The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1982-08-11; Planning Commission; ; CT 82-14 - MCMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC.-PLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE: JUNE 21, 19'8 2 i/~ DATE: TO: FROM: STAFF REPORT August 11, 1982 Planning Commission Planning Department SUBJECT: CT 82-14 -MCMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC. -Request for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to create 38 single family lots east of Pontiac Drive, north and south of Victoria Avenue and west of future Elm Avenue in the R-1 7500 zone. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative subdivision map to create 38 single family lots on 12.11 acres, located, as described above. The proposed subdivision originally received tentative approval in January 1975 as Phase III of Templin Heights, CT 74-14. This tentative map, which has since expired, gave approval for development of 264 lots on 83.25 acres in three phases. The first two phases have received final maps. Phase I has been constructed. The applicant is essentially requesting reinstatement of Phase III of the previously approved map. The subject property has been previously graded. Significant stands of eucalyptus trees exist at the western border of the property. The majority of these trees would be removed to accomodate the alignment and improvements to Elm Avenue. II. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1. Does the proposed tentative map satisfy all requirements of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance? 2. Does the proposed tentative map satisfy all requirements of the Carlsbad Subdivision Ordinance and the State Map Act? Discussion The proposed subdivision would create thirty-eight single family lots. As conditioned, the proposed Tentative Map would satisfy all applicable requirements of the Carlsbad Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. ® I Staff believes that the design of the proposed subdivision and improvements would not adversely impact surrounding properties. Although Unit II of Templin Heights has not yet been constructed, Unit III has been planned as an extension of the project and should be compatible in terms of density and housing types. Property to the north is planned for similar single family development. Property to the south, as of now in the county, is designated for low-medium density residential development in the General Plan. The developer would be required to dedicate and improve one-half of Elm Avenue as a function of this tentative map approval. Given the approved alignment of Elm Avenue to the north and south of the project site, the vast majority of the eucalyptus stands would be removed to accomodate the street. Staff is recommending split grades for northbound and southbound Elm Avenue with a sloping median. This slope is existing and would allow the preservation of several trees in a landscaped median. Initial engineering studies indicate that this concept could be accomodated within the approved right-of-way (please see Exhibit "X"). Overall, staff believes that, as conditioned, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and satisfies all requirements of the Carlsbad Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and State Map Act. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on July 22, 1982. IV. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolution No. 2000, APPROVING CT 82-14, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Reso No. 2000 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Environmental Documents 6. Reduced Exhibit 7. Exhibit "X" dated August 11, 1982 8. Exhibit "A" dated August 11, 1982 CN:bw 7/28/82 -2- 2 CT 82-14 -McMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC. ADDED CONDITION The Land Use Planning Manager shall have the authority to approve minor encroachments of decks or similar uncovered structures within the first 10' of the open space easement abutting lots 231 through 244. Plans for development of such structures shall be approved prior to issuance of a building permit or placement of such structure. MAP \ ,. '\ \ $CAI.E I'': JIJIJO' • • 3 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: er 82-14 APPLICANT: M:MILLIN DEVEI.OPMENT, INC. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Tentative Subdivision map to create 38 single family lots east of Pontiac Drive, north and south of Victoria Avenue and west of Future Elm Avenue. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of lot J of Rancho Agua Hedioda, according to map thereof, No. 823 filed in the office of the County Recorder November 16,1896. APN: 167 -100 -24 Acres 12.11 Proposed No. of lots/Units 38 ----------------- GENERAL PI.AN AND ZONING Land Use Designation ----------RIM Density Allowed ----------0-4 Density Proposed 3. 