HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-08-19; City Council; 6336; 20 LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND 19 UNIT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT- APPLICANT: FREYe e 1 *-
4' 1% ? <
CITY OF CTiRi-SBAD
_____I- -_I
I N i T i At Dept. lid. --
AGENDA 6IL.L NO. b33G _- -_-e- -
UhTL -
DE PA RT iq E N T i --- Planning
I cty. nt"c* IJ!' ' - i -..-.A
Cty. Mgr. <:
August lgl 1386 -_--- c-
-- - ___ "_--- -___.
- ~ ^-_I_.. --_I- ---I".--
SUBJE''T'20 LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND 19 UNIT PLANNED UNIT DEVELCll
APPLICANT : FREY CASE NO: CT 80-14/PUD-16
- __----.--.- - . STATEMENT CFT M,4TTER --DI--..lll.h-L-*(.*-...- -
The applicant requests approval of a 20 lot tentative tract map a.i
13 unit planned unit development located on the northwest corner
of Hillside Drive and Park Drive in the R-1 zone. At the initial public hearing on this item, the Planning Commission voiced conce. about drainage in the area, traffic on E-Iillside Drive, and the location of the recreational vehicle storage area and the matter was returned back to staff for additional review. At the continuc public'hearing the Planning Commission reviewed a revised staff report containing additional conditions on this item and was satisfied that they were resolved.
The Planning Commission revised Condition No. 12 to require that the homeowners maintain the recreational vehicle storage area. Also, the Planning Commission revised Condition No. 15 to ensure
that the recreational vehicle storage area is adequately screened
from view prior to final occupancy of any units. With these chart
development standards and design criteria of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance and all the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
During the public hearing, one citizen voiced opposition to the location of the recreational vehicle storage site and grading of the site.
Through staff review and Planning Commission hearing, all issues
on this matter have been satisfactorily resolved.
the planning Commission has found this project to meet all
EXHIBITS
PC Resolution No. 1656
PC Resolution No. 1657 Staff Report dated, July 23, 1980 Exhibit Y, dated ~u1:;13,1980
Exhibit X, dated July 18, 1980 Exhibit Z, dated July 18, 1980.
RECOMMENDAT ION
Eh' thFlanning staff and Planning Commission recommend that
this application be APPROVED and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare documents APPROVING (CT 80-14/PUD-16) per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1656.
-
’. # * 0 0
AG€NDA BILL NO. 6336 Pago 2
Counci 1 Action:
8-19-80 Council directed the City Attorney to prepare documents approving CT 80- as per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1656, with conditions 24 and 2i modified to allow future determination of dedicated right-of-way and strc width on Hillside.
I., ‘1 , ‘1
x
2
*3
4
a5
6
7
’8
9
lo
l1
12
l3
14
. l5
’ l6
I.7
18
I’
2o
‘X
22
23
24
25
26
27
.. 28
A 0’ 0
PLANNING COMISSIOfiJ RESOLUTION NO. 1656
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
APPROVAL OF A 20 LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF PARK DRIVE AND HILLSIDE DRIVE.
APPLICANT: MARTIN FEY CASE NO: CT 80-14
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOKMENDING
i
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property t
Lots 1.5 and 20 and that portion of Lot 19 lying North- easterly of the Southeasterly prolongation of the
Southwesterly line of said Lot 15, all in Block “G”
of Bella Vista, according to Map thereof No. 2152 file
March 7,. 1929
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to t
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a reque
provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad.Municipa1 Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 25th day
1980, hold a duly noticed public hearing and a continued pu
hearing on July 23, 1980, as prescribed by law to consider
request; arid
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and cons
all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desi.rin
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to t
Tentative Tract Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
/ _. Commission as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
€3) That hased on the evidence presented at the public he; the Cmnmission recommends APPROVAL of CT 80-14, based
following findings and subject to the following condit
.- .
////
////
r P
a-, ', f'
1
2
g
4
'\
.' 5
.6
7
8
9
10
31
12
13
14-
15'
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1 28
0 01
Findings:
1) The proposed project is consistent with the city's Gene Plan since it is within the density range specified
Genera:L Plan. for the sit@ as indicited on the Land Um ElQmQnt of tk
2) The site is physically suitable for the type and densit the development since the site is adequate in size and
3 to accommodate residential development at the proposed
and still meet all the requirements of the city's subdi ordinaiice.
3) The project is consistent with all city public facilitl
policies and ordinances since:
a. The applicant has received 19 eduls from the secor plnase sewer allocation in the City of Carlsbad Sev
D.i strict .
b. The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition to this project, insured tlhat the final map will not be approved unless thc
City Council finds that sewer service is available
to serve the project. In addition, the Planning
Commission has added a condition that a note shal: be placed on the final map that building permits m'ay not be issued for the project unless the City E:ngineer determines that sewer service is availab:
Since the final map cannot be approved unless stewer service is available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service
rlemains available, the Planning Commission is satisfied that the requirements of the public
facilities element of the general plan have been
met insofar as they apply to sewer service for
this project.
c. School facilities will be provided by the Carlsbac
Unified School District.
d. Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of i
e. All necessary public -improvements have been provic will be required as conditions of approval.
f. The applicant has agreed and is required by the ii
*- . of an appropriate condition to pay a public facil. fee. Performance of that contract and payment of
will enable this body to find that public facilit. be available concurrent with need as required by .
General Plan.
////
9- -2- F- PC RES0 #1656
1
A*,
1
2
3
4,
.' 5
.6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
l3
14
15
16
27
18
X'
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
.& 28
3 0 0
4) The proposed project is compatible with surrounding and future land uses since it is being developed as R-1 property and the surrounding uses are or will be low-
medium density residegtial.
The design of t.he project will not cause any significar environmental impacts since based on an initial study
of the project (including a field investigation of the site and archaeological survey) the Planning Director has deter-mined that the project will not result in an1
a declaration of negative environmental impact an May 15, 1980, Log No. 702.
