HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-05-21; City Council; 2144-2; Review Proposed Specific Plan Tenative Map Ponderosa Homes Kaiser-AetnaC A L 2' Pa 0 I? N T c L 2; I, s j: L 1-
fy (
i May 21, 1974
9 - '1 ii L" G 3 7' Y 0 0 E' I
_^_-1-.___1_I_
Asypjid'? IJ'.~J? XO. 2144 -.-- - Supplement No. 2. . . .' Datc?:
1
i<erc?r.z-F?c? 70 :
^----A----------..-._I_____ -__- -__---__-I__ __._____I_____ I_____
1.
isg!Jjcct: Review of proposed Specific Plan (SP-131) - Submi i-ted 1;~: and Tentative Map (CT 73-18).
APPLICANT: PONDEROSA HOYES (Kaiser-Aetna) . (
---_I- .---.-----^---. ___ ----------_ I-.--.-- XI -.__-_.-__ ____.__-. .. .--
,'
A. si- il t: f'mc ?I t: 0 f t 11 <:: ].:'a f- i: 2 1' ----- -----__ .__----__._____._______._
. - The City Council originally considered an appeal of. the Planninq 'Commission's recommendation for Denial of the proposed 420 unit residential development, on September 1.8, 1973. In the following six-month period, discussion between the
Applicant, City staff and Owner was directed toward the concept of Planned Community development and issues which the Planninq Commission felt were reasons for denial. Specific Plan and Tentative !.lap, Exhibits A. b B.). The apolicant.reauested in Februar.y, 1974 that the City Council hearins be continued until the requirements of the Public Facilities Element and Policy could be met. There has been no
substantial change in the develooment as proposed since the Planninq Commission
The Planning Commission approved the nroject after a redesign (revised
i recommended approval of the revised SDecific Plan and Tentative Plap.
..
f:' :.I h .?' h j fi --. - - - - ___
1. Memo to City Yanager dated.Earch 29, 1974.
2. Memo to City Cncl. dated January 24, 1974.
t
S~-r:ff .?e~:ur:iiirc;;r?a-i:jc,r;s to the City rlanager: --- ---- - ------ .-- - ______ ______._._,
That the City Council approve the revised Specific Plan and Tentative Map (Exhibits
".A1' 8 "B") subject to the conditions outlined in the Planning 3irectors' report to Council , January 24, 1974.
-'
c
. L* :? 0
I --_- -- 0. i.)r.bruary - 1_-- - - ___ 5 ___ , 1974 __ I r
*'\
>
Ci c_ti f~L?:~~r~~'s A~eco~-::c.~~~ <~:pn -_-______ --- ___---
Concur.
4-2-74
A new report has been prepared by the staff and attached for your review.
6-5-74-
The staff reports dated March 29 , 1974 and January-24 , 1974 are
still valid. At this time it does not appear that the school
district and the developer have been able to reach agreement in meeting the City's Public Facility Policy. Therefore, it is
anticipated that the developer will appesr before the Council in an eff-ort to convince them that they have satisfactorily met the
Policy and the school district should have a representative stating their position.
No additional information is available at this time.
report will be.presented at the June 18 Council meeting.
.
.
6-18-74
An oral
Council ictio;: --____
!;e 2- j-- '7
~ +?/?e 0 ~
2-19-74
4-2-74
It was agreed this matter be tabled and the proposed Specific Plan be re- at a later date.
The matter was continued to May 7, 1974 at 7:30 P.M.
>4 '- ;'- 74 E .:., .1.t*-,i*ll
/,'. Lj r /'+
6-5--74 - Continued to 6-18-74.
6-18-74 The staff was instructed to prepare the .necessary documents
the specific plan and tentative map.
-2-
-1
* t 0 0
SAN DIEGUITO
UNION HIGH SCHObL DIQTRICT
2151 NEWCASTLE, CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA 92007 0 714- 753-6491
June 18, 1974
-
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Rancho del Ponderosa
Gentlemen:
Our district has reviewed the proposed 418 unit development generally
located north of Olivenhain Road and east of El Camino Real and have
evaluated the impact of that development on the facilities of our district.
Please be informed that our district is able to assure you that school
facilities and services will be available concurrent with need for this
deve 1 opmen t .
-. .
Sincerely, A kQfLLh4.8-
William A. Berrier
Superintendent
bfs
BOARD OF TRUSTEES David H. Thompson, Douglas M. Fouquet, Jack. R. Stevens, Daniel J. Rodriquez
President Vice President Clerk
ADM I NlSTRATl ON : William A. Berrier. Robert A. Morton, John J. I
Business N superintendent Assistant Superintendent
0 0
March 29, 1974
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 131 AND TENTATIVE WAP CT 73-18 (PONDEROSA HDMES/KAISER AETNA)
REF: AGENDA BILL 1\10. 2144
The applications were filed with the Planning Department on June 4, 1973 and
presented to the Planning Commission on Auqust 28, 1973. An Environmental Impi Report was presented in conjunction with the Chanqe of Zone and Vaster Plan, wl were approved on May 1, 1973. The findinqs of that EIR (No.122) identified sv
impacts which the proposed development would have:
a. potential growth inducinq impacts as they may effect overlapina
jurisdictional areas; and as they may effect presently non-urbanized neighboring lands.
impacts on public services such as schools, water, sewer, fire, and
police protection - impacts such that capacities may be reached or ov
extended in the near future.
b.
Other impacts defined are: agriculture, San Diequito Communitv plan, natural
resources and turkey farming. The Planning Commission and Citv Council acceDt the EIR and subsequently used the findings of that EIR as the basis of evaluat the Specific Plan and Tentative Map requests. The Planninq Department recomme
approval of the Specific Plan & Tentative Map, with ,justification based on:
conformance of the applications to the approved Vaster Plan.
conformance of the applications to all reauirements for propertv in 1 Planned Community district.
conformance of the precise development to existing and Proposed deve-
ment in the surroundinq area.
The Planninq Commission, after a public hearinq, was of the opinion the apDlir were deficient in several areas, and by the following motion recommended Deni the City Council:
a.
b.
c.
0 - 2- 0
quote from Minutes of August 28, 1973, Item D, Case Nos. €IS-186, SP-131 and CT 73-18 - "Commissioner Wrench moved for Denial for the reasons : 1.
2.
Lot sizes proposed subvert the intent of the P-C Zone.
Circulation element has not been adequately considered for
the SPecific Plan.
Design of the subdivision is not consistent with the intent of P-C Zoning. 'I
3.
The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 with one Commissioner absent.
filed an Appeal of the Planning Commission decision with the City Council. On
September 18, 1973 the City Council heard the Appeal, and by Minute Motion,
requested the public hearing be reopened, and staff be d-irected to amplify the reasons for the Planninq Commission Denial, The motion carried 3-0 with 2 Councilmen absent. Subsequent motion was made to continue the matter to Octobt
The applicar
Znd, 1973 for further consideration.
By memorandum, staff reported back to the Planning Commission on September 25, 1973, stating that findings of the original Master Plan ilnd EIR were still valid and outlined concerns listed in the EIR and staff 'reports for the Ayres property and La Costa properties, e.g., El Camino Glens (3nd Santa Fe Glens. TI Commission requested that any Potential redesign of the project incorporate prc visions for gradina, functional open spaces within the develorsment, and increa! amenities in exchange for smaller lot sizes. The Planning Commission, by Vinu
Motion, adorsted the staff report and requested that it be forwarded to the Cit
Council for consideration. On October 2, 1973, the Cit,y Council was presented
with the Commission's report, and after substantial discussion "Moved that the
Appeal be granted and the matter be referred back to the Planning Cornmission f
consideration of those items contained in the Planning Department report of
September 25, 1973, and modifications of the project in accordance therewith." The motion carried by a vote of 4-yes and 0-no, with 1 abstention.
On October 9, 1973 the Planning Commission submitted the following report to t
Commission's recommendations. City Council in response to the Council's decision to redesign according to tt,
"The Planning Commission agrees to the redesign of the Specific Plan for Rancho del Ponderosa, and requests that the proposed redesign be submittc the Commission for review, prior to being submitteci to the City Council" Additionally, the Commission expressed its concern with the scale and deqree c development occurrinq in the southerly portion of the City and recommended thi additional residential developmental proposals should not be approved unless; comprehensive circulation system for the area could be developed with time an( amount of improvement indicated. The project should not be approved until prc can be made for realistic sewer capacities and, until a viable program for sc' facilities is developed. On October 16, 1973 the City Council moved that fu
I WIIUCI WJU I1 0 -3- 0
action be withheld until the Specific Plan redesign is resubmitted.
carried 4-1.
