HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-05-25; Planning Commission; ; CT 83-05|CP 228 - CRC/LA COSTA PROPERTIES, LTDAPPljii\.TION SUBMITTAL DATE: MARc9J, 1983. . . . . ....
STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 25, 1983
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Land Use Planning Office
SUBJECT: CT 83-5/CP-228 -CRC/LA COSTA PROPERTIES, LTD. -
Request for a 20-unit tentative tract map and
condominium permit on property located on the south
side of La Costa Avenue, west of La Coruna Place, in
the RD-M zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the
Negative Declaration issued by the Land Use Planning Manager,
and ADOPT Resolution No. 2122, APPROVING CT 83-5/CP-228, based
on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the construction of four buildings
providing a total of twenty condominium units, on an irregularly
shaped, steeply sloping, 1.58 acre parcel overlooking La Costa
Avenue. Most of the site is presently covered by native
vegetation. Construction of the project will require
approximately 5000 cubic yards of earthwork. Almost 50% of the
site will remain in its natural state. The project will result
in a net density of 12.6 dwelling units per acre which is within
the General Plan density range of 10-20 du/ac designated for
this site. Surrounding zoing and development include R-2 and
duplexes to the south (on top of the hill), R-1 and vacant to
the east, R-1 and single family homes to the north (across La
Costa Avenue), and on a similar, steeply sloping lot, RD-Mand
vacant to the west.
III. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1. Is the project sensitive to the natural topography of
the site?
2. Does the project conform with the development standards
and design criteria of the Planned Development
Ordinance?
3. Does the project take into account its high visibility
from La Costa Avenue and the Golf Course area?
Discussion
Since the site is severely constrained by the steep topography,
it became apparent early in the site design process that much of
the property was unbuildable. To this end, staff and the
applicant agreed upon an area (the flattest portion) of the site
that could accomodate condominium development.
In addition, while hillside developments often create larger
building pads through high retaining walls, for aesthetic
reasons, staff indicated they would strongly discourage the
utilization of retaining walls that would be visible from La
Costa Avenue.
The final plan, as shown on exhibits "A" -"L", is a result of
numerous plan revisions by the applicant and staff. While the
resulting project appears somewhat crowded, staff believes this
to be the best design that could result from such a severely
contrained site with a guarantee of 10 units per acre. In
addition, almost 50% of the site will remain undisturbed.
The project complies with the design criteria and development
standards of the Planned Development Ordinance. All resident
parking is to be located in a subterranean garage located beneath
the upper two buildings. This garage layout is shown on Exhibit
"L". Visitor parking is located immediately off the entrance
driveway. A central primary recreation area is proposed to
include a patio with spa and related facilities. Two secondary
recreation areas are proposed to include barbeques, benches,
overlook sites, and other passive features. Details of the
common recreation facilities are shown on Exhibit "B" and "C". A
series of meandering walkways through the central courtyard
connect the lower townhouse units to the upper flats and garage.
The closest building to La Costa Avenue will maintain a 30-foot
setback. As shown on the landscape plan (Exhibit "B"), this
area will receive extensive landscape treatment to act as a
visual screen and help abate traffic noise. In addition, the
project is planned so that no retaining walls will be visible
from La Costa Avenue. While the structures are up to 35-feet
high, the "stepped-back" design should break up the walls to a
degree that the project does not totally dominate the hillside.
In summary, staff believes that this project accounts for the
sensitivities of the site, and meets the requirements of the
Planned Development Ordinance.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Land Use Planning Manager has determined that this project
will not have a significant impact on the environment and
therefore, issued a Negative Declaration on May 6, 1983.
-2-
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2122
2. Location Map
3. Background Data Sheet
4. Disclosure Form
5. Environmental Documents
6. Exhibits "A", 11 B11 , "C", "D", "I", "J", "K" and "L", dated
May 11, 1983, and Exhibits "E", "F", "G" and "H", dated
March 11, 1983.
PJK:bw
5/10/83
-3-
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: CT 83-5/CP-228
APPLICANT: CRC/La Costa Properties, Ltd.
