidewalk, drainage facilities and new bridges over San Marcos Creek. The project will also entail constmction of sewer, potable water and recycled water mains in association with Cartsbad Municipai Water District, Olivenhain Municipal Water District, Vallecitos Water District and Villages of La Costa. b. Realignment of Melrose Drive to connect to the new RSF/Melrose Drive intersection. Melrose Drive will be constmcted to full City of Carisbad prime arterial standards, immediately south of the Corintia Street intersection, eastbound Melrose Drive will consist of two through lanes and two right tum lanes. There will also be two left turn lanes for eastbound Melrose Drive to northbound RSF. c. Realign Corintia Street to tie into the realigned Melrose Drive. Corintia Street witi be designed and constmcted to 60-foot right-of-way collector street standards. d. To constmct the median curbs, median hardscape, landscape and irrigation, top asphalt pavement iift of 1.5-inches, and final pavement striping in the portion of the San Marcos Road Project from Melrose Drive to Meadowtari< Ranch Road to conform to the (5) 10/07/03 design shown on the approved plans for the San Marcos Road Project. B. CARLSBAD AGREES: 1. To act as the lead agency for the preparation of plans and specifications for the Cartsbad Road Project prior to constmction, bidding the project, construction administration and inspection, and constmction of the project, act as lead agency for the purposes of CEQA, as welt as act as the lead agency to ensure comptetion of the project per the approved plans and specifications. 2. To provide San Marcos the opportunity to review the plans and specifications on an ongoing basis as they may pertain to San Marcos. 3. To construct and complete the improvements to Melrose Drive and Corintia Street as a project priority for the Phase 2 portion of the Carisbad Road Project. 4. To construct, and open to traffic, the realignment of Melrose Drive and Cortinia Street prior to detouring traffic to Sparrow Way and Melrose Drive East due to the temporary closing of La Costa Meadows Drive. 5. To constmct the median curbs, median hardscape, landscape and irrigation, top asphalt pavement lift of 1.5-inches, and final pavement striping in the portion of the San Marcos Road Project from Melrose Drive to Meadowlari^ Ranch Road to conform to the design shown on the approved plans for the San Marcos Road Project. 6. Except for the sole negligent and willful misconduct of San Marcos, to bear all responsibility pursuant to Section VII of this Agreement for any liabitity arising out ofthe activities described in this Section tl. C. SAN MARCOS AGREES: 1. To review and approve the plans and specification as they relate to San Marcos. 2. To assist Carisbad in obtaining any permits needed from San Marcos. (6) 10/07/03 III. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS Carisbad and San Marcos mutually agree to pursue jurisdictional boundary adjustments through the San Diego County Locat Agency Formation Commission (i_AFCO) upon compietion of roadway improvements. The generally proposed boundary modification is as shown on Exhibit "D" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The precise tocation of the boundary adjustment witt be determined by staff from both Cities and mutually agreed upon by the City Council of both Cities. Plats and legal descriptions shall be drafted by Carisbad with the cost of this work to be shared equally by both Cities. San Marcos wiil be responsible for processing the boundary adjustment with LAFCO. Carisbad wilt provide assistance as needed by San Marcos. IV. NATtONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMiNATtON SYSTEM Being that severat storm drain systems for both City projects have origins within San Marcos and points of discharge within Carisbad, the Parties agree that each City wilt be responsible for the control of poilutants originating within their respective jurisdictional boundaries. Carisbad wilt report any measured poilutants at the discharge points of these storm drain systems to San Marcos as soon as the poitutants are detected. Once notified of pollutants in the storm drain system, San Marcos agrees to trace any detected pollutant to the point of origin and, to the degree allowed by law, rectify the problem to eliminate the potiutant source. Within 30 days of being notified of poitutants in the storm drain system, San Marcos wiil report to Carisbad on the steps taken to eliminate the poitutants, or on the progress of the pollutant elimination process. San Marcos will continue to provide reports to Carisbad on a monthly basis until the source of the pollution is eliminated. Upon elimination of the pollutant, San Marcos will notify Carisbad of the steps taken in the elimination process. V. REGIONAL FUNDING The Parties agree to actively pursue Federal, State & regional funds to assist in the construction of the Carisbad Project. VI. OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE A. ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Upon completion of all work under Sections t and ti of this Agreement, ownership and titte to materiais, equipment, and appurtenance which are installed within (7) 10/07/03 ^ Cartsbad's current rtght-of-way wili automatically be vested and maintained by Cartsbad, with the exception of the traffic signals at the intersection of RSF/Melrose Drive. Materials, equipment, and appurtenances, which are instalted within San Marcos' current right-of-way, witt automatically be vested and maintained by San Marcos. Upon LAFCO's approval of any jurisdictional boundary adjustment fc>etween Carisbad and San Marcos, the road improvements affected by the boundary adjustment shall automaticalty become vested in the ownership of, and maintained by, the respective City having jurisdiction over the improvement No further agreement wilt be necessary to transfer ownership as hereinabove stated. B. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS Traffic signal improvements at the intersection of RSF/Melrose Drive shall be owned, maintained and administered by San Marcos. The cost to maintain the traffic signat at the intersection of RSF/Meirose Drive shall be shared equally by both Cities. San Marcos wili annually provide Carisbad with a request for reimbursement of maintenance expenses. The request for reimbursement shall be accompanied by an itemized breakdown of the expenses associated with the maintenance of the traffic signal. Carisbad and San Marcos may altematively enter into a separate traffic signal maintenance agreement based on any mutually agreed upon terms. VII. LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION Pursuant to Section 895.4 of the Government Code, Carisbad and San Marcos agree that each will assume the full liability imposed upon it or any of its officers, agents, or employees for injury by a negligent or wrongfut act or omission occurring in the performance of this Agreement, and each party agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the other party for any loss, or expense that may be imposed upon such other party by virtue of Section 895.4 and 895.6 pf the Govemment Code. The indemnity provisions are not limited in any way by the extent of any policy of insurance currently in force and held by either party. All construction contracts for any project which spans the jurisdictional boundary between Carisbad and San Marcos shall include indemnity provisions and insurance provisions, whereby the contractor (8) 10/07/03 indemnifies both Carisbad and San Marcos and adds both Cities as additionat insured on its insurance Policy. Vill. NOTlFICATiONS Uniess OthenA/ise specificaily provided for in this Agreement, att notices, demands, or other communications given hereunder wilt be in writing and wiii be deemed to have been duly delivered upon personal delivery or as of the second business day after mailing by the United States mail, retum receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: If to Carisbad: City Engineer City of Cartsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Cartsbad, CA 92008 tf to San Marcos: City Engineer City of San Marcos 1 Civic Center Drive San Marcos, CA 92069-2918 IX. MODIFICATIONS This Agreement may not be modified, amended, or otherwise changed unless by an amendment, in writing, executed by the parties hereto. X. COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed by the Cities in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an originat, but ail such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instmment. XI. CHOICE OF LAW This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and venue shall be proper in the San Diego Superior Court, North County Branch. XII. SEVERABILITY If one or more clauses, sentences, paragraphs, provisions or terms of this Agreement shall be held to be unlawful, invalid, or unenforceable, it is hereby agreed by the Cities that the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby. (9) 10/07/03 3^ Xttl. HEADINGS The headings of artictes and paragraphs of this Agreement are for convenience only, and no presumption or implication of the intent of the parties as to the construction of this Agreement shall be drawn therefrom. XIV COMPLETION AGREEMENT The foregoing constitutes the full and complete agreement of the parties. There are no oral understandings or agreements not set forth in writing herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the CITY OF CARLSBAD and by the CITY OF SAN MARCOS pursuant to action taken by their respective City Councils. CITY corp MARCOS, a municipai R. W. Gittings.yCr / r>icipai corp m/^ Date: Lewis, Mayor ATTESJ: ^ Susie Vasquez, Q\^f\l\&t APPROVED AS TO FORM: By •Welen Hotmes Peak, City Attorney ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM Ron^dSlKBall, City Attorne ay Deputy City Attorney (10) 10/07/03 3\ LOCATION MA PACIFIC OCEAN PROJECT NAME: SAN MARCOS RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER 3190 ^9- EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF SAN MARCOS RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD PROJECT I. COSTS FOR PORTION OF PROJECT WITHIN CITY OF CARLSBAD ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION SAN MARCOS LOW BID CITYOFCARLSBAD ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT BID COST QTY. COST DIRECT COSTS 1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 229,594.81 $ 229,594.81 0.01 $ 2.295.95 4 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $ 242,890.00 $ 242,890.00 0.01 $ 2.426.90 5 FINAL STRIPING & SIGNING 1 LS $ 25,546.25 $ 25,546.25 0.01 $ 255.46 7 EROSION CONTROL 1 LS $ 91,613.40 $ 91,613.40 0.01 $ 916.13 28 UNCLASSIFIED FILL 106,800 LS $ 2.68 $ 286,224.00 1.068 $ 2.862.24 52 16'TYPE B-1 CURB INLET 1 EA $ 6,227.40 $ 6,227.40 0.5 $ 3.113.70 69 TYPE'D* BROW DITCH 3.360 LF $ 11.13 $ 37,386.80 345 $ 3,839.85 132 6" TYPE 'G' CURB & GUTTER 12,212 LF $ 8.03 $ 98,062.36 301 $ 2.417.03 135 PCC SIDEWALK 3,535 SF $ 2.03 $ 7,176.05 2.644 $ 5.367.32 138 PCC CURB HAMPS 14 EA $ 663.40 $ 6,287.60 1.5 $ 995.10 140 5" AC PVMT. 11.705 TON $ 44.08 $ 519.923.60 340 $ 14.996.02 141 8-CL II AB 18,347 TON $ 12.84 $ 235,575.48 756 $ 9.707.04 142 4" AC PVMT-TEMP 35 TON $ 135.89 $ 4,756.15 35 $ 4.756.15 143 6'CL 11 AB-TEMP 51 TON $ 20.44 $ 1,042.44 51 $ 1,042.44 146 MIRAFI 180N FILTER FABRIC FOR NEW STR.SECTION 45,362 SY $ 0.75 34.021.50 1,800 $ 1,350.00 148 1 1/2" AC OVERLAY 328 TON $ 52.43 $ 17,197.04 54 $ 2.831.22 149 6" TYPE'A'AC DIKE 470 LF $ 6.10 $ 2,867.00 177 $ 1,079.70 151 SURVEY MONUMENT, M-10 24 EA S 321.00 $ 7,704.00 1 $ 321.00 152 CONTINOUS BARRICADE, M-9 180 LF S 26.75 $ 4,815.00 110 $ 2,942.50 165 TRAFFIC SIGNAL. RSF/MELROSE 1 LS $ 267.376.95 $ 267.376.95 0.5 $ 133.688.48 166 2" RIGID STEEL SERVICE CONDUIT 1 LS $ 10,165.00 $ 10,165.00 0.5 $ 5.082.50 167 DUAL TYPE III TS METER PEDESTAL 1 LS $ 5,045.05 $ 5,045.05 O.S $ 2,522.53 238 HYDROSEED MIX #1 211,400 SF $ 0.05 $ 10.570.00 1,500 $ 75.00 SUBTOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 204.886.25 INDIRECT COSTS DESIGN (Melrose Drive & Dual Rt. Turns to Melrose) $ 50.000.00 CONSTRUCTION MGT. INSPECTION, MATERIALS TESTING & SURVEYING | $ 18.000.00 SUBTOTAL INDIRECT COSTSI $ 68.000.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION W/iN CARLSBAD s 272.888.25 IL COST FOR PAVING MEDIAN AREA - MELROSE TO MEADOWLARK RANCH RD. ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT BID UNIT COST COST 1 3.5' Asphalt Concrete Pavement 288 TON $44.08 $ 12.695.04 2 8" Class 2 Aggregate Base 641 TON $12.84 $ 8.230.44 TOTAL COST FOR PAVING MEDIAN (in-lieu of median) s 20,925.48 1 20.925.48 1 1 in. CONSTRUCTION BY CARLSBAD - MELROSE DRIVE TO MEADOWLARK RANCH ROAD ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION SUB-TOTAL: UNIT BID UNIT COST 1 1 COST i 1 Irrigation 1 Remote Control Valves (3/4*0 1 EA s 81.32 $ 81.32 2 Remote Control Valves (1-1/2*) 1 EA $ 176.55 $ 176.55 3 Quick Coupler Valves 1 EA $ 104.86 $ 104.86 4 Air Relief Vakes 1 EA $ 9.36 $ 9.38 5 Gate Valves 1 EA $ 69.55 $ 69.55 6 Flush Valves 3 EA $ 9.36 s 28.08 7 2-1/2" Sleeves 35 LF % 3.17 $ 110.95 8 2** Sleeves 35 LF $ 2.95 $ 103.25 9 1-1/2* Sleeves 140 LF $ 2.78 $ 388.20 10 3/4" Lateral 1,000 LF $ 1.13 s 1.130.00 11 Tree Drip Emitters 47 EA $ 41.69 $ 1.959.43 13 Irrigated Shrub Area 3.360 SF $ 5.11 $ 17.169.60 Subtotal Irrigation $ 21.332.15 Planting 1 24* Box Trees 25 EA $ 250.00 $ 6.250.00 2 15 Gallon Shrubs 51 EA $ 85.00 $ 4,335.00 3 5 Gallon Shrubs 453 EA % 20.00 $ 9,060.00 4 1 Gallon Shrubs 78 EA $ 6.00 $ 468.00 5 1/4" Decomposed Granite vnth Binder (3") 3,875 SF $ 5.00 $ 19,375.00 1 1 6 Rootbaniers 265 LF $ 9.70 $ 2.764.50 1 Subtotal Planting; s 42,252.50 Landscape Construction 1 1 4" Stamped Concrete 8100 SF $ 4.12 s 33.372.00 Subtotal Landscape Construction { $ 33,372.00 Street Improvements 1 6" Type "B-I" Median Curb 1605 LF $ 6.96 $ 11,169.06 2 6" Mount Curb 170 LF s 8.03 $ 1,364.54 SulJtotsI Street Improvements J $ 12,533.60 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BY CARLSBAO $ 109,490.25 $ 109.490.26 TOTAL COST TO CARLSBAD (1 + II • III) $ 184,321.48 TOTAL COST FOR CARLSBAD CASH OUT $ 184.000.00 33 LOCATION MA: cmr OF OCEANSIDE NOT TO SCALE ESfHAVCN RD. PROJECT SITE pAonc OCEAN PROJECT NAME: CARLSBAD RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER 3190 EXfflBIT AREA FROM CARLSBAO TO SAN MARCOS AREA FROM SAN MARCOS TO CARLSBAD EXISTING aiY BOUNDARY MELRQ^ DRIVE EAST PROPOSED NEW CITY BOUNDARY CITY OF SAN MARCOS f^.LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIV^-^ • EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY NOT TO SCALE PROJECT NAME' PROPOSED CITY BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PROJECT NUMBER 3907 EXHIBIT D 35 EXHIBIT T NOT TO SCALE SITEMAP RSF Boundary Adjustment GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 3. EXHIBIT g ^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6783 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE FINDING THAT THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND 4 10-807 (ND) APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS ^ ADEQUATELY ANALYZES THE ANNEXATION TO CARLSBAD OF 0.696 ACRE FROM THE CITY OF SAN 6 MARCOS, AND THE DETACHMENT OF 1.746 ACRES FROM CARLSBAD TO THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS TO 7 FACILITATE A BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES ALONG RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD ^ NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF ROAD AND o MELROSE DRIVE TO SOUTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE ES[ LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE H. 10 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASE NO: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 11 j2 WHEREAS, in 2003 the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad entered into an 13 agreement (City Council Resolution No. 2003-305) for the construction of a segment of RSF 14 Road and mutually agreed to pursue jurisdictional boundary adjustments through the San Diego County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) upon completion of roadway improvements to better match the realignment of the road and simplify jurisdiction of the 17 intersection; and 18 WHEREAS, consistent with Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 20 Guidelines sections 15051(d) and 15367, both cities have agreed that San Marcos would be the 21 "lead agency" for environmental review purposes regarding the jurisdictional boundary 22 adjustments; and ^•^ WHEREAS, consistent with CEQA Section 15381, Carlsbad is a "responsible 24 agency;" and 25 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application 26 2y with the City of Carlsbad to process an annexation and detachment, and, for land to be annexed 28 into the City of Carlsbad, a general plan amendment and zone change - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01; and WHEREAS, the boundary adjustment for the annexation of 0.696 acre to the City of Carlsbad and detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos affects property legally described in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and 6 WHEREAS, a Final Negative Declaration, ND 10-807(ND), adequate to address 7 the actions to be taken by the City of Carlsbad, was prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos City Council on April 12, 20011 (San Marcos City Council Resolution 2011-7473 and Ordinance 2011-1346); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 6, 2011, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 13 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 14 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the ND. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 20 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 21 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby RECOMMENDS THE FINDING THAT THE ND 22 PREPARED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS. 23 ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. IS ADEQUATE FOR THE RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 24 11-02/DTCH 11-01 based on the following findings and condition: 25 Findings; 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find 27 a. it-has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the ND prepared and approved by the City 28 of San Marcos for RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - GPA 11-03/ZC 11 02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 and the environmental impacts therein identified for PC RESO NO. 6783 -2- 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 c. this project and any comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and the ND has been prepared in accordance vs^ith requirements of the Califomia Enviromnental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and its decision regarding the adequacy of the ND reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad; and d. based on the EIA and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Condition: 1. This approval is granted subject to the finding by the City Council that the ND prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos (ND 10-807) is adequate as described in this Planning Commission Resolution, and the approval of GPA 11-03, ZC 11-02 and ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6784, 6785 and 6786 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, Califomia, held on July 6, 2011, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAE^: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Amold, Blaclc, Nygaard, Schumacher, Scully and Siekmann STEPHEN^HAP" L'HEUREUX, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNESfG COMMISSION ATTEST: DONNEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6783 3"^ 1 Civic Center Drive ^Jj^Kjj^^llj^^i^^^^ftT^ Telephone San Marcos, CA 92069-2918 \ Wf^S^^^m^ ^^^BJ^Ll 760.744.1050 2 S BlPirW/ FAX: 760.591.4135 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Revised) The City of San Marcos intends to adopt ND 10-807. A Negative Declaration* has been prepared for this project and is available for review at the City of San Marcos, Deveiopment Services Department, 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA 92069-2949. CASE NO.: PZ 10-20/ PZ 10-21 / PZ 10-22/ GPA 10-108A/GPA 10-1088/GPA 10-108C / ND 10-807 APPLICANT: City of San Marcos DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The proposed project consists of the following actions: 1. A General Plan Amendment to add .675 acres from the City of Carlsbad public road right-of-way to the City of San Marcos public road right-of-way. 2. A Genera! Plan Amendment in the City of San Marcos for 1.072 acres of right-of-way land in the City of Carlsbad to a Light Industrial designation in the City of San Marcos. 3. A General Plan Amendment in the City of Carisbad to add .696 acres of public right-of-way to the City of Carlsbad from the City of San Marcos. 4. A Prezone of 1.072 acres from roadway right-of-way in the City of Carisbad to Light Industrial (LM) in the City of San Marcos. 5. A Prezone of .696 acres from the City of San Marcos right-of-way to the City of Carisbad right-of-way. 6. A Prezone of 12.46 acres to Open Space designated as Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) and Light Industrial in the City of San Marcos. 7. A vacation of 1.072 acres of public road right-of-way upon annexation to the City of San Marcos, and a boundary adjustment of said area to existing adjacent parcel numbers: 223-030-62, 223-651-11, 223-030-95 and 223-030-46. 8. A 1.702 acre detachment from the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Carisbad and annexation to the jurisdictional boundary of the City of San Marcos. 9. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos jurisdictional boundary and annexation to the City of Carlsbad jurisdictional boundary. 10. A 4.093 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 11. A 12.66 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos from the County of San Diego. 12. A .675 acre City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence Amendment and annexation to the City of Carlsbad Sphere of Influence. 13. A 1.702 acre Sphere of Influence Amendment from the City of Carisbad and annexation to the City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence. 14. A 1.346 detachment from County Service Area 83 - San Dieguito Local Parks 15. A 1.346 detachment from County Service Area 107 - Elfin Forest Fire Department A majority of the project areas wili not involve any physical change. Only Area 1 will result in the potential for some minor alteration of already disturbed and/or paved project area to use as landscape or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary change in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels. (Continued OVER ) This Negative Declaration shall serve as environmental review to consider project impacts associated with the proposed actions for all three project areas. LOCATION: The project consists of three project areas located within the western and southwestem areas of the City. The first area (Area 1) is an approximately 2.39 acre area of road right-of-way located along Rancho Santa Fe Road (north of Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive) straddling the boundaries of the cities of San Marcos and Carisbad. The second area (Area 2) is an approximate 11.32 acre property of upland habitat acquired by the City to provide mitigation for the Rancho Santa Fe Road improvements (La Costa Meadows Drive to Island Drive) and remnant right-of-way resulting from the realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road located north of Area 1 on the east side of Rancho Santa Fe Road, north of Calle Venudo. The third area (Area 3) is an approximate 1.35 acre area of area located north ofthe County Dip road alignment and including the segment of San Elijo Road located in the County with City segments on each side located on north of San Elijo Road between Old Creek Ranch Development, just east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and San Elijo Hills Development whereupon San Elijo Road terminates at the eastem boundary. REVIEW PERIOD: December 20, 2010 to January 10, 2011. The purpose of this notice Is to give interested persons an opportunity to be informed of the environmental determination prior to action by the City. If you have questions about this Notice, you may contact Susan Vandrew Rodriguez, Associate Planner, at 744-1050, extension 3237 or svandrew@san-marcos.net. COUNTY CLERK: Please post until January 10, 2011 per Section 21092.3 of the Public Resources Code. *Negative Declaration means a written statement/analysis briefly describing the reasons why a proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment OTY QF SAN: IW}ARe.©S PROPOSED PROJECT AREAS N010-607 EXHIBtTA I; :,j;tl ProposedJ^nr>exaUon_Ar8Bs ^ i San Mareoe City Unite i i San Marcos Fife Protectton District f"*"}- Proposed City Umlts .E<xn««I D*t>: &K<ei3. lOm CraatKl By: CCyofSwi M<rca< Pubic WMk> EwrY n«« tMwi nw)« to ufun Uw •ixi»»ey ot may nol Bi loaiiW.iif ojowfThe City of S»n Umwn ««aum4«''no raBpociatbnty vtelns-^nvuc* of M« InftKmrtjon mi Inooijiotatos by ritartooe ta ifl»«(«lm«r ragvdkig'Vsi of sny vrtfrwttM, *ha(h« •«««»<) «ImpllKl, contwTilr« (h« UM of tha MPW. f <X •dailtona) Wemrtw JM (iw Olsdalin«r on »>« City's w«b«t«. COPY Ml Final Negative Declaration 10-807 Response to Comments and Errata Prepared by Susan Vandrew Rodriguez 1/26/2011 INTRODUCTION TO THE FINAL MND 1. Final MND Contents The Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road (Project Area 1 and 2) and San Elijo Road (Project Area 3) Property Reorganization complies with all criteria, standards, and procedures of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (Califomia Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (Califomia Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.). This document consists of the following sections: Section A - Introduction to the Final MND: This section provides a description of the Final MND contents and process. Section B - Responses to Comments on the Draft MND: This section provides the comment letters on the Draft MND that were received during and the 21-day public review period, as well as the City of San Marcos's (City) responses to each comment. Section C - Errata: This section documents specific changes to the Draft MND that are to be considered part of the Final MND. This includes corrections to the information in the Draft MND to reflect the responses to comments in Section B of this document, as well as other corrections to the Draft MND, pursuant to Section 15088(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. Additional information provided in the responses to comments on the Draft MND is not reflected in the Errata to the Draft MND. Such additional information is part ofthe Final MND or Conditions of Approval, however, and will be considered in the decision-making process. 2. Overview of the MND Process The 21-day public review period for the Draft MND extended from December 20, 2010 to January 10, 2011. The Draft MND was circulated to responsible and other agencies having jurisdiction by law over the environment affected by the proposed project. Simultaneously, notices of availability of the Draft MND were published in the local newspaper and sent to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the three project area sites. The Draft MND was available for review at the City of San Marcos City Hall at 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA, 92069. During and after the CEQA public review period, one (1) comment letter on the Draft MND was received from Mary Chesus and Selma Castanedo dated December 29, 2010. A copy ofthe letter, along with the City of San Marcos' written response is included in Section B of this Final MND. The Final MND includes the responses to comments received during the public review period and Final MND Errata pages. The entire Final MND with response to comments ^3 SECTIONA INTRODUCTION TO THE FINAL MND qu (RTC) and Errata is available for review at the City of San Marcos City Hall at 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA, 92069. The City of San Marcos's City Council will subsequently consider whether to certify the Final MND as complete and in compliance with CEQA and must consider it in approving or denying the proposed project. Ifthe project is approved, a Notice of Determination (NOD) shall be filed with the County Clerk's office. Public input is allowed at the City of San Marcos's Planning Commission and City Council public hearing, respectively, for consideration and certification ofthe Final MND. In the final review of the proposed project, environmental, economic and social factors will be considered to determine the most appropriate course of action. SECTION B RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENTS To: City of San Marcos From: Mary Chesus and Sehna Castanedo DEC 2 9 2010 CITY ur sm nAKCOS Comment 1 Subject: Lots in area 1, North of Via Alondra - West of Calle Venado - East of Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of the San Marcos Gulf Course. There are multiple partial lots (parcel No: 222-042-14,222-042-17, and 222-042-20) that the City of San Marcos has planning to move the property fi-om coimty ovmership to city ownership, and maintain as open area. At that time, the city would no longer pay taxes to the county, but wouid still have the liability of maintaining the property. The below picture notes the parcels discussed for consideration: Comment 2 This proposal is for the purchase of this land, whereby the owner would have a lien on the property, where 75% of the property would remain as open land for plant life. The 25% would be utilized for a home. In this way, the city would get the benefit of 75% open space, getting annual taxes from the owner and the city would receive $50,000 for the value ofthe usable land, while reducing its annual maintenance costs. This would reduce the liability on the city, while creating a revenue stream for the city. Thanks for any consideration. Selma Castanedo and Mary Chesus COPY a7 Response to Letter Received fi-om Mary Chesus & Selma Castanedo for Annexation Proiect Area 1 Comment 1: The City is proposing to move Assessor Parcel Numbers 222-042-14, 222-042-17, and 222-042-20 from the County to City ownership. Response 1: The City is proposing a change to the City jurisdictional boundary to include the parcels listed above for Project Area 1. The project area parcels are owned by the City and no change to property ownership is proposed. Comment 2: A proposal to purchase parcel 222-042-14 for the purpose of constmcting a home and maintaining 75% as open space. Response 2: Planning staff has detemiined that the 2.57 acres ofthe remainder property is not required to meet a City open space obligation. On the 1.54 acre parcel (222-042-14), a non-inhabitable The Rural Residential General Plan density of .125-1 dwelling units per acre would allow up to two singie-family detached homes on the 2.57 acres. A Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance analysis would be required to determine the ultimate number of units that could be built on the 2.57 acres. The letter submitted by the Ms. Chesus and Ms. Castanedo has been submitted to Real Property Services. This said, the City the project recommendation includes the existing General Plan designation of Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) to remain on 2.57 acres of this project area. The response to this letter will be included in the Final Negative Declai-ation ND 10-807 and the Errata to the MND will reflect the recommendation to retain 2.57 acres as Rural Residential and a Prezone of 2.57 acres as Agricultmral Residential (A-1) recommended for an Open Space designation and OS Zone in the draft ND 10-807. The modification will result in fewer acres proposed for a General Plan Amendment than previously considered in ND 10-807 and no change in the determination of a less than significance land use impacts would occur as a result of the reduction in the General Plan Amendment proposed in Area 1. LfS SECTION C ERRATA CITY OF SAN MARCOS NEGATIVE DECLARATION 10-807 DATE: January 26, 2011 APPLICANT: City of San Marcos Planning Division 1. PROJECT CASE NUMBER PROPOSED PROJECT: PZ 10-20, PZ 10-21, PZ 10-22, GPA 10-108A, GPA 10-108B and GPA 10-108C 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of San Marcos, 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA 92069. 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Susan Vandrew Rodriguez, 760-744-1050 ext. 3237 or svandrew@san-marcos.net. 4. PROJECT LOCATION: The project consists of three project areas located within the westem and southwestem areas of the City. The first area (Area 1) is an approximate 11.32acre City of San Marcos owned property consisting of mitigation open space and vacant land comprising four parcels located on the east side of Rancho Santa Fe Road at Via AUondra and south of Via Allondra. The second area (Area 2) is an approximately 2.39 acre area of road right-of-way located along Rancho Santa Fe Road (north of Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive), straddling the City boundaries of San Marcos and Carlsbad. The third area (Area 3) is an approximate 3.92 acre area located north of the San Elijo Road realignment, and including the segment of San Elijo Road located in the County. This roadway segment is between City segments on each side and located north of San Elijo Road between Old Creek Ranch Development, just east of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and San Elijo Hills Development. All three project areas are identified on Exhibit A -Proposed Project Areas. 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: City of San Marcos Planning Division, City of San Marcos, 1 Civic Center Drive, San Marcos, CA 92069-2918. 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Areas 1: Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) in San Marcos and Estate Residential (2, 4 du/acre) in the County of San Diego. Area 2: Public road right-of-way in San Marcos, and Medium Density Residential and Medium-high Density Residential in Carlsbad. Area 3: SPA (.125-1 du/acre) and Light Industrial in San Marcos and Residential/Estate Residential (2, 4 du/acre) in the County of San Diego. 7. ZONING: Area 1: RS 1 (Residential) and RR 2 (Rural Residential) in the County of San Diego (no zoning in San Marcos, prezone proposed). Area 2: Public road right-of-way. Agricultural Residential (A-1), and LM Light Industrial in San Marcos, and Single-family (R-l) and Planned Community (P-C) in Carlsbad. 5d Area 3: RR 2 (Rural Residential) and (Rural Residential) RR .5 in the County of San Diego (no zoning in San Marcos, prezone proposed). 8. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: BACKGROUND: Area 1: In 1998 the City approved the realignment and widening of approximately 5,000 linear feet of Rancho Santa Fe Road, including realignment of Calle Venado, and completed the constmction in 2005. The realignment and widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road resulted in biological impacts for which for which the City provided upland mitigation on 8.51 acres east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of Via Allondra. The realignment also resulted in remaining land in the unincorporated County consisting of City of San Marcos road right-of-way and vacant land now owned by the City adjacent to the new alignment of Via Allondra and Calle Venado. The purpose of the proposed project is to add this area to the City of San Marcos, as 8.51 acres of this area is to remain as biological mitigation open space and 2.57 acres is to remain as Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) The Rural Residential General Plan density of .125-1 dwelling units per acre would allow up to two single-family detached homes on the 2.57 acres.The purpose of proposed project is to add this area to the City of San Marcos as 8.51 acres of biological mitigation open space, 2.57 acres is to remain as Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre)and and .24 acres is to be added to the City boundary as part of the Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment area. Area #1 is within the City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence. Area 2: In 2003, the Cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad entered into an agreement for the constmction of Rancho Santa Fe Road and adjustment to the coinmon City boundary to four-lane major arterial standards. As per the agreement, the City of San Marcos is to process with the Local Agency Formation Commission the boundary changes between the two cities as that the road realignment cut across, and then back over, the jurisdictional boundaries of both cities. The purpose of the proposed project is to address each of the city's boundaries relative to the reahgned road as agreed upon between the two cities, and to allow for minimal use of any of the remnant land that resulted from the road realignment which was not required for the road improvement. Area 3: In 2006, the City of San Marcos realigned and widened 2,000 linear feet of an existing portion of San Elijo Road between the Old Creek Ranch Development, just east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and San Elijo Hills Development whereupon San Elijo Road terminates at the eastem boundary. The widening and realignment bisected County property just south of the City limit leaving a County area north of the new roadway alignment. New road right-of-way was acquired for the roadway and dedicated as easements to the City of San Marcos within the County jurisdiction. The new alignment is within the City of San Marcos jurisdictional boundary with exception of an approximately 1,000 feet of roadway referred to as the "County Dip" located within the County jurisdictional boundary. Five parcels remain in the County north of the new road alignment. The boundary adjustment would modify the City boundary to the south ofthe new road alignment which would therefore also annex the five open space parcels located north of the new alignment. The purpose ofthe proposed project is to annex the realigned section of San Marcos public road right-of- way withinthe County jurisdiction to the City to provide a cleaner jurisdictional boundary in the area. Area #3 is located within the City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence. The proposed project consists of the following actions: 61 1. A General Plan Amendment to add .675 acres to the City of San Marcos public road right-of-way (previously City of Carlsbad public road right-of-way). 2. A General Plan Amendment to add 1.072 acres to a Light Industrial designation in the City of San Marcos (previously public right-of-way in the City ofCarlsbad) 3. A General Plan Amendment in the City ofCarlsbad to add .696 acres of public right-of-way to the City of Carlsbad (previously City of Carlsbad public right-of-way). 4. A General Plan Amendment to modify .971 acres from Light Industrial, 8.51 acres from Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) and .375 acres from Hillside Residential (.25-.50) to Open Space (OS); a change of 10.6 acres to Open Space (OS). 5. A Sphere of Influence Amendment, annexation, and Prezone of 1.072 acres from roadway right-of- way in the City ofCarlsbad to Light Industrial (LM) in the City of San Marcos. 6. A Sphere of Influence Amendment, annexation, and Prezone of .696 acres from the City of San Marcos right-of-way to the City of Carlsbad right-of-way. 7. A vacation of 1.072 acres of public road right-of-way upon annexation to the City of San Marcos, and a lot line adjustment of said area to existing adjacent parcel numbers 223-030-62, 223-651-11, 223-030-95 and 223-030-46. 8. A 1.702 acre detachment from the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Carlsbad and annexation to the jurisdictional boundary of the City of San Marcos. 9. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos jurisdictional boundary and annexation to the City of Carlsbad jurisdictional boundary. 10. A 5.618 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 11. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 12. A 15.25 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos from the County of San Diego. 13. A .696 acre City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence Amendment and annexation to the City of Carlsbad Sphere of Influence. 14. A Prezone of 12.446 acres to SPA-Open Space OS (12.075 acres) and Open Space OS (.375 acres) in the City of San Marcos. 15. A 3.92 detachment from County Service Area 83 - San Dieguito Local Parks 16. A 3.92 detachment from County Service Area 107 - Elfin Forest Fire Department A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in fiiture potential for some minor alteration of already disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. . . This Negative Declaration shall serve as environmental review to consider project impacts associated with the proposed actions for all three project areas. 9. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: Area 1: This project area is located just east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and is surrounded by low density residential to the south and east in the County, and medium residential to the north and west in the County and City of San Marcos, respectively. A non-inhabitable single-family home previously 59- located on the 1.54 acre parcel (222-042-14) was demolished in 2006. This 1.54 acre parcel and the other .96 acre remnant property (222-042-17 and 222-042-20) have remained vacant since 2006. The site is located in the Lake San Marcos Neighborhood ofthe San Marcos General Plan. Area 2: This project area consists of a major arterial roadway located on the boundary ofthe cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad. The surrounding area is developed as multi-family residential to the northeast and an industrial park to the southeast in the City of San Marcos, and single-family residential to the west in the City of Carlsbad. The site is located in the Questhaven/La Costa Community in the San Marcos General Plan with a Rural Residential .125-1 du/acre designation. Area 3: This project area includes a portion of the San Elijo Road, a four lane major aterial, and an older paved section of Questhaven Road that serves to provide access to San Diego Gas & Electric, San Elijo Hills and Center for Natural Lands Management properties. Vacant land designated as Hillside Residential (.25-.50 du/acre) and San Elijo Hills is located to the west and Specific Plan Land Use (.125- 1 du/acre) is located to the north. A Light Industrial/Studio SPA is located to the east and a closed County landfill to the southeast ofthe site. The site is located in the Questhaven/La Costa Community in the San Marcos General Plan. 10. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (e.g. PERMITS, FINANCING APPROVAL OR PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT): Approval by the City of Carlsbad (Responsible Agency) City Council to recommend the City jurisdictional boundary adjustment and Sphere Amendment between the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad and the Local Agency Formation Commission (Responsible Agency) approval of all actions. 11. MITIGATION MEASURES: None. 53 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTLVLLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Sigmficant Impacf as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: • Aesthetics • Agriculture Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Geology/Soils • Hazards & Hazardous Materials • Hydrology/Water Quality • Land Use/Planning DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: • Mineral Resources • Noise • Population/Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation/Traffic • Utilities/Service Systems • Mandatory Findings of Significance • I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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 a "potentially significant impacf or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Susan Vandrew Rodriguez Januarv 26.2011 Date Associate Planner Printed Name Titie 5H ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Pottntially Potentially Significant Significant Unless Impact Less TTian Significant No Impact I. AESTHETICS: Would the proposal: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic view? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? • • • A majority ofthe project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demohshed home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2.No significant impacts to the obstmction of any scenic vista, or view open to the public are anticipated from the proposed project. Potentisdiy Potentially Significant Significant Unless Impact Mitigated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact IL AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES-In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Cahfomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia Dept. of conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the Califomia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and Forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the Califomia Air Resources Board. - Would the project: 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 Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? • • • • b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, 7 55 or a Williamson Act contract c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Govemment Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion or forest land to non-forest use? • • • e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? • • The proposed project has not been used for agricultural purposes nor is the area designated as farmland or agricultural land. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact agricultural resources. Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Unless Impact Mitigated Less Than Significant No Impact Imi>act 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 proposal: a) Conflict with or obstmct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 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 (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? • • d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? • • e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? • So A majority ofthe project areas will not involve any physical change. Only Area 2 will result in the potential for some minor alteration of akeady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as landscape or hardscape as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary change in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels. This minor activity is not determined to be growth inducing, and the proposed project is not anticipated to generate an air quality impact. Potentially Less Potentially Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special statue species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. • • • • b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the Cahfomia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? • • • • c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetiands as defmed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemal pools, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological intermption, or other means? • • • • d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? • • • • e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? • • • • f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? • • • • 57 A majority ofthe project areas will not involve any physical change. Only Area 2 will result in the potential for some minor alteration of already disturbed and/or paved project area to use as landscape or hardscape as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary change in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels. The proposed project will prezone the parcels in Areas 2 and 3 to open space and the existing open space on these parcels will remain as such. The proposed project is not anticipated to generate a biological resource impact. Potenti^ly Potentially Significant Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would ^/?e;?ro;?o.sa/.- a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? • b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuantto §15064.5? • c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paieontological resource or site or unique geologic features? • d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? • • • • A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of already disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2When the road projects were constmcted in the project areas, all cultural resources impacts associated with the road realignment areas were mitigatedAny new minor improvements in Areas 1 or 2 upon annexation of property to San Marcos will occur in aheady developed and disturbed areas previously used for roadways and a single-family residence. Therefore the proposed project is not anticipated to generate a cultural resource impact. Potentially PotentiaUy Significant Significant Unless Itnpact Less Than Significant No Intact Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or stmctures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 10 i) 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 ofa Imown fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Pubhcation 42. • • • • ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? • • • • iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? • • • • iv) Landslides? • • • • b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? • • • • c) 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? • • • • d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? • • • • e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative waste water disposal systems - where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? • • • • Any new minor improvements would be subject to compliance with the City Grading Ordinance as a matter of course. This compliance will ensure that any new hardscape/landscape activity that could result from proposed project would potentially result in a less than significant impact to soils and geology. Potenti^ly Less Potentially Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impart VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the enviromnent? • • • • b) Conflict with an apphcable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? • • • • 11 A majority ofthe project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of already disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance comphance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, paridng lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2This minor activity is not determined to be growth inducing, and the proposed project is not anticipated to generate a greenhouse gas emissions impact. Potenti^ly Less Potentially Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impart VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use of Disposal of hazardous materials? • • • • b) Create a significant hazard to the pubhc or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? • • • • c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? • • • • d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? • • • • e) For a project located 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 woridng in the project area? • • • • f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • • g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency 12 GO evacuation plan? • • • h) Expose people or stmctures 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? • • • A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance comphance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. When the road projects were constmcted in the project areas, all cultural resources impacts associated with the road realignment areas were mitigated. Any minor improvements activities that could result in Areas 1 or 2 upon annexation of property to San Marcos will occur in aheady developed and disturbed areas previously used for roadways or as a low density single family residence. would be subject to compliance with all City and County Codes as a matter of course. This compliance will ensure that any improvements that could result from the proposed project would potentially result in a less than significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials. Potentially Less Potentisdly Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No Mitigated Impart Inepact Impart IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? • • b) Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality or cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? • • • c) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? • • • d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or 13 (o 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 (e.g. downstream)? • • • e) Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage pattems due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes? • • • f) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a maimer, which would resuh in flooding on-or off-site? • • • g) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage • • • systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? h) Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated increased runoff? • • • i) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following constmction? • • • j) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash). • • • k) Be tributary to an aheady impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list. If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired? • • • 1) Be tributary to environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. MSCP, RARE, Areas of Special Biological Significance, etc.)