Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-06-19; City Council; 7796; LAND USE PLANNING IN THE SUNNY CREEK RESIDENTIAL AREAi d PI -4 u It is recornended that the City Council direct staff to complete the Sunny CI Specific Plan and set the matter for public hearing. ITEM EXPLANATION This item is brought before the City Council to give staff direction regardir the land use planning in the Sunny Creek residential area. The City Council previously directed staff to prepare a specific plan for this area to presert its rural character. The area is bounded by future College Avenue and Cannon Road to the west and north and by the Dawson Ecological Preserve and the Sunn Creek drainage basin to the east and south. Staff has drafted a specific plan with corresponding exhibits (please see attached report). This plan has been sent out for review by all the affected property owners. Creek Specific Plan by a series of meetings with individual mers and a groc meeting with all the residents in the area. After the specific plan was sent cut, a number of letters were written from n of the owners expressing opposition to the plan (letters attached). The prin concern was the density restriction on individual parcels. Staff's intent WE to transition the density from lowest in the southern and eastern prtions tc highest in the northern and western prtions djacent to College Avenue and Cannon Road. Staff believes that the overall density for the Sunny Creek are should not exceed 2 units per acre. Another criticism expressed by one property mer is that the specific plan should allow clustering of housing types in flatter areas &ile providing mr open space. In effect, this scheme wuld ke implementing the city's P.U.D. process. Staff cannot supprt this concept because it detracts €rom a rural- residential character which was the original content of the specific plan. Staff believes that the Sunny Creek planning area can supprt a rural residential development as suggested by the specific plan. conanents received from the property owners, staff believes some revisions to specific plan are necessary. Staff believes, however, that the intent of the specific plan should remain intact which is to provide for low density, rural residential estate development. w -4 cn 8 -3 u 8 m 8 $ 5 Ti 3 % e CI These property mers have been kept abreast of the Sunny 8 s 4-1 4-1 3 m '3 E 2 4 -d 8 -e a3 I OI 4 \I) I 8 In light of the I - AIL^ 0, unY Feburary 21, 1984. Post Office Box 1065 Carlsbad, California 92008 Phone: 438-0668 Mr. Michael J. Holtzmiller Land Use Planner for the City of Carlsbad. Dear Mr. Holtzmiller: My wife and I are upset to say the least, because you and your staff, in spite of requests to the contrary, keep including our pr in your draft copy of the proposed Sunny Creek Specific Plan. As y are well aware, our hill top property is more than a mile from, ar different from, the property in the canyon along Simny Creek Road. You are well aware too, that our family trust owns 152 acres out the 246 acres in the whole parcel out of which, you have designate 160 acres south of Cannon Road to be included in the Sunny Creek Over 90% of this land is outside of the Sunny Creek watershed, anc ofsight of that area, the drainage going into the Encina Creek. In the past several months we have met with you and your staff gone to a meeting at Rusty Grosse's home; and attended open sessic at City Hall regarding the area. Each time the discussion has tux to lowering the densities now assigned to our property, apparent1 meet the wants of the property owners along Sunny Creekxoad. Eac time we have objected, and must again voice our opposition to the arbitrary lowering of the density on this part of our land. Furtf we are sure that our immediate adjoining neighbors on the south, f the same way about this downzoning. If approved, this plan will di not only our property rights, but our value in the land.. The Cit has already exercised its control over our land to the extent aut1 and the downzoning proposed is unwarranted, unneeded, and unfair. We are trying to sell our property and we resent these contini roadblocks being thrown in our way. We annexed this property to t City over ten years ago and paid taxes to the City without requirj any city services during those years. We have shown that we are willing to work with the City using the existing general plan to designate land use and general density, but we do feel, that this harrassment has gone far enough. Will you please stop? S inc er e 1 y, Co-Trustees of ly Family Trust No.1. L - -- UNIVERSITY OF CAEFORNIA SYSTEMWIDE ADMINISTRATION BERKELEY * DAVIS * IRVINE * LOS ANGELES * RIVERSIDE * SAN DIEGO * SAN FRANCISCO SANTA BARBARA * SANTA CR Division of Agriculture BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94720 and Natural Resources February 24, 1984 Mr. Michael J. HolZaniller Land Use Planning Manager City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92007-1989 Dear Michael: Thank you for the opportunity to coment on your January 23, 1984 docmnt en- titled Sunny Creek Specific Plan, interpret it as an early draft expressiq conceptual ideas which will be refined as the planning process proceeds. spirit but I mst also mention that others within the University, mst likely