The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 00-05; Magnolia Gardens II; Tentative Map (CT)'• CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPUCATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) • Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit • Administrative Variance • Coastal Development Permit • Conditional Use Permit O Condominium Permit IS Environmental Impact Assessment • General Plan Amendment • Hillside Development Permit • Local Coastal Plan Amendment D Master Plan r~| Non-Residential Planned Development • Planned Development Permit (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) Q Planned Industrial Permit Q Planning Commission ^ Determination • Precise Development Plan • Redevelopment Permit • Site Development Plan • Special Use Permit • Specific Plian Q Tentative Porool Map Obtain from Engineering Department (3 Tentative Tract Map Q Variance • Zone Change • List other appiications not specified (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; 1 - |g'l <iN)^u6- f=#^>wiLr u»9rs 5) OWNER NAME {Print or Type) <A*n CA ITO 6) APPLiCANT NAME (Print or Type) L.Ueie.<;/^Te. FIMANJCIAL,, i wc MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO ^THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE " / / '— SIGNATURE DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Pod.. iiaA-<:T -TH-u'm LAMPS - yHA<g \(»^\ NOTE: A PROPOSED 'PROJECT REQUimNG MULTIPLE APPUCATIONS BE RLED/lflUST3E SUBMITTED PRIORTO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPUCATION BE RLED. MUST BE SUBMrTTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P;M. Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 2 8) o LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN ijdP<T "^iti^ £> F \/^LUgV ST STREETADDRESS {NORTH, SOUTH. EAST, WEST) SIDE OF AND (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISJON 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING ^-1 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING QO I^LKVl R-l (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMEBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. Form 16 PAGE 2 OF 2 ^ >^ L-1060 3/1/00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION PROJECT NAME: Maonolia Gardens II APPLICANT NAME: Silveroate Financial. Inc. Please describe fully the proposed project. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also inclucle any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation. Magnolia Gardens is a six-lot, single-family subdivision lying between Chestnut Avenue and Magnolia Avenue on the west side of Valley Street. The subject site has been used for agriculture purposes and the property contains old greenhouses which will be removed from the site. The property ranges in elevation from 176' to 154' with an average slope of 3%. There are no 25% or 40% slopes on the property. The site grading will be done in conjunction with an adjacent parcel owned by the same applicant known as Magnolia Gardens (CT98-12). Onsite cut per Magnolia Gardens II is 540± cubic yards, and the fill requirement is 3500+ cubic yards requiring an import of 2,960± cubic yards from CT98-12. Using the 3500 cubic yards fill requirement to compute the yards per acre, the project only requires 1,912± cubic yards per acre of grading, well within the acceptable range (0-7999 CY/Ac). The minimum lot size required for this area is 7500 sq. ft. The six lots range in size from 11,108 sq. ft., more or less, to 11,334 sq. ft. with an average lot size of 11,180± sq. ft. The growth control point for this area is 3.2 dwelling units per acre, and the density for this project with six lots on 1.83 acres is 3.27 dwelling units per acre. The alignment of 'B' Street was established with CT98-12. The six lots meet the minimum lot depth requirement of 90 feet and the width of these lots is 124 feet. This project completes the loop street between Valley and Magnolia Avenue to provide adequate safety circulation for the residents in the area. In addition, the project is consistent with the surrounding development in both lot size and the minimal grading required to develop this subdivision. Rev. 4/91 ProjDesc.frm City of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disciosure of certain ownersliip interests on ail application^^which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defuied as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint ventiure, association, social club, fratemai organization, coiporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit"' . Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and endty .of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. I. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If tlie applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of tlie shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Coro/Part ^^t,v;g<^<;A-TC f^\<OA/Oct/^u , | y o Title Title j&PPLi<^K)T Address Address *V^KJ r>teco\,.*tt.tu? *S€.e ATT^ci^'^K^tftiT*" 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide tlte COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv- owned corporation, include the names, tities, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person <A.AA ITO ^^0M/^ Cotp/Part. Title ^:^6f^^jp^ /t^ Title Address Address 2075 Las Paimas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 ^ NON-PROFIT OWANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trusL list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organi2ation or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust Non Profit/Trust Title Title Address _1 Address Have you had more than $250 wortii of business transact^ with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions. Committees and/or Council within tiie past twelve (12) months? I I Yes ^ No If yes, please indicate personfs): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessaiy. I certify that all the above infonnation is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of owner/date Signature of appiicant/daU ' Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of ov^Tier/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Rage 2 of 2 I ( OWNERSHIP & OFFICERS Company: Silvergatc Financial, Inc. Tax TD Number: 33-0885814 Shareholders of Silvcrgate Financial, Inc. 25% Brian N. Khoury, Trustee ofthe Brian N. Khoury Re^«)cable Trust U/A/D Januaty 27,1987, as amended 2505 Congress Street, Suile 200 San Dicgo, C A 92110 (619)294-7700 . ID #: 555-51-7029 25% Ja.son B. Khoury, Trustee ofthe Ja.son B. Khoury Revocable Trust U/A/D January 27,1987, as amended 2505 Congress Street, Suite 200 San Dieeo, CA 92110 (619)294-7700 ID #: 565-35-6044 25% Noelle F. Khoury, Trustee ofthe Noellc F. Khoury Revocable Trust U/A/D January 27, 1987, as amended 2505 Congress Street, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92110 (619)294-7700 ID #: 555-51-6459 25% Tavvfiq N. Khoury and Richel G. Khoury, Trustees ofthe TNKRGK Family Trust " U/A/D December 23,1976, as amended 2505 Congre.<» Street, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92110 (619)294-7700 ID #: 362-34-7203 Officers of Silvcrgate Financial, Inc. Russ Richard - DirecUir, President Tawfiiq N. Khoury - Director Brian N. Khoury - Director, Vice Presidenl Jason B-Khoury - Director, Vice President ) Noellc F. Khoury - Director, Vice President, Sccretaxy Dennis M. I'erdig - Vice President Tammy Miller - Vice Prc:sidcnt, CFO STATEMENT OF AGREEMENT TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP CITY OF CARLSBAD The Subdivision Map Act and the Carlsbad Municipal Code sets a fifty (50) day time restriction on Planning Commission processing of Tentative Maps and a thirty (30) day time limit for City Council action. These time limits can only be extended by the mutual conciurence of the applicant and the City. By accepting applications for Tentative Maps concurrently with applications for other approvals which are prerequisites to the map; i.e., Environmental Assessment, Enviromnental Impact Report, Condominium Plan, Plaimed Unit Development, etc., the fifty (50) day time limits and the thirty (30) day time limits are often exceeded. If you wish to have your application processed concurrently, this agreement must be signed by the applicant or his agent. If you choose not to sign the statement, the City will not accept your application for the Tentative Map tmtil all prior necessary entitlements have been processed and approved. The undersigned imderstands that the processing time required by the City may exceed the time limits, therefore the undersigned agrees to extend the time limits for Planning Coinmission and City Council action and fully concurs vdth any extensions of time up to one year from the date the application was accepted as complete to properly review all of the applications. ignature i/ Date Signature Name (Print) Relationship to Application (Property Owner-Agent) FRM0037 2/96 801 Pine Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008 . (760) 729-9291 • FAX (760) 729-9685 ...a world class district February 8,2000 State of Califomia Department of Real Estate ^ 107 Soutii Broadway, Room 7111 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Re: Project Name: Developer: Cross Streets: North of Magnolia Avenue, West of Valley Street Project Size: 205-220-12 Carlsbad Unified School District has reviewed the above project and its impact on school attendance areas in this District. At this time, the schools of attendance for this project are: Magnolia Elementary School (K-6) 1905 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-6120 Valley Junior High School (7-8) 1645 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-6020 Carlsbad High School (9-12) 3557 Monroe Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760)434-1726 The Goveming Board wishes to advise the Department of Real Estate and residents of Carlsbad that at present the Carlsbad Unified School District elementary schools are operating at full capacity. It is possible, therefore, that the students generated from this project may not attend the closest neighborhood school due to overcrowded conditions and, in fact, may attend school across town. You should also be aware tiiat tiiere are no school buses for regular student fransportation from home to school. The Governing Board wishes to also inform you that conditions imposed upon new development within the City of Carlsbad requires mitigation of school impacts. Sincerely, r\/7 RECEIVED Gaylen Freeman Assistant Superintendent, Business Services F^ 0 9 2032 cc: Developer LADWIG DES ICH 6R ^ vVi • Loduiig Design Group, Inc. March 2, 2000 Plaiming Department CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Reference: MAGNOLIA GARDENS IT/NEW TENTATIVE MAP SUBMITTAL (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-1067) Please process the enclosed tentative map package. Included with this application are: Check in the amount of $6,150 made payable to the City ofCarlsbad. (ELA =$ 1030, TM = $5120) One copy of the Vicinity Map One copy of the Statement of Agreement for Tentative Subdivision Map Three copies of a current Preliminary Title Report Completed Land Use Review Application Form Letter from the Carlsbad Unified School District Original Disclosure Statement Environmental Impact Assessment Form One copy of the Reduced Tentative Map and Conceptual Landscape Plan Ten copies of the Tentative Map (2 sheets) Ten copies of the Conceptual Landscape Plan (1 Sheet) As indicated above, please process the above tentative map package. We look forward to a written response from the City in approximately 30 days. If you have any questions in the meantime, please give me a call. RECEIVED Sincerely, W ' 0 ' 2000 LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. ^JJ^ CARLSBAD PUNNING DEPT. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb:001 Enclosures cc: Dennis Ferdig, Silvergate Financial Inc., w/enclosure Dennis Furman, Crosby Mead & Benton, w/enclosure Tony Lawson, ADL Planning Associates, w/enclosure 703 Polomor Rirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbod, CaiiForniQ 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 9200! Applicant: SILVERGATE FINANCIAL Description CT000005 Ainount 6,150.00 Receipt Number: R0010388 Transaction Date: 03/02/2000 i564 03/02/00 OOOl 01 0^^ C-PRMT 6150-C<0 Pay Type Method Payment Check Description Amount 214 6,150.00 Transaction Amount: 6,150.00 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times 1 ^] formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San Diego County; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: July 24, 2000 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. San Mareoe Dated at , California 24th this of -day July, 2000 Proof of Publication of Mitigated Negatice Declaration MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: North of Magnolia Street and west of Valley Street Project Description: A tentative subdivision map proposing 6 lots greater ttian 11,000 square feet in area for single family tiomes witti grading, street improvements and utilities for a 1.83 acre site. The entire site is proposed to be graded with 2,960 cubic yards of soil imported from the adjacent proper-ty approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project. The project includes completion of improvements for part of a proposed public street approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project that would provide a connection between Magnolia Avenue and Valley Street. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental re- view of the above described project pursuant to the Guide- lines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the proiect plans or pro-posals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the ef- fects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the en-vironment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evi-dence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the en- vironment. Therefore, a MitigatecTNegative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Fara-day Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Pianning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Plan-ning Department at (760)602-4612. DATED: JULY 24, 20OO CASE NO: CT 00-05 CASE NAME: MAGNOLIA GARDENS II /s/MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER, Planning Director Legal 67721 July 24, 2000 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times This space is for me County Clerk's Filing Stamp rs.'' PUNN/NG DEPARTMENT v. City 01 M/ Carkbad c"^/ formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San Diego County; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: October 5, 2000 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. San Marcos Dated at , California 5th Proof of Publication of Notice of public Hearing K,^^,., NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the Planning Commission of the City of i^'i' 3 hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Car sbad Village Drive, Carisbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 18, 2000, to consider a re- quest for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Miti-gation Monitonng and Reporting Program, and Tentative Tract Map to create 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single-family homes with grading, street improve- ments and utilities on a 1.83 acre site located north of Mag-nolia Avenue and west of Valley Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 and more particulariy described as' That portion of Tract 240-5 of Thum lands, in the Citv of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, accord-ing to map thereof No. 1681, filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego County, December 9, 1915 Those persons wishing to speak on this proposai are cor- dially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after October 12, 2000 If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Plannino Department at (760)602-4612. The time within which you may judicially challenge this Ten- tative Tract Map, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Tentative Tract Map in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public , heanng described in this notice or in written correspondence 7 delivered to the City of Carisbad at or prior to ttie public '.'X hearing. 1° CASET^ILE: CT 00-05 3K CASE NAME: MAGNOLIA GARDENS li 85 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 5i. S7 MAGNOLIA GARDENS II CT 00-05 Legal 68310. Octobers, 2000 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT DFQ 753.5a (6-91) 98990 County/Btate Agency of Filing: Project Title: ^SV\GyNn\ VCx (^ CcVjtxS:^ '^'^ Project Applicant Name Project Applicant Address: Project Applicant ^chec(( appropr/afe boxj; Local Public Agency Q vScFfB State Agency I I CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: Environmental Impact Report $850.00 Negative Declaration $1,250.00 Application Fee Water Diversion fSfafe Water Resources Control Board Only) $850.00 Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs $850.00 County Administrative Fee $25.00 (Project that is exempt from fees _ CrOtAL RECEIVED Signature and title of person receiving payment FIRST COPY-PROJECT APPLICANT SECOND COPY-DFG/FASB r^^^^j^>Other Special District j j Tivate Entity []3 ' THIRD COPY-LEAD AGENCY FOURTH COPY-COUNTY/STATE AGENCY OF FIUNG Notice of Determination 0 0 0617 I I Office ofPlanning and Reseaili 'INNING DEPApf^Sg^f: CITYOFCARLSBAD To: P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812 County Clerk County of San Diego Mailstop 833, Attn: MITA PO Box 121750 SanDiego, CA 92112-1750 City Of Carbbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue fc^r^ -V^Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-46 0 SY. Sflory J. Smith, Recorrier/Courrty ClTrfc OCT 3 1 2000 Project No: CT 00-05 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 ofthe Public Resources Code. Magnolia Gardens II Project Title N^A City of Carlsbad, Don Neu (760) 602-4612 DEPUTY State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number North of Magnolia Avenue and west of Valley Street in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Locations (include County) Project Description: Tentative Tract Map to create 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single-family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities on a 1.83 acre site. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on October 18, 2000, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment 2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions ofCEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project. 5. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the fmal Mitigated Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record ofproject approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. MICHAEL). HOtzWiLLER!, PlanningDij-^gffiED IN THE OFFICE O Date received for filing at OPR: iVi kH Co SAN DIEGO COUNTT ON. OCT 3 1 2000 POSTED. OCT 3 1 2000 bUN^tfLERK RETURNED TO AGENCY ON Revised uciouei IMS Q Q Citv of. Carlsbad Planning Department MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: North of Magnolia Street and west of Valley Street Project Description: A tentative subdivision map proposing 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities for a 1.83 acre site. The entire site is proposed to be graded with 2,960 cubic yards of soil imported fi-om the adjacent property approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project. The project includes completion of improvements for part of a proposed public street approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project that would provide a connection between Magnolia Avenue and Valley Street. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quahty Act and the Enviromnental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for pubhc review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) 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. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Plarming Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. Comments fi-om the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4612. DATED: CASE NO: CASE NAME: JULY 24, 2000 CT 00-05 MAGNOLIA GARDENS II PUBLISH DATE: JULY 24, 2000 MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLI Planning Director 1635 Faraclay Avenue • Carlsbaci, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ® CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME PO BOX 944209 SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2090 CERTIFICATION OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Project Title/Location (Include County): Magnolia Gardens II - CT 00-05/ North of Magnolia Avenue and west of Valley Street in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego Name and Address of Applicant: Dennis Ferdig Silvergate Financial, Inc. 2505 Congress Sfi-eet, Suite 2205 SanDiego, CA92110 Project Description: Tentative Tract Map to create 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single- family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities on a 1.83 acre site. Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary): 1. The City of Carlsbad Plarming Department has completed an Enviroimiental Initial Study for the above referenced property, including evaluation of the proposed project's potential for adverse environmental impacts on fish and wildlife resources. 2. Based on the complete Environmental Initial Study, the City of Carlsbad Planning Department finds that the proposed project will not encroach upon wildlife habitat area, will have no potential adverse individual or cumulative effects on wildlife resources, and requires no mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project which would affect fish or wildlife. Certification: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. lAEL J. HOL^ILLEk' MICHAEL Planning Director Lead Agency: CITY OF CARLSBAD ™:nih Date: wj l^jOO Section 711.4, Fish and Game Code DFG: 1/91 c c Fff E COPY Citv of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 18, 2000, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Tentative Tract Map to create 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single-family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities on a 1.83 acre site located north of Magnolia Avenue and west of Valley Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 and more particularly described as: That portion of Tract 240-5 of Thum lands, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 1681, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, December 9,1915. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after October 12, 2000. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4612. The time within which you may judicially challenge this Tentative Tract Map, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Tentative Tract Map in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carisbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CT 00-05 CASE NAME: MAGNOLIA GARDENS II PUBLISH: OCTOBER 5, 2000 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ® SITE MAGNOUA GARDENS II CT 00-05 o o Icicluiig Design Group, Inc. June 21, 2000 Don Neu v\1^ C,^^ CityofCarlsbad Planning Department Q'^ \AG^ 1635 Faraday Avenue QJ(C^ Reference: MAGNOLIA GARDENS n-CTOO-05/RADIUS MAP, OWNERS LIST & LABELS (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-1067) Dear Don: Enclosed is one copy ofthe radius map along with two sets of the mailing labels and one copy ofthe owners list. If you need additional copies of anything, please give me a call. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb:Neu003 Enclosures cc: Dennis Ferdig, Silvergate Financial Inc. without enclosures 703 Palomar nirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbod, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 NOTI OF PUBLIC HEARING COUNT^. LERK /^^S^SGT^ Mailto: County Clerk, County of SanDiego, Mailstop 833, POBox 121750, SanDiego, 1 92112^'*' » ^ •'©N Response must be received^y: October 6^2000 Public Hearing Date: October 18. 2000 Public Hearing Place: 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA. 92008 Public Hearing Time: 6:00 p.m. Project Title: Magnolia Gardens II (CT 00-05) Lead Agency: CITY OF CARLSBAD - PLANNING Contact Person: StreetAddress: 1635 FARADAY AVENUE Phone: (760) 602-4612 Don Neu ourrtyClerfc 1 2000 DEPUTY City: CARLSBAD Zip: 92008 County: SAN DIEGO COUNTY PROJECT LOCATION: County: SAN DIEGO COUNTY City/Nearest Community: CITY OF CARLSBAD Cross Streets: Magnolia Street & Valley Street Total Acres: 1.83 Assessor's Parcel No. 205-220-12 Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: Airports: McCLELLAN/PALOMAR Section: Twp. SR 78 Waterways: Railways: NCTD _ Range: Base: Buena Vista &, Agua Hedionda Lagoons, Pacific Ocean Schools: Magnolia Elementary & Vallev Jr. High ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: CEQA: • • • • NOP Early Cons iN'eg Dec Draft EIR • • Supplement/Subsequent EIR (Prior SCH No.) Other: Mitigated Negative Declaration LOCAL ACTION TYPE: ^General Plan Update Q OGenera! Plan Amendment Q ^General Pian Element O HHZone Code Amendment Q Specific Pian Master Plan Planned Unit Development Site Plan I I Rezone I I Use Pennit ^ Land Division (Subdivision, Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) I I Annexation I I Redevelopment I I Coastal Permit • Other: DEVELOPMENT TYPE: ^Residential: Units •office: Sq. Ft. •commercial: Sq. Ft. •industrial: Sq. Ft. •Recreational: Acres. Acres. Acres. Acres 1.83 PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT: •Aesthetic/Visual • Flood Plain/Flooding 1 1 Schools/Universities • Water Quality •Agricultural Land • Forest Land/Fire Hazard 1 1 Septic Systems • Water Supply/Ground Water •Air Quality • Geological/Seismic 1 1 Sewer Capacity • Wetland/Riparian ! l.^rchaeological/Histor!ca) • .Minerals 1 1 Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading • Wildlife •Coastal Zone • Noise • Solid Waste • Growth Inducing i iDi'ainaai'A'usoiplioii 1—1 1 1 • p.~.1,/t-T ^,,.-.Vri.,1... i opuiaiiUiiy 1 iwuaiii^ uaiL*ii\,^. n Land Use • Economic/Jobs 1—1 1 1 • Public Services/Facilities 1 1 Traffic/Circulation Cumulative Effect •Fiscal • Recreation/Parks 1 1 Vegetation • Other: Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use Greenhouses/R-1 (Single-Family Residential)/RLM (Residential Low-Medium Density) Project Description: A tentative map proposing 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities for a 1.83 acre site. The entire site is proposed to be graded with 2,960 cubic yards of soil imported from the adjacent property approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project. The project includes completion of improvements for part of a proposed public street approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project that would provide a connection between Magnolia Avenue and Valley Street. Where documents are located for Public Review: Community Development Center, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 February 2000 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK SAN DIEGO COUNTY ON AUG 3 1 2000 I m.STF.D A.UG ^ ^ ^ RF.MOVFn nn n 9 9nnn I RETURNED T.O AGENCY ON nn n ? 7nnn 'DEPUTY . L Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: North of Magnolia Street and west of Valley Street Project Description: A tentative subdivision map proposing 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single family homes with grading, street improvements and utilities for a 1.83 acre site. The entire site is proposed to be graded with 2,960 cubic yards of soil imported fi'om the adjacent property approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project. The project includes completion of improvements for part of a proposed public street approved for the Magnolia Gardens I project that would provide a coimection between Magnolia Avenue and Valley Street. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an enviroimiental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in hght of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Plarming Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4612. DATED: JULY 24, 2000 CASE NO: CT 00-05 CASE NAME: MAGNOLIA GARDENS II PUBLISH DATE: JULY 24, 2000 MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ® ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: CT 00-05 DATE: Julv 11.2000 BACKGROUND 1. CASENAME: Magnolia Gardens II 2. APPLICANT: Silvergate Financial. Inc - Attn: Dennis M. Ferdig 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2505 Congress Street. Suite 200. San Diego. CA 92110: (619) 299-5112 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Mav 18. 2000 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A tentative subdivision map proposing 6 lots greater than 11.000 square feet in area for single familv homes with grading, street improvements and utilities for a 1.83 acre site located north of Magnolia Avenue and west of Vallev Street. The entire site is proposed to be graded with 2.960 cubic yards of soil imported fi-om the adiacent propertv approved for the Magnolia Gardens I proiect. The proiect includes completion of improvements for a proposed public street approved for the Magnolia Gardens I proiect that would provide a connection between Magnolia Avenue and Vallev Street. The site is currentlv covered with agricultural greenhouses and sheds. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Planning ^ Transportation/Circulation Q Public Services I I Population and Housing Q Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Geological Problems Energy & Mineral Resources |^ Aesthetics I I Water ^ Hazards Q Cultural Resources Air Quality Q Noise O Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 03/28/96 DETERME^ATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. XI 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I I I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I I 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 all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Master Environmental Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-01), including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. '7-/9- on Planner Signature Date Planning Direcrors Signmure Date Rev. 03/28/96 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 (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part If, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that eariier EIR. • 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. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end ofthe form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) b) Conflict with applicable enviroimiental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cimiulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major intrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) b) Seismic ground shaking? ((#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ((#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -5.1.15) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15) g) Subsidence ofthe land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) h) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- 11) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) Potentially Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated No Impact • • • X • • • X • • n X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- 11) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for pubhc water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11) Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • m • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- 1-5.3-12) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 -5.3-12) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ((#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) d) Create objectionable odors? ((#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) X • • • • • • X • • • X • n • X VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) f) Conflicts with adopted pohcies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? (#I:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) • • • • • • • • • X • • • X • • n X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24) e) Wildhfe dispersal or migration corridors? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5,12.1-5 & 5.13- 1-5.13-9) c) Result in the loss of availability of a knowoi mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents ofthe State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 -5.13-9) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5; #2) e) Increase fure hazard in areas with flammable brash, grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9- 15) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#1 :Pgs 5.9- 1 -5.9-15) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6) b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4) c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (#1, pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.8-7) e) Other govemmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • M • n • X • • • X • • • X • n n X • • • X • • • X • • • • Kl • • • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1-5.13-9) • • • S Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than No Significant Impact Impact b) Communications systems? (#1; pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) • • • X c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution • • • X facilities? (#I:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) • • • X d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7) • • • X e) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8) • • • X f) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3) • • • X g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) • • • X XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? (#1 :Pgs 5.1 l-I -5.11-5) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5) c) Create lightorglare?(#l:Pgs5.11-1 -5.11-5) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paieontological resources? (#I:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) c) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1-5.8-10) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 -5.12.8-7) b) XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife 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 endangered plant or animal or eluninate important examples of the major periods of Cahfomia history or prehistory? • n • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in cormection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significant Impact • S No Impact • • • • Rev. 03/28/96 XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis of this proposed single family residential project has been completed through the General Plan Update (GPA 94-01) and related Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01). The MEIR is cited as source #1 in the preceding checklist. This proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the General Plan and is considered a project that was described in MEIR 93-01 as within its scope. There will be no additional significant impacts due to this development that were not analyzed in the MEIR. This project is, therefore, within the scope of the prior MEIR and no new environmental document nor Public Resources Code 21081 findings are required. All feasible mitigation measures identified in MEIR 93-01 which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into this project. 