On October 16, 1973 the City Council adopted City Council Policy #17 which requ adequacy of pub1 ic facilities in connection with developmental proposals.
Pol icy requires the applicant (Ponderosa Homes) to present evidence satisfactor
to the Council that all of the required public services, includinq schools, wil in fact be provided concurrent with need. Commission was presented with a staff report on the redesign of the Specific P- The report indicated that proposed redesign had met the requirements outlined t
the City Council :
1. grading.
2, provisions of functional open space.
3. provisions for amenities in exchange for smaller lots.
The motion
The
On January 22, 1974 the Planning
After discussion by the Commissioners and presentations by the applicant, Mr.
Charles Sollazzo and Project Engineer, Mr. Lyle Gabrielson, a motion was made; "that the Planninq Commission approve the memorandum with attached Specific Pli and Tentative Map (Exhibits A. & B.) for Rancho del Ponderosa, and forward samc to the City Council .'I
During discussion, Commissioners Little and Forman expressed opposition to the project for reasons established in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 951 & 9! adopted August 28, 1973, and additionally, stated they felt more time should bc given to review the redesign of the Specific Plan. The motion carried by a vo of 3-2 with two Commissioners absent.
The applicant did not indicate to the Planninq Commission at their meetinq of
January 22, 1974 that he had complied with Council Policy #17, although the
conditions as outlined in staff memorandum to the City Council, dated January
24, 1974 recommended as a condition of approval that; "all requirements of any ordinance or regulation of the State of California, City of Car'lsbad, or any o
governmental entity shall be compl ied with."
On February 5, 1974 the City Council was presented a letter from Rick Enqineer
on behalf of the applicant requesting the matter be continued to February 19, to allow negotiations to be comDleted with the school district. By consensus
the Council, the matter was continued to the next regular meeting. On Februar
1974, the applicant's engineer, Mr. Lyle Gabrielson submitted a letter to the
Council requesting continuance of the subject development indefinitely, to all for some agreement to be reached by the developer and the school district. AT discussion, the motion was made to Table the matter.
Per request of Mr. Don R. Worley, attorney for Ponderosa Homes, a public hear. for the proposed Specific Plan and Tentative Map was renoticed for hearing be:
the City Council on April 2, 1974.
It is the staff's position that the proposed revisions to the Specific Plan ai Tentative Map have, to some degree, mitigated the concerns represented by the
Council and Planning Commission.
I uiiuci u3a IIUI 0 - 4- 0
The Planning Commission and City Council held a joint meeting on January 17, 19 discuss and evaluate Planned Community concepts. Consensus of opinion, after
should have concept guidelines included in the Ordinance, and there should be s
reason for a certain amount of discretion in evaluating the desiqn. It was als
the consensus of opinion that the City should investiqate the possibility of
providing guidelines and standards for various sized Planned Communities ( 50 a versus 500 acres).
Staff feels that the P-C Ordinance can be used as a vehicle for developing sins
family detached developments. The proposed pro.ject redesign provides for qradi
which is not substantially detrimental to topoqraphy nor does it represent trac
grading practices seen by the Planning Commission, staff and City Council. Thc applicant, additionally, has made every effort to develop a functional and uset open space system. The provision of open space as presented by the applicant,
the basic intent of P-C design concepts. It must be pointed out that large 1
Planned Communities (400-500 acres) can provide larger amounts of useable or fi
Open Space which would include walkways, golf courses and large green belts. HI the proposed development (100 acres) does not have the same type open space th, occurs in the Planned Communities the size of Irvine (Turtlerock, Lomas Santa I
Rancho Bernardo) .
The Planninq Commission's original concern centered around a discussion of the circulation system as provided for on the Tentative Map. It was pointed out t
circulation was not sufficient, and in their opinion, this development should
occur until secondary access points could be developed. In evaluating the cir for the entire area, indication is that the roads provided by this development tie directly to rdoads which will be developed as part of the El Camino Glens M Plan and Santa Fe Glens Master Plan. Therefore, the circulation for the entir area would be satisfactory when completed. Staff is of the opinion that becau
the only access is developed on Olivenhain Road, the circulation for the Drop0
improve as adjacent property to the east and west are developed according to e Master Plans.
The concern for public facilities, i.e., water, sewer and schools, also preser major consideration. Pursuant to our public facilities policy, Leucadia Couni Water District has assured the City, by letter dated June 21, 1973, that the ( would furnish sewer service to the development, providing the subject propert;
annexed to their District, and if capacities were available after the Encina I is expanded durinq Phase 2 and 2-A. Olivenhain Municipal Water District indic the ability to provide adequate water to serve proposed subdivision, however, not have the capacity to serve the entire area, unless a second line could be
By letter of May 15, 1973, the Encinitas Union School District stated they wo
serve the subject property, however, in subsequent letter of September 24, 19
the district indicated their desire to renegotiate with the applicant. As of
date assurance is not available that additional public services (San Dieguito
High School District) can be provided per City Council Policy #17.
The staff recognizes that approvals have been qiven in the past, but would li
be sure the City Council is aware of circulation, public facilities and Planr
Community design comcepts, as they are applied to this project.
lengthy discussion, indicated that Planned Communities in the City of Carlsbad
development may not be the most satisfactory, However, the circulation syster
ronaerosa t 0 -5- 0
Staff would recommend that the City Council approve the subject apulication, as
redesigned, and attach conditions as out1 ined in Planning Department staff repol dated January 24, 1974. Justification is based on:
a. conformance of revised Specific Plan to approved Master Plan (MP-105).
b. conformance of revised Specific Plan to all requirements for property
located in the P-C Zone District.
conformance of precise development to existinq and proposed developmen approved in the area.
the redesign meets the intent of the Planning Commission memorandum o October 11, 1973 regarding project redesign.
c.
d.
-- __ 7-,
/LL1 i -. T /
\ \\[. \3<\ , \ km A. AGATEP; Planning Director
It 0
!>I E ii: 0 R F, pi 9 U :J]
r
_I- -- _--
January 24, 1970,
TO: THE IiONORABI-E CiTY COliXCIL
F ROI?: . DONALD AGATEP, PLANiiIFiG DIRECT02
SUBJECT: RECOl4flENDED COiiDITIOP!S TO BE ATTACHED TO A!;‘{ APPROVAI S?-131 AND CT 73-18 (KAISER-AETNA/PONDER@SA HOMES)
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 131: The approval of the revised Specific ? could bexsxfied by:
1. Conformance of the revised Specific Plan to the appro’
2. Conformance of the revised Specific Plan to all requii ments of the Municipal Ordinance for property located the Planning Conmission Zone District.
Conformance of the precise development to the existin(
Plaster Plan No. 105.
3.
proposed development in the area.
Any approval should be subject to the following conditions:
1. The approval of this Specific Plan is gracted for the described in appl jcati-on and any attachments thereto, as shown on the plot plan submitted labeled Exhibits F. The location of all buildings, fences, signs, roac parking areas, landscaping, and other facilities or fi tures s!?all be located substantially as shown on the ! plans labeled Exhibits E and F, except or unless indii otherwi se herein.
2. Unless the construction of the structure or facility commenced not lat3r than one year after the date the
proval is granted and is diligently pursued thereafte this approval ws11 actornatically become null and void
3. Any minor change may be approved by the Planning Dire Any substantial change wil: require the filing of an cation for an amendment to be considered by ti72 P!ann Commission.
4. A17 requ-irenents of any law, ordinance or resulatjon State of California, City of Carlsbad, and any other mental entity shall be conplied with.
5. Prior to obtaining a building permit and within 30 da
hereof, the applicant shall file with the Secretaarjf o Planning Co ission wi-itten acceptance of the conditi stated herein.
-1 -
r - L
6. Coapliance with 2nd exrcu'iion of ~11 conditions liste hereor! shall bt necessary, unless oliierwisc specified prior to obtafcing final building inspection clearanc
Deviation from this requirenent shall be per~:.itted on
by Vlri-ttei? con22nt of th.2 Plznning Director.
