HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-15; Planning Commission; ; CT 97-14|PUD 97-ll|SDP 97-16|HDP 97-13|CDP 97-34 - MARIAN0A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
P.C. AGENDA OF: October 15,1997
I Application complete date: August 20, 1997
Project Planner: Anne Hysong
Project Engineer: Mike Shirey
SUBJECT: CT 97-14PUD 97-ll/SDP 97-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAN0 -
Request for approval of a Site Development Plan and recommendation of
approval for a Tentative Map, Planned Development Permit, Hillside
Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit to: (1) subdivide the
property into 150 single-family lots, one multi-family lot, 2 recreation lots, 1 RV
lot, and 2 open space lots; and (2) construct 27 one, two, and three bedroom
affordable apartment units; all on property generally located east and west of
future Aviara Parkway, north of future Poinsettia Lane, and south of Palomar
Airport Road, within the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP-203) and Local Facilities
Management Zone 20.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4188
APPROVING SDP 97-16 and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4186, 4187,
CDP 97-34 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
41 89 and 41 90 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of CT 97-14, PUD 97-1 1 , HDP 97-1 3, and
11. INTRODUCTION
The applicant is requesting approval of various permits to subdivide the 53.7 acre parcel into a
total of 157 lots including 150 small single-family lots, 1 multi-family lot with a 27 unit
affordable apartment project, and two open space lots. Architectural elevations and floor plans
are provided for both the single family homes and affordable apartment units. As designed and
conditioned, the project is consistent with the General Plan, Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP-203),
Mello I1 LCP, Subdivision Ordinance, and the relevant Zoning Chapters of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The Mariano project is located within the boundaries of Area A of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and
also within the Mello I1 segment of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program (LCP). The site has the
following dual General Plan designation allowing a maximum of 185 units: 17.2 acres of RM
allowing residential medium density (4-8 dwelling units/acre) and 36.5 acres of RLM allowing
residential low-medium density (0 - 4 dwelling units/acre) development. The project consists of
a total of 177 units (150 single family homes on small lots and 27 affordable apartment. units)
resulting in a density of 4.16 ddacre in the RM area and 4.1 1 ddacre in the RLM portion of the
site. The combined project density of 4.13 dwelling units per acre is below the 6 ddacre density
c - -*
CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 1/SDk 97-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAuO - -. October 15, 1997
Page 2
permitted by the RM land use designation and above the dwelling units per acre permitted by the
RLM designation The Zone 20 Specific Plan permits density transfers from one area to another
to enable the provision of affordable housing units as long as the overall density does not exceed
that allowed by the General Plan.
The site also contains dual zoning designations of Residential Density Multiple with the
Qualified Overlay (RDM-Q) and One Family Residential/l0,000 square foot minimum lot size
(R-1-10-Q) with the Qualified Overlay. Due to the preservation of open space onsite and the
alignment of Aviara Parkway, a major circulation arterial, through the central portion of the site,
a Planned Development Permit application is proposed to cluster development within the
remaining developable area and to allow lot sizes less than 10,000 square feet. Proposed single
family lot sizes range in size from 5,050 square feet to 23,110 square feet and units range in size
from 1,850 square feet to 2,912 square feet. The Qualified Overlay Zone requires the approval of
a site development plan to ensure that site design and architecture is consistent with all
applicable development and design regulations. Since the project’s inclusionary housing
requirement is proposed onsite, the site development plan request also includes a 27 unit
apartment project to ensure consistency with Chapters 21.53 and 21.85 of the Zoning Ordinance
which regulate affordable housing projects. The proposed affordable apartment project consists
of three separate structures on a 2 acre lot (Lot 5) with one containing eight 995 square foot two
bedroom units and the other two buildings containing eight 550 - 635 square foot one bedroom
units and three 1,025 square foot three bedroom units4
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640 acre
Zone 20 Planning Area. Specific Plan 203 was approved by the Planning Commission and City
Council in 1993. The proposed planned developmenthubdivision would include 1 50 small
single family lots, one multi-family lot, two open space lots, two recreation lots, one RV lot, and
one private access lot to Sudan Interior Mission. In accordance with the provisions of the Zone
20 Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR 90-03), approximately 8.3 acres of open
space will be preserved within and surrounding the 150’ wide SDG&E easement (Lots 6 and
155) which bisects the property from north to south. The open space would include a 12’ wide
asphalt trail that would also function as an access road for SDG&E vehicles. The proposed
alignment of Aviara Parkway (an 102’ wide circulation merial roadway), which would bisect the
central portion of the site, is the only remaining unimproved segment of that north-south
roadway between Poinsettia Lane and Palomar Airport Road. Additional Specific Plan open
space would be provided along each side of Aviara Parkway through the provision of 50’ wide
landscaped setbacks.
The site consists of 53.7 acres of vacant, previously cultivated land which is surrounded by
Cobblestone Road and the Sudan Interior Mission to the north, the Emerald Ridge East
subdivision to the west, the Sambi Seaside Heights subdivision to the south, and the Cobblestone
subdivision to the east. The parcel rises approximately 80 to 100 from both the west and east to
a ridge line that is approximately 280 feet in elevation within the western half of the site. The
majority of the site consists of hillside topography with 25% or less gradient. Steeper slopes
(25%+) exist within the eastern half of the site along both sides of the proposed Aviara Parkway
alignment and to the west of the SDG&E easement. The site conditions described above require
compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance development standards and design
guidelines regulating grading and architecture. The proposed grading design consists of cut and
- CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 l/SDP 97-16/HDP - 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO
October 15, 1997
fill to create hillside lots which generally follow the existing topography, i.e., rising in elevation
from west to the ridge line, fill to elevate the roadway to enable its connection to the existing
road grades at the northern and southern property boundaries, and cut and fill within the eastern
half of the site to create building pads between the roadway and SDG&E easement.
Vehicular access to the site will be provided from the south by Aviara Parkway and PlumTree
Road through the Sambi Seaside Heights (Kaufman & Broad) subdivision and from the north by
Aviara Parkway.
The proposed project is subject to the following adopted land use plans and regulations:
A. General Plan with RM and RLM Land Use Designations;
B. Specific Plan 203;
C. Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP);.
D. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance), including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Chapter 21.45 - Planned Development Ordinance;
Chapter 2 1.06 - Qualified Development Overlay Zone;
Chapter 21.85 - Inclusionary Housing, and Section 21.53.120 Affordable Housing
Multi Family Residential;
Chapter 21.95 - Hillside Development Regulations;
Chapters 21.201, 21.202, and 21.203 - Coastal Development Permit Procedures,
Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, and Coastal Agriculture Overlay
Zone.
E. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 20 (Subdivision Ordinance);
F. Habitat Management Plan (in process);
G. Growth Management Ordinance, (Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan); and
H. Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 1 9) and the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). -
IV. ANALYSIS
The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis
section discusses compliance with each of the regulations/policies utilizing both text and tables.
- CT 97-14PUD 97-1 l/SDk 97-16/HDP - 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO
October 15, 1997
Page 4
A. General Plan
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan.
The table below indicates how the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan
which are particularly relevant to this proposal.
Land Use
Housing
Open Space
Circulation
Noise
Park & Rec
Public Safety
a) Proposed residential density of 4.16 ddnet acre in the RM GP designation is
within the RM density range of 4-8 ddnet acre and below the growth control
point of 6 ddnet acre
b) Proposed residential density of 4.1 1 ddacre in the FUM GP designation is
above the FUM density range of 0-4 ddnet acre and the growth control point
of 3.2 ddnet acre. The additional density is due to a 27 unit affordable
housing project, and the General Plan allows density increases above the
maximum residential densities permitted by the growth control point to enable
development of low income housing which is compatible with adjacent land
uses and in close proximity to a major roadway. The small apartment project,
located adjacent to Aviara Parkway and consisting of three separate buildings,
is consistent in scale and compatible with surrounding single and multi-family
development.
Project includes a 27 unit affordable apartment complex to satisfy its 15%
inclusionary housing requirement.
8.3 acres of open space within and adjacent to the SDG&E easement and 50’ wide
landscaped setbacks along Aviara Parkway.
City Wide Trail Link No. 30 to be aligned through the SDG&E easement.
Required roadway and intersection improvement in accordance with City standards
of Aviara Parkway and local public streets through the subdivision as shown on the
tentative map and included as conditions of approval.
