The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEIR 106; RANCHO LA QUESTA; DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - RANCHO LA CUESTA SUBDIVISION; 1973-02-021213) 375·2556 • F"ROM L.A. 772 · 1555 RAYMOND L.OUIGLEY DONALD E. DAWSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS t,c ·• SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION 304 TE.JON PLACE .. _ ti --• -------------C ------.. • -• -• -.. • • C • • • 'Ill \ PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 90274 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Rancho La Cuesta Subdivision Carlsbad, California Newport Shores Builders Developer for Prepared by Rancho La Costa, a limited partnership Owner South Bay Engineering Corporation February 2, 1973 -1- ---- -.. ----------------.c -.. -• ---------:c -• .. - Title Page Table of Contents Contributors Introduction Project Description TABLE OF CONTENTS Environmental Setting Without the Project Impact on the Natural Environment Impact on the Human Environment Adverse Effects which cannot be Avoided Mitigation Measures to Minimize the Detrimental Impact Alternatives to the Proposed Action The Relationship between Local Short Term Uses of Man's Environment and the Maintenance and Enchancement of Long Term Environmental P rod u .c t i v i t y Any Irreversible Environmental Changes which would be involved in the Proposed Action Should It Be Implemented The Growth Inducing Impact of the Proposed Activity upon the Neighborhood and/or Community The Boundaries of the Area which may be Significantly Affected by the Proposed Activity Environmental lmoact Assessment Checklist (Appendix A) Human/Governmental Systems (Appendix B) Aeri a.l Photograph -2- l 2 3 4 4 7 14 15 21 21 22 24 25 25 26 27 30 31 -----·c_· -•---. --------------c: ------.. ------• • --C ----- CONTRIBUTORS This report was prepared by South Bay Engineering Corporation under the supervision of Donald E. Dawson, Vice President. Technical contributors were: Jaime Pero, B.S.C~E., California R.C.E. 14416 observations January,1973 . ') James Henricksen, Ph.D., Plant Taxonomist, Anatomist Associate Prof. of Botany, California State University at Los Angeles. observations January 26-30, 1973 Gerald Collier, Ph.D., Ornithologist, Animal Behaviorist Assoicate Prof. of Zoology, San Diego State University observations January 26-30, 1973 Ross E. Dingman, Ph. D., Vertibrate Biologist Associate Prof. of Biology, University of San Diego observations January 26-30, 1973 Donald E. Dawson, B.S., California R.M.E. 4797 observations January 1972 -January 1973 -3- ------------------------.. ----• ---• • • • • • • • .. • - C C C DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INTRODUCTIOtJ This report is prepared as a "draft Environmental Impact Report" in accordance with City of Carlsbad Ordinance No. 1150, Its purpose is to summarize the effect upon the environment of the creation of an approximately 121 acre residential and commercial sub- division as shown on Tentative Tract Map {C.T. 72-34) entitled "Rancho la Cuesta". Concurrent with the processing this subdivision through the Carlsbad Planning Commission and the City Council of Carlsbad, an approximately 1100 acre parcel, of which this 121 acres is a part, is in the process of being pre-annexation zoned prepara- tory to its annexation to the City of Carlsbad. The impact of a subdivision of 38 lots nificant, and the purpose of this report is to consider tbe detrimeRtiJ and beneficial effects which will occur. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subdivision, known as~Rancho la Cuesta C.T. 72-34, consists )Y:--. of 121± acres lying along El Camino Real between Arenal and J\lga 2£ Roads adjacent to the City of Carlsbad. The enclosed 8 1/2" x ll 11~- USGS topographical map (Figur~l) illustrates this location. Simi-1~o larly, the map shows the complete boundary of the approximately 1100 ti~ acres owned by Rancho La Costa, a limited partnership, of which acreage the subdivision is a part . -4- • . , ., • • • - • • • • \ .. \ \ ; • \' ;I " . ■ I i : CENY/lc'ONM£NTAI. IMPACT REPORT • • • RANCHO I.A CUESTA Tl2A C .,-C-.·r. 72·.I-I- -----C ---------------.. -C -----------------C --• -.. All of this land is currently zoned under San Diego County zone \ ··-' ~ Nt>. r{' ~n \ P classification A-1· {8), .s1F1e ;t lies in county territory.oaRd Rot~ rJ' As a prelude to the annexation of the 1100 acres to the City of Carlsbad, a "Master Development Plan"(Maste,r Plan) and a Land Use Map showing densit)@'been prepared along with an "Application for Adoption of ~eeific • Master Plan". These have been, or are being, delivered to the City of Carlsbad along with an "Application for Change of Zone" provided for in chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. An alteration oft~ _!.., City of Carlsbad General Plan will ultimately be effected. -1 ~(,\ The net effect will be to bring the entire 1100 acres within the city limits of Carlsbad and to provide zoning and jurisdiction. New zoning is expected to b~ as shown in Figure l. The Carlsbad General Plan currently specifies "Low Density" (3-7 families per acre) for the westerly plateau land of the Rancho La Cuesta sub- division and "Tourist-Resort" for the valley area adjace~~;:. :1 . .t..J Camino Real. The C-1 zone proposed in Rancho La Cuesta &81'1"@3'5011d-!