HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 93-08; Carrillo Ranch Village O; Tentative Map (CT) (38)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART n
CASE NO. CT 93-08/PUD 93-07
DATE: MARCH 28. 1994
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Carrillo Ranch - Village "0"
2. APPLICANT: Continental Homes
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 12636 High Bluff Drive. Suite 300.
San Diego. CA 92130
(6191 793-2580
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: July 14. 1993
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of Village "O" of the Carrillo Ranch Master
Plan MP 139CE"). The project is generally located west of Melrose Avenue extension and south of
proposed Carrillo Way. The project site contains approximately 19.3 gross acres. The proposed
Tentative Map and Planned Development is for 51 single family lots and 1 open space lot.
The proposed 51 single family residential lots of Villages "O" are on minimum 5.000 square foot lots.
The area proposed for development is covered by an approved Hillside Development Permit HDP 91-17
and certified Environmental Impact Report EIR 91-04.
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 or Negative Declaration.
* 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. On the checklist, "NO" will be
checked to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the
project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed
insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insig"
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appear 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.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
(sig) (insig)
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards?
2. Appreciably change the topography or any
unique physical features?
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
6. Result in substantial changes in air
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? X
7. Substantially change the course or flow of
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? X
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply? X
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources? X
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
(sig) (insig)
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
13. Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance?
15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects?
16. Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals?
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
(sig) (insig)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area? X
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services? X
-3-
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
(sig) (insig)
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
20. Increase existing noise levels?
21. Produce new light or glare?
22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
23. Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
26. Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
27. Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans?
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing? X
25. Generate substantial additional traffic? X
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? X
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities? X
-4-
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life 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 en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
34. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
35. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively con-
siderable" means that the incremental
effects of an individual 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.)
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
YES
(sig)
YES
(insig)
NO
-5-
Q_ _...AL EVALUATION
On July 27, 1993, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-04) was certified for the approximately
417.9 acre Carrillo Ranch Master Plan MP 139(E) project. Consistent with the Master Plan, a Tentative
Map and Planned Development (CT 93-08/PUD 93-07) have been submitted for Village "O". The
Tentative Map for Villages "O" contains 51 single family residential lots on minimum 5,000 square foot
lots. Also proposed is 1 open space lot.
The area proposed for development has an approved Hillside Development Permit HDP 91-17. The
proposed building pad elevations are consistent with the grading approved as part of HDP 91-17. No
additional grading is proposed as part of this project. Areas proposed for preservation as part of the
Master Plan are being designated for open space through open space easements.
For this environmental analysis, staff conducted several field trips to the subject property and reviewed
the Carrillo Ranch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report EIR 91-04 which already covered this
property. In that: (1) the proposed project site has already been reviewed under the Master Plan EIR
91-04; (2) as designated, the proposed project implements all recommended mitigation measures of EIR
91-04; and (3) the project will preserve, through open space easements, the master plan designated
conservation habitat, no significant environmental impacts will occur if all of the mitigation measures
specified in EIR 91-04 are implemented.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. Hillside Development Permit HDP 91-17 (approved 7/27/93) includes the remedial grading
necessary for Village "O" as well as for the development of Melrose Avenue. No additional
grading is proposed at this time. The proposed project will not result in any unstable earth
conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards since issuance of
future grading permits will ensure compliance with all City grading standards to prevent any
geologic instabilities resulting from grading operations.
2. Hillside Development Permit (HDP 91-17) has already been approved and will result in
topographical changes to the project area but, as identified in EIR 91-04, no unique physical
features will be eliminated.
3. Standard City erosion control measures associated with future grading permits will prevent the
erosion of soils onto or off of the project site.
4. As identified in EIR 91 -04, the proposed project will not affect the natural systems of any beaches,
rivers, creeks, lagoons or lakes.
5. Although implementation of this project would result in long-term emissions of criteria pollutants
and paniculate matter as identified in EIR 91-04, The Carrillo Ranch Master Plan has incorporated
mitigation measures which would allow it to conform to regional air quality plans, including the
provision of bike lanes and pedestrian trails to reduce vehicle miles travelled. The applicant has
requested from North County Transit District (NCTD) desired transit accommodations within the
project. At this time NCTD is not requesting specific facilities to be included as part of the
tentative map. The Applicant will continue to cooperate with NCTD on future transit stop
locations/facilities within the project area.
-6-
^'"\
6. As identified in EIR 91 -04, trff'proposed project will not impact the>H3nbient air quality of the area
or cause changes in air movements, odor, moisture or temperature.
7. The project site is located within the San Marcos Creek/Batiquitos Lagoon watershed. The
approved engineering and grading designs for this project (Village "O") ensure that the project
drainage complies with City standards. The project area is located outside of the floodplain area.
8. Surface water, ground water or public water supply will not be significantly impacted by this
project. EIR 91-04 found no significant impacts to these resources as mitigated.
9. EIR 91-04 found that there would be no significant use of natural resource associated with
development consistent with the Master Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the Master
Plan.
10. As described in the applicant's environmental assessment, future consumption of fuel is consistent
with the long term growth forecasts of the region. As identified in EIR 91-04, the proposed
project will use normal amounts of fuel and energy; substantial amounts of fuel and energy will
not be required.
11. EIR 91-04 did not identify any potentially significant cultural resources within Village "O".
12. EIR 91-04 recommended redesign of the Master Plan to avoid impacts to San Diego thommint.
This project is consistent with the Master Plan and the recommendations of EIR 91-04.