1. Exterior traffic noise levels do not exceed 60 &A CNEL,
2. Mitigation of interior noise levels to 45 dBA,
3. Residential land use is conditionally compatible with land uses designated
within the 60-65 dBA CNEL noise contours of the airport land use plan
(CLUP).
Proposed project is required to pay Park-in-lieu fees.
Proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and fire hydrants, as
shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval.
CT 97-14PUD 97-1 l/SDk 77-16/HDP 97-131CDP 97-34 - MARIAuO - - October 15, 1997
Pane 5
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires project compliance with all applicable land use plans,
policies, and ordinances, except as modified by the Specific Plan. The following
discussion describes the proposed project's conformance with the relevant Specific Plan
regulations which include Affordable Housing, Land Use (General Plan, Zoning,
Development Standards, and the Mello I1 LCP), and Open Space Preservation.
Affordable Housing
The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires consistency with the City's Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance (Chapter 21.89, requiring that 15% of the total number of proposed units are
made affordable to low income households. When feasible and compatible with
surrounding land uses, the affordable units are required to be constructed onsite. In
accordance with the Specific Plan, density transfers are permitted to enable the higher
densities necessary for affordable projects thereby avoiding the need for Zone 20 projects
to request density increase incentives to offset the cost of affordable housing. Prior to
permitting density transfers allowing higher densities within the area proposed for the
affordable housing (receptor site), the Planning Commission and City Council must make
findings that the Growth Management southwest dwelling unit cap is not exceeded, the
affordable project is consistent with the Zone 20 LFMP ensuring that all necessary public
facilities will be constructed, locational criteria for higher density projects are satisfied,
and the affordable project is compatible with surrounding development.
The project's 15% inclusionary requirement is 26.5 dwelling units. The proposed project
is consistent with the Zone 20 Specific Plan Affordable Housing requirements since it
includes a request for approval of a site development plan for 27 one, two, and three
bedroom affordable apartment units to be located onsite (Lot 5) at the southeast corner of
proposed Aviara Parkway and Cobblestone Road to satis@ this requirement. The
location of affordable units within the portion of the site designated for low-medium
density (EM) results in a density of 106 units while the General Plan permits 82.59
units. The additional density requires a density transfer of 23.41 units from the portion of
the site designated for medium (RM) density. Consistent with the Zone 20 Specific Plan
affordable housing requirements, since the density is 31.48 units below the maximum
allowed within the RM designated area, the transfer of 23.41 units would:
1) result in an overall project density that is below that allowed by the General Plan
for both General Plan designated areas;
2) the affordable project would not alter the Zone 20 projected demand for public
facilities which the project would be conditioned to construct or satisfy;
3) the project is consistent with locational criteria for higher density affordable
projects in that it is located in proximity to both Aviara Parkway, a major
circulation arterial roadway providing public transportation, and surrounding
employment centers; and
4) the project is compatible with surrounding development in that the proposed
CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 1/SDI- / I-l6/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAvd - -- October 15, 1997
DESIGN CRITERIA
apartment buildings are consistent with the Laurel Tree affordable project
approved directly to the north, small in scale and similar in architecture and
materials to proposed single family development, and the project would provide
onsite parking and recreational facilities to adequately serve the project and is
designed with landscaped slopes and setbacks to buffer and screen the project
from surrounding single family lots.
COMPLIANCE
Land Use
10% of ridgeline units shall be one
story
Variety of roof, wall, and accent
materials/colors;
Variety of one and two story
structures
Variety of building architectural
accent features
Variety of Roof Heights and
The project is located within Area A of the Specific Plan. The project site is designated
for medium and low medium density residential development to be implemented by the
One Family Residential and Qualified Overlay Zones (R-1-1 0-Q) which allow single
family development. The Qualified Overlay zone requires approval of a site development
plan, which includes architectural elevations, floor plans, and building footprints. Since a
small lot single family subdivision is proposed, the Zone 20 Specific Plan development
regulations require compliance with the Planned Development Ordinance, Chapter 21.45
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, as well as Specific Plan architectural design criteria and
landscape guidelines for major arterials, slopes and project entries. As shown on the
zoning compliance table under section D below, the proposed small lot single family
project is consistent with Planned Development Ordinance development and design
standards. The proposed placement of structures and architecture are consistent with
Zone 20 Specific Plan architectural guidelines as specified in the following table:
35% of structures located west of Aviara Parkway along
the ridgeline will be single story
Four exterior color schemes for wall, trim, and accent
which will blend into the natural hillside landscape
Four floor plans: 1 single story and 3 two-story (30%
proposed as single story)
Three front facade treatments for each of the four floor
plans/variety of wood colored flat tile roof colors
Combination of one and two story roof elements with
CT 97-14PUD 97-11lSD). 97-16/HDP 97-13lCDP 97-34 - MARIANO -. - October 15, 1997
As shown on Exhibits “MM’ - “AAA”, the conceptual landscape design for project
slopes along the Aviara Parkway corridor and internal slopes is consistent with the Zone
20 Specific Plan and the City’s Landscape Design Manual.
ODen SDace Preservation
The project is consistent with the Open Space provisions of the Zone 20 Specific Plan in
that Lots 6 and 155 would be preserved in open space; slopes exceeding 40% will be
disturbed due to grading necessary for the construction of Aviara Parkway, a circulation
arterial roadway; mitigation measures that establish a physical barrier between residential
and agricultural uses would be provided; Citywide Trail Link No. 30 through the SDG&E
easement would be dedicated, and 200 square feet per unit of recreation area would be
provided.
Mello I1 Local Coastal Promam - See the discussion under item C below.
C. Mello I1 Local Coastal Program
The project is located within and subject to the Mello I1 Local Coastal Program segment
and is designated for residential low medium (RLM) and medium (RM) density land use
and R- 1 - 10-Q and RDM-Q zoning.
Development Regulations
The project is consistent with Mello I1 LCP policies requiring the preservation of steep
slopes (25%+) possessing chaparral and coastal sage plant communities (“dual criterion”
slopes) except that the policy does not apply to projects required to construct circulation
arterial roadways. The site consists of 4 acres of coastal deed restricted 25%+ slopes
containing coastal sage within the SDG&E easement and within and adjacent to the
proposed alignment of Aviara Parkway. The .6 acres within the SDG&E easement will
be preserved, however, the remaining 3.4 acres will be disturbed due to grading required
for the roadway and thinning and pruning necessitated by fire suppression zones to
accommodate single family lots located at the ridgeline above the roadway.
Mello I1 policies also provide for the preservation of all 25% slopes unless specific
findings can be made. The project will disturb other 25% slopes and the following
required Mello I1 Policy 4-3 findings can be made to allow disturbance to these slopes:
1. the findings of a soils investigation determine that the slopes areas are stable and
any corrective grading necessary for the project will be completed;
2. grading is essential to the development design and intent;
3. slope disturbance will not result in substantial damage or alteration to major
wildlife habitat or native vegetation areas;
CT 97-14PUD 97-1 l/SDI. 9 7-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO - -- October 15, 1997
4. if the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated by steep slopes, no more than
one third of the area of parcels exceeding 10 acres shall be subject to major grade
changes; and
5. , north facing slopes shall be preserved.
The above findings can be made for the project which contains approximately 10.22 acres
of 25%+ slopes (19% of site). A geotechnical analysis, prepared for the project by
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., concluded that the slope areas to be disturbed would be
stable provided their recommendations are implemented and any corrective grading
necessary for the project is completed. Grading of the 25%+ slopes is essential to the
design of the project in that slope areas located in the southern half of the site between the
SDG&E easement and proposed Aviara Parkway alignment require corrective grading
due to previous disturbance that has resulted in severe erosion. Corrective stabilization of
these slopes with appropriate drainage and planting provisions is required. The project
will be conditioned to comply with the recommendations of this report thereby ensuring
stable earth conditions for the life of the project. Due to the fixed vertical alignment of
the proposed roadway which is approximately 25 - 35 feet above existing grade, the
grading design also requires fill of the ravine containing 25%+ slopes located between the
SDG&E easement and roadway to create building pads. The site is not predominated by
steep slopes, and slopes proposed for disturbance are east and west facing and not
required to be preserved.