- r011gb.ly to the 11 Neighborhood-Commercial 11 zone location in the General Plan. In particular, Tract C.T. 72-34 will encompass zones R-1-7500, RD-Mand C-1. Proposed zones for other portions of the 1100 acres are similarly shown. After the pre-annexation zoning for the entire acreage is processed through the Carlsbad Planning Commission and the City Council, formal annexation procedures as authorized by San Diego County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in their document "South Carlsbad No. 1. 15 Annexation 11 (LAFCO reference Ho. CA-2-5) on December 4, 1972, may then proceed through the Carlsbad City Council. -6- ---. --C --.. -.. ----.. -.. .. --.. -C .. .. .. .. .. --.. .. .. --.. • .. .. .. C • • • • .. Land zone and use as proposed by the tentative map for Rancho La Cuesta is shown in Table 11 A11 • While this table corresponds with the Tentative Map C.T.72-34 dated December, 1972 as revised 1/17/73, certain characteristics should be noted . .l. The residential area immediately west of El Camino in the valley comprising 35.8~ acres consists of 100 lots which < 'I--' lie in the proposed RD-M zone. Each lot will contain i9:9c\v--¥ form of two family common wall residences. This arrange- ment was proposed to service the local demand for lower priced housing described to the developer by city officials. 2. On the plateau west of the valley, 278 single family residences will occupy the 278 7500 square foot lots in the 70.9~ acre area. Approximately 60 lots are in the R-1-7500 zone and about 218 are in the RD-M zone • I' ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT 1 cA') L ~ ,<,( c.,.,-, .r::.< l2. ~ ! t'v'-\ C • : C \ .-'.,,:/\ ,..L-'.._,,\_)'-' • • . . The environment of the proposed Rancho La Cuesta subdivision~ essentially the low-lying, round bottomed valley immediately to the west of El Camino Real and the sloping hill and plateau lands immedi- ately west of the valley . El Camino Real~ planned as a 102 foot right-of-way major _·(.., ~ s.f<Y '., I • arterial highway. The name, which means 11 the Kings Highway", was(.,ttvl-'-J..,r:r'- that given to the road followed by the mission Fathers as they trav- eled between missions in the early days of California. The route of the present El Camino Real is reported to follow roughly that path . The logical design of this road was such as to follow the ridge ✓-ascending from near sea level at La Costa Avenue to approximately 300 feet elevation near the vicinity of Palomar Airport Road . -7- ---. --C ----TABLE A -Rancho La Cuesta Subdivision Details --TWO FAMILY -SINGLE CONDOMINIUM ITEM FAMILY DUPLEX COMMERCIAL TOTAL --Zone R-1-7500 RD-M C-1 --Lots 278 100 3 381 --Dwe 11 in g Units 278 200 478 ---Acreage- C Residential 70.9 35.8 .•• 106. 7 --Acreage- ~il"ZI~) -All 70.9 35. 8 13. 6 --Owe 11 in g Units -per residen- ti a 1 acre 3.9 5.6 4.5 --Density Shown -on Master -Development Plan 5 & 10 10 ----.. • -C ------8- • • • • • C ----• -• • • • -------C ---------.. -------C -• • -- The La Costa Country Club, golf course·, tennis courts, resort, cz_ and condominium houses in a random settingf lie along the eastern .,. side of El Camino Real, but are somewhat separated from Rancho La Cuesta by virtue of the width of El Camino and the fact that the first residential area in Rancho La Cuesta will be below the El Camino Road level by approximately 45 feet. The northern environment to the Rancho La Cuesta land is a continuation of the valley and hill slopes along El Camino Real . The southern environment is the continuation of the valley along El Camino Real. About one quarter of a mile from Arenal Road, the southern boundary, this valley emerges into the floodplain of the San Marcos Creek which is known as Batiquitos Lagoon. The valley, while round bottomed, has been further ravined in a narrow a"""'"'~ channel cut about 15 ± feet deep by the waters flowing ...A-rain periods. The proposed developw.ent site consists almost entirely of - open disturbed grasslands and cultivated fields.(Fig.2) Only a small portion of the original vegetation remains on a few easterly facing slopes. The entire area at one time must have contained a dense stand of native Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation but this was largely removed and the land used for agricultural cropland,<:£:i0-50 ac_i:.D of cleared land is st, used for crops and presently contains a stand of Winter Barley (Hordeum vulgare). Most of the ther cleared areas have lain fallow for a years and now contain grasslands. These areas have a vegetation cover con- sisting almost entirely of annual introduced grasses and weeds.! Among the more common species are: Avena spp. (Wild Oats)~ Bromus rigidus, ~-~ollis (Brome Grasses), Hordeum sp. (Wild Barley), Lolium ~ultiflorum (Annual Rye Grass) and an array of ~eedy herbs -9- •,o Legend Ce>asrcl Sa_pe Scrub /J/d' he/d's W/TA Shrubs Cu/J'"Jyatecl F)e/d's ,,, R,z11c/Jo l.. tZ Cuest'4 Genert?lizcn:I Ves,et"t7ho11 M,p ••• Euca/ypr-us Groves,*** Oak ffees r:::::::1 G,-«ssl,u1d'.s ,Rvderal !lab/tars 0 \ I A .,, 0 ), ~ I \ :, e'tm/. " N. t> ,..Q. '( ' ' .. ,. ' --~.