5)
d
adye~iie envisonmental impacts and therefore has iscud
Conditions:
General
1) Approval is granted for CT 80-14, as shown on Exhibit(s "X", dated July 18, 1980, incorporated by reference and
file in the Planning Department. Development shall occ substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
This project is approved upon the express condition tha building permits shall not be issued for developments o
the subject property unless the City Engineer determine
- such sewer permits and will continue to be available un
time of occupancy.
3) This project is approved upon the express condition tha
final map shall not be approved unless the City Council as of the time of such approval that sewer service is available to serve the subdivision.
This project is approved upon the express condition tha the applicant shall pay a public facilities fee as requ by City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, 0' file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and according to the agreement executed by the applicant for payment of said fee a copy of that agreement dated.March 3, 1980, is on file with the City and is incorporated herein by reference. If said fee i paid as promised, this application will not be consistei
be void,
The applicant shall install street trees to city spec-
ifications at 40 foot intervals along all public street
frontages prior to final occupancy of any building. Thc variety of said trees shall be subject to the approval of the Parks and Recreation Department.
2)
sewer facilities are available at the time of applicati
4)
with the General Plan and approval for this project s:ha
I. .
5)
////
PC RES0 #1656 -3-
6 r
.' .*,
,
2
2
3
4
' 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I
13
14
o l5
l6
17
l8
39
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
, 28
.I 0
6) The applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the city, prior to the approval of the final map as per Chapter
20.44 of the cityls subdivision regulations.
The applicant shall submit a street name list consisten
with the city's street naming policy subject to the Planning Director's approval prior to final map approva
The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and
by the Planning Department prior to final map approval.
7)
I
8)
D irrigation plan which shall be submitted to and approve
Fire Department
9) An all weather access road shall be maintained through0 construction as required by the Fire Marshall.
Water for fire protection shall be available before any combustible materials are placed on the building site a
required by the Fire Marshall.
All private driveways shall be kept clear of parked vel-
at all times, and shall have posted "NO Parking/Fire Lz Tow Away Zone" as per condition in Municipal Code.
Fire retardant roofs shall be installed on all structur subject to the approval of the Building and Fire Depart
10)
11)
12)
Engineering
13) No grading shall be done during the rainy season, from October 1 to April 15, unless erosion control measures
approved by the City Engineer are implemented.
All slopes shall be hydroseeded immediately upon complt of grading per the requirements of the City Engineer.
The developer shall-receive the approval of the City EI for a site grading plan and obtain a grading permit pr: issuance of building oermits.
Grading shall occur in accordance with an approved grac and erosion control plan, city standards, and an appro'
soils and geologic investigation report which shall in( slope stability calculatidns _. and construction speciffLC<
Drainage improvements shall be constructed in accordan
..an approved plan, and the work shall be coordinated wi
overall plan for grading to the satisfaction of the Ci Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, all drainag improvements indicated on the tentative map shall be i
subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
PC RES0 #1656 /
r -4-
* -1. .-,
P
3.
0 e
19) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Bristoj- (
storm drain shall be completed and the drainage improve] 7 3
d,
' 5
,6
7
8
9
10
'X
12
13
1.4
35.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
x 28
. for the subject property shall connect to the Bristol CI
storm drain subject to the approval of the City Enginee
A11 roof drainaq-e from the houses shall be directed out
the private street.
No grading shall occur and no drainage structures shall placed outside the limits of the subdivision unless a 1
of permission from the owner of the property is obtaine
The structural section of the private street shall conf to city standards based on R-value tests.
20)
21) d
22)
23) The concrete terrace drain shall be maintained by the homeowner!s association or individual property owners i prpetuity. A statement clearly identifying this respon shall be placed in the CC&R'S.
Park Drive and Hillside Drive shall be dedicated for st purposes at the time of final map approval. Park Drive be based on a half street width of 34 feet; Hillside Dr shall be based on a half street width of 34 feet and a
centerline radius at the curve of 300 feet. Said easem
shall be dedicated to the city free and clear of all li and encumbrances.
The developer shall improve all public streets to city
standards and subject to the approval of the City Engin prior to final occupancy of any units. The improvement
be based on a centerline to curb width of 24 feet for F
Drive and a centerline to curb width of 26 feet for Hi1
Drive. The improvements shall include sidewalks, stre;
lights to city standards and the posting of "No Parkinc
signs on Hillside Drive.
All access rights to Park Drive and Hillside Drive from subdivision shall be relinquished and waived on the fin
except for a 30 foot opening for the private street on
Drive.
24)
25)
26)
8
//// _-*
//// _.
////
////
/I//
/
6- .
////
////
PC RES0 #1656 -5- .fl ,--
v
0 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
, 28
.
I
--*
/ -.
\
.- .
< -6- PC RES0 #1656
P
,. * . +.. . 1.1
I”
2
-g
4
‘5
6
7
.8
9
10
X’
X’
13
l4
15
l6
l7
l8
19
2o
21
22
- 23
24
25
26
27
\ 28
, 0 0.i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1657
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR ly
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARK DRIVE AND HILLSIDE DRIVE ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARK DRIVE AND HILLSIDE DRIVE.
CASE NO: PUD-16 4 APPLICANT : MARTIN FREY
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, t
Lots 15 and 20 and that portion of Lot 19 lying North-
easterly of the Southeasterly prolongation of the
Southwesterly line of said Lot 15, all in Block “G” of Bella Vista, according to Map thereof No. 2152 filed Ma
7, 1929
has’ been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to th
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a reques
provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad. Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 25th day o
June, 1980, hold a duly noticed public hearing and a continu
public hearing on July 23, 1980, as prescribed by law to con
said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consi
all testimony and arguments, if any of all persons desiring
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to th
Planned Unit Development; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning ..
Commission as follows: .