from the San Diego campus, may offer their am cments too, As you hm, the University is concerned about the potential impact of surr0ru-d development on the Dawson Los Monos Canyon Reserve. with the status of this reserve as one of a system of 26 similar reserves makin up the UniVeYsity's Natural Reserve System (E), has value worthy of special magement attention and appreciate the plan's sensitivity Ward its emlogical value. of the Specific Plan that might *act the Dawson Reserve. Thwe is no mention of its status but I My ccarnnents are offered in that By now you are acquainted We feel the Dawson Reserve My ccmnents will focus on those aspec 1. I am not fully acquainted with the details of your zoning designations but I interpret your exhibit C to indicate that development density grades fron the least density closest to the reserve to heaviest density farthest from it. (The map would benefit from a legend,) We endorse this approach as a means of minimizing the impact of development, 2. great deal. of vandalism to equipment, plot markers, and other scientific paraphenalia left in the field during the course of a study, Many studies will involve observati of animal behavior. by disrupting normal behavior patterns, and this could have drastic impact, especially if the poached animal is one under study, is naturally very important to us. dogs could be especially vexing. should be required to have a trespass mntrol elemnt, Trespass is one of OUT concerns and the above. density concept helps a Our concern goes beyond liability issues since there is also risk Trespass activity could alter the outcome of such studies There is even the danger of poaching So you can see that fencing or some other form of trespass contrc The problem of maraudinq domestic cats and From OUT perspective, project developent pla - 3- T -mm Michael J. Holzmiller February 24, 1984 Page 2 3. An ecologist would not consider the reserve "destroyed" (page 1) by the recent fires on Mt. Marron. Ecologically, fire is a natural feature of the landscape ad while it is important to manage it with special care in an urban setting, it should not be viwed as detrkntal to the utility of the reserve. For the mst part, our concerns are the sm as those of the local residents and public officials. spread onto the reserve frm adjacent urban areas or vice versa. breaks of fire resistant plantings in key high risk areas would be appropriate. Perhaps this should also be addressed in project developent plans. We would not want uncontrolled fires to Perhaps fuel 4. Your enviromental constraints map shows areas of steep slope which I presme will be left in their natural state. that the reserve, as an island in a sea of developwnt, will not provide all the needs €or the ranging wildlife, I would suggest that these unbuidable areas be connect& by corridors for wildlife access. Not only would this contribute to the aesthetics of the project but I suspect many of the residents will appreciate the elhanced view of the wildlife in their daily lives. Czante these corridors will require coordination with trespass control and fire hazard reduction but I am confident this can be done in creative ways including use of lot setbacks and dwelling separation as well as open space designation. ponds are also iqmrtant to the wildlife values and should be integrated with this activity. Since it is reasonable to assm The 5, As you can appreciate, natural areas (i .e., reserve) planning is mnven iently ad logically done on the basis of watershed boundaries. these do not coincide wi'th ownership boundaries. comn boundary between the reserve and the Tootsie-X project. exhibit B shows this area is too steep to build on and I hope it Will be possib to treat it as if it were a portion of the reserve by leaving the natural vege- tation intact. I think there are some benefits to be derived. Homeowners in this area will have a pleasing vista of the undeveloped reserve ard an enhanced sense of remoteness. Due to the slope and the nature of the vegetation, trespa will be limited and suitable management objectives will enhance the opportunity to manage the watershed as a unit. Frequently Such is the case along the Fortunately, 6. While it is impossible to maintain a pristine stream in this setting, i it possible to change storm runoff frm streets and landsacped areas, away frm the natural drainages into Aqua Hdionda Creek, This will prevent hydrocarbons heavy metals, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides frm entering the stream are especially interested 2i-1~ It is important to people wishing to study fresh water ecology that the stream be as pure as possible. Grading and drainage pla as well as storm drain construction is important here and your plan shows an en lightened attitude in this respectbutperhsps it could be strengthened in its consideration of erosion control, - T * ’. Mr. Michael Holzmiller February 24, 1984 Page 3 As you my be aware, the University of California is one of four Trustee Agenck under CEQA and the State EIR guidelines. during the scoping phase of any enviromtal assessment for specific developer and fllbdivision plans within the Sunny Creek Planning Area. Please consider thi letter a formal request for such consultation. Notice for consultation