The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1976-03-24; Planning Commission; ; CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS) TO PROVIDE FOR A FUTURE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENTt. ' . • • CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT March 24, 1976 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT CA5E NOS: EIR~3O7; GPA-38 APPLICANT: LA COSTA LAND CO. • REQUEST: CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS) TO PROVIDE FOR A FUTURE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT SECTION I: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: A. EIR-3O7: Staff recommends that the Final EIR-3O7-(including all commPnts made at the public hearings) be certified as having met all requirerne~ts of the Carlsbad EnvironmentJl Protection Ordinance of 1972 and the California Environmental Quality Act. FINDINGS: 1. The draft EIR was properly noticed and reviewed. 2. The comments received from reviewing agencies have been adequately addressed by the Planning Director. 3. The impacts of the project can be adequately mitigated. B. GAP-38: Staff recommends that GPA-38, as modified, be approved based on the following findings and subject to the following condftions. FINDINGS: 1. The amendment, as modified, reflects a more thorough investigation of the land use potential of the area than currently exists. 2. The amendment, as modified, is consistent with the other elements of the General Pl an. 3. An environmental impact report has been prepared for the project that adequately identifies the existing conditions and potential impacts which can be properly mitigated through the normal develop- ment review-process. •. • • 4. The amendment, as modified, is consistent with the surrounding land use proposals. CONDITIONS: 1. This approval is granted for the land described on Exhibit C, dated March 24, 1976. The Land Use and Circulation Elements shall be amended to reflect the applicable items as represented on Exhibit C, unless indicated otherwise herein. 2. On page 31 of the Land Use Element text, under "Special Treatment Area", the following addition shall be made: (f) The proposed Community Core area located in southeast Carlsbad." 3. On page 42 of the Land Use Element text, under "Special Treatment Area Guidelines", the following addition shall be made: 11 6. A specific plan should be prepared for the proposed Community Core area located in southeast Carlsbad. Particular attention should be given to the possible land uses, their function and need, and their impact on the surrounding area and the rest of the City." 4 • T h e m i t i g a t i n 0 me a s u r P. s s u g g e s t e d i n t h e e n v i r o nm e n L a l ·i 1111.J a c t reports shall be incorporated with later discretionary approvals. SECTION. II: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: I. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: Subject property is generally located east of El Camino Real and south of Palomar Airport Road. The 3610-acre area emcompasses all of the undeveloped, 11 P-C 11 zoned lands owned by La Costa Land Co. II. EXISTING ZONING: S~bject Property: North: East: South: West: Enclosed: III. EXISTING LAND USE: P-C P-C County (San Marcos) County (Olivenhain) Mixed City and County Mixed City Zoning Subject Property: Mostly vacant (some abandoned dry farming and marginal grazing) North: Vacant and agriculture East: Vacant, agriculture and minimal urban .uses south: Vacant and agriculture -2- • • , III.· EXISTING LAND USE (Continued): West: Batiquitos Lagoon, vacant and agriculture IV. PAST HISTORY AND RELATED CASES: The Rancho La Costa Area began developing within San Diego County's jurisdiction in 1965. In 1972, approximately 4909 acres of La Costa properties were annexed to Carlsbad and a Master Development Plan was approved. In 1973, an additional 493 acres (El Camino ·Glens or Wiegand Property and La Costa Northeast) were annexed. These tw6 areas are not included within any Master Plan approval. Also in )973, the City ap- proved a Master Plan (and ~nnexation) on 717 acres owned by Marvin Kratter. La Costa purchased this property in 1974 and calls the area La Costa North. The 3610 acres of land that fall under the purview of this request encompass all of the above La Costa properties not presently covered by approved maps. In 1974, the City adopted its present Land Use Element of the General Plan. At that time, both the City and La Costa were aware of certain inconsistencies between the new Land Use Plan and the adopted Master Plans. A Master· Plan amendment was encouraged at that time and a coordinated program between La Costa, their consultants and City Staff began. During the course of study, both the landowners and City Staff realized the need to again amend the Genera, Plan, especially the Land Use Element. The need for this amendment was based on many things: trend changes in the housing market, changes in the overall La Costa concept, environmental factors, plan refinement, etc. The proposed amendment represents those findings and desired