Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 98-10; Carlsbad by the Sea LC Downs; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (5)Barbara Kennedy - Carlsbad -by-the-Sea — — _ Page 1 From: Rich Rudolf To: Barbara Kennedy Date: 12/17/98 2:39PM Subject: Carlsbad -by-the-Sea I read your second paragraph of your 12/15/98 memo to me and the Planning Director as responding positively to my 12/8/98 hand-written note; you have reviewed the documents against the appropriate Standard Form, and concluded they are the appropriate Standard Form and no changes have been made to the Standard Form. Since all of these documents are "instruments" as defined in the Government Code relating to recordation of documents, they need only be executed and acknowledged by the party being bound to allow recording. So they do not need to be re-executed and re-recorded. Please ensure some administrative system is now in place to assure follow-up and return to city for processing after owner/developer execution and acknowledgment, prior to recordation. Thanks. CC: Chris DeCerbo, Karen Kundtz, Lorraine Wood, Mic... December 15,1998 To: Rich Rudolph, City Attorney's Office Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director From: Barbara Kennedy, Assistant Planner RE: Documents for CARLSBAD BY THE SEA - CDP no's. 98-10, 98-18, 98-19, 98-20, 98- 21, 98-22, 98-23, 98-45, and 98-50. In response to the memo from Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk (12-9-98) regarding the notices for the nine Carlsbad by the Sea Coastal Development Permits, please review the following information which you requested. The Notices of Restriction of Real Property is a standard notice identifying that a Coastal Development Permit has been issued for the subject property. The Notices Concerning Carlsbad Boulevard Transportation Corridor, Aircraft Impacts, Railroad Impacts, Proximity of Commuter Rail Station and Odor Impacts is a notice that was prepared specifically (Rev. 3/27/95) for properties within the La Costa Downs Specific Plan SP 201. The Specific Plan requires that these notices of impacts shall be recorded on the subject properties. In addition, recordation of these notices are required as conditions of approval in the Planning Commission resolutions. The notices for these properties were prepared and given to the applicant for their signature and notarization. The applicant was directed to return the notices to staff for recordation. However, he misunderstood the directions and had his title company record the documents which were unsigned by the City Attorney and Planning Director. It is my understanding that these documents have both been previously approved by the City Attorney's Office on other occasions. I have notified the applicant that he erred in recording these documents and he will cooperate with the City to resolve the situation. Please let me know if there is any additional information you need or if you need me to take any additional action regarding the notices at this time. Thanks, "CB/^ BARBARA KENNEDY Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk Lorraine Wood, City Clerk's Office December 9,1998 TO: CHRIS DECERBO, PRINCIPAL PLANNER FROM: Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk RE: DOCUMENTS FOR CARLSBAD BY THE SEA - CDP NOS. 98-23. 98-22. 98-21. 98-20. 98-21. 98-19. 98-18. 98-10. 98-45. AND 98-50 Chris, as I explained to you on the phone today, we received eighteen (18) documents from the County Recorder on 12/2/98, all of which were recorded by First American Title Co. These documents were not processed through the Clerk's Office, and in fact, do not contain any city signatures at all. The documents are as follows: Nine (9) Notices of Restriction of Real Property; and Nine (9) Notices Concerning Carlsbad Boulevard Transportation Corridor, Aircraft Impacts, Railroad Impacts, Proximity of Commuter Rail Station, and Odor Impacts. Copies of each of the documents are attached for your review. Also attached are the notes from Assistant City Attorney Rudolf explaining what needs to be done about these documents. Rich has requested that we find out how these documents were recorded without the city's knowledge and approval, and report this information to him. He has also requested that the Project Planner review these documents for appropriateness and report that information to him as well. As you will see in Rich's notes, the documents may need to be re-executed and re-recorded, depending on the information that is provided to him about the documents. I am keeping the original recorded documents in the Clerk's Office until Rich makes a determination (after he receives the requested information from you) about how we should proceed. If the documents need to be re-executed and re-recorded, I will send the originals back to you. If he determines that nothing else needs to be done with these documents, we will just file them in the Clerk's Office. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information, and please keep us in the "information loop" regarding these documents. Thanks. EN KUNDTZ Attachments: Notes from Rich Rudolf (9) Notices of Restriction (9) Notices Concerning Impacts c: Rich Rudolf, City Attorney's Office Lorraine Wood, City Clerk's Office To: Rich Rudolph From: Lorraine Woda.VOffice of the City Clerk Subject: Documents Recorded Without City Approval Date: December 8, 1998 cc: Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk The attached documents were received by the City Clerk's Office on December 2, 1998 from the County Recorder. All of the documents were sent to the Recorder by the First American Title Subdivision Mapping Department. The documents were recorded, even though the City signatures were lacking. It appears that these documents were never routed within the City for approval. How do you suggest that we proceed with these documents? MEMORANDUM March 2, 1998 TO: Planning Tech. - Greg Fisher FROM: Engineering Tech. - Mari Sparks CDP 98-10 : SEAGROVE PRODUCTIONS COMPLETENESS AND ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above-referenced project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are currently incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following incomplete items: 1. Please include a vicinity map that includes major cross streets including it's own north arrow. 2.~x- Please provide the name of the sewer, water and school districts providing service to the project. 3. Please indicate aJi easements and encumbrances if applicable. 4. Please show any existing driveways, street lights, public improvements, fire hydrants, etc., which are adjacent to and across the street from this project. 5. Show existing street improvements on both sides of street. 6. Show proposed location of sewer, water and utility services, (keep meters and laterals out of driveway) 7. Please indicate the amount of grading, i.e., cut/fill and import/export. 8. The complete property boundary must be shown on the site plan, which must include all bearings as well as distances. CDP 98-10 : SEAGROVE PRODUCTIONS March 2, 1998 Page 2 1. The line of the drainage swale must be 5' from the building and 2' from the property line, i.e. the house must be 7' from the property line. (Refer to Standard GS -14). As an alternative, a letter from a registered soils engineer recommending the swale be less than 5' from the building may be accepted. 2. Please show driveway grade break at property line. 3. Please combine D-27 curb drain outlets with the adjacent project to reduce damage to public improvements. 4. Proof of recordation of the proposed drainage easement will be required prior to building permit issuance. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either see or contact me at extension 4510. MARI SPARKS Engineer Tech. Land Development