A)
B)
‘*That the above recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hear the Commission recommends APPROVAL of PUD-16, based on following findings and sub’ject to the following conditj
//// *
f /
'.. c
1..
1
2
3
4
*\ 5
6
7
8
9
10
l1
12
13
14
15.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
,
1
0 e I 1 , s
Findings!
1) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the per
residing in the vicinity or injurious to property or in
ments in the area because:
a. The property will be developed as a single family subdivision and will be compatible with surroundin
uses.
'2) All design criteria and development standards set forth
PUD ordinance have been met.
The proposed project will contribute to the general we1 of the neighborhood and community.
The proposed project is consistent with the general pla since it is within the density range specified for the as indicated on the land use plan.
The project is consistent with all city public faciliti
policies and ordinances because:
a. The applicant has received 19 edu's from the secor phase sewer allocation of the City Sanitation Dist
b. The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition to this pyoject, insured that the final map will not be approved unless the
City Council finds that sewer service is available
to serve the project. In addition, the Planning Commission has added a condition that a note shall be placed on the final map that building permits
may not be issued for the condominium project
unless the City Engineer determines that sewer service is available. Since the final map cannot be approved unless sewer service is available, and
building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains available, the Planning
Commission is satisfied that the requirements of the public facilities element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer
service for this project.
The applicant has agreed' and is required by the
inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contrac
and payment of the fee will enable this body to
concurrent with need as required by the General
Plan.
A11 necessary public improvements have been provic
3)
4)
5)
'
c.
*- . find that public facilities will be available
d,
will be required as conditions of approval.
J -2- PC RES0 #1657 ~
... *'
1-
2
-3
4
*5
6
7
8
9
x0
I1
1-2
13
12
s5
IS
x7
1'8
I9
2-0
-_
>
21
22
-23
c-
24 -
2-5
i6
r-
27
k28
,' 0 0
- e. School facilities will be available in the Carlsbad
Unified School District.
6) The design of the project will not cause any significant
environmental impacts since based on an initial study of
the project (including a field investigation of the site
an archaeological survey) the Planning Director has detc that the project will not result in any adverse environn
impacts and therefore has issued a declaration of negatj
Y environmental impact on May 15, 1980, Log No. 702.
Conditions
1) Approval is granted for PUD-16, as shown on Exhibit(s) ' dated June 9, 1980, incorporated by reference and on fil the Planning Department. Development shall occur subst:
as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
2) This-project is approved upon the express condition that building permits shall not be issued for developmer
~ - of the subject property unless the City Engineer determ:
that sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. -_ -.
3) This project is approved upon the express condition that the final map shall not be approved unless the
City Council finds as of the time of such approval that sewer service is available to serve the project.
4) This project is approved upon the express condition tha.
the applicant shall pay a public facilities fee as requ.
by City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, 01
file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and according to the agreement executed by the applicant for payment of said fee a copy of that agreement dated March 3, 1980, is on file with the City and is incorporated herein by reference. If said fee i
paid as promised, this application will not be consiste with the General Plan and approval for this project sha
be void. _-
The applicant shall prepare a'reproducible mylar of the
final Planned Unit Development site plan incorporating conditions contained herein. Said site plan shall be
submitted to and approved by the Planning Department pr
'The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and
irrigation plan which shall be submitted to and approve by the Planning Department prior to final map approval.
Said plan shall include planting of slopes with drought
tolerant native vegetation.
5)
the issuance -. of .building permits.
6)
I///
PC RES0 #1657 1- -3- -- .f
-.dl*- ".. * 2
9
2
3
4.
.' 5
.6
Y
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15' '
16
17
. 18
19 'I
0 .I
7) The applicant shall establish a homeowner's associatior
and corresponding covenants, conditions and restrictior Said CC&R's shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Department prior' to final map approval.
In order to provide for fire protection during the
construction period, the applicant shall maintain passa vehicular access to all buildings. In addition, adequa
fire hydrants with required fire flows shall be install on and off
Any signs proposed for this development shall be
designed in conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning
Department prior to installation of such signs.
All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and del
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance wj
all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other
applicable city ordinances in effect at time of buildir
permit issuance.
The homeowner's association will be responsible for maj
taining the private street, recreation areas, recreatic
vehicle storage area and open space easement. This requirement shall be stated in the CC&R'S.
Fences or walls within the required side or rear Lztbac
not exceed a height of 6'. Fences or walls within the required front setbacks shall not exceed a height of 3'
14) The recreation areas shall be shielded from the surrour
.streets and residences by a combination of-heavy landsc slopes and fences to the satisfaction of the Planning
Department.
8)
9 site as required by the Fire Department.
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
128
15) The recreational vehicle storage area as shown on Exhi1
dated July 18, 1980, shall be surrounded by a six foot
fence with a locking gate. Lighting for this area shal directed so that it does not spill over onto surroundir residences. A .dense mature landscape screen surroundir storage area shall be established to the satisfaction c the Planning Director and-shall be shown on the landscz and irrigation plan per Condition No. 6. Said landscar
shall be installed prior to final occupancy of any unit
,..the Planning Director shall ensure at this time that tk
landscaping effectively serves to screen the storage' ax from Park Drive, adjacent residents and the private st1 /I//
//I/
////
f PC RES0 #1657 ,+ -4-
19 la
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
~ 20
I I
e
--*
/ _.
\
6- .
.# -5- /-
PC RES0 #1657
e 0 1 *.. 3 - -
STAFF REPORT
DATE : July 23, 1980
TO; Planning Cvmi~sion
FROM : Mike Howes, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: CT 80-14/PUD-lG - FREY, Request for a 20 lot
development on property located on the northwest
corner of Hillside Drive and Park Drive in the
R-1 Zone.
tentative tract map and 19 unit planned unit
/
As the Commission will recall, this project was previously discussed at the Planning Commission meeting of June 25,
1980. At that meeting the Commission objected to the locat: of the recreational vehicle sotrage area and also requested additional research and information concerning, the future width of Hillside Drive and drainage in the area. Since th;
time the staff has had several meetings with the applicant
to address these concerns.