14 ---------- Existing Zone R-1-7500 Proposed Zone ------------------------ Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: zoning Site R-1-7500 lt>rth R-1-10,000 South COUNTY East P-C ----- West R-1-9,000/7,500 Land use VACANT VACANT VACANT SFRS/VACANT PUBLIC FACILITIES School District CARLSBAD Water CARLSBAD Sewer CARLSBAD EDU's Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated June 1, 1982 ------=-------------- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAcr ASSESSMENT X Negative Declaration, issued __ J_ul_y~2_2~,_19_8_2 _____ _ E.I.R. Certified, dated -------------- Other, --------------------------------- -' - '' \ l If after the intormation you nave suom~~~eu nas oeen reviewed, it is aecermine.::1 . t.hat further informat •• equired, you will be so·v·. APPLICANT: AGENT: -. MEl-lBERS: • McMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC. , a California corporation Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication} 2727 Hoove~ Avenue, National City, CA 92050 Business Address (714) 477 4117 Telephone ·Number - Ed Elliott, Vice President Name 2727 Hoover Avenue, ~ational City, CA Business Addres~ -(714) 477-4ll7 Telephone Number See coreorate fe~oltiti6n attach~d Name ·(individual, partner, joint_ . venture, corporation, syndication) Business Address 7elephone Nu..'"'\ber 3~siness Address 'I'elephor.e Ncmber 92050 Home ~.ddress Telephone Number Home Address Telephone ~~umber (Attach more sheets if necessary) • .. - ··I/We decla:::e unde:?:_ penalty of perjury that the information contained in thi~ dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be· relied upon as being true and correct until a~ended. BY Agent -Vice President _;.;=~-~.;:..:;.~~:...:...:..:.;,_..:__-,-----=---'"-----Agent, 0:-:ne~, Par\:n~r ). •• FEE $100.00 RECEIPT NO: 'ENVIRO'.\1i'-ffa\;TAL IMPACT ASSES.SillENT FORM -Part (To be Completed by APPLICAi'IT) CASE No: e r ad: _ 1 1 DATE: G/;-1 /f 7--r . Applicant: McM ILL IN DEVELOPMENT, I NC. Address of Applicant: 2727 HOOVER AVENUE . -------------------------- NAT ION AL CITY, CA 92050 Phone Ntnnber: (714) 4 77 411 7 ___ .____ _ __,_ _______ _ Name, address and phone mnnber of person to be contacted (if other than .ApplicE..Irt): ATTENTION: ED ELLIOTT, VICE PRESIDENT 'GENERAL INFORi\t\TION: Description of Project: raw land Project Location/ Address: Reference Thomas Brothers Gui de 14 C 3 Victoria Avenue East of Pontiac Drive • Assessor Parcel Number: 167 100 24 Zone cf Subject Property; Residential Proposed Use of Site: 38 unit subdivision List all other applicable applications_ related to this project: ------------------------------------- ND 1 EIR ]. 2. Describe the actj_vity area, inciuding distinguishing natural and :rr.an,ra(1e charact2ristics; also provide precise _sloJ?e a.na.l1•sis ·wh2n appropriate.· N/A j_ Describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design and/or operation of the project. (For a more specific discu£sion of·energy conservation requirements see of the City's EIR Guidelines). Residences will be built to meet or exceed· applicable codes. 4. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit ~izes, range of sale prices or re!ltS 6 and type of household [;ize e:-::pected. Plans will probably range from 1,500 -2~00 sf, sales prices from $125 '000. -$170,000. range 5. If ccrnrne:.~:.-cial, indicate the type, wh2t.h2r neighborhood, city or region2lly oriented, sqtiare footage of sales area, ~1d lo&ding facilities~ N/A. 6. If industria1, indicate type, est.i.mated employment per shift, and loading facilities. NIA ... , 7. If ins ti tutiona.l, indicate the major function, estim~tec ·_ employxcrit per shift, estimated occupancy, leading facilities, and c01mnunity benefits to be dcrivt20. frc:n the px-oject. N/A 1. ENVIRONM.:.::NTAL Itvi?l~CT ANALYSIS ----------- A·nswer the follm·ring _qt:estions hy· placing a check in the appropriat·c space. (Discuss all i terns checked yes. Attach additional sheets as necessary}. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5} 6) ·n 8} 9) -Could the project significantly change present ·1and uses i~ the vicinity of the_~ctivity? Could the activity affect the use of a rec- reational area, or area of important aesthetic value? Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood? Could the activity result in the displ~cement of co:::nmuni ty resider.ts? Could tha activity increase the number Qf low -~nd moderate cost housing units in the city? Could tho activity decrea~e the number of low and mod~st cost ho~sing units in the ci~y? Are any of the natural or man-made features in the ~cti~it7 ~rea uniqu~, that is. net· found in other p~rts of the County, State, or Na't;ion? Could th,:,~ ncti v·i ty significantly affect a historical or archaeological site or its settings'? Could the activity signific~ntly affect the potential µse, extr~ction, or conservation of a scarce natural icsource? 