✓ • -•~ o , ~ .... f: , /':400' SOUTH BAT ICNGINICICRING CORPORATION 304 TEJON PLACE PALOS VERDES ESTATES CALIFORNIA 90274 ~ (213) 375-2556 ~ RAYMONO L. QUIGLEY R.C.E. 7191 772-1555 .. • • • • -------• -.. -.. .. --.. -.. ----• ------- C C as Wild Mustards (Brassica spp.), Wild Radish (Raphanus sativus), Filaree (Erodium spp.) and the like. A few shrubby species have invaded these grassland areas, and where not disturbed have formed localized patches of depauperate Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation. Only a few shrubby· species have invaded the grassland. namely Artemesia californica (California Sagebrush), and Haplopappus venetus (Goldenbush). Occasional stands of the large perennial herb, Foeniculum vulgare (Sweet Fennel) have become established along El Camino Real. The site also contains a 12-15 acre stand of Coastal Sage Scrub along its northern most border. This is a dense, healthy stand containing many of the species that characterize the more extensive stands to the west. This small stand is dominated by shrubs of Adenostoma fasciculatum (Chamise), a species actually more charac- teristic of Chapparral, while Salvia melifera (Black Sage) and Rhus intergrifolia (Lemonadeberry), Rhus laurina (Laurel Sumac), and a mixture of other species occur in lesser frequencies. A few narrow extensions of this scrub extend down into the .grassland along small arroyos where willow (Salix sp.) sector of this site that actually has high natural values is the stand of Coastal Sage Scrub, along the northern border of the site. The grassland and agricultural areas are basically dist~rbed ecosystems. Each of these areas, however, support wildlife but all species would occur elsewhere on the La Costa Site and in the .. general area as well. No species of plants or animals is restricted : ~ this site and none is totally dependent on this area for survival. : V Of all 1100 acres of the La Costa Site, development of th"is'area into moderate-low density housing would have the least impact on --11- 7 , • • • .. • C .. .. • • -.. • --------.. -. .. C --.. .. -.. .. -.. -.. ------,..,.. -'------ '7~ _.a.--"-~ natural systems in the area. ~-· Soil conditions vary from somewhat fertile in the valley area to poorly fertile 1n the ridges and platuau area. Erosion has r' taken place along this westerly edge of the Rancho La Cuesta r- plateau land and a badland effect has resulted from the inability -of smaJJ soi] retentipn plant coyer to develop on the steep slopes .,,,.,-- with relatively low rainfall and low fertility. The condition of - exposed soil has produced silting which carries down toward the Batiquitos floodplain. Batiquitos Lagoon lies beyond the mouth of the valley along El Camino Real and extends to the west about two miles toward the ocean • Technically, Batiquitos Lagoon is a floodplain. It is ✓r deeply silted. It is completely dry six to eight months of the xv yeari Shoreline action normally closes any connection with the ,,.. ocean. Heavy rains result in filling of the lagoon to a depth of a few inches to a few feet. Generally, this water evaporates or percolates. The sand barrier to the ocean is man breached when necessary to allow water to flow to the ocean • San Diego Count employees indicate that in their memory it has not been self b__reaching in the last ten years 1-.ut.. 0,(3 • ~ ~ At this time, the formal definition of Ba~s ~agoon has not been established relative to the California Coastal Zone Conservation Act of 1972. In specific, it has not been determined: 1. If Batiquitos Lagoon is a body of water.-r ~ ~ a,.4-~ "'--V----....,_ 2. If it is a body of water, what are its boundaries. 3. If it is a body of water, is it subject to tidal action. 1-rione, a small amount or much of the Subdivision falls within the "Permit /\rea" depending on the ansHcrs to these three questions. -12- • • ■ • • • -• -• -• -• -----------.. -------• • -----• • • - C C C The 121 ± acre site is a portion of thellOO acre proposed annexation. Both lie in proximity to the Batiquitos Lagoon. An overall Draft Environmental Impact Report is in preparation cover- ing the 1100 acres and its interaction with the Lagoon. The portion of that report dealing with the flora and fauna has, for reference purposes, been prepared as a 40 page reference Supplement to this report on the Rancho La Cuesta Subdivision by Drs. Henricksen, Collier and Dingman. -13- • • • .. .. C • ,. • .. .. -.. -.. .. -.. • ----C ----.. --< t. -----.. ----C --• -- IMPACT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 1. Land Forms -Approximately 600,000 cubic yards of dirt will be moved which will result in the shaving of some hilltORS and r i d g e s an d f i l l i n g o f mi n o r c any on s . Ma j o r h i l l s an d c an y_o n s w i l l , Cmore or 1@ retain their forms with some grading to accpmmodate streets and residential building sites. 2. Natural Vegetation -The existing natural vegetation, disturbed grasslands and scrub, as well as the cultivated fields wil.1 largely disappear except for portions of hillsides, bordering El Camino ? Real and west of the valley.<:!!!~,.-e-;-i-m_p_a-c7t-w~i~l~l-;-b-e-s~i-g-n-.i~f~i~c-a-n~t--:--b-u~t ....... o~f-:::,-0 Ciruoor importance:?:) 3. Wildlife -Non domestic wildlife except for those animals which can adjust to ma~s presence will be displaced. The impact on the region wi 11 be minor. -~ ~~ Y· ~o,L s 12-r' 1-t. li.ri: 4. Hazards -Unstable slopes will be eliminated. Erosion will be_..:.-:='" minimized. The impact will be moderate but of great importance. 