Hydrology standards of the Mello I1 segment of Carlsbad's LCP require the drainage
system to be designed to ensure that runoff resulting from a 10 year frequency storm of 6
hours, and 24 hours duration under developed conditions, are less than or equal to the
runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing developed
conditions. A permanent detention facility is being required as a condition of approval
for the project to mitigate any storm runoff impacts. Drainage from the project will be
routed through storm drains beneath Aviara Parkway and under Cobblestone Road where
it will flow into Encinas Creek through the Laurel Tree project to the north. The project
will be conditioned to provide adequate drainage, siltation and erosion control facilities as
part of the approved grading permit, and the grading operation will be limited to the
summer construction season, April 1 to October 1.
The project contains vacant non-prime agricultural land and is located in the Coastal
Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site 11). The Mello I1 LCP requires mitigation when non-
prime coastal agricultural land is converted to urban land uses. In accordance with the
provisions of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Program EIR, the project would be
conditioned to comply with Option 2 which permits the payment of an "Agricultural
Conversion Mitigation Fee" to the California Coastal Conservancy.
CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 l/SDk 97-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO - -. October 15, 1997
Page 9
Resident Parking
Guest Parking:
D. ZONING ORDINANCE
2 Covered SpacesLJnit 2 & 3 Car Garages
40 spaces 40 spaces
1. Chapter 2 1.45 - Planned Development Ordinance
The developer is proposing a small lot single family subdivision requiring compliance with the
Planned Development Ordinance except for Lot 5 which is proposed for 27 affordable apartment
units requiring compliance with Zoning Ordinance Chapters 21.53 and 21.85. In accordance
with Planned Development design criteria, the project design is compatible with surrounding
land uses and circulation patterns through its connections with adjacent single family
developments and provides for adequate usable open space that is readily accessible to residents.
In accordance with City Council Policy No. 44, the project exceeds the applicable architectural
guidelines for small lot single family residences in that single story edges are provided when
there are three 2 story units in a row, 57% of the total units provide a single story edge around
40% of the building perimeter, 100% of the units provide 4 separate building planes on the front
elevation and 4 separate building planes on the rear elevation, and both two and three car garage
doors are proposed. The following table summarizes the project’s compliance with the Planned
Development development standards:
Lot Size (Min.) 3,500 sq. ft. 5,050 - 23,110
Setbacks
Major Arterial:
Front Yard :
40’
20’
50’
20’
Building Height
Minimum Distance
Between Structures:
(10 in a row)
One and two story:
Street Widths
Private (no parking):
Public :
(local)
Max. 30’12 stories I ~ ~~
Max. 28’12 stories
10’
15’
20’
10’
15’
20’
30’
56’ & 60’
Recreational Space:
(200 sq. fthnit)
Private Passive
Common
15’ X 15’ Min. Yard
Children’s Play Area
15’ X 15’ Min. Yard
2 Tot Lots - 11,960 Sq. ft.
CT 97-14PUD 97-1 l/SDP 97-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO - - October 15, 1997
STANDARD
Inclusionary Requirements(UnitsRees)
Location of Units
Mix of Bedrooms (1 0% 3 Bedroom)
Incentives Requested: 1. Density Increase;
2. Standards Modifications;
3. Direct Financial
Affordable Housing Agreement
2. Qualified Development Overlay Zone:
The property contains the Q-Overlay Zone which requires the submittal and approval of a
Site Development Plan ensuring that the project would not adversely impact the site or
surrounding uses or areas, including traffic circulation, the site is adequate to
accommodate the proposed project, all the necessary amenities are provided, and the
street system system serving the project is adequate. Since the proposed project is a
Planned Development, the project’s conformance with the Planned Development
Ordinance development standards and design criteria, Zone 20 Specific Plan development
regulations, and Zone 20 EIR mitigation ensure that the required Qualified Overlay
findings are satisfied.
REQUIRED PROVIDED
26.5 27
Onsite Onsite (Lot 5)
Three Bedroom - 3 Three Bedroom - 3 Units
Units One Bedroom - 8 Units
Two Bedroom - 16 Units
None None
Note: See Density Transfer
discussion under B. Specific Plan -
Affordable Housing above.
required by Condition of
Approval*
Signed agreement Affordable Housing Agreement
prior to final map
3. Chapter 21.85 Inclusionary Housing, and Chapter 21.53, Site Development Plan:
As specified in the above discussion under B. Zone 20 Specific Plan - Affordable
Housing, the project is subject to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requiring that a
minimum of 15% of all approved residential units in any specific plan be restricted to and
affordable to lower income households. Section 21 ~3.120 of the Zoning Ordinance
requires Planning Commission approval of a site development plan for multi-family
affordable projects of 50 or fewer units based on findings that the project is consistent
with the underlying zoning/specific plan and in conformance with General Plan policies
and goals. (See the above consistency discussions under A. General Plan and B. Specific
Plan - Affordable Housing). The Housing Commission will review the project on
October 9, 1997, and staff will present the Housing Commission’s recommendation
during the public hearing.
The project includes 150 single-family lots with an inclusionary housing requirement of
26.5 dwelling units which must be affordable to lower income households. In addition,
10 percent of those units, or 3 units, must be three-bedroom. The project complies with
the Inclusionary Housing provisions of the Municipal Code (Chapter 21.85) as
demonstrated below:
- -
- CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 l/SDP Y 7-16/HDP - 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO
October 15, 1997
Page 11
* The Affordable Housing Agreement is a legally binding agreement between the developer
and the City which provides the specific details regarding the phasing and implementation
of the affordable housing requirements of this project.
4. Hillside Development Regulations:
The project site contains slopes of 15% or greater and an elevation differential greater
than 15 feet, therefore, a Hillside Development Permit is required. .The table below
indicates how the project complies with the requirements of the Hillside Development
Regulations:
Slope Height
Grading Volume
40%+ Slopes
Contour Grading
Slope Screening
Slope Setback
Architecture
Roadways
30 Feet
8,000 - 10,000 cubic ydslacre -
potentially acceptable
Undevelopable unless
modifications to standards
approved or excluded from
standards
Variety of Slope Direction &
Undulation
Landscaping
Not Quantified - 15 Foot '
Recommended
Roofline, Building Bulk & Scale
Follow Contours
60 - 70 Feet Max.*
8,805 cubic yardslacre**
Modifications to 40% slopes due
to extensive grading to
accommodate Aviara Pkwy and
to correct unusual soils
condition.
Manufactured Slopes have been
contoured to follow the adjacent
road and open space alignments
Combination of trees, shrubs, &
ground cover
Minimum 15 Feet
Roof lines are parallel with hill-
side slopes, one and two story
buildings set back from top of
slope with 10 - 20 feet of
separation
Curvilinear streets that follow
contours and provide access to
terraced lots.
* In accordance with Section 21.95.070 of the Hillside Ordinance, justification is required
for the modification of the 30' maximum manufactured slope height standard. As
proposed, the only manufactured slopes that exceed 30 feet in height are located at the
CT 97-14PUD 97-1 1/SDP Y I-l6/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO - - October 15, 1997
southwest comer of Aviara Parkway and Cobblestone Road. The total slope height, which
is separated at midpoint by a drainage swale, is approximately 65 - 70 feet at the highest
point. The increased slope height at this location results from previously approved road
alignments and grades for Aviara Parkway and Cobblestone Road and Specific
Plan/Hillside Development Ordinance standards requiring proposed grading to be
compatible with existing hillside topography. Existing topography consists of a major
ridgeline to the west of proposed Aviara Parkway, and the project is designed with the 65
to 70 foot high manufactured slopes to preserve a ridgeline which is approximately 60 -
70 feet above the roadway at the above described location.
Due to the preservation of significant open space within and adjacent to the SDG&E
corridor, a grading design that is driven by the approved horizontal and vertical alignment
of Aviara Parkway, a circulation arterial roadway, and remedial grading required east of
Aviara Parkway, proposed grading quantities (excluding Aviara Parkway quantities) to
develop the project are increased to the potentially acceptable range. Grading quantities
in the potentially acceptable range are therefore necessary to create terraced, single family
building pads and access streets which follow the natural hillside contour above or below
the roadway. The grading design does not result in increased project density in that the
proposed 177 units are less that the 185 units permitted by the Growth Management
growth control point.