7. A detailed landsc2pe and sprinkjer plan prepared by a landscape architect shall be submitted to the Plannin Director for consideration and approval. This requir ment shall apply to all the private park arezs, open areas, the propos2d neandeTiny sidewalk and proposed trance medians. Said plan shall also include the d2t plans for the proposed recreation facilities to be in stalled in the private park areas.
E. Prior to final building inspection clearance for each
phaseall, landscaping and recreational facilities sha
be installed. Said landscaping shall, at all times, maintained in a manner acceptable to the Plannjng Dir
tor.
9. Prior to any construction, the applicant .shall submit plans to the appropriate entity providing domestic wa to the proposed development for its approval of the 1 tion, type and adequacy of water lines, and to this F Department for approval of the location of fire hydra
Homeowner's Association for the purpose of maintainin private park arezs.
________ TENTATIVE MAP NO. 73-1E: The approval of the revised Tentativ could be justified by:
1. Confornance of revjsed Tentative Plap to all requireme of the Municipal Ordinance Code and the regulations o
10. The applicant shzll establish and herezfter mair,tain
State of California Subdivision Map Act.
2. Said map is ir, conformance with the adopted Master P1
Specific Plan.
With regard to compliant: to the Parks Ordinance requirements, recommended that in-lieu fees be required for this development tification is based upon:
1. !,Io park site is shown on the subject property on the
2. The location of the property on the City's exterior b
General PI an.
would not be an ideal location for a City Park.
3. The size and shape of the subdivision wo?ild not permi park of a size that could adequately function 2s a p~; park.
-2-
- - r
Aily approval should be s~ibject to the follov!ir!g conditfons:
1, The developxsnt of the property described herein shal
subjzct to the restrictsons and 1.im.itat-ions set i~~th herein which are in addition to all the requirern2nts, mitations and restrictions cf all inunicipa'l ordinance State ?.nd Fedzral statutes now in force, or vlhici? her terg may be in force for the pul-pose of preservins th residential charzcteristics of adjacent properties.
2. The C.CPl2's for this development shall be submjtted t Plann'ng Director for review and approval prior to th
suance of any building permits.
3. Park-in-lieu fees shall be granted to the City prjor proval of the final Map.
4. In order to provide for reasonable fire protection du the construction period, the subdivider shall niaintai sable vehicular access to all buildings; and adequate hydrants with required fire flows shall be installed
recommended by the Fire Department.
5. All public improvenents shall be made in conformity t City of Carlsbad Engineering Design Criteria and Stan Plans, the Subdivision Ordinance and other City Stand to the satisfaction of the City Engineer without cost the City of Carlsbad, and free of all liens and encum brances. Improvement plans for water and sewer syste shall meet the requirements of the respective service tricts.
6. Ornamental street lighting shall be prov:'ded for as r
by blunicipal Ord-inance Code. The developer shall pos bond in the anount necessary to energize szid strezt for an eighteen (18) month period a-iter construction mit the incGrporation of the subdivision into a niaint
district.
7. A71 land and/or easements required by this Ordinance be granted to the City of Carlsbad without cost to th and free of all liens and encumbrances. This require shall include all easements dedicated to UtilSty Dist after approva? of the Tentative Nap by the City Counc
8. The subdivider shall dedicate to the public all right ingress and egriss from lots abutting upon rEistricted cess streets and roads over and across the iines of s lots abutting said streets and roads. This dedicatio
with the intent that the owners of said lots will hav
rights of access whatsoever to said str~ets and roads words, "access rights dedicated to the City", shal'i b tered along the road adjacent to the lots affected on map proper, Olivenhain Road shall be considered a re
ted access street in this instant?.
be so designated on the certificate sheet of the Fin2
-3-
- - 9. The propcsecl street tianies are fiot approved. Street i sijaj] be subj:;cf ~CI app~oval arid shz.71 he d2tsignated
accordance wi th ths siandards and pol ic-i es adopted b, Planning Commission on file in the Planning Cep2irtc;e
Said names shall be approved by the Planning Direct3 or to recordation of the Final Map.
10. All setbacks on the ir,ciividual lots shall conform to requirements for lots in the R-1 zone district.
11. Th. applicant shall provide a fu!ly-zctuated traffic nal at the intersection of El Camino Real and Oliven Rcad.
r
12. All lots Raving double street frontage shall havi. ti: cess to one of said streets relinquished to the City Carlsbad in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer
13. Olivenhain Road shall be dedicated and improved on t basis of a 51 ft. half street for the full frontage o
devel opmznt, to City Standards.
14. If required by the City Engineering Office, the impr plans shall include a report of a geological investi and a complete grading plan of the entire site. The and plan shall be prepared by civil engineers licens the State of California and experienced in erosion c
shall certify that they have investigat2d the site a pared data with full consideration of the consequenc the included and neighboring properties.
15. The locations of parking, one side only, as jndicate portions of Los Pinos Stree-t, shall be subject to th provai of the City Engineer.
16. The horizontal alignment of the indicated Las Paimer
and Las Palneras Street in the vicinity of proposed 280-298 and 320-337 shall be revised to eliminate a tially hazardous curve in a manner acceptable to the Engineer.
who shall be acceptable to the City Engineer; and th
-4-
-.
I ,a
SAN DIEGUIT
UNasN HIGH SCHOOL Q~STRICT
215! #E,IBGSSTLE. CiPOIcT, CAfltOfl!flfr 92089 714- 753-6EiI
!*lay 30, 1974
Xayot Robax C, Prazee
CITY 01 CAUSSAQ
L2CO Ek Avzrae
Carlsbad 9 CaliSormta 92808 Re: Rancho deb Porderssa -
Dear Xayot- Frazeet
The Saa Dieguito L%im High School. District: has bccn asked to provide assuram
to the Ciw of Czlsbad tbt school facilities will. be available concur-i-ent tri
need for secouda-;.f. studeats frm _. the . proposed Pon.d.erosa Eoroes development.
Dist.;r=Lc~, hcilizies are present19 overcrGwded and pro j ections indicate a conti]
&flus of stxcients fspm homes alr5~dg 2?proved or under construction, The dis currat facility xnzeds are summrized - for the COUILCFI~S informtion on the ae!,
pagas.
0r'ficid.s of the distric.t have et: rsceatly with representatives of Ponderosa.
to disccss the hptct: of the dEveloomnt 05 d-isrrlbct: facilities, After discus
assur~xes ca be providsd to the City of Carlsbad that school facilities ill
availz3ls for secondary studmts from the proposed Ponderosa development concu
vith need.
b
-.
n<+k - i'"'" L-- developr, the schod. district imst, at this time, indicate that no
Sincerely, d& 0. i3m& 0
Vi1Iiai-n A. Berrier
Superintend eat
.- DZS
BOARD 07 T>.:JST.EZS: David H. Thompson. 331i;ids u. Fou.;uet. Jdck. R. Slevms, Cd n i yi J. R odr iq u er
Preridint V-re -+Ewbcqt Clerk
.. Robert A. ?.lorton,
AS 5 i i i 3 n t f,u 2 2 f 1 n ! c n d on t
Jann J. Da
Liurinejs >Jar
A~MINtST?AT:ON: Wiiliatn A. De-ricr,
SuDr..rlfl!;!ndrt?;
0
!* _I
.I. LC
$/ * ‘.. 2 ,. 0
I. !: . SAX DIEGUITO EUON EIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
?
STLTDZXT GZOXTH 1967 to 1973
3322 Sa Die,dto Unioa High School Dbcrict has grown fron 2794 students in 1
Bond funds w to 4038 5 1973 for over a. 30 Fercent iilkiease in a six year period.
jot 27ailtjle 2cl-k~ tl?zt ti32 so th2 discricc had to resort to other measures to
p,ro-.rT2e for tha large ~kf11~x of zew st~de2ts who were generated, largely from the
--ons~uct;cz of osv Zxelkg Exits in tb2 rea. The district is expected to grow
5-8 ?.ercenc by th? o?ahg of school ia :he fa1_3! of 1974. In addition to the regu
Ieq~irfid p=~og~;?11, Sul DieLguito provid2s a coqlete .and growing adult school and co
.ecr~iztrim ?rosza that kvolves over 2,000 arex adults each semester, In order t
-ccanrzadate Us h~o+xti~ mer the years sev=al steps have been taken.
