HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-02-07; City Council; 9842; ZONE 8 - LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN CITY OF CARLSBAD,
I *- A.
n w
PC e 3
>o
.. z 0
e 6
5 0
6
z
/i UP GAHLSBAU - AUtNw BILL
DEPT. I
C,TYA MTG. 2/7/eff
DEPT. GM CITY M
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Gv
AB#- TITLE: ZONE 8 - LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN CITY OF CARLSBAD
The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council a Resol uti on No. r9-32 approving the Negati e Declaration issued by P1 anni ng Di rector and adopt Resol uti on No. #?-X? approving the L Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8.
ITEM EXPLANATION
Zone 8 is the seventh property owner-initiated and privately prepared L Facilities Management Plan to be heard by the City Council. A plan for zone was presented to the Planning Commission and City Council previous1 July of 1988. At that time, the plan was not in a condition such that s
about to expire. Therefore, the plan was denied without prejudice. The now meets the City Requirements and is ready for approval.
On December 21, 1988, the Planning Commission approved this plan on a vot 4 to 3, as described in the minutes from the Planning Commission me€ attached as Exhibit 6. At issue in the Commission's consideration of this was the use of leased and joint-use areas to meet the park standard. majority of the Commission voted to recommend approval of the plan with the condition as recommended by staff. The recommended park condition is bas€ the existing parks inventory as contained in the Citywide Facilities Improvement Plan and adopted parks inventory, which includes leased and jc use areas for purposes of meeting the performance standard.
This local plan analyzes all 11 public facilities to determine whether conform with the City's adopted performance standards. A1 1 publ ic faci performance standards are currently being met and will continue to be met a zone builds out.
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 contains specific condil which must be complied with prior to approval of the first final map i ssuance of a grading permit or bui 1 ding permit, whichever occurs first, w' this zone. These conditions include providing the City a detailed finar plan guaranteeing construction of all publ ic facility improvements as ident. in the plan. Until this financing mechanism has been approved by the Cit; final maps, grading permits, or building permits will be approved in Zor however, staff will begin accepting and processing applications within this once the plan has been adopted by the City Council.
Attached as Exhibit No. 4, is the Executive Summary from the Local Facil Management P1 an.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning Director on April 29, indicating that the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 is
Declaration was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on Dec 21, 1988.
could recommend approval j but the state-mandated time 1 imits for processing
anticipated to have any adverse impacts on the environment. The Neg
I
L ? m
'> $.z$e 2 of Agenda Bill No. es
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 will not cause any significant environmental impacts. The plan is a public facilities planning document that implements Carlsbad's General Plan. The plan makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply of public facilities and outlines the provision of adequate public facilities concurrent with the estimated demands. The plan recognizes that CEQA review will be required prior to the initialization of any public or private project that is generally discussed in this plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff time has been utilized in the preparation of this plan. These costs will
be recovered through the processing fee established by the City Council. It is anticipated that further staff time will be necessary to monitor this plan and other zone plans on a yearly basis. The implementation of this plan, however, should help future fiscal planning by estimating the timing of future public facilities and their costs.
EXHIBITS
1) City Council Resolution No. 2) City Council Resolution No.
3) Local Map - Facilities Management Zone 8 4) Executive Summary - Zone 8 5) Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2805 and 2806 6) Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes dated December 21, 1988
f7-3A. 89-33'.
b
b i- ri
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
. 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v w
RESOLUTION NO. 89-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
PLAN 8.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
February 7, , 1989, hold 2
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to conside
request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon heari
considering all testimony and arguments, examining the
study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, cons
any written comments received, the City Council consider
factors relating to the Negative Declaration including P
Commission Resolution No. 2805 granting Planning Corm
approval of said Negative Declaration: and
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council
City of Carlsbad, California as follows:
1) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
2) That the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning D on April 29, 1988 was prepared in compliance wi
California Environmental Quality Act and Title 19
Carlsbad Municipal Code.
3) That there is no substantial evidence that the pro: conditioned may have a significant effect on the envir
4) That the City Council of the City of Carlsbad incor
into this resolution Planning Commission Resolution N
including findings contained therein.
....
-*--
e...
....
b ' 4k bl
- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
- 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
? w
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
Carlsbad City Council held on the 7th day of Februar
, 1989 by the following vote, to wit:
Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Mamaux and Larson
None
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT: Council Member Pettine
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City dlerk
( SEAL )
-2-
,
b
& +J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
- 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1c w
89-33 RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
WHEREAS, a Local Facilities Management Plan ha
prepared for Local Facilities Management Zone 8 in accordanc
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on December 2
hold a duly noticed public hearing as required by law to cc
said plan and at the conclusion of the hearing adopted Res
No. 2806 making findings and recommending that the City (
adopt a plan: and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued
Planning Director on April 29, 1988 indicating that the
Facilities Management Plan is not anticipated to ha
significant adverse impact on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council at their meeting of Fe
19 89 , 1989 held a duly noticed public hear
considered all testimony and arguments of anyone desirin?
heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City
of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows:
1) That the above recitations are true and correct.
2) That the findings and conditions of the Planning Corn in Resolution No. 2806 also constitute the findir conditions of the City Council
3) That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone December 21, 1988 on file with the City Clerk and incor
herein by reference is hereby approved. Any deve occurring within the boundaries of Zone 8 shall comp all the terms and conditions of said plan.
,
b . +'- .I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
- 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
? w
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
7th day of February Carlsbad City Council held on the
1989 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Mamaux and Larson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Pettine / @ d/c., / &c LAUDE 'A:- LEWIS , Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City klerk
(SEAL)
-2-
b 0 w EXH I
,I P
$ij
CII” 01 Clrl.
Garlh M-~.m.o
JANUARY
I
EXHIBIT 4 b w a
k- , ,a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone E
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The incorporates and implements the 1986 Citywide Facilities
Improvements Plan. 1
The plan begins with the assumptions used to generate the
out projections for residential and non-residential develo within Zone 8. Build out is the type and amount of lanc planned for by the City's General Plan. The plan then phasl estimates the zone's development on a yearly basis until
out is reached. Phasing is done to predict future fac demands. The adequacy of public facilities is analyzed acco
to this demand. The analysis includes an inventory of exi:
and proposed facilities, a phasing schedule that establishe:
timing for the provision of facilities in relationship to del and a financing plan that establishes methods of funding nt
facilities. Since the plan is a regulatory document, facility section contains conditions to ensure that facil
will conform to the adopted performance standards. Mand,
compliance with the plan and conditions will assure the adec
of facilities within Zone 8.
Exhibit 1 on page 8 indicates where Zone 8 is within the ( Exhibit 2 on page 9 provides a brief synopsis of the I Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8. Exhibit 3 on pag provides a one page highlight of the synopsis.
prepared pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program
FINANCE OVERVIEW
In preparing this Local Facilities Management Plan, it has bc
infrastructure requirements of this zone and of the nortk
quadrant. However, a combination of financing techniques
address both the need for upgrading facilities enabling the conform with the adopted performance standards and ensc conformance of future facilities as development occurs. A cc set of goals for the financing of the major facilities ca stated as follows:
clear that no one financing mechanism can satisfy the cor
1. Provide feasible financing techniques to ensure
that all facilities are provided in conformance
with the adopted performance standards.
1 The 1986 CFIP was adopted by City Council on 9-2
(CC Resolution No. 8797).
1
b 0
c 1'
2. Provide for the implementation of financing techn
which consider the financial limitations assoc
with the high costs of infrastructure construction
Provide for financing options which consider bot1
needs of the City and the property owners.
The adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan ident
the various ways that capital improvements could be fina
The capital facilities necessary to support the City of Car
generally fall into two categories -- those provide( developers as a condition of development approvals, and
financing sources.
It is the City's responsibility to plan for the constructior
maintenance of City projects and to finance these projects i best possible way. The following describes some of the fina
options available.