**
5. Chapters 2 1.201.140, 2 1.203, and 2 1.204. - Coastal Development Permit
Procedures, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, and Coastal Agriculture
Overlay Zone
Chapter 21.201 requires approval of a coastal development permit for the proposed
development to ensure that the project is consistent with the Mello I1 Local Coastal
Program policies and conforms to the requirements of the Mello I1 Coastal Resource
Protection Overlay Zone and Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone. (See Discussion under
C. Mello I1 Local Coastal Program above).
E. Subdivision Ordinance
The proposed tentative map complies with all the requirements of the City’s Subdivision
Ordinance, Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Primary access to the property
would be provided by Aviara Parkway, a 102’ wide major circulation arterial, which
currently terminates at the project’s southern boundary. Secondary access is proposed
through the connection of Streets “C” and “E” to Plum Tree Road in the Sambi Seaside
Heights project to the south.
The proposed project is required to provide streets, sidewalks, street lights, and fire
hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval. The local
streets have adequate public right-of-way and connect to Aviara Parkway which is a non-
loaded major circulation arterial. All the local, collector, and major streets within this
area would be constructed by the developer to full public street width standards, and have
curb, gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 l/SDP Y /-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAhO - -. October 15, 1997
adequate to handle the project's pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate
emergency vehicles.
Traffic and sewer access to the adjacent southeast parcel (Roesch) has been investigated.
In accordance with the Final Program EIR for the Zone 20 Specific Plan, this area of the
Roesch property is unable to be developed due to environmental constraints. Therefore,
traffic and sewer access to this parcel from the Mariano project is not required.
To mitigate drainage impacts from the project site, the developer is required to provide
adequate drainage, erosion control, and urban pollutant basins. The drainage requirements
of Specific Plan 203, City ordinances, and Mello I1 have been considered and appropriate
drainage facilities have been designed and secured. In addition to City Engineering
Standards and compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan, National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards will be satisfied to prevent any
discharge violations.
The subdivision will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by
court judgment, or acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
within the proposed subdivision. The project has been designed and structured such that
there are no conflicts with any established easements. In addition, the property is not
subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965
(Williamson Act).
F. Habitat Management Plan (Draft)
The project is not located within any of the Preserve Planning Areas (PPAs) defined by
the City's draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP) dated July, 1994. Although disturbance
to 3.4 acres of coastal sage scrub (CSS) will result from implementation of the project, it
will not preclude connectivity between PPAs nor preclude the preservation of CSS
habitat. Moreover, this project provides mitigation in the form of off-site preservation at
a 2 to 1 ratio because it will result in the purchase for preservation of 6.8 acres of habitat
in an off-site habitat mitigation bank.
Since completion of a subregional NCCP/HMP has not occurred, prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the City may have to authorize this project to draw from the City's 5%
CSS take allowance (4d rule) to ensure that the project does not preclude the City's draft
HMP. The take of 3.4 acres of CSS habitat must not exceed the 5% allowance and will
not jeopardize the HMP since it is located outside the HMP preserve planning areas
(PPA) and/or linkage planning areas (LPA) and therefore makes no contribution to the
overall preserve system, and will not significantly impact the use of habitat patches as
archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs. Since mitigation for the habitat loss
will result in the preservation of equal or better habitat in an off-site location, the project
will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher.
The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The development of the
Mariano property is a legal development which is consistent with the City's General Plan
and all required permits will be obtained.
- CT 97-14/PUD 97-1 l/SDP Y I-16IHDP - 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAN0
October 15, 1997
G. Growth Management
The proposed project is located within the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Zone in
the southwest quadrant of the City. The impacts created by this development on public
facilities and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summarized as
follows:
The project is 8 dwelling units below the Growth Management Dwelling Unit allowance
of 185 dwelling units for the property as permitted by the Growth Management
Ordinance growth control point. Surplus dwelling units that are not used by the
developer are placed into a City bank of excess dwelling units. The City can allocate
these dwelling units for affordable housing or other special housing needs within this
quadrant.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts from the future development of Zone
20 was analyzed by the Zone 20 Program EIR (EIR 90-03). Additional project level studies have
been conducted including soils investigation and biological, noise and traffic analyses. These
studies provide more focused and detailed project level analyses and indicate that additional
environmental impacts beyond those identified and analyzed by the Final EIR 90-03 would not
result from implementation of the project. The project qualifies as subsequent development to
both the City’s MEIR and Final EIR 90-03 in accordance with Section 21083.3 of the California
Environmental Quality Act; therefore, the Planning Director issued a Notice of Prior
Environmental Compliance on August 1 1, 1997. The recommended and applicable mitigation
measures of MEIR 93-01 and Final EIR 90-03 are incorporated into the project or included as
conditions of approval for this project. Conditions include specific mitigation for impacts to
coastal sage scrub habitat identified by EIR 90-03 through the purchase of 6.8 credits at a 2:l
replacement ratio in an approved mitigation bank (Carlsbad Highlands), a regional detention
basin within the natural drainage course to reduce siltation into Encinas Creek, noise walls along
areas impacted by Aviara Parkway, and consistency with architectural guidelines to reduce
potential negative aesthetic impacts. With regard to air quality and circulation impacts, the
CT 97-14PUD 97-1 1/SDP Y /-16/HDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIANO - - October 15, 1997
Page 15
City’s MEIR found that the cumulative impacts of the implementation of projects consistent with
the General Plan are significant and adverse due to regional factors, therefore, the City Council
adopted a statement of overriding consideration. The project is consistent with the General Plan
as to these effects; therefore, no additional environmental document is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 41 86
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4 187
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4 188
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4189
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4190
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance dated August 1 1, 1997
Environmental Impact Assessment dated February 9, 1997
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Disclosure Form
Reduced Exhibits dated October 15, 1997
Full Sized Exhibits “A” - “AAA” dated October 15, 1997.
MARIANO
CT 97-l4/PUD 97-1 I/SDP 97-16/
HDP 97=13/CDP 97-34
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET -
CASE NO: CT 97- 14PUD 97- 1 l/SDP 97- 16/HDP 97- 13/CDP 97-34
CASENAME: MARIAN0
APPLICANT: PACWEST GROUP, INC.
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for approval of a Site Development Plan and recommendation
of auproval for a Tentative Map, Planned Development Permit. Hillside Development Permit, and
Coastal Development Permit to: (1) subdivide the proper@ into 150 single-family lots. one multi-family
lot, 2 recreation lots, 1 RV lot. and 2 open space lots; and (2) construct 27 one, two. and three affordable
auartment units on proper& generally located east and west of future Aviara Parkway. north of future
Poinsettia Lane, and south of Palomar Aimort Road, within the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP-203) and
Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Being a portion of Lot “G” of the Rancho Agua Hedionda in the
City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. State of California according to the Map thereof 823. filed in the
office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County. November 16,1896.
APN: 212-040-41 Acres: 53.7 Proposed No. of LotsNnits: 157 Lotdl77 Units
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: RM/RLM
Density Allowed:
Density Proposed: Rh4 - 4.16 DUlACRE RLM - 4.1 1 DU/ACRE
Existing Zone:-
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning Requirements)
RM - 6 DU/ACRE RLM - 3.2 DU/ACRE
RDM-0 AND R- 1 - 10-0 Proposed Zone: SAME
Zoning, Land Use
Site RDM-Q/R- 1 - 10-Q Vacant
North RDM-Q Vacant/Sudan Interior Mission
South RDM-Q/R- 1 - 10-Q Sambi Seaside Heights Single and Multi-
Family Units
East R- 1 Cobblestone
West R-1-Q Emerald Ridge East Single Family Units
PUBLIC FACILITIES
- School District: CUSD Water District: CMWD Sewer District: CARLSBAD
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 177
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: May 6. 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
0 Negative Declaration, issued
0 Certified Environmental Impact Report,
Other, Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance
i
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Please Take Notice:
The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the 'project
described below have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified
environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be
required and a notice of determination will be filed.
Project Title:
CT 96-05/SDP 96-06/PUD 96-04/HDP 96-05 - MARIANO
Project Location:
East of Hidden Valley Road, south of Palomar Airport Road and Cobblestone Road,
and west of the Cobblestone Sea Village project in the Zone 20 Specific Plan.