should k sent to: As such we muld like to be consulted Jeffery A. Kennedy and Dr. Paul Dayton Environmental Planner Natural Reserve System Code A001 2120 University Avenue La Jolla, CA 92093 Berkeley, CA 94720 Scripps Institution of Oceanc 415/644-4217 In closing let me say that there are two people on the local scene who should be included on your mailing list for future correspondence on this subject. They E Professor Ted Case Ms. Patricia Collum Reserve Manager campus Planner Dawson Los Monos Reserve Depar-tment of Biology, C016 university of California Sa Diego, CA 92093 San Diego, CA 92093 Office of the Vice Chancel101 Resource Managen-ent, (2-014 University of California Sincerely , $-/* /I- ChWk. Norden H, Cheatham Field Representative Natural Reserve System cc: TedCase PatrTcia Collum Paul Dayton Jeffery Kennedy J. Roger Smelsen v - KATO&WILSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 598 Candlewood St. Brea Calif, 92621 (714j 990-1221 February 4, 1984 WARREN KAT0 SUE F WILSON Land Use Planning Office City Of Carlsbad 1200 3:Zm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Attn: IXichael J, Holuniller 9 Land Use Planning Tdavsager Gentlemen: Please be advised that 0-i office has been retained by Iiiroshi and Ida Kato concerning ii specific plm for the Sunayereek area of Carlsbad, We are in receipt of a draft copy of the plain with attached Exhibits and have been asked to colluzlent on the proposed specific -plan, Because of the unique aspects of the Kat0 property located at the northeast corner of the 0-1 du's/acre density area shown on Sxhibit "C" to the draft plan, the proposed plan is inconsistent with the statzd objectives of the plm, o2erates unfairly and nay be invalid if adopted, Section I1 Paragraph 2 of the plan states tiiat: "In determining said density, the City Comicil or Planning Commission, whichever is the final decision making body, shall ensure that the project's density is compatible with adjacent development,f1 The Kat0 property is imediately adjacent to the Leis-me World project of Oceasibe. This tract is currently zoned for 4.7 d-xf s/acre. The suggested density of 0-1 du's/acre does not %&e into consicieration the adjacent property and the ad-option 02 such a density my be arbitrary or capricious. As envisioned by the draft ~lm, there should be a natural aad easy traasition from the 4.7 du! s/acre of the Leisure World tract to the SuLmy- creek area, Vould-be residents of the one acre lots would not like to be adjacent to a relatively liigiier density area and the property would be rendered at least partially un- suitable for the pemitted Fur: Joses. l'eoruary 4, Lr3tjL - - iage z A higher density such as 0-4 du's/acre or 0-3 duts/acre would not be inconsistent with any of the objectives of the specific plan. The vast majority of the Kato property is a flat lttablelandfl that does not exhibit the extreme slopes that are foi;ind in the reminder of the plan area, There are no riparian woodlands or ponds on or adjacent to the property. The only steep slope on the property creates a natuzal boundary ad b-uffer zone to the adjacent Dawson ecological preserve. None,of the truly unique attributes of the Sunnycreek area would be distwbed and thus the rural chxracter of the area caa be mintained with the kiglier density suggested here. Please advise us of the plauned neighborhood meeting at the below listed address: 45 Hiroshi Kato 3250 Sumycreek Road Carlsbadi, Cri t We thark you for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yows, /.- " &&q&p- 'JA.RREN XATO WIIK/hs I - 4679 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CALI F, 92008 FEBRUARY 18, 1984 SUBJECT: SUNNY CREEK SPECI FI c PLAN DEAR MR l HOLZMI LLER, THE SUNNY CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN CAME TO us SECOYD HA EXPRESS OUR DISAGREEMENT WITH THE DOCUMENT, ALSO I RE- RECENTLY] QUEST AGAIN THAT WE BE PUT ON THE MAILING LIST TO RECEIVE AS PROPERTY OWNERS OF 94 ACRES, WE D LIKE TO INFORMATION REGARDING OUR PROPERTY] PAST EXPERIEYCE HAS TAUGI~T us SOME HARD LESSO~JS, THE SHOULD HAVE WORRIED: LAST YEAR WE WERE PRESENT AT A MEETING AT GROSSES AND A FURTHER ONE AT CITY HALL REGARDING DENSITY IN THE SUNNY CREEK AREA, WE EXPRESSED CONCERN AND A DESIRE TO MAINTAIN OUR PROPERTY IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE MANDAN PROJECT, IT A MOBILE HOME PARK IN THE VALLE~(HIGH DENSITY) , NOT TO PHRASES "DON T WORRY,,,IT S NOT CAST IN CEMENT CAN WORK IT OUT LATER WERE USED TO PACIFY US IN THE CASE OF THE AGUA hEDIONDA SPECIFIC I'LAN, AND "WE WE NOW KNOW WE THE ESTABLISHED DENSITY i IS VISUALLY MORE CONNECTED TO THE CARLSBAD a IGHLANDS AREA, MENTION LEI~URE TECH, TO THE EAST, CLUDING GRANITE OUTCROPPINGS) IS GOING TO SUPPLY OPEN SPACE CONSTRAINTS AND WILL DEMAND PLANNING INGENUITY, WE DO NOT BELIEVE OUR PROPERTY SHOULD BE TIED TO DENSITY THE TOPOGRAPHY(1N- PROBLEMS ALONG SUNNY CREEK, RECENTLY, WE ATTENDED THE _COUNCIL MEETING AT WHICH THE GEN- ERAL PLAN WAS DISCUSSED, ZONING ON THAT PLAN IS b-& I iHE PLANNING STAFF,.DEMONSTRATED CLEARLY THAT THE GENERA LAN WAS WORKING, ClUR PROPERTY WE DO NOT WANT IT CHANGED, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVES AND STUDIES ALL DEVELOPMENT MAPS AND HAS AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT OR