10 Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Magnolia Gardens II project is a proposal to demolish the existing greenhouses and sheds on a 1.83 acre site and create 6 lots greater than 11,000 square feet in area for single family homes. The project includes grading of the entire site which consists of 540 cubic yards of cut, 3,500 cubic yards of fill and 2,960 cubic yards of import from the adjacent site of the approved Magnolia Gardens I (CT 98-12) project. Completion of improvements for a pubhc street approved as part of the Magnolia Gardens I project that will make a connection between Magnolia Avenue and Valley Street are included in the proposal. The project site is located north of Magnolia Avenue and west of Valley Street within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is designated as RLM (Residential Low-Medium Density) on the General Plan Land Use Map. The zoning for the site is R-l (Single Family Residential) having a minimum lot area of 7,500 square feet. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 IL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS B. Environmental Impact Discussion V. a) Air Quality The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attainment basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality ofthe region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the project. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the Planning Department. VI. a) Transportation/Circulation The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management perfomiance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when 12 Rev. 03/28/96 adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design ofthe project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is required. IX. d) Hazards Master Environmental Impact Report 93-01 prepared for the General Plan Update requires that a soils testing report be prepared by a registered engineer and submitted to the County Health Department for review and approval where residential development is proposed in areas that are presently or have previously been used for agricultural production. Chemical residue may exist in soil and affect the health of future residents. The project site has been occupied by greenhouses. The required soils testing has been completed and a report submitted to the County Department of Environmental Health Land and Water Quality Division. The report and the mitigation measure proposed by the testing firm Geosoils Inc. has been accepted by Coimty Environmental Health. Therefore, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce impacts related to hazardous materials to less than significant: 1. Remedial earthwork is proposed for the Toxaphene contaminated soil. The contaminated soil shall be placed under the proposed roadway and not within 10 feet of finish pad grades. The soil shall be buried at least five feet to mitigate the potential for human contact. Geosoils, Inc. or another Registered Environmental Assessor is required to submit a certification letter to the County Department of Environmental Health Services verifying that the contaminated soil was placed under the proposed roadway according to the criteria listed in the March 15, 1999 limited site assessment report. A copy of the required certification letter shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a dwelling unit. 13 Rev. 03/28/96 III. EARLIER ANALYSES USED The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, 92008, (760) 602-4600. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City ofCarlsbad Planning Department. 2. Limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Agricultural Chemical Residue Survev. Magnolia Gardens Development, dated March 15, 1999, Geosoils, Inc. and the April 4, 2000 Addendum. 14 Rev. 03/28/96 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES 1. Remedial earthwork is proposed for the Toxaphene contaminated soil. The contaminated soil shall be placed under the proposed roadway and not within 10 feet of finish pad grades. The soil shall be buried at least five feet to mitigate the potential for human contact. Geosoils, Inc. or another Registered Environmental Assessor is required to submit a certification letter to the County Department of Environmental Health Services verifying that the contaminated soil was placed under the proposed roadway according to the criteria listed in the March 15, 1999 limited site assessment report. A copy of the required certification letter shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance ofthe first building permit for a dwelling unit. ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) 15 Rev. 03/28/96 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date ' Signature / \ 16 Rev. 03/28/96 PROJECTNAME: Magnolia Gardens 11 APPROVAL DATE: FILE NUMBERS: CT 00-05 CONDITIONAL NEG. DEC. The following environmental nnltigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). m z < TJ O m Mitigation IMeasure Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementatio Remarks Remedial earthwork is proposed for the Toxaphene contaminated soil. The contanninated soil shall be placed under the proposed roadway and not within 10 feet of finish pad grades. The soil shall be buried at least five feet to mitigate the potential for human contact. Geosoils, Inc. or another Registered Environmental Assessor is required to submit a certification letter to the County Department of Environmental Health Services verifying that the contaminated soil was placed under the proposed roadway according to the criteria listed in the March 15, 1999 limited site assessment report. A copy of the required certification letter shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a dwelling unit. Project Planning N/A o z o o z o o m o TJ ti (Q (D Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. ^2,h^: I GARYW.ERBECK r,cr.ABT...r»i-p r.»,.«««............. L..^...^.. RICHAROHAAS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DIRVCTOR DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUAUTY DIVISION P.O. BOX 129261, SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-9261 (619) 338-2222 FAX (619) 338-2377 1-800-253-9933 June 9. 2000 RECEIVED Mr. Dennis Ferdig J 1 4 2000 Pacific Scene Financial, LLC riTv r\r- r^Ar^, 2505 Congress Street, Suite 220 v^l I Y UF CARLSBAD SanDiego, CA92110 PLANNING DEPT. Dear Mr. Ferdig: VOLUNTARY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CASE H38418-001 MAGNOLIA GARDENS DEVELOPMENT I AND II VALLEY STREET (BETWEEN MAGNOLIA AVE. AND CHESTNUT AVE.) CARLSBAD. CA The site remediation information submitted to this agency by GeoSoils consultants, summarizing the site characterization and mitigation activities at the above-referenced location, has been reviewed. With the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of existing conditions, it is the position of this office that no further action is required at this time. Please be advised that this letter does not relieve you of any liability under the California Health and Safety Code or the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act. If previously unidentified contamination is discovered which may affect public health, safety and/or water quality, additional site assessment and cleanup may be necessary. Changes in the proposed use ofthe above site may require reevaluation to determine ifthe change will pose a risk to public health. Thank you for your efforts in resolving this matter. Please contact Laurie Apecechea of the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program (SAM), at (619) 338-2457, if you require additional assistance. Sincerely, CHRIS GONAVER. Chief Land and Water Quality Division CG:LA:kf Enclosure cc: Regional Water Quality Control Board Consultant Edward Lump, GeoSoils Inc. WP/38418NF1 "Environmental and public health through leadership, partnership and science" Case Closure Summary •LOP or Voluntary Assistance Prd^m AGENCY INFORMATION Agency Name: County of San Dlego, Environmental Health, SAM Address: P.O. Box 129261 j CIty/State/ZIP: San Dlego, CA 92112-9261 Phone: (619) 338-2222 FAX: (619) 338-2377 DEH staff Person: Laurie Apecechea Title: Project Manager CASE INFORMATION CaseNo. H38418-001 Site Name: Magnolia Gardens Development I and 11 site Address: Valley Street, between Magnolia Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, Carisbad, CA Property Owner: Pacific Scene Homes Responsible/Requesting Party: (same) Address: 2505 Congress Street Address: San Diego, CA 92110 Phone: Dennis Ferdig Phone: (619)299-5112 Type of Case: Non-Tank Case RWQCB/DTSC notification of DEH Oversight: 7/20/99 III. SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION Cause and Type of Contamination (if any): Pesticide contaminated soil. Agricultural land to residential conversion site Characterization complete? Yes Monitoring Wells Installed? Yes Total Number: 1 Proper Screened interval? Yes Number of decommissioned wells: 1 Range of groundwater levels on the site? 18 feet to 20 feet Groundwater Flow Direction: Unknown Most Sensitive Current Use: Groundwater having designated or potential beneficial uses for: Municipal/Domestic Agricultural industriai Are Drinking Water Weils Affected? No RWQCB Basin Number: 904.21 Is Surface Water Affected? No Nearest Surface Water name: Aqua Hedionda Off-Slte Beneficial Use Impacts (addresses/locations): None TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF AFFECTED MATERIAL Material Amount (Include Units) Action (Treatment or Disposal w/Destination) Date soil 1,110 cubic yards Buried on site* unknown Non-LOP • Underground Storage Tank Oversight handled outside the LOP Non-Tank - Voluntary Assistance Program DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 1 of 2 mi Case Closure Summary ^ •LOP or Voluntary Assistance Pro^m III. SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION (Continued) H38418-001 MAXIMUM DOCUMENTED CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS - • BEFORE AND AFTER CLEANUP Contaminant Soii (ppm| Before After Water (ppm) Before After Contaminant Soil (ppm) Before After Water (ppm) Before After DDT total .286 .286 <.0001 <.0001 2,4-DB .0089 .0089 N/A N/A Toxaphene 1.04 1.04 <.010 <.010 Heptachlor Epoxide .0005 .0005 <.0005 <.0005 DEHP .072 .072 N/A N/A TRPH N/A N/A 31.8 31.8 Lead 19 19 N/A N/A TPH-G <10 <10 <.05 <.05 2.4,5-T .0064 .0064 N/A N/A TPH-D <10 <10 <.5 <.5 Comments: A limited Phase I environmental site assessment and limited agricultural chemical residue survey was conducted to fulfill the requirement of the City of Carisbad's Standard Agricultural area Mitigation Condition. A total of 12 soii samples were originally taken from the upper 1 1/2 feet within the S-acre site. The analytical results were compared to the Preliminary Remedial Goals (PRG's) to evaluate the risk to human health. Oniy one sample result was above the PRG values. Toxaphene was found at 1.04 mg/kg which Is less than the hazardous waste criteria but greater than the PRG at .4 mg/kg. The consultant states that this sampie concentration appears to represent an outlier and Is not representative of site conditions. Ali of the other samples are non-detect for Toxaphene inciuding the sample taken in the same spot at 11/2 feet A groundwater monitoring well was installed and sampled to determine groundwater impacts. The analytical results Indicate the agricultural operations on the property have not advereely affected groundwater. A second sampling event occurred to address the chemical mixing areas that were not sampled originally. An additional 10 soii samples were collected at the site including the new parcei Magnolia Gardens 11 which is a 1.8 acre site. The resuits are beiow the PRG values for the contaminants. The analytical results of the second sampling event are consistent with similar farmlands in San Diego County. The majority of contaminants detected fall within the Chlorinated Pesticides suite which are known for their pereistence in nature. The consultant has proposed remedial earthwork for the Toxaphene contaminated soil. The soii wiii be placed under the proposed roadway and not within 10 feet of finish pad grades. The soil wili be buried at least 5 feet to mitigate the potential for human contact DEH concurs with the proposed remedial activity as presented in the March 15,1999 limited site assessment report and in the GeoSoils letter dated May 11, 2000. Since Toxaphene is very volatile, precautions must be taken to assure worker safety during the soii burial process. See Section Vll below for additionai requirements. IV. CLOSURE Does completed corrective action protect existing beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Pian? Yes Does completed corrective action protect potentiat beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Pian? Yes Does corrective action protect public health for current land use? Case review based on proposed use as residences. Yes Are there other issues DEH needs to follow up on: Yes* Site Management Requirements: None Should corrective action be reviewed if land use changes? Yes List Enforcement Actions Taken: N/A List Enforcement Actions Rescinded: N/A Is this account up to date and current?; Yes LOCAL AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE DATA Name: Kevin Heaton Title: Senior Hydrogeologist l^nd and Water Quality Division Signature: y/^A^uS Date: (5>/?