Project Description:
An 159 lot tentative map and small lot planned unit development for 153 single
family residential lots ranging in size from 5,190 to 23,360 square feet in area, two
open space lots, one multi-family lot, and a site development plan for the placement
and architecture of 153 single family structures and 26 onsite inclusionary
apartment units to satisfy project's inclusionary housing requirement. Onsite and
offsite project improvements include local public and private streets, curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, and drainage facilities to serve the lots, the construction of Aviara
Parkway between the northern boundary of the Sambi project and Cobblestone
Road, and alignment of a trail segment through the project's SDG&E easement and
open space corridor.
Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas
Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit
comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of publication.
DATED: AUGUST 1 1, 1997
CASE NO: CT 96-05/SDP 96-06/PUD 96-04/HDP 96-05
CASE NAME: MARIANO
PUBLISH DATE: AUGUST 11, 1997
Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-11 61 - FAX (G19) 438-0894 @
--
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: CT 96-05/SDP 95-1 l/HDP 95-12
DATE: Februarv 9.1997
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Mariano
2. APPLICANT: PacWest Grouu Inc. (Henthorn and Associates)
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 703 Palomar Aimort Road, Suite 300,
Carlsbad, California 92009: (760) 438-3 182
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: May 6.1996
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 159 lot tentative map and small lot Dlanned unit development for
153 single family residential lots ranging in size from 5.190 to 23,360 square feet in area. two
ouen .mace lots, one multi-family lot. and a site development plan for the Dlacement and
architecture of 153 single family structures and 27 onsite inclusionarv ammnent units to satisfy
the proiect’s inclusionary housing requirement. Onsite and offsite Droiect improvements include
local Dublic and Drivate streets, curbs. gutters, sidewalks and drainage facilities to serve the lots,
the construction of Aviara Parkway between the northern boundary of the Sambi Droiect and
Cobblestone Road. and alignment of a trail segment through the Droiect’s SDG&E easement and
oDen wace corridor.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
IxI Land Use and Planning IxI TransportatiodCirculation 0 Public Services
[7 Population and Housing Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
0 Geological Problems Energy 8c Mineral Resources Aesthetics
0 Water
8 Air Quality
0 Hazards
Noise
0 Cultural Resources
0 Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
- DETERMINATION. -
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
c] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
0 I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant 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 EIR is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
g /I- 0 /7
Planning Dirxtor’s %nature Date
2 Rev. 03/28/96
L
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS -
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
0 A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
0 “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
0 “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
0 “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
0 Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but fl potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
0 When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily ‘required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
0 A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
3 Rev. 03/28/96
/--
e If there are one or more Potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated”
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
e An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the’ significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part I1 analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
4 Rev. 03/28/96
- -.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Significant Significant
Impact Unless Mitigation
lncorporated I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source # 1 and 8)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? ((Source #1 and 8)
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ((Source #1 and 2)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? ((Source #2)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? ((Source #2)
0 0
0 0
0
0 1e3
0 0
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ((Source #1)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (Source #2)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (Source #2)
0 0
0 0
0 0
111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (Source #2 and 3)
b) Seismic ground shaking? (Source #2 and 3)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (Source
#3)
0 0 o 0 0 0
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (Source #3)
e) Landslides or mudflows? (Source #3)
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (Source
g) Subsidence of the land? (Source #3)
h) Expansive soils? (Source #3)
i)
#3).
Unique geologic or physical features? (Source #3)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoft? (Source #2 and 4)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (Source #2 and 4)
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (Source #2 and 4)
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
IXI
LessThan No Significan lrnpact
t lmpact
0 0
0 IXI
0 (XI
0 1x1
0 (XI
0 €3 0 IXI 0 IXI
0 1e3 0 €4
(XI 0
0 (XI 0 (XI IXI
IXI 0
0 (XI
5 Rev. 03/28/96
- Issues (and Supporting Information Sour-. Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
0
0
0
LessThan No
Significan Impact
t lmpact
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (Source #2 and 4)
e) Changes in currents, or the come or direction of water
movements? (Source #1)
f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (Source # 4)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (Source # 4)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (Source # 4)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (Source
#I>
0
0
0
0 €3
0 Ixi
El IXI
0
0 0 0 El 0 €3
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source # 1)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (Source # 1)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (Source # 1)
d) Create objectionable odors? (Source # 1 and 2)
IXI
0 0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 IXI 0 1e3
0 IXI 0
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCLJLATION. Would the
proposal result in:
1x1 a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (Source #
1) 0
0
0 0
0 IXI b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? (Source # 2)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(Source # 2)
d) Insuficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(Source # 2)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(Source # 1 and 2)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(Source # 1 and 2)
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (Source # 1 and
2)
0
0
0
0
0 0 IXI
0 IXI
0 1x1
0 IXI
0
0
0
0 0 0 IXI
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (Source # 2 and 7)
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
(Source # 2 and 7)
17
0
IXI
0
0 0
0 IXI
6 Rev. 03/28/96
c
- Issues (and Supporting Information Sourr&.- Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
0
0
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source # 2 and 7)
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(Source # 2 and 7)
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (Source # 2
and 7)
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0
0
0
ENERGY AND MINEW RESOURCES. Would the
proposal? Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
(Source # 1)
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (Source # 1)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (Source # 1)
0 0
c3 0
0 0
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (Source # 1)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source # 1)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (Source # 1)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (Source # 1)
e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (Source # 2)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (Source # 2 and 5)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (Source # 2
and 5)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? (Source # 1 and 2)
b) Police protection? (Source # 1)
c) Schools? (Source # 1 and 2)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
(Source # 1)
e) Other governmental services? (Source # 1 and 2)
0
0
0
0
0
0 1x1
LessThan No
Significan Impact
t Impact
IXI 0
ix1 0
0 ix1
0 IXI
0 IXI
cl IXI
0 1x1
0 1x1
0 IXI
0 IXI
IXI 0
0 IXI 0 0
7 Rev. 03/28/96
_-
- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources), Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significan Impact Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation
Incorporated
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
Power or natural gas? (Source # 1)
Communications systems? (Source # 1)
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (Source # 1 and 2)
Sewer or septic tanks? (Source # 1 and 2)
Storm water drainage? (Source # 1 and 2)
Solid waste disposal? (Source # 1)
Local or regional water supplies? (Source # 1 and 2)
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (Source #
2) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (Source
# 2) Create light or glare? (Source # 1)
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paleontological resources? (Source # 2)
Disturb archaeological resources? (Source # 2)
Affect historical resources? (Source # 2)
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (Source #
2) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (Source # 2)
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0
0
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
0 0 0 IXI o 0 0 Ix1
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (Source # 1 and 2)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (Source # 2)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
0 a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
0 0
8 Rev. 03/28/96
-
- Issues (and Supporting Information Sourw&. Potentially
Significant
Impact
€3 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 connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
El
Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significan impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Unless t impact
0 0 0
0 0 Ixl
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
Section 15063(c)(3)@).
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis..
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
9 Rev. 03/28/96
DISCUSSION of ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Proiect Backmound and Environmental Setting:
The project is located south of Palomar Airport Road, east of future Hidden Valley Road, north
of Sambi Seaside Heights, south of the Sudan Interior Mission and Cobblestone Road, and west
of the Cobblestone project in the City of Carlsbad. The property slopes moderately down to the
east and west from a gently sloping ridge in the central portion of the site. Two canyons draining
to the north exist in the eastern portion of the site. Approximate elevations across the site range
from a high of 285 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to a low of 90 feet MSL. The previously
cultivated site is currently undeveloped and high tension power transmission lines extend north-
south through the eastern canyon. Earth materials encountered on the 53:7 acre site include the
Eocene-age Del MarRriars Formation, the Eocene-age Scripps Formation and Pleistocence-age
terrace deposits overlain by topsoil and alluvium (the Holocene-age allluvium exists in the
eastern canyon area and the western drainage ravine). In addition, artificial fill soil exists in the
eastern canyon area. In general, the upper portions of the site are underlain by topsoil and
massive sandstone and siltstone materials, while the lower portions of the site are underlain by
the fill and alluvial soils.. The majority of the site consists of hillside topography with 25% or
less gradient. Steeper slopes exist along the parcel's northern and southern boundaries, and
within two small east-west finger canyons. Although the majority of the property is disturbed by
past agricultural activities, the property supports two native habitat types: Diegan coastal sage
scrub and wetland vegetation. There'is a drainage channel near the southern property boundary
which supports some upland plant species. Three sensitive bird species (turkey vulture, northern
harrier, and California gnatcatcher) were observed onsite during field surveys.