13. To reduce chances of possible invasion of native plant areas by non-native landscaping species a
revegetation plan for disturbed and mitigated areas has been be approved by a qualified biologist,
and landscaping plans for the tentative map have been reviewed by the biologist as specified in
EIR 91-04. The biologist hired to monitor implementation of EIR mitigation measures has
concluded that the proposed landscape plans are consistent with the mitigation requirements of
EIR 91-04.
14. As identified in EIR 91-04, this property does not contain any prime or unique farmland and has
not been designated for agricultural use in the Carlsbad General Plan. Although limited
agricultural activities have occurred within the project area, pursuant to a letter dated April 7,
1993, all farming activities on the applicant's property have stopped.
15. EIR 91-04 identified potential impacts to native habitat areas during grading and construction.
EIR 91-04 concluded impacts could be mitigated to less than significant. The proposed Tentative
Map will implement the mitigation measures as recommended in EIR 91-04. As part of the
tentative map approval, conservation easements will be required on native habitat areas.
16. EIR 91-04 identified potential impacts from possible predation or disturbance of California
gnatcatchers or other sensitive wildlife species by future residents or pets. EIR 91-04 concluded
impacts could be mitigated to less than significant. The proposed Tentative Map will implement
the mitigation measures as recommended in EIR 91-04.
-7-
n*fc
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
17. The site is currently undeveloped but is designated primarily for residential uses in the Carlsbad
General Plan. The proposed land uses of this project are consistent with the approved Master
Plan MP 139(E) and approved Carlsbad General Plan. The land uses proposed will be internally
compatible as well as being compatible with adjacent uses.
18. As will be required by the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan, with the payment of all fees
and the implementation of all improvement conditions, all public facilities and services will be
available to meet the demands of the future development of the 51 single-family residential units
proposed on the project site.
19. This project will not result in the need for sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control
systems beyond that identified in the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan.
20. As identified in EIR 91-04 the construction of this project will result in short-term insignificant
construction noise impacts. Pursuant to the noise study of EIR 91-04, noise mitigation is
necessary adjacent to Melrose Avenue. Consistent with the noise study noise barriers have been
included in the design of this project. A detailed noise study, to be submitted with the delayed
architectural review, will be a condition of tentative map approval for each Village that has
potential noise impacts from Melrose Avenue. The detailed noise study will ensure compliance
with City noise standards.
21. Pursuant to EIR 91-04, the project will be required to install no glare lights within the project.
Future lighting on site will be directed so as not to impact future views or impact habitat within
natural open space areas.
22. As this is a residential project, it will not involve significant risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances. No hazardous materials are required to implement the proposed project.
23. The proposed density of the project (3.9 DU/AC) is in compliance with the Master Plan's
anticipated density of 3.9 DU/AC and is within the density range of the RLM General Plan
designation.
24. The project will provide additional housing units to meet existing demand.
25. A total of approximately 510 ADT generated by this project will be accommodated by existing and
future roadway improvements. EIR 91-04 concluded impacts to roadways could be mitigated to
less than significant. The proposed tentative map will implement the mitigation measures as
recommended in EIR 91-04.
26. The parking facilities created by this project will be accommodated onsite. Two garage spaces
will be provided for each unit (three spaces for each panhandle unit) and adequate on street guest
parking will be provided throughout the project.
27. As identified in EIR 91-04, the additional 510 ADT generated by the project will be
accommodated by the existing and planned circulation network.
-8-
28. The proposed project is locaSffd outside of the McClellan Palomar**Slrport Influence Area.
29. As identified in EIR 91-04, the project as designed will not cause conflicts at proposed
intersections.
30. The proposed project will not interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation
plans.
31. All manufactured slopes created in compliance with HDP 91-17 will be fully landscaped. Proposed
residential lots located within the Special Park Design District will have special design standards
applied to them to ensure that they are aesthetically pleasing and do not impede views of the park
site. As identified in EIR 91-04, no existing views will be significantly impacted through the
implementation of the proposed project.
32. Included in the Master Plan is the requirement for dedication of a 16.4 acre community park site.
This new park will serve residents of the proposed project. Further, consistent with the Planned
Development Ordinance, a private recreational facility is proposed on lot 52 of Village "O". The
project will not have a significant effect on existing recreational opportunities.
-9-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECTTfPCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and
g) no project alternative.
a) The project is proposed to be developed in one phase. Additional phases are not
necessary due to the small size of the development.
b) The project has been designed consistent with the Carrillo Ranch Master Plan, Carlsbad
General Plan and all City ordinances.
c) The project is proposed at the scale (density) allowed by the Master Plan and the Carlsbad
General Plan.
d) The project is in conformance with the City's General Plan and the Carrillo Ranch Master
Plan. Alternate uses would require amendment of these documents.
e) The proposed project involves subdivision of the site only. Development of the site will
occur only if facilities are guaranteed.
f) Development of this site is consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan and Carrillo Ranch Master
Plan. The land could be left vacant, but the property owner wishes to develop the land in
accordance with current designations and approved plans.
g) The "no project" alternative is not in conformance with the General Plan or Master Plan
designation for the site, therefore, it is not environmentally preferable.
-10-
*>**'****
DETERMINATION '>-'
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
_ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with
previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required.
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration will be proposed.
_ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date Signature
Date Planning Director
TW:lh
-11-