The applicant has proposed to relocate the required RV
storage area frorn its original location to the area shown a!
Park Drive.
open recreation space, this praject will still meet the requirements of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance.
The proposed RV storage area will be paved and surrounded
by a six foot high chain link fence with a locking gate.
A condition is being recommended by staff that this RV
storage area be surrounded by a heavy landscape screen to tkie satisfaction of the Planning Director. With this condition, staff feels that the revised location of RV
storage area is acceptable.
The applicant has agreed to eliminate the 3' wide walk
located on lot 15 as shown by Exhibit "A", dated 6/9/80. This walkway was to provide pedestrian access between the original RV storage area and the residences.
storage is relocated there would be no reason for this
an open space lot to the north of the entrance driveway off Although this will result in the reduction of
If the RV
stairway to be constructed.
The Planning Commission also had concerns relating to drainage and traffic circulation in the vicinity. Staff
has reviewed these issues and is recommending conditions requiring drainage structures to be built for the area pric
to development of the site and the widening of Hillside Drive. A memo from the Engineering Department, dated
July 23, 1980, details these issues.
+ P
, * .b e 0
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 1656 APPROVING CT 80-14 and Resolution
No. 1657, APPROVING PUD-16, based on the findings and
~uliil;& $8 eke mnditiona mtained thsrein.
Attachments
Staff Report dated June 25, 1980
PC Resolution No. 1656
PC Resolution No. 1657
PC Minutes dated June 25, 1980 Engineering Department Memo dated, July 17, 1980 Exhibit "X" dated July 18, 1980
MI3 : ar
7/17/80
-2-
0 e --7 .
z-, , &
( STAFF REPORT
DATE : June 25, 1980
TO : Planning omm mission
FROM: Mike Howes, Assistant Planner
-SUBJECT: CT 80-14/PUD-16 - FREY _I - Request for a 20 lot, 19 unit Planned Unit Devel-opment and Tentative
Map on property located on the northwest corner of Hillside Drive and Park Drive in the R-1 zone.
1
I
I. ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to'subdivide a 4.85 acre parcel
into a 20 lot subdivision - Planned Unit Development o
19 lots will be used for single family residences while the remaining
lot will be taken up by a private street and ope= spac The site generally slopes away from Park Drive toward wash along the northwesterly edge of the property.
The southerly edge or' the property slopes at approxi.ma 1% to 1 toward the intersection of Park Drive and Hill Drive.
"he applicant is developing this project as Planned Un
Development due to the stsep topography in the souther portion of the property which would require extensive
grading if this site was developed to R-1 standards.
A 30' wide private street with cul-de-sacs at each enE will be conFtructed to give access to the 19 residence
created by this proje\ct. Construction of a 30' wide private street and split level homes on the parcels wi greatly reduce the amount of grading required.
--...property located as described above.
1
" 11. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1. Can sufficient facts be found to make the rnandatc findings required for approval of a Planned Unit
Development? >
a}
b)
Are all design criteria met?
Are all development standards met?
0 a .. . . '* >*
i
Design Criteria and Development - Standards
As mentioned, the applicant is proposing to construct
19 single family dwellings on a 4.85 acre parcel.
desirable to develop this parcel as a Planned Unit
Development to avoid excessive grading and to best
preserve the views offered by this property. the development of this project will take place on the
flatter portion of the lot while the steep slopes alonc
the southerly edge of the property will be left in thej
natural state for aesthetic purposes and for erosion
The zoning for this parcel is R-1-7500 and the General Plan designation is RLM, Residential Low-Nedium Densit) (0-4 dwelling units per acre). The proposed project i: in conformgnce with both the zoning and General Plan
. . designation for the subject property. The large singlc family homes which are proposed for this project are
compatible with the existing single family residences
located on most of the surrounding properties.
The relatively narrow width of the lot and the steep
topography of the parcel make a 30' wide private stree
far more desirable than a 60' wide public street. All of the lots created by this project will front onto t,h
-private street. This design will tend to create a fee of community in that all of the properties will f:ce o
a small private street with easily accessible common
recreation areas.
With respect to open space and recreation, the applicz
is proposing two recfeation areas with a total square
footage of approximately 7600 square feet. These two
recreational areas would be centrally located on each side of the project's entrance off Park Drive as showr
on Exhibit "A" . Heavy landscaping, slopes and a soli fence will visually separate these recreation areas fr
traffic on Park Drive and the residences within the pi
that are immediately adjacent to these parcels. One c the recreation areas will be child-oriented with swinc
a sandbox and a trike path, while the other recreatio; area will have barbeque facilities and picnic benches,
Both of these open space areas as well as the private streets will be maintained by a homeowner's associatit
The applicant has met all of the development standard of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance and in some
cases exceeded them. The proposed 30' wide street wi
allow the required 19 guest parking spaces to be loca
The topography of the subject pami makes it highly
Most of
. Icontrol.
,
b
-2-
0 0. I P.
1 * 1.. *.
along the east side of the street and at cul-de-sacs at each end.
along the west side of the street. Plost of the homes
proposed for this project will have three car garages
be utilized as additional guest parking. A recreation;
vehicle storage area will be provided on a level portic
of the property located adjacent to Hillside Drive.
This storage area will be surrounded by a 6' high chaiI
link fence and lighted security purposes.
round that this storage area will be neccessible to the residents of the project.
. ..All of the proposed homes will be split level with homogeneous architectural design. As shown on Exhibit
I those lots which do not have a usable backyard, due to
the steep topography along the outer edges of this project, will be provided with large decks to allow thi
occupants $0 enjoy the views provided by these parcels Three foot high stucco walls and six foot high wood
fences will be utilized to define open space and creat an increased sense of unity.