10) Does the activity area serve as a hQbifht, food source nesting plnce, sourc~:of water, etc. for rare or endangered wildlife on fish species? 11) Could the activ5.ty significantly affect fish, wildlife or plant life? ·12) Arc there-any r.:i.rc er endangered plc!nt species in tile activity area?. 13) Could the activity ch.:i.rige existing features . of any of lh::: c.1 ty' s la9oonr;, L.-:;ys, or tidelor!cl~;? NO X x· X X X X X X X X X. 14) Couj_d the 2c.ti vfty change cxis tin9 features of any of the city's beaches? · 15) Could· the activity result in the ~rosion or el~minati6n of agricultural lands? 16) Could the activity serve to encourage develop- ment of presently undeveloped areas or intesify development of already developed-areas? 17). Will the activity require a-variance from established enviroru--nental standards (air, water, noise, etc)? 18) Will the activity require certification, authorization or issuance cf a permit by any .local, state er federal environmental control agency? 1~} Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditionil u3e permit by the city? 20.) Will the acti:i.d ty involve the app]_ication, us-2, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? 21) .Will the activitv involve construction of facilities in a ~load plain? 22) Will the activity invclve construction of facilities on a slope of 25 pcrc2nt or greatsr? 23) Will the activity involve construction of facilities in the area of an acttve_ fault? 24). Could the activity result in the generation of s~gn.:i.f ic~nt amounts of noise? , 25) Could the activity re~ult in the generation of significant amounts of dust? 26} Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or oth2r materialsj 27} Could the activity rc~ult in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the_ regio11 1 s air or w~tcr resources? {Should note, surface, ground water, off-shore). 28) · Will the project substantially i;-icrcase fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, .etc.)? 29) Wi.11 there be a .signifi.cant change to cx~sting l,1nd f or.m·? X X X X X X X X X X X X X ... X· X X ·. (a) ind:i..catc ·estimated grading to be done ;in cubic yards 20,000 • cy (b) pcrce·nt2.ge of alteration to ·the present land fori".l . -o- (c) maximum height of cut or fill slopes 38. 7 fee_t 30) Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewer~, drains, or .• streets? 31) Is the activity carried out as pa~t of a large~ project or series of projects? X . X. II. STATEMEi\JT OF NON-SIGNIFICANT ENVIROK?-lENTAL EFFECTS If you have answered yes to one or more of the questions . in Section I but you think-the activity will have no significant environmental effects, indicate your reasons below: • This is a re-application for reinstate~ent of a previously approved Tenative Map (74-14A) in accordance with 2/2/82 letter from Ronald A. Beeman, Assistant City Manager/Developme~tal Services, City of Carlsbad, copy attached. III. CCN\!ENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO Ju\T'{ OF THE QUESTIONS IN SECTION I (If_ additional space is needed for answering any questions attach additional sheets as may be needed). McMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC. Signature· By: ---~-~------'------,(~P,....e-r-_;;-0---'n'--c-om-1.p_..;cl~e-... '""'1..i.-n_g_r_e--p'--o-r-,-t...,..) _____ _ Ed Elliott,•Vice President Date Signed /~ / 1 l?'?Z, ---v---~, ------- ) •• • 'ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESS'Mf:Nf FORM -Part II (To Be Completed By The PLANNING DEPARTMENT) ) CASE NO. c.,,, '2>2-\4 DAIB: -JU LY a:, tgeg:_. I. • BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT: ~ ty\ \ L.Ll't-...~ 1"/Ev., I 1--.lc..,. 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: (-,1~f) L'.\,7-4 \CZ Z7Z7 \::k:X2YEP:>. A,vE. · 3. DAIB cHEcKLisT SUBMITIED:_..;_j=· ·~u~"=\r:=· '-e_· ·__., ...... le..,__z.~· • _______ _ II .• ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (EXPLANATIONS OF ALL AFFIRMATIVE ANSWERS ARE TO BE WRITTEN UNDER Section III -DISCUSSION OF EI'iVIRONvfENTAL EVALUATION) 1. • Earth Will. the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or grolllld surface relief features? d. The destn1ction, covering or modification of any llllique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or ero- sion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Yes Maybe No ···/ ND 2 .. ,1 ' 2. Air: Will the proposal have signi- results in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, rnositure or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water: Will the proposal have sigi- ficant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water move- ments, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flm'l of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of sur- face water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through • direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water othcn•ise available for public water supplies? Yes Maybe No 1/ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b, Reduction of the nrnnbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction.of new species of animals into an area·, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. • ·Noise. Will the proposal signi- ficantly increase existing noise levels? 