The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1983-10-26; Planning Commission; ; EIR 83-07|GPA/LU 83-02|ZC 281 - ROBERT'S GROUP' APPLICA.T SUBMITTAL DATE: JuPi, 19a3 DATE: TO: FROM: STAFF REPORT October 26, 1983 Planning Commission Land Use Planning Office CD SUBJECT: EIR 83-7/GPA/LU 83-2/ZC-281 -ROBERT'S GROUP -Request for 1) certification of an environmental impact report for a 36 acre parcel located immediately south of Palomar Airport Business Park, 1500 feet west of El Camino Real, 2) a general plan amendment from RM to RH and OS, and 3) preannexational zone change from a county agriculture zone to RD-Mand OS. I• RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1) ADOPT Resolution No. 2210 recommending CERTIFICATION of EIR 83-7 to the City Council based on the findings contained therein; 2) ADOPT Resolution No. 2211 recommending DENIAL of GPA/LU 83-2 to the City Council based on the findings contained therein; 3) ADOPT Resolution No. 2212 recommending APPROVAL of zc- 281, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This application is a request for the certification of an environmental impact report, general plan amendment and zone change as described above. The entire 36 acre site is presently designated for medium-density residential uses (4-10 du/ac) in the City's General Plan. It is presently situated in a county island with county agriculture zoning. The applicant proposes to change the land use designation on the northwest quadrant of the site to RH (20-30 du/ac). The designation on the northeast quadrant would be changed to O-S to accommodate a possible future tennis/health club facility (through conditional use permit). All residential area zoning would be changed to RD-M, and the open space area to o-s. Please see attached Exhibit 'A' and I BI. The site is presently vacant, with no improved or dedicated public frontage or access. Part of the site is presently used for agricultural purposes. A 200-foot wide SDG&E easement for electrical transmission lines crosses much of the property in a north-to-south-east direction. Development would be severely ' • constrained within this easement. The property is directly adjacent to the southern boundary of Palomar Airport Business Park, and conceptual development plans include an access point through the park. Other access is proposed indirectly from El Camino Real and future Poinsettia Lane. The general plan designates medium density residential land uses on all surrounding properties except the planned industrial to the north. The site slopes moderately to steeply up from the business park to a ridge which bisects the property in an east-west direction. Southerly of the ridge, the terrain slopes moderately down to the south. This southerly half of the site is presently used for the production of tomatoes. III. EIR 83-7 -MAJOR IMPACTS 1. Grading The EIR points out that ultimate development of the site could result in large amounts of earthwork and the creation of large cut and fill slopes. The potential exists that a higher density development could require a greater amount of grading. As a result, staff is recommending that high density development not be allowed on this site, and further, that any development on site be clustered on the flatter portions of the property. This will mitigate any significant grading impacts. 2. Archaeology The possibility exists that significant archaeological resources may be found on the site. Mitigation measures include further study prior to grading, and salvage if determined necessary by a qualified archaeologist. 3. Noise Palomar Airport Management has indicated that this site will be subject to frequent low-level aircraft overflight. An increase in density on the site would increase the magnitude of the problem. Staff recommends no increase in allowable density so as to minimize the number of persons subjected to the impact. 