Signs prohibiting parking will be locatel
with twenty-seven foot wide drivewilys which c0uli-i also
Staff has *
111. RECOM4ENDATION *
It is recommended that the Planning Comlission adopt Resolution No. 1656, APPROVING CT 8P-14 and Resolution
NO, 1657 APPROVKPUD-16, based on the findings and t subject to the conditions contained therein.
Attachments
Background Data Sheet
Disclosure Form
PC Resolution No. 1656
PC Resolution'No. 1657
.
-* Location Map
ME1 : ar
6/11/80
v
-3-
0 JY1W\+ILW"LIL.I LYY* I--- . . *.I 0 I.
WE NO: CT 80-14/PUD-16
MARTIN FREY
--
NairJZ'iEi I
RlQUEST 322 "ATION:
the northwest comer of ILllside Drive and Park Drive.
Propsed 20 lot 19 unit tract and plmd unit develop
a
0- IASAL 2ZS.2ZZTXC2?: Lot 15 md 20 and that portion of lot 19 lyinC_r n of the southeasterly prolongation of the soutlwssterly line of said llTJQJ&%2 lot is a:
Block "G" of Bdla Vista, Nap No. 2152 filed. in the Office of the Co
March 7, 1929.
Acres 4.85 No. c2 2%~
- Assess Zzzcel Nm2x.r: 207 - 022 - 06
1
I
\
CZXSIAL PW ANI ZOYIRG -4
&nerd. Zzn Lad E= "aiqs-Lcn m1
En.sity XCm: 0-4 du/acre Densiq Props& 4 du/acre
msWa~ :or2 R-1-7500 Praposed Zone R-1-7500
-. SurrOtx-L?~ zahg z-L2! 3-2:
Land use '- . .-A
WLYG -
eo^ R-1-7500 Vacant
wk? R-1-15,000 Vacant
. "mt R-1-7500 - .Single lf%nily mellings
~st R-1-7500 . Single Family Dwellings
mc SJT.F* ..
ehd =&-.-,-t: City of Carlsbad, letter dated Xlarch 13, 1980
.. wak- 7;~-L i---c Carlsbad --*,- E: SA-: C.L Cxlsbad -< mu's 19 allocate
?cikJ.ic! F'aciiiALts =B >-~z<s.t, ch&d
(Wkler:
- A u--c
project. Wch 3, 1980 -
-
.. l331T~~~ IKPACT ASSESSPm
my 15, 1980 Log NO. 702 X Negative mclaration, issued
E.I.R. Certified, dated
*Other p
..I ,) !. .? : ? :" 0 ' ;.I
.," ' * x.
I. -< * .. * -4. .. ..
?
,'.f .
.. zf =ftsr ttlc infomation YOU have submitted has been reviewed, it is determined
.that furthcr infornation is required, you will be SO advised.
8
t :APPLICANT : Diversified Financial SJ s t ems, Inc.
Name (individual, part:icrship, joint venture, corporation, syndicat
2171 El Camino Real, Oceansirle, CA 92054 ---. Business Address I ..
(714) 757-6520 Telephonc Nmbcr
Surfland Development Corporation . AGENT : Name .. . 2172 EL Camino Real, Oceznside, CA 92054
Business Address
/
.. .. '.
*. (714) 757-8820
Telephone Number
k!EMDERS:. See Attachment
Name (individual, partner, joint
venture, corpora tion, syfdic a t ion 1
Home Address
- Business Address
I.
Telephone Number .: ! . Telepho?? Number .. * i, %
Home Mdress
-? t , .. j fame
.1 . I #
c.
!. '. ,
--. Business Address ..
a. .. i ( ''
.! .. '.j : . Telephone Number Telephone Nu.mber . 1. .. .-
.* i .
1':
I , .' . (...
. -. .. ..
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
-X/$& declare undcr.penalty of perjury that the information contained in this d.
closure is true and correct and that'it will remain true and correct and may bl
'relied upon as being true and correct until amended, ' . .. ! ..
I '. !. I!.'. . I'. . .. t . Diversified Financial Systems, Inc .!
Applicant w . .I. ,. . * ,.,. '. *,
,* . s . WAxL2L . ..
--r BY
-.
zz , (hgilCr, I'artricr
Martiri D. Frcy, Vice-Pres clent .. .. * Surfland Developmcnt Corporation -.. ..
.. 1 :
-. ,.
.. .-* I
'. , ,I . ** . i 1 .,. . $1 i, I
I i i *
1 1, . '.*I -0' 0
'8s u bb -. -. c- *-a
.. "
.. ..
L "$- tw-=- lf" /
a 'I 'r2.c. p$ltp4Lmz%I 6 s-2B 0 ** ,
*b %, * .
2. _--- CT 80-14/PUD-15, Frey-Request for a 20 lot, 19 unit Planned Unit Developmc:lt and Tentative gap onpropertylocatcd on the nc -
west corner of Hillside Drive and Park Drive iz the - 1:-L Zone. e" 't.
An introductory staff report was presented by the Planning Direc
lhg efip;lai~g$ $he nature of the 3aiksT gqd- pff .ii issues identi-fi
in the writeen reporr.
The staff report: was continued by Bill Hofman w11.0, with the aid transparencies (location map) and wall rnaF exhibits depizti-ng
design of the project, detailed the June 25, 19SO staff report, explaining a Planned Unit Development wcluld allow maximum utili;
tion ef the site, taking advantage of the steep topography tu
afford. views of the lagoon. Mr? Wofman also described the recreati-pnal amenities and landscaping features of tbe project.
Commissioner Ssse, expressed the desire to include the standarc
lighting condition. Mr. Hofman concurred.
Comtssioner Rombotis requested clarification of thc coordinatic of Park Drive and Hillside in relation to the project and exist!
streets and development, expressing concern that a coordinated
traffic pattern be achieved. Mr. Rombotis further ir~quired if
this project vas included in the recently-famed Pxistsol Cove Assessment District.