Vehicular access to the site would be provided by Aviara Parkway, a major circulation arterial
roadway and a local street leading fiom Hidden Valley Road, a non-loaded collector street,
which extends from Camino de las Ondas to Palomar Airport Road. Although the project would
be conditioned to improve Aviara Parkway through the parcel, the alignment and design of this
roadway from Palomar Airport Road to its existing terminus has already been approved and the
off-site segments have been environmentally reviewed and approved by previous projects.
The project site is located within the boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP-203) which
covers the 640 acre Zone 20 Planning Area. The certified Final Program EIR 90-03 (PEIR) for
SP 203 addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with the future buildout of the
Zone 20 Specific Plan area and is on file in the Planning Department. Use of a Program EIR
enables the city to characterize the overall environmental impacts of the specific plan. The Final
Program EIR contains broad, general environmental analysis that serves as an information base
to be consulted when ultimately approving subsequent projects (Le., tentative maps, site
development plans, grading permits, etc.) within the specific plan area. The applicable and
recommended mitigation measures of Final EIR 90-03 will be included as conditions of approval
for this project. This subsequent expanded Initial Study is intended to supplement the Final EIR
and provide more focused and detailed project level analysis of site specific environmental
impacts, and, if applicable, provide more refined project level mitigation measures as required by
Final EIR 90-03. Through the aid of the required additional project specific biological,
soils/geological, noise, slope, and viewshed analyses performed for this project, no additional
significant environmental impacts beyond those identified by the Final EIR 90-03 have been
identified. Mitigation measures that are applicable to the project and already included in Final
10 Rev. 03/28/96
-
- EIR 90-03 will therefore be added-ie-the tentative map resolution.
-.
In addition to the Final EIR for Specific Plan 203, the City has certified a Final Master
Environmental Lmpact Report (MEIR) for an update of the 1994 General Plan. The certified
MEIR is on file in the Planning Department. The MEIR serves as the basis of environmental
review and impact mitigation for projects that are subsequent to and consistent with the General
Plan, including projects within the Zone 20 Specific Plan area.
I. LAND USE
.. A. Zoning
The property contains both the RM and RLM General Plan designations with RDM-Q zoning.
The project is consistent with these designations except that a density transfer from the RM area
to the RLM area, permitted by the Zone 20 Specific Plan for the purpose of providing onsite
affordable housing, is required since the location of the 26 unit inclusionary apartment project is
within the RLM designated area. The project density within the RM area (density range = 4-8
ddacre) is 4.16 ddacre and within the RLM area (density range 0-4 ddacre) is 4.18 ddacre and
with a density transfer of 25.41 dwelling units from the RM designated area to the RLM
designated area, the project is consistent with the densities allowed by the General Plan in each
land use designations. Therefore, no significant adverse environmental impacts will result from
the development of the single family project.
B. Mello I1 LCP
The project is also subject to the Mello I1 LCP segment of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program.
Mello I1 Policy 4-3 requires the preservation of slopes exceeding 25% grade which possess
coastal sage scrub habitat (dual criterion slopes). Disturbance of these areas for circulation
arterial roadways is permitted; therefore the project will disturb 25% slopes containing habitat
for Aviara Parkway, a major north-south circulation arterial through the City. The project will
disturb other 25% slopes which require corrective grading to ensure stability and the following
required Mello II' Policy 4-3 findings can be made to allow disturbance to these slopes:
1. the findings of the Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. soils investigation determine that the
slope areas to be disturbed would be stable provided that their recommendations are
implemented and any corrective grading necessary for the project is completed;
grading is essential to the development design and intent;
slope disturbance will not result in substantial damage or alteration to major wildlife
habitat or native vegetation areas;
no more than one third of the area (>lo acres) shall be subject to major grade changes;
north facing slopes shall be preserved.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrology standards of the Mello I1 segment of Carlsbad's LCP require that post development
surface run-off from a lO-yearI6 hour storm even must cany any increased velocity at the
property line. Drainage from the project will be provided through the routing of onsite storm
drains with a major drainage facility constructed in Aviara Parkway. Significant offsite flows
from the southern undeveloped areas will be carried through the eastern canyon (SDG&E
easement) through a grass lined or improved channel to a desiltation basin at the Cobblestone
11 Rev. 03/28/96
- Road crossing.
D. Agriculture
The site is located in the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site 11) of the Mello I1 segment of
Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program. Section 3.0 of Final EIR 90-03 evaluated impacts created by
the conversion of agricultural land use to urban land use in the overlay zone. The PEIR
concluded that the cumulative loss of agricultural land could be offset with the mitigation
measures established and required by the Mello I1 segment of the LCP; therefore. the tentative
map will be conditioned to require the payment of an agricultural mitigation fee prior to approval
of a final map.
As detailed by the PEIR, Zone 20 is comprised of agricultural uses which are typically
incompatible with residential uses due to physical and operational characteristics such as tilling
and pesticideherbicide spraying. The Mariano tentative map will be conditioned to include the
applicable mitigation measures required by the PEIR to reduce impacts to agricultural resources.
Since the project is surrounded by development along the northern, western, southern, and
eastern boundaries, the required 25' wide open space easement between open field agricultural
operations and onsite developable areas would not be required. PEIR mitigation requiring the
notification of to all future residential land owners that this area is subject to dust, pesticide, and
odors associated with adjacent agricultural operation and the provision of temporary road
connections to maintain continued access to adjacent agricultural properties will be conditions of
map approval.
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING
B. Growth Inducing
As specified by the Zone 20 PEIR, the development of projects including transportation routes,
public services, and land uses within the Zone 20 Planning Area is not growth inducing since the
area has been previously planned and designed for residential development by the City's General
Plan, Growth Management Program, and Zone 20 LFMP. Although the project will be
conditioned to construct Aviara Parkway, it is a planned north-south major arterial already
approved to provide access to projects located to the south and north within Zone 20.
Development already exists or has been approved to the south, north, west and east; therefore,
urbanization of the area is inevitable.
111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
Consistent with the Zone 20 PEIR, the recommendations of the preliminary geotechnical
investigation performed for the project by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will be incorporated as
project conditions in accordance with the PEIR.
IV. WATER OUALITY
As anticipated by the water quality discussion in Section 5.2 of the Master EIR (MEIR) 93-01
and the Zone 20 Program EIR (PEIR), sedimentation impacts to Encinas Creek due to the
creation of impervious surfaces onsite, the reduction of absorption rates, and an increase in
surface runoff and runoff velocities would result without mitigation. As required by the PEIR,
12 Rev. 03/28/96
- previously approved projects were-required to install energy dissipation facilities (i.e. rip-rap)
along the drainage course in addition to a permanent regional basin located within the drainage
course approximately 250’ south of Encinas Creek. The remaining appropriate PEIR and MEIR
mitigation measures which include requirements for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit and consistency with the City’s Master Drainage and Storm Water
Quality Management Plan will be added to the project as conditions of approval.
V. AIROUALITY
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the
San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin“, any additional air emissions are considered
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand
Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mass
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5)
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is
located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked
“Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-0 1, by City
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Oveniding Considerations” for air
quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent
projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the
Planning Department.
VI. CIRCULATION
-
The project would increase local traffic in the area, however, a Traffic Study prepared for the
project by Urban Systems Associates, Inc. dated September 12, 1995, and a Traffic Impact
Analysis conducted as part of the Zone 20 Specific Plan indicates that compliance with the
circulation mitigation of the Zone 20 Specific Plan PEIR and the Local Facilities Management
Plan for Zone 20 would mitigate any significant local traffic impacts (Section 3.5, Page 111-58,
Final EIR 90-03). The project will therefore be conditioned to construct and/or improve all
roadways necessary for or impacted by this development. These include Aviara Parkway through
the property and all internal streets to City standards.
13 Rev. 03/28/96
- The implementation of subsequen+projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate
to accommodate buildout traffk; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely
impacted by regional through-Mic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections
are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures
to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop
alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian
linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when
adopted. The diversion of regional through-trafEc from a failing Interstate or State .Highway
onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The
applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been
incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore,
the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included
a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of
Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation
impacts is required.