5. Lagoon -Silting of the lagoon will be reduced; however, a greater amount of rash will be deposited at the lagoon shores. In addition, an unknow effect might occur from fertilizer and pesticides washed off by excess irrigation or storm runoff. \[he impact will be minor J (but of moderate importanc~ The impact of this subdivision Hill be less than other portions of the 1100 acres . G. Air Quality -The natural wind patterns which prevail for most of the year will the automobile and ,replace emm ssions The impact on the air quality will be minimal. -14- • • .. • -• -• -----------.. ----.. .. -------.. -• • • • • • • • • C C C IMPACT ON THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 1. Population -The present population of the City of Carlsbad is approximately 15,000 residing mostly in the "old" part of town about 8 miles from the site. The current neighboring population in the La Costa Development is estimated at 300. There is no population on the immediate north, west or south. Table 11 B11 shows the estimated population densities resulting from complete occupancy of Rancho La Cuesta. Densities were deter- mined in accordance with the 1960 Census of Population of Housing: Final Report PHC (1) -82 Los Angeles, Long Beach SMSA as delineated in Carlsbad Ordinance No. 9190 and school populations were determined from "Estimate of School Age Students" as prepared by the Carlsbad Unified School District (5-11-71) which is shown on Table 11 C11 • Such estimates are helpful in recognizing the order of magnitude of impact of subdivision on utilities, schools, city services, insti- tutional facilities, (libraries, churches, etc.) commercial services (stores, professional services), recreational facilities, traffic and economic revenues. The limitations of such estimates must be recognized. ~ The age, level, occupational spectrum, and social custom quality of th opulation may cause significant changes in the density of otal population and school population. Further, the actual demand for various services will vary even more widely with taste and life style of the real population . The new residents will definitely create an impact on the existing population in direct proportion to a new/old ration and inverse proportion to the distance where they presently reside. Therefore, the impact on the residents of La Costa Development will_ be of major -15- • • • • -C • -• .. • .. -• • .. • .. ------C . --.. -.. -.. -.. -.. • .. • • • -c· • • • • - TABLE B POPULATION DENSITIES ITEM SINGLE FAMILY Total Population Dwelling Units 278 Person/House 1 3. 1 Population 862 School Population: Class Used 2 Single Homes Popular Price Students/Home K-6 .74 7-8 .20 9-12 .38 Total 1. 31 Students K-6 203 7-8 55 9-12 106 Total 364 1 -Carlsbad Ordinance No. 9190 2 -See Table C -16- TWO FAMILY DUPLEX HOMES TOTAL 200 478 2. 1 420 1302 Dup 1 ex Homes Medium Ren ta 1 • 3 7 • 11 • 1 8 .66 74 277 22 77 36 142 132 496 • • • • • C • -• • -.. -• -.. .. .. --- 4111 -.. C ;:_ Type of Dwell.:.ng Single Homes, 3 & 4 Bedroom Single Homes, 3 & 4 Bedroom Single Homes, 3 & 4 Bedroom Single Homes, 2 Bedroom Table C CARLSBAD mn FltD SU,L1UL DISTRICT 801 Pine Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 ESTIMATE OF SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS FOR EAC!i 100 oi::~u.r::cs (PUBLIC SCHOOLS) Price Range Popular Price Range Above Popular Price Range Upper Price Range Popular Price Pange -·Single Homes, 2 Bedroom Above Popular Price Range .. ------.. .. -• -.. • C -• • • - Duplex Homes, 2 & 3 Bedroom (or Common Wall Homes) Duplex Homes, 2 & 3 Bedroom (or Common Wall Homes) Apartments, 1 & 2 Bedroom Apartments, 1 & 2 Bedroom Low Rental Range. ~edium Rental Range Low Rental Range ~edium Rental Range Apartments, 2 & 3 Bedroom 1ligh Rental Range ( Condom:i.ni urns) I , ~eo//vOM!N, :1,f->....;. ; :.JS,:::. -,..:..-~ _. s ?·/.: :,-1---;.: /F /;,.()-_·;(:'.:/v1C:NT. ~6C ~"~-V; .;.! (: _7,;,_. :,., /<' '; <J S/11/71 FH1.: ,11., -17- Number of Grade Level Students K-6 (Elem.) 74 7-8 (Jr.Hi.) 20 9-12 (H,S.) 38 K~6 (Elem.) 49 7-8 (Jr. Hi.) 24 9-12 (H,S,) 46 K-6 (Elem,) 38 7-8 (Jr.Hi.) 22 9-12 (H.S.) 39 K-6 (Elem.) 7-8 (Jr.Hi.) 9-12 (H.S.) K-6 (Elem.) 7-8 (Jr.Hi.) 9-12 (H.S.) K-6 (Elem.) 7-8 (Jr. Hi.) 9-12 (H,S,) K-6 (E'lem.) 7-8 (Jr. Hi.) 9-12 (H.S.) K-6 (Elem.) 7-8 (Jr.Iii.) 9-12 (H.S,) K-6 ( El ctn. ) 7-8 (Jr.Hi.) 9-12 (ll.S.) K-6 (Elem.) 7-8 (Jr. Hi.) 9-12 (!LS.) 44 13 26 24 12 23 56 12 / 37 n 18 28 R 9 14 6 11 13 8 12 , .. • • • ---- Ill .. .. .. -----.. .. --.. .. .. Ill --.. -.. -------------- r "-- C r-\.-, ~magnitude and of great importance while for those living in the old part of town will be of minor magnitude and moderate importance as related to schools, taxes, city services and traffic. 