? If so, can it exacerbate aheady existing sensitive conditions? • • • m) Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality, to either marine, fresh or wetland waters? n) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 14 o) 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 hazard delineation map? • p) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area stmctures which would impede or redirect flood flows? q) Expose people or stmctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or dam? • • r) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? • A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2 . A new residence in Area 1 or minor hardscape/landscape activities that could result in Area 2 upon annexation of property to San Marcos will occur in aheady developed and disturbed areas previously used for roadways or as a residence. Any old road pavement removal and disposal and new hardscape/ landscape instaUation that could result from Area 1 or 2 improvementswould be subject to compliance with the City Stommwater MS-4 Permit. Water flow will not be permitted to be diverted or redirected as a result of any hardscape/landscape improvement. Any new hardscape/landscape is anticipated to create a nominal change in the overall surface water flow, and all flow from Area 2 to the City storm drain system would be subject to stormwater compliance. Therefore, the proposed project would potentially result in a less than significant impact to hydrology and water quality. Potentiidiy PotentiaUy Significant Significant Unless Mitigated Impact Less Than Significant No Impact Impa^rt X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, pohcy, 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? 15 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? • • The existing project areas General Plan Designation are Pubhc road right-of way. Rural Residential (.125- 1 du/acre), and Light Industrial m San Marcos, and Medium Density Residential and Medium-high Density Residential in Carlsbad. The existing zoning is Public road right-of-way and LM Light Industrial in San Marcos and R-l Single-family and P-C Planned Community in Carlsbad. 1. A General Plan Amendment to add .675 acres to the City of San Marcos public road right-of-way (previously City of Carlsbad public road right-of-way). 2. A General Plan Amendment to add 1.072 acres to a Light Industrial designation in the City of San Marcos (previously public right-of-way in the City ofCarlsbad) 3. A General Plan Amendment in the City of Carlsbad to add .696 acres of pubhc right-of-way to the City of Carlsbad (previously City of Carlsbad public right-of-way). 4. A General Plan Amendment to modify .971 acres from Light Industrial and 8.51 acres from Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) to Open Space (OS) and .375 acres from SPA .125-1 du/acre to SPA (OS); a change of 10.6acres to Open Space (OS). 5. A Sphere of Influence Amendment, annexation, and Prezone of 1.072 acres from roadway right-of- way in the City of Carlsbad to Light Industrial (LM) in the City of San Marcos. 6. A Sphere of Influence Amendment, annexation, and Prezone of .696 acres from the City of San Marcos right-of-way to the City of Carlsbad right-of-way. 7. A vacation of 1.072 acres of pubhc road right-of-way upon annexation to the City of San Marcos, and a lot line adjustment of said area to existing adjacent parcel numbers 223-030-62, 223-651-11, 223-030-95 and 223-030-46. 8. A 1.702acre detachment from the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Carlsbad and annexation to the jurisdictional boundary of the City of San Marcos. 9. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos jurisdictional boundary and annexation to the City of Carlsbad jurisdictional boundary. 10. A 5.618 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 11. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 12. A 15.25acre annexation to the City of San Marcos from the County of San Diego. 13. A .696 acre City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence Amendment and annexation to the City of Carlsbad Sphere of Influence. 14. A Prezone of 12.446 acres to SPA-Open Space OS (12.075 acres) and Open Space OS (.375 acres) in the City of San Marcos. 15. A 3.92 detachment from County Service Area 83 - San Dieguito Local Parks 16. A 3.92 detachment from County Service Area 107 - Elfin Forest Fire Department Area 1: This project area is located just east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and is surrounded by low density residential to the south and east in the County, and medium residential to the north and west m the County and City of San Marcos, respectively. A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may resuh in fUmre potential for some minor alteration of already dismrbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape 16 and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. Area 1: The realignment and widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road resulted in biological impacts for which the City provided a 8.51 acre parcel for upland mitigation east of Rancho Santa Fe Road north and south of Via AUondra/Calle Venado. The realignment also resuhed in remaining land in the unincorporated County consisting of City of San Marcos road right-of-way and vacant land now owned by the City adjacent to the new alignment of Via Allondra and Calle Venado. A non-inhabitable single-family home previously located on the 1.54 acre parcel (222-042-14) was demolished in 2006. This 1.54 acre parcel and the other .96 acre remnant property (222-042-17 and 222-042-20) have remained vacant since 2006. The purpose ofthe proposed project is to add 8.51 areas of biological mitigation open space, .24 acres of dedicated roadway (Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment area), and 2.57 acres remaining as Rural Residential (.125-1 du/acre) consistent with the surrounding area, to the City jurisdictional boundary. Area #1 is within the City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence. Area 2: This project area consists of a six lane major arterial roadway located on the boundary ofthe cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad. The surrounding area is developed as multi-family residential to the northeast and an industrial park to the southeast in the City of San Marcos and single-family residential to the west m the City of Carlsbad. The road realignment resulted in the bifurcation of road right-of-way on each side of the road realignment of jurisdictional boundary areas of both cities. The purpose of the proposed project is to address these bifurcations of the either city's boundaries as agreed upon between the two cities. The proposed project actions will serve to address clean-up both the jurisdictional boundaries of both the cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos with a less than significant impact to the Zonmg and General Plan of each City and the surrounding land uses. The land that will be swapped may be used as hardscape or landscape of existing Light Industrial uses east of Rancho Santa Fe Road upon vacation of the roadway. A lot line adjustment can then be processed for four parcels east of Rancho Santa Fe Road that will be able to add land area from the vacated area to each parcel. The project area will involve a Sphere Amendment between the two cities. This change however will not resuh in a significant change to each cities boundary, and no residences are impacted. The proposed boundary change between the cities will not generate a significant land use impact, and wiU not conflict with any existing plans for either City. Area 3: This project area includes a portion of the San Elijo Road, a four lane major aterial, and an older paved section of Questhaven Road that serves to provide access to San Diego Gas & Electric, San Elijo Hills and Center for Natural Lands Management properties. San Elijo HiUs is located to the north and west ofthe site, with open space directly to the north and the closed County landfill to the southeast ofthe site. New road right-of-way was acquired for the roadway and dedicated as easements to the City of San Marcos within the County jurisdiction. The new alignment is within the City of San Marcos jurisdictional boundary with exception of feet of roadway referred to as the "County Dip" located within the County. Five parcels remain in the County north of the new road alignment. The boundary adjustment would modify the City boundary to the south of the new road alignment which would therefore also annex the five open space parcels located north of the new alignment. The purpose ofthe proposed project is to annex the realigned section of San Marcos public road right-of-way thereby establishing a cleaner jurisdictional boundary in the area. In addition, the Annexation, General Plan 17 (ob Amendment, and Prezone will serve to designate and zone the project area as the existing use of the land as open space. Area #3 is located within the City of San Marcos Sphere of Influence. The change to Area 2 wiU serve to clean-up jurisdictional boundaries as agreed upon between the cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos and allow for some potential use of land no longer needed for right-of-way to provide landscape or hardscape in support of adjacent hght industrial uses. The City of San Marcos boundary being modified in Area 1 and 3 wiU serve to designate current open space as such in the San Marcos General Plan and remain compatible with surrounding open space and low density residential land uses in both Areas 1 and 3. These areas are also not known to be located within an existing or proposed County preserve area. The proposal will serve the overall purpose of the project as outimed herein and also allow for land use compatibility with the City of San Marcos General Plan, and provide for jurisdictional authority by the City of San Marcos of the three project areas. PotentiaUy PotentiaUy Significant Unless Impact Less Significant Tluui Significant No Impact Impart XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Resuh 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? • • There are no known mineral resources on the site and no new physical development is proposed by the project. Therefore, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on any known mineral resources. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Impart Less Significant Than Significant No Impact Impart XII. NOISE. Would the project result in: 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? • • b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? • • d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? • • • • e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a pubhc airport or pubhc use airport, would the project expose people residing or working 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? • • • • A majority of the project areas will not involve any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may result in future potential for some minor alteration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance comphance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing hght industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. Any constmction activity associated with the constmction of a new home, new hardscape/ landscape instaUation that could result from in Areas 1 and 2 would be subject to compliance with aU Noise City and County Codes as a matter of course. Specifically, some short-term constmction noise impacts may occur to nearby residents. Constmction activity will be required to occur during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm Monday through Friday and on Saturday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM; no work shaU be allowed on Sundays and Holidays observed by the City. Also the contractor will be required to use only such equipment on the work and in such state of repair, that the emission of sound there from is within the noise tolerance of that equipment, as established by accepted standards ofthe industry. The noise control measures during constmction will lesson impacts to a level below sigmficant. This compliance wiU ensure that any new hardscape/landscape activity that could result from the proposed project would potentially result in a less than significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials. Potentisdly Less PotentiaUy Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No Impart Impact Impart XIIL POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastmcture)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 19 (/7 c) necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? • The proposed project will not include the constmction or demolition of any existing housing, thereby not displacing any existing residents, and is therefore not anticipated to result in impacts to population and housing. Potentiidly Potentially Significant Significant Uniess Mitigated Impart Less Than Significant No Inpact Impart xrv. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically ahered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically ahered govemmental facilities, the constmction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objective for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? other public facihties? • • • • • A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may resuh in ftiture potential for some minor aheration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demohshed home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable pennits as weU as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. Therefore, no impact to public services is anticipated to result from the proposed project. The proposed project will include: 1. A 5.618 acre annexation to the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 2. A .696 acre detachment from the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District. 3. A 3.92detachment from County Service Area 83 - San Dieguito Local Parks 4. A 3.92 detachment from County Service Area 107 - Elfin Forest Fire Department 20 Through a mutual aid agreement, the City of San Marcos Fire Protection District currently provides service to the project area. In addition, the project area is aheady surrounded by area served by the San Marcos Fire Protection District. This said the modification to the SMFPD to add the three acres wiU not impact service levels. The closet station to each area is in the City of San Marcos on Rancho Santa Fe Road. There are City of San Marcos park and recreational faculties in close proximity to the project areas. Removal of Area 3 from the CSA 83 and 107 are not anticipated to significantly impact parks or fire protection services to these areas aheady adjacent to the City of San Marcos, and serve by proximity and a mutual aid agreement. Potentially PotentiaUy Significant Unless Mitigated Impart Significant Than Significant No Impact Impart XV. 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? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the constmction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? • • Potentially PotentiaUy Significant Untess ^_Miti^te^__^^^Imp^t^ Significant Than Significant No Impact Impart XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) 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)?, b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? • • • c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? • 21 d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting ahemative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? • • • • • • A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may resuh in future potential for some minor alteration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density smgle-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as weU as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordmance compliance to determme the ultimate unit number on 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existmg light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. No negative impact is anticipated to parking from the proposed project. Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Untess Mitigated Impart Less Than Significant No Inq^act Impart XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the constmction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constmction of which could cause significant environmental effects? • • c) Require or result in the constmction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constmction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result m a detemiination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projects 22 projected demand in addition to the providers' existing commitments? • • • f) Be served by a landfiU with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? • • • A majority ofthe project areas wiU not mvoive any physical change. A portion of Area 1 (2.57 acres) and Area 2 (1.027 acres) may resuh in future potential for some minor aheration of aheady disturbed and/or paved project area to use as: 1) 1 to 2 low density single-family residences where a demolished home had previously existed (Area 1) requiring applicable permits as well as Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance compliance to determine the ultimate unit number on Area 1; and 2) landscape and/or hardscape (pavement, parking lot, etc.) as accessory to existing light industrial uses located adjacent to the project area resulting from the vacation and boundary changes in the City of San Marcos upon annexation of 1.027 acres to four separate parcels on Area 2. A new low density single-family home and minor hardscape/landscape activities that could result in Areas 1 or 2 upon annexation of property to San Marcos will occur in aheady developed and disturbed areas previously used for roadways and would provide only accessory infrastmcture to existing buildings. Therefore, no impact to utilities is anticipated to resuh from the proposed project. 