VII. BIOLOGY
The Biology Section (3.4) of the Zone 20 Specific Plan PEIR provides baseline data at a gross
scale due to the large size of the specific plan area. Given the large number of property owners
and their differing development horizons and the inevitable change in biological conditions over
the long-term buildout of the area, it is not possible to mitigate biological impacts fiom the
buildout of the entire specific plan under one comprehensive open space easement that crosses
property lines or a habitat revegetatiodenhancement plan sponsored solely by the property
owners. The implementation of the biological section of the EIR is based on fbture site specific
biological survey studies that focus on the impacts created by individual subsequent development
projects. These additional biological studies are required to consider the baseline data and
biological open space recommendations of the PEIR and provide more detailed and current
resource surveys plotted at the tentative map scale for each property. The range of future
mitigation options specified by the PEIR may include preservation of sensitive habitat onsite in
conjunction with enhancementhevegetation plans, payment of fees into a regional conservation
plan, or the purchase and protection of similar habitat offsite.
To satisfy these PEIR mitigation requirements, a biological field survey was prepared for the
project by Anita Hayworth, Biological Consultant (Report dated January 10, 1995). This
subsequent biological study provides more focused , current, and detailed project level analysis
of site specific biological impacts and provides more refined project level mitigation measures as
14 Rev. 03/28/96
required by the Zone 20 PEIR. Theproperty was surveyed and no sensitive plant or wildlife
species were observed, however approximately 4 acres of disturbed coastal sage scrub (CSS)
exist within the central and southeastern areas of the property. .6 acres of this area located within
the southeastern portion of the site has been previously deed restricted and is proposed to be
dedicated in open space. The remaining area has also been previously deed restricted, however,
grading for Aviara Parkway, a major circulation arterial roadway and the required 60’ fire
suppression buffer located adjacent to the roadway will result in disturbance to the remaining 3.4
acres of CSS. In accordance with the PEIR biological mitigation requirements, the tentative map
will be conditioned to require mitigation of 3.4 acres of CSS through the purchase of equal
quality habitat at a 2: 1 replacement ratio to be preserved in an offsite habitat mitigation bank.
The eastern portion of the property contains a mow north-south tributary canyon to Canyon de
las Encinas. The canyon supports a narrow, deeply incised channel in the south, and a broader,
sandy floodplain area in the north. The drainage potentially ms under the jurisdiction of the US
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act,
and/or the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of
the CDFG code. A wetland determination was conducted on July 1, 1996 by Dudek &
Associates biologist and the area was inspected and described in three segments: (1) a deep,
incised drainage channel along the eastern edge of the property; (2) a narrow sandy channel to
the west; and (3) the confluence of the two channels. The eastern drainage which consists of a
deep, narrow, incised mostly unvegetated channel (offsite to the south the drainage supports a
moderately broad band of southern willow scrub dominated by arroyo willow). The western
channel is a narrow sandy wash extending primarily through a shallow channel surrounded by
coyotebrush scrub. The wash is unvegetated for the most part with occasional individuals of
coyotebrush. The confluence of channels or northern portion of the channel opens into a broad
floodplain. Here the channel is poorly defined and the general vegetation is coyotebrush scrub
with small clumps of mule fat and one small arroyo willow. The spatial coverage of mule fat and
the single willow comprise less than .01 acre.
No ACOE wetland habitat is present onsite, however, the incised channels represent “other
waters of the US” and total ACOE jurisdiction is approximately .21 acres of unvegetated
channels. Because impacts to ACOE jurisdiction are less than one acre, above headwaters, and
affect no federal listed species, notification of the ACOE is not required, however, it is
recommended.
CDFG jurisdiction includes only the approximately .01 acre of mule fat that occurs adjacent to
the drainage. Because of the extremely limited impacts, it is unlikely that a CDFG 1603
agreement (streambed alteration) is required, however, the project will be conditioned to require
consultation for concurrence on this issue prior to the issuance of a grading permit or final map,
whichever occurs first.
Based on the biologist’s determination that no significant impact to wetlands will occur (no
permits required from the resource agencies) , no mitigation is recommended for this project.
NCCP/HMP, 4D RULE
The project is not located within any of the Preserve Planning Areas defined by the City’s draft
Habitat Management Plan (HMP) dated July, 1994, Although disturbance to 3.4 acres of coastal
sage scrub will result from implementation of the project, it will not preclude connectivity
15 Rev. 03/28/96
- between PPA's nor preclude the pservation of CSS habitat. Moreover, this project provides
mitigation in the form of offsite preservation because it will result in the purchase for
preservation 6.8 acres of habitat in an offsite habitat mitigation bank.
Since completion of a subregional NCCP/HMP, has not occurred, prior to the issuance of a
grading permit, the City may have to authorize this project to draw from the City's 5% CSS take
allowance (4d rule) to ensure that the project does not preclude the City's draft HMP. The take
of 3.4 acres of CSS habitat will not exceed the 5% allowance, nor jeopardize the HMP since it is
located outside the HMP preserve planning areas (PPA) and/or linkage planning areas (LPA),
makes no contribution to the overall preserve system, and will not significantly impact the use of
habitat patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPA's. Since mitigation for the
habitat loss will result in the preservation of equal or better habitat in ai^ offsite location, the
project will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the Gnatcatcher.
The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawfbl activities. The development of the Mariano
property is a legal development which is consistent with the City's General Plan and all required
permits will be obtained.
X. NOISE
Section 3.8 of the Zone 20 PEIR evaluated potential noise impacts for future projects located in
the Specific Plan area and recommended that noise studies be prepared for projects impacted by
traffic and airport noise. A portion of the site is located within the 60 to 65 &A CNEL airport
and Aviara Parkway noise contours, therefore, noise from existing Palomar Airport Road and
the airport would create a potential ,impact on the homes in this project. In the Comprehensive
Airport Land Use Plan, residential development is considered conditionally compatible within
the 60 to 65 CNEL contour area. A Noise Study was prepared for the project by Ogden
Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. Noise levels on the project site are projected to be
significant since they exceed the City's 60 CNEL noise standard due to fbture noise generated by
traffic on Aviara Parkway. Therefore, in accordance with the Zone 20 PEIR mitigation
requirements, the tentative map will be conditioned to comply with the noise study
recommendations requiring the construction of masonry noise barrier wall at the top of slopes on
designated lots to attenuate the exterior noise level to 60 dBA CNEL or less, the provision of
interior noise mitigation, if necessary, legal notification to future homeowners of potential airport
noise impacts, and recordation of avigation easements on lots within the 60-65 CNEL noise
contour.
XI and XII. PUBLIC FACILITIES
The project is located within the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management (LFM) Zone. Public
facilities and financing have been accounted for in the Zone 20 LFM Plan to accommodate the
residential development. The residential land use would be consistent with the General Plan,
therefore, the project would not significantly impact the provision of public facilities. In
addition, a condition will be added to the project to require that the developer enter into an
agreement with the appropriate school district to ensure that there are adequate school facilities
available to serve the residential subdivision - (Section 3.11, Page 111-1 12, Zone 20 PEIR).
16 Rev. 03/28/96
- XIII. VISUAL AESTHETICS -
Section 3.13 of the Zone 20 PEIR analyzed potential visual impacts created by development
within the Specific Plan area. It was determined that visual impacts to the Palomar Airport
Road Viewshed (Vantage Points 8 and 9) could be potentially significant. To reduce these
potential impacts to below a level of significance, the PEIR mitigation measures include
additional visual analysis, landform-contour .grading and landscaping, and compliance with
visual design guidelines.
The Mariano project includes a hillside development permit application (HDP 96-05) which
requires compliance with hillside architectural and grading standards. The project is in
compliance with these standards which are consistent with the PEIR mitigation requiring
landform grading and contouring. Additional visual analysis performed by the applicant has
identified that units will be visible from the Palomar Airport Road viewshed and future structures
will therefore require compliance with the PEIR visual design guidelines including combination
of one and two story homes, a variety of roof heights and roof massing, a variety of earth tone
roof and wall materials and colors, and enhanced fenestration.
SOURCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
MEIR - 1994 General Plan Update of the Carlsbad General Plan.
Final EIR 90-03 - Zone 20 Specific Plan.
“Report of Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation” prepared by Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. dated December 21, 1995 and “Letter Report - Update to Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation dated September 26, 1996 for the PacWest Group, Inc. and
MAAC Project.
“Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study - Mariano” dated April 29, 1996 prepared
by Hunsaker & Associates San Diego, Inc.