RmUEST AND 1.DCATION: Twenty unit tentative tract map on south side of La Costa
Avenue at La Coruna Place.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 180 of La Costa Unit 1 according to Map No. 6117 filed
June 3, 1968. APN: 216-016-22
Acres 1.58 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 1 ----------------
Land Use Designation
GENERAL PIAN AND ZONING
RMH --------
Density Allowed 10-20 du/ac Density Proposed 12.6 du/ac _____ __._ __ _
Existing Zone RD-M ----------
SU r rounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning
Site RD-M
N:>rth R-1-10
South R-2
East R-1-75
West RD-M
Proposed Zone ---------
Land Use
Vacant
SFD
Duplex
Vacant
Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District San Dieguito/Encinitas Water Leucadia Se.ver Leucadia EDU's 20
Public Facilities Fee Agreanent, daterl April 15, 1983
----=-----'-------------
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
~ Negative Declaration, issued _Ma_y_6-"-, _1_9_8_3 ______ _
E.I.R. Certified, dated ---------------
0th er, --------------------------------
APPLICAN'l': CRC/La ...CO.s.ta Prapert ies, L.T-----------
Nam,;: (individual, partn0Y:~-;lu.p, joint venture, corf'Or.ation,. synd.i.cation)
AGENT;
NEHBERS:
.11.J.5 Hotel Cj rcle South., Suite 201, Sao nj ego, ..:.cA__.9 .... 2 ..... J ....... a ... s.__ ___ _
Business Address
_(619) 293-7652
• •rclephone l'1u.rtl.l.:ic~:r
Scott M. F~rguso_n _______ , __________________________ _
Name
Same ______________ , ____ , ___________ , _____ _
Business Address
...S alllQ ----·••·-,·---'£e lephe;11r:: Numb::!r
_.£..q~~-nt!:Y.~e.ource s CorpOE~ ticin
Name ·(individnal, partner, joint.
venture, corpo:r.-a tion, !::yndic..:d: ion)
--------·----------Uorne l'.ddres~
_ll~~~otel Circles South, Suite 201, ~n Diego, CA 921Q8~---
Busine::;s Address
(61~) 293-7652 ---------------Telephone Ni;.;::l'ocr
-;------------------~ia.r;ie
3·.isiness. Address
·--··----·---····-----·--·-------Telephonc-:: ~iur.tb~'):.l"
-------------~---
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
1/1·le decl.::~=~ ur:de:c l_cenal ty of perjury that th':! inforir.ation contained in thi.'.'; dis-
closure is true and correct and Chat it will remain true and correct and may be·
rel iccl upon a:~ being tr.ue and corn~ct until .c'!:nendec1.
UY
' ' '·' ... .,' Loc#raoN
l ◄ Cos,-4111
R-DM
R-DM
; '
R-1-10
CASE NO. CT83-5/Cp2_28 . I .
APPLICANT ·CRC/LA co·sTA' r VICINITY MAP
l' • FE~00.00
RECEIPT NO:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSJvlEN'f FORM -Part I
(To be Completed by APPLICANT)
CASE NO: --------
DATE:_ 3/? ;f3
Applicm,t: __ C_R_~/~A COSTA PROPERTIES, LTD.
Pddress of Applicant: 1335 HOTEL CIRCLE SO. SUITE __ _2'"""0-"-5-'-. __________ _
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108
Phone Number: (619) 295-0602 ----------
Name, address and phone mrrnber of person to be contacted (if other than Applicant):
NORMAN KASUBUCHI --E. F. COOK & ASSOC., LTD., 5858 MT. ALIFAN DR., S.D~CA 92111
(619) 279-2823
'GENERAL I'.~FORM.ATION:
Description of Project: THIS IS A 1-LOT SUBDIVISION FOR A 20-UNIT . ....Gfill.DOf".JINIUM
PROJECT WITH AN UNDERGROUND PARKING STRUCTURE. ;.,;.;;;_::;...;...;:..:..;.::;..:.... ____________ _
Project Location/Address: __ SOUTH OF LA COSTA AVE., WEST OF NUEVA CASTILLA WAY AT
• THE WEST END OF LA CORUNA PLACE, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ·-----~----
Assessor Parcel Number: 216 -16 -22
Zone of Subject Property: RO-M
Proposed Use of Site: 20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
List all other app1icable applications -related to this project:
TENT. TRACT MAP, MAJOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ND 1
EIR l
• • 2. Describe the activity area, including distinguishing natural
and man-made characteristicsi also provide precise slope
analysis when appropriate. APPROX. 50% OF THE SITE HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
GRADED AS A 2:1 SLOPE TO CONSTRUCT LA COSTA AVE. ALONG THE NORTHER PORTION OF
THE PROPERTY. THE REMAINDER IS IN A NAUTRAL CONDITION WITH THE SITE SLOPING
STEEPLY TO MODERATELY, NORTHEASTERLY TOWARDS LA COSTA AVE. DRAINAGE IS SHEET
FLOW TOWARDS LA COSTA AVE. AND IS THEN INTERCEPTED PARTIALLY BY 3 GUNITE
DITCHES. VEGETATION CONSISTS OF 1CE PLANT ON THE SLOPE BANK WITH THE REMAINDER
COVERED BY NATIVE SHRUBS & GRASSES.