A. Cash/Pay-as-you-qo financinq. The City has used method of financing to pay for most cay improvements constructed to date.
In concept, the City charges the development commi
a series of fees which provide the source of incor pay for capital projects. When enough cash has
assembled, the City constructs the next capital prl in order of priority. This method forces the Cil
delay construction of various projects until funds
been collected. These fees include:
1. Public Facilities Fees
2. Park-In-Lieu Fees
3. Planned Local Drainage Fees
4. Traffic Impact Fees
5. Bridge and Thoroughfare Benefit District Fees
6. Sewer Fees
7. Water Fees
Special Districts collect their own various fees.
3.
provided by the City through a system of fees, taxes, or l
B. Reimbursement hsreements. In certain instance developer may ask the City to move a project forwa:
time and to construct a facility before funds have collected. When this occurs, the City could adopt
policy of having the interested developer construcl
project based on a reimbursement agreement.
would pay the developer back for the portion of project that was to be funded by City resources 07 period of time.
The
Payments would commence at the
2
1 w w
'4 J
the City had originally scheduled the constructi
the facility in the Capital Improvement Program.
Moving the project forward in time is for the be
of the developer. Therefore, the City's rep? would be limited to the cost of the public porti
the project and no interest would accrue tc
developer. The use of this method of project finc
does not eliminate the developer's obligation t City fees. The developer must still pay all City
associated with a development.
C. Credit for City Fees. When it is in the p: interest to construct certain public facilities e2 than would be possible under a pay-as-you-go prc the City can consider giving a developer credi
fees that would otherwise be paid, up to the co
the public improvement. These credits would reduc
amount of fees payable in future years from a CE
development.
Fee credits must be used carefully to avoid elimir
of income from capital fees necessary to finance
projects. Two alternatives exist for fee credits:
-- Full Fee Credit immediately: Under this option, the developer who builds a public
improvement would be eligible to deduct 100%
of the cost of the improvement from fees
payable. Once the fee credit is exhausted, the developer begins paying fees as normally assessed by the City. Under this option the developer gets immediate credit for the total
cost of a project.
-- Partial Fee Credit - Credit over time: In this option, the developer who builds a
public improvement receives a credit for the cost of a public improvement. However, the use of that credit is spread over a number of
years. This allows the City to continue to
receive at least a portion of fees designated for other capital projects while giving the
public improvements that would have otherwise been paid for by the City. No interest would
accrue to the developer as a part of this arrangement.
developer credit for the construction of
3
i e
c > I I
D. Debt Financins. A range of debt financing alternative
available to the City. If it is in the public intere: push a project ahead and to construct an improvement b
funds are on hand, debt financing may be the answer. I pro j ect is being pushed forward for the convenienc benefit of a developer, that developer should bear the
of issuance and interest over the life of the debt i
The actual mechanics of a debt issue and how to dete
the developer's responsibility to support these costs 1 be defined as the method of debt financing was chosen.
Some of the debt financing vehicles available are I below:
Assessment Districts:
Under Council Policy No. 33, the City may assist a deve
in the construction of various public improvements tha' be financed through the use of assessment districts if
is significant public benefit from the improvement.
cases where a City contribution is planned, the City ma! a developer to pay the City contribution. The deve:
could then be reimbursed at a later date or given
credits.
Special Benefit Districts:
State law allows the formation of a variety of spt
benefit districts. These districts may be used to func construction of parks, libraries, police or fire facilil
and street lighting systems to name a few. These disti
may be formed by a vote of the property owners who
assess themselves for the cost of improvements.
The developer and/or land owner bears the burden of
service payments. City participation in a district of
type is possible to the extent of public improvements
would have otherwise been the responsibility of the C
However, the movement of capital improvements forwarc
offsetting interest, debt issue, or other additional CoI
Community Facility District: (Mello-Roos)
Under Council Policy No. 38, the City may assist thr Mello-Roos financing the construction of public facili
in conjunction with development. Mello-Roos Commu Facility Districts (CFDs) operate similar to assess
districts, but provide a more flexible tool for governme
entities to finance a wider range of public infrastruct again through the issuance of tax exempt bonds. Facili which may be financed by a Mello-Roos District inc
time would require some concession from the develope
4
L 0 0
'I I I
parks, parkways, open space, schools, libraries,
pipelines, telephone lines and can be used to elim
special assessment liens. These districts may alsc
operating costs to the extent the services are in add
to those already being provided prior to the formatic
the district.
Revenue Bonds:
The City may elect to issue revenue bonds to fi improvements related to utility functions or other
services that generate a fee for service,
City functions could support the use of revenue bonds public improvements are being installed ahead of schedu accommodate a developer, the City would expect the deve to offset many of the costs of such an issue as desc
above.
Tax Increment Bonds:
although
Public improvements in the City's redevelopment area Ci financed through the use of tax increment bonds.
Redevelopment Agency has developed a plan for
construction of public improvements using this methc financing. A developer asking for public improvements '
constructed ahead of schedule must consider the age]
ability and willingness to defer other projects.
Certificates of Participation:
Certain public facilities such as buildings can be finl through Certificates of Participation. This is in effc
lease agreement between the City and another agency
developer wishing to push projects forward might. con: constructing facilities such as a library or fire stl
using this financing tool.
bear certain costs or to accept credit in lieu of pa;
for certain improvements.
General Obligation Bonds:
The City has the ability to issue General Obligation I to fund the construction of public improvements. Thir
only be done with the approval of 2/3 of the voters .
election. It is unlikely that the City will have
ability to use this method of funding public projects 1
benefit specific developments.
Financinq Policies
The adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements
contains the following financing policies:
The developer may be askc
5
'A b 0 V
I
1. Recognize that those projects identified in the P
responsibility of the City to fund, however,
priority for funding projects is at the discretic
the City Council.
Facilities Fee Calculation are the ult
2. Recognize that the Capital Improvement Program
play a significant role in helping to esta
compliance with the adopted performance stand
Priority for the funding of projects should go tc fill areas or areas of the City where exi
deficiencies exist.
3. Agree to consider assisting developers with CrI against future fees, reimbursement agreements, fo
assessment districts, etc., only when it is clear the public interest to do so or to rectify p facility deficiencies and not to induce growt prematurely upgrading public facilities.
Recognize that all credit or reimbursement arrange
will be made based upon the City's plans for timi certain public facilities. For example, if a deve wanted to put in an improvement that the City ha1
planned for 5 years and was not necessary to recti existing deficiency, the City would not con
beginning to provide credits or reimbursement unti
5th year, if at all.
5. Recognize that public facility improvements mad front or ahead of City plans by developers must pr the funds necessary to cover annual operating cost
the facility until the time the City had previ planned to provide the facility.
6. With the recent reduction in residential densitie:
overall restriction on residential develop
recognize that it may be necessary to start cha
fees to commercial and industrial land uses in
where they are not presently assessed. With reduction in residential land uses and density, i be necessary to charge commercial and industrii make up the deficit.
4.
6
b 0 w
Financing Summary
This Local Facilities Management Plan has identified CE
facilities that will fall below the adopted performance star
without the proposed mitigation at some time during the coui
build out. The developers in Zone 8 propose to pr mitigation to bring them into conformance with the ad
performance standards. The specific mitigation for each fac is shown in the corresponding facility sections of this plan
This plan also identifies when future public facilitiez
needed as growth occurs to ensure compliance with the ad performance standards. A complete financing section is pro
at the end of this plan which provides a description 0.
facility improvements to be made, timing of improvements, estimates, and funding priorities.
7
8
m-=-m
GROWTH MANAGEMENT F'ROGRAMaY OF CARLSBAD
MANAGEMEL$U
ZONE ll" *r 8 8 KAUFMAN and BROAD imt - ~d, ~h mpr* CA mn
I e
EXHIBLT 2
As of December 21, 1988
ZONE 8 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY CHART
LFMP 88-8
City Administrative
Facilities adopted performance standard
Library Facilities Existing facilities meet
Existing facilities meet the
2006.
adopted performance standard
2003.