7. • -~ht and Glare. Will the pro- posal significantly produce new light or glare? . 8. Land Use. Will the proposal have signific~mt results in 'the a1tcrution of the present or planned larn.1 use of an area? -3- ·yes Maybe No 9. Natural Resources. Will the pro- . posal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of haz- ardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? · 11. Population. Will the proposal significantly alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal signi - ficantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?° 13. • Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal have significant re- sults in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b, Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing trans~· portation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or move~ ment of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? £: Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -4- •• Yes :Maybe No .. • , 'I. 14. Public Services. Will the pro- posal have a sibmificant effect upon, or have significant results in the need for new or altered goveTill1lental services in any of the follmving areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. :Maintenance of public facili- ties, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Eriergy. · Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. D~nand upon existing sources of energy, or require the develop- ment of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal have ~ significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the . following utili tics: a. Power or natural gas? b .. Communications systems? c. Water? . d. Sewer or septic tanks? e.. Stonn water drainage? f~ Solid waste and disposal? 17 .. • Hwnan Hc~l th. Will the proposal have s1gnigicant results in the· creation of any health haz~n-d or potential health hazard (excluding• n1cntal health)? -5- •• Yes Maybe No ...... ···/ ···/ ... L .. '"/ • ·>~: •• ·;;-,: 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the pro- posal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open topublic view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? . . 20. Archeo1ogica1/Historical. Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? •• Yes Maybe No 21. ANALYZF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO nm PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) PHASED DI:vILOPME~T or THE PROJECT; b) AL 1I:RNA1;E SITE DESIGNS; c) ALTEP\.11\JATE SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT; cl) ALTERNATE USES FOR 1HE SITE; e) DEVELOPMENT AT SOME FUTURE TIME RATixR 111!\.\J NOW; f) ALTERi\lATE SITES FOR TP,.E ·PROPOSED USE; g) NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE. -n--tE-?P,o~_> '""T"E'"1-~11VE. ~P ,? T\-\e T-l--t\P-,Q ·P;-\-A"?E OF~ y=p,EVIO~LY . AF'PPo\LEO ~u.BD\\1\$\~ -6- -•• ) Yes Maybe No 22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF.SIGNIFICANCE. a) DOES 1HE PROJECT HA VE THE POTEN- TIAL TO DEGRADE TI-IE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, OR CURTAIL TIIE DIVERSITY IN 11-lE ENVIRONMENT? / b) DOES 'IBE PROJECT HA VE 1HE POTEN- TIAL TO ACHIEVE SHORT-TERM, TO TI-IE DISADVANTAGE OF LONG-TERM, ENVIRONMENTAL GO/\l,S? (A SHORT- TERM IMPACT ON 1HE ENVIRONMENT . IS ONE WHICH OCCURS IN A RE- LATIVELY BRIEF, DEFINITIVE PERIOD OF TIME WHILE LONG-TERM IMPACTS WILL EI\1DURE W'ELL INTD TilE FUTURE. ) / c) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE IMPACTS \\1HIGH ARE INDIVIDUALLY LIMITED, BUT CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERC\BLE? (A PROJECT MAY JJvlPACT ON 'TIVO OR MORE SEP/\RATE RESOURCES WHERE IBE IMPACT ON EACH RE- SOURCE IS RELATIVELY S!lli\LL, BUT WHERE TI-lE EFFECT OF THE WTAL OF TI{OSE IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT IS SIGNIFICANT.) / d) DOES IBE PROJECT HAVE ThVIRON- MENTAL EFFECTS hlIICH WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS, / EI1HER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY? III.· LISCUSSION OF ENVIRO~'MENTAL EVALUTION "Tl-\€-f?Pa_re.e:r' t? A ~EGU"ES>T ~~ A.PP-?-:ov'AL OF A TE~~ ~e:>D\V\""?l01---\ 1'4b.P ""to C-P-i~TE-~ Bl\--bLE-1=,b.lv\lLy' LDt$ ~~ \2-, l l ~ ~"E.