2. Schools -Table B shows that approximately 496 students will be living in this development. According to Table C provided by the Carlsbad Unified School District, the school population can be estimated to consist of 277 students K-6 {elementary); 77 student~ r"" 7 and 8 (intermediate} and 142 students 9-12 (high schooll. -According to Mr. Lance, Business Manager for the School District, the present schools are filled to capacity. The district has a new elementary school site already purchased but, as all the other sites, it is in the older portion of town. At present the District is negotiating the purchase of an intermediate school site near Poinsettia Lane and the Interstate 5 Freeway. The School buildings, however, must be financed through bonds which have been defeated in recent electicns. The School District officials, on the other hand, are determined to fulfill the Districts obligation to provide education even if it means to bus all the children to exist- ing schools or to go in double sessions or year round schedules. The impact on the school system will be of major magnitude and )/<, of great importance. If no new schools are built, the impact will be detrimental, however. if new scbaaJs ace buiJt due to tbis develop- ment, the impact will be beneficial since they will decongest the existing schools and would eliminate the need for busing of students from La Costa. 3. Rccreation"l Facilities -There exists several recreational facilities within the area of influence of the project, including the La Costa Tennis Courts, Golf Course, and riding rings, the Rancho Carlsbad Golf Course, the Carlsbad and Oceanside beaches, -18- • • • • ·c --• Ill --.. and the Palomar Airport. An inspection of these facilities indi- cates that none of these facilities are overcrowded and some operate under capacity and would welcome additional patronage since they are all privately owned. The beaches are public and can serve a much larger population than at present. Overall, the impact on private facilities will be moderate in magnitude, of great import- ance, and beneficial in results. The increased tax rate may also ~~result in beneficial effects in the maintenance and improvement of -"10~ ""' • cf>~ be a ch fa ci l i t i e s . -t->~ / ',o 4. Utilities ---... -.. -.. -.. .. .. ---.. ------------- C . . C ~ a. Water -The site lies within the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. The estimated average consumption by the residents of this tract will be 260,000 gallons p~r day. The District has enough capacity in its system to satisfy this demand. _ _...Jhe impact on the service to present customers will be nil . b. Sewers -Approximately one half of this tract lies within th e ~u c a d i a W a t e r D i s t r i c}) w h i ch p r o v i de s s ewe r s e r v i c e to this residents in the La Costa development. The present sewer system in the area consists of collection mains, a pumping st~tion, and a sewage treatment plant near the El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue intersection. The pumping_ station and the treatment plant are operating at near capacity and could serve only a portion of the project. construction of a new pumping sta~ion and source systems connecting to the City's trunk system and treat- plant will start shortly and be in service by July 1974. This system will have more than adequate capacity to serve the present residents and ali of those from Rancho La Cuesta. -19- -• ---C -------• • ---.. .. .. --C 1111 -.. .. .. .. ... --.. ---- 1111 --C ----- Considering the new·system, the impact on this service will be of great magnitude, of major importance· to the District, and beneficial from an economic and operational point of view. Conversations have started on political arrangements between the Leucadia District and the City of Carlsbad that hopefully will permit the District to serve the entire project. c. Power and Gas -The San Diego Gas and Electric Company owns the high voltage power line running near the southwest corner of the site, and the high pressure gas line ,running along El Camino Real thus insuring adequate service. The impact on these facilities will be of minimal magnitude and moderate importance . 5. Traffic -The estimated one way trips generated by this develop- ment will average([°Q trips per dwelling unit per da,V"or a total of 4870 average daily trips, all using El Camino Real. It is estimated that the traffic will be split half using Arenal Road Exit and the . other half using the Alga Road exit . The impact of this traffic on El Camino Real will be of minor magnitude and of moderate importance, while the impact at the Arenal and Alga intersections on the same road will be of major magnitude and moderate importance. Like all traffic on public ways, the impact can be considered detrimental. 6. Local Business -A neighborhood shopping center is under construct- ion at El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue and a regional shopping center has been operating for some time on El Camino Real south of Escondido Road. Both centers are estimated to be operating under capacity and would welcome additional patronage above what the Rancho La Cuesta will provide. The impact on their transactions, -20- • • .. -• C ---.. ------ -- ---------• • -• ·c -• • -- employment and taxes generated are considered beneficial . 7. Visual -The front development will be in the valley adjacent to El Camino Real with a roof line elevation approximately 35 feet below the roadway elevation. The second front will be on a ridge with a roof line approximately 10 feet above ·the roadway elevation but wi 11 be at least 700 feet away. The impact therefore, \'i 11 be of minimal magnitude and of moderate importance. The question whether it is beneficial or detrimental is of subjective nature and depends on individual taste. 