I 6 ZortzbLfi BuKiid5ngs AdCed L
Th~t strict first dipped into its apetamg budget: ia 1969-70 to add five
,ore2J>I~ buj~r3-i~~g;s have beea added by laasing, ~d.fzh option to purchase, in order E(
.Annual Rental, Ten Dace CQpLZtd Q
Acccwtrzd bp Board
,ort2’ul_2 cLzssrums at Sari Dieguito 7Mgh School. b~ludi~~g these five, the folLow
I
; 1p TKLth ~U;?rH :
--Contract Agree- - - . Nne of Comuzrny . Payment - nat Date -’-* a - J. . _I--
1/14/70 8/4/69 Ea corp. (S.D.) $25,925 - 00 5 C~ss-rro~ $181,475 .OO
l/W?l D3i.S ed Facilities
12 Cksrocxx $986,900 .OO
(O.C. /E .W.> 26,700 .OO 3 /8 /71
Dpafzb (O.C./X.F!.) 15,973 -00 11 fO /11/72 6/8/72 6 CL2csroms $-U1,853 .OO
8/2/73 9/32/73 hrora (E.17’) 4,792.67 4 I 2 Classrooas .$ 33,,548,69
?.“e d%rdct -2s RTJ obligated to a mual payment of $73,396.67 to cover Lea.
or 25 portzhlz b-Lldkgs, %ne distr5ct was also Iorced to expend nouey for site I rim-, equi;-zmt ad ZuzIxiskiigs ad fa^ alterzt3.o~ to pci-mncnfi buildzags where 1
odd nat ,dfice, The zddiriml buAdC~g alonc mounted to :
I968 Disaicp: buLlt Porrable .. $ 15,801.37
1372 E--- A,lnsion of O.C. Sauger ad Locker 81,187 .IS
1973 Zs~aiisioa of E.W. Shmer ad Locker 88,737 @ 62
$185,726.15
-1- ..
.. __ - - ____ ~ ----_ - ---- * __ --- -
, -,- ' 0 - S;izg Suer"llo, io GIC;T~~ Cz~acitp
Portz3les vere nat ;early enou*, ad the district was forced to go on "s~g
schebide, flrst zc ti2 -b5~5 scAool .z~ci fWy at all three regular schools, This
11 stzggers" th2 sciool dizzy by b&,o*g sdats to the school in shifts and is the .
step bezore cc?hte Goc3l.e sess3.01~~.
a bud&g's Ci3?2dq by g??m2.iXr?'y ta to fifteen peicent: through total utili of s?eCkEz2d ?eer;'As dETAs p& psriods of the, The staggered schedule exa
price 02 2XtrZ Cm'iCa Ectivitlss 2s ~d-1 as creating conditions that lead to rj
T'e sJing schedule permits the diseict to
studez~t: fZacir'ica+ioa wich "de school %'+elf.
:. mxd ZSSU~ P~ssad
I_
Duz-hi: this ti-.P d.istt;,cr offid& were attqtltsg to meet future facj-Ety n
Unsl
.>y- cenzdvs"&g a cxz~trp.-wide &fort to pass a bond Lssue to build a.~ additianal
=&mL, z$ate s
~I~L~cT-s wwe ~E&I Li ?~VPZ~CX 2968, b Q~td~be~ 1969, and, b February 1970. Fin2
;-~~~-j~~~~~ Et 3s !Ij.e~:rd-f~ zs v&U ZS. 23 CCZIS~C~ 2 SSCOSL~ high school Crith S. S~U ,=z w~dqr of XOQ by Sept~=.;r*uer af 1974, Tkis seeorad hZ& s&oal. is ta open Sc
o ~~s5stzzce Ask& frm Dcvdqers
af i5e cdckir faczSies, md pur&iase still mothel: site,
3U-mt eifar'e: VZ~S mcwfd. k &rsba 02 u71 to pass bunds far: rmovatim of e.
.- ,
__I-
It - appra,t'emzn be2csre the passage of: the successful bond issue that the
FA FQ~A GE~LEW $0 gm3.z~ m- accehxztiag rake wd that the district
-e of =xzzc=id a~sisranck j5 it vas to provide zdequate school- facjAi
z rqidly qrndk?ig sch~o~ age pap~E5mi- Dzvelnpers begaa. 5;-~;queatjag the Czisty-i
;smg 1etc:~~s of zz~iziccs to publie agmrAes that adequate school facilities w~tr
+Tdz2b12 c:~~~p;~~c m:a~. the a-2~ of *&:cix &zvdopmat, sczct-hkg which the disc IDd-;. cat ~J~E~SE at a bicikhg cw:kmt frm the developer to the distric
l7k~c-l- 2SSiSlr~32 CY? * - Irr or&r to ~;TE a. ~~Lfoi-m me5md of dc&~~g r:_irB ab1 developers, Sari Dfegpit
1 poliq~ 23 Y-7 02 2-972-
s ~~33. zs OUT 0-a needs zs Li"cenrxiz& Zixm expr-kr~z. Tne district took State e
:or ae gxdict~~d ZUE~F~ of S~CUTI~~ S~TX?ETI& .f~Oi;i I~ous~~ de~lop~mts 2nd appli
-~fi~-,-,t~:.d -v rLe djxeet COS- of pr0~52h.g or+e porsakle cLassqso~~ ~n district propest
X= 2s zh costs or' car~~mctzU,o ~~EGXLCZC facilit5~-.s over a prolmgcrl pzriod of
h ~~Giix m prmLdo 2-55 sckacl fzejg_jci.zc: ~~.cessar-y cunc~~rrertf, viitki the need, tlies
?ere x.yjlizd k ec,~~~=:-a d,yh a 2jz~xeid. assizcace from each developer who p
~.~~~L~G-E~L horasjnt twxi-~~ vitk& r&c Sa E-egxxLt-s bo1a~2aries. TIE B~srd authorized
&TA~=Z~CI~ zo e>$-= -hr;- z. stzwhzd ag;:~x~n2t: iur-a tu prot8ide fririaucid assist.
~~"ld ~E~EP-cx? de-eclsqxzs &a ~mposcd otk.~ t2r.m thc usem1 ciriwstances, tliu op?on^t
qqw..~~x b&are tue had to di.~:mss ~li~~~-iz-&5-ve.s~ I.,.;. costs TOFC mci needs changed,
kxxd ~~:~lztdy ~LT~S& irs prrXcy 5.n JCCE uf S73, pr:ovtdhg for mre fiaahilit
lealhg WL& indiviu'd ck~&yers, &s,st d&i~cl~pe~~ reeogTaize.3' the ~SOSEZ. relation
xtvcrsl r3z quality ~r' ckie ar~2 and its s&aals zud cillingly entered hta agreeare
,mmide zssis tmce,
r-
TIS pol.Lcy TFS E~rsed on the kistoricd record of other
,cw;:J- CSS- OE ppaedfzg pa~r*~&l~ kd ~E?Z~ZSLGQ~ f~~~dities at that: ti=. The dis
-
-2- c
I .. . - - a+' " w .
, AJ'L, a=\ -._-- --I-1.- -v .. v .s ;c,!.Lel h2v2 bee2 ther thzn th2 $350 per unit eation that was suggest
the p2e;rioc.s policy. for 2mma %ny those ZgrsPments will produce no incom? since circu
will prevest the develo?er froa ever coqleting his plans.
finacid zssistzce only if building pemits are taken out - so far the total as:
to the c2.Fstrict: aomts :0'$48.280.00 %at Emey has all been deposited in the dj
Specizl 23.~21~2 dccomt =(a can only b2 used for buildings or' other capital outla)
puqcrses. 'ihs xo9q collected so far TU be budgeted in the 1974-75 budget as p;
~l ovi'~1~=91. $800 ,COO+ sptndizg pros= for buildings, equipment arLd supplies that: L
necessay to tmplete the construction projects currently underway.
h2s 2-v~~ ~3~0, &to &e district's operatkg budget.