3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated'into the
design and/or operation of the project. (For a more specific
discussion of energy conservation requirements, see
of the city's EIR Guidelines).
This project utilizes minimal window openings, full insulation in the roofs
and walls (R-19 & ·R-11 respectively). The south exposure takes advantage of
walls to shade windows. The common areas will be landscaped with deciduous
species of trees to provide shade in summer and sunlight in winter.
4. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit
sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household
size expected.
Townhouses: 4@ 1526 SF, 3@ 1458 SF
Flats: 10@ 1312 SF, 3@ 1062 SF
Price Range: $125,000 to $150,000
This will be an adult complex.
5. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city
or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and
loading facilities.
N/A
6 .. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift,
and loading facilities .
. N/A
7. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated
employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading
facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the
project.
N/A
-2-
• • I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Answer the following questions by placing a check in the
appropriatP. space. (Discuss all items checked "yes".
Attach additional sheets as necessary.)
YES NO
1) Could the project significantly change present
land uses in the vicinity of the activity?
2) Could the activity affect the use of a recre-
ational area, or area of important aesthetic
value?
3) Could the activity affect the functioning of
an established community or neighborhood?
4) Could the activity result in the displacement
of community residents?
5) Could the activity increase the n~mber of low
and modest cost housing units in the city?
6) Could the activity decrease the number of low
and modest cost housing units in the city?
7) Are any of the natural or man-made features
in the activity area unique; that is, not
found in other parts of the County, State or
Nation?
8) Could the activity significantly affect a
historical or archaeological site or its
settings?
9) Could the activity significantly affect the
potential use, extraction, or conservation
of a scarce natural resource?
10) Does the activity significantly affect the
potential use, extraction, or conservation
of a scarce natural resource?
11) Could the activity significantly affect
fish, wildlife or plant life?
12) Are there any rare or endangered plant
species in the activity area?
13) Could the activity change existing features
of any of the city's lagoons, bays, or
tidelands?
-3-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
_ _J{__
• •
14) Could the activity change existing features of
any of the city's beaches?
15) Could the activity result in the erosion or
elimination of agricultural lands?
16) Could the activity serve to encourage develop-
ment of presently undeveloped areas or intensify
development of already developed areas?
17) Will the activity require a variance from
established environmental standards (air, water,
noise, etc.)?
18) Will the activity require certification,
authorizatiori or issuance of a permit by any
local, state or federal environmental control
agency?
19) Will the activity require issuance of a
variance or conditional use permit by the city?
20) Will the activity involve the application, use,
or disposal of potentially hazardous materials?
21) Will the activity involve construction of
facilities in a flood plain?
22) Will the activity involve construction of
facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater?
23) Will the activity involve construction of
facilities in the area of an active fault?
24) Could the activity result in the generation
of significant amounts of noise?
25) Could the activity result in the generation
of significant amounts of dust?
26) Will the activity involve the burning of brush,
trees, or other materials?
27) Could the activity result in a significant
change in the quality of any portion of the
region's air or water resources? (Should note,
surface, ground water, off-shore).
28) Will the project substantially increase fuel
consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc.)?
29) Will there be a significant change to existing
land form?
-4-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
_x_ __ _
X
__ x ____ _
X
X
X
X
X
X
,, • • (a) indicate estimated grading to be done in
cubic yards 5000 CY _._...::..;:~-=-'----------
(b) percentage of alteration to the present
land form 43% __ ......:...::'-"'--------
(c) maximum height of cut or fill slopes
10'
30) Will the activity result in substantial increases
in the use of utilities, sewers, drains, or
streets?