/2*.<i<^ VI. RWQCB NOTIFICATION y Date Submitted to RWQCB: N/A RWQCB Response: RWQCB Staff Name: Title: Date: DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 2 of 3 Case Closure Summary ^ WSfi-LOP or Voluntary Assistance Program VII. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. DATA. ETC. H38418-001 * Once the remedial action is compieted, DEH is requesting that GeoSoUs submit a certification ietter to this department that the contaminated soii was placed under the roadways according to the criteria listed in ths March 15,1999 limited site assessment report and letter dated May 11,2000. This document and the related CASE CLOSURE LETTER, shall be retained by the lead agency as part ofthe official site file. DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 3 of 3 c ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) CASENO: DATE RECEIVED: BACKGROUND z 1. CASE NAME: mA-^UOUt A (^/VlgPgOS (To be completed by staff) 2. APPLICANT: *>I Ll/g|g.C>ATE Fl MA^3C|Ac , f <^ 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 'Z^<^S C&t^<iilS.'^^ 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: T>gv/gCopKHE/uT (Pp F/^i^iL^Y LcoTS gAJ l-g?? ^c^rxgT |M M.t^-CABALSg>»£> SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that'would be potentially affected by this project. This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Planning I I Population and Housing I I Geological Problems • Water ' Q Air Quality I I Transportation/Circulation ' Q Public Services I I Biological Resources Utilities & Service Systems I I Energy & Mineral Resources Q Aesthetics ( I Hazards Q Cultural Resources I I Noise Q Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 03/28/96 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 Enviroimiental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative^Declaration. • A brief explanation is reqtured for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses folloving each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source dociunent to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impacf is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earUer EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • 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. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce fhe impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to detennine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears 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. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supportmg Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? ( ) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, includmg liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( - ) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) h) Expansive soils? ( ) i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • • • m • / • • m • • • m • • • • • • • • • • • • m • • • El • • • El • • • • • • m • • • m • • • El • • • m • • • • • • a • • • m • • • • • • Rev. 03/28/96 c Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amotmt of surface water in any water body?( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groimdwater recharge capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amoimt of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (• ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • Kl • • • m • • m • m • • • m • • • • • • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • • • • m • • • m • • • Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplementdl documents may be referred to and attached) VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing soufces of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable bmsh, grass, or trees? ( ) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) c) Schools? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • • m • • m • ' • • • • • IS • • • • • • m • • • • • • m • • • m • • • • • • m • • • m • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • m • • • m Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) d) Maintenance of pubhc facilities, including roads? ( ) e) Other govemmental services? ( ) XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) b) Communications systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) g) Local or regional water supphes? ( ) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paieontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) c) Affect historical resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • • • • • /' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • m • • • m • • • • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • m • • XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) • • • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental.documents may be referred to and attached) XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other curtent projects, and the effects of probable fiiture projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact • ^ • • • m XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) - Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined firom the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please use this area to discuss any of the environmental factors that were checked "No impacf yet lack any information citations and any factors that were checked "Potentially Significant Impacf or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." The City has adopted a "Statement of Overriding Consideration" with regard to air quality and circulation impacts resulting from the normal buildout according to the General Plan. The following sample text is intended to guide your discussion of the impacts to these environmental factors. AIR OUALITY: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consimiption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attairmient basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. Tlie applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impacf. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to ali subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the Planning Department. CIRCULATION: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent v»itli and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 fiill and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections 9 Rev. 03/28/96 c are projected to fail the City's adopted Grov^ Management performance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impacf. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no fiirther environmental review of circulation impacts is required. LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) 10 Rev. 03/28/96 LocluQg Design GroufPlnc. Page 1 of2 ATTACHMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM PART 1 FOR MAGNOLIA GARDENS II (CTOO-05) I. Land Use and Planning ^ The project is an in-fill project within the older portions of Carlsbad. Existing lots adjacent to the north edge ofthe subdivision range in size fi-om 7,545 sq. ft. to 24,558 sq. ft. Existing lots to the west of the property range in size 8,265 sq. ft. to 16,712 sq. ft. Lots along Highland Drive between Chestnut and MagnoUa range in size from 11,250 sq. ft. to 23,992 sq. ft. and lots along Magnolia Avenue just east of Highland Drive range in size from 8,100 sq. ft. to 9,180 sq. ft. The density for the project exceeds growth management (3.278 units per acre vs. 3.2) by 0.078 units per acre. Six lots are proposed whereas eight 8,360 square foot lots could fit within the ownership and exceed the 7500 square foot minimum requirement. The average lots size within Magnolia Gardens nisll,147sq.ft. with the smallest lot being 11,108 and three lots at 11,160 sq. ft. There are 7 long existing parcels along the north edge of the project that range in size from 14,959 sq. ft. to 24,558 sq. ft. It is likely that someday these older parcels may be fiuther subdivided similar to the two parcels that are immediately north of Lot No. 6 along the west edge of Valley Street. These two parcels are both 60x125.76 for a total square footage of 7,545 sq. ft. each. II. Population of Housmg Development ofthis parcel will not displace any existing housing units but provide for 6 new residences. III. Geologic Problems According to GeoSoils, Inc., the project's soils engineer, no unusual geologic problems exist on or near the proposed Magnolia Gardens II. IV. Water Surface waters will be picked up in a new onsite storm drain system located in the new pubUc street and wiU discharge into an existing system at MagnoUa Avenue. V. Air Quality - No additional comments. 703 PQlomar Rirport ROQCI • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 r \,^/f Attachment Page 2 of2 VI. Transportation and Circulation This project will complete a loop street system cormection between Villey Sfreet and Magnolia Sfreet and provide additional fraffic circulation in the immediate vicinity of two nearby elementary schools. VH. Biological Resources The property has been used for a greenhouse and agricultural uses for sometime and no sensitive biological resources exist onsite. VIH. Energy and Mineral Resources - No additional comments. IX. Hazards GeoSoils, Inc. has preformed a limited Phase I environmental site analysis and agricultural chemical residue survey on March 15,1999 and an addendum on April 4,2000. GeoSoils, Inc. has stated that relatively low concenfrations of agricultural chemical residues detected appear that the agricultural operations on the property have not generated significant agricultural chemical residues. SmaU amounts of soils in the upper one foot area are recommended to be buried below grade in the sfreets within the project. X. Noise - No further comment. XI. Public Services With the cormection of "B"Sfreet and the installation of utilities, fire and police protection will improve in the area including better access to the nearby school sites. XIIL Aesthetics The new pads are at sfreet grade and will be set at virtually the existing grades and no adjacent views will be affected. XIV. Cultural Resources - No additional comments. XV. Recreational - No additional comments. XVI. No additional comments. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 fcity o FILECOPY of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION October 23, 2000 Dermis Ferdig Silvergate Financial 2505 Congress St., Ste. 220 SanDiego, CA92110 SUBJECT: CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS U At the Planning Commission meeting of October 18, 2000, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 (Heineman Absent) to APPROVE your request. The decision of the Planning Commission became final on October 18, 2000. The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is govemed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be file'd in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attomey of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the Planning Director, Michael J. Holzmiller, Secretary of the Planning Commission, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (760) 602-4600. Sincerely, Planning Director MJH:DN:mh Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4840,4841 c: Bob Ladwig SamCaito Ladwig Design Group 2754 Aubum Ave. 703 Palomar Airport Road, Ste. 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carisbad, CA 92009 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ^ Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department September 26, 2000 Silvergate Financial Dennis Ferdig Ste 220 2505 Congress St San Diego CA 92110 SUBJECT: CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS II The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be mailed to you on Friday, September 29, 2000. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on October 10, 2000. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 10:30. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring your required unmounted colored exhiblt(s) with you to this meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission. Your colored exhibits must be submitted at this time to ensure review by the Planning Commission at their briefings. If the colored exhibits are not available for their review, vour proiect couid be rescheduled to a later time. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) here by the scheduled time above. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Don Neu at (760) 602-4612. CITY OF CARLSBAD -4(TL^ GARY E. WAYNE Assistant Planning Director GEW.-DN.cs c: Sam Caito, 2754 Auburn Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group, Ste 300, 703 Palomar Airport Rd., Carlsbad, CA 92009 File Copy 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us . FILECOPY Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department August 30, 2000 Bob Ladwig Ladwig Design Group 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS II Your application has been tentatively scheduled for a hearing by the Planning Commission on October 18, 2000. However, for this to occur, you must submit the additional items listed below. If the required items are not received by September 27, 2000, your project will be rescheduled for a later hearing. In the event the scheduled hearing date is the last available date for the City to comply with the Permit Streamlining Act, and the required items listed below have not been submitted, the project will be scheduled for denial. 1. Please submit the following plans: A) 1 2 copies of your (tentative map and landscape plan) on 24" x 36" sheets of paper, stapled in complete sets folded into 8/2' x 11" size. B) One SVi" x 11" copy of your reduced tentative map and landscape plans. These copies must be of a quality which is photographically reproducible. Only essential data should be included on plans. 2. As required by Section 65091 of the California Government Code, please submit the following information needed for noticing and sign the enclosed form: A) 600' Owners List - a typewritten list of names and addresses of all property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property, including the applicant and/or owner. The list shall include the San Diego County Assessor's parcel number from the latest equalized assessment rolls. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA^RDENS II ^ August 30, 2000 Page 2 B) Mailing Labels - two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property. The list must be typed in all CAPITAL LETTERS, left justified, void of any punctuation. For any address other than a single family residence, an apartment or suite number must be included but the Apartment, Suite and/or Building Number must NOT appear in the street address line. DO NOT type assessor's parcel number on labels. DO NOT provide addressed envelopes - PROVIDE LABELS ONLY. Acceptable fonts are: Arial 11 pt, Arial Rounded MT Bold 9 pt, Courier 14 pt, Courier New 11 pt, and MS Line Draw 11 pt. Sample labels are as follows: UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith Mrs. Jane Smith MRS JANE SMITH 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 123 Magnolia Ave. APT 3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Apt. #3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE Carisbad, CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 C) Radius Map - a map to scale, not less than 1" = 200', showing all lots entirely and partially within 600 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots should be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owner's list. The scale of the map may be reduced to a scale acceptable to the Planning Director if the required scale is impractical. D) Fee - a fee shall be paid for covering the cost of mailing notices. Such fee shall equal the current postage rate times the total number of labels. Cash check (payable to the City of Carlsbad) and credit cards are accepted. E) Public Notice Sign - The required public notice sign shall be posted on the property including the text and color as previously approved. Sincerely, Don Neu, AICP Senior Planner DNmh Attachment C: Dennis Ferdig, Silvergate Financial, Inc. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE LATEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE BY: DATE: RECEIVED BY DATE: Loduiig Design Group, inc. August 1, 2000 Don Neu CityofCarlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Reference: MAGNOLIA GARDENS n-CTOO-05 (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-1067) Dear Don: Enclosed per our discussion this moming are three sets of the tentative map and three sets of the landscape plan. In addition I have enclosed the City check prints from your previous review. We have gone through the lists from the City dated June 9th and July 20th and have made the additions as you have requested. Please look the plan over, and if there are any other minor changes you would like to have made, please give us a call. In addition, I did confirm with Tony Lawson that he will have the visualization exhibits completed in about two weeks well before the first of September deadline as you had mentioned this moming. Again, please look everything over and if you have any questions, give me a call. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb:Neu004 Enclosures cc: Dennis Ferdig Tony Lawson Dennis Furman 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760)438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 loduiig Design Group, inc. June 14,2000 Don Neu CityofCarlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Reference: MAGNOLIA GARDENS n-CTOO-05 (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-1067) Dear Don: Thank you for accepting our tentative map application as complete for processing. Per your request, I have attached eight complete sets ofthe plans for MagnoUa Gardens II that you can distribute to other departments and agencies for review and comment. On your planning issue number 4, you indicate that the sfreet standards for the project area are still pending City Council action. We would like to request that you set up a meeting with yourself. Engineering and other appropriate City representatives along with Dennis Ferdig and myself to discuss with you the street standards for Valley Sfreet and the new streets that are within the project. In addition, we would like to discuss the recently adopted sfreet tree requirements as they pertain to this subdivision. We look forward to meeting with you soon and, again, please give me a call to give me one or two times that work best for you and your staff to review our request. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RECEIVED RCL:lb:Neu002 Enclosures JUN \^2m . . , CITY OF CARLSBAD cc: Denms Ferdig, Silvergate Financial Inc. PLAN NING DE PT 703 Palomar fiirport Road •Suite 300 • Carlsbad. California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 GARYW.ERBECK DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION P.O. BOX 129261, SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-9261 (619) 338-2222 FAX (619) 338-2377 1-800-253-9933 RICHARD HAAS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR June 9, 2000 RECEIVED Mr. Dennis Ferdig Pacific Scene Financial, LLC 2505 Congress Street, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92110 Dear Mr. Ferdig: m 1 4 2000 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. VOLUNTARY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CASE H38418-001 MAGNOLIA GARDENS DEVELOPMENT I AND II VALLEY STREET (BETWEEN MAGNOLIA AVE. AND CHESTNUT AVE.) CARLSBAD, CA The site remediation information submitted to this agency by GeoSoils consultants, summarizing the site characterization and mitigation activities at the above-referenced location, has been reviewed. With the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of existing conditions, it is the position of this office that no further action is required at this time. Please be advised that this letter does not relieve you of any liability under the Califomia Health and Safety Code or the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act. If previously unidentified contamination is discovered which may affect public health, safety and/or water quality, additional site assessment and cleanup may be necessary. Changes in the proposed use ofthe above site may require reevaluation to detemiine ifthe change will pose a risk to public health. Thank you for your efforts in resolving this matter. Please contact Laurie Apecechea of the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program (SAM), at (619) 338-2457, if you require additional assistance. Sincerely, CHRIS GONAVER, Chief Land and Water Quality Division CG:LA:kf Enclosure cc: Regional Water Quality Control Board Consultant Edward Lump, GeoSoils Inc. "Environmental and public health through leadership, partnership and science" WP/38418NF1 rWh Case Closure Summary •LOP or Voluntary Assistance Proi m AGENCY INFORMATION DATE: May 15. 