The district receives
fume of this
c m? hTDS
I_
'Ill12 ;-.4Oitia3 of portables, cxpansim and renovation of existing faciuties arr
ne^.^ h.Z.~3 sr3001 bas bcreas~d BuiPikh~ czgazity to approximtely 4700 fan- the fa14
En.rd21==t is exxgectred to reach appro~m-ccly 4400 which will provj-de, at the nost
yeax's respire f~am ae swing s&edu_lx zt SOZE I.oc~~~o~s.
remzzizri at Sa i)iegx=cits next fall, t7mt -us sill be over its rated capad-tr arnd
~21 d.zixt: su1d.y result izs placing both high sclxmls' OR 2 swdng schedule at the
Since dI district seE.j
cmt5X.tlE ~a Sr.-i~-tg s~hedde, The grmath that is mti~ip2t:ed for the 1975-76 school
3f t-)tac y- ox,
1
6 SUXX!-Y - -: '. - -. .. ,.
352- sw s "&.e school, district-is qdsiag every effort to provide school faci
p~r zJ-1. st~d;t.~ku -50 reside kPkthiL1 its' bmdaries, -:r2a z-~~de it L-~TZ-~V~ that the district seek fi.rta~&.l. assistance froa other SOTI
-jrdpJ: ea prov3-d~ t&~ necessary school fzcilities csacurrent with need.
Q Itrtiz Cs.v21opcr asl&..g l%zt-lze share h &E cost of providing such facilities sin
ixaze sckool faeli_llities are 2 legit-tz concern of aex residmts a.nd a distlin.ct 2
-B 6~7 7 -7.30 2 hoz~_ -m residelsts bo& CFJ aad est&lished. a.re acutely awzce of th
0ae-Lh:z'rim a2 *&.e p&Ec school to th?. grralitly of the area. Adequate facilities
,rerecLu;XsFr:e to my edxat-lonal progrm. frm vocational to college prep.
However, the comtbued. gmwh
'i%e Board.
.Lp 12.2 costs of 1,ay.O ad coesfxuction have gone up appreciably since costs of p:
C. rg~xes, 5r0-s 213 cctside cons-dcixg fim on ths predicted nuzber of students that: F
2kcjJl:ies xere fTrst est&iz.c& in 1972,- Convers~!Ly, the district now has more ac
5~1erzz 22 fro3 nez Iiouskg de.c;.elo~mmtss. :&LIc, tkis nuaber is generzl3.y I-GtJer th;
;&re f=szj=r,e LIS~O h 1972, che si@e fzmil,y hcme still produces by far the lax)
11&-c2: of school zge chsdrun to the SGCQ~~A-P~. d5istrLCt:. 'file Board. ?s presently 3
;o"ifr t22.3 nder 02 rewr day seuden-zs cxqected f~cm differeIi.r: Iiousj_rLg tyFes and
.,.OSC 05 2rovfdkg t2~orrr-q~ school fzciliries to harase. the increase. In the neani
;Lngle faZPy hm~s in ?he northern p31c of"r,Pe district. Hcwever,. the Sa Diem:
ygk Sc.3~07- Disir-ict CEFJO~ 3-t this 15x provide t:o the City of Carlsbad. any assui
:hat- sezmZ2r-y school fzcilities will be avzilablei concurrent with need for studer
<red f';.z11: t-2 prpos2d ~o;ld~rOS;! dovel~~2nt. Gn the contrary, based on current p'1
.E z.?;?~rs c32t 11jpr.2 ill not be adscmt2 school kcilities zvailable in that tht ~cilcols S~T;~Z tbis davdopmnt, San Die=@to Eiigii School and Oak Crest Junior H:
1x2 ccrlrnntly ovzrcrofcded md o?erati-,g cn swing schedules, as discussed above.
I fs
I. ,~~~.c'sPo~s have been held :.?it& repyesentatives of Ponderosa hoaes who plan sone 1
-.
.. .. -. . . .. . . . . .
.. -3.- . ..
*
. ..
. - 7100
3xxx
e .. - -0- - .i
::.?A cs:: ST2;J CT I ON
-.
I b
?? xni t-19 ci Faci 1 i ti 5s
:-L is thr gcsl of the SZE 2j?:!zito Unisn High School District Board of irvst::s tc\ pravick tk bS pgjj:bi: ie2rning environT:nt for all of th
5t.ri3 bu,ri~.5 -
Tk DSstri ct*s cz~scity to provide sufficient instruct
~Z:=ICZ is b2iri9 “Lhrzats.r;& 5y tk~ m?rZval and construction of many r,cvi
-
:;.;TO ljvz :.i<tlClin Th2 hs.ndzri?s of the Szn Dieguita Unlcn Hjah School [;{St-ri ri d ..-(-.
-. r2sjd3ntizi &vslc;xnts :f;thin -2k distr-ict‘s boundaries. - -,
I;’s?2fu-!ly the 3-is’;r-i ct pzt?+cns ad re;ister~?d voters xi11 csriti~ue to su
L~s schzol dis”sic’i thrcc~h Ek aUthwfz3.tion of bonds for the conrtmc-i; of pev.ixer;f sciiml TECY . i LI ;is % T,OY!-“VSI” rzpi d groltrth within tk District rqu-i~ ~ltsnai-iv~ scl~lt-i~rrs Po ‘ik scs~:cio?. housing problems on an inter bs~is, Cd!-jcg this cer-iod, t~..yr~r=jr c~~ssroons along with 0th~~. soluti
>fill 52 ut-ilizzd t;a t.k ixx<:x~ 2x”Lnt the District has the financial
r2s03rc~s tb <smts to this er.3 in OP+~ to avoid the requirerent to oue on do~ajle sa2s-i~~-1s, Tix Xx-iistrzt-iw~ ar?d Board of Truste2s \/ill exp’lo
123a’i ?y zv;.-iia5ie ~Y~UB tq’ ~zttw“c such iulsds and/or financiz.1 assistmc
to proyilz th2 spz~ 1i20Cd 20 ~~~<~i~i~i 2 quality educational program,
In this r’~sard, 65causz a h<cjh quality educational pmgrarn benefits not
stc$z4nts zzd I32 CKZ:I~: ty 52: also.S.~fit~ 1 and developers and bu.i-ftIer
to ii;cicrdz ny=3zzrty Y’ . dz:~l~;z:-s 2nd 5uitd2r-s within ths class of persons \-;;.hcr;l ii c~zx~~l and otkzr- ccntri i;utior?s xi 11 be vi gorously sol i cited,
ft will b-2 <?E policy cf tk Eszrd of ’Trustees, within the Siga1 1imi.ts
i ts discr:t-i 3.1 3 to ext.2116 c~s;zr2ti XI tt) devel open and bui Iders v;ho ass
ti?? Djstrjct in thg task of ywiding i~t~~irn incisiures. to maintain thz h
c;:;iljty of th-2 eddcatiozz? ?rc-;ra ani such cdopzr.ztion shall be in the
-1 .~
.- - .
-. .- .
-- 2-&-*,- 1
. ~
. ...
-.
ky fa,zjlitstj;s LLfis- s>,-jp cf CTbir hn-2- v,I..-39 it shall be th2 policy of the Eo
- K??’S~:T;~ zs ikz assistznco pi-xidsd by t5~. develop2r. .
:{g spzcl’fic pjdi~lins CZR 3s estzblishxl in evaluating the ~~3sur-e of zssirtzncs assured by ‘Lit.? ~~Yz!~?oP CF Ptlilder, but all reasonable factc
si.,sgjd h? -tzken inzy ~.cccG~%, inclzdins, but not restricted to, the fall ..
- -, IE zntic?~at& iz+ct of ti12 d2~7op~2nt on school enrollcent;
..
-77 -1~2 burdzn on thi’d?*:elc??r as izbicated by tke record, if any, of
.I si-i~ce~s cr f2.iiC.72 of 522 d?~‘?i0;2;- in rnsving his product at preser pric2 13sr2.’ls3 2:nci CL??F c?rcur:stzzc~s;
-192 t3~:ng of ti?? iurnjshinp 0f.th3 assistance to th? District ref;:
.z. t~ ti.,? <s~jefo~~r’s rz-quzsc-rcr cc33zration froin the District;
-1h-2 czytzinty of ‘;,h.? zsszrzcc2 that.”che promised assistancf vji11 bE
-;<hcthor t-hz zsSUr.ar!cz of zssistance from ik dzveloper to this disl
of th-2 szzp I;.cc?scIre 2s givzn by th2 d;ve?oper to other school distr
-. .-
.c
-
in fzct, forthccxing;
- e e
March 29, 1974
TO : CITY MANAGER
FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 931 AND TENTATIVE MAP CT 73-18 (PONDEROSA HOMES/KAISER AETNA)
REF: AGENDA BILL NO. 2144
The applications were filed with the Planning Department on June 4, 1973 and presented to the Planning Commission on August 28, 1973. An Environmental Imp Report was presented in conjunction with the Change of Zone and Master Plan, v were approved on May 1, 1973. impacts which the proposed development would have: The findings of that EIR (No.122) identified SF
a. potential growth inducing impacts as they may effect overlapinq jurisdictional areas; and as they may effect presently non-urbanized nei ghbori ng 1 ands .
impacts on public services such as schools, water, sewer, ffre, and police prctzction - impacts such that capacities may be reached or ob extended in the near future.
b.