31) Is the activity carried out as part of a larger
project or series of projects?
-5·-·.
X
X
-• II. STATEMENT OF NON-SIGNIFICAN'r ENVIRONMEN'I'AL EFPEC"rS
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:
ALTHOUGH THIS PROJECT PROPOSES TO LOCATE BUILDINGS WITHIN A 2:1 SLOPE
BANK, WE FEEL IT WILL HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE THE UNITS WILL
BE BUILT INTO THE SLOPE BANK UTILIZING A COMBINED RETAINING/FOUNDATION
WALL. LANDSCAPING WILL BE PROVIDED ALONG LA COSTA AVE. TO SHIELD THE
UNITS, FURTHER REDUCING THE VISUAL IMPACT OF THE STRUCTURES.
III. COMMENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS IN SECTION I
(If additional space is needed for answering any questions,
attached additional sheets as may be needed.)
Signature ___ h?~----!~ ~CE ,3!82i
"'4-U//~~ompleting report)
t=:F. Ct;)(Jt. t Assoc. Lro.
Date Signed &1<.. ~ fl=B __ ,3 ___________ _
-6-
.)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM -Part II
(To Be Completed By 'The
PLANNING DEPAR1MENT)
()
CASE NO. CT ~ Jr ~ \ l(), i:ir
DATE: S '" ,~3
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: av\ L~ • W~fA_ t11Y>re,z:ne~
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: ------------
l33~ l-\oleL l\tv!R SOU1l\ l Q~. U(
3. DATE CHECKLIST SUBMITIED:_2"-ll-"'i-t-l-=-i;,._· ·_· -----------
II .• ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(EXPLANATIONS OF ALL AFFIRMATIVE ANSWERS ARE TO BE WRITTEN UNDER
Section III -DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION)
1. Earth Will the proposal have signi-
ficant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disn1ptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface r.elief features_?
d. TI1e destruction, covering or
modification of any unique 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 hay, inlet or lake?
Yes Maybe No
ND 2
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,
mositure 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
flow 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 otherwise available for
public water supplies?
()
Yes Maybe No
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal have signi-
ficant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of
species, or nwnbers 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
micro fauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers 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. Light and Glare. Will the pro-
posal significantly produce new
light or glare?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal have
significant results in the alteration
of the present or planned land use of
an area?
-3-
0
Yes • Maybe No
X
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. • Ttanspotta tion/ Circulation. Will
the proposal have significant re-
sults in:
a. Generation of additional
vehicular movement?
b, Effects on existing parking
fac.:ilities, 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
14. Public Services. Will the pro-
posal hav:e a significant effect
upon, or have significant results
in the need for new or altered
govenwental services in any of
the following areas:
15.
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
. facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facili-
ties, including roads?
f. Other goverrnnental services?
Erterfi'. Will the proposal have
signi_icant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of
fuel or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources
of energy, or require the develop-
ment o°f new sources of energy?
16. • Utilities. Will the proposal have
significant results in the need £or
new systems, or alterations to the
following utilities:
a, Power or natural gas?
b .. ,. Communkation.s systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
' e.: Sto:1,111 water drainage?
£ .. Solid waste and disposal?
17 .. • ·Hu.mart Health. Will the proposal
have sigiuglcant results in the
creation of any health hazard or
potential heal th hazard (_excluding
mental health)?
-5-
Yes Maybe No
X
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
to public view?
19. Recreation. Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact
upon the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?.
20. Archeological/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. ANALYZE VIABLE ALTERi"\JATIVES TO TI-IE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF lliE PROJECT; b) ALTERNA'l'E SITE
DESIGNS; c) ALTERi\JATE SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT; d) ALTERNATE
USES FOR TI-IE SITE; e) DEVELOPME!Vf AT SOME FUTIJRE TIME RATh£R
1HA.~ NOW; f) ALTERNATE SITES FOR IBE PROPOSED USE; g) NO
PROJECT ALTERNATIVE.