4. Visual Large manufactured slopes and bulky, dense, buildings could create an unappealing visual impact. Mitigation measures include requirements at time of development for contour grading, low-profile, clustered buildings, and extensive landscape treatment. ( 2) ' • IV. ANALYSIS -GENERAL PLAN AND ZONE CHANGE Planning Issues 1) Would the proposed land use/zone change be compatible with existing and future land uses? 2) Is the proposed land use a more appropriate use for the site? Discussion When conducting an analysis of the Carlsbad General Plan, one quickly notes the vast industrial and non-residential land use belt running generally parallel to Palomar Airport Road through the middle of the city. This belt is intended to follow the approach and take-off patterns for aircraft using Palomar Airport. Industrial uses are considered much more tolerant of the noise generated by aircraft than are residential uses, which are designated in areas outside this belt. Traditional planning theory suggests that large employment centers such as Carlsbad's industrial belt should be surrounded by a concentric circle of workforce residential centers, providing high density, moderate cost housing in close proximity to the employment area. The idea is to minimize commuting distances from home to work. While staff believes this to be a sound premise under most urban conditions, Carlsbad's circumstances are somewhat different. Palomar Airport sits at the heart of the industrial center. The noise and crash hazards associated with an airport make it incompatible with high density residential uses. Staff does not believe it appropriate to increase residential densities on the periphery of this industrial area, in the belief that this would only increase the number of families inconvenienced by airport impacts. In addition, it is felt that the existing general plan provides a good range of residential densities in all four quadrants of the city, with adequate arterials to transport commuters to the industrial workplace. Further, Carlsbad's size is not so great as to conclude that travel distances are extreme. As a result, with respect to this project, staff cannot recommend approval of the requested land use change to RH (20-30 du/ac). Staff recommends that the general plan be maintained as presently designated (RM over the entire site), and, as such, development based on the gross acreage would be allowed on the less constrained portions of the site. Staff does recommend approval of preannexational zoning to RD-Mover the entire site since this zone is consistent with the existing underlying general plan. ( 3 ) ' • Attachments 1. PC Resolutions Nos. 2210, 2211 & 2212 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Exhibit "A" and "B", dated October 14, 1983 PJK/ar ( 4) r· ---~ i ,--NM-., • -=---..-:,:a.-------1-k ___ wa,--.-..-n--~~~-• _,m ___ w ____ ..,_,._1u-=J I SBTE , BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: EIR 83-7/GPA/LU 83-2/ZC-281 APPLICANT: ROBERTS GROUP • REQUEST AND LOCATION: General Plan Amendment from RM to RH and OS1 Zone Change from County E-1-A to RD-Mand OS. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N:>rthwest corner of southwest corner of Section 23, 'Ibwnship 12 south, range 4 west, in San Diego County. APN: 215-020-01 Acres 36.2 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A ------------ GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RM -------- Density Allowed 4-10 du/ac Density Proposed 20-30 du/ac Existing Zone E-1-A-County -------=---Proposed Zone RD-M, OS ----------- Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Site E-1-A (County) North P-1 --- South E-1-A (County) East E-1-A (County) West P-C PUBLIC FACILITIES Land Use Vacant Industrial Buildings Vacant vacant Vacant School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's N/A ---'--- Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated __ M~a.:f;.y__:...3_1 !.., _1_9_8_3 _________ _ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT __ Negative Declaration, issued __________ _ X E.I.R. Certified, dated October 28, 1983 Other, _____________________________ _ ' t ,PR-OPOSED LAND USES '.,, --;~-m'M---;.,_. "'-v--~ ../ I 'f}-~ • . .._--'\ ., .............. : •• ✓' •• _""-R?-5 . '-... ______ _...... ... -.. __ ... ___ ,· \ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL , \_,- --(EXISTING)· - EXHI_BIT A '10-14-83 SCALE: ..____, 0 100Ft. ZONING MAP EXHIBIT B OCTOBER 14, 1983 \ \ \ \ ----·--~----- \ ---~·;-;:; A,\RPORT _ PAL ----~- ' P-M P-M \ 1348' ----------r------,-~!l!'!■.l!l!I ....... ...,... I ~ i/l!l/!/1/1/1/l/l/l/! 1 !/li!!!!!ll/!!/ 1 ~------P-M I I 1348' I I I I E-1-A(Co.) : : SITE 1 , E-1-A{Co.) I I to I I I I R-DM I P-C I ',, I I ', I I , ... , --------' I R-DM1 l E-1-A(Co.) r--r-~ __ : __ _ , 1 ::& l o c-1 1 I I Q IN I I I I I Q I I I a: IO I ~-------I I -------•--.L I ROBERTS GROUP PROPOSED ZC-281