Other impacts defined are: resources and turkey farming. The Planning Commission and City Council accept the EIR and subsequentiy used the findings of that EIR as the basis of evalual the Specific Plan and Tentative Map requests. The Planning Department recomrnz approval of the Specific Plan & Tentative Map, with justification based on:
agriculture, San Dieguito C0mmunit.y Plan: natural
a. conformance of the applications to the approved Master Plan.
b. conformance of the applications to all requirements for property in Planned Community district.
conformance of the precise development to existing and proposed deve rnent in the surroundinq area.
The Planning Commission, after a public hearing, was of the opinion the applj
were deficient in several areas, and by the following motion recommended Deni the City Council:
c.
e - 2- 0
Quote from Minutes of August 28, 1973, Item D, Case Nose EIS-186, SP-131 and CT 73-18 - "Comixissioner Wrench moved for Denial for the rea sons : 1.
2.
Lot sizes proposed subvert the intent of the P-C Zone.
Circulation element has not been adequately considered for the Specific Plan.
Design of the subdivision is not consistent with the intent of P-C Zoning. I'
3.
The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 with one Commissioner absent. The applica filed an Appeal of the Planning Commission decision with the City Council. On September 18, 1973 the City Council heard the Appeal, and b.y Minute Motion, requested the public hearing be reopened, and staff be directed to amplify the reasons for the Planning Commission Denial. The motion carried 3-0 with 2
2nd, 1973 for further consideration.
By memorandum, staff reported back to the Planning Commission on September 25, 1973, stating that findings of the original Master Plan and EIR were still valid and outlined concerns listed in the EIR and staff reports for the Ayres property and La Costa properties, e.g. , El Camino Glens and Santa Fe Glens. 1 Commission requested that any potential redesign of the project incorporate pr visions for grading, functional open spaces within the development, and increa amenities 'n exchange for smaller lot sizes. The Planning Commission, by Plinu Motion, adopted the staff report and requested that it be forwarded to the Cit Council for consideration. On October 2, 1973, the Cit-y Council was presentec with the Commission's report, and after substantial discuss-ion "Moved that thc Appeal be granted and the matter be referred back to the Plannfng Commission f consideration of those items contained in the Plannl'ng Department report of September 25, 1973, and modifications of the project in accordance therewith.' The motion carrjed by a vote of 4-yes and 0-no, with 1 abstention.
On October 9, 1973 the Planning Commission submitted the following report to 1 City Council in response to the Council's decision to redesign according to tl Commission's recommendations.
"The Planning Cornmission agrees to the redesign of the Specific Plan for Rancho del Ponderosa, and requests that the proposed redesign be submitt! the Commission for review, prior to being submitted to the City Council" Additionally, the Commission expressed its concern with the scale and degree development occurring in the southerly portion of the City and recommended th additional residential developmental proposals should not be approved unless; comprehensive circulation system for the area could be developed with time an amount of improvement indicated. The project should not be approved Gntil pr can be made for realistic sewer capacities and, until a viable program for sc facilities is developed. On October 16, 1973 the City Council moved that fu
Councilmen absent. Subsequent motion was made to continue the matter tu Octok
e -3- 0
action be withheld until the Specific Plan redesign is resubmitted. carried 4-1.
On October 16, 1973 the City Council adopted City Council Policy #17 which req adequacy of pub1 ic faci 1 i ties in connection with developmental proposal s .I The Policy requires the appl icant (Ponderosa Homes) to present evidence satisfacto to the Council that all of the required public services, includinq schools, wi in fact be provided concurrent with need. Commission was presented with a staff report on the redesign of the Specific P The report indicated that proposed redesign had met the requirements out1 ined
The motio
On January 22, 1974 the Planning
the City Council:
1. grading. 2. provisions of functional open space. 3. provisions for amenities in exchange for smaller lots.
After discussion by the Commissioners and presentations by the applicant, Mr. Charles Sollazzo and Project Engineer, Mr. Lyle Gabrielson, a motion was made; "that the Planning Commission approve the memorandum with attzched Specific P1 and Tentative Map (Exhibits A. & B.) for Rancho del Ponderosa, and forward sarr to the City Council .I'
During discussion, Cornmissioners Little and Forman expressed opposition to the project for reasons established in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 957 & S adopted August 28, 1973, and additionally, stated they felt more time should t given to review the redesign of the Specific Plan. The motion carried by a vc of 3-2 with two Commissioners absent.
The appJicant did not indicate to the Planning Commission at their meetinq of January 22, 1974 that he had complied with Council Policy #17, a7though tbe conditions as outlined in staff memorandum to the City CouncSi, dated Januarj 24, 1974 recommended as a condition of approval that; "ali requirements of anj ordinance or regulation of the State of California, City of Carlsbad, or any c governmental entity s ha1 1 be compl ied with. I'
On February 5, 1974 the City Council was presented a letter from Rick Engineer on behalf of the applicant requesting the matter be continued to February 19, to allow negotiations to be conpleted with the school district. By consensus the Council, the matter was continued to the next regular meeting. On Februa 1974, the applicant's engineer, Mr. Lyle Gabrielson submitted a letter to the Council requesting continuance of the subject development indefinitely, to a1 for some agreement to be reached by the developer and the school district. A discussion, the motion was made to Table the matter.
Per request of Mr. Don R. Morley, attorney for Ponderosa Homes, a pubiic hear for the proposed Specific Plan and Tentative Map was renoticed for hearing be the City Council on April 2, 1974.
It is the staff's position that the proposed revisions to the Specific Plan a Tentative Map have, to some degree, mitigated the concerns represented by the Council and Planning Commission.
0 - T- o
The Planning Commission and City Council held a joint meeting on January 17, 1 discuss and evaluate Planned Community concepts. Consensus of opinion, after lengthy discussion, indicated that Planned Communities in the City of Carlsbad
should have concept guidelines included in the Ordinance, and there should be reason for a certain amount of discretion in evaluating the desiqn. It was a1 the consensus of opinion that the City should investigate the possibility of
providing guidelines and standards for various sized Planned Communities ( 50 versus 500 acres).
Staff feels that the P-C Ordinance can be used as a vehicle for developing sin
family detached developments. The proposed project redesign provides for grad
which is not substantially detrimental to topography nor does it represent tra grading practices seen by the Planning Cornmission, staff and City Council. Th applicant, additionally, has made every effort to develop a functional and use open space system. The provision of open space as presented bey the applicant the basic intent of P-C design concepts. It must be pointed out that large Planned Communities (400-500 acres) can provide larger amounts of useable or f Open Space which would include walkways, golf courses and large green belts. P the proposed development (100 acres) does not have the same type open space tl occurs in the Planned Communities the size of Irvine (Turtlerock, Lomas Santa Rancho Bernardo).
The Planning Commission's original concern centered around a discussion of tht circulation system as provided for on the Tentative Map. It was pointed out 1 circulation was not sufficient, and in their opinion, this development should occur until secondary access points could be developed. In evaluating the c7'~ for the entire area, indication is that the roads provided by this developmenl
tie directly to yoads which will be developed as part of the El Camins Glens ! Plan and Santa Fe Glens Master Plan. Therefore, the circulation for the entiv area would be satisfactory when completed. Staff is of the opinion that becai the only access is developed on Olivenhain Road, the circulation for the prop( development may not be the most satisfactory. However, the circulation syster improve as adjacent property to the east and west are developed according to i Master Plans.
The concern for public facilities, i.e., watero sewer and schools, also presei major coRsideration. Pursuant to our public facilities policy, Leucadia Coun- Water District has assured the City, by letter dated June 21, 1973, that the (
would furnish sewer service to the development, providing the subject properti annexed to their District, and if capacities were available after the Encina is expanded during Phase 2 and 2-A. Olivenhain Municipal Water District indi the ability to provide adequate water to serve proposed subdivision, however, not have the capacity to serve the entire area, unless a second line could be By letter of May 15, 1973, the Encinitas Union School District stated they wo serve the subject property, however, in subsequent letter of September 24, 19
date assurance is not available that additional public services (San Dieguito High School District) can be provided per City Council Policy #17.