changes. V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT INFORMATION: Environmental Impact Report #307 addresses the anticipated impacts of the La Costa General Plan and Master Plan Amendments. State law requires that the EIR be certified at the first discretionary action associated with the project. The EIR must address the ultimate impacts of the project; those impacts which cannot be adequately assessed in the early planning stages must be covered in subsequent EIR supplements. The Planning Commission and City Council, therefore, must certify the EIR prior to acting on the General Plan Amendment for La Costa. The certified EIR must then be reconsidered in conjunction with the upcoming hearing on the La Costa Master Plan. It is Staff's opinion that EIR supplements will be necessary for all individual development proposals within the Master Plan area. Mitigation measures have been proposed to adequately lessen the anticipated impacts of the project. Staff believes that these mitigations should appropriately be applied as condi- tions to the Master Plan. · -3- • • \VI. GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION: The proposed amendments are consis- tent with the other elements and the purpose and intent of the General Plan. VII. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Public facilities, such as future school sites, have been adequately addressed for this level of approval. An involved discussion of future needs are contained in the EIR and the necessary mitigation measures (i.e., development phasing) will occur during later Master Plan amendment discussions. VIII. MAJOR PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: l . I s th e pro po s e d am e n ct r11 e n t be t t e r th a n t h e ex i st ;-n g p l a n ? 2. Is the proposed amendment the best possible plan? 3. Is the proposed amendment consistent with City policy and general planning objectives? IV. INCIDENTAL INFORMATION: All affected departments have re- viewed and contributed in part to.this report. SECTION III: DISCUSSION: The existing General Plan for the La Costa area is basically a com- pos~te of previously approv2d master plans. The proposed changes in the Northeast and Far South areas are relatively consistent with the existing plan but reflect certain refinements that evolved from a more thorough investigation than had been done previously. The changes in the La Costa North area are somewhat more involved. Primarily, this is due to La Costa's desire to modify the develop- ment concept adopted in the Kratter Master Plan. The community needs (open space corridors, etc.) and environmental constraints have still been considered and incorporated into the plan. The following exhibits are copies of the affected portions of the amendment request shown formally on the wall exhibits. Each area has a graphic showing the existing General Plan, La Costa's request, and Staff's proposal. Staff feels that it is based on a done previously. with City policy its proposal is better than the existing plan b"ecause much more thorough study of the areas than had been Staff also suggests that the proposal is consistent and the objectives of the total General Plan. Whether or not the proposal is the best possible plan is difficult. to judge. It is possible, and in fact expected, that future amend- ments will be made in some areas after further study is made. However, • • .• • • I • . ihe proposal does represent the best planning efforts to date. ATTACHMENTS: As noted above MZ:cpl • • /\ 1-.:..., ... , •.. A ~ICK ENGINEERING COMPANY I :¼A~i11~~Lcr~~~~w1,;r~ 3088 PIO PICO DR. • SUITE 202 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 · P.O. BOX 1129 • PHONE • AREA CODE 714 • 729-4987 Mr. Don Agatep City Planning Director City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carls bad, California 92 00 8 March l~., 1976 REC~K~/ED MAR 16 1976 CITY OF CARLSBAD. · PlannJng De2ar:tment RE: SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE LA COSTA MASTER PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Dear Don: We have reviewed the above report and find the entire report acceptable. I would like to take this opportunity to thank your staff, especially Dana Hield for her excellent job of answering the comments of tho reviewing agencies that responded to the EIR data. · If you have any questions, please call. RCL:fm cc: Mr. paul D. Bussey Ms.. Dana Hield Mr. Irving Roston Sincerely, ~(?~' Robert C. Ladwig ·, i ' .. os \\ . 1· .l\ .. t'IBIT A-) Ext~T•~'-Ge.~"'-PLAI\\ •· . ~X"4161T 6-1 · LA. CoSTA f'RcPoSAL. .. •• • .· CXHIBfT A.-2... EX..STI~ ~R.A~ PL.AA ' • •· .. . · E.lC.'-'IB-IT ·e-2. L~ l~TA PRoPo~A.L RM .. ' i ------~-----------:---------~ •• ~;c..-,s,, ~-2 ··1.·1 STAF"F P~oPOSA-L. Ex"1err A-3 E.><.t451' •~c;, Ge.~e.~AL P~tJ FA~ SoOTH ( "RE./J\ I) -. ; '~· . ; . ,· ~-: :':_ , . . • E.xH1s,,-6-3 lA CoSTA .. PR.o_PoS~L , FA.R SouT~ ( A.~ei\, 1) ' • • · ExM,e1, _c_:.. .3 STAFF P~oPo-S,L .. FA-.R-SouTf-\ . (A.RE~ 1). · • • . E,<..t\u3,._. ~-4 . • E)(l~Tll\>C':, £ERA\.. Pl>.~ _, Fl>..R So0Tt-1 (ARE:A 2) E,-5,,-c_-4 STAFI= PRopo-SA..L FAR 500TH (A.REA 2.)