Loading...
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-