“Acoustical Technical Report - Mariano Site Development, Carlsbad California” dated
September’ 25,1995 prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. and
“Mariano Acoustical Report - Letter Update” dated April 1 1,1997.
“Transportation Analysis for F.M.Z. 20Mariano” dated September 12, 1995 prepared for
PacWest by Urban Systems Associates, Inc.
“Biological Resources Survey Report for the Carlsbad Heights Property, Carlsbad,
California” dated January 10, 1995 prepared by Anita M. Hayworth, Biological
Consultant.
“Wetland Determination Report for the Mariano Project,” prepared by Dudek and
Associates, dated July 24, 1996.
17 Rev. 03/28/96
CITY OF CARLSBAD -
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 20 GENERAL PLAN: RMKLM
DEVELOPER’S NAME: PACWEST GROUP. INC.
ADDRESS:
FILE NAME AND NO: CT 97-14RUD 97-1 l/SDP 97-16MDP 97-13/CDP 97-34 - MARIAN0
ZONING: R-1-10-ORD-M-O
550 WEST “C”’ STREET. SUITE 1750. SAN DIEGO. CA 92101
PHONE NO.: (619) 544-9100 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 212-040-41
QUANTITY OF LAND USEDEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 53.7 ACRES/177 DU’S
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: UNKNOWN
A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 6 15 SO FT
B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = 328 SO FT
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage =
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin =
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire:
Open Space: Acreage Provided =
Schools:
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demands in EDUs
Served by Fire Station No. =
177 EDU
1.23 ACRES
1,716 ADT
NO. 4
8.3 ACRES
CUSD
177 EDU
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
K. Water: Demand in GPD = 38.940 GPD
L. The project is 8 units the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The following information must bo disclosed:
1.
2.
3.
4.
-
List the names and addresses of all per3am Raving a finrncial inteisd in the rpplicaQon. .- PacWest Group, Inc.
550 West "C" Street, Suite 1750
San Dieqo, CA 92101
Ownor
List the names and rddroasor of all poisons hrving uly ownonhip intotost in tho proporty involved.
.-e.- PacWest, Ltd.
550 West ttCtt Street, Suite 1750
San Dieoo. CA 92101 . =-
If any poison idontifiod punuant to (1) or (2) abmm ia I corporrtiocl 01 partnorship, list tho names anc addresses of rll individual$ owning mor0 than 10% of tho 8hU08 in tJw cotporrtion or owning my paRnershiF interest in tho partnership. Cruss ProDertv CaDital Partners 900 Third Avenue. New York 10022 - - MRP Partnkrs + HTC
Desert Equities
Partners - -.--a=- -I-- -- 1221 Avenue of the Americas. NY 10020
3400 Central Avenue, Riverside 92506
27720 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula 92590
If any pnon khrMod pummt to (1) or (2) b I rn+woiIt organization or I trust, list tho names ana addresses of 8ny pwson dng u ofkor or director of tho non-prolit organizrtiorr or as trust60 or beneficiaq of the trust. i
G I -?
Disclosure Statement
5. Have you had more than $250.00 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff.
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No ,/ If yes, please indicate person(s)
~~~~~~ ~
Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city
political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary)
SWEL M* wT\I f;oL *&EL W. &SL~ fZL . sf. L 7%.
Print or typd name of owner Print or type name of applicant
r WP? WJC~
DISCL0S.FR.M 2/96 PAGE 1 of 2
I
I
t u.r
ELEVATION - SIDE VIEW- - -m UUII - nmm
ELEVATION - END VIEW
pIl0l-m DU moa (1110 timaw
BUILDING ONE - PLAN AND ELEVATIONS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
I
I
I
PLAN VIEW
BUILDING TWO - PLAN AND ELEVATIONS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ELEVATION:- SIDE VIEW= mmnm-m-w-nrr)
---- - '
I
ELEVATION - END VIEW
--m-mcma.r rir~~
b f
I
-G..- ------
,
-- L
I
\
I
I
J4 I
PLAN No./
1850 sf
I
I
LEFT ELEVATION
..
FRONT EIE VATION
PLAN ZA
I
HGm ELEVATfON REAR EL EVA TION ,ma IC*'& ,*I.., ,.
THE CASE GROUP
A R C I1 IT B C T I .n."nawon.,*, ..I,,,, ""r,xm,'nLUI.*. ,1111 ",",.",.." ,l.,.l..*.'.ll
SEP 09 1997
I
I
LEFT ELEVATION
TYPICAL FINISH nt.r TtllALS * CONCRrrI ROOF TfL€ . S7lKCO WRAPPED FASCIA
* SNCCO TfNlSlf . STUCCO wmrmn TRIM
VfMl mMCD WNDOWC WmP .CIJUTERS
/ n
FRONT ELEVATION
PUN ZB
HGm ELEVATION
n-
REAR ELEVATION
.
I
I-
&
LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELE VATIQN
PLAN IC
RI%NT ELEVATION REAR ELE VATIOAJ
1wf ,"-a'.-
SEQ 09 1997
CARLSBAD CALlFOhWlA
I
PLAN N 0.2 UPPER LEVEL lO6X sf ,m, IEl'L ,,,.., ,.
PLAN N0.2 2313 sf LOWER LEVEL 1245 sf
I
L797.14, PLVJW-II.SDPP7-I6 HDPW IJ.CDP97.JI MARIAN0
CARLSHAU CAl.fl'Ok"lA
LEFT ELEVATION
RZGHT €LEVA TION
KA'T 1" -.,.-
4.
FRONT ELEVATION
PWNZA
REAR ELEVATION
I
_-A-
T I, E SEP 09 1997
I
a
LEFT ELEVATION
1 I II
I
FRONT ELEVATION
PLAN2B
I
LEFT ELEVATION TYPICXL Ffh'lStl MATERIALS . CONCRCTE ROOF nu . smm WRAPPED mw.. . S- WMPPCn TRIM
I II
FRONT ELEVATION
PUNZC
REAR ELEVATION
I
i. -7-
PLAN No.3 UPPER LEVEL 945 sf PLAN No.3 2496 sf LOWER LEVEL 1551 .Tf'
I
I
THE SEP 09 1997
LEfl ELEVATION
R
I
I
FRONT ELEVATION
PLAN 3A
i
REAR ELEVATION
ff 97-14. WD 97-IJ. SDP 97 16. HDP 57 13. CDP 97.34 MARIA NO
CARf SRAD CAf.fKMNffI
S€P 09 1997
I
I
n
_..
L Em EL EVA TION
-h.
-.-
FRONT ELE VATZON
PUN38
RIGm ELEVATION nn REAR ELEVATfOZV
i
I
I
CT17.M. PUD97.11.SDP97-16 HD?97 IJ.CDP97-34 MARIA NO SEP 09 1997
CARISHAD CALIIORNIA
I
tt &
c
LEFT ELEVATION
RIGHT ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION
PLANJC
REAR ELEVATION
I
THE CASE GROUP ARCHITECTS
.I* - ru .y.lm..u .nM-A.* -,1, .Pu- cyllp CRRI-SBAD C(LlFORML4 SEP 09 1997
I
PLAN No.4 UPPER LEVEL 1441 sf
'1 I--- - 68-x Bd'
LOWER LEVEL 1471 sj PI!&/ No.4
2912 sf
I
MAHANO
CARLSRAD CAI.IFORNIA S€P 09 1997
PacWest Ltd.
"I I
H
I
II H
LEFT ELEVATZOAJ
NGWT ELEVATION
m
I
FRONT ELE VATZON
PLAN42
I,," 1
REAR ELEVATZON
CTW-14. PUD 9711, SDP V7-16. HDP 07-IJ. CDP W-Y MARIAN0
CAUISBAD CAM'OUNIA SfP 09 1997
I
H 'I! !I
w 1m1 - II I II
P i
LEfl ELEVATION
RIGHT ELE VA TION
€RONT ELEVATZON
PLAN48
REAR EL E VA TZON
I
I
__M_
I
TUB CASE GROUP
ARCHITOCTS V(..mllOll..ll M"l .uY"IyWW m .I* U".U M .nN
SEP 09 7997
1 f
P
L€€T ELE VATION
a
I I1 --- I 1 I L I
RIGHT ELEVATION
nn
FRONT ELEVATION
PLAN 4c
REAR ELEVATION
I
MAHANO
CARISBAD CqIfr'RNfA