Wastewater
Treatment Capacity Existing facilities meet adopted performance standard
2000.
Parks Park ~istrict 1 (nortk quadrant) meets the adc performance standard with proposed mitigation measures
build out.
Drainage Drainage facilities will meet adopted performance standard the proposed mitigation measur
Circulation Circulation facilities will the adopted performance sta with the proposed mitigation
build out.
Fire Fire facilities meet the ad performance standard until out.
Open Space Existing open space meets adopted performance standard build out.
Schools Zone 8 will meet the ad performance standard until
out.
9
I 0 0 r
Sewer Collection System Sewer facilities in Zone 8 wil meet the adopted perfori standard with the pro1 mitigation measures until
out.
Water Distribution System Water service to Zone 8 will the adopted performance sta
with the proposed mitig;
measures until build out.
10
, 0 0 c.
EXHIBIT 3
ZONE 8 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET
LFMP 88-8
As of December 21, 1988
Conformance with Adopted
Facility Performance Standard
Citywide:
1) City Administrative Yes, until 2006. Facilities
2) Library Facilities Yes, until 2003.
3) Wastewater Treatment Yes, until 2000.
Capacity
Northwest Quadrant:
4) Parks Yes, with mitigation measi
Zone 8:
5) Drainage Yes, with mitigation measi
6) Circulation Yes, with mitigation measi
7) Fire Yes.
8) Open Space Yes.
9) Schools Yes.
10) Sewer Collection System Yes, with mitigation measi
11) Water Distribution System Yes, with mitigation measi
11
e ’-
EXHIBIT 4
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 8
LFMP 88-8
1. All development within Zone 8 shall conform to
provisions of Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Facilities Management Plan. and to the provisions and conditions of this 1
2. All development within Zone 8 shall be required to F
public facilities fee pursuant to the standards adopte the City Council on July 28, 1987, and as amended from to time and all other applicable fees. Development in
8 shall also be responsible for any additional fees t
incorporated into this plan that are found to be neces
to enable facilities to meet the adopted perforn standards.
3. The City of Carlsbad shall monitor all facilities in Zc
pursuant to Subsections 21.90.130(c), (d) and (e) of Carlsbad Municipal Code.
4. All development in Zone 8 shall be in conformance with
adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan as adc
Periodic amendment to the Zone 8 Local Facilities Manage
Plan is anticipated to incorporate newly acquired data
add conditions and upgrade standards as determined thr
the required monitoring program. Amendment to this Plan
be initiated by action of the Planning Commission,
Council or property owners at any time.
6. If a public facility or service is found not to bc
conformance with an adopted performance standard during
yearly monitoring, or at any other time, the matter wil
immediately brought before the City Council. If the
Council determines that a non-conformance does exist the
future building or development permits shall be is
unless an amendment to the CFIP or the LFMP for this zon
approved by the City Council which addresses those faci
shortfalls and brings those facilities into conformance
by City Council Resolution 8797 on September 23, 1986.
5.
the adopted performance standards.
7. After adoption of this Plan by the City Council, no built permits will be allowed unless the performance standards complied with. This includes all projects which were ex under Section 21.90.030(c) of the Carlsbad Municipal Cod
12
0
8. Approval of this LFMP does not constitute p environmental review for projects within Zone 8. All f\
projects within Zone 8 shall undergo environmental rc per Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Any mitigz
measures determined during a pro] ect ' s environmental rc shall be complied with in their entirety unless findin: overriding consideration are made by the City Council.
9. Approval of this Plan does not constitute p discretionary review for projects within Zone 8. All fi
projects shall undergo review per Title 21 of the Carl Municipal Code. The plan establishes the maximum allob
number of residential units for facilities planning purr
only. The plan does not'guarantee any specific resider
density.
13
e
t'
EXHIBIT 5
SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 8
LFMP 88-8
AS OF DECEMBER 21, 1988
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES
No special conditions are necessary at this time.
LIBRARY
No special conditions are necessary at this time.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY
The following actions shall be pursued jointly by each I district to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity th
the year 2000:
1. Monitor Encina treatment plant flows on a monthly bas: determine actual flow rates and to have an early warnir
capacity problems.
Actively pursue acceleration and phasing of treatment I Phase IV expansion to provide adequate capacity.
The six member agencies shall form an agreement to max.
the utilization of available treatment capacity at EI WPCF.
2.
3.
PARKS
. 1. All development in Zone 8 shall pay Park-in-Lieu Fees Public Facility Fees for Park District 1.
Prior to the recordation of the first final map, issuanl
a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs
within Zone 8, a Parks Agreement shall be require include the following provisions:
a. A letter of credit or other secured final
acceptable to the City in the amount of $771
guaranteeing the construction of 6.7 acres of park
from a financial institution and upon terms
conditions acceptable to the Finance Director and
Attorney, shall be provided at the time this agref
is executed.
2.
14
0
.A 1 @
b. Park operating costs shall be provided either throu letter of credit or other secured financing frc financial institution and upon terms and condit acceptable to the Finance Director and City Attor or the establishment of a Park District 1 Gr Management Fee that would cover the operating costs the Park. The amount of the costs and the time which the developers in Park District 1 woulc
responsible for these costs shall be provided
C. The Parks Agreement shall be consistent with
requirements of the City's Growth Management Progra
d. The Parks Agreement shall provide mechanisms
reimbursements, Park-In-Lieu fee credits and/or
credits.
No residential development will be allowed after 1992 UI
actions have been taken to construct additional
facilities.
within the Parks Agreement.
3.
DRAINAGE
1. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuancl grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs f within Zone 8, the developer(s) shall be required to:
a. Pay any drainage area fees established in
b.
current Drainage Master Plan; and
Execute an agreement to pay any drainage area established in the forthcoming revised ME
Drainage Plan.
2. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuancc
grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs f
within Zone 8, the developer(s) must provide the City w.
financing mechanism guaranteeing the construction of
necessary drainage facilities required to serve the pro1 development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
15
J 1 W m
q Specifically, these facilities shall include the follow
Location/Facility
Area A:
1. 54" Storm Drain
2. 36" Storm Drain
3. Desiltation Basin
Area E:
1. 30" Storm Drain
Area I:
1. 36" Storm Drain
2. 30" Storm Drain
Area J:
1. 30" Storm Drain
Area 0:
1. 30" Storm Drain
Area 0:
1. Desiltation Basin
3. Prior to the development of Macario Canyon Park, fundi] the following improvements shall be guaranteed:
Location/Facilitv
Macario Canyon Park:
1. Open Channel 7' deep
2. 72" Storm Drain
3. 54" Storm Drain
CIRCULATION
1. An on-going monitoring program shall be establishel evaluate the aspects of improvements, development, demand on circulation facilities. The required timir
improvements is based upon the projected demanc
timing may be modified without amendment to this ] however, any deletions or additions to the improvements require amending this local plan.
2. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuanc
grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs fir: Zone 8, detailed intersection graphics depicting exi:
and build out conditions shall be submitted and approvt
the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The reqi
development in the zone and the surrounding region.
16
1 0 0 4
intersection graphics are for those intersections ident
as being impacted by 20% or more of traffic generated this zone. These impacted intersections are identifit Appendix E.
3. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuanc grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs fir, Zone 8, a comprehensive financing program guaranteein?
construction of the following circulation improvements
be adopted:
A. Improvements Needed Now
None
B. Improvements Needed bv 1990
1. Construction of Cannon Road to half width j Arterial standards from El Camino Real to
Del Norte to include the following:
a. Grade to Major Arterial standards
b. Two full travel lanes
c. Fully landscaped median
d. Intersection improvements inclu installation of traffic signals at:
(1) El Camino Real and Cannon Road
(2)
Estimated Cost: $10,850,000
Completion Date: 1990
Cannon Road and Paseo Del Norte
2. Installation of a traffic signal at the C;
Road/I-5 off-ramp intersections.
