HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 98-14; Thompson/Tabata; Tentative Map (CT) (113)MARY & JOSEPH HULL
913 POPPY LANE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009
May 1, 2001
Mr. Michael J. Holzmiller
Planning Dkector
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314
Dear Mr. Holzmiller:
We have completed our review of the Negative Declaration (ND) dated April 4,
2001 for the proposed Standard Pacific Development Project-Thompson/Tabata
Site. Our comments are outlined by categories of Project and Environmental Issues
and identified by page number as shown in the ND.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The Final ND should include a concise and complete list of public information
meetings held and any public notices sent for the project. I requested a copy of this
information last year and did not receive any response. In addition, the ND should
contain a summary of the modifications to the project and tentative map including
the reasoning for each modification. The ND states on the first page that..."there
is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the
project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment." Because the
tentative map has been revised numerous times, including moving the affordable
units to the south side of Poinsettia Lane, a complete history is needed for the
"whole record".
The ND should also contain a map of the project location and a map of the project
site at a minimum. A map showing the project layout and circulation is also
suggested.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PAGE 10-The project site contains three areas, the size and density of each area
should be added to the ND. The project also straddles Poinsettia Lane and the area
of each portion should be included in the ND.
PAGE 10-In late 2000 the greenhouses on the property were removed. This is after
Standard Pacific acquired the property. Did the City issue a permit and approve this
removal? If not, what is the justification for this work on the property?
PAGE 10-The development proposes 500,000 cubic yards of cuts and fills. The ND
states that the topography would remain essentially the same, yet the cut and fills
proposed are over 30 feet in height. This should be addressed in the Aesthetics
section as a visual impact to the area.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Cont...
PAGE 11-The project proposes three connections to the local street network. An
important component that should be considered in the ND is the proposed signal at
Poinsettia Lane and Snapdragon Drive. The city conducted a meeting in August of
last year and stated that a signal is already warranted at that location. The ND
completely ignores that issue. A detailed discussion of the proposed signal is
necessary for a complete ND.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
PAGE 11-The project is divided in two sections north and south of Poinsettia Lane.
The ND should contain densities for each section of the project along with the
description contained for the western and eastern portion of the project.
PAGE 12-A complete summary of the Master EIR for the 1994 General Plan
update should be included in the ND.
PAGE 12-The overall density for the project should be added in section c). The
density of Mariner's Point needs to be included. Generally, the project is too dense.
The proposed project includes a number of lots that are not only less than 7,500
square feet but, are less than 6,500 square feet. The project should contain a more
balanced lot sizing and more open space. This lack of open space creates a loss of
character to the area and substantial increases in urban runoff which directly impacts
Batiquitos Lagoon.
PAGE 13-How will the mitigation funding of $419,265 for loss of agricultural land
be used?
PAGE 13-Due to the new project, Section e) should contain a detailed discussion of
the significant impact of the connection of the new development to the existing
developments. The established communities of Spinnaker Hill and Vista Pacifica
will be disrupted by the proposed development due to the significant increase in
traffic on the streets within those developments.
PAGE 14-Include the actual current number of units in the SW quadrant of
Carlsbad. Utilizing information from 1986 is inappropriate.
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
PAGE 14-Aa additional mitigation measure should be added to notify potential
homebuyers that this project is in Zone 4 for seismic design. Zone 4 is the highest
zone number included in the UBC.
PAGE 15-As previously mentioned the project proposes cuts and fills over 30 feet
in height. Special care should be taken to prevent erosion both during and after
construction of the project. The applicant should coordinate with and be required
to obtain a permit form the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Due to the
large amount of grading and lack of open space, high amounts of erosion are likely.
WATER
PAGE 16-The property is described as having greenhouses covering a large portion
of the project. In fact, the site had mostly open fields with greenhouses coving
about 15 to 20 % of the site (see attached photo).
PAGE 16-The project should be redesigned to create more open space areas to
prevention high concentrations of urban runoff. Of the 82.20 acre site 76.46 acres
are to be graded. This grading should be reduced to avoid impacting water quality.
The lack of open space contributes significantly to urban runoff pollution with
potential impacts to the Batiquitos Lagoon. This should be of great concern
because it not only impacts the lagoon environment but the beaches of southern
Carlsbad that connects directly to the lagoon.
AIR QUALITY
PAGE 19-Section c) states that the maximum building height for the project is 30
feet for single family residences and 35 feet for multi-family residences. Based on
the grading proposed with cuts and fills of over 30 feet in height, the existing terrain
could be 60-65 feet different in some areas. This should be discussed in the
Aesthetics section of the ND. This large of an alteration with close proximity to the
coast is a significant impact to the surrounding area.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
Page 20-The Linscott, Law & Greenspan (LLG) traffic study contains several
inconsistencies and errors regarding the existing and proposed traffic volumes (see
attached). The report also should include information for Snapdragon Drive
including discussion of the proposed signal at Poinsettia Lane. The traffic study also
fails to address a key intersection at Poinsettia Lane and Batiquitos Drive. This
intersection currently experiences demand that exceeds capacity for the northbound
Batiquitos Drive left turn to westbound Poinsettia Lane. This information is
necessary for an adequate review by the residents of Spinnaker Hill and Vista
Pacifica.
The current layout of the project proposes three points of access. These include
Street "A" to Poinsettia Lane, Rose Drive to Daisy Avenue and Alyssum to
Snapdragon Drive. It is estimated that the project will generate 2,562 daily trips
(ADT). The traffic study shows 70% of the trips from the project will go to 1-5.