8. City Services -The demand for police, fire fighting, street cleaning, and other field services will increase in proportion to the population. The City, having planned to annex this property is ready and able to provide them. The impact can be considered of moderate magnitude and major importance. The impact could be con- sidered beneficial for the La Costa residents since this will justify a more intense patrolling of the area. ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED The urbanization of the area will result in the following detrimental effects which cannot be avoided. 1. Loss of visual open space 2. Increased traffic flow 3. A disappearance of the rural atmosphere prevalent in the area. 4. Temporary congestion in the school system . 1'1ITIGl\TION rlE/\SURES TO t1Itlit1IZE THE DETRitlENTAL lilPACT 1. Aesthetic -The enclosed tentative tract map shows that minimum of grading will be done along El Camin6 Real where this impact could -21- - - --.. -.. -----------.. -----.. -.. .. ------.. ---.. - r-· / C . . ,-- \,.._ be the greatest. In addition the landscapirig done normally on the front yards will result in green belts of trees an~ flowers which do not exist at present. 2. Traffic -This is a regional problem and should be analyzed by the city and county to determine the needs of traffic signals, decelerating lanes, or any other remedial measures that would reduce congestion and accidents. Existing ordinances make provisions for equitable financing of these improvements. 3. Lagoon -Again this is a regional problem which must be solved considering the county's plans for a regional park in the area. Among possible solutions or improvement measures could be the installation of debris traps at the storm drain outlets, dredging of the lagoon, creation of a channel to connect it permanently with the ocean, and many other alternatives. These solutions, however, can not be assessed to a single development since the beneficial or detrimental effect and the potential beneficial improvements are regional in magnitude. f1LTERtlATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Only those alternative uses which are of greater beneficial effect than the proposed action are considered. In order of progressive feasibility the following alternate uses have been evaluated. 1. iJo 1\ction -n,e present site is mostly vacant land on which taxes have been paid for years and is under economic pressure to have it developed. The beneficial effect would be the preservation of visual· open s p a c e ( n o t ~<t,,t,~ o p e n s p a c e s i n c e i t i s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ) , an d t h 2 preservation of rural at~osphere in the re9ion. -22- .. • • .. ---.. --------.. -.. -• -.. -.. 1111 ---.. ---.. -----.. • --- C C . . C The detrimental effects will be contin~ed erosion of the land, silting of the lagoon, elimination of possible greater tax base ~o finance needed public schools, regional parks, and improved city seryices . - 2. Conversion to Agricultural Lands -The topography and the soils qualities make this proposition almost an impossibility or greater agricultural use would have prevailed to date. 3. Public Park -There are plans for the county to create a regional park around the Batiquitos Lagoon. Additional park land, therefore, becomes unnecessary. The detrimental effects would be the purchase with public funds of what might be excessive park land, and operation and maintenance costs that could raise the present tax rates for present residents. 4. Private Recreational Facility -This alternative would be limited only to the creation of golf course, tennis courts, amusement park, and other similar uses. The beneficial uses would be the creation of open space and greater availability of play facilities. The detrimental effect would be financial competition to the neighboring golf courses, and tennis club, which, in the absence of additional patronage or reduced attendance, might result at best in lowered quality of facilities, maintenance, and service, and at worst, in financial disaster for everybody . a c o 1 1 e g 2 o r u ,1 i v e rs i t y co u 1 d be e s tab 1 i s he d i n the a re a . Ho i-1 e v e r , there are innumerable sites in the region with better tooography where an institution of this nature could be established. Moreover, these centers are not created unless there is a population large enough to justify it. Not allowing this development to proceed -2 3- -----r ,_ --.. .. -... ----.. -.. --.. .. C -'' -----.. ----.. -.. • .. .. c· ----- reduces the chances for the creation of such a college or uni ve rs i ty. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIROl·lMEiH /\NU THE MAitHEMArlCE AND ENCHANCEMErn OF LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCTIVITY As discussed in other sections, the development of Rancho La Cuesta will result in the disappearance of some agricultural land and of a potential open space use. The degree of this impact h owe v e r h a s be e n s h own to be mi n i ma l . / -r/1· ol I( I CIT The immediate or short term use of the development estimated at 50 years is the creation of modern housing at reasonable cost for at least two generations. Long range effects must be considered in regional terms through proper census of existing environmental conditions, and their changing, preserving, or regulating through well though general plans. Since the city and the county hav_g already adopted such plans to which this deye]opment conforms, a 4 further discussion of this item falls e ond the scope of this e o t . Nevertheless, one can assume that the long term environmental use for, let's say, 100 or 200 years will still be residential while the present downtown area goes through re-cycling to multiple or open spaces uses. -~"'°' .,..l, ~ C>c:> "(OU ~e"AC~ c.. • w c. L v~ , o ,., ? -2 4- -----C -------------.. .. -.. -C -----------------C ----- ~ a ANY IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSEU ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEHENTED In general the changes,@_cept to landfori) would not be irreversible. While restoration of city residential and/or commercial areas to rural conditions is infrequent no other changes made here would be irreversible. Abandonmen+ of agriculture on the present areas results in a very prompt re-establishment of indigenous and endemic vegetation plus associatedfauna~ Similarly, while infrequent and unlikely, abandonment of the residential subdivision and removal of construction evidence would permii a natural restoration to the present condition. THE GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY UPON THE t l E I G H 8 0 R HOO D A[JD / 0 H C OM i 1 Li r l I T Y Development of a site or an area is influenced primarily by marketing projections. An analysis of establishment of industries in the Carlsbad-Oceanside-Encinitas area, and an analysis of present house availability and price ranges, indicate a strong need for a dcvelopnent like Rancho La Cuesta, with homes that can be considered in the €pul!!}price category. '7 The present owners control over 2000 acres in the area of which approximately 1100 acres, including this site, are being annexed to the City of Carlsbad. The owners chose this oroperty as a first phase because of the proximity to La Costa development, and the close- ness of water, sewer, power, gas, and other es sen ti al services. In other words_,~velopmen__§)have induced this development and it is logical to expect that in turn the Rancho La Cuesta will induce or facilitate neighboring developments. -2 5- --------.. -------.. -• -.. -------------.. .. --.. .. • • -- r \..~ C C . Since this and future developments will be built in accordance with City and County General Plans, t~ere should not be any<f§cern=:) with respect to the growth inducing factor. On the contrary, it should be considered that this type of development is beneficial to the community overall1 since it satisfies the city government's philosophy of providing well-planned beautified neighborhoods, at a price that people in a spectrum of income brackets can afford. ~&o'-'.,. pi.£ ""b-tcJrt.t:!. ~v.:Lo?M-.t.~, w'f\~, ,. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE AREA WHICH MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY Figure l shows the location of the site and the boundaries of significant effect upon the natural environment and upon the human environment. This last area of influence will create also significant impact in the old portion of town, not shown in the map. -26- 111111II11111111111111 II 11II11111111 1111 1111 I N -...J I ,Ei·lVI::~fEr:Tr,L !i,:P/\(T t",_'?SESSf.1EiiT CHECKLIST PHYS ICli.L SYSTEr•:S: --------- Definition: Systems pcrtaininq to geologic, hydrologic and atmospheric processes and the probable effects of each. How to assess inpact of physical Systems: , .!. • Each category should be evaluated as in it's existing state, and the changes thut rnay occur in each respective phase o~ development. Th2 responses should be a one or two word statement. e.g. : Existing_ Land -'.'"orm Knolls, valleys Soil stahility Expansive soi l GEOLOGY: A. B • C . D • C L. • Land Form (Unique physical features i.e. r'.cuntains, b2.ys. lagoons, etc) Soil "i"ypc/Soi l Stability Soil Exp,-:r:sive Bedrock Stability (dip/slope) Hazards: 1 . Sci s 1;1 i c s us c e pt i bi l i ty 2. Su'.Jsidence 3. :1Jdf101:1 PlatPau_ vallPv Sandv soil minimal StahlP None recent NonP None 2. HYDROLOGY: A. Flood Pla:1; 10-50-100 yr. (Indicate on a Map) B. Aquifer, AqJifer recharge, percolati !mprmeablc surface? C. Drainage and runoff, increase from impermeable surface? D. Channel stability E. Water resources -fresh F. 11 11 -,salt G. 11 11 -brackish H . 11 11 -i r r i g a ti on I. 11 11 industrial J. 11 11 -domestic Below all levels 0 !1' Percolation. runo Permeable Cut erosion None vear a round Nooe_ lfone Carlsbad M.W.D. N/A Carlsbad M.W.D. (A·PPENGI:()') PHASE Developmental O~erational Graded terraces Graded terraces Cor1pacted soi l s Compacted s O i 1 s slooes.qraded sitesslooes.qraded Site C Sandv soil -----Sandv soil minimal minimal StahlP Stable ------ ) --Resident i al ff Reduced oercola1 ion Hvdroloav in crease runoff Residential Hydrol< construction Storm Drain None None ----· -- .. Carlsbad M.W.D. Carlsbad M.W.D. I I 111111111111111111111111II11111111111 I 1111 I N co I 'PHYS10L SYSTEMS:· (continued) '() 1---------.....---------.....:...:A..;.;R..:..P-=E'-;-i!c..:::D;..::r:...:.x.;..i Existing PHASE Developmental Operational K. W a t e r q u a l i t y : P h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s +-S;:;....:_i ..:..1 -=-t.,__..,_r-=u..!..:n..::eo:..:.f__,_f __ 1-i,_,_n-'-'c,C...r'-'e........_,w,...~.J.....L~---+'-=--~"-'-';J....:).JLL+---'-=.;;,.....;,.--'-1 I' 11 11 Chem i cal ch a r act er i st i cs inc re as 3 . L. M • iL 0. 11 11 B i o l o g i c c ha r a c t er i s t i c s -1--a=r...:..:;:.-=-.E~-=-r-,._e __ -+-n-'-'o'-'--"'-.,_c ,...h .,,,_a.,,,_n.,,,__e _____ -,..u......,_1...,a._;.....u....,,__,, Pollution existing al construct· n Pollution expected icultural construction Ocean ch~racteristics: 1. Waves (wind, tsunami) 2. Tidal action Other effects {\ H10 S P H E R I C : ------------ fl .. /~ i r \' e: s o u r c e s B • Inversion C . r . quality: co ' co, nlr Hydrocarbon, or~anic, D . P h o t c c h e ;,1 i c a l smog C S::~C(J F. Cl uri ty G. t·J oath er modification: H • II II I II II J . II II 90 !/ 1' • II II L . Other Clear Minimal NOX, so particulates,etc. h~~11~·n~1-·m'-=-arl ____ -+----"m~i~n~i~m~a~l=-------+---=-=---=~.:..=.:"-=.---M1n1ma minimal Temperature Precipitation Humidity \-!ind Odor Minimal minimal Mo de rate Low Moderate Moderate BIOTIC SYS T E:-1 S: See report and Supplement. Definition: Pertaining to flora (flowers) and fauna (animals) and the probable effects o~ each. How to assess impacts of development:· Each category should be .valuated as to the existing state and the changes that may occur during , or as a result of the developmental phase or operation phase. The responses should identify the appropri- ate plant or animal species and the potential impact on them. I I I N \.0 I ._, ~ I TII., ! y j' .. Jl sJ I (~VI ~ti ~-u Jct ) I I 1. 2 • 3 . .n FLOR !\_LE._b_ALLI1 A. ., P h y t o p 1 a n k t o n --R e d \\Io o d B. Corridor C. Garrier D. Vegetative Cover 1. Economic 2. Non-Economic E. Endemic (Native) 1. Economic 2. Non-::conomic F. Scientifically valuable G . H. (R2re and/or endangered) Pest species -. 1 ~uccess1cno. change I . -t,: 21 n induced 1 . 2 . E c o n o rn i c ( F 1 o \•/ e r s , A g Non-[co11omic F A U ~1 /\ ( fl. r: I : ; ;i, i_ ) A. Zoopl~n~ton --Elk B . Ha b i ta t J 11 d :,1 i gr at i on are C. Econo;nic species 0 . E n d e ::1 i c ( 1 l a t i v e ) s p e c i e s 1. Econo:1ic 2 . i) C 1> = C ,) 17 Q;'.1 i C E. Scie:r:tificc1lly Va1uable (Rare and/or endangered) F. Pest s~ccies, vectors G. Domestic 1 . E C 11 O ,1; i C 2. 1!on-Economic H. [:on-Domestic Ecosystem _St ab i 1 i t y ( Pl ant/ An i l. Site 2·. Localized area 3. Community 4. Region 5. State 6. Nation 4. Other I I t I I riculture) as ma 1 ) • I I I I I I :n Existing ' ~rassland-Scrub Partial Partial non-irrigated fields oastal Saqe-qra NnnP •pw rPninn;:il Pn d None Noxious weeds ~n;ic;t;il Scrub-or rJon-i rri gated fields ;rassland 1nrlPr;itP-nati ve omolete None None ;everal reaional Few RPaionallv Skunks.Rattlesna None None M;:inv Moderately Stable MnrP Stable various I ... _.; n. r . ----"~v-in11c: various I I I I I I I ~A Pi tMD I')i ~) I I I • PHASE . oOational Developmental -Reduced native incr.landscaping Reduced corridor reduced corridor increased barrier increased barrier 1 an as - none domestic ~ape s reduction minimal scrub Cul ti vars None .Possible rare ~mi C oossiblv reducec oossiblv reduced None None None Reduced lS S None Domestic PI an ts None None None Cult i Va te d olants. lawns reduced reduced reduced reduced None domesticated None None Iv native-reduced loca l lY-reduced ·local r --- Reduced locallv Reduced locally es Reduced possibly incr. None Possible None nnmi:>c:tir ppt_c; Reduced Reduced Reduced Re-stabalization Moderate reduction moderate reducti o n Minimal reduc::ion Minimal reduction ------ - .. ---•·c .. APPENDIX U HUMA N/GOVERtH·1E NTA L SYSTEMS I • I S THE PROP OS ED P ~w J EC T I N C OH F OR Mf\f,! C E \·/I TH : ( y cs -no ) .. .. ---------• ---.. ---------------- ---.. a. b. . c. d. . . e. f. g. h. i. i. City RPniQnill Countv Goals --¥-e-S--Yes Yes ·-----• .. Pol icics Yes Yes Yes ~---- I Precedents Yes Yes Yes P 1 cJ ns Yes Yes Yes ·- 1 ) G c n e r c1 l P l "' n ~-~ .QL.lLm.!.5__i_r~---~t l Ci:lC n l No ( l ) Yes Yes b ) C o n s c r w1_ t: i 0_11 ~ 'Y~_s Yes Yes ~J) ~ n S 1li1 CC " "Yes Yes Yes • . ____ ....:::..J_ .. ---------·--~--- d 1 Lund Use: A[~(1301) '\_ •· Yes Yes Yes ~Ll i rcu l u ti on '\_ \ Yes Yes Yes ·---. _fj_J:!_Q i _ s e '--Yes Yes Yes g_}_ Se i s111 i c Sa_f ct y N/S Ye~ Yes .bJ Safety_ NJS Yes Yes i 1 1-1 i 5 t O 1· i C CO c..c_i cl O r / fi/_S_ Yes Yes Scenic _ Hv.ty N/S Yes Yes j} 8 i c y_c l c Paths -N/S N/S N/S 2) ,Specific Plc1_n £l_G..a r f i el c!.__Sp_c~_c;__i_[__i _c N/A __Ji/_A_ N/A r 1,111 N/A N/A N/A b 1 D rady~p_cc_i f i c N/A N/A ---rrnr:-·-· r' la n N/A N/A N/A ~) Other N/A NIA N/A Zoning tl.o. ( 1) N/A JLQ___lU_ ·- Subdivision M~_0_c t Yes Yes Yes Ca12ital I mp roverncn ts Yes N/A N/A Land Use Controls Yes Yes Yes I • e, f 1 ood pl c.i in control o rd. [if A hi l lsicle o rc.J. Yes N/A N/A 9radin9 o rel. Yes parks i n lieu fees ( 3 ) School District Yes N/A N/A S[2ecic1l Districts N/S N/A N/A N/A Not Applicable N/S No specific requirements known ( l) t-lodi fi cation requested to effect conformance (2) Refer to text for applicability of permit area (3) In discussion -30- State F2deral --- Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes -Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes Yes N/S N/S N/A N/A N/A N7A N/A IUA NT!f. N/A N/A N/A ruA N/A Yes N/A N/A N/A ( 2 ) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A