Mr. Allen explained the circulation element 05 the General Pian did not designate either Park or Hillside as a sec.onrllary arteri.; Park Drive is designated as bike route and a 68 fool: 1:ight-of-wi was desired by staff. Hillside Street is a collectsi: with GO fi
right-of -way.
Commissioner Rombotis inquired into the absence of the standard condition re grading in the winter. Mr. Allen indicated same 6~
be included.
Commissioner Rombotis inquired into the purpose of Condi.tion No
requiring a Master Plan of the existing on-site trees, questj,on
whether any trees were involved.
f - s,
Mr. Hofman responded staff considered the planting of the slope be critical based on the area terrain and fact that it is one o the more asethically attractive locations in the City. Mr. Hor'i
indicated it was staff's desire to preserve the natural vegetat
therefore "vegetation" b70Uld accurately denote the ivlaster Plan.
Vice-Chairwoman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7 : 28 Y .M. a
invited public testimony.
Public Testimony
The Commission recognized Richard Williams of Surfland Dcvelopm
Corporation. Mr. Williams acknowledged the project to he in th Bristol Cove Assessrrient District and indicated the requested gr conditions were automatically contained in t-hc Coastal Comnissi
c- y..-
Page 3
0 a .I ." .-.
Comiissioner Larsan requested clarification of the type of land-
scaping and/or fencing LO be ssed to scxeen the RV storage area, and when the grading is completed, inqulxed into the relation of the RV lot to Hillside.
Mr. Williams explalned landscaping would consist of trees to scr the storage area, along with a chain Link fence and, when the grading is completed, the RV lot will be at the same level as
c
Hrllgide 1
The Commission then recognized C. R. Perry of Redondo Beach, CA, who indicated he represented the owners of the property Located.
expressed concern and oppcsition to any upstream development
. which would serve to increase the volume of water crossi-ng their
property which is located at the base of the hill and directly
downstream from the proposed project.
Additionally, Mr, Perry expresseci concerns rexarive to the RV
storage area, indicating Hillside is a very steep road which car
accommodate massive vehicles.
The Comi.ssion the= recognized Norm Kelleno€fer, residing on
Grady Place nexc the proposed development site. Nr. Kellenoffel
inquired as to the omer of the property, whether the prcject would obs'cruct his view, relation of the project to the level CI~ Park Drive and objected to the inc1usion of an XV storage area i
The Commission recognized Edward Moore, who indicated he owned lot 20, just below the proposed development. Mr. Moore express
concerns re drainage, indicatiag he had spent considerable amou to stabilize his property.
The Comission recognized Marion Lefferdink, representing the ]B Cove Property Owners ' -%ssociation, who expressed the opinion if
develo2ment was alloxsd to precede construction of the drainage distrizt, ehere wodd Ze no lagobn for anyone to view. Mrs- Le expressed additional c~~cerns relative to traffic on Hillside a Park.
The Comission recog?ized Rick IJhite, 4107 Park Drive, who indi
he shared a lineal bmx2.ary with the proposed subdivision. Mr. White reiterated coicerns regarding the RV storage area, object
on the basis that no one else has them and expressing the opinj if the developer were desirous of including same, that they be located in the middle of the project, rather than on the perimc
where neighbors must look out at it.
Mr. Hofman then responded to concerns, explaining the RV parkj-1 a requircmcnt of the PUD ordinance. It was staff's opinTon th:
Hillside is a steep street, the amount of traffic generated duc
. at @69 Hillside Drive, Carlsbad, CA. Essentially, Mr. Perry
c. the presently propos3d site.
.
the RV storage would be minimal. c
Page 4
e -. e ,I .-,
Mr. Elofman ftlr ther reiterated the requirement for the applicant to submit a drainage plan prior to development to insure proper drainage of the site. If other property will be affected, then
the drainage plan would not be apprcved.
Commissioner Rombstis inquired if the assessment district was proposed to accomodate t:his project in its developed stage.
Richard Allen respcnded affirmatively. Further, a condition sf the proposed development is the widening and improvement to current City standards of both Hillside and :Park adjacent t~ tht
c
!
’ project.
. Rebuttal. by the Applicant
The Commission agaln recognized Richard Williams who indicated the property is aimed by Diversified Financial, and the propert: is a’ssessed parcel 75-10 in the Assessment District. A general.
partern of Diversified is Coastal Equities, dba as Diversified Financial Systems. We are Surfland Development Corporatlon and
do all development and construction for Diversified Financial.
The Comnission recognized Norm Amdt, 11495 Red Cedar Drive,
San Diegcs, CA, who indicated he is the engineer of work, with a business in Escondidio. Mx. Arndt explained the project had been custom designed to fit the natural terrain, including the
use of tri-levels, srl.it levels and private drives to minimize the grading. He further explained the relationship of the unit to surrounding area in terms of height and distance (referred t
wall maps) and indicating the projsct optimized views while nin
mizirig grading to preserve the slopes.
Bill Hofman offered that an Environmental Impact Assessment had
compleced and reviewed which found facts sufficient to i-ssue a negative declaration rzflectlng the project would not have sign
adverse impacts on the environment.
Mr. Wlllia-s offere2 t2e applicant had retained an independent archzzglogist to prepzre a survey, which reflected no unusual p
life, Indian ruins, etc.
The Coxnission again rzcognized Norm Kellenoffer who requested
Comxission consideratioz of the deleting the RV,storage area, expressing the opinion same was inappropriate in a residential
Mr. Williams responded the applicant would have no objection if
that approximately 80% of the homes would have 3-car garages, M
3-car driveways.