-6-
(--)
\_ ---(_) -Yes Maybe
22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) DOES 1HE PROJECT I-1\VE 1HE POTEN-
TIAL TO DEGRADE 1HE QUALITY OF
TI-IE ENVIRONMENT, OR CURTAIL 1HE
DIVERSITY IN 1HE ENVIRONMENT?
b) DOES 1HE PROJECT HAVE TI-IE POTEN-
TIAL TO ACHIEVE SHORT-TERM, TO
1HE ,")ISADVANTAGE OF LONG-TERM,
ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS? (A SHORT-
TERM IMPACT ON TI-IE ENVIRONMENT
IS ONE WHICH OCCURS IN A RE-
LATIVELY BRIEF, DEFINITIVE
PERIOD OF TIME WHILE LONG-TERM
IMPACTS WILL ENDURE WELL INTO
TI-IE FU'IURE. )
c) DOES 1HE PROJECT HAVE IMPACTS
WHICH ARE INDIVIDUALLY LIMITED,
BUT Cill1ULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE?
(A PROJECT MAY IMPACT ON TWO
OR MORE SEPARATE RESOURCES
WHERE TI-IE IMPACT ON EACH RE-
SOURCE IS RELATIVELY SMALL,
BUT \\ll-1ERE TI-IE EFFECT OF TI-IE
TOTAL OF THOSE IMPACTS ON TI-IE
ENVIRONMENT IS SIGNIFICANT.)
d) DOES 11-IE PROJECT HAVE ENVIRON-
MENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WILL
CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE
EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS,
EITI-IER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY?
III.· DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUTION
~-\. ~i -~ 'Sl"'re fOlt-~ PrtcfD~ED fto~
$\;O,?e~ S'ft:-e<7L'f 00\1\1/\l _ 17) LA lD~fA J:Wf. 1)\15
~n,o~Uf: ~ B€tt-J R.£\/1 H:~ ~ 11M)eS 'B~ ffl£
~~, U;'1\~l0N l 11\\S ftt-o1€0f) SH1)\) L,t) NO'f ws{
~ ~et,St lW\.\?4UfS 1l 1rte @vV f~~W\.f"~f • 111£
f {l{)'f"l~cf CAlW r(lo M, of: A-PP'2-t\JA1..-}fPi11; 1""U41'. 'Tlttf
_ ~J""tl,,~ V\A-VY( ,?l1Jt9e P,;l.f f""-1~~~ <PmL""" l6NOi1Htv\
-7-
(')
\___.-
No
X
,, .
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVAL ·· • ' . ~ UATION (Continued)
IO\O 'il-tb~t voaa~ 1:'ije1.~ £eU~/'IOP)1')1>tJJ ~ ~~ tN
"mt, b€0-rtrnN\t41..-l~\)~11~A'\1rf,.J • l F 11-W. f)~V\a6f~
f\t,toes ~· ~~ ~ ~mo® r3Jt" No ,~,1\1<.s ~
swpe JJ~ ..
-8-
0
IV. DETERMINATION. (TO BE COMPLETED BY 11-JE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
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.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the envirorunent, 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.
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
-9-
~ ~re
()
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued) •
VI APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITII MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY 11IAT I HA.VE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGA.TIONG MEA-
SURES AND CONCUR WITI-f THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date:
Signature of Applicant
-10-
DEVELOPMENTAL
SERVICES
LAND USE PLANNING OFFICE
•
~ttp of ~arl~bab
• 1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1989
(619) 438-5591
NEGATIVE DECIARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: South of La Costa Avenue, irrmediately west
of La Coruna Place.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 'Twenty unit condominium project on 1.58 acre
parcel on rroderate to steeply sloping site. 5000 cubic yards of
earthwDrk are propose::!.. Fifty percent of site to maintainoo in
natural open space.
'Ihe City of carlsbad has conducted an environmental revie.v of the
a.rove describe::!. project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation
of the tC:alifornia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental
Protection Ordinance of the City of carlsbad. As a result of said
revie.v, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not
have a significant irrpact on the environment) is hereby issue::!. for the
subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Land Use Planning Office.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on
file in the Land Use Planning Office, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue,
carlsbad, CA. 92003. Comnents fran the public are invited. Please
submit corrments in writing to the I.and Use Planning Office within ten
(10) days of date of issuance.
IY\TED: May 6, .1983 1vu:Qa~ MICHAELJ.LZMI3R
CASE ID: CT 83-5/CP-228
APPLICANT: CRC/La Costa Properties
roBLISU DATE: r,,'ay 11, 1983
ND-4
5/81
Land Use Planning ~;anager