Estimated Cost: $120,000
Completion Date: 1990
3. Construction of dual left turn lanes at CI Road and 1-5 Northbound and Southbound.
Estimated Cost: $93,000
Completion Date: 1990
17
5 I w W
I
C. ImDrovements Needed BY 1995
Construction of Cannon Road to full width 1
Arterial between Paseo Del Norte and El Camino Rea
Estimated Cost: $1,728,000
Completion Date: 1995
D. Improvements Needed By 2000
None
E. Improvements Needed Bv Build Out
None
FIRE
No special conditions are necessary at this .time.
OPEN SPACE
No special conditions are necessary at this time.
SCHOOLS
Prior to the recordation of any residential final map, issi
Zone 8, an agreement shall be entered into between Car.
Unified School District and the affected property owner(s)
shall provide for the following:
1. The deeding of an acceptable school site to the Car:
Unified School District if it is determined by the Disl a school within Zone 8 is warranted.
2. A financing plan approved by the City and Carlsbad Un: School District guaranteeing the construction of nece: elementary school facilities in Zone 8 pursuant to cond.
If any reimbursements and/or school fee credits are to be g.
the school aqreement/f inancing plan shall provide a mechaniz do so.
of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs firs1
#1.
18
. * L W W
SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM
1. No special conditions are required for Planning Area!
2. Special Conditions (except for Planning Areas "A" and
and llC1l in the Kelly Ranch portion of Zone 8.
are as follows:
a. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuan
grading permit or building permit, whichever o
first in Zone 8, a financing program guaranteeinc
construction of the South Agua Hedionda Interc from El Camino Real to the Vista-Carlsbad Interc
must be approved by the City.
b. Prior to issuance of any building permits in ZOI the City Engineer shall make a finding that the
Agua Hedionda Interceptor will be in place
operational to serve development within Zone 8.
c. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuan grading permits or building permits, whichever o first in Zone 8, a financing program guaranteeinc
construction of the necessary sewer collection s
by the City.
to serve the proposed development area must be app
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
1. Prior to the recordation of any final map, issuance grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs fir
Zone 8, the developers shall dedicate the Evans Reservoir site and appropriate easements to the Costa Municipal Water District to the satisfaction of the Dis
Engineer.
If this site has been previously purchased by an developer for the purpose of dedication to the Costa Municipal Water District, reimbursement of all associated with the acquisition of the site and approp
easements shall be made to that developer prior to recordation of the first final map, issuance of a gr permit or building permit, whichever occurs first in Zo
2. All development within Zone 8 shall pay the approp
connection fee as required by the Costa Real Municipal '
District.
19
,. e w
3. Prior to the recordation of a final map, issuance grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs fir!
of the following water facilities shall be approved: Zone 8 I a financing mechanism guaranteeing the construc
Facility Location Facility Lensth
(feet)
Area E 14" Water Main 2 , 400 Area F 14" Water Main 800
10" Water Main 400 Area H 14" Water Main 700
10" Water Main 500 Area I 10" Water Main 550
Area J 10" Water Main 850
Area K IO1' Water Main 600
Area L lot1 Water Main 500
Area M 10" Water Main 300
Area N 10" Water Main 400
. Area o 10" Water Main 800
Area P 10" Water Main 250
Area Q loll Water Main 400
Area R lot1 Water Main 350
Macario Canyon 12" Water Main 2,400
Area G 14" Water Main 1,200
20
*1
,0 a EXHlBlT 5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2805
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF PARK DRIVE, WEST OF ELCAMINO REAL, NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, AND EASTOF INTERSTATE 5.
APPLICANT: KAUFMAN AND BROADCASE NO.:LOCAL FACILITIES MASTER PLAN - ZONE 8
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of December, hold
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request,
and
9
II WHEREAS, at said public hearing,upon hearing and considering all
10
11
12
13
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as
14
I/follows:
15 II A)That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
l6 B)That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
17 Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declarationaccording to Exhibit "ND" dated April 29, 1988, and “PII”, dated April
18 20, 1988, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following
19 I
findings and conditions:
Findinqs:
20 1.The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 will not cause any
21 significant environmental impacts.The plan is a public facilities
planning document that implements the existing General Plan. The plan
22 makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply of publicfacilities,and outlines the provision of adequate public facilities
23 concurrent with estimated demands.The plan recognizes that CEQA review
will be required prior to mitigation of any public or private project
24 that is generally discussed in the plan.A Negative Declaration has beenissued on April 29, 1988 and recommended for approval by-the Planning
25 Commission on December 21, 1988.
26
27
////
/I/
28
‘.
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the F
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st
December, 1988, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES :
Commissioners: Schlehuber, Holmes, Hall & Marcu
Chairperson McFadden, Commi ssi oners I Schramm 1 I
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None. +.. %c&
EANNE B. MCFADDEN, Chair1 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST:
I, .”:: .( LC -qL it&& fT-+jhAL -7 MICHAEL J. HOLZhlf LLEd
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 2805 -2-
m, 2075 LAS PALMAS C
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
e
- PfANNlNG DEPARTMENT (619) 438-1161
&itp of &ari$€lab
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Kelly Ranch, Macario Canyon Park,
the Kirgis Property (APNs 201-101-12, 15; 208-020-28, 30;
010-03, 05, 07, 11-13; 212-080-19, 20)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Based on the City of Carlsbad’s Gel Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 pro’
for public facilities to meet adopted performance standards.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review o
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carl:
As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declari
that the project will not have a significant impact on
environment) is hereby issued for the subject pro:
Justification for this action is on file in the Plai
Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documenl
on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas D Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Pla
Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance.
a
DATED: April 29, 1988
CASE NO: LFMP 87-8 Planning Director
APPLICANT: Kaufman & Broad
PUBLISH DATE: April 29, 1988
BH:af
MICHAEL J. HOMMILLM
0 e
ENV1RONMTNL”TL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. LFMP 8
DATE : 4/20/88
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT : Kaufman & Broad
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 12520 Hiqh Bluff Dr.
Suite 120
(619) 259-6000(Brian Milich) San Dieso, CA 92130
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: September 24, 1987
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
YES MAYBE
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of
modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or
off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
0 m
YES MAYBE
2. & - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
c. Alteration of air movement,
odors?
moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of groupd
waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
-2-
e' a
YES MAY BE - NO
I_
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, X
crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing X
d. Reduction in acreage of any E
X - of plants? -
species? -
agricultural crop? -
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? -
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
- rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement Of
animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels?
Liqht and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light cr glare?
Land Use - Will the proposal have
significant results in the alteration of
the present or planned land use of an
area?
-
6.
7.
8.
-3-
e m
MAY BE \ YES
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
10. Risk of Upset - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
11. Population - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area? X
12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in:
movement? a. Generation of additional vehicular
b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
P
-4-
0 W
YES MAY BE -
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need for new or
altered governmental services in any of
the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational 6 facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
f. Other governmental services?
15. Enerqy - Will the proposal have
including roads?
significant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? -
-5-
0 W
YES MAY BE
18, Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive
public view?
Recreation - Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities?
20. Archeolosical/Historical - Will the
19.
proposal have significant results in
the alteration of a significant archeological or historical site,
structure, object or building?
Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed proiect such as: 21.
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desigi
c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the 2 e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter-
nate sites for the proposed, and 9) no project alternative.
a) The project is a public facility information and plannir
study. Phased planning will not efficiently or adequate1 address the need for public facilities.
b) The project is a public facility information and plannir
study.
c) The project is a public facility information and plannir
study.
d) Uses for the area covered by the plan are based on tE existing General Plan
e) The plan considers phased development.
f) The project is a public facility information and plannin study.
g) As the project is a public facility information and plannin study the no project alternative would not assure adequat public facilities to meet demand. The no project alternativ
would therefore cause the most detriment.