DENY THE PLANS, SURELY THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN WORKING IN THE PAST, WHY NOT ALLOW - IT TO CONTINUE WORKING IN THE FUTURE, IN CLOSING, WE WANT TO REEMPHASIZE OUR OPPOSITION TO THE SUNNY CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AS IT AFFECTS OUR PROPERTY, - - LAW OFFICES OF SWIRSKY 8 SAUER AN ASSOCIATION INCLUDING MAILING ADDRE' PAUL S SWIRSKY A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION WILLIAM N SAUER, JR POST OFFICE BOX 2745 JEFFERSON STREET A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TELEPHONE (619) 729- 1197 Februarv 17,1954 Mr. Michael (7. Holzmiller Land Use Planning Manager Developmental Services Land Use Planning Office City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 Fie: Sunny Creek Specific Plan Dear Mr. Holzmiller; The undersigned is acting as the attornev for Banning Cantari as Executor of the Will of Joseph Cantarini and Banning Cantarini an individual. Mr. Banning Cantarini owns a portion of the Canta Ranch as an individual and acts as Executor of the estate interes He also acts as atttorney in fact for the other record owners, so that he controls and speaks for all owners of the Cantarini Ranch The Cantarini Ranch consists of 141.62 acres set forth in vour Su Creek specific plan mao and is listed under Countv Assessor's nur 209-070-01 and 209-070-02. For the last several years the Cantarini Qanch owners and 0th property owners within the snecific plan area have relied upon th general plan of the City of Carlsbad for zoninq in the specific a and have expended thousands of dollars in reliance uDon the aener plan. To date, I have found no property owner in the snecific area who has requested this specific plan. My investiqation has revealed that the property owners involved object to the plan whi in effect does not allow the property owners to develop their lan based upon the existing qeneral plan of the City of Carlsbad, whi they have relied upon. In my opinion the proposed Sunny Creek Specific Plan is an arbitrary action by the City of Carlsbad to the detriment of the property owners, based upon their tentative plans for development of the property in accordance with the general plan of the City of Carlsbad. -1- - - Page 2 Letter to Mr. Michael J. Holzmiller February 17,1984 I must point out that at this time the City of Carlsbad is assisting the property owners in the specific plan area in the creation of a College-Cannon Assessment District to provide major thoroughfares for the area as well as property located outside of the specific plan area. At the same time you are recommending that the utilization of the property in the specific plan area for development be downgraded thereby placing an additional burden on each living unit developed under your proposed specific plan. I am of the opinion that these two projects, namely the College-Cannon Assessment District and the Sunny Creek Specific , Plan are incompatible and not to the best interests of the property owners and the City of Carlsbad. The owners of the Cantarini Ranch strongly object to the Sunny Creek Specific Plan that you have outlined in your reuort and map. Sincerely, ,/=7 ._ 6 $E-u-. 4 ..<* ’>& A?, ip PAIJL S. SllrIRSKY PSS/ss cc: Mr. Cantarini Mr. Gaiser I w I1 RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA P. 0. BOX 463, CARLSBAD, CALmORNIA 92008 TEL. 729-3066 Feb. 20, 1984 Michael J. I-lolzmiller Land Use Planning Manager 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA. 92008 Subject: Sunny Creek Specific Plan Dear Mr. Iiolzmiller: As a one half owner of 94 acres included in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan I want to make a strong protest about the specific plan proposed by the planning staff. Below are comments about the need for a specific plan for this area. Generally, although not always, specific plans are originated by land owners or developers asking for certain changes or adaptions to the zoning on a particular property. We as land- owners have made no such request. A developer Steven Berrie has talked to members of the planning staff about our propert3 He will be coming to the City with a plan which will not require a change in the General Plan nola a change in zoning. As a landowner I do not wGnt the City staff planning our property for US. When the Mandana property was being approved there was talk about what would be done with other nearby properties. The idea was to reduce the density on'these properties. 'dhy must we along with the Cantarinis and other, suffer the effect downzoning of our property and loss of value because the Mandana owners agreed to I unit per acre? i'he properties are really quite different. Our property is on top of a hill wit1 views to the ocean and the mountains. The Mandana prpperty is mostly on a south slope looking into Agua Hedionda creek ar facing a steep hill on the south side of the creek. Maybe lax lots make sense on their land. The area of our land that has been reduced to 3 units per acre Qaries from nearly flat to rolling, the most developable part of our land. Uqfortunatly the land included in the Sunny Creek Specific Pra is under the incoming flight pattern of Palomar IYlcClellan air; port, The Staff is trying to have builders produce estate ty-p lots