23 7f Potenti^ly Less PotentiaUy Significant Than Significant Unless Significant No ^^ImMct^^^^__^mgact__^______Jragact^ XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality ofthe envhonment, substantially reduce the habitat ofa 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 Cahfomia history or prehistory? • • • • The project is not known to contain any sensitive biological or cultural resources, the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of tiie environment, substantially reduce the habitat ofa 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 Cahfomia history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in coimection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and tiie effects of probably ftiture projects)? • • • • The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, as the project site will involve an upgrade of an existing roadway segment. The Negative Declaration analysis identifies only less than significant impacts that could resuh from the project, and no mitigation is proposed therefore the project is not cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects which wiU cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either dhectly or indirectly? • • • • The project impacts are all less than significant and do not warrant mitigation and will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 24 19^ 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6784 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE 4 LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF "PRIME ARTERIAL" ON 0.696 ACRE OF ANNEXED ROAD RIGHT- 6 OF-WAY GENERALLY LOCATED ON A PORTION OF THE EAST SIDE OF RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, SOUTH 7 OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND MELROSE DRIVE, AND NORTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL ^ FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11 9 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASENQ: GPA 11-03 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad; and 13 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a General Plan 14 Amendment as shovm on Exhibit "GPA 11-03" dated July 6, 2011, attached hereto and on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - GPA 11-03, as provided in Govemment Code Section 65350 et. seq. and Section 21.52.150 ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the 0.696 acre of road right of way to be annexed is legally 2Q described as "Parcel C" in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution 6786; said resolution 21 is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad entered into an agreement (Resolution No. 2003-305) for the construction of a segment of RSF Road and mutually agreed to pursue jurisdictional boundary adjustments through the San Diego County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) upon completion of roadway improvements to better match the realignment of the road and simplify jurisdiction of the intersection and 28 adjoining roadway segments; and 73 23 24 25 26 WHEREAS, it was mutually agreed that the City of San Marcos would be the lead agency and would be responsible for processing the environmental document to comply with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad supports the City of San Marcos submitting an 6 application on behalf of both cities to process the boundary adjustment with LAFCO pursuant to 7 the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Govemment Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the Califomia Govemment Code; and WHEREAS, the boundary adjustment is for the annexation of 0.696 acre to the City of Carlsbad and detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos for three parcels on RSF Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa 8 9 10 11 12 13 Meadows Drive, as shown on Exhibit "ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01," attached to Reso No. 6786 14 and by this reference incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the proposed boundary changes are shovm and legally described on Exhibit "A," attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on July 6, 2011, hold a duly noticed 2Q public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 21 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 22 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: 15 16 17 18 19 23 24 25 26 2^ A) That the above recitations are true and correct 28 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - GPA 11-03, based on the following findings: PC RESO NO. 6784 Fmdings: 1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in 3 conformance with the Elements of the City's General Plan based on the facts set forth in ^ the staff report dated July 6,2011 including, but not limited to the following: a. Land Use and Circulation: The proposed General Plan Land Use designation of "Prime Arterial" is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map and the ^ Circulation Element. The amendment also facilitates the boundary adjustment necessary between the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad after the realignment and improvements of the RSF Road segment to address the 0.696 acre that is now right-of-way land. b. Land Use: The proposed boundary adjustment and Prime Arterial Land Use designation amendment are consistent with the Growth Management and Public Facilities Goal A.2, which states, "A City which maintains a system of public facilities adequate for the projected population," in that it respects and 11 recognizes a Prime Arterial roadway constructed to be adequate in width and capacity to accommodate the build-out ofthe city. 9 10 12 13 c. Circulation: The proposed amendment is consistent with Streets and Traffic Control, Goal A.4, which states, "A City with properly maintained, smooth 14 functioning and safe traffic control systems," in that the boundary adjustment makes jurisdictional boundaries and maintenance responsibilities of the 15 roadway and traffic lights at the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive easier to determine and logical. 16 17 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Condition: J g 1. This approval is granted subject to the finding by the City Council that the ND prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos (ND 10-807) is adequate as described in 19 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783, and the approval of ZC 11-02 and ANX 11- 01/DTCH 11-01 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission 20 Resolutions No. 6783, 6785 and 6786 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. PC RESO NO. 6784 7^ PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission ofthe City of Carlsbad, Califomia, held on July 6, 2011, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Arnold, Black, Nygaard, Schumacher, Scully and Siekmann NOES: ABSENT: 9 ABSTAIN: 10 11 12 STEPHEN "HAP" L'HEtJREUX, Chairperson 13 CARLSBAD PLANNESIG COMMISSION ATTEST: 14 15 16 17 DON NEU 18 Planning Director 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6784 Exhibit "GPA 11-03" July 6, 2011 GPA 11-03 RSF Boundary Adjustment s ..'•ool u 0>. COSTA MEADOWS DR Qr / I - CO / Annex to Carisbad Detach to San Marcos EXISTING \o\ o /Of MELROSE DR Prime Arterial Bfoposed poundai^ \^fKCOSJA MEADOWS DR /"/^ Detach to San Marcos PROPOSED Related Case File No(s): ZC 11-02 / ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01 General Plan Land Use Designation Changes** Property From: To: A. Right-of-way Right-of-way (Cun-ently in San Marcos) Prime Arterial B. C. Applies to property to be annexed only. 77 ^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6785 ^ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE TO APPROVE A ZONE 4 DESIGNATION OF "ARTERIAL ROADWAY" ON 0.696 ACRE OF ANNEXED RIGHT-OF-WAY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, 6 SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND MELROSE DRIVE, AND NORTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN 7 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11. CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT ^ CASE NO: ZC 11-02 5 23 24 25 26 27 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has filed a verified application for zoning and related land use documents to implement the 2003 agreement between the Cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos (City Council Resolution No. 2003-305) regarding, in part, the constmction of a 9 10 11 12 13 segment of RSF Road and the adjustment of the jurisdictional boundary between the two cities 14 through the San Diego County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) upon ^ ^ completion of roadway improvements; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad supports the City of San Marcos in submitting 17 an application to LAFCO to process the boundary adjustment; and 18 WHEREAS, the City of San Marcos is in agreement with the proposed Zone 2Q Change in order to allow a boundary adjustment between the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad 21 as agreed upon between the two cities that resulted from the realignment of this section of RSF 22 Road, and WHEREAS, the Zone Change implements the terms of the agreed upon boundary adjustment between the two cities by appropriately zoning land to be annexed to the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as shovm 28 on Exhibit "ZC 11-02" dated JULY 6, 2011, attached hereto and on file in the Planning 7^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Department, RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - ZC 11-02, as provided by Chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed Zone Change is set forth in the draft City Council Ordinance, EXHIBIT "B" dated July 6, 2011, and attached hereto RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - ZC 11-02 and affects property legally described as "Parcel C" in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 6, 2011, 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are tme and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - ZC 11-02, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. That the proposed Zone Change to Arterial Roadway is consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the General Plan, in that the Zone Change is for land that is within the public right-of-way on a Prime Arterial Circulation Element roadway. 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. 3. The Zone Change is necessary to implement the boundary adjustment agreement (Resolution No. 2003-305) between the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad and to be consistent with the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act PC RESO NO. 6785 7^ of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code; which requires the city to prezone (for two years) the annexation of property. 4. That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity, and general welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that the property proposed for a designation of Arterial Roadway is within the public right- of-way on a Circulation Element roadway designated as Prime Arterial. Conditions: 1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy 10 issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said 11 conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer j2 or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Zone Change. 13 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Zone Change documents, as necessary to make them intemally 14 consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development, ^ ^ different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 3. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and 17 regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 19 18 4. If any condition for constmction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Govemment Code 2Q Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid, this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies 21 with all requirements of law. 22 5. Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold 2^ harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims 24 and costs, including court costs and attomey's fees incurred by the City arising, directiy or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Zone Change, (b) City's 25 approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or nondiscretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all 2^ liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have 28 been concluded and continues even if the City's approval is not validated. PC RESO NO. 6785 ^ This approval is granted subject to the finding by the City Council that the ND prepared 2 and approved by the City of San Marcos (ND 10-807) is adequate as described in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783, and the approval of GPA 11-03 and ANX 3 11-01/DTCH 11-01 and is subject to all conditions contained in Plarming Commission Resolutions No. 6783, 6784 and 6786 for those other approvals incorporated herein by 4 reference. 19 20 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on July 6, 2011, by the following vote, to wit: ^ AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Amold, Black, Nygaard, 9 Schumacher, Scully and Siekmann 10 NOES: 11 ABSENT: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ATTEST ABSTAESf: STEFHEN^IMP'' L'HEUREUX, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 21 DONNEU Planning Director 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6785 -4- Exhibit "B" Julys, 2011 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 21.050.030 3 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A ZONE CHANGE, ZC 11-02, 4 OF ARTERIAL ROADWAY ON A 0.696 ACRE OF ANNEXED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST 5 SIDE OF RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) ROAD, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND MELROSE DRIVE, AND NORTH 6 OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11. 7 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CASE NO.: ZC 11-02 WHEREAS, the City Council did on the day of 2011, hold a duly noticed publid hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as shown on Exhibit "ZC 11-02 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT", dated July 6, 2011, attached hereto and made a part hereof and as legally described as Parcel "C" in Exhibit "A" to Planning Commission Resolution 6786; said resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council considered all ^ ^ factors relating to the ZC 11 -02 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT. .r. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carisbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That Section 21.050.03 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, being the zoning map, is amended as shown on the map marked Exhibit "ZC 11-02," dated July 6, 2011 attached hereto and made a part thereof. SECTION II: That the findings and conditions ofthe Planning Commission as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6785 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 Exhibit "ZC 11-02" July 6, 2011 ZC 11-02 RSF Boundary Adjustment EXISTING PROPOSED Related Case File No(s): GPA 11-03 / ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01 Zoning Designation Changes** Property From: To: A. Right-of-way Right-of-way (Currently in San Marcos) Arterial Roadway B. C. Applies to property to be annexed only. ^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6786 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNESIG COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ANNEXATION OF 0.696 ACRE TO THE 4 CITY OF CARLSBAD AND DETACHMENT OF 1.746 ACRES TO THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON RANCHO SANTA FE (RSF) 6 ROAD, NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RSF AND MELROSE DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF LA COSTA MEADOWS 7 DRIVE ESI LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11, CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT ^ CASE NO: ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 5 16 17 18 19 20 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad entered into an 9 10 11 12 13 agreement (Resolution No. 2003-305) for the constmction of a segment of RSF Road and 14 mutually agreed to pursue jurisdictional boundary adjustments through the San Diego County ^ ^ Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) upon completion of roadway improvements to better match the realignment of the road and simplify jurisdiction of the intersection; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Annexation and Detachment of properties between the cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos as shovm on Exhibit "ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01" dated July 6, 2011, attached hereto and on file in the Carlsbad 21 Planning Department, RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01; and 22 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad supports the City of San Marcos submitting an 23 application to process the boundary adjustment with LAFCO pursuant to the 24 Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Govemment Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, 25 commencing with Section 56000 of the Califomia Govemment Code; and 26 2y WHEREAS, the boundary adjustment is for the annexation of 0.696 acre to the City of 28 Carlsbad and detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos for three parcels on RSF Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive, 9 10 11 12 23 24 28 as shown on Exhibit "ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01" and legally described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on July 6, 2011, hold a duly noticed 1 2 3 4 ^ public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 5 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 7 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Annexation & Detachment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the above recitations are tme and correct. 