The staff recognizes that approvals have been given in the past, but would lj be sure the City Council is aware of circulation, public facilities and Plann Community design comcepts, as they are applied to this project.
the district indicated their desire to renegotiate with the applicant. As of
0 -5-
Staff would recommend that the City Council approve the subject application, a: redesigned, and attach conditions as out1 ined in Planning Department staff rep( dated January 24, 1974.
conformance of revised Specific Plan to approved Master Plan (MP-105)
conformance of revised Specific Plan to all requirements for property located in the P-C Zone District.
conformance of precise development to existing and proposed developmet approved in the area.
the redesign meets the intent of the Planning Commission memorandum October 11, 1973 regarding project redesign.
Justification is based on:
a.
b.
c.
d.
xsp!!c\q DONAL A. AGATEP,
Planning Director
941 C
CENTR: 8initas aninn Srbooi Bi trift 9' I25 ilN
OCEAN Kb
PIOM
r nL.,IIILI.I
DANIEl G MUZOZ, PH.D
CCEKX
REED R. BURN
h\lCHA:EL E. PARKISH, PH.D 133 UNION ST?EZT
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 SIDNEY )A. SHAW
ROBERT 1. B??ICKMAN, PH.D PACIFIC V
SUPERINTENDENT & BOARD SECRETARY TELEPHOGG 753.1 152 6- 1b
a& T c ~ az I3q E -jj-j$
SEp 24 I373
CITY OF CARLS3AB Ptmsting Department
Septe-der 20, 1973
Mr. Don Agatep, Planning
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Ave,
Carlsbad, California 92008
Dear Don:
The proposed 420 unit Ka iser-Aetna development (Ponderosa I3ornes)
concerns us greatly.
This school district is at pupil capacity; our transportation
facilities are overtaxed; our ability to provide school facilities
rests on the decision of the electorate in our forthcoming bond
elect ion ./
We have an agreement with Kaiser-Aeina providing us with $100 per
unit at issuance of building permit(s); this agreement was consummat
prior to my tenure and is grossly icsufficient in terms of our land
and facility requirements -
Our current stance is one of securir?g an appropriate amount of Land
(10 acres) on which to construct an elementary school €or the child1
generated by the Ponderosa Homes s~division and ot'ner developments
in the area.
~t is our hope, then, that the Carlshad City Council will continue
the hearing on the above until such a the as we are able to re-
negotiate our agreeinent with Kaiser-Aetna m
Sincerely yours,
& tG2&E&*-
Robert L. ariclman, Ph. D.
Super in t e nde n -L
F!LB/d!
0'. P-- . -oi
. . L"I".I11
r,f cnicti/\r:t i PA~RIS~I
DWlGfiT E. COOK
c]:ri[i[t?fi C," J lj;f!l?',' Jr. wfc:)vitlc ( yf AA! J-..>iJ >!<Jfyi~l
J>V*'tES P. JOIIPiSON
1
,C, -> CLEfiE
0 c. . DISRiCi SU?it3:4iEND~~Ji . IC5 UNION STRiET tm-rmE s. iim
ERIC IARSON PA:
ENCINITAS, CAliiORt.lik 92024
'l'ilEPh'OliT 753-ll52
--State thy 15, ,of 1973 Calizornia . :: gyd;
Departmeat 02 Real Estate
Lo$ Angeleo I California 90012
107 South Eroadi:~~ - P,oo;~ 8063
Re: Yaiser-Aetna - Ponderosa IIoZes
OSiegand Property)
Gentlemen:
The Encinitas Uaion School District trill service this pro jcct:
with a Kindsrgartcn through grade six elcmenl-ary school progra,
. .The ,project .is. Located Live .miLcs Zrorn the Capri Schooj,,
Bus transportat:on will be furnrsilcd by the school districr j.n
diE;trict-orYncd buses or coiltract buses Lror hone to school, This ic done vith school disixict ftiilds.
Faiccr-Acrna has cigned a voluiltary agreemcilt: by i~hfch they TT.~~L
P~Y one hu1ldrcd dollars ($I.OO,O9) per cirsc!.li!lg utlif: to help elle
district lessen the ix:pc~ of subciivicioao oii present: cchsg~.
facilities.
*
'ncerc J.y yours, P&*-q&9w - *.
Ymcs P. Johnson, Secretary
Xncinitao Union Scilool Piscrict
Board of Trustees
/
Approved: Nay 15, 1373 Encinitac Union School District:
Board of Trustcea
I F6LL2Ld-k-& .. .- fF- ~O--%+L-
JUIiso 1'. JOIiIISOKI, SC L'c'iCiZy
./ 1.
.*
0 e'
I
-. -. p'-p /r. i,tS/ t.q- cF I.jpy7'cs'
.. c;:c-;>.;.y ... -;,;2<<t. $-]A,? ;o.i.1 a::;iq 5s ci tX.92 c;:cx?,2 f2on CI?C sni!iu",z *f thc
Piay 15 1 -. e-;~ IJ;-~~,(:;! ~cbc~j. p.is-t.:c j.ci Sx:zi cjl: : r.?;s-k~.s ,mt; nz da-kxi ,,,,*_-b-.No
0
/wiirn7/ \/4mP# fP. Sj.wc -._-* --.=-,.--- - -..- - .-u- w ---.-CY-- James P. Johns 1, ?! lf .. District Super nteident
.$ notion vas made by Trustee Parrish to approve zgrccment with
Kaiser ktma 'Ponderosa Hones and authorize Superintendent Johnson
to sign for the district.
unanimously,
Cook, 3 ettcr to Dcpax tnent of Real Estate 17as unanimously approved.
Seconded by Trustee k-trson and approved
On inotion of Trustee Parish, seconded by Trustes
\.
/ .*
8
0- *
..
..
# .. I'
.-
*
'-. I
*
I) 0 LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
1959 ELCAMINO REAL LEUCADIA. CALIFORNIA 92024 753-0155
June 21, 1973
ECI
JUN
CITY OF
Planning
City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 9200 8
Attention: Director of Planning
Re: CT No. 73-18, Rancho Del Ponderosa
Gentlemen:
This is to advise you that the proposed subdivision to be known as "Rancho Del Ponderosa" is not now located within the boundaries of the Leucadia County Water District, although the proposed subdivisio is contiguous to the District's boundary line on the south property line.
It would be necessary for the property to be annexed to the Leucadia County Water District in order to obtain sewer service. Annex? tion of property to the District must be approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission and by the District Board of Directors. If the
subject property were annexed to the Leucadia County Water District, sewer service would be available to each parcel of the proposed subdiv- ision when arrangements were made €or installation, by the subdivider, at his expense, of the necessary onsite and offsite sewerage system.
The Leucadia County Water District would furnish sewer service to said development upon payment of the applicable connection fee charges, surcharge fees, service lateral fees and monthly sewer service charges o
Yours very truly,
LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Q&c&
Richard E. Hanson
Secretary- Manager
RE H: hc-i
cc: Ponderosa Homes
Rick Engineering Company
. .-
./'-
COU N 5 EL
1% Pi/-- .* (
, UIivcdiain Municipa btcr fitrif
1966 OCIVENHAIN ROAD Vm Peltr ./oms B. Wood. Prts. ENGINEEX
* Eoyle €ng Howard Go!rnc. L'. Pres.
MANAGER Bill Hollir
Roger G. Miller. Treasurer
BOARD OF DIRECT043
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
PHONE 753-6456
. Joseph Wanket. Director
February 23, 1973 Qrto Berk. Dtreclor
Mr. David Meyer
Planning Department
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008
Sgbject: 1,4P- ,ancho Del Ponderosa PC Dear Mr. Meyer: f rC-lo6
Confizmins our telephone conversation of February 21, this District can provide adequate water to serve the pro-
posed subdivision. However, the water system will have tc be layed out before we can determine how the properties
will be best served. The District does have a 12" line along Olivenhsin Road which presently has adequate capacii for the development and has capacity to ssrve other areas
adjacent to this pro?osed developmento IIowever, the pipe- lifie does not have the capacity to serve all of the area
and, therefore, a second line may have to be run from the north, approximately 2000' to serve the property properly
If you have any further questions, please call me,
Yours truly, y
&/e- ? -w~ k ~ (.; LL L
I ..;\ e f. / ,-
I. i- *,-J
</ *I
/t:-icc[ ~.