Mr. Hofman responded that RV parking can be providccl on the sic
providing there is a minimum of 10 feet. RV cannot be parked j
the driveways, and must be behind the front setback line of 25
in this case and 10 feet must be allowed for the width of the s
(
.
the Commission deleted the requirement for the RV storage, indi
c,
Pap€? 5
0 0 a. * .. .* .*.
In response t~ inquiry by Gomissioners Larson and Rombotis, Mr. FTilliams indicated there would be no objection on the part of the applicant to scheduling construction to. follow completior of the drainage improvement construction, providing the drainagc
improvements were completed at the time now anticipated..
Commissioner Laxson ex ressed the o inion the storage area was
necessary; further, it is a requirement of the PUD ordinance. However, the Commission musC determine the RV storage site to
be suitable and not detrimental to the surroilnding properties c In this instance, the site currently proposed would be detrimeni and suggested same be relocated to an zrea somewhere within the proj ect e
Commissioner Rombotis expressed approval of the project in conct and suggested staff and the applicant come back with a report addicessing the impacts of traffic and RV storage area concerns.
The Coinmission continued CT 80-14/PUD-16, Frey, A Request for a
lot, 19 Unit Planned Unit Development and Tentative Map on property located on the northwes'c corner of Hillside Drive and Park Drive to July 23, 1980.
MOTION: ROMBOTIS
KfES : MARCUS, JOSE LEEDS, LARSON FKIESTEDT AED ROMBOTIS NOES : None e: ABSTAIN: None
(3
I P B
I
SECOND: JOSE
. ABSENT: CHAIRWIN SCHICK
In response to inquiry, Mr. Williams agreed to the continuance.
3. CT 80-13/CP-68, Mahin and Crisman, Request for a Tentative
Subdivision Map and Cordominium fermit for 5 units on the west: side of Madison Streel jetween Pine Avenue and Walnut.
An introductory staf? zeporr was presented by Jim Hagaman, expl the nsz-xe of the nat~er and stating the planning issues identi by ster'f.
The staff presentztion ;cas continued by Bill Hofman tJlrro, with t
projecz, discussed the issues of general plan consistency and condozilniumordinance requirements. With regard to the issue of development standards and design criteria, Mr. HoEmnn compared
ordinance requirements wFth the design features of the project, pressing the concerns as set forth in the June 25, 1980 staff I:
Mr. IIofman concluded for those reasons, staff could not recommc approval of this project.
Vice-Chairwoman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8: 21 P.M. i invited public testimony.
aid. of wall map ex>..lbits depciting the location and design of t
c:
Page 6
a a ..
s.6 ‘ -*
*, ; :a
MEMORANDUM - July 17, 1980
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM : PRINCIPAL CIVIL ENGINEER
SUBJECT: CT80-14/PUD-l6--FREY
At the June 25, 1980 Planning Commission meeting, questions were raised by the public and members of the Coamission regarding drainage and the traffic on Hillside Drive. Staff was directed to report on these items and, specifically, whether the proposed storm drain was designed to handle run- off ‘frc1i-n the subject development and whether the traffic
luded in the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan would affec
A 48-inch storm drain pipe is being constructed assessment district. The notice to proceed was give
to the contractor on July 7, 1980 and he is required to com-
plete the work within 120 days or by November 5, 1980. The subject property has been included in the assessment district
The pipe has been designed to carry the runoff from a 10-year frequency storm b;sed on the drainage area being fully devel- oped according to the General Plan. Runoff volunes in excess of the design capacity will continue to flow overland until the street system is fully improved. At that time, where it
is feasible, the streets will be designed to carry the excess runoff up to a 50-year frequency storm within the curbline.
The developer proposes to connect a storm drain from the pri- vate street to the Bristol Cove storm drai.n. Staff has also
the private street. With these systems in place, the overlan
~~OVJ from this site will be less than that now occurring.
Traffic: Included in the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan EIR is
a trafTic study done by Alan M, Voorhees and Associates in
May 1976. This study covered the estimated future traffic generated in an area bounded by Tamarack Avenue, El Camino Re Agua Hedionda Lagoon and Interstate 5.
The study considered several development alternatives: Hills
Drive constructed as a through street or ].eft as is; Park Dri extended through to Cannon Road or never connected;and combin ations of the above. In all cases, Hillside Drive between €11
?Land Avenue and Park Drive were estimated to have very high future traffic volumes, These volumes are in the range of 90
to 13,000 vehicles per day. A two-lane street can adequately handle about 5000 vehicles per day.
craific study is that this section of Hi1:Lsi.de Drive should b
constructed as a four-lane street. The report further recom- mended a strect width of approximately 50 feet with no parkin
permitted.
n of Hillside Drive.
included a colldition to require all roof drains to flow to
The conclusion of this
e e #/ '* .-,. -
-2-
Ths Engineering Department has reviewed the traffic study along with our traffic engineering consultant. report remains valid and concur in its recommendations.
GQpJitigni hfiye been included in the resolution to re 9 uire
that Hillside Drive be dedicated on The basis of a right-of- way width of 68 feet and a curb-to-curb width of 52 feet which will provide four lanes of traffic with parking prohibit
Although it is desireable in a residential neighborhood to
width of 84 feet. Deleting parking is consistent with the recommendations contained in the EIR for the Agua Kedionda Specific Plan and will signjficantly reduce the amount of grading required in this hilly area.
existing sharp and dangerous curve on Hillside Drive will be flattened and improved.
We find the
provide on-street parking, that would require a right-of-way
Additionally, the
@A&ZW*rn< k,
Richard H. Allen, Jr. Principal Civil Engineer
RHA : nimt
P
0 e.
.e. 0
#
%
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CT 80-14/PUD-16
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Carlsbad City Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, August 19, 1980 at 6:OO P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad to consider approval of a 20 lot, 19 unit subdivisic
Drive and Park Drive and more particularly described as: "Lo1 15 and 20 and that portion of Lot 19 lying Northeasterly of the Southeasterly prolongation of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 15, all in Block "GI' of Bella Vista, according to
Map thereof No. 2152 filed March 7, 1929."