This breaks down to about 45% of the trips from the project entering/exiting at
"A" Street to Poinsettia Lane and 25% of the project trips using the connection of
Rose Drive to Daisy Avenue. In addition, 10% of the project trips are estimated to
use the Daisy connection in order to proceed south on Batiquitos Drive. This
means that 35 % of the trips from the project will use Daisy Avenue. This adds 760
trips to Daisy Avenue bringing the total ADT on Daisy Avenue to about 2800
ADT. By contrast, the project proposes to add 980 trips to westbound Poinsettia
Lane and 430 trips a day to eastbound Poinsettia Lane. This trip distribution is
severely unbalanced given that Poinsettia currently carries 10 times the amount of
traffic, as does Daisy Avenue. Due to this increase of traffic on Daisy Avenue a
significant impact will occur on Daisy Avenue and in the Spinnaker Hill community.
However, the traffic study concludes that the additional traffic on Daisy Avenue will
be within acceptable values. The report classifies Daisy as a residential collector
street with a capacity of 4,500 ADT; this is an incorrect classification. The report
cites the San Diego County Public Road Standards for classifying streets. Because
Daisy Avenue is as wide as a residential collector street, the report assumes it is one.
For non-circulation element roads (Section 4.5) a residential collector is defined as a
having a 60-foot right-of-way wide and 40 foot curb-to curb width. It also states,
"Such roads are not envisioned as providing for through traffic generating in one
community and destined for another." As such, the proper classification for Daisy
Avenue is a "residential road." A residential road has a capacity of 1,500 ADT. This
explains why the general consensus within the Spinnaker Hill Community is that the
existing traffic volume on Daisy Avenue already exceeds proper design values.
The City of San Diego Street Design Manual has more detailed information regarding
roadway classification. This manual has similar urban local streets as compared with
the County standards. The City manual has several types of residential streets for
use in residential areas. These include a Two-Lane Collector Street, a Two-Lane
Sub-Collector Street, and a Residential Street. The two-lane collector has a
recommended capacity of 5,000 ADT, along with no direct front residential access.
Whereas the two-lane sub-collector has a capacity of 2,200 ADT, the residential
street has a capacity of 1,500 ADT, both with direct residential access. Direct access
is really the main difference between a collector type of street and a residential road.
The proposed ADT on Daisy Avenue far exceeds these values. Therefore, the
project will cause a significant impact.
The ND needs to address this significant impact and provide for alternatives to avoid
this impact. Two such alternatives are suggested below:
(1) As currently configured, a right in/right on Poinsettia Lane could be added to
the development. It could be placed between Snapdragon Drive and the proposed
connection of Street "A". An emergency access type gate could be placed at the
proposed connection to Daisy Avenue, similar to the existing gate at the southerly
end of Daisy Avenue.
(2) Redesign the development to create a loop system with two full points of access
to Poinsettia Lane. This system could place two signals on existing Poinsettia Lane
about 600 feet apart. These signals would both be three-way signals and provide full
access to the development. Although, this configuration would require a variance to
the signal spacing policy of the City of Carlsbad, in this particular case the signals
could be interconnected and basically perform as one signal. Left turn movements
from the development could be synchronized such that the disruption of Poinsettia
Lane would occur only once for both signals. In other words, placing two signals
with reduced signal spacing would not impact Poinsettia Lane to any greater extent
than a single signal. This signal spacing would also meet the Caltrans ramp signal
spacing criteria of 160 meters (525 feet).
In addition, the traffic report notes that speeding has been observed on Daisy
Avenue. It also states the City should prepare a "Traffic Calming Report" to
address this issue. Calming devices such as stop signs, mini-roundabouts and raised
pinch points along Daisy Avenue are suggested. The proposed project obviously
compounds this public safety situation. The ND contains no information or
discussion of a traffic calming report.
PUBLIC SERVICES
PAGE 26-The Carlsbad School District has recently changed the elementary school
boundaries. The ND should contain a letter from the School District that the new
students associated with the development can be accommodated. This information
should also include the current total enrollment at each school, the enrollment
generated by the project, and the capacity of each school. The ND is incomplete in
this area.
RECREATIONAL
PAGE 31-Based on the size of the project an additional 2.62 acres of parkland is
needed. Will the project contribute to acquire parkland? If so, where? If not, how
is this impact being mitigated?
Currently, NCTD operates bus service (Route #321) on Daisy Avenue. Will the
project impact this bus service? The ND should require coordination with NCTD
before the project is approved to ensure this service continues and is not impacted.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this document but strongly feel that the
impacts of this project are significant and severe to the adjacent communities. Based
on the number of comments above and general lack of conclusive data in the ND it
is substantially inadequate for public circulation and should be revised and released
again for public comment. The ND was issued on April 4, 2001 with a 30-day
comment period. If you have any questions regarding our comments please contact
us at (760) 438-2719.
Sincerely,
Mary R. Hull Joseph R. Hull
c: Carlsbad City Council
Carlsbad Planning Commission
•- va
CAMOfD HE 145 ONDAS
NOTE; — ADTs are shown midblock
— AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shown at the intersections
REV. 12/07/00 NO SCALE
LLG919R.DWG
I l\s(Ol I
I \\\ \
r.KI I NSI'AN
Figure 5
EXISTING TRAFRC VOLUMES
AM/PM PEAK HOURS & ADTs
Y/////////S
NOTE: — ADTs ore shown mldblock
- AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shown at the Intersections
REV.NO SCALE
ILQ010&DWG Figure 7b
TOTAL PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
WITH ALYSSUM ROAD CONNECTED
AM/PM PEAK HOURS & ADTs
•o •o
^«*k
NOTE: - ADTs are shown midblock
— AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shown at the intersections*
REV. 12/07/00 SCALE
LU»1«tOWO Figure 8a
EXISTING -I- PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
WITHOUT ALYSSUM ROAD CONNECTED
AM/PM PEAK HOURS