Bill Hollingsworth General Manager
a, BH:sb
INTEPSECTION OLIVENHAIN ROAD AT RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD -
0 a
‘7ELEP.C 12c3 SL!<\ AVENLE
CARLSZAD, CXLIFO2NiA WOCa :7!4) 72.
FLANN I NG DEPAIITP1ENT
Citp of &arlf;biab
March 20, 1974
Mr. Donald 2. l~!orley, Esq,
Seltzer, Caplan, blil kins & McMahon 3003 Fourth Avenue Sari Dieeo, California, 92tJ3
Re: Jailcho del Ponderosa -I- - City Council Hearin2 _I
Dear Sir:
Per your request to the City of Carfsbad, the Public Hearing for the Specific Plan and Tentative Map apDlications has been noticed for hearing before the City of Carlsbad City Council on A?ril 2, 1974. Attached is a copy of the notice that wil? be published in the Carlsba
Journal on Thursday, !!?arch 21, 1974.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact
me at your convenitnce.
Sincerely, P\Q&C$?\ --- L2-J s-- 1,- - DOYALD A. AGATEP
Planning Director \
ilAA/dk
cc: Lyle Gabrielson, Rick Enqineering
Chirc k Sol 1 azzo , Ponderosa ilomes
Betty Boon, Deputy County Council
Vi nce Bi ondo, City ,4ttorne\/
- e
QjJtJ f-JF 0
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(714) 729-1181
VINCENT F. BIONDO JR.
CITY ATTOiiNEY March 19, 1974 RECEiVED
MAR1 9 1974
Donald R. Worley, Esq.
Seltzer, Caplan, Wilkins & McMahon
3003 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, California 92x03
Re: Kaiser-Aetna (Ponderosa Homes) v. City of Carisbad;
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Planning Department
Superior Court No. 4085N: Your File 02011 -___
Dear Mr. Worley:
4
Fie have your letter of March 8, 1974 regarding the
above-referenced action. Your letter reqwsts that the
tentative map and specific plan for the Ponderosa Homes
development currently pending before our City Council be
letter I have requested that our Planning Department pro-
cess your request. They should camiunicate with you in the near future regarding the hearing'date-
set €or hearing as soon as possible, By a copy of this
As you know, City Council. Policy No. 15 requires
that the proponent of a Zoning, Rezoning, Development or Redevelopment application present evidence satisfactory to
the City Council that all required public services will be
available concurrent with need. In that regard I have re-
viewed your letter to the San Dieguito Union High School District which purports to tender some forifi of agreement,
I think it is important that you understand clearly the
City's position in regard to Policy No. 17. We do not re-
quire a fee or a contract or anything in particular from a
developer in satisfaction of the Policy. The details of a!
agreement which nay be required by a School District Polici
are matters for you and the District to resolve.
Our Council has dete,mir?ed that they must receive assurances that those services normally required by resi-
dents of a development will be available before they appro
it. This determination is based on their legislative judg ment that the public interest requires the Council to insu
that individuals buying homes in our City will be able to
- 0 e
Donald R. Worley, Esq.
Page Two
March 19, 1974
receive those services reasonably necessary to preserve zinc
protect their health, safety and general welfare. At the
hearing of your matter the City Council will, I am sure,
receive and evaluate whatever evidence you may wish to
present on behalf of your client which indicates that all necessary public services in connection with the Pondei osa Homes development will, in fact, be provided concurrenl
with need. What the City Council. is concerned with is facl material going ts questions such as the pctentiai. i.mpact oj
your development on school services and the ability of the
District to deal with such an impact...
You should be informed that I do not concur in you] analysis of the situation as set out. in your March 8 lettei
policies of the San Dieguita Union High School District.
Further, acceptance of your proposal as to how we might prc
ceed in connection with the Ponderosa development certain11
does not preserve the status quo. Rather, it presents the
possibility that in approving your development the City
Council may be placed in a posture of having approved a de-
velopment without provisions for necessary public facilitic
The City of Carlsbad makes no contentions in regard to any
Please inform me if you have any further questions
as to what you can expect when your matter is heard by the
Council.
Very truly yours,
CITY OF CARLSBAD 1 *q /7& (:b’ d/‘
U’VY md5 Vincent F. Biondo, Jf City Attorney
VFB : af
cc; City Manager Planning Director Betty E. Boone
m 0
/
;&~:ry 2i 3 1974
Rick Erq 1 n9er-i ,-ig Cxi;;ls.iy 5620 Fr.ial-s Road Slin Diego, Caiifornfa, 92110
Subject: Agenda Eill 2144 - Ponderosa Hs;?es
Dear Lyl?:
Pur.;uant to your letter of Febr2ar.v 19, 1974 requesting an ifidefinite contii
cq sbhject d9enda. bil?, t+e City Cwncil, at its regularly schei"i~;led rrwtirg
of Febrci;try 19, 197a, grsnted an indefinite continuance by tclhlii-g th? itein i such tiw as coqiance with Couricii Policy $17 can bc! achieved./ At such tir r;hz policy has ken satisfactorily met, please notify this office as soon as
so that we rzy renotice the Public Hearing.
Th2nk yair for ycur consi4erdtjoc dnd atL_?~;i~; in Lnis mctLer.
-. l-l_--l___-_l_-____
si ncerel y , \i; r. I (-:\ \
r- -;\ <--' bJz,L\ L': \'Y'\\ Cd?IALD A. AGATE?, ?l~nn-ing Directgr
UAA/ d k
I
-
L
~ , i''
e e
I PLANNING CONSULTANT RECEIVED
FEf3 1 9 1974
r- I'
RBcCS ENGINEERING COMPANY AND CIVILENGINEER
5620 FRIARS ROAD . SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92110
TELEPHONE AREA CODE 714 . 291-0707
CtTY OF CARLSBAD
Pfanning Department
February 19, 1974
City Council
The City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, Caiifo-mia 92008
RE: AGENDA BILL 2144
Gentlemen :
Please continue Agenda Bill 2144 concerning Ponderosa Homes request
for a Specific Plan and Tentative Map for 420 units on Olivenhain Road
indefinitely. We are unable, at this time, to provide the necessary
school letter satisfying Council Policy 17, as we are still negotiating
with the San Dieguito Union High School District.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely ,
?f> .,?LL,\
Lyle F. Gabrielson
LFG:eb
cc: Mr. Charles Sollazzo
w - ,
5;?0 Fz;'I,,pS ;?3;\1 D S+\N 0 -r x !. E P Ii 0 N L- . AGq'Er"l co3=_ 712 ~ 291-g;'07
,- t,..:> r ; j - 7 2 .a,- -!JQ - ri:?'? 1: t
Fc?brQary 19, 1974
ci-cy COUr?Cil
Ths City of Carisbad
1200 Elm Avenxe
CarlSSad, California 92098
PE: AGENDA BILL 2144
Gentlemen:
Please continue Agend? gill 2144 concerflii?g Tonderosa Homes request
for a Specific Plan and Tzntatfve Map for 420 units on Olivenhain R0i2.d
indefinitely. live are unable, at this time, to p-ovide thz neczssary
school letter satisfying Coimcii Policy i 7, as we are stiil negcjtiating
with the San Dieguito Union ITicjh School District.
Thank you for ycar prozpt a-ite-rtion to this matter.
Sincerely,
/
'- 3: ,,i- -I /T ,-T i . '- j ._ \ :, '\<., .)\
J
Lyle F. Gabrielson
LFG:sb
cc: Mr. Charlns Sollazzo
v ec- i
mnm 2082 BUSINESS CENTEQ DRIVE 1 SUITE 100 5 IRVINE, CA 92664
(714) 833-2180 7 P 0 BOX 2340 1 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
February 13, 1974
City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008
Attn: City Clerk
Gentlemen:
We are presently developing residential housing within your city boundaries and are very interested
in keeping abreast of the progress of our City.
We would sincerely appreciate receiving, on a weekly basis, copies of the Planning Commission and City Council agendas, along with the published minutes of City hearings.
We understand this would be a potential inconvenience, but sincerely appreciate your effort in helping us stay informed.
Very truly yours,
PONDEROSA HOMES
// i , ,L'* \
C.D. Sollazzo
Vice President Program Development
CDS/dc
/'
/ 11
/J
division of KAISER=