-PJAcU....Y \LYA..TE: "E-.b..ST OF Fbt-\17..b.L:-DR. ~TH-~ ~TH O'F-Vl~l2:-\A... ..,&/E_ ~ VJ~TOF-t=u'TU'F\E_. 'J ~ AVE. T-1-\e ~'Ec:r \'=:, A R~L\C-b..770'\--\. +=DP) ~ 01== A.. ~.,.,ol-.l. o~ A. ~EA.I, Olk:::,\.-Y APPPDvED --rE'NlA-7"\VE:., lv\b.p 1 CC..,-74-\4~)~~c:..-Fl\JA.L ~> u\--.\\rlIC,.., OF" -n-\E.. '\Ev\PL\1---\ ~B~T::S>. ~ru~-r. -WE. Su.BJ~ • "'FRO~rY ~ -e,~ ~E,\/l0<-6\.Y 6~ k \.S "CEA.b~ DF ~ Y ~\bN\F-\~ ~EtA\ tON '-/Jtn-l--n-\=E_ ~ Gt=" k ~D DF-~'TLlPtE...·~LY-PrV..~ ~. ½\E. 4-l6'i\.l- . ) DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) ~--,..,MA~L-Y ~a::::c::> ~~\~ '/~$ C>F=6'2A.D1N~ ~ .PP.o~-i-o A.~rN. ~<RED ~U\LQ\~C,, PbO ~ ~EEr ~A:\7~. rr DOB=:>~ ~ ~T~ A~J...s>ui..l,-Or-~~\~dw'-0 ~~lc=:i~\~c..4.m.,y Rea~ Dut:7"0 l{il,Ti-\-~ • ~\:£::.-\IA.:no t---6. c:,p -b..PPRZ>Je.D -A.c:Do \i---ll ~ ~ - OPN~ * ~V\/.A..-Y4S>. -~ '\-lo ~!URAL ~\D- -FbP->~6?. P~n .. .Y 'E-Xl?,/ 1'b ~lbr'l---\\t=-\dA.~, . \lv\P~oN-~~~ ~ Vl~LlA...L ~t=:{1QS lb -sx:Pan1EO. n-t0 :A."-h7cLt PAT-"EO ~T 17--\:E.. QJ..--rY"~ _evt~, 6PAot~ ~D\~ WILL_ 1--1\~Tc-~~y Co~_ P-iEb~l°Ne, tt-l-~:::, C:s\~Ot~. - 0 •• IV. DETERMINATION. (TO BE COMPLETED BY 1BE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) _59,the basis of this initial evaluation: LI find the proposed project COUl.D NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 conditional negative declaration will will be prepared. • I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date:. ·7Laf6z..· V. MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) -9- ' ·•' . ' . •• MITIGATING Mf'.J\SlmES (Continued). Vl • APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITII MITIGATING J\fEASURES IBIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED TI-IE ABOVE MITIGATIONG MEA- SURES AND CONCUR WITI-I TI-IE ADDITION OF TI-IESE l\1EASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date: Signature of Applicant -10- • DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Managi,r (714)438-559e a Building Department (714) 433-5525 a Engineering Department (714) 43&6541 □ Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding SL (714) 438-5611 pf Planning Depertmont • (714) 438-6591 Citp. of etarl~hab NroATIVE DECLARATION • 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 PIOnt:T· ADDRESS/IOCATION: East of Pontiac Drive,, north arrl south of Victoria Avenue arxl west of future Elm Avenueo ProJJ:rr DESCRIPTION: Reapplication for a previously approved tentative subdivision map (er 74-14 (A)) for the final phase, Unit . III, of the Templin Heights project creating 38 single-fa.'llily residential lotso '!he City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act aoo the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad.· As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supf()rtive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA .. 920080 caments £ran the public are invited. Ple~e sub.nit camnents in writing to the Planning Department within ten ( 10) days of date of issuance .. DATID: July 22, 1982 CASE NO: Cl' 82-14 MIOIAELJ.ZMiR Land Use Planning Manager APPLICANT: r-t::Millin Development, Inc., PUBLISH DATE: July 24, 1982 ND-4 5/81 ec. ' DEVELOPMENTAL 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 □ 13ullding Department (714) 438-5525 ([itp of <!arlsbab □ Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 D Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714) 438-5611 ~annlng Department (714) 438-5591 PUBLIC NOI'ICE OF PREPARATION PLEASE TAKE NOI'ICE: '!he Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Description: Reapplication for a previously approved tentative subdivision map, (CT 74-14(A)) for the final phase, Unit III, of the Templin Heights project creating 38 single-family residential lots. Project address/Location: East of Pontiac Drive, North and South of Victoria Avenue arrl west of future Elm Avenue. Anticipated significant impacts: None We need to know your ideas about the effect this project might have on the environment and your suggestions for ways the project could be revised to reduce or avoid any significant environmental damage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environ- mental review of this project. Your comments on the environmental impact of the proposed project may be sul::mitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA.92008, no later than July 23, 1982. DATED:·· July 2, 1982 CASE NO: Cl' 82-14 APPLICANT: McMillin Development Co. -l'ln.·A1. _ ,l)~~A ... /JQ ~tZ... Land Use Planning Manager PUBLISH DATE: July 7, 1982 ND 3 5/81 crrv STANDARD 84' ROW l'~t'Nhj Oft 131~~ I~' I~/ 12.' e' r;z..' S' 10' I I G,4' L I l 51-0r"E ,-5.S' f 4.G'f f 45•1 5.$•'J fl,O' 94' ELM AVENUE~ • ~ ~ ~ti 't. "tJ -f 'i.' } z." J2 J z.. L L I L 1 -st.o"'f=>E ~ z:1 ~s·1 -i,7' 17' 2'1' 14_sl 2-'I " ?::C>' 84' PROPOSED ROW CT 82-14 EXHIBIT X 8/11/82