-6-
0 0
YES '= MAY BE
22. Mandatory findinqs of sisnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, or curtail the diversity
in the environment?
b. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
environment is one which occurs in a
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
nr. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 is a facilitie planning document. The intent of the plan is to establis parameters and thresholds that assure public facilities ar available when needed as determined by the City's adopte performance standards. To accomplish this purpose occasionall locations and costs of public facility improvements ar
estimated for informational purposes. These estimates ma
result in increased development fees.
Traditionally the developer in maximizing their capital retur
passes such fees on to the home buyer or tenant. This result in higher priced housing which affects the availability of IC
and moderate income housing. However, as real estate value i determined primarily by location, without other marke
would be developed with either low or moderate income housin
due to its view proximity to the Pacific Ocean and Agua
incentives, it is unreasonable to assume the subject propert
-7-
e 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
Hedionda Lagoon. It is not the development fee in itself thz
will force lower income families into other communities, bl
the existing nature of the market place.
It is recognized that CEQA review for these public facilitit
estimates is general, and does not satisfy CEQA requiremen1 for the specific project . The Zone 8 Local Facilitit Management Plan requires complete CEQA review prior t
initialization of any public or private project discussed i
the Local Facilities Management Plan. Macario Canyon Park (E1
80-9), Kelly Ranch (EIR 83-4) are examples of that level c
review.
-8-
e 0
Iv. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
- On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect c the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significar effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attache sheet have been added to the project. Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
A Conditional Negative
4/27 /a
Date Signature '
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-9-
b 0 0
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
8"
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEAS
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
-10-
!'
i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
.19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 5 0 v
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2806
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 8 ON PROPERTY
CAMINO REAL, NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, AND EAST
OF INTERSTATE 5.
APPLICANT: KAUFMAN AND BROAD
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF PARK DRIVE, WEST OF EL
CASE NO.: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 8
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Ca
and referred to the Planning Commission, and
WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 8797 adopting th
Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishing facility zonc
performance standards for pub1 ic facilities, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 9808 requirir
processing of a Local Facil i ties Management P1 an, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8110 and
implementing Proposition E approved on November 4, 1986 by the citizi
Carlsbad, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of December
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider
request; and
I WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considerin
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard,
Commission considered all factors relating to the Local Facilities Plana!
Plan for Zone 8.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissi
follows:
, A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
////
////
:
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
za
0 v
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing
Commission recommends APPROVAL of Local Facil i ties Management P1 an 8, based on the following findings and subject to the fol condition:
Findinqs:
1) That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 is consisten the Land Use Element, the Public Facilities Element, and the Elements contained in Carlsbad’s General Plan.
2) That the local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 k consisten Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Managemenl amended by Ordinance No. 8110 and Ordinance No. 9829 and with the a 1986 Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan.
That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 and the cond contained therein will promote the public safety and welfare by en: that public facilities will be provided in conformance with the ac performance standards.
4) The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 will control the ‘ and locations of growth by tying the pace of development to the pro’ of public facilities and improvements.
5) The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 will ensure I facilities and services are available in conformance with the ac performance standards prior to development occurring.
3)
Condition
1) Approval is granted for Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone contained in the Plan titled Local Facilities Management Plan Zc
dated December 21, 1988, incorporated herein by reference.
1 //// 1 ////
I///
////
////
////
////
////
////
I PC RES0 NO. 2806 -2-
t'
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
w v
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st
December, 1988, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Commissioners: Schlehuber, Holmes, Hall & Marcus.
Chairperson McFadden, Commissioners: Schramm & Erwin.
+e %Cd%4
EANNE B. MCFADDEN, Chairpe
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIO
ATTEST:
< -\, 3 % f /\ -1.
, i,' 116 l. 'lLjb / ,& ~ 1
M /kHAEt \ 'i f %i L'
PLANNING DIRECTOR
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3 - PC RES0 NO. 2806
December 21, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page ,
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Resolution No. 2801 approving CUP 88-20 for an existing
elementary school and the construction of additional school
classrooms generally located at 3820 Pi0 Pic0 Drive, based
on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein, with the added provision that the boys and girls
restrooms be switched and a "No Entry" sign be required
at the westerly end of the diagonal parking area located
along the southerly portion of the property.
3) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 8 - Request,
approval of the Local Facilities Management Plan for
Zone 8 on property located in the northwestern quadrant
of the City, adjacent to fhe eastern edge of Agua
Hedionda Lagoon.
Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst, began the staff
report and stated that although the zone plan document
provides an analysis of all 11 public facilities identified
in the citywide facilities and improvements plan, the staff
Presentation will only focus on five public facilities:
parks, schools, circulation, sewer, and water. in presentation of the plan will be Brian Hunter, Steve
Jantz, and Phil Carter. Zone 8 is located in the northwest
quadrant of the city on the eastern edge of the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon. It is the seventh property-owner prepared zone plan
to be brought before the Planning Commission.
Zone 8 was presented previously in July 1988 but, at that
time, staff could not recommend approval because the zone
plan was incomplete. It was denied without prejudice.
Don Rideout stated that Zone 8 is presently undeveloped and
consists of 731.2 acres. The land uses are primarily
residential with a substantial amount of open space and a
small amount of recreational/commercial. Significant
constraints to development exist, including protection of wildlife habitat, power line easements, and publicly owned
acreage.
realistic buildout estimate for purposes of assessing public
facility impacts.
ultimately approved for this zone may be less than the
buildout estimate as stated in the plan.
maximum buildout estimate of 1,225 du's is fully in compliance with Proposition E as approved by the citizens of
Carlsbad on November 4, 1986.
Brian Hunter presented the Parks and Schools portion of the
plan and stated that this zone is very similar to Zone 24,
also located in the northwest quadrant.
Parks
Zone 8 has been conditioned to provide 6.7 acres of improved
park land. condition requires this park land to be improved. This is
similar to the condition contained in Zones 19, 20, 22 and
24. After 1992, additional park land will be required.
Schools
This is the first zone plan to be presented in which the
General Plan does not identify a school site.
has been conditioned to provide an elementary school site and
financing for construction, if necessary. The school
Assisting him
However,
These constraints have been analyzed to arrive at a
The actual number of dwelling units as
In any case, the
The City already owns the property but the
The zone plan
district is presently revising their projections for future
school sites.
COMMISSIONERS
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Marcus
Mc Fadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
I 0 MINUR~ y
Steve Jantz continued the presentation.
Circulation
Traffic analysis indicates that one circulation element
within Zone 8 will be impacted, i.e. Cannon Road from El
Camino Real to 1-5. All other existing roadways and
intersections meet the performance standards.
that future development will require that Cannon Road be
built to two lanes from El Camino Real to 1-5 with the first phase of development, i.e. Cannon Road must be in place and
operational prior to future impacts generated from this zone.
The construction of Cannon Road is projected to be started in
1990 to coincide with the proposed Cannon Road Assessment
District. Cannon Road is designated as a major arterial with
two lanes in each direction.
handle traffic generated from this zone and adjacent zones
from 1990 through 1994, However, in 1995 the performance
standard will not be met unless an additional two lanes are
constructed on Cannon. Zone 8 has a very small frontage on
El Camino Real and with the construction of Cannon Road, it
will complete the improvements along El Camino Real.
Therefore, this zone plan has been specifically conditioned
that prior to the recordation of the first final map,
issuance of grading or building permits, whichever occurs
first, a comprehensive financing program guaranteeing the
construction of the facilities must be approved.
Sewer
The performance standard indicates that trunk line capacity
sewer master plan identifies sewer drainage basins, existing
capacity, and the existing intercepter systems which will handle future development within the City. Zone 8 is located
entirely within the south Agua Hedionda intercepter basin.