which are very expensive to build. To make sense an expensive lot will have an expensive home. I am sure there is not now nor will there ever be a market for all the estate type lots that the planning staff envisions on the more than 4 acres included in the proposed specific plan, Who will want t spend $200,000. to $300,000. on a home and lot under the flig pattern. The other problem is that the land does not lend its to single family, -10,000 sq. ft. lots because of the slopes. The City approved lvCarlsbad Iiighlandstf, and asked for moderate priced housing on some of the best hiltops within the City boundries. This action set the tone for the rest of the nortk east cornor of the City, includeng our property. Another iterr 0 0 -2- to remember is that across a completly artificial city boundry in Oceanside, Leisure Teck is now building a retirement community which will have more than 4 dwelling units per acre. During the discussion of densities which took place when Mandana was being approved there were comments by City staff such as rtDonlt worry we will work with you on planning and de I fr sities" or "This is only a preliminary look at the land". that is true then let the landowner bring in sometning to look at. We do not want your staff doing the planning before we even have a chance, We have learned from bitter experience that once a line is drawn or a paragraph written by a City staff member it is nearly impossible to have that road, green belt or paragraph changed. -It does not matter how quickly the work was done or how little thought went into the drawing of a line it becomes nearly sacred. .For this reason I am against having the staff do anything with my property. When I or a developer come to the City with an idea or plan that is the time for the staff to become involved, The topography and environmental constraints of our property dictate that a specific plan will be submitted to the City. The staff has plenty of opportunitv at that time for input in the planning of the land. I ask that you do not put further donstraints such as reduced density on the property before we.come'to the staff with our ideas. At a recent Council meeting the planning department presented a report which showed that the Carlsbad General Plan is in fact working well. If that is true there is no need to make arbitrary changes in the present zoning by the use of a specific plan. In brief I do not want my property included in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Give Steve Berrie an opportunity to show you what he has in mind. He must follow.present Carlsbad development standards. I know he will have lots of open space, protect the environment, and present a quality plan for our property. YOU and your staff will have ample opportunity to critique his ideas when they come through normal channels. Please do not set up more arbitrary rules before you have used the present system and see what he wants to do with the land. Sincerely yours, W. AlJan Kelly r l * , . . ‘j . c 0 MANDANA CORPORATION 18552 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 341 Irvine, California 92715 February 3, 1984 Mike Holzmiller Land Use Planning Manager CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Paul Kulkas Re: Proposed City of Carlsbad Sunny Creek Specific Plan Gentlemen: Mandana Corporation and its development consultants have re- viewed the proposed Sunny Creek Specific Plan prepared by the Land Use Planning Office and wish to make the following observations and comments. First of all, we commend you for the time and effort spent by your office and staff in preparing the draft specific plan. We concur with the stated purpose of the specific plan; to wit: to provide standards for developing and maintaining a rural-type environment in the Sunny Creek area. However, we are also of the opinion that the density boundaries would more properly be made uniform and consistent throughout the Sunny Creek area, rather than the arbitrary density boundaries shown on your draft specific plan. Density should be determined by design philosophies and guidelines and should not be esta- blished by the arbitrary placement of a density bo.undary. Using the westerly boundary of CT83-9, Ridge Ranch (formerly Carlsbad Ridge), as an example, the specific plan, as proposed, would permit development of two dwelling units per acre on one side of the boundary line shown, while restricting develop- ment to one dwelling unit per acre on the other side of the same line. As a result, physical and aesthetic separation becomes manufactured and not natural, least of all designed. It is our opinion that the density ranges should be re-evaluated to provide for density consistency throughout the Sunny Creek area. As the proposal presently stands, other property in the Sunny Creek area, practically adjacent to our Ridge Ranch property would have a permissible density up to four times Page Two February 3, 1984 CITY OF CARLSBAD greater than our property. Perhaps the best means of remedying this situation would be to increase our permissible density to at least 0-2 dwelling units per acre. Another possible alternative would be to provide for a density of 0-4 dwelling units per acre for the entire Sunny Creek area, thereby leaving implementation of the specific plan purposes and intent to proper site development on a site-by-site basis. Any develop- ment then could be required to respect the natural environ- ments of Los Monos Canyon, Sunny Creek, etc., while achieving the rural character desired by the proposed specific plan. Thank you for the consideration of and attention to the above comments. Respectfully, MANDANA CORPORATION BY: A. GHAHREMANI, President C. e. ni.