13 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - ANX 14 11-02/DTCH 11-01 based on the following findings and subject to the following condition. 15 Findings: 17 1. The Rancho Santa Fe Road boundary adjustment and related annexation and detachment reflect the mutual agreement of the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad as required by the 18 December 12, 2003, "Agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the City of San Marcos for the constmction of a portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Adjustment to the ^ ^ Common City Boundary." 20 2. The annexation and detachment of parcels represent beneficial changes to the boundary 21 between San Marcos and Carlsbad because they help clarify in a logical manner the boundaries of maintenance and liability between the two cities. Further, they represent 22 appropriate adjustments based on the existing land uses they would encompass. Condition: 1. This approval is granted subject to the finding by the City Council that the ND prepared 25 and approved by the City of San Marcos (ND 10-807) is adequate as described in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783, and the approval of GPA 11-03 and ZC 11- 2^ 02 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 2y 6783, 6784 and 6785 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. PC RESO NO. 6786 -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, Califomia, held on July 6, 2011, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAESF: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Arnold, Black, Nygaard, Schumacher, Scully and Siekmann STEPHEN^'HAP'^ L'HEUREUX, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNE^IG COMMISSION ATTEST: DON NEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6786 -3- Exhibit "ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01" July 6, 2011 ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 RSF Boundary Adjustment A - Detach 0.674 acre to San Marcos B - Detach 1.072 acres to San Marcos C - Annex 0.696 acre to Carlsbad 8^ RO - "MELROSE AVENUE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REORGANIZATION" (CITY OF CARLSBAD) ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITIES OF SAN MARCOS AND CARLSBAD, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED APRIL 10,1886, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL C: BEGINNING AT A POINT ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NUMBER 454, SOUTH 00°32'20" WEST (SOUTH 00°32'16" WEST PER COURSE NUMBER 30 OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274 DESIGNATED AS THE MELROSE AVENUE REORGANIZATION, PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED JULY 5, 1983), (SOUTH 00°32'01" WEST PER SAID MAP NUMBER 13525) 646.11 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PARCEL C; THENCE COURSE 1. LEAVING SAID COURSE 30 OF SAID RESOLUTION 7274, SOUTH 86°02'14" EAST 93.79 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON A LINE BEING 66.00 FEET EASTERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO, AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AS SHOWN ON CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 3907; THENCE COURSE 2. SOUTHWESTERLY PARALLEL AND 66.00 FEET EASTERLY OF SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 3°57'46" WEST 47.90 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1334.00 FEET; THENCE COURSE 3. SOUTHEASTERLY PARALLEL AND 66.00 FEET EASTERLY OF SAID CENTERLINiE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°55'43", HAVING A CHORD LENGTH OF 369.67 FEET AND ARC LENGTH OF 370.86 FEET TO A POINT ON COURSE 32 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274; THENCE EXHIBIT "A" SHEETI OF2 COURSE 4. NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID COURSE 32, NORTH 35°25'40" WEST (NORTH 35°25'44" WEST PER COURSE NUMBER 32 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274) 198.30 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 830.00 FEET (830.00 FEET PER COURSE NUMBER 31 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274) A RADIAL THROUGH POINT BEARS SOUTH 85°13'37" WEST; THENCE COURSE 5. NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE ALONG COURSE 31 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°18'43", HAVING A CHORD LENGTH OF 76.92 FEET AND ARC LENGTH OF 76.95 FEET (5°18'43, 76.95 FEET PER SAID COURSE 31); THENCE COURSE 6. TANGENT TO SAID CURVE ALONG SAID COURSE 30 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274, NORTH 0°32'20" EAST 184.59 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PARCEL B. CONTAINING: 30,328.38 SQ.FT. 0.696 ACRES MORE OR LESS EXHIBIT "A" SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS BASIS OF BRUUNGS: THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR IHIS SURVEY IS THE NAD 83 CAUFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM ZONE 6, GRID BEARING BETWEH STATION "SM 126" (NO. 1126) AND STATION 'SM 138" (NO. 1138) PER ROS 13928. ie N 04'09'26" W PROPOSED PARCEL "C AREA: 30,328.38 SQ. FT. 0.696 ACRES NOTE: FOR AUGNMENT OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD SEE IMPROVEMENT DRAWINGS FOR RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD - SAN MARCOS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 179 AND CITY OF CARLSBAO PROJECT NO. 3907. ( ) = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER QTY OF CARLSBAD RESOLUTION NO, 7274 APPROVED 5-6-1983, (COURSE) = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER QTY OF CARLSBAD RESOLUTION NO. 7274 APPROVED 6-6-1983. [ ] « INDICATES RECORD DATA PER CITY OF SAN MARCOS PROJECT NO, 179 <> - INDICATES RECORD DATA PE3? OTf OF CARLSBAD PROJECT NO. 3907 (( )) = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER ROS 11834 « » = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER MAP 13525 TPOB ^ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OATlE: SCALE: 02-18-2010 rslOO" MAPPING DIVISION SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ^= RO A.RAP/U3E: MaRO^ AVENUE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REORGANIZATiON ANNEXATION TO CffY OF CARLSBAD DETACHMENT FROM CfTY OF SAN MARCOS 0.696ACRES | 81: 1 fXWNHBi: a6.c. MaRO^ AVENUE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REORGANIZATiON ANNEXATION TO CffY OF CARLSBAD DETACHMENT FROM CfTY OF SAN MARCOS TMOMASBflOS: ^i2B-f^ | SCALE:jL_IN=iOOlFT SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS CO o > m O o PARCEL "C" COURSES S 86X)2't4' E 93.79' @ S 03'57'46" W 47.90' <N 03*5746" E> ® A=15'55'43" R-1334.00' L=370.86' © N 3575'40" W 198.30' (N 3575'44' W) (D A=0518'43" /A^miB'AZ' R=830.00' ( R=830.00' L=76.95' \L=76.95' y //A=0518'29"\v (( R^830.00' )) \\L==76.89* JJ ® N 00'32'20" E 184.59' (N 00*32'16" E) ® N 86-02'H'' W(R) (B) S 78^2'03" W(R) © S 8513'37'' W(R) (N 8513'33" E(R)) ® N 897r40'^ W(R) ((N 89'28'45'' W)) (COURSE 31) ',(D EXISTNG QTY-BCM^OARY UNE R O - 'MELROSE AVENUE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REORGANIZATION" (CITY OF SAN MARCOS) ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITIES OF SAN MARCOS AND CARLSBAD, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED APRIL 10, 1886, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: BEGINNING AT A POINT ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NUMBER 454, SOUTH 00°32'20" WEST (SOUTH 00°32'16" WEST PER COURSE NUMBER 30 OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274 DESIGNATED AS THE MELROSE AVENUE REORGANIZATION, PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED JULY 5,1983), (SOUTH 00°32'01" WEST PER SAID MAP NUMBER 13525) 21 52 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PARCEL A; THENCE COURSE 1. CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NUMBER 454, ALSO BEING SAID COURSE 30 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274, SOUTH 0°32'20" WEST 624.59 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A"; THENCE COURSE 2. LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 86°02' 14" WEST 38.21 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON A LINE BEING 66.00 FEET WESTERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO, AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AS SHOWN ON CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 3907; THENCE COURSE 3 NORTH 42^01 '39" WEST 35.72 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MELROSE DRIVE, 66 00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF MELROSE DRIVE AS SHOWN ON SAID CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS; THENCE COURSE 4. NORTH 7°50'37" WEST 150.81 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MELROSE DRIVE, 78 00 FEET NORTHERLY OF SAID CENTERLINE; THENCE COURSE 5. NORTH 54°16'34" EAST 39.04 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON A LINE BEING 92.50 FEET WESTERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF RANCHO SANTA FE ' ROAD AS SHOWN ON CITY OF SAN MARCOS CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 179; THENCE EXHIBIT "A" PAGE 1 OF 3 COURSE 6. NORTHEASTERLY PARALLEL AND 92.50 FEET WESTERLY OF SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 3'^57'46" EAST 308.04 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 130.50 FEET; THENCE COURSE 7. LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°52'48" , HAVING A CHORD LENGTH OF 40.56 FEET AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.72 FEET; THENCE COURSES. TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 21 °50'34" EAST 51.88 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 109.50 FEET; THENCE COURSE 9. NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15"=' 16'05", HAVING A CHORD LENGTH OF 29.09 FEET AND ARC LENGTH OF 29.18 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNLNG OF PARCEL A. CONTAINING: 29,394.38 SQ. FT. 0.674 ACRES MORE OR LESS PARCEL B: BEGINNING AT AFORESAID POINT "A"; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NUMBER 454 SOUTH 00°32'20" WEST (SOUTH 00°32'16" WEST PER COURSE NUMBER 30 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274) 184.59 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVE^JG A RADIUS OF 830.00 FEET (830.00 FEET PER COURSE 31 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°18'43" A DISTANCE OF 76.95 FEET (5'^18'43", 76.95 FEET PER SAID COURSE 31 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274); THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG COURSE NUMBER 32 OF SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 7274, SOUTH 35°25'40" EAST 198.30 FEET (SOUTH 35°25'44" EAST PER SAID COURSE NUMBER 32) TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PARCEL "B"; THENCE COURSE 10: CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID COURSE NUMBER 32 SOUTH 35°25'40" EAST 732.08 FEET; COURSE 11. THENCE LEAVING SAID COURSE NUMBER 32, SOUTH 53°15'56" WEST 52.02 FEET; THENCE COURSE 12. NORTH 36°44'04" WEST 149.00 FEET; THENCE COURSE 13. SOUTH 53°15'56" WEST 44.79 FEET; THENCE COURSE 14. NORTH 32°06'54" WEST 35.22 FEET; THENCE COURSE 15. NORTH 34°09'57" WEST 96.30 FEET; THENCE COURSE 16. NORTH 11°53'15" EAST 33.90 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON A LINE BEING 36.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO, AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF LA EXHIBIT 'A" PAGE 2 OF 3 COSTA MEADOWS DRIVE AS SHOWN ON CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 3907; THENCE COURSE 17. NORTH 35°06'41" WEST 72.00 FEET TO A POINT LYJNG ON A LINE BEING 36.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO, AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF LA COSTA MEADOWS DRTVE AS SHOWN ON CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 3907; THENCE COURSE 18. NORTH 75°40'38" WEST 37.68 FEET; THENCE COURSE 19. NORTH 26°19'57" WEST 20.03 FEET; THENCE COURSE 20. NORTH 11 °36'47" WEST 60.70 FEET; THENCE COURSE 21. NORTH 22°03'11" WEST 59.70 FEET; THENCE COURSE 22. NORTH 32'^29'29" WEST 60.71 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON A LE^E BEING 66.00 FEET EASTERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO, AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERL^^^E OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NUMBER 3907, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON- TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1334.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH POINT BEARS SOUTH 71 °47'47" WEST; THENCE COURSE 23. NORTHWESTERLY PARALLEL AND 66.00 FEET EASTERLY OF SAID CENTERLINE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6°14'16" HAVmG A CHORD LENGTH OF 145.16 FEET AND ARC LENGTH OF 145.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PARCEL "B". PARCEL B CONTAINING: 46,683.46 SQ. FT. 1.072 ACRES MORE OR LESS TOTAL AREA OF PARCELS A AND B: 76,077.84 SQ. FT. 1.746 ACRES MORE OR LESS JN2875 EXHIBIT "A" PAGE 3 OF 3 15 SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SUR\^Y IS THE NAD 83 CAUFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM ZONE 6. GRID BEARING BETWEEN STATION "SM 126' (NO. 1126) AND STATION "SM 138" (NO. 1138) PER ROS 13928. ie N 04'09'26'' W PROPOSED PARCa "A" AREA: PRCFOSEO PARCEL "8" AREA: TOTAL AREA OF PARCELS A&B 29,394.38 SQ. FT. 0.674 ACRES 46,583.48 SQ. FT. 1.072 Aa?ES 76,077.84 Sa FT. 1.746 ACRES NOTE: FOR AUGNMENT OF RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD SEE IMPROVEMENT DRAWINGS FOR RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD - SAN MARCOS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 179 AND aiY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT NO. 3907. 1 O CN OO CM LEGEND: ( ) = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER OVf OF CARLSBAD RESOLUTION NO. 7274 APPROVED 5-6-1983. (COURSE) = INDICATES RECORD DATA PER QTY OF CARLSBAD RESaUTlON NO. 7274 APPROVED 6-6-1983. INDICATES RECORD DATA PER CITY OF SAN MARCOS PROJECT NO. 179 INDICATES RECORD DATA PER CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT NO. 3907 INDICATES RECORD DATA PER ROS 11834 INDICATES RECORD DATA PER MAP 13525 [] < > (( )) « » TPOB = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING mMinjuP NO SC/OJS [DATE: 1 SCALE: 02-18-2010 i"=iory MAPPING DIVISION SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TO |A,R,APAG& MB-ROSe AVB^UE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD RKJRGANIZATION ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SAN MARCOS DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF CARLSBAD 1.746 ACRES | R.G.C. MB-ROSe AVB^UE / RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD RKJRGANIZATION ANNEXATION TO CITY OF SAN MARCOS DETACHMENT FROM CITY OF CARLSBAD THOMASBBOS: l^28-A-« | SCALE: t" {N= 100'rr WLY m OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAO #454 SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS PARCEL "A" COURSES S0(r32'20"W 624.59' N 86'02'14" W 38.21' H ATQl'ZB" W 35.72' N 07150*37" W 150.81' N 5416*34 E 39.04' N03'5r46"E 308.04' A=17'52*48" R=t30.50' L=:40.72' •A=17-52'48" R=130.50' .L=40.72' . N 21'50'34" E 51.88' [N2T50'33''E 51.88'} A-1516'05" R-109.50' [R=t09.50'] L-29,18' S00'32'20"W 21.52" (S 00-32T6" W) S 8375'3r E(R) S 6809'26" E(R) N 68'09'26" W(R) N 86'02'14" W(R) CENTERUNE INTERSECTION RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND MEU^OSE DRIVE ^ S^CET3 SCALE:X.IN=100'FT SEE SHEET 2 ©- (COURSE 31)1 (H)' SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS PARCa "B" COURSES 5Q)S 35'25'40" E 732.08' 5315'56" W 52.02' ^ N 36'44'04'* W 149.00' S 5315'56" W 44,79' @N 32106'54'' W 35.22' @ N 34'09'57" W ^.30* g) N 1f53'15" E 33.90' i7)N 35'06'4r W 72.00' W N 75"40'38" W 37.68' N 2619'57'' W 20.03' ^N im'47' W 60.70' 2V) N 22'03'tr W 59.70' SN 32'29'29'' W 60.71' ^A-0614'16'' R=t334,00* L«t45.23' 0 S 00*32'20*' W 184.59' (S 00*32'16" W) (?) N 89*27'40" W(R) {(N 89-28'45" E)) CH) A=0518'43"/A=05f8'43 ^ R=:830.00' R=830.00' L=76.95' U=76.95' // A=05*18'29"\\ I R=830.00' WL^76.89* // (?) N 8513'37' E(R) ^ (N 8513*33" E(R)) 0 S 3575*40" E 198.30' (S 3575'44" E) ® S 78'02'03" W{R) 0 S 71'47'4r ^R) The City of CARLSBAD Planning Division EXHIBIT Cj A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. P.C. AGENDA OF: Juty 6, 2011 Application complete date: June 8, 2011 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Tecla Levy SUBJECT: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - Request for a recommendation that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783 RECOMMENDING A FINDING that the Final Negative Declaration ND 10-807 prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos is adequate for the RSF Boundary Adjustment project and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6784, 6785 and 6786 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of General Plan Amendment (GPA 11-03), Zone Change (ZC 11-02), and Annexation/Detachment of property (ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01) based on the findings contained therein. H. INTRODUCTION The project consists of a boundary adjustment between the cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos due to widening and realigning approximately one half mile of RSF Road from north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. The adjustment is proposed so the boundary reflects street improvements completed by the two cities in 2004. Two parcels will be detached to the City of San Marcos and one parcel will be annexed to the City of Carlsbad. The parcel to be annexed to the City of Carlsbad requires a General Plan and Zoning designation and consists entirely of roadway. HI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND In 2003 the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad entered into an agreement (City Council Resolution No. 2003-305) for the adjustment of the common city boundary to address the remnant right-of-way land for each city that resulted from the realigning and widening of an approximate 2.3 mile section of RSF Road to Prime Arterial status. The project was completed in 2004 in two phases: Phase 1, from La Costa Avenue to San Elijo Road; and Phase 2, fiom San Elijo Road to Melrose Drive. Improvements included: 1) widening the road from two lanes to six A GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT JULY 6,2011 PAGE 2 lanes; 2) realigning the road generally to the east; and 3) replacing the bridge structure at the San Marcos Creek crossing. The 2003 agreement states the responsibilifies for both cities. The City of San Marcos is the lead agency on the environmental document to comply with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and for the submittal of an application to LAFCO on behalf of both cities for the approval of prezoning (the parcel must be prezoned for at least two years to be in compliance with the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Govemment Reorganization Act of 2000), general plan land-use changes, annexation and detachment of parcels. The City of Carlsbad is responsible for preparing legal descriptions and plats for the three parcels (Exhibit "A"), which it has completed. Both cities must adopt resolutions supporting the annexation, detachment, and application to LAFCO. LAFCO will process the sphere of influence changes for both cities. The City of San Marcos adopted its required resolutions, including approval of a Negative Declaration (ND), at its City Council meeting of April 12, 2011. IV. ANALYSIS The boundary adjustment will allow the Melrose Drive and RSF Road intersection to be located within the City of San Marcos. RSF Road south of the intersection will be in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed boundary changes are shown generally on the attached location map and several Planning Commission resolutions and are legally described in Exhibit "A," (attached) and as follows: • Proposed Parcel "A" - 0.674 acre detached to City of San Marcos (north and south of Melrose Drive, on the west side of RSF Road). Before the realignment, this area was empty land. The realignment added road right-of-way and right turn lanes, which the boundary adjustment will encompass. • Proposed Parcel "B" - 1.072 acres detached to the City of San Marcos (north and south of La Costa Meadows Drive on the east side of RSF Road). Before the realignment, this area was all road right-of-way. After the realignment, the area now consists of excess road right-of-way that adjacent parcels can use for landscaping and additional parking. • Proposed Parcel "C" - 0.696 acre annexed to the City of Carisbad (south of Melrose Drive, on the east side of RSF Road). Before realignment, this area was road right-of- way. After the realignment, the area now encompasses entirely road right-of-way. As stated above, property is being detached from the City of San Marcos and annexed to the City of Carisbad (0.696 acre) and being detached from the City of Carlsbad (1.746 acres) and annexed to the City of San Marcos. Land coming into the City of Carlsbad is presently road right-of-way, which is proposed to be designated as Prime Arterial per the city's Circulation Element. The parcel is proposed to have a Zoning designation (prezone) of Arterial Roadway. Land being detached to the City of San Marcos is both road right-of-way (Parcel "A") and developable land (Parcel "B"); that latter will be used by adjacent privately-owned lots for landscaping and parking. 160 GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT JULY 6,2011 PAGE 3 . A. General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Consistency Staff analyzed the proposed amendment's consistency with the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan and their associated policies and programs. The proposed amendment does not conflict with any goal, objecfive or policy of the General Plan as shown below. General Plan Findings: • Land Use and Circulation: The proposed General Plan Land Use designation of "Prime Arterial" is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map and the Circulation Element. The amendment also facilitates the boundary adjustment necessary between the cities of San Marcos and Carlsbad after the realignment and improvements of the RSF Road segment to address the 0.696 acre that is now right-of-way land. • Land Use: The proposed boundary adjustment and Prime Arterial Land Use designation amendment are consistent with the Growth Management and Public Facilities Goal A.2, which states, "A City which maintains a system of public facilities adequate for the projected populafion," in that it respects and recognizes a Prime Arterial roadway constructed to be adequate in width and capacity to accommodate the build-out of the city. • Circulation: The proposed amendment is consistent with Streets and Traffic Control, Goal A.4, which states, "A City with properly maintained, smooth functioning and safe traffic control systems," in that the boundary adjustment makes jurisdictional boundaries and maintenance responsibilities of the roadway and traffic lights at the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive easier to determine and logical. Zone Change Findings: • That the proposed Zone Change to Arterial Roadway is consistent with the goals and policies ofthe various elements ofthe General Plan, in that the Zone Change is for land that is within the public right-of-way on a Prime Arterial Circulation Element roadway. • That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan and Zoning as mandated by California state law and the City of Carisbad General Plan Land Use Element. • The Zone Change is necessary to implement the boundary adjustment agreement (Resolufion No. 2003-305) between the cifies of San Marcos and Carisbad and to be consistent with the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Govemment Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Secfion 56000 of the California Government Code; which requires the city to prezone (for two years) the annexation of property. • That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity, and general welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that the property proposed for 10 GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT JULY 6,2011 PAGE 4 a designation of Arterial Roadway is within the public right-of-way on a Circulation Element roadway designated as Prime Arterial. As shovm above, the proposed changes do not create any conflicts with the provisions of the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. B. Annexation and Detachment Consistency As per the agreement between the cifies of Carisbad and San Marcos (Resolufion No. 2003-305) for the adjustment ofthe common city boundary, the City of San Marcos will process boundary changes between the two cities through the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to adjust each of the cities' boundaries relative to the realigned road per the requirements of the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Govemment Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Secfion 56000 ofthe Califomia Govemment Code. The Act also requires the city to "prezone" the property that will be annexed/detached for at least two years. As stated previously, the proposed zone change for the 0.696 acre parcel the City of Carlsbad proposes to annex will have a "prezone" designafion of Arterial Roadway. While the City has no required findings for the approval of a detachment and annexation, the following conclusions support the recommendafion for their approval: • The Rancho Santa Fe Road boundary adjustment and related annexation and detachment reflect the mutual agreement ofthe chies of San Marcos and Carlsbad as required by the December 12, 2003, "Agreement between the City of Carisbad and the City of San Marcos for the construction of a portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Adjustment to the Common City Boundary." • The annexation and detachment of parcels represent beneficial changes to the boundary between the cities of San Marcos and Carisbad because they help clarify in a logical manner the boundaries of maintenance and liability between the two cities. Further, they represent appropriate adjustments based on the existing land uses they would encompass. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Per the 2003 Agreement City of San Marcos is the lead agency on the CEQA document for the boundary adjustment. Since the City of Carisbad has decision-making authority over aspects of the project for which it is responsible, the City of Carisbad serves as a "responsible agency." This means that the City of Carlsbad is to consider the environmental document prepared by the lead agency as it makes its decisions, and, if appropriate, determine the document is adequate for its purposes. City of San Marcos staff conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. The assessment determined the project does not have any potentially significant impacts. The draft ND was circulated for a 21-day public review period from December 20, 2010 to January 10, 2011. The final ND (ND 10-807), dated January 26, 2011, was approved by I6r GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT JULY 6, 2011 PAGE 5 the City of San Marcos at its April 12, 2011 City Council meeting (Resolufion No. 2011-7473 & Ordinance No. 2011-1346). City ofCarlsbad staff has determined that the ND is adequate and that the project would not have a potentially significant effect on the environment. The document notes, for example, that the boundary adjustment will not involve any physical change and land to be annexed by the City of San Marcos from the City ofCarlsbad is already disturbed and may be used for uses accessory to adjacent existing industrial businesses. Staff therefore recommends the Planning Commission, based on its independent judgment, find the ND prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos as adequate and recommend its approval to the City Council. The ND approved by the City of San Marcos is attached. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolufion No. 6783 (ND) 2. Planning Commission Resolufion No. 6784 (GPA) 3. Planning Commission Resolufion No. 6785 (ZC) 4. Planning Commission Resolufion No. 6786 (ANX/DTCH) 5. Locafion Map 6. Background Data Sheet 7. Local Facilifies Impact Assessment Form 8. Reduced Exhibit Planning Commission Minutes July 6, 2011 EXHIBIT \P Page 3 MOTION ACTION: VOTE: AYES: Motion by Commlssioper Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Banning Commission Resolution No. 6780 approving Coastal Development PepKit CDP 11-04 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contemed therein Including the errata sheet. 7-0 Chairpen?^ L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Comrafssioner Black, Commissioner Nygaa/f Commissioner Schumacher, Commissiop^ Siekmann, and Commissior Scull Chairperspii' L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Ag^da Item 1 and asked Mr. to introduce the next item: ^ 2. GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 - RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - Request for a recommendation that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Associate Planner Pam Drew would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. Ms. Drew gave a brief presentation and stated she wouid be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Siekmann inquired if any of the land proposed to be annexed was included in any of the open space totals. Ms. Drew stated the three designated areas were part of the roadway right-of-way. Commissioner Schumacher asked if there are any underground utilities in the intersection that is to be annexed. Ms. Drew deferred the question to Glen Van Peski, Engineering Manager. Mr. Van Peski stated that district boundaries for the sewer and water districts do not follow city boundaries and he does not believe there are any conflicts with the district boundaries for the underground utilities. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, Chairperson L'Heureux opened and closed public testimony on the Item. DISCUSSION Commissioner Nygaard congratulated Staff on a great job with the project. She commented that the project makes logical sense and stated her support of the project. Commissioner Siekmann concun^ed with Commissioner Nygaard. Commissioner Arnold also stated his concurrence with his fellow Commissioners. Commissioner Black stated his concurrence with his fellow Commissioners. Planning Commission Minutes July 6, 2011 Page 4 Commissioner Schumacher also stated he concurs with his fellow Commissioners. Chairperson L'Heureux stated the project makes logical sense and stated his support ofthe project. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6783 recommending a finding that the Final Negative Declaration ND 10-807 prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos Is adequate for the RSF Boundary Adjustment project and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6784, 6785 and 6786 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment (GPA 11-03), Zone Change (ZC 11-02), and Annexation/Detachment of property (ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01) based on the findings contained therein, VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Nygaard, Commissioner Schumacher, Commissioner Siekmann, and Commissioner Scully NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 2 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 3. GPA 11-04 - HOUSING ELEMENT PRO( approval of an^Addendum to the previou General Pl^ Amendment to make pifnor changes to Housing Element Program 2.1. :AM 2.1 - Request for a recommendation of adopted Mitigated >4gatlve Declaration and a th^time frames of 2005-2010 Mr. Neu introduced presentation. ^enda Item 3 and stated Senior Planner Sc0tt Donnell would make^the Staff Commissioner/^ully recused herself from dais due to a conflictof Interest. Chairpersp^n L'Heureux opened theBfublic hearing on Agend/ltem 2. Mr. D/^nell gave a detailed pre^ntation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. fairperson L'Heureux as)^ if there were any qu^ons of Staff. Commissioner NygaanzTasked ifthe date changes proposed for the docupffent deal with the dates/mat the zone changes will accomplished and do not pertain to moving/forward on any housi^ in the community. Mr. Djemnell stated that was correct. Commissionej/Schumacher asked if smother project comes Ink/the city that is not Iand4hat has been allocated oj;4dentified in the RHNA numbers that helps with th^low to moderate incomizr housing, does it affect the/^ojects that have beeii/raentified or is there a tranter of those units. Mr. Donnell stated that if that were to occur, it would be a^onus because it could psfhaps enable the City to/De over the minimum number of units it needs to pravide to meet its affordablejiousing goals. It is also/^bonus if it can replace a project the city is countin^hat is withdrawn or is upiable to be completed wjtnln the Housing Element cycle. Commissioner Scj^macher inquired about tWe Barrio area and what Will constitute satisfaction of completion for the Barrio. Mr. Donnell stated generally the way state law reads, all land use actions associated with what the Housing Element proposes which are necessary to enable it would need to be completed in 19 months. Commissioner Schumacher asked what that would entail for the City. Mr. Donnell stated it would be General Plan and Zoning amendments. RSF Boundary Adjustment Exhibit "ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01 EXHIBIT \\ II ^^^/^ Proposed Survey Boundary Existing Survey Boundary Annex to Carlsbad [ ] Detach to San Marcos /\,^ Existing RSF Alignment /^^.^^ Previous RSF Alignment PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 CCP.) This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp 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. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times- Advocate and which newspapers have been 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: February 18*^ 2012 Proof of Publication of NOTICE 0^ PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your Interest may be af-fected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Viiiage Drive, Carlsbad, Cal-ifornia, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 28, 1012, to consider recommend- ing that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and approval of a Gen- eral Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Whereas, on July 6, 2011 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recom-mended approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Those persons wishing to speal< on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after February 24,2012. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Drew in the Planning Division at 760-602-4644 or pam .drew @ carlsbadca.aov. If you challenge the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation and/or Detachment 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 correspon-dence delivered to the City o1 Garlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: GPA 11-03/ZC 11 -02/ANX 11 -02/DTCH 11-01 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL net 2309602 02/18/2012 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Escondido, California On this 20^^ day Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, tliat the City Council of the City of Carisbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 28, 1012, to consider recommending that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Whereas, on July 6, 2011 the City of Carisbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recommended approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda biil will be available on and after February 24, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Drew in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4644 or pam.drew@carisbadca.gov. If you challenge the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation and/or Detachment 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 con-espondence delivered to the City of Carisbad, Attn: City Cleric's Office, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: GPA 11 -03/ZC 11 -02/ANX 11 -02/DTCH 11-01 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PUBLISH: February 18, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL MELROSE DR •— L U LA COSTA MEADOWS DR I UJ Q N NOT TO SCALE SITEMAP RSF Boundary Adjustment GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council ofthe City ofCarlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 28,1012, to consider recommending that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Whereas, on July 6, 2011 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recommended approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after February 24, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Drew in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4644 or pam.drewOcarlsbadca.gov. If you challenge the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation and/or Detachment 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's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or priorto the public hearing. CASE FILE: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PUBLISH: February 18, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL LA COSTA MEADOWS OR NOT TO SCALE RSF Boundary Adjustment GPA 11-03 / ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 28,1012, to consider recommending that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Whereas, on July 6, 2011 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared and approved by the City of San Marcos for the boundary adjustment is adequate and recommended approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation of 0.696 acre from the City of San Marcos, and Detachment of 1.746 acres to the City of San Marcos to facilitate a boundary adjustment between the two cities along Rancho Santa Fe (RSF) Road north of the intersection of RSF Road and Melrose Drive to south of La Costa Meadows Drive. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after February 24, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Drew in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4644 or pam.drew(S)carlsbadca.ROV. If you challenge the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Annexation and/or Detachment 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's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 CASE NAME: RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PUBLISH: February 18, 2012 WOT ro SCALE RSF Boundary Adjustment GPA 11-03/ZC 11-02/ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® j^Feed Paper See instruction Sheet | for Easy Peel Feature CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92011 SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DISTRICT STE 250 255 PICO AVE SAN MARCOS CA 92069 iAVERY®5i60® ENCINITAS SCHOOL DISTRICT 101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DISTRICT 710 ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS CA 92024 LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DIST TIM JOCHEN 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT 1966 OLIVENHAIN RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 S VULCAN AV ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF SAN MARCOS 1 CIVIC CENTER DR SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 CITY OF OCEANSIDE 300 NORTH COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CITY OF VISTA 600 EUCALYPTUS AVE VISTA CA 92084 VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT 201 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SANDIEGO CA 92182-4505 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH AND GAME 3883 RUFFIN ROAD SANDIEGO CA 92123 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY STE 100 9174 SKYPARK CT SANDIEGO CA 92123-4340 SD COUNTY PLANNING STEB 5201 RUFFIN RD SANDIEGO CA 92123 LAFCO 1600 PACIFIC HWY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 10124 OLD GROVE RD SANDIEGO CA 92131 SANDAG STE 800 401 B STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 CA COASTAL COMMISSION ATTN TONI ROSS STE 103 7575 METROPOLITAN DR SANDIEGO CA 92108-4402 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY PO BOX 82776 SANDIEGO CA 92138-2776 CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5934 PRIESTLEY DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER MICHAEL MCSWEENEY - BIASD STE 110 9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407 Etiquettes faciles d peler Utilises le gabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens de chargement Consultez la feullle d'instructlon vvww.avery.com l-SnO-GO-AVFRV Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® LA COSTA MEADOWS LLC 1697 LA COSTA MEADOWS DR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 ! A J^Feed Paper See Instruction Sheet \ •"•••^ for Easy Peel Feature ANDERSON MARTIN S & KATHLEEN 3521 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 [AVERY®5160® ARMSTRONG PETER J & LESLEE L 6840 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 BARR TRUST 3518 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 BERUTI FAMILY 11-04-11 3267 SITIO TORTUGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 BIEWER KAYLA L 2622 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 BLANKMEYER FAMILY 05-03-08 3482 FILOLICIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BLOOMBERG BRIAN J & MARGARET E 3419 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BORG RICKARDL&ALICES 744 VALSERENO DR OLIVENHAIN CA 92024 BROWN JAMES & MARY LIZABETH 6834 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 BULLUM IVAN M & ROSEMARY 3486 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BURBAGE MELISSA A 3426 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLOS SHARON E 3406 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD PRESCHOOL LTD PTNSHP 100 W BROADWAY #1100 GLENDALE CA 91210 CASSEN TODD H & AMBER M 3522 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 NATURAL LANDS MANAGEMENT 215 WASH ST FALLBROOK CA 92028 CHIANG KANG-CHIEH & WU NGA YIN 3404 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHOI SOLOMON 6856 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CIHOMSKY JOHN & THERESA A 6846 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONTRERAS DEBRA 3515 CALLE HIDALGO CARLSBAD CA 92009 DHANEKULA RAMAKRISHNA 3481 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 DOMINGUEZ FRANK & TERESA 3175 NWWEEDLN POULSBO WA 98370 ELLIOTT AARON M & KRISTI A H 3478 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ELSMORE FAMILY 06-17-94 2017 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ESTANCIA COASTAL L L C 2020 MAIN ST #1100 IRVINE CA 92614 FAIRBANKS GARY & MARY 1412 TENNIS CLUB DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 FIKE JAMES E& KIMBERLY A 1836 MEADOWLARK RANCH RD SAN MARCOS CA 92078 FOLEY MARC & TORI 6853 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 FREIDIN KELLY M 1808 MEADOWLARK RANCH RD SAN MARCOS CA 92078 GAILEY FAMILY 09-29-98 3512 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes fadles h peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens de charaement Consultez la feullle H'inctriirtinn www.avery.com Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® GALLEGOS AARON 3483 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 I A j^Feed Paper See Instruction Sheet} for Easy Peel Featur^^ ^ iAVERY®5i60® GARCIA DAMIAN 2654 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 GARCIA ENRIQUE & CYNTHIA 3480 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GENTILE ROBERT J & CHRISTA L 3418 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GILUES 09-11-98 1701 LA COSTA MEADOWS DR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 GOLDEN SUSAN I 3410 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GOMEZ ALFONSO 6873 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 GOURLEY JOHN E & PAIGE M 6865 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 GRANDE ELLEN 6890 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 GRAWIN WILLIAM J JR & CHRISTINE A 6855 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 HARRIS SCOTT A & ELIA R 3519 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 HARRIS VANESSA 6860 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 HENDERSON TRAVIS &. ALICIA 3424 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 HENNING RYAN & SCHWARTZ EMILY 2624 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 HESS DAVID & ESPERANZA 3479 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 HOFFMANN JURGEN & JENNIFER 8889 ELUNGHAM ST SAN DIEGO CA 92129 HUGHES TIMOTHY G 6854 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 HUNTER INDUSTRIES INC 1940 DIAMOND ST SAN MARCOS CA 92078 JANKE MICHAEL 2630 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 JANOFSKY JASON 3400 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAJOHNCHALERMSAK PONGCHAI 3432 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KASPAR ALLAN & ERIN 6881 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 KOLL/ LA COSTA MEADOWS LLC 4343 VON KARMAN AVE #150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 KREISCH-DEFRANCISCO FAMILY 6850 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 KRETZSCHMAR FAMILY 05-05-10 6898 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 KRICHEVER ALEXANDER & LARISA 6839 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 KUCKGEORGE S& ANGELAS 3501 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 LACOSTA MEADOWS INVESTORS LLC 2221 LAS PALMAS DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 LACOSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGOCA 92123 U\W RYAN G & ALYSSA 3526 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes faciles h peler Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens de charaement Consultez la feuille rl'inctri irtinn www.avery.com 1 -onn_/sr». AI/CDV Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEIVIPIATE 5160® LEE JOHNNIE & YUAN KEYING 3484 FILOLICIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 I ^ — See Instruction Sheet | j^Feed Paper • for Easy P^-^ feature LEE MARVIN & ASHLEY 2006 12-18-06 6869 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 iAVERY®5i60® ! LEE TAI 3485 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 LEWIS DAVID S & STEPHANIE E 3476 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 UNGSIJUN 3422 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARINOS MANUEL W 8t CYNTHIA S 2652 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 MCBRIDE MARY A 09-16-08 P O BOX 1182 CARDIFF CA 92007 MCFADDEN MICHAEL & PELAEZ ANA L 3507 CALLE HIDALGO CARLSBAD CA 92009 N V CHARTWELL INVESTMENTS L P 310 S TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD #107-337 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 NASRI WAJMA A 8i ARMAD Z 3428 FILOLICIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 NGUYEN STEAVEN & THAO 3416 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 NICHOLS FAMILY 2009 02-18-09 501 AVOCADO AVE CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 NIELSEN MARK A & NAOMI J 3434 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 NORRIS DANIEL A &. ARLENE L 6848 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 NORTHOVER MARC 3520 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 ONEILLREBECAM 1234 MACKINNON AVE CARDIFF BY THE SEA CA 92007 PAIT ELLEN 3425 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 PALMER KRAIG & MALLORY 3509 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 PARKER NATHANAEL W & AUTUMN A 6885 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 PASSERELLO ROBERT 71 GREYLOCK RD BRISTOL Rl 02809 PAZIURA ALFONSA 08-30-11 1248 HEATHERVIEW DR OAK PARK CA 91377 PICCIONI FAMILY02-19-02 P 0 BOX 1323 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 PICKERING STEPHEN N & JOY L 6882 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 PILGRIM JAMES D & SARAH D 2632 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 POOLE KENNETH & MARIE FAMILY 2652 COLT RD RANCHO PALOS VERDES CA 90275 POPE CATHERINE M 3402 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 PULLIAM AMY P 3427 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 PURCELL DAVID M & LYNDA 6894 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 RADEMACHER 2000 06-22-00 1450 FLAGSHIP CT SAN MARCOS CA 92078 RENFROWJOAN 6838 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes faciles h peler Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens de chargement Consultez la feuille d'instructlon www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® REPPUCCI DIANNE 143 STH ST DEL MAR CA 92014 I A j^Feed Paper See Instruction Sheet | fcr Easy Peel Feature REVILLA LUIS G& USA 6858 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 iAVERY®5i60® ROBERTS DOUGLAS E & EMILY 3514 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERTS JEFFREY B 3524 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERTS LESLIE R 3515 CORTE MORA CARLSBAD CA 92009 RODRIGUEZ JOHN & JOANNA 3430 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SALTER RICK & YOUNG PENNY 6844 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAMSON JOSE E 3420 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SCHLEUNES ALFRED III 2127 MEADOWLARK RANCH CIR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SEDDON HEATHER L 2621 RAWHIDE LN SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SGP L L C 1699 LA COSTA MEADOWS DR #101 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SHRADER MICHAEL E P 0 BOX 2063 LEUCADIA CA 92024 SIMAS DANIEL D&JUDITH 3517 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 SLENDER MONTE & WILSON- 3523 CALLE HIDALGO CARLSBAD CA 92009 SMITH ROBERT & ALICE FAMILY 1687 LA PLAZA DR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SMITH STUARTS 6870 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 STANDARD PACIFIC CORP 15360 BARRANCA PKWY IRVINE CA 92618 STANDRING ERNEST 2005 11-07-05 5433 NEW MILLS RD SAN DIEGO CA 92115 STIGER RONALD DJR 3421 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SWANSON STEPHEN M & AIMEE 3477 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SY STEPHANIE SL 6877 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 TAT NGUYEN C &. AMY LAM 6866 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 TRACT 85-19 COMMUNITY ASSN 3103 VILLA WAY NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 TRIVITTE HOBIE & MCGURGAN 6830 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 UWINS JAMES R8i JENNIFER L 6847 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC AGENCY 00000 VELEZ LUIS A & GINGER 3414 FILOLI CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 VELLA DEBRA 6841 VIA VERANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes fadles it peler lltilkP7 IP nnharit AVPPV® filRIX® VERRET STEVEN J & JEWEL A 3505 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 A Spn« dp rharnpmpnt VILLEGAS CESAR A & WOLFSON WENDY K 6886 CAMINO DE AMIGOS CARLSBAD CA 92009 Consultez la feuille /l'inr<fri •/"f i AM www.avery.com 4 onn.fzr\ A%#CO\/ Easy Peel Labels Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® ! A J^Feed Paper See Instruction Sheet i WALKE ABHUEET M & RAMNATHKAR 3423 FILOU CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 '••"•^ for Easy Peel Feature WALSH FAMILY 09-29-11 3516 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 iAVERY®5i60® ! WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING INC 2280 WARDLOW CIR CORONA CA 92880 WESTON DOUGLAS A 8i SUSAN B 3513 CORTE RAMON CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILDE ROBERT H JR 8i MASUMI 2116 MEADOWLARK RANCH CIR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 WILSON DAVID & JENNIFER A 1820WINDRIVERST SAN MARCOS CA 92078 WOODHOUSE CRAIG H 8i ERIKA M 3511 CALLE HIDALGO CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes fadles d peler I Itilicay la naharH- AVPRV® mfin® Sens de charaement Consultez la feuille d'instructlon www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY RSF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTPam DrewFebruary 28, 2012 Location MapMELROSE DRCORINTIA STR A N C H O S A N T A F E R DFILOLI CRVIA MARINERO SPARROW LNLA COSTA MEADOWS DRV A L L E C IT O S W D D Y XANA WYBOULD E R ID GE DR S RANCHO SANTA FE RDVIA BORREGOS V IA V E R A N O C A M INO D E A M IG OS 0300600150FeetGPA 11-03 / ZC 11-02 ANX 11-02 / DTCH 11-01RSF Boundary Adjustment Background• 2003 agreement with the City of San Marcos for a boundary adjustment.• City of San Marcos would be lead on LAFCO & CEQA process.• City of Carlsbad would prepare the legal descriptions and plats.3 Background Cont.• Road widening was completed in 2007• On-site mitigation work completed in 2008• Final plats and legal documents completed in 2009• ND was completed and adopted in 20114 5A – 0.674 acreB – 1.072 acresC – 0.696 acreNewOld Parcel B 6 Environmental Review• A Negative Declaration has been prepared and adopted by the City of San Marcos.• Staff concludes the Negative Declaration is adequate and will not have any potentially significant impacts on the environment.7 Review Process•Planning Commission (July 6, 2011)Negative DeclarationGPA 11‐03 (Prime Arterial)ZC 11‐02 (Arterial Roadway)ANX 11‐02 (Annexation)DTCH 11‐01 (Detachment)8 Recommendation• City Council introduce Ordinance No. CS-173 (ZC 11-02)• City Council Adopt Resolution No. 2012-044 adopting the Findings that the Negative Declaration is adequate9 Recommendation Cont.• City Council adopt Resolutions No. 2012-045, 2012-046 & 2012-047 (GPA 11-03, ANX 11-02/DTCH 11-01 and Tax Exchange Agreement)10