2000 Agency Name: County of San Dlego, Environmental Health, SAM Address: P.O. Box 129261 CIty/State/ZIP: San Diego, CA 92112-9261 Phone: (619) 338-2222 FAX: (619) 338-2377 DEH Staff Person: Laurie Apecechea Title: Proiect Manager CASE INFORMATION Case No. H38418-001 Site Name: Magnolia Gardens Development I and II Site Address: Valley Street, between Magnolia Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, Carlsbad, CA Property Owner: Pacific Scene Homes Address: 2S05 Congress Street Phone: Dennis Ferdig Responsible/Requesting Party : (same) Address: SanDiego, CA 92110 Phone: (619)299-5112 Type of Case: Non-Tank Case RWQCB/DTSC notification of DEH Oversight: 7/20/99 III. SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION Cause and Type of Contamination (If any): Pesticide contaminated soil. Agricultural land to residential conversion Site Characterization complete? Yes Monitoring Wells Installed? Yes Total Number: 1 Proper Screened Interval? Yes Number of decommissioned wells: 1 Range of groundwater levels on the site? 18 feet to 20 feet Groundwater Flow Direction: Unknown Most Sensitive Current Use: Groundwater having designated or potential beneficial uses for: Municipal/Domestic Agricultural Industrial Are Drinking Water Wells Affected? No RWQCB Basin Number: 904.21 Is Surface Water Affected? No Nearest Surface Water name: Aqua Hedionda Off-Site Beneficial Use Impacts (addresses/locations): None TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF AFFECTED MATERIAL Material Amount (Include Units) Action (Treatment or Disposal w/Destinatlon) Date soil 1,110 cubic yards Buried on site* unknown Non-LOP - Underground Storage Tank Oversight handled outside the LOP Non-Tank - Voluntary Assistance Program DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 1 of 2 III. Case Closure Summary \. Wi-LOP or Voluntary Assistance Progp^m SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION (Continued) H38418-001 MAXIMUM DOCUMENTED CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS - • BEFORE AND AFTER CLEANUP Contaminant Soil (ppm) Before After Water (ppm) Before After Contaminant Soii (ppm) Before After Water (ppm) Before After DDT toUl .286 .286 <.0001 <.0001 2,4-DB .0089 .0089 N/A N/A Toxaphene 1.04 1.04 <.010 <.010 Heptachlor Epoxide .0005 .0005 <.0005 <.0005 DEHP .072 .072 N/A N/A TRPH N/A N/A 31.8 31.8 Lead 19 19 N/A N/A TPH-G <10 <10 <.05 <.05 2,4,5-T .0064 .0064 N/A N/A TPH-D <10 <10 <.5 <.5 Comments: A limited Phase I environmental site assessment and iimited agricultural chemical residue survey was conducted to fulfill the requirement of the City of Carisbad's Standard Agricultural area Mitigation Condition. A total of 12 soil samples were originally taken from the upper 11/2 feet within the 5-acre site. The analytical results were compared to the Preliminary Remedial Goals (PRG's) to evaluate the risk to human health. Only one sample result was above the PRG values. Toxaphene was found at 1.04 mg/kg which is less than the hazardous waste criteria but greater than the PRG at .4 mg/kg. The consultant states that this sample concentration appears to represent an outlier and is not representative of site conditions. Ail of the other samples are non-detect for Toxaphene including the sample taken in the same spot at 11/2 feet A groundwater monitoring well was installed and sampled to determine groundwater impacts. The analytical results indicate the agricultural operations on the property have not advereely affected groundwater. A second sampling event occurred to address the chemical mixing areas that were not sampled originally. An additional 10 soil samples were collected at the site including the new parcel Magnolia Gardens II which is a 1.8 acre site. The results are below the PRG values for the contaminants. The analytical results of the second sampling event are consistent with similar farmlands in San Diego County. The majority of contaminants detected fail within the Chlorinated Pesticides suite which are known for their pereistence in nature. The consultant has proposed remedial earthwork for the Toxaphene contaminated soii. The soil wili be placed under the proposed roadway and not within 10 feet of finish pad grades. The soil wili be buried at least 5 feet to mitigate the potential for human contact. DEH concure with the proposed remedial activity as presented In the March 15,1999 limited site assessment report and in the GeoSoils letter dated May 11, 2000. Since Toxaphene is veiy volatile, precautions must t>e taken to assure worker safety during the soil burial process. See Section Vll below for additional requirements. IV. CLOSURE Does completed corrective action protect existing beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes Does completed corrective action protect potential beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes Does corrective action protect public health for current land use? Case review based on proposed use as residences. Yes Are there other Issues DEH needs to follow up on: Yes* Site Management Requirements: None Should corrective action be reviewed if land use changes? Yes List Enforcement Actions Taken: N/A List Enforcement Actions Rescinded: N/A Is this account up to date and current?: Yes LOCAL AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE DATA Name: Kevin Heaton Title: Senior Hydrogeologist Land and Water Quality Division Signature: Date: ^/^jl^^ VI. RWQCB NOTIFICATION Date Submitted to RWQCB: N/A RWQCB Response: RWQCB Staff Name: Title: Oate: DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 2 of 3 Case Closure Summary ?!fi-LOP or Voluntary Assistance Pro^m Vll. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. DATA. ETC. H38418-001 * Once the remedial action is compieted, DEH is requesting that GeoSoils submit a certification letter to this department that the contaminated soil was placed underthe roadways according to the criteria listed in the March 15,1999 limited site assessment report and letter dated May 11,2000. This document and the related CASE CLOSURE LETTER, shall be retained by the lead agency as part ofthe official site file. DEH:HM-9159 (Rev. 6/99) Page 3 of 3 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department June 9, 2000 Dennis M. Ferdig Silvergate Financial, Inc. Suite 220 2505 Congress Street San Diego, CA 92110 SUBJECT: CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS II The items requested from you earlier to make your Tentative Tract Map, application no. CT 00-05 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Attached is a list of issues identified thus far. Any issues shouid be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Don Neu, at (760) 602-4612, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincereiy, MICHAEL J. HOLZMit Planning Director MJH:DN:cs Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group Adrienne Landers Skip Hammann Frank Jimeno File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ ISSUES OF CONCERN No. CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS Planning: 1. On May 16, 2000 the City Council approved two new requirements for Residential Infill Development. The two new requirements include (1) the posting of on site project notice signs and, (2) the submittal of photo-simulation exhibits. The project notice signs are required to be posted on-site at two times: (1) upon City determination of completeness of a formal project application; and (2) concurrent with the public notice period for a public hearing for the project. Please refer to the public noticing section of the Visitor Serving Commercial Overlay Zone for the specific criteria for the posted notice for the site. The photo-simulation exhibits should include views of the project from adjacent streets and existing developed properties. Both of these items must be completed prior to the project being scheduled for a Planning Commission Hearing. 2. Enclosed is a redlined checkprint from the City's Consultant Landscape Architect. Please revise the plan to incorporate the requested revisions. 3. Please provide eight (8) complete sets of plans as soon as possible so that they can be distributed to other departments and agencies for review and comment. The project cannot be scheduled for a public hearing until responses are received from other departments and agencies. 4. The street standards for the area of the project site are still pending City Council action. A moratorium exists at this time as it pertains to projects that include the construction of new streets in this area unless the City Council approves an exemption. Engineering: Engineering staff comments are not yet available but will be provided to you in separate correspondence. , O "1 loduiig Design Group, Inc. May 17, 2000 RECEIVED MAY 18 im Don Neu CITY OF CARLCr.D CityofCarlsbad PLANNING DEF i 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Reference: MAGNOLIA GARDENS H CTOO-05 (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-1067) Dear Don: Please find attached four copies of the revised tentative map including the check prints submitted with your preliminary conmients dated March 31,2000 and received on April 5,2000. We have gone through the list of items needed to complete the application along with the issues of concems. We have made all the changes requested and I would like to go through each item following the order in your letter dated March 31. LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION PLANNING 1. We have provided spot elevations and lot drainage for each pad. 2. In addition to the pad elevations that indicate the direction of drainage, we have also included three cross sections taken through the project as indicated on the attached exhibits. 3. The existing and proposed street lights within and adjacent to the project have been shown. 4-ab. The quantity of each species and estimated yearly amount of irrigation water required to maintain each zone has been included. 5. As suggested, I have attached a written justification for the major categories within the Environmental Impact Assessment form Part 1. 6. On the front sheet of the Disclosure Statement, I have added the address and title of appHcant under Silvergate Financial. We did include with our original appUcation the required names and addresses of the individuals owning more than 10%. In addition, the officers of Silvergate Financial, Inc. are included on the 3rd sheet which I have now entitled Exhibit "A". 703 Polomor Airport Rood • Suite 300 • Corlsbod. Colifornio 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Don Neu May 17, 2000 Page 2 7. A Preliminary Hydrology Map and calculations were included with the original submittal. It was submitted shortly after the initial submittal and was given directly to the project engineer (Frank Jimeno). 8. I have attached a series of photographs taken around the property and have identified on each photograph the location taken. 9. I have provided a digital copy of the submittal as required. 10. We had included with the original submittal a Notice of Time Limits on Discretionary Actions. I have included another copy for your records. Engineering 1. We are still waiting for engineering comments for the project. ISSUES OF CONCERNS Planning 1. The proposal does exceed the growth management control point for the site by 0.078 units per acre. This is calculated by dividing 6 units by 1.83 net developable acres. The same applicant recently received City approval for Magnolia Gardens I which is CT98-12. That project had 12 lots plus two second dwelling units for a total of 14 units on 4.93 acres for a growth management density of 2.84 dwelling imits per acre. Magnolia Gardens II will purchase approximately 1 credit of affordable housing. Combining the two projects you would have the 14 imits from Phase I and 6+1 unit for Phase II for a total unit count including the affordable housing of 21 units on a total of 6.76 acres with an overall density of 3.1 dwelling units per acre. This is under the growth control point for the area (3.2 dwelling units per acre). The average lot size for Magnolia Gardens II is 11,147 sq. ft. There are seven existing long and narrow parcels adjacent to and north of the project that range in size from 14,959 sq. ft. to 24,558 sq. ft. It is likely that some of these parcels will be combined or developed similar to other parcels in the same block that have been divided. There are two parcels adjacent to lot 6 ofthe project that are 7,545 sq. ft. each. Our six new parcels are similar in size to the parcels recently approved immediately across the street by the same applicant. These four parcels within Magnolia Gardens Unit I range in size from 10,630 sq. ft. to 11,670 sq. ft. The six new parcels are compatible in size and shape with existing and new parcels in the area. In addition, our parcel is large enough to acconmiodate eight 8,360 sq. ft. lots which exceeds the 7500 sq. ft. minimum requirement for the area. The applicant has decided to request a smaller number of lots and be compatible with the surrounding area. 703 Polomor Airport Rood • Suite 300 • Corlsbod. Colifornio 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Don Neu May 17, 2000 Page 3 2. The attached phase I enviroimiental review by GeoSoils, Inc. goes into detail as far investigating and recommending remediation for any concentration of agriculture chemicals. 