- BY+/ v - a SUNNYCREEK SPECIFIC PLAN Introduction The purpose of the Sunnycreek Specific Plan is to establish standards for developing a rural-type environment in an area bounded by College Avenue, Cannon Road, the Sunnycreek biological habitat and the Dawson Ecological Preserve (Exhibit 'A'), The intent of this specific plan is to allow development of this area in conformance with the general plan while preserving the rural and environmentally sensitive character of the area. The specific plan will identify the major environmental features of the site. Also, the specific plan will indicate the permitted uses, allowable maximum density, development standards and design criteria which all developments shall adhere. The intent of these standards is to provide for development that is consistent with the intent and purpose of maintaining a rural character and environment in the area. I , Environmental Features The Sunnycreek Specific Plan area contains and is bounded by significant environmental resources. The southern boundary of the planning area is the Sunnycreek drainage basin. This is a well-developed riparian woodland which follows the Agua Hedionda Creek. The tree canopy is formed by willows, cottonwoods, western sycamore, and live oak. This habitat contains 39 observed bird species of which 29 are associated with the riparian woodland.* The eastern boundary of the specific plan is the Los Monos Canyon containing the Dawson Ecological Preserve, This preserve contains rare plant species of mediterranean variety, A portion of this reserve was destroyed by a recent fire, however, the overall resource value of this preserve is still high. The Los Monos Canyon and the Sunnycreek drainage basin is part of the Agua Hedionda Creek. The northern boundary of the study area is the future alignment of Cannon Road, the Carlsbad Highlands project, and the Leisure World project in Oceanside. The portion of the Carlsbad Highlands project that borders the specific plan area consists of a significant oak woodland riparian habitat that will be preserved as open space. * Source - Del Mar Financial Draft EIR - w The western boundary of the study area is the alignment of College Avenue. The planning area is unique in that it is self contained in terms of street Circulation patterns. Access to the area can only be from either College Avenue or Cannon Road. The property will not be subjected to through traffic to the east or south. The study area itself is made up of a series of ridges and minor drainage basins. The topography can be considered slightly to moderately steep in most places, and severely steep in some areas. The ridges and drainage basins trend predominately towards the west and southwest. As a result of both natural and man made causes, several small ponds have been formed throughout the area. Specifically, the Mandana property and the Cantarini property contain several of these ponds. From a planning standpoint, the major environmental features suggest developable and nondevelopable areas of the plan. These areas are shown on the environmental constraints map (Exhibit IB'). The sunnycreek drainage area and the Dawson ecological preserve are indicated as open space and development would not be permitted in these areas. Also, the relatively steeper portions of the site (25% slope) will require either strict grading practices to minimize any adverse environmental impacts or the prohibition of any development of these areas. The pond areas are considered to have some aesthetic value and for that reason should be preserved or enhanced at the time of future development. 11. Density The purpose of the density regulations of this specific plan is to refine the overall 0-4 du/acre density range of the general plan by providing a transition from College Boulevard and Cannon Road to Los Monos Canyon. All developments within this specific plan area shall comply with the density ranges as shown on Exhibit "C". In determining said density, the City Council or Planning Commission, whichever is the final decision making body, shall ensure that the project's density is compatible with adjacent development. Any existing separate parcel located within the Sunnycreek Biological Habitat or Los Monos Canyon shall be permitted to develop at a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre. 111. Developmental Regulations The purpose of the developmental regulations of this specific plan are to insure a rural type environment. The primary regulations relate to large front setbacks and separation between dwelling units. -2- - - A. Permitted Uses ~11 uses, accessory usesI and conditional uses permitted in the R-E zone shall be allowed in the specific plan area. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the zoning ordinance, all development for residential purposes shall consist of single family detached units. B. Development Standards 1) Building Height - No building in the specific plan area 2) Front Yard shall exceed a height of 35 feet. Through Street. Every building located on a through public or private street shall have a front yard setback of at least 70 feet. Loop and Cul-de-sac Streets. Every building located on a loop or cul-de-sac public or private street shall have a front yard setback of at least 40 feet. Buildings or structures may occupy a portion of the front yard as follows: (a) Fences of wood or wood and masonry combination, chain link or equal quality, not to exceed five feet in height, provided the fence is at least fifty percent open and is located at least ten feet from the front property line; (b) Roofed shelter for animals, open on at least three sides, provided it is located at least twenty feet from any property line fronting on a public street or easement; (c) The Planning Commission may approve the construction of dwellings and garages provided they are located at least twenty feet from the street property line in cases where the difference in elevation of the required front yard setback line and the center line of the street exceed fifteen feet. Application for such reduction in required front yard setback shall be made by site development plan, as provided in Chapter 21 .O6. 3) Side Yards (a) In the specific plan area, for a standard subdivision, an interior side yard shall not be less than fifteen feet in width and street side yard shall not be less than forty feet in width. The minimum width of a street side yard may be reduced to 20 feet if located adjacent to a cul-de-sac or loop public or private street. The Planning Commission may approve the construction of dwellings and garages, provided they are located at least twenty feet from the street property line in cases where the difference in elevation of the required street side yard setback line and the center line of the street exceed fifteen feet. Application for such reduction in required street side yard setback shall be made by site development plan, as provided in Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; -3- - - (b) In a planned development, the interior side yard requirement may be reduced, however, the distance between any dwelling units shall be a minimum of thirty feet. 4) Placement of Buildings, Placement of buildings on any lot shall conform to the following: occupy any portion of a required yard; habitation, shall observe a distance from any rear property line the equivalent of twice the required interior side yard; habitation and detached accessory buildings shall not be less than ten feet; this chapter shall conform to all other provisions of law governing the same, and no pen, coop, stable or barn shall be erected within forty feet of any building used for human habitation or within twenty-five feet of any property line; further than five hundred feet from a fire hydrant shall not be issued without the approval of the fire chief. The fire chief may require the installation of additional safety equipment, including fire hydrants or stand pipes, as a condition of such approval. 5) Minimum Lot Area. The minimum required area of a lot shall be determined as follows: Density Provided by Specific Plan Minimum Lot Area (a) Except as otherwise stated herein, no building shall (b) Any building, any portion of which is used for human (c) The distance between buildings used for human (d) The keeping of all domestic animals provided for in (e) A building permit for a dwelling unit to be located 0-1 du's/acre 1 Acre 0-2 du's/acre 1/2 Acre 0-3 du's/acre 15,000 Sq.Ft, 0-4 du I s/acre l0,OOO Sq,Ft. The minimum lot area may be reduced if a planned development permit is approved by the Planning Commission. In approving any such reductions, the Planning Commission shall find that the specific plan's intent and purpose of maintaining a rural environment is maintained. Such reductions shall only be made if it is clearly shown by the applicant that such reductions are needed to preserve existing significant environmental features and that an equivalent amount of common open space will be provided throughout the development. 6) Subdivision of Land. The subdivision of land in the specific plan area shall b e subject to the following: the city's subdivision regulations (Title 2O), except as specified herein; (a) Subdivisions shall be subject to all provisions of -4- v - , (b) In addition, the Planning Commission and City Council will review the tentative map for compliance with the intent and purpose of the specific plan and with the following standards : characteristics of the area within the specific plan area; with the terrain by following natural drainage courses, ridge lines and tops of graded slopes, wherever practicable; usable access without undue alteration of the terrain. submit a preliminary grading plan to the city with the tentative map. The preliminary grading plan shall show existing topography, preliminary grading, drainage, drives, building pads, streets and trails. In addition, the preliminary grading plans shall indicate all areas of mature trees and native perennial vegetation. the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council must also find that a subdivision is consistent with the requirements of this section. Failure of a subdivision to meet the standards of this section shall be grounds for denial. 