Initially, the zone plan proposed sewer outside this basin
into the north Agua Hedionda basin. However, the proposal
would have used up capacity within the north Agua Hedionda
intercepter system, taking sewer capacity that should be used
for adjacent zones within the north Agua Hedionda basin.
Therefore, in order to provide sewer service in Zone 8, the
south Agua Hedionda intercepter must be provided prior to
future development within Zone 8. This zone plan has been
specifically conditioned that prior to the recordation of the
first final map, issuance of grading or building permits,
whichever occurs first, a comprehensive financing program
guaranteeing the construction of the sewer line must be
approved.
Water
The Costa Real Municipal Water District has determined that
construction of certain water facilities are necessary to
Zone 8 assumes
The four lanes are expected to
must be available concurrent with development. The current
serve future development within the zone. The most important
facility is the dedication and construction of the Evans
Point Reservoir site. Therefore, this zone plan has been specifically conditioned that prior to the recordation of the
first final map, issuance of grading or building permits,
whichever occurs first, a reservoir site must be dedicated to
the Costa Real Municipal Water District to the satisfaction
of the District Engineer.
He noted that Zone 24 also had the condition for acquisition
of a reservoir site. As part of the condition, if an
adjacent zone is required to acquire the site which is
December 21, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8
located in Zone 8, prior to any development within Zone 8,
which were required to acquire that site for the district.
In sunnnary, he noted that the major facilities serving Zone 8
center around the construction of Cannon Road. Cannon Road
will provide circulation facilities, sewer, and water to
Zones 5, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 24. The Cannon Road
Assessment District is an alternative form of financing;
however, the plan is conditioned that they must provide a
financing mechanism that will guarantee the construction of
these facilities.
Phil Carter, continued the presentation.
Financing
The Zone 8 plan provides a financing section which highlights
each of the 11 public facilities, what future public
facilities will be needed, the estimated costs of each of
those facilities, as well as the available financing options
to fund those facilities in conformance with the adopted
performance standards.
they must reimburse those developments or property owners
Phil Carter concluded his presentation by stating that the
plan is well prepared and staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Erwin requested clarification on the letter from Howard Kirgis (Exhibit I) which contains a disclaimer that
there will be no financial obligation against the subject
property, either now or in the future, in connection with
said submission and approval. Mr. Carter replied that this
disclaimer deals with the cost of preparing the Local
Facilities Management Plan. Under the Growth Management
Ordinance, the property owner who prepares the plan can
request, at the time that authorization is granted from the
City Council, to be reimbursed by all other property owners
at the time they develop.
authorization from the City Council, Kaufman and Broad,
indicated that they would pay all costs associated with
preparation of the plan. This disclaimer refers solely to
the cost of preparing the plan and will not waive any future
fees which Mr. Kirgis may be required to pay for developing
his property.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if Mr. Kirgis understands that he
will be required to pay certain development fees if he
chooses to develop his property in the future. Mr. Carter
replied that Mr. Kirgis understands this requirement.
Commissioner Erwin recommended that Cannon Road be constructed at the onset to full width and that the Cannon
Road Assessment District should be the only way that Cannon
Road is developed.
Commissioner Erwin noted that Faraday is designed as a two
lane collector street and inquired about the width of Faraday
through Zone 8. Mr. Jantz replied that a collector street
requires 64 ft. of right-of-way with 48 ft. curb-to-curb
pavement width. However, the width of the road could change
with the development of the Macario Canyon park.
Commissioner Erwin feels that Faraday will be a short cut
through the area and would like to see it widened at the
onset. Mr. Carter cannot recommend that Faraday be widened
as part of the zone plan but he noted that staff will keep
The property owner who got
COMMlSSlONERS
I
December 21, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9
1
looking at Faraday as development occurs.
currently graded out wider than the development requirement.
Chairman McFadden inquired who will be in the Cannon Road
Assessment District. Mr. Carter replied that the Cannon Road
Assessment District will include property owners from Zones 13, 14, 15, 24, and 8 who are currently working to construct
Cannon Road.
Chairman McFadden is concerned with the phasing of Cannon
Road. She recalls that Zone 24 mentioned two lanes but
grading to four lanes.
plan proposed four full lanes with first development in 1990,
rather than a two phase construction. However, this zone
plan states two and two until 1995.
Chairman McFadden inquired if staff is concurring with the
two phase construction. Mr. Carter replied that when Zone 24
was presented, the property owners felt that without the
assessment district they could not finance Cannon Road and
they would be precluded from developing.
the condition to put in all four lanes of Cannon Road with
the first phase of development. In Zone 8, the property
owners felt that if the Cannon Road Assessment District had
problems in going forward, they would have the ability to
finance the two lanes from El Camino Real to 1-5 while
maintaining conformance with our standards for circulation and they would be able to begin building their projects.
Staff believes that the road will actually be built at four
lanes from El Camino Real to the freeway at one phase but
that will be determined as the zone plans for Zones 14 and 15
are analyzed. With the traffic impact of those zone plans
which are currently approved, Zone 8, and the existing
traffic, the analysis shows that two lanes from El Camino
Real to 1-5 will maintain an acceptable level OF service
until the year 1995, at which time it would have to be
widened to its full width.
Chairman McFadden inquired what will happen if Zones 14 and
15 begin development first. Mr. Carter replied that the conditions would be changed and the road would be required to
built in at four lanes rather than two lanes.
Chairman McFadden inquired how this can be assured. Mr.
Carter replied that the zone plan requires that Cannon Road
be fully financed before any development can occur. The zone
plans for Zones 14 and 15 will be conditioned to require the
improvements all the way to 1-5 before development can occur.
Commissioner Schlehuber stated that it is his understanding
that the financing is in the form of a bond but it is actual
cash up front. the assessment district is the actual choice of the property
owners.
Commissioner Marcus inquired when Zones 13, 14 and 15 are
expected to come in. Mr. Carter has no idea when 13 will
come in but 14 and 15 are currently being looked at by the
consultant and he estimates that they will come forth to the
Planning Commission within 4-6 months, however, it does
depend on the property owners.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
Faraday is
Mr. .lantz replied that the Zone 24
So they agreed with
Mr. Carter replied he was cosrect even though
COMMISSIONERS
I a MINU* y
Bill Carden, 14286 Ricardo Drive, Del Mar, addressed the
Commission and stated that this zone plan was originally
submitted to staff approximately 20 months ago. A great deal
of work has gone into the plan due to the complexity of the
growth management plan. He feels it is the best local
facilities management plan reviewed to date and requested the Commission's approval,
available to answer specific questions.
Bill Hofman, Hofman & Associates, 2386 Faraday Avenue,
Carlsbad, presented himself at the podium to answer
questions.
Commissioner Hall inquired about the two lanes versus four
lanes for Cannon Road. Mr. Hofman replied that the preferred
financing alternative mechanism is the assessment district
which is proposing four lanes. Zone 8 is looking for
flexibility to develop the property in case the assessment
district does not occur in a timely manner.
Commissioner Hall requested Mr. Hofman to define a timely
manner. Mr. Hofman replied that 1990 would be considered
acceptable although there are some potential delays
approaching with environmental reviews on Reach 3 and 4.
Reach 1 is from 1-5 to Faraday, Reach 2 is from Faraday to El
Camino Real, Reach 3 is from El Camino Real eastward about
halfway to the Oceanside boundary, and Reach 4 is the final
section. Some of these delays could then cause a delay in
the formation of the assessment district. Also, there is
always the possibility of a problem if the property owners do
not wish to cooperate. There was some discussion at the City
Council meeting that Cannon must be four lanes all the way to
1-5 if it is to be connected to Oceanside. Mr. Carter added
that the City is also a participant in the assessment
district in the amount of approximately $6.5 million. City Council is concerned that if an assessment district is
formed, they don't want Cannon Road built in pieces--they
want the initial construction from El Camino Real to 1-5 to
be four lanes.