3. The applicant agrees with the payment of an in lieu fee for the inclusionary housing requirement. 4. The engineer has revised Note No. 1 on Sheet 1 to include compliance with the substantial conformance policy. 5. CTOO-05 has been added to all sheets. 6. Additional sfreet elevations have been added to Street "B" on sheet 2 so the staff can analyze the grading as proposed. 7. We are aware of the current moratorium that exists pertaining to new projects that include construction of new streets. The applicant is willing to set aside the required standard right of way and would be willing to adjust the improvements should the City ofCarlsbad approve new street standards for this area. In addition, if by the time the project reaches the Plarming Commission, and the moratorium is still in place, the applicant will request an exemption before the City Council as required in the current moratorium ordinance. 8. The Engineer has included new aerial topography with the application that answers the questions about elevations on the lots adjacent to the north property line ofthe site. 9. Lot grades including lot 5 and 6 have been adjusted to closer conform to the existing developed parcels to the north. 10. The Engineer has added cross sections to the project to aid the Commission and Staff to review in more detail the project and how it relates to the adjacent development. 11. The pad grade elevations noted in Magnolia Gardens Unit I have been adjusted as suggested. 12. The landscape architect has revised the landscape plan to conform to the new grading and the additional comments as noted. 13. As mentioned above, we are enclosing four new prints of the revised drawings along with the check prints from the first plan check received from the staff the first week in April 2000. Please look all our revisions over and we look forward to receiving confirmation from the City that all the issues and concems have been addressed and that we can now receive a letter from the City stating our appUcation is complete and we will continue on through the processing stage toward Planning Commission review. 703 Polomor fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Corlsbod. Colifornio 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 o 4^% Don Neu May 17, 2000 Page 4 If there are additional items that staff has concems about, we look forward to responding to your requests as soon as possible. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb:Neu001 Enclosures cc: Dermis Ferdig, Silvergate Financial Inc. Dennis Furman, Crosby Mead & Benton Tony Lawson, ADL Planning Assoc. 703 Polomor fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Corlsbod. California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 ^LLy^QfCarJs b a d Planning Department March 31, 2000 Dennis M. Ferdig Silvergate Financial, Inc. 2505 Congress Street, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92110 SUBJECT: CT 00-05 - MAGNOUA GARDENS II Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, application no. CT 00-05, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. Aii iist items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this iist must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, March 2, 2000, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Don Neu, at (760) 602-4612, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. IICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:DN:mh c: Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group Adrienne Landers Frank Jimeno File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 . (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ® UST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPUCATION No. CT 00-05 - MAGNOLIA GARDENS II Planning: 1. Provide spot elevations at the corners of each pad. 2. Indicate the method for draining each lot. Include a typical cross section taken parallel to the frontage for lots with less than standard frontage. 3. Show all existing and proposed street lights within and adjacent to the project. 4. On the landscape plan please include the following: a. The quantity of each species b. An estimate of the yearly amount of irrigation (supplemental) water required to maintain each zone. 5. Complete the Environmental Impact Assessment Form. Provide written justification for the boxes checked in each of the subject categories. A response may not be needed for each individual question; however, at a minimum a response must be provided for each roman numeral labeled category such as land use, population & housing, etc. 6. Complete item number 1 on the disclosure form. 7. Provide a Preliminary Hydrology map and calculations. This is required for all lots exceeding one acre. Show before and after discharges to each including drainage basin. 8. Provide photographs of the property taken from the north, south, east and west. 9. A digital copy of the submittal is required. 10. Sign and submit a "Notice of Time Limits on Discretionary Applications." Engineering: 1. Engineering Department comments will follow in a separate letter. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. The proposed density exceeds the growth management control point for the site. Special findings contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan must be made to exceed the growth control point. 2. A report documenting the results of soils testing for hazardous concentrations of agricultural chemicals must be submitted in order for the environmental documents analyzing the impacts of the proposed project to be prepared. 3. The project will be required to pay an in-lieu fee by the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. 4. Revise note number 1 on sheet 1 of the tentative map to include compliance with the City of Carlsbad Substantial Conformance Policy as indicated on the checkprint. 5. Add the project number (CT 00-05) to all plan sheets. 6. Provide elevations for Street "B" on sheet 2 so that proposed grading can be evaluated. 7. The street standards for the area of the project site are still pending City Council action. A moratorium exists at this time as it pertains to new projects that include the construction of new streets in this area unless the City Council approves an exemption. 8. Please provide lot elevations for all lots adjacent to the north property line of the site. 9. The major issue for the project is the proposed grading specifically the lot elevations in relation to existing lots to the north and the proposed street. It is recommended that the proposed pad elevations be lowered especially for lots 5 and 6 which reduces the slope height between the site and properties to the north as well as the amount of import needed. The City Council, Planning Commission and City Staff have repeatedly heard neighborhood opposition on infill project's where grading designs resulted in slopes between properties that typically are not issues of concern in more undeveloped areas of the City. 10. To assist the public and commissioners understand the proposed grading design staff is requesting that several cross sections be prepared. The locations for the cross sections are noted on sheet 2 of the checkprint and include one running in an east to west direction through the site and two running in a north to south direction. Both sections must go a reasonable distance offsite to show the proposed grades in relation to existing grades. 11. Please revise two of the pad elevations noted on lots for the Magnolia Gardens I project to be consistent with the elevations shown on the approved tentative map. Refer to the redlined checkprint for the applicable locations. 12. Several minor revisions to the Preliminary Landscape Plan are necessary. Please refer to the enclosed checkprint 13. Please return the enclosed checkprints with three (3) sets of revised plans to allow review and processing of the project for a Planning Commission hearing to proceed. Engineering: 1. Engineering Department comments will follow in a separate letter. r CITY OF OCEANSIDE HIGHWAY 1^^^ .SI AGUA HEDION LAGOON CITY OF VISTA f\j NOT TO SCALE V^CITY OF SAN MARCOS PACIFIC OCEAN CITY OF ENCINITAS VICINITY MAP MAGNOLIA GARDENS TENTATIVE MAP 703 PRLOMRfl AIRPORT RORD SU1T€ 300 CRRLSBRD, Cfl 92009 PHON€ (760) 438-3182 FRX a60)438-0173 L-1067 2-1-00 s/r£ MAGNOLIA GARDENS II CT 00-05 TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS MAGNOLIA GARDENS II TENTATIVE MAP SHEET 1 OF 3 CARLSBAD TRACT NO. CT 00-05 ESnWTED TMfnC QDOHDfe MMyuy LOT SOE: /W£A mnm MOW pHDPOsco UIT vomr-. - D LOTS) -W TMPS POI OW - 7900 SF JlCOiaCS: scMOb err or cuuM nKiot art OF cmsaio STONM DNNN: CITY OF CMUM) cn/tuatKt sDCAc TaEmoME: PManc KU mc PKMCCnON: DMUM) FPC OEMmyCMT GRADING DATA: TOTAL UJT tmue tMS HL IQTM. MtOUtr OF SHE TD K ORMOk t.S3 JC KMCOIT OF TDTM. SHE GNMOk tOO « MiouMr or snt wmt IU SLOPES OR tKant o K. PERCENT or TOTM. SnC «m SLOPES OR OREATER: 0 S MMUMT OP cur: »40 cr. ^ MiouNT or nts MOO cr. ± MKMtr or MRORri UM cr ^ FROM cr M-ii SRE ORMMMO TQ K A PMIT Or CT W-ll GR«OINB PUW JM ORNIHO OreunON. KOURES iVMIPML OF THS PROJCCIS ¥W*. MAP. PENCDir OP TOTM. SIIE MIM 2S> SLOPES OR ORCAin: 0 k CONSTRAINTS INFORMATION: ASSESSOR^ PMEEL HUURCN: 200-220-^2 t ROUCN ORM» SNOMl ME tPPKUOWIE ANO SUUTT TO CHINOC DURM FMN. OCSXM W ACCCMOMNCC Mlt4 HC cnr OP CMLSBAO^ SUBSTMilW. COWQRIMiCE POUCT. Hi. SmPCS « 3:1 IWOHUH UNUSS OTHERMSC MOCAm. 4 m. QRMMO OCCURNNG OrPSflE OUISOC OT THE SUROMSKM BOUNOMTT Ml REQUnC ORMWIS PERWaSWR IXTTCRS OR CMOKMIS mOM THE UNIIEfa.VI« OMNCR OP 1>C PROPEmr PMOR TO THAT ORMIMO. SUMWRD OAMHMQ OS-U AW IS FOR AOOmONM. TYPICAL LOT DRAINAGE AFTER FINISH GRADING SLOPE VARIES HIGH PAD LOCATION MAP LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTKM OF TMCT 240-S OF THUM LANDS. M THE OTY OT CMtlSBW. COUNTY CF SM OCGO, STATE OF CMJFOKNH, ACCOROnC TO Utf> TMEK OF NO. 16B1, FUD H THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECOROER OF SW OEGO COUNFY, OECEUeER «, 1915. DEVELOPER/APPUCANT SLWKAIE FNMCM, WC. 2909 CONGflCSS ST. . STE 220 SW DCOO, CA, «2110 PHOME (780)299-5112 OWNER SMI CMTO 2794 AUBURN INt CMLSaift CA. 9200S PHONE {790) 930-2296 cnv 0 VICINITY MAP SECTION *A' Ewawan or •ow MAGNOLIA GARDENS II TENTATIVE MAP ICROSBY MEAO BENTON UDWIG DESIGN GROUP. INC. 703 P/UWW MPORT ROAO SUIE 300 run IBW CA 9200t PHONE cno) U«-3ia2 FAX (7«l)43a-OI73 L-1M7 2-10-00 HG2-TH-Ld»o 8-9-00 7i33«l u. tST MAGNOLIA GARDENS II TENTATIVE MAP SHEET 2 OF 3 CARLSBAD TRACT NO. CT 00-05 11391 |« *«oqATa pm m-wm LADWIG DESIGN GROUP. INC. 703 PALOMM AMPCRT MMD SUIE xn CAIUBAa CA 92009 mONE (7U) U»-3ia2 FAX (700)436-0173 HGZ-TH-2.d«e e'9~a0 ia46Ml an EST MAGNOLIA GARDENS II TENTATIVE MAP SHEET 3 OF 3 CARLSBAD TRACT NO. CT 00-05 so m 00 wo .Lor.i_ tors LOT a u SECTION A-A 200 ac wo vo wo MMWDLMfier 09-00 I Lore SECTION B-B UMNOUAKCTOO-OSI LOT3 wo PD «0 t 3i: SECTION C-C ICROSBY MEAD BENTON UOWIG OESIGN GROUP, INC. 701 PAUMAR ««PORT ROW SUTE 300 fiMVINK CA 92008 PHONE (780) 430-3102 FAX (700)43S-OI73 L-10.7 2-10-00 HG2-TH-3.di>0 8-9-00 7S&00 an EST iVIAGNOLIA GARDENS il LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PUN CARLSBAO TRACT NO. 0005 OW« SlaWT LIMI. - NOTES: L Afprawwai*^ H* U A»J of M IM a M« on W pW>. M bl 4. AflMiwarS IMS Itan 9.1. I IO. A Mto tMt b 0«0 ACCOM) O.M AcnooM O0O AC. (OMI 0.00 AC. MMI LandK^o* Mnol. MATBt fiCNSer/ATKM PLANT PALETTE noon 34' mmmi ZM 3 - IO* - BO* a. Hr—Itar* b M ratmawm ttatar a^^M/lm. M MMnd HM MM t# Ito Mto M M MAV ptoM af Ito PKn. B. Tto IM ptai atoll nWa»t Xarbaa^a prkw^ O nsn W oMIon < 3M • aaHanf PMa«?«Sr9»M,^^Mbnp!^ Tfial«M Mffwrta apMHM OH 0 0 IV MT 0OO«»aaHMl ftotiM if^MTi nial WiaplmUnb MsaM LIJliltrMB tMCMWV T«HM PptvM ICM£ I* •