APPLICANT: FREY
PUBLISH : August 9, 1980
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
0n property generally located on the northwest corner of Hill!
0
..
..
7 /J i b
/oPA<n0/4 &/qP In .
f,'y;&JJg~J,J. /&
PI
, .. . ..
nam T- 6t Katnicx
Carlshd, CA 92008 4157 Park Drive I @ 91" 210 Park Drive Walkerman, I11 prlshd, CR 92008 ! 4180 Park Drive
.Richard V.J. & Sharon L, whiy dore W. & Parianne R,
I. j, Carlsbad, CA 92008
(2) (13) ' (24)
1 4220 park Drive
I
Ralph E. & Mabel L. Ingold
4135 Park Drive James J. & Linda S, Kacirek ! John I?. .& Marilyn (
; 1510 Grady Place I Chrlsbad, (3 92008 *' Carlsbad, CA 92008 i Calshd, CA 92008
It
1 I (25)
! JarcesH. &Ka.thleei
(3) RLLd rP, ~r esaulke P.
4117 Park Drive I 1520 Grady Place ! 4213 Isle Drive
Carlsbadi, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008
I
P4) * mmt c* & mga H* pam
I! I\ (15) II Norman E. & mrothy E. I
1 (26)
I Jeane Vlsalli
I Carlsbac3, CA 92008 ;
14)
Ema R. Salsa
Of Kelnhofer I 4240 Park Drive ii 1525 Grady Place ji Carlshd, CA 92008
4120 Park Drive
, Carlsbad, CA 92008
1 ',
(5) jt (16) Bowling, Ralph M. & Mary A. 1 I Pat eat r Gladys L. Glassfor 4130 Park Drive i 1515 Grady Place L 612 17th M Carlsbad, CA 92008 ' Carlsbad, CA 92008 r Albuquaque, N.M.
( 6) 1: (17) i . (28) Paul D. & Barbara E. Bussey Hersy E. & Wq J
1510 Sunrise Circle /, 4107 Isle Drive : 4242 Park Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 j Carlsbad, CA 92008 ' Qrlsba6, CA 92008
1
. __ \ 1: ii I
ti Thanas A. & Sally J. Freese 1
j,
\'
'i , (29)M?%?hael K, & F m 1515 Sunrise Circle 1' 4109 Isle Erive 4217 Isle Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 1; Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlshd, CA 9200E
(8)
JaItIes E- & ~l~e bpelles j i mgene F. & mi. E. Wiltgen ' Mkjael A. & Cam
1750 Barbxa Lane ' 4111 Isle Drive ' 4244 Park Drive Uucadia Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 9200E
19) (20) (31) mad 9, Doyle, : John F. & :Lora L. Hughes
4150 Park Drive 1505 Grady Place - 4219 Isle Drive
Carlsbad, CA 920G8 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92001
(7) 11 (18)
! Wayne & Rosw Lingenfe1ter; j Jay A, & K, Lee film
I+
.. I'
(30) ': I
1 (19)
I I
Robert A. 6 Barban B, Allan
(32) I
I (21) (10) Richad J* & Joan M. kidan i ?bas PI. & son&;
4160 Park Drive ' 4202 Park Drive ; 4221 Isle Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 ' Carlsbad, CA 92005 ' Carlsbad, CA 92001
william L- & Rmem E. fihrt-in
(11) (22) (33) Virginia B. Gcxnez EGrrond 'w. & Jean P, DominCJCleZ Joh J, & Linda K
~'170 Park Drive 4208 Park Drive 4246 Park Drive Crlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 9200
LL. i\~iiuuy 246 Highland Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 p-
1 g&A, CA 35008 I
($3 1 (46) mmld L. 1 BQtti L. ClaK@
(36) j; (47)
. (37) /I (48)
- ___ - - - . cw H... Lawson
s e mi
Boyd ! kAUi4 0. l&aa 4248 Park Drive
Carlsbad, I CA 92008 4228 Highland Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
[I
)I
j Richard J. & Jean Horkon ,I '1 4245 Hillside Drive
/i Carlsbad, CA 92008
August & Daisy F. Lundelius 4225 Isle Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008
I1 j:
Esther Gosghe 1 ~ohn E. & -is J. m
1 1729 Hillside Drive Carlsbad, Ca 92008 4208 Highland Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 4;
(38)
l%3-met.l-l M* & =*erinec-'J~!f-!ns A. & Kalora G, Packer
I I
1725 Hillside Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 1 Carlsbad, Ca 92008
(33) i (50) Tkxnas A. & Yukiko V. Hearn
624 S. Dim Street I 4178 Highland Drive
oceanside, CA 92054 I Carlsbad, CA 92008
4205 Hillside Drive
Floyd E. & Esther M. Robins
!
'I
i
11 (40) ji (51) Edward C. &Mary L. Moore FLedrick A. & M. Dolores
4901Avila Avenue i; Hitf lesz mlsba6, CA 92008 'I 1, 4158 Highland Drive
I; Carlsbad, CA 92008
\! (52)
j 1 Elizabeth N. Rash
' 4156 Highland Drive
i/ Lodie E,(- Louie W.) & (41) Curt E. Aagre
c/o Walter Perry
4269 Hillside Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 T
1%
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(42) d*&~
frn&LA Donald 4280 Highland W. Richards Drive .
LW YAaSd- Carlsbad, CA 92008
(43) Richard L, & Joanne T.Shlemner
4264 Highland Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008
(44) Joseph J. & Marietta J. Martin
4265 Hillside Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
-..-..-__
---..*... I __1c_ ----
--_a -~
..
i
---..- ..... ...................
w-------
.~ - .
................. Jt.
-
"
i
ric
- -
bm -.
,a
"
a
b
s a ltprRn DRIVE<\ m
=I
I- *---- 150
-
~ _-- -- - -
- -
130
110
I
I I
I