Commissioner Hall inquired about the $12.8 million cost of
the assessment district and inquired if the City's portion is $6.5 million. Mr. Carter replied that $12.8 million is the
cost from El Camino Real west to 1-5;
that cost would be $6.5 million. The remainder ot Cannon
Road would be approximately $25 million.
Commissioner Erwin requested a staff response to his comments
regarding Faraday. Mr. Carter deferred comment on the ADT's
to Bill Hofman. Mr. Hofman replied that the ADT estimate was
based on the SANDAG buildout projections which indicates that
Faraday would be adequate as a collector street. He could
not offer an opinion on whether Faraday as a collector street
would be adequate or inadequate.
Commissioner Srwin inquired if the property owners in Zone 8
would be reimbursed from other zones for the construction of
Cannon Road.
He stated that Bill Hofman is
The I
the City's portion of
There could be the potential for some reimbursement but it has not been determined at this time.
Commissioner Ervin inquired if four lanes were put in at the onset, and only two lanes were needed, would the property
owner have the ability to recoup the difference. Mr. Carter
replied that if facilities are put in that will benefit a
future property owner, they have the ability to recoup the
cost. However, it is not guaranteed. Mr. Hofman added that
December 21, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION page 11
it would be extremely difficult for one property owner to
tront this large amount of money in hopes of recouping it at
a later date.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
Chairman McFadden inquired what the City Council decided at
the last night’s meeting regarding parks and the reasons for
their decision. Mr. Carter replied that the City Council
determined that the joint use or leased property can be used
to count towards the performance standard for parks since
this has been done since the inception of growth management.
The City feels that since the School District cannot deny use
of their properties to the public that these properties
should not be excluded. By removing these properties from
the parks inventory, the City would be asking future
developers to make up for past discrepancies. The City
Council requested staff to compile an inventory of existing
City property and potential park property in order to
evaluate whether the City needs to purchase additional
property to satisfy the parks requirement.
Chairman McFadden believes there is a California law which
states that if a school property will no longer be used the
school district must offer it for sale or lease to other
governmental agencies. Mr. Carter replied that the Civics
Act requires notification to the City jurisdiction if a school district wishes to sell or lease the property. The
City has first option.
District. The third option is to a County park agency.
Chairman McFadden noted that seven acres of the Pine School
property is under consideration for purchase with PFF funds.
If other schools are retired, how has the City addressed the
financing to come up with money to lease or buy the property.
Mr. Carter replied that there is no financing program at the
present time to allow us to purchase all school property
currently under joint use agreements.
area it is difficult for the City to go back and impose park
requirements after the fact.
Chairman McFadden inquired how we can ensure that park
facilities will be available if school property becomes
unavailable. Mr. Carter replied that the City will
absolutely guarantee that park facilities will be available
or development in a quadrant will be shut down.
Chairman McFadden feels very strongly that the City is very
far away from fulfilling the performance standard for parks
plan that does not ensure that adequate park facilities will
be available.
Commissioner Erwin supports Chairman McFadden’s concern.
Motion was duly made and seconded to adopt Resolution No.
2805 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No.
2806 recommending approval of Local Facilities Management
for Zone 8. Motion failed.
The second option is to a Park
In a fully developed
and she cannot in good conscience vote in favor of a zone
COMMISSIONERS
I
I
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Marcus
McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
December 21, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12
During discussion an amendment to the motion was made by
Commissioner Erwin and seconded by Chairman McFadden to
include a provision for purchase of a future park site.
Commissioner Schramm agreed with the amendment.
Commissioner Schlehuber could not accept the amendment and it
was withdrawn.
Motion was duly made and seconded to adopt Resolution No.
2805 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No.
2806 recommending approval of Local Facilities Management
Plan for Zone 8 with an additional provision that the City
look for a park site.
However,
Motion failed.
During discussion Commissioner Hall requested that the motion
contain more definition on the park site.
would like to see a quadrant demand for additional park lands
and cited 10.8 acres
some of which she feels the City could acquire. Commissioner
Chairman McFadden
of RMH zoned properties in Zone 8,
Schlehuber feels that if Macario Canyon is counted there is
more than enough park land to satisfy the standard.
Michael Holzmiller advised the Commission that staff has been
preparing the zone plans per the approved inventory of park
lands which was approved by the City Council.
inventory will become part of the new Parks and Recreation
element which will be coming to the Planning Commission for a
public hearing in the near future. He suggested the
possibility of approving LFMP #8 subject to the new Parks and
Recreation element.
Chairman McFadden would like to see additional park lands
provided in Zone 8 before she can vote for it.
Mr. Carter inquired if Chairman McFadden could accept the
zone plan if it were conditioned to provide funding for 6.7
acres of park land or dedication of an adequate park site.
If this is acceptable, the Zone plan could be approved and a
separate motion made to recommend that the City Council not
accept funds from Zone 8 for park lands but, instead, require
dedication of a park site. He feels that a separate motion
would be more effective than a dissenting vote(s) on a Zone
The park
plan,
Commissioner Schlehuber feels that the LFMP #8 meets the City
requirements and that it should be approved and forwarded to
Council. He feels there may be some legal ramifications in
adding the park site verbiage to the motion for approval of the zone plan.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Resolution No. 2805 recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt
Resolution No. 2806 recommending approval of Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8.
He would like input by the City Attorney.
Commissioner Erwin requested that the minutes reflect our strong feelings on the 'park issue.
COMMISSIONERS
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Marcus
McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Marcus
McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
,' - w "' ' 6
I
February 7, 1989
City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Street
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Mayor and City Council:
I am speaking this evening on behalf of a group of citizens who live in the Northwest Quadrant, the oldest part of the city and the place where Carlsbad began. We are concerned that this
quadrant is being short changed in the area of parks as is shown by the Zone Plan being considered tonight.
reasons for feeling this way:
The demographics of our quadrant show that 76.5% of its popu-
lation at build out will be in Zone 1. Within Zone 1, between the two lagoons, the freeway and the railroad, the 1980 census
shows that this area has 52% families with children under 18, 42.6% Hispanics and 74.4% renters. These demographics need
to be evaluated when accesibility of proposed parks is con- sidered. In addition, staff estimates that by the end of 1989 the quadrant will be at 75.1% of the estimated number of units expected by 2013 or approximately build out. These
figures come from Exhibit 39, Page 89 of Zone Plan 8. It follows therefore that only about 25% more Park-in-Lieu and Public Facilities Fund money will be coming in for the Northwest Quadrant.
2. School grounds such as Buena Vista and Pine are included in
the park inventory. What is wrong with this policy? First, the proposed 1988 Parks and Recreation Element recommends that lease arrangements with local schools be used to supplement neighborhood and community recreational needs. Instead the school land is counted at 100% of its acreage to fulfill
the park requirements of the Growth Management Plan. These grounds are available to the public only 40% of the time. If this part time use is allowed for in the calculation, the Northwest Quadrant is presently short of parks.
The second problem with- this policy is that the school district or the city could terminate this current arrangement for a variety of reasons. If this were to happen, what guarantee is there that the city would have the funds to acquire these properties as required by the Growth Management Plan? The agree- ments with the school district for shared use are only
temporary solutions to the shortage of parks in the North- west Quadrant. Only land actually owned by the city should be counted in the park inventory.
We have several
1.
L
i
t
.( 2' * a
I
3. Present city park plans do not recognize the unique nature
of the Northwest Quadrant. We realize that large parcels for parks such as Stagecoach or Calavera Hills are not practical for this area. However we do have an opportunity to create other kinds of parks that make use of our lagoons and unused city land. The Redevelopment Area also affects this area.