7) Modifications of Public Improvements. All public facilities, dedications and improvements shall be required in accord with this code and adopted policies and standards of the city; however, as hereinafter provided, the Planning Commission or City Council, whichever is the final decision making body, may modify certain special public improvement standards provided the design of these modified improvements is related to the function, topography and needs of the area. Any such modifications shall be reflected as conditions of approval to a tentative subdivision map. Street improvements and dedications for streets inside subdivisions may be modified as follows: (a) Right-of-way for streets may be reduced provided that they not be reduced to less than forty feet; (b) Parking lane may be deleted on one side of streets; (c) Pavement width may be reduced on streets serving eight or fewer units to twenty-eight feet with parking on one side, or thirty-two feet with parking on both sides; (a) Pavement width may be reduced on streets serving more than eight units to thirty feet with parking on one side, or thirty-six feet with parking on both sides; (e) All or part of the required sidewalks, curbs, gutters or drainage structures may be waived or modified if it is found that such improvements are unwarranted and would distract from the rural character of the area. If such requirements are waived, the City Engineer may require that drainage easements and/or drainage releases be made part of the tract map to ensure proper drainage over private property. (i) Preservation of the rural and natural (ii) Property lines shall be designed in keeping (iii) Each lot of the subdivision is buildable with (c) To facilitate this review, the applicant shall (d) In addition to the findings required by Title 20 and -5- - w (f) Horizontal and vertical alignment standards may be modified or waived to reduce grading. In such cases, an adequate right-of-way shall be provided to accommodate possible future corrections to meet city standards. that street right-of-way be privately maintained under a property owners' association or may accept an offer of dedication. If privately owned, the streets shall be open to the public by easement . Any modification pursuant to this section shall not (9) The City Council shall have the option of requiring relieve the subdivider from providing public facilities, dedications and improvements that also provide services necessary for the welfare of the general public, as required by the general plan, applicable specific plans or city ordinances or policies. 8) Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. The filing of a tentative map in the specific plan area shall include the submittal of proposed private deed covenants, conditions and restrictions. As a minimum these documents shall include the following provisions: (1) Lots in the specific plan area may not be resubdivided . (2) Minimum floor area for dwelling units shall be included. (3) Provisions for the maintenance of private property, including private streets, pedestrian and equestrian trails and open areas, are in a manner consistent with the purposes of this zone. provisions shall be included . (4) If custom lots are proposed, maximum grading (5) The city shall be a party. (6) The covenants, conditions and restrictions may not be amended without the approval of the Planning Commission or City Council, whichever is the final decision making body, they must be approved and recorded prior to approval of the final map . IV. Design Standards A. Grading The grading of any project within the specific plan area shall comply with the following design standards: 1) Grading for large subdivisions shall be minimized, however, where grading is necessary it shall blend with the natural topography wherever practicable; 2) Grading shall be contoured to blend with the natural topography and shall avoid sharp angles wherever practicable; Large cut and fill slopes shall be avoided wherever possible . 3) -6- - - f B. Building Orientations Building orientations shall comply with the following design standards: 1) The orientation of buildings within a subdivision shall 2) Unique features of individual sites (e.g., mature trees, rock outcroppings, mounds, etc.) shall be preserved; 3) Buildings shall be spaced and oriented in such a way as to project a sense of openness and randomness and, in so doing, keeping with the intent of maintaining a rural character: all practical view points, adjoining developments, streets, trails and other view corridors. relate to the natural topography. 4) Buildings shall have a desirable visual appearance from C. Streetscape Streetlights, street signs, bus benches and all other street furniture shall be of a rustic character. Detailed plans for said street furniture showing the types of materials and colors shall be submitted to and approved by the Land Use Planning Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the specific plan area. -7- i -.+---*.--+--+-- I 1 0 5 -- - - c -I .+ .' - -! 1 -. -. .. ~ ? ._.- -+---*--6- -cp- -*- * .. I - -- -. . b -* - -+---e-- -. -.~--m*--+l---+--q I