Therefore the Housing and Redevelopment and Parks and Recrea- tion Commissions need to coordinate their objectives.
The tourists they seek to attract will use city facilities,
Tn conclusion, we are all aware that the Parks and Recreatior Element of the General Plan will come to the council in aboui
eight weeks. Presently it does not deal with the concerns that we have just raised. Because development is increasing the cost of land and reducing its availability, the city needs to identify parcels now that could be used for parks in the Northwest Quadrant. Therefore when the Element comes before you, we urge you to instruct the Parks and Recreation to return with a revised longcrange park plan for the North-
west Quadrant before the adoption of the next Capital Improvc ment Budget in July.
Thank you for this opportunity to let you know our concerns.
We are looking forward to participating in the process of
developing objectives with the Park and Recreation Depart- ment as we have specific suggestions we would like to make. We have the opportunity in the Northwest Quadrant to create something as unique as the area itself and at the same time fulfill the park requirements. The members of our group
are:
We applaud your request for an inventory of city-owned lands
Greg Armstrong Jeanne McFadden ' fd Margaret Brownley Margie Monroy . fl.+ Ramona Finnila Mario Monroy bfib
Barbara Hallman Barbara Otwell
Thelma Hayes Harold Otwell
Don Jackson Roy Sanchez
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will ho a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Californi at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday,, , to consider a Loc
Facilities Management Plan on property generally located at Kelly Ranch a Macario Canyon Park and more particularly described as:
Portions of Ranch Agua Hedionda
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to atte the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planni Department at 438- 1161.
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may I limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub1 hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to tl
City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: LFMP 8 APPLICANT: KAUFMAN AND BROAD PUBLISH:
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
9, 8 a
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LFMP-8
t<'
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold
a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, February 7, 1989, to consider a Local
Facilities Management Plan on property generally located at Kelly Ranch and
Macario Canyon Park, and more particularly described as:
Portions of Rancho Agua Hedionda
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning
Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be lirn
to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City o
Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Kaufman and Broad
PUBLISH: January 27, 1989 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
j$
,' "A,Lw *I us- --.A. -- -- .-----I ---- -- -- - ---- - ---- - ----- -- -_I-----. (. Waste CL .up - The council approved the submittal of an
application to the Encina Admini-
strative Agency for authorization to discharge groundwater cleanup flow into the Encina joint sewer system, and authorized the city engineer to issue a permit to the
Unisys Corporation for that
h* '! ,
Medicare Catastrophic Health Care Tax
tant agreement with JHK & Asso-
ciates for the Growth Manage- ment Plan Traffic Monitoring Program; and appropriated
$59,764 for the project.
tion of an additional 9,000 square
feet of deck at the Carlsbad Swim
Board Appointment - The
council continued consideration of an appointment to the Personnel
Board to fill an unexpired term.
City Report - The council will
receive a report from the city trea-
surer on city investments as of
Marcos Country Andersons
Lake San Marcos
An American Express comwny
\
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public
Portions of Rancho Aqua Hedionda
If you have questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning Department at
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Kaufman and Broad
PUBLISH: January 27,1989
438-1 161.
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
-
l U2139+ i4 M 295 28'8 USTWI
Declared or paid in preceding 12 man.
Paid in stock in preceding 12 months
JtlOn date Ex-dividend or ex-nghts Ex-dividend and sales in full
ted cash value on exdividend or ex-
Holder OweS purchase price install-
r notes: Rights Units When hstrihuted When issued - Warrants - With warrants - Without warrants
IW to read OK
-4he-counter tables comprise traaes as of noon Eastern time today through puter-Inked quotation service known as Vatlonal Association of Securities 's Automated Quotation system The AQ listings are for the National Market n h stock traded on the National Market itified by an abbreviation for the com- ollowed by the company's annual divi- per share based on its most recent rly or semiannual dividend
I refers to the stock's price per share noon Eastern time today Stock pnces [pressed in whole numbers and frac- hat must be converted to dollars and For example, 27% equals $27 875 is the change between the preceding g day's final price and today's noon
sr notes New 365-day high New 365-day low Stock went ex-dividend. any dividend
Stock split or a dividend of 25 percent re was paid within 52 weeks a comp1;te list of footnotes, see "How i NYSE
le goes to the seller, not the buyer
rn
unlilnd 64 18 13% 19 Vanh 5 60 3 17% WdFM 150 17 17 Wyms 60 4 25 Unlkn 10 25 t 19 VKmp n228 142 1019+ 15 Wendyr 24 717 6 + 15 Wse 416 5
UJerB* 106 34 211Q+ 1/4 VKMT n Ult~ 6% 82 979+ 1/4 Varm TO4 3e ?A :&e 1; 6424$,,35 -62114+ 79 UldMM 125 23/4- 75 Vanan 26 591 2810- 1/4 WsWE g8O 10 14'/4+ 'A xTm 72 41 421/4+ ')a UPLMn 2 11& 19 vun~ - 31/4+ 19 qWNA 1335 1132+132 ZW1a 187 3 + 19
UsairG 12 680 39 + in Vanly pfl 30 51 221~- 19 VIWCNA Dl 2 33/4 Zavre 40 685 24'Q+ 'A USHOm 59 17~ V- aa 1 %I+ 1/4 W~SL 22 27, la Z~~IIIIE 174 1910 216 1114 Zenln "6% 17 95, 15 USSM 46 473 26k+ 19 VBSV~ 4 356 15 wuwm
USSurg 60 M 3210- 1/4 VaEP 00772 142 si%.+ 1/4 WUn PfB 25 6%- % WenLb
Usweat 352 4aJu611,4+ 79 VaEP p1745 a0 7814- 1/4 WUgE 2 1469 5575i 79 ZsnNtl 8Ob 99 1715
UnTech 160 1611 4439t 14 Voshay S 147 19l/4+ % U'SfVm m 22 30 zera 44 a3 1835+ '9
U~,T~I 1 92 1177 471~t 59 VlBaCh 1 M 897 s1/4+114 ww ST m 694 z@m+ k Zumln 68 163 2e3/4
UWR Bo 11 16l/4+ 1/4 VOnS 115 1& Weyerp~62 4 353,s- 1/4 zweu 1- 291 1010+ I9
I 11,
Unnrde 75 77h+ 19 VulCM 392 12 1671% le yWhPl1 326 lZ%+17A ZWWT n168 93 9%
1
APPLICANT: Kaufman and Broad
PUBLISH: January 27,1989 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at
jals & Badges $10-300
de Blvd., Oceanside an. 28,722-1821 Ad
the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue,
Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday,
February 7, 1989, to consider a Local Facilities
Management Plan on property generally located at
Kelly Ranch and Macario Canyon Park, and more
particularly described as:
Portions of Rancho Agua Hedionda
If you have any questions regarding this matter,
please call the Planning Department at 438-11 61.
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management
Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City cf Carlsbad
City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing. .-
Waste C+up -The council approved the submittal of an application to the Encina Admini- strative Agency for authorization
to discharge groundwater cleanup
flow into the Encina joint sewer
system, and authorized the city
engineer to issue a permit to the
Unisys Corporation for that
ciates for the Growth Manage-
ment Plan Traffic Monitoring
Swim Complex Deck - The
feet of deck at the Carlsbad Swim
Board Appointment - The
council continued consideration of
an appointment to the Personnel Board to fill an unexpired term. City Report - The council will receive a report from the city trea- surer on city investments as of
Lake San Marcos
An Amercn Ewes company
NOTICE OFPUBLIC HEARING
LFMP=8
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, February 7,1989 to consider a Local Facilities Management Plan on
property generally located at Kelly Ranch and Macario Canyon Park, and more particu-
larly described as:
If you have questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning Department at
If you challenge the Local Facilities Management Plan in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk’s Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Kaufman and Broad PUBLISH: January 27,1989
Portions of Rancho Aqua Hedionda
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL