The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-05-16; City Council; 10031; Amendment To Batiquitos Master PlanCl- OF CARLSBAD - AGENF” BILL p/A” hB#.&&i?de ./.F TITLE: AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLAN 175 (BATIQUITOS MT& 5/16/89 LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK) TO ALLOW MINOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE REARYARDS DEPT.PLN OF ALL PHASE I BATIQUITOS LAGOON BLUFF EDGE L EQITI V InTC MD-17YA\ _ DTC I RECOMMENDED ACTION: Both the Planning Commission and the staff are recommending that the City Council direct the City Attorney's Office to prepare documents APPROVING MP-175(A) and the Negative Declaration. ITEM EXPLANATION In October of 1985 the City Council approved a Master Plan (MP-175) establishing the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park. At the time the Master Plan was approved, Council also approved a tentative map and other associated site plan and planned unit development applications for Phase I of the project. The existing Master Plan currently requires that all structures proposed along the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge be setback between 45 and 50 feet. This setback provision applies to all existing and future bluff edge single family residences within the Master Plan (i.e., Planning Areas "C" and "H"). A strict interpretation of the required setback provision would effectively prohibit the construction of any "structure" requiring a building permit (i.e., many typical minor accessory structures such as spas, spa equipment enclosures, decks, barbecues or trellis) within what would be the rearyards of these dwelling units. In accordance, Sammis Property requests the approval of this Master Plan Amendment to allow typical minor accessory structures within the rearyards of bluff edge lots within this Master Plan. Because the right to place minor accessory structures within ones rearyard is typically enjoyed by other Carlsbad property owners and because prohibition of this common property right could result in a significant code enforcement problem for the City, staff recommended support of Master Plan Amendment 175(A). As shown in Exhibit "B" this amendment defines (1) what specific uses or accessory structures may be permitted within the 45 foot setback area, (2) where specific accessory structures may be located relative to the bluff, and (3) design guidelines specifying maximum heights and other dimensions of permitted accessory structures or uses. The Planning Commission considered this item on November 16, 1988, January 4, 1989 and again on March 15, 1989. This item was continued from the first two meetings to enable staff, responsible resource agencies and Sammis Properties to negotiate an acceptable public lagoon trail location over the Master Plan area prior to considering this amendment. The Planning Commission's concern was that the proposed minor accessory structures not preclude the placement of a public bluff top trail location along the northerly side of the lagoon. On March 15, 1989 the Planning Commission recommended approval of MP-175(A) (6-l McFadden). A conceptual lagoon bluff top trail alignment was also approved as a part of this amendment. In response to questions from the Planning Commission, several conditions were added (See Conditions 4, 5 and 6 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768), but no major issues were identified. Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. /O,d3/- Sammis Properties has already provided the City with a Grant Deed over lots 2-5 of Planning Area "C" as specified in Condition No. 2 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768. Otherwise, as noted in condition No. 3 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768, this Master Plan Amendment will require approval by the California Coastal Commission. Please see the attached staff report to the Planning Commission for specific details regarding this Master Plan Amendment. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on November 2, 1988. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative Declaration on March 15, 1989. FISCAL IMPACT This Master Plan Amendment will result in no fiscal impacts to the City of Carlsbad. EXHIBITS 1) Location Map 2) Exhibit "B" and "C" dated March 15, 1989 3) Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2767 and 2768 4) Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 15, 1989 with attachments -. . LOCATION IiiAP . ‘,\ City of Cartsbad I MP- 175(A) BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK - REVISED EXHIBIT "8" DATED KARCH 15, 1989 CHAPTER IV - SECTION B PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, - SPECIAL PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: PAGE 33 PRESENTLY READS AS: Setbacks: 45' and 50' All structures shall be setback a minimum of between from the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. Amended Page 33 shall read as: Setbacks: All,structures with the exception of those structures or uses described below, and 50' shall be setback a minimum of between 45' from the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. (A) Landscaped Wood Trellis - developer, to be constructed by the as shown on approved building plans for the model units. Specific dimensions of the trellis shall be: (1) a maximum height of 9'6 " from the finished grade of the lot upon which the trellis is to be located: (2) a maximum width of 8' from the outside edge of the posts supporting the trellis; and (3) the trellis shall not extend out more than 8' from the exterior of the rear wall of the residential structure. (B) The following structures or uses are permitted to be constructed within 15' of the exterior of the rear wall of the residential structure, provided that: (1) the uses are located a minimum of 3" (excluding spas which shall be a minimum of 5') from the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge (either manufactured or natural, whichever is closest to the residential structure): and (2) the uses do not exceed a height of 36" above the finished grade of the lot nor require excavation .of greater than 36" below grade. 1) spas (maximum 10' in diameter) 2) barbecues 3) planters 4) garden walls 5) spa equipment enclosures (Cl The following structures or uses, provided that they do not exceed a height of 10" above finished grade, are permitted to be constructed*within that area of any lot between the exterior rear wall of the residential structure to within 3' (excluding spas which shall be a minimum of 5') from the closest bluff edge (natural or manufactured) or the inner edge of the 10 foot trail easement (see oD'v below). F 1) decks 2) 3) spas (maximum 10' in diameter) patios and hardscape (D) AS shown on Exhibit “Cl’, dated March 15,1989, the project applicant shall be required to construct the following: 1) A five-foot wide lagoon public access . (constructed of decomposed granite) to be lo~a'~$ within a 10 foot wide trail easement, dedicated by the applicant to an appropriate State or local agency or nonprofit organization. 2) A uniform wrought iron fence. (maximum 4' high on top of a solid block barrier, one foot above grade) and located at a distance of 10 feet from the northern perimeter of the lagoon public access trail.* 3) A uniform wrought iron fence (maximum i@ high) and located along the southern perimeter of the lagoon public access trail or on downhill side of trail along desiltation basin, whichever applies. Note : The restrictions on accessory structures noted above apply to the 45 to 50 foot setback area overwhich the deed restrictions apply0 Several bluff top structures are setback a greater distance than 50 feet from the natural bluff edge. Any accessory Structures or structural additions or modifications in the rearyard between the structure and 45-50' setback will require City and possibly Coastal Commission approval prior to construction. *In the area adjacent to the desiltation basin at the westerly portion of Planning Area ttC'V, the trail may (if approved by the California Coastal Commission) be placed along the lower slopes as depicted on Exhibits t'Att and IrB1' dated March 15, 1989. If the trail is so located, then a fence as noted above may be placed 10' from the rear property line (to accommodate a 10' drainage easement) in-lieu of the up-slope fence required for the trail (if so approved by the California Coastal Commission). . . There are gcncrpl!\: 3 different blufftop/lot configuration sccnrrlor as de’ d In the diagrams below. t1t v I3clJ E!wIBI 1 ‘C’ IMlEO wwctt 15, 198 SETBACK AREA C 1 I I I Vlaxlmum 4’ high wrought iron fence over I' htgh block wall to be.,constructed by developer. l *Haximum 3’ hfgh wrought fron fence to be constructed by dcvelc LAQOON SETBACK AREA Note: These restrictions apply to the 45-50 setback area described in the LAQOON Coastal Permit, Master Plan and deed restrictions. On*lots where the structure is setback greater than SO', accessory structures, structural modifications, and/or additions will require approval of the City and possibly the California Coastal Commission. ACCESSORY USES PERJ4ITTEO - SETBACK AREA "A' (8') Landscaped Trellis 1. Max 9'6" Ht. 2. Per approved bldg plan. 3. Anything per- mitted in Areas "B" L "C". '8' (IS') Spas Barbecues Planter Boxes Garden Wall s Spa Equipment Enclosures 1. Max 36" Ht. 2. Anything permitted in Area "C". [UP 10 3’ FRU4 ClOStST RlUfF fffiC IIAfLIIAl (R ‘C’ R4YIIf1CrIIILO 011 IIWFP EOCf OF lttf IO’ IPAll EAsc*cNl blilCHCVLR IS ClOSfP 10 srauruIc~ Decks Spas (shall be 5' from the edge as defined above.) Patios Hardscape 1. Max 10" Ht. - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2767 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW MINOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE REARYARDS OF ALL PHASE I SINGLE FAMILY LOTS (PLANNING AREA "C") LOCATED ON THE WEST AND SOUTH SIDES OF NAVIGATOR CIRCLE ALONG THE SOUTH FACING BATIQUITOS LAGOON BLUFF EDGE AND OVERLOOKING THE DESILTATION BASIN. APPLICANT: SAMMIS PROPERTIES CASE NO.: MP 175fA) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 5th day of. October, 1988, the 2nd day of November, 1988, the 16th day of November 1988, the 4th day of January, 1989, and the 15th day of March, 1989 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all 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 follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit llNDqg dated November 2 1988 and rlPII@*, dated August 16, 1988 attached hereto and m&de a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findinas: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project. may have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis. . 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 h 3. Although there exists Coastal sage scrub vegetation along the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff, biological adjacent to the setback area, impacts from the construction of accessory structures will be avoided in that all permitted accessory structures will be setback a minimum of three feet from the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge, thereby encroachment into the habitat area. not permitting Potential visual impacts from permitting accessory structures within the 45 foot setback area will be mitigated through specific design criteria for permitted accessory uses, which will specify permitted uses, and maximum height and setback encroachment guidelines. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of March, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehuber, Holmes, Erwin, C Marcus. NOES: Commissioner McFadden. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: w&Q&&$&& MICHAEL J. Sit!LZMI&ER PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RESO NO. 2767 -20 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD. CA 9200G-4859 Ulitu af tlktrlsbab PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATIOy Exhibit “ND” TELEPHONE (619) 436-1161 PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The south side of Navigator Circle, along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: An Amendment to Master Plan 175 (Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park) to allow minor accessory structures and improvements within the required 45' structural setback areas of approved single family lots located along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (IO) days of date of,issuance. DATED: November 2, 1988 CASE NO: MP-175(A) Planning Director APPLICANT: Sammis Properties PUBLISH DATE: November 2, 1988 I. 1. 2. 3. II. 1. .- Exhibit “PI IfI ENVIRONHENTALIMl?ACTASSESSMENTFORM- PART II (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. MP 175(A) DATE: Auuust 16. 1988 BACKGROUND APPLICANT: Sammis Pronerties ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2650 Camino De1 Rio North #lOO. San Dieao. CA 92108 (619) 298-7112 DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: Mav 18. 1988 J$NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section III - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) YES MAYBE No - Earth Will the proposal have significant results in: a. b. C. d. e. f. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? Change in topography or ground surface relief features? The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features? Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? 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? X X X X X X . - 2. Air - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. b. C. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. b. C. d. e. f. h. X X X X X X X X X X X Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? -2- . 4 4. Plant Itifg -,Will the proposal have significant results in: MAYBE NO a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: X 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)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X c. Introduction of new species of animals into an areii, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. - Noise Will the proposal significantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Liuht and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light or glare? X X 8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X -3- - . . 9. a. b. 10. 11. 12. 13. a. b. C. d. e. f. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in: Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 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? Ponulation - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? . Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Tr nsnortation/Circulation - Will the priposal have significant results in: Generation of additional vehicular movement? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? MAYBE NO X X X X X X X X X X X -4- - MAYBE BQ 14. ervices - 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 facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy - Will the proposal have 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)? X X X X X X X X .X X X X x -5- I . 18. 19. 20. 21. MAYBE . Aesthetu - 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? X Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Archeoloaical/Historical/PaleontolooicaL - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building? Analyze viable alternatives to the nronosed nroiect such as: NO a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. a) b) Cl d) e) f) 4) N/A. N/A. The project (proposed accessory structures) have been reduced in height (scale) to reduce visibility. The only other environmentally acceptable use for the site would be open space. N/A since the dwelling units are already constructed and occupied. N/A. See d) above. -69 ’ . - XES MAYBE NO 22. Mandator-v findinas of sianificance - 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 environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 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? X X X X III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project 'applicant is proposing to amend Specific Plan 175 (Batiguitos Lagoon Educational Park) to allow the development of typical minor accessory structures (spas, decks, barbecues, trellis, planters) within the required 45 foot structural setback areas of already approved single family lots, from the south facing Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge. An environmental impact report (EIR 84-3) has already been certified for Master Plan 175. For this Master Plan Amendment environmental analysis, staff conducted several field trips to the subject property. Although there exists coastal sage scrub vegetation along the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge, biological impacts from development (accessory structures) will be mitigated in that all permitted accessory structures will be setback a minimum of 3' from the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge, thereby not permitting encroachment into the habitat area. Potential visual impacts from permitting accessory structures within the 45' setback area will be mitigated through specific design criteria which will, specify allowed uses, maximum height of structures and maximum allowable distances from the external wall of the dwelling units. - >,- - * DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) The project applicant has also been willing to grant to the City a 45 foot open space/conservation easement over the setback area whereby the City will be able to clearly regulate that accessory structures proposed within the 45 foot easement are in strict compliance with the development standards established for uses within this easement, Overall, because the structures that will be permitted: (1) Are typical accessory structures, the use of which are enjoyed by other property owners ; and (2) Will not result in any significant biological or visual impacts, no project specific environmental impacts are anticipated. There were no public comments received during the public review period for the negative declaration. -8- I+. 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 on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0-17-86 au Date Signature . l$L&&&&g*& 7 I bate Planning Dir&or V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable) . -9- A , i 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2768 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF MASTER PLAN 175(A), TO AMEND EXISTING MASTER PLAN 175 TO ALLOW MINOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE REARYARDS OF ALL PHASE I SINGLE FAMILY LOTS (PLANNING AREA "C") LOCATED ON THE WEST AND SOUTH SIDES OF NAVIGATOR CIRCLE ALONG THE SOUTH FACING BATIQUITOS LAGOON BLUFF EDGE AND OVERLOOKING THE DESILTATION BASIN. APPLICANT: SAMMIS PROPERTIES CASE NO.: MP 175(A) WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit: All of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Parcel Map No. 13653, together with a portion of the west half of Section 33, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, SBBM, all in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 5th day of October, 1988, the 2nd day of' November, 1988, the 16th day of November 1988, the 4th day of January, 1989, and the 15th day of March, 1989 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said pubic hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said commission considered all factors relating to the Master Plan: and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: 4 . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I.0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2s 27 28 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission recommends APPROVAL of MP 175(A), 'based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findincs: 1. The Master Plan Amendment is in compliance with the intent and purpose of the original 45 foot structural setback requirement because through the incorporation of specific accessory use limitations and structural height and encroachment design guidelines, for such accessory uses, biological and visual impacts to Batiguitos Lagoon will be avoided. In addition, the project applicant has dedicated to the City an easement over the 45' setback area, thereby enabling the City to clearly regulate accessory uses allowed within this setback area. 2. This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on November 2, 1988 and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on March 15, 1989. In approving this Negative Declaration the Planning Commission has considered the initial study, the staff analysis, all required mitigation measures and any written comments received regarding the significant effects this project could have on the environment. 3. The Master Plan Amendment is consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan and with Section 21.38.120 of Title 21, which regulates amendments of Master Plans. Conditions 1. Approval is granted for MP 175(A) as shown on Exhibits *lBa and I'C", dated March 15, 1989, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department. All conditions of MP 175 and of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2485 are hereby incorporated except as modified by this resolution. 2. . . . . This amendment to MP 175 is approved subject to the condition that the Grant Deed approved by City Council (Resolution No. 88-290), establishing a 45 foot open space easement along the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge be modified to: (a) also include bluff edge lots 2-5 of CT 85-14 and (b) permit within the 45 foot setback/open space easement those minor accessory structures identified within this amendment (as shown on Exhibit IrBll , dated March 15, 1989). PC REBO NO. 2768 -29 I ’ . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1; 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. The lagoon public access trail as shown on Exhibits @~A@~-'~B@', dated March 1, 1989 is approved, subject to the approval of the California coastal Commission. Any trail revisions mandated by the California Coastal Commission'and approved by the city of Carlsbad's Planning'Director will necessitate that the trail plan be redesigned by the project applicant. 4. Approval is granted for MP 175(A) subject to the approval of a Coastal Development Permit Amendment consistent with this Amendment and subject to the condition that a lagoon public access trail, as shown on Exhibits "AW-"BW, dated March 1, 1989, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department, is designed, project applicant. constructed and maintained by the This public access trail, or portions thereof, as approved by the Planning Director, shall be constructed prior to the issuance of a buildaing permit for, or construction of accessory structures within the rearyards of the bluff edge dwelling units within Planning Area V1@ of MP 175. If the California Coastal Commission approves the construction of any rearyard minor accessory structures, as identified in Exhibit B, dated March 15, 1989, prior to the construction of the lagoon public access trail, then the City of Carlsbad will require that Sammis Properties shall provide to the City an adequate bond, letter of credit, or .other appropriate security for the construction of this trail, prior to the initiation of construction of any of these approved rearyard structures. 5. MP-175(A) is approved subject to the condition that the 3 foot high wrought iron fence proposed along the lagoon side of the public access trail be increased to a height of 4 feet, or that some other adequate barrier, as approved by the Planning Director be provided by the project applicant in its place. 6. MPi175(A) is approved subject to the condition that the lagoon trail public parking lot, as shown on Exhibit "AU, dated March 1, 1989;be relocated to some other area of the site, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. An acceptable new location for this lagoon trail and public parking (6 spaces) shall be identified prior to the initiation of construction of the lagoon trail. . ‘. . . . . . . . * . . PC RESO NO. 2768 -39 : . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ! 11 12 13 ld 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 c. 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of March, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schramm, Schlehuber, Holmes, Erwin & Marcus. NOES: Commissioner McFadden. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Mrcwx J. PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RESO NO. 2768 -I- DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJEU!T: C APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE MAY 18. 1988 STAFF REPORT MARCH 15, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT MP 175(A) - BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK - Request for approval of an Amendment to Master Plan 175 (Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park) to allow minor accessory structures within the rearyards of all Phase I single family lots (Planning Area ffC@l) located on the west and south sides of Navigator Circle along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge and overlooking the desiltation basin. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2767 APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768 APPROVING MP 175(A) based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of an Amendment to Master Plan 175. Master Plan 175, as approved by the City Council on October 15, 1985, established comprehensive development standards for the 167.9 acre Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park, which is located immediately north of Batiquitos Lagoon between Interstate 5 and Carlsbad Boulevard. Specifically, the existing Master Plan 175 (page 33) requires that all structures within Planning Areas flCff be setback a minimum of between 45 and 50 feet from the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon 'bluff edge. "Structuresl* as defined within Title 21, "anything constructed or elected which requires means location on the ground or attached to something having a location on the ground". As shown on Exhibit 'IA", this 45-50 foot setback requirement would apply to single family residential lots 6-35 of CT 85-14. A strict interpretation of this required setback provision of MP 175 would not allow the construction of any "structure" requiring a building permit (i.e., many typical minor accessory structures such as spas, spa equipment enclosures, decks, barbecues, trellis, and above grade planters), within what will be the rearyards of these identified lots. MP 175(A) BATIQUITOS' LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MARCH 15, 1989 Paae 2 The project applicant is proposing an Amendment to Masterj Plan 175 in order to allow typical minor accessory structures within the rearyard of the above mentioned lots. The amended wording to Master Plan 175 is attached as Exhibit 'lBO. III. ~ALYl318 , Plannina Issues 1) Does the proposed Amendment ensure compliance with thie intent of the 45 foot structural setback requirement of Master Plan 175? 2) Does the proposed Amendment comply with the provisions of the Master Plan's Coastal Development Permit? Discussion I The required 45 foot rearyard structural setback standbrd for residential lots located along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge, was negotiated by staff for purposes of (1) mitigating visual impacts of development along this natural scenic lagoon resource, and (2) preserving a buffer between development and the sensitive coastal sage scrub habitat located along the lagoon bluffs. In accordance with this requirement, all bluff edge dwellinlg units within Planning Area V!" of Master Plan 175 will be setbktck the required 45 feet from the bluff edge. However, as noted earlier in this report, the existing 45 foot structural setback provision of this Master Plan would not allow future property owners of the identified bluff edge lots to construct within their rearyards any minor -'accessory structures (i.e., spas, patios, or barbecues) typically enjoyed by other property owners within the City. Staff feels that this prohibition of a common property right, while technically justified through the Master Plan provisions, could ultimately result in a significant code enforcement problem for the City. In view of this concern, staff has developed a Master Plan Amendment (see Exhibit MB" 1 which defines, (1) what uses or accessory structures may be permitted within the 45 foot setback area, (2) where specific accessory structures may be located relative to the bluff, and (3) design guidelines specifying maximum heights and other dimensions of permitted accessory structures or uses. MP 175(A) . BATIQUITOS'LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MARCH 15, 1989 Paae 3 AS shown on Exhibit "C", all permitted uses or accessory structures must be setback a minimum distance of three feet from the existing manufactured or natural Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge; whichever is closest to the residential structure. This required setback will effectively mitigate potential biological impacts by prohibiting encroachment of structures into the identified coastal sage scrub habitat located along the lagoon bluff. With the exception of the landscaped trellis which may be constructed according to the approved building plan height of 9 foot 6 inches (and may extend 8 feet from the rear wall of the residential structure into the 45 foot setback area), no other uses or accessory structures greater than 36 inches in height are permitted to extend more than 15 feet into the 45 foot setback area. All other uses or accessory structures permitted to encroach more than 15 feet into the setback area may not exceed a height of 10 inches above finished grade. Staff believes that because of these specific use limitations and height and encroachment design guidelines, there will be no biological or visual impacts to Batiquitos Lagoon; thereby ensuring compliance with the original purpose and intent of the 45 foot setback requirement of Master Plan 175. In addition, on August 9, 1988, the project applicant dedicated to the City of Carlsbad a Grant Deed (see Exhibit oD'l) for the purposes of establishing a 45 foot setback/open space easement over the rearyards of the Phase I Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park bluff edge lots 6-35 of CT 85-14. This easement will enable the City to clearly regulate and ensure that any uses or accessory structures proposed within the 45 foot structural setback area (easement area) are in strict compliance with the uses permitted, and design criteria established through this Master Plan Amendment. As a condition of approval of this Master Plan Amendment application, staff recommends that this Grant Deed be modified to (1) also include bluff edge lots 2-5 (see Exhibit IIE'l) of CT 85-14 and to (2) permit the accessory structures identified within this Amendment within the 45 foot setback easement. As proposed, this Master Plan Amendment is not in compliance with the existing provisions of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan Coastal Development Permit. City staff has reviewed this Amendment request with San Diego' Regional Coastal Commission staff. While coastal staff has indicated preliminary support of the Amendment request, the project applicant will have to process a Coastal Development Permit Amendment. MP 175(A) * . BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MARCH 15, 1989 Paae 4 As discussed in the attached memorandum, there also exists a deed restriction over the entire 45-50 foot setback of the Planning Area @@cl@ residences, from the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge, in favor of the California Coastal Commission. This deed restriction'includes a 10 foot wide easement for a lagoon public access trail. While the minor accessory structures proposed with this Master Plan amendment would not preclude the construction of the conceptual lagoon public access trail, as shown on Exhibits ItAt@ and IrBtt, dated March 1, 1989, .it is emphasized here that both the accessory structural uses and the lagoon trail alignment will require the approval of the California Coastal Commission. (See memo to Planning Commission dated March 15, 1989 attached, for further discission.) Overall, staff recommends support of MP 175(A) because (1) the proposed Master Plan Amendment is in compliance with the intent and purpose of the original 45 foot structural setback requirement in that biological and visual impacts to Batiquitos Lagoon will be avoided and because, (2) the project applicant has dedicated to the City an easement over the 45 foot setback area, thereby enabling the City to clearly regulate accessory uses allowed within this setback area. IV. EMIROEMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have ,a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on November 2, 1988. Th-is Master Plan Amendment environmental analysis, along with the field checks conducted by staff, identified that the 45 foot setback area has already been previously graded for residential development. Although there exists coastal sage scrub vegetation along the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff, adjacent to the setback area, biological impacts from the construction of accessory structures will be avoided in that all permitted accessory structures will be setback a minimum of three feet from the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge, thereby not permitting encroachment into the habitat area. Potential visual impacts from permitting accessory structures within the 45 foot setback area will be mitigated through specific . design criteria for permitted accessory uses, which will specify permitted uses, and maximum height and setback encroachment guidelines. Two letters of comment 'were received (from the Department of Fish and Game and Delores Welty) in response to the notice for a Negative Declaration. These comments were subsequently responded to, and are included as attachments to this report. - . MP 175(A) ' . BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MARCH 15, 1989 Paae 5 Attachments 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2767 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768 Memorandum to Planning Commission, dated March 15, 1989 Response to notice for a Negative Declaration Exhibit "Atq dated August 15, 1988 Revised Exhibit )'Btl, dated March 15, 1989 Revised Exhibit "C", dated March 15, 1989 Exhibit wDl@, Grant Deed to the City of carlsbad Location Map Background Data Sheet Exhibit @'Xl' City Council Ordinance No. Exhibits qIA:'-ttBw, dated March 1, 1989 CDD:af s/19/88 h MEMURANOUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: I. MARCH 15, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT MP 175(A) - BATIOUITOSLAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK - Conceptual alignment for the Batiquitos Lagoon public access, native trail. 01SCUSS1oN On November 16, 1988 MP 175(A) was presented to the Planning Commission, with staff recommending approval of Master Plan Amendment 175(A)to allow specific minor accessory structures within the rearyards of all Phase I, bluff edge, single family lots (Planning Area "C") of the Batiquitos Lagoon Education Park. During this hearing the Planning Commissioners expressed concern that allowing these minor accessory structures could preclude the placement of a public bluff top trail along the north side of Batiquitos Lagoon. In accordance, the Planning Commission voted to continue MP 175(A) to January 4, 1989 to .enable staff to negotiate a trail location along the northerly side of the lagoon. The Planning Commission also stipulated that if an acceptable trail location could not be negotiated then the Planning Commission would not recommend support of any minor accessary structures within the rearyards of these bluff edge lots. At the Planning Commission hearing on January 4, 1989, staff reviewed with the Planning Commissioners an existing deed restriction which has been placed over the rearyards (the entire 45 foot setback area of these units from the lagoon bluff edge) of the bluff top homes in favor of the California Coastal Commission. This deed restriction includes an irrevocable offer to dedicate a 10 foot wide strip for public access purposes, and has been included within the titles of the bluff edge lots of this Master Plan. Staff also reviewed a letter received from the California Department of Fish and Game requesting that any decision on minor accessary structures proposed within the rearyard of these bluff edge lots be postponed until city staff could meet with them and other responsible resource agencies to determine an acceptable location for the trail. Since the public trail could not be located as yet, the Planning Commission tabled MP 175(A) with the stipulation that when a location for this public trail was resolved, the amendment would return at a renoticed pub1 ic hearing. On January 13, 1989 City staff, the project applicant and responsible resource agencies (ie. California Coastal Commission, and Department of Fish and Game) .met along the lagoon bluff edge upon the subject property. All representatives in attendance at this meeting agreed that a public access trail along the top of bluff, rather than along the lagoon edge, would be environmentally preferable. In accordance, the project applicant and City staff have negotiated a conceptual public access trail along the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff as discussed below. - MP 157(A) - BATI&. fos . c MARCH 15, 1989 PAGE 2 h As shown on Exhibit "A" trail head public parking (6 spaces) would be located upon an open space lot located between Windrose Circle and the existing on-site desiltation basin. The public access trail, which will be a minimum of five feet wide and composed of decomposed granite, will extend southward from the proposed parking lot, along the east and west sides of the desiltation basin, to observation points located along the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. This portion of the trail from the parking lot to the observation point is proposed to be located along lower manufactured benches on both sides of this desiltation basin. Railroad ties will be incorporated into the steeper upper portions of the side slopes of this desiltation basin in order to facilitate easier public access to the observation point. In order to ensure public safety; (1) the trail has been designed to not cross the desiltation basin spillways and (2) the desiltation basin will be fenced to prohib'it public encroachment. From the eastern most lookout area (Phase I of Master Plan 175j the proposed trail will be cut into the manufactured bluff along the rear property lines of lots 1 through 24 then it will follow the existing drainage bench along the.rear of lots 8 - 20. As shown on Exhibit "B", a concrete lid will be placed over the drainage bench with a slotted concrete drain being constructed below the lid. In this way, the covered drainage bench will be converted into this portion of the public trail. With this proposal, the only grading required would be on the already disturbed uphill side of the trail. This grading would be minimal and would only be necessary to widen the trail to 5 feet. Environmentally compatible railroad tie retaining walls (1 level high) would be placed along the uphill side of the proposed walkway. No additional grading into the natural lagoon bluff habitat to the south of this proposed trail would be necessary. Wrought iron fencing (4 feet on top of a solid block barrier one foot above grade) will be constructed to prohibit encroachment onto private residential property to the north and into sensitive lagoon bluff habitat to the south of the trail.' The distance between the two fences will be a minimum of 10 feet in accordance with the provisions of the deed . restriction. The downhill fence will follow the edge of the natural bluff which is not in every case the rear property line. A significant topographic mound (lO.feet high) exists within the rear of lots 5-8. Within this area, the proposed five foot wide trail will be depressed (notched into the topography to a depth of 18" below grade). Immediately to the east, the five foot wide trail will be constructed at grade across lots 2 thru 4. The same wrought iron perimeter trail fencing will be incorporated across lots 2-8. At the eastern lot line of lot 2, two trail alignment alternatives are included. One alternative would extend the trail southwestward along the drainage channel located between lot 2 and the adjacent recreation lot and out to Navigator Circle, From there, the trail would continue out to Windrose Circle, southward to the Poinsettia Avenue bridge. : MP 157(A) - BATIQV-OS MARCH 15, 1989 PAGE 3 ‘. The second alternative would extend the trail from the eastern lot line of lot 2 to the eastern property line of the Master Plan. If a pedestrian bridge is ever constructed over I-5 (thereby providing a continuous connection with the eastern portfon of the trail along the Hillman Property) then this second alternative alignment would be necessary. In accordance, the project applicant will need to reserve an easement for this trail alignment. If this alignment alternative is not feasible, then it will be quit claimed at a specific future date. The specific alignment for the western extent of this lagoon public access trail (that portion between the observation point located on the western side of the desiltation basin to the A.T.&S.F. railroad right-of-way and ultimately to Carlsbad Boulevard) has not been determined as yet. Staff believes that this portion of the trail will be located along the top of the Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge. However, there is a possibility that, as a condition of approval associated with a separate Master Plan Amendment request for the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park (MP-175(C)), the proposed residential development (Planning Area "H") along this portion of the lagoon bluff will be set back further, thereby opening up more area along the lagoon bluff top for a lagoon public access trail. In identifying a conceptual acceptable lagoon public access trail alignment, a number of goals were. established including: (1) That the trail provide a usable public access along Batiquitos Lagoon, (2) That grading (aesthetic effects) are minimized along the bluff edge, (3) That encroachment into sensitive biological habitat is minimized, and (4) That privacy for bluff edge property owners be maintained. Overall, staff believes that the proposed conceptual trail location plan does work and does respond to each of these project goals. As proposed, this trail will provide a usable public access trail along the northern perimeter of Batiquitos Lagoon. The amount of grading for this proposed trail will be very minimal, in that the trail will follow the existing drainage bench and other graded portions of the property. Construction of this proposed trail will require no encroachment into sensitive biological habitats, including; (1) the cattail dominated freshwater marsh located to the south of the existing desiltation basin, and (2) the coastal sage scrub covered lagoon side slopes. In addition, the privacy for residents at most of the bluff edge dwelling units will be preserved in that the proposed trail will be located down slope from their dwelling units. While City staff is willing to recommend approval of this proposed trail alignment, there is, however, an important issue which will need-to be addressed, as discussed below. ' MP 157(A) - BATIQU, JS ' . MARCH 15, 1989 PAGE 4 . The California Coastal Commission is the holder of the deed restrictinn (lagoon trail easement) over the Master Plan. In accordance, the ultimate alignment for this lagoon trail will be subject to the approval of the California Coastal Commission. As noted earlier in this report, the deed restriction covers the entirety of the rearyards of the bluff edge Tots and requires a 10 foot wide easement for trail purposes. The trail as proposed is only 5 feet wide. Staff, however, believes that the proposed 5 foot wide trail is the best alternative because a 10 foot wide trail would either (1) have to be located upon the bluff top, within the immediate (usable portion of) rearyards of the bluff edge dwelling units or (2) additional lagoon side slope grading would be necessary. Locating the trail within the rearyards (some of which are as narrow as 15 feet in depth) would reduce usable private open space (to as little as 5 feet) and create invasion of privacy and potential vandalism impacts. Grading additional area of the lagoon side slopes to construct a 10 foot wide trail could result in aesthetic and biological impacts. In accordance with this concern, staff has added Condition No. 3 to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768, which specifies that this lagoon public access trail plan is approved subject to the approval of the California Coastal Commission. Any trail revisions mandated by the California Coastal Commission will necessitate that the trail plan be redesigned by the project applicant. In order to ensure that the lagoon public access trail is constructed in a timely manner, and maintained, staff has added Condition No. 4 to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2768. This condition specifies that this lagoon trail shall be constructed prior to minor accessory structures being constructed within the rearyards of the bluff edge dwelling units within Planning Area "C". In addition, the project applicant shall be responsible for maintaining this trail. Overall, since the proposed trail plan appears to meet all of the goals for an acceptable lagoon public access trail , staff recommends that this trail plan be approved as a part of Master Plan 175(A). CDD:af March 1, 1989 Exhibit 4 Two letters Of comment were submitted in response to the Negative Declaration issued for MP-175(A) (see attached letters from the Department of Fish and Game dated September 19, 1988 and from Delores Welty, dated October 21, 1988). Thh specific comments and responses to these are listed below: LEllER FROM DFPARTMNT OF FISH AND GAME (1) COMMENT: "In response to the Draft EIR prepared for the Sammis Development Project, both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of Fish and Game indicated that a lOO-foot , natural open space buffer would be adequate to ensure slope stability, maintain upland habitat, protect wetland habitat and provide passive public use..." RESPONSE: The Environmental Impact Report (EIR 84-3) concluded that a bluff edge setback of minimum 45' was adequate to mitigate biological and visual impacts of development. As you also note in your comment, this 45' setback was approved by the Coastal Commission. 12) COMMENT: The Department of Fish and Game recommends that no structure should be allowed within the reduced 45 foot setback, and that the natural open space use designation be maintained. RESPONSE: The purpose of the 45' setback was to mitigate potential biological encroachment and visual impacts from development. These setback goals will still be achieved with this proposed Master Plan Amendment in that all accessory structures are required to be setback a minimum of 3' from the Batiquitos Lagoon Bluff edge closest to the dwelling unit, with a 5' high wrought iron fence, (to prohibit intrusions), required to -be constructed along the nearest bluff edge (either manufactured or natural) closest to the structure. In addition, potential visual impacts from the construction of accessary structures will be mitigated in that specific design criteria which specify; allowed uses, maximum heights, and maximum allowable distances permitted within the setback area, have been incorporated into this proposed amendment. The project applicant has also dedicated to the City an Open Space Easement over the 45' setback area. 131 COMMENT; The Department recommends revegetation of the graded lots up to the 45 foot setback line with native vegetation and maintenance of revegetated areas. RESPONSE: This was a specific condition of the Coastal Permit of the Master Planned Project. 141 COMMENT: We believe that an EIR is required for the proposed amendment unless the setback is left undisturbed by any accessory structures. : . RFSPONSE: As noted is Response No. 2, implementation of the proposed Master Plan Amendment would still ensure compliance with the intended setback goals, therefore no significant impacts are anticipated. (51 COMMENT: We additionally find that the proposed Amendment conflicts with the requirements of Coastal Act Section 30270 related to the retention of environmentally sensitive areas. RESPONSF: Coastal staff was consulted with during negotiations regarding 9 this proposed Amendment. A Coastal Development Permit Amendment will be required for this Amendment. LETTER FROH DELORES WELTY JlI COMMENT: Page 6 of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II, item 18 should be checked "Yes," for the following reasons: A) The 45 foot setback was mitigation for the visual impact of the project. I refer you to the project's original Environmental Impact study, pages 11 and 12, part 3. Toooqrauhv and Visual Aesthetics; and to page 54, part c., Mitiaation (Exhibits "A" and "8," enclosed). The 45-50 foot buffer area was intended as open space, not rear yards. There were to be no structures in this buffer/setback area, and the understanding of the public was that this area would be left in open space, that it would not be private property, that it would serve as a visual buffer for adjacent property as well as for scenic highways, and that it was part of the buffer space required between construction impacts and the lagoon wetland. The environmental study also recommends that building height adjacent to the bluff be limited to 15 feet. Until these dwelling units began to rise, the public believed that the builder had been held to this requirement. Bluff edge houses were supposed to be one-story dwellings. RESPONSE: You are correct that the 45' setback was intended to mitigate visual impacts of development along the lagoon bluffs. In accordance, structural design and use criteria have been established through this amendment to ensure that visual impacts are adequately mitigated. As shown on CT 85-14, the buffer area in question is located upon residential lots and not within a designated open space area. The reason for this amendment request is to allow typical minor accessary uses to be constructed upon what is private property. The existing Master Plan does require that structures (specifically residences) be setback 45' from the bluff edge. However, as noted in the existing staff report, prohibiting minor accessary uses within what is the rear yards on private property would be a difficult enforcement problem, - 12) COMMENT: RESPONSE: 13) COMMENT: especially since there existed no open space easement over the setback area. Through this amendment negotiation, the applicant has dedicated an open space easement to the City in order to allow the specific use and design criteria of this amendment to be enforced. In the context of this existing situation, the City feels that this amendment request is the best solution in that, (1) The City has been dedicated an Open Space Easement over the 45' setback area, (2) the future homeowners will be allowed to construct typical minor accessary uses within a portion of their rear yards and (3) no significant biological or visual impacts will occur in view of the specific use and design guidelines applicable to permitted accessory uses. The EIR (84-3) does not recommend that bluff edge dwelling units be limited in height to 15'. This 15' height was only referenced relative to a standard recommended within the unadopted Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan. Within the 45/50 foot setback, a IO-foot wide public access trail was required. (Exhibits "A" and "a") Public access to water bodies is protected by state law. Sammis was required to designate land for a possible trail along the top of the bluff. This requirement is a condition put on his project by the Coastal Commission. It is part of.his Coastal Commission permit. (Exhibit "D"). Placement of rear yard structures within the 45' setback area as requested by Sammis would eliminate the possibility of any trail along the top of the bluff. This amendment could allow fences and other structures to be placed on the trail by homeowners. This amendment is therefore not acceptable. Placement of the trail at the top of the bluff was recommended as a mitigation requirement of the project (Exhibit "A" page 12, Bioloqv,). and was part of the mitigation requirements (Exhibit "B", page 54, a.). While the EIR does stipulate that no development should occur below the top of the bluff, the precise location for the lagoon trail was to be determined through the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan. This is currently being reviewed as part of the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan EIR. The Coastal Permit does not require that a 10' wide public access trail be located along the bluff top. Instead, it specifies that . if the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan recommends that the trail be located at the top of bluff, then the project applicant is required to satisfy this requirement. The purpose of the proposed landscaping adjacent to the homes on the top of the bluffs was also part of the mitigation for the visual impact of this project on scenic I-5, Batiquitos Lagoon, and the surrounding area. (Exhibit "B" page 54, c.) As the trees are now placed, that is, ON THE PROPOSED TRAIL - SITE, they will not adequately mitigate the visual impact. Instead, they merely block the proposed trail site and adversely impact the ocean view of homes east of I-5 which overlook the project. RESPONSE: Comment noted. When the landscaping referred to in the EIR, is fully planted and reaches maturity, it will serve to buffer the development from the lagoon viewshed. (4, COMMENT: Page 6, item 21. e) of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT I FORM - PART II is not 100% correct. This item says "the dwelling units are already constructed and occupied." .Actually, NONE of the dwelling units on lots 10 through 24 have been built. lots. Foundations are not yet poured for these Lots 10 through 24 are the lots that were graded to unacceptable levels and which the builder reduced somewhat in height in compliance with a previous plan amendment. Lots 10 through 24 are also the lots where we most fear losing the public access trail since so much of the 45 foot setback is used up in steep manufactured slopes. After all, when a lot is raised 11 feet above the original bluff, 22 feet are used up by the manufactured slope in order to comply with city regulations of a 2:l slope ratio. It is true that the dwelling units along the siltation basin have been constructed and are occupied. The problems facing the builder are more knotty here than they are on the bluff edge. RESPONSE: Comment noted. You are correct that all of the aforementioned units have not been fully constructed. However, building permits have been pulled for each of those units and foundations have been poured for most of them. 15, COMMENT: We Agree with alternative d), page 6 of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II: "The only other environmentally acceptable use for the site would be open space." In fact, the mitigation measures which were agreed upon by the builder at the time of the acceptance of Master Plan 175 reauire that the site be open space. (See Exhibits "A" "8" and "D"). RESPONSE: Comment noted. J6) COMMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II, page 7, item 22. Mandator-v findinqs of siqnificance,: Items (a), (b), and (c) should all be marked "yes." It is true that the project amendment has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment (a). It has the potential to impact the environment over the long-term (b). Most significantly, the project amendment does have impacts which seem individually considerable (c). limited but are cumulatively This conclusion was also reached by the environmental study for the project. (Exhibit "8" pages 50 through 54). RESPONSE: As noted in the response to comment #I, the use and design criteria provisions incorporated into this amendment will ' . function to mitigate potentially significant project impacts. (7) COMMENT: V. We concur with staff and developer See Exhibit "C" dated August 17, 1988, of the staff report - (enclosed) that the 45/50 foot buffer zone should be measured from the bluff edge of the manufactured slope as indicated on the drawing. However, in reality, the setback area is NOT measured from the edge of the manufactured bluff. Therefore: VI. Staff EXHIBIT "C" is misleading. The drawing on Exhibit "C" of the City of Carlsbad Planning Staff Report indicated that the 45' setback area is measured from the top of the manufactured bluff edge. This is correct. Instead, for the majority of all lots, the 45' setback area is measured from the top of the remaining natural bluff edge- --that is, the lowest edge. We have enclosed a corrected drawing. (See Corrected staff report Exhibit "C" attached) RESPONSE: Measurements which are calculated from "the bluff edge" can be misinterpreted, and should be restated so that there is no room for misunderstanding among staff, builder, and public as to which bluff edge is indicated--the natural bluff edge or the manufactured bluff edge, You are correct in stating that for most of the bluff edge lots, the 45' setback area extends to the natural bluff edge. However, because there exist several lots which include 45' to the manufactured bluff edge, staff felt that exhibit "C" would be most appropriate. Exhibit "C" clearly shows that no structures or uses of any type could extend beyond the edge of the manufactured bluff, regardless of the depth of the rear yard. While your proposed revised Exhibit "C" applies to some of the lots, it doe not provide any clarity for properties which have topographically level rear yards, in excess of 15' in depth. - f!L Please see column "C" of Exhibit "C." There is no reason to allow these structures to be build within 3' from either bluff edge. Again, we stress that putting structures this close to the bluff edge and within the 45/50 foot setback/buffer area does two things: 1) It violates the Coastal Commission permit condition which requires the builder to set aside 10" for a public access trail, and 2) it eliminates the purpose of the setback as mitigation for loss of view and for protection of the wetlands. None of the Accessory Uses suggested on Exhibit "C" should be allowed within the buffer area. The builder should be required to honor the development standards of his Master Plan. RESPONSE: There exists no Coastal Commission permit condition requirfng that a 10' foot wide pathway be set aside for a public access trail. Again, the location for this trail will be determined through the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan. As noted In Response #l, the use and design provisions of the amendment will function to adequately mitigate potential impacts. CD:lh A:BATIQ.NOT : _._ _ C -_ -_-- -- -_ ;: =-- _ .__- E -;z - - - -= - Y.-z--- r __ ,,-: -.-z - --- ‘- - -2 _--- __ -A;& - __ . $k& uf clIaGf&a govm4OW8 OrtIC --a. OfL~c~-~f~P~an~lng 6 Revarch: State C,ieprlngtyause 1400 TXNTW STRIET UACRAMRNTO 080 14 , DJms; a&?!, /9&? FAX N(JbLB=t (9161323-3749 7 OF COPIES INCWDING COWR SHEET: r If any problems with this tranemissLon please call (916) 3224813 - ‘a l * - -; -_ -;I- ._ ;- --- ---= --_ --- _ ,_.--- =- _. i, - - .- -w-m ---: --- L . a, CcAuIpIALoHiQ gr n;r 8owRNoI l . ‘Ct O? PUNNING AND RI%I!!ARCH '-mum . 'WlMQcA wt4. -- . Chrts OeCsrbo City of Carltbad NIvlgator Circle Cwlrbad, CA 9iWY Scntenbcr 22, 19UcI subjett Batlquibos Lagoon Educattonal Park Raster Plan Amendment SCH% 88082404 mu8 Ms, Watbo: l)w Strta Clurfnghouu has Suhitted the &ovo rm& propsed Mgativq peclrration to roloctad mute agwciir for review. The review period is now closed and the g’cmmnta frrrm tb roqondfng agency ( ior) ir (are) l nclomd. 01 the enclosed Notice of Completion form you will noto that the Cloaringlwuso has chxkmd tb qmncier that have -ntod. Plee maview the Notice of Complotlon to enbura that your comont p8ck8ga ir cenglateh If the cwnt pWcage ir sot in order, pleur notify tin Strto Cleu@ptxim iumdiately. N8nmdor to refer to the project13 eig!atdigit Stat0 Cluring:bu8a nmber Iy) thatwermy rupond promptly. Pkau mk fhrt Section 21104 of the California Public Rasourcea Cbdi roqufrrs thata 'Q nrpcuuible agmq w othqr pblic agancy aha only maka rubstantive cwntr regarding there activities involved in a project which atie within an area of +qertfm of the agency or which are raquirod to be carried cut or app?Tovwd by the agency.m (kting,ugmnciu am ala0 required by this aaction to suppert their ccmmpts with apacif ic +ocumPtatfoP. Theme axumnta l farwudd for your use in adopting your Xegatiyb Clclrrati&. If you nwd mre inforartion or clarification, wo rocomrnmd that you contact the -cmmntfnp rprry rt ywr e8rlio8t ammienco. Thi8 lotfor mm th8t you hvo caupliad with the State Clsaringhouae revhw goquirorunt8 for draft l nviromantal documonta , pursuant ta the California pnvimrrmtrl maJAy Mt. Pleua contact Keith Lu at 916/445-0613 if you haw any qwrtforw regarding the l nvirummntrl rovim procos8. * F~.d.+ . , Iavid c. rsvwrJturp ‘ski oefica of mmit Amistune* h Memorandum To I 1. Project8 Cootdinntor ROSOUCCII Ayrrr~~ 2. City 02 Larlrhd Planning De artmrnt 2074 Las P Ps ma8 Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 from I hportmont of fbh ond Oomo * --- -__ TlwRmvmrAgoncy Data 8 September 19, 1988 w: Negative Decl8ration: plan Amendment, Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master City of Carlobad, San Dlego County - SCH 88082404 The Department of Fish and Game biologist familiar with the atea has inspected the site and reviewed the proposed amendment to the Batiquftos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan (Master ?lan 175) located on the Ssmmfs Propettfes on the south sidi of Navigation Circle along the south-facing bluff edge to the north of the Batiquitos Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed amendment would allow residents to install accessory structures and improvements within the requlrod 4%foot “structural sotback” areas of the lagoon bluff top. In response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Sanunis Development Project, both the U.3, Fish and Wfldlife Service (USPWS) and the Department, irtdicatrd that a IOC-faot natural oprn space buffer would be adequate to ensure uluyr stability, maintain upland, hahi tat,, protect wetland habitat, and provide parsive public use of the Batiquitos tbqoon State Geological Reserve. Commission, 4Sfoot Due to action by the Californ:.a Coastal a minimal but fer. setback was approved. This Ls, at beet, a fn the USFWS's response to the EIR, (dated April 30, 1985) C,hey stated; “A buffer strip of a minimum of 100 feat from the edge of the bluff could 6erve the dual purpose of providing a buffer to protect important biological and wetland resources as well as provide recreational/open spa.:e . , opportunities . . . . The coastal rage scrub covectd bluifs and wetland areas 6hould be maintained in a natural anJ undisturbed state and no structures should be- allowed (within :he buffer area). 1’ The Department recommends that no structures be allowed within thr reduced 4S-foot setback, and that the ntturill open rpace use dsoignation be maintained. graded, in some places, Since th6 ar?a is already to within 10 feet of the bluff top edge, preservation of the native vegetation ie now inpossible. The Department recommends rtvegetation af the graded l3t6 4S-foot setback line with native vegetation and mainten rtvtgttattd areas. This would provide bluff stabi:izat in the prevention of sediments entering Batiquitas Lag Rsgarding the prerontly proposed amendment, “spas, dec trellises, barbecues, planters,” fences, walls, etc., structure6 that should not be allowed within the 45-foo structural setback. I - ,-.. The aetbrck should be designated “open apace”, and the public trail should be the only authorited bctlvity within the 4S-foot retbrck arra. In conclurion, the Dspartment.objects to the UIC of a Neg6tivr Declaration of project impact since significant adverse impacts to sensitive *bluff armas, as well as Batiquitos Lagoon itself, could result from project implementation. On the contrary, we believe that an EfR 16 required for the proposed amendment unless the retback is left undisturbed by any accessory atructL:rea, and unlraa the setback ir used a6 a natural open apace buffer to protect the natural bluff habitat and the adjacent senritive wrtland resource6 of Batiquitos Lagoon. we teconuuend that no 6ttucture6 of any kind be allowed within the 45foor, aetback, that the setback area be retained as open apace, and that, it be fully rmatored through a rovegotation program. We additimally find that propored aarndmetnt conflicts with roquirementr of Coastal Act Secticn 30270 r6lsted to the retention of environmentally aenaitivo areas such as the northern bluffs of Batiluitoa Lagoon. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comnent on this pro'ect. 2 If you have any questions, please contact Frrd Worthlsy, Reg onal Man6 or of Region 5, at 330 Golderr Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA 908 % 2 or by telephone at (213) 530-5113. Pf Pete bontadrlli Director cc: USPW8, Laguna Nfguel Coartal Comuirrion - ’ . - Lb / 3 cr-, .,;-.-- ‘1 I n ! DATE OCTOBER 21, 1988 TO: TLRMNING CO:~IMISSIOh’ Leucadia, CA 32021 SUEJJXT: ?;EGATIVE DECLARATION concern in3 i?? 175 (A), - EA’I’IQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PAFZ - Rquest for a??roval of an Amendment to allow accessory structures tiithin the 45 foot setback area along the south facing aatiquitos Lagoon bluff edge and overlooking the desiltation -basin. Llear Com,niss ioner 5: I hJVt2 ceceiveil 2 notice Of tile iJU51 ic ilear inij sc11cdu1cd for Novebeer 2 before the Plann inq CtJliliniSSion, but I have not jet received 3 notice concerniny tile rc--oy;f2n iny of the ;>er id of zo:nment concernins tile negative declaration. Never tnc1ess, I accept the public ilearincj .73tice d.5 an inclication t !l a t buy cox~en ts concernins the nc;;ativc declaration idill :2 e iouncl accc;t5ble ;It this tim, and tllat t;..~ city will respond to ~ this a;?;jcal. Chmk you iasr this 022ortunity to CG::~:l!eIlt. I object to tile ,.rsntiniJ of ~4lldIlIen t , 3 a r:2sjiltiv2 jeclsratitin on cllis ,lro- ca5cJ ancl I reGuc’s\I that t!‘lt’ :Jcilc!cz Lit re%uireJ tu provide 3 sup;?le:\ic!ntal Environ;:iental Z,::i1;1L‘t ?t?i>OZL a’;; Z&Lic:iZed 5y CEG:Y to evaluate changes in the I!aster Plan. ;.!a ‘1 reL.sons follow: .-- 2/7 **Comments concerning the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR&l - PART II of the NEGATIVE DECLARATION I. Page 6 of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II, item 18 should be. checked “Yes,” for the following reasons: A) The 45 foot setback was mitigation for the visual impact of the project. I refer you to the project’s Fnvironmental Impact study, original . nnd Visual hsthetrcs pages 11 and 12, part 3. w and to page 54, (Exhibits "A",and ,B,' kclosed). part c., Mlaaatm The 45-50 foot buffer area was intended as open space, not rear yards. There were to be no structures in this buffer/setback area, and the understanding of the public was that this area would be left in open space, that it would not be private property, that it would serve as a visual buffer for adjacent property as well as for scenic highways, and that it was part of the buffer space required between construction impacts and the lagoon wetland. The environmental study also recommends that building height adjacent to the bluff be limited to 15 feet. Until these dwelling units began to rise, the public believed that the builder had been held to this requirement. Bluff edge houses were supposed to be one-story dwellings. B) Within the 45/50 foot setback, a lo-foot wide public access trail was required. (Exhibits ,A” and “B”) Public access to water bodies is protected by state law. Sammis was required to designate land for a possible trail along the top of the bluff. This requirement is a condition put on his project by the Coastal Commission. It is part of his Coastal Commission permit. (Exhibit “D”) Placement of rear yard structures within the 45’ setback area as requested by Sammis would eliminate the possibility of any trail along the top of the bluff. This amendment could allow fences and other structures to be placed on the trail by homeowners. This amendment is therefore not acceptable. Placement of the trail at the top of the bluff was recommended as mitigation k requirement of the project (Exhibit “A” page 12, and was part of the mitigation requirements (Exhibit “B”, page 54, a.). I ,- 3/7 Cl The purpose of the proposed landscaping adjacent to the homes on the top of the bluffs was also part of the mitigation for the visual impact of this project on scenic I-5, Batiquitos Lagoon, and the surrounding area. (Exhibit “BR page 54, c.) AS \ the trees are now placed, that is, ON THE PROPOSED TRAIL SITE, they will not adequately mitigate the visual impact . Instead, they merely block the proposed trail site and adversely impact the ocean view *of homes east of I-5 which overlook the project. II. Page 6, item 21. e)of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 is not 100% correct. This item says “the dwelling units are already constructed and occupied.” Actually , NONE of the dwelling units on lots 10 through 24 have been built. Foundations are not yet poured for these lots. Lots 10 through 24 are the lots that were graded to unacceptable levels and which the builder reduced somewhat in height in compliance with a previous plan amendment. Lots 10 through 24 are also the lots where we most fear losing the public access trail since so much of the 45 foot setback is used up in steep manufactured slopes. After all, when a lot is raised 11 feet above the original bluff, 22 feet are used up by the manufactured slope in order to comply with city regulations of a 2:l slope ratio. It is true that the dwelling units along the siltation basin have been cons true ted and are occupied. The problems facing the builder are more. knotty here than they are on the bluff edge. III. Wei agree with alternative d), page 6 of the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II: “The only other environmentally acceptable use for- the site would be open space.” In fact, the mitigation measures which were agreed upon by the builder at the time of the acceptance of Master Plan 175 recruire that the site be open space. (See Exhibits 'A" “8” and “D”) . !- 4/7 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II, page 7, item 22. Mddd.Uy f af sianificance,: Items (a), (b), and (C) should all be marked “yes.” It is true that the project amendment has the potential to degrade the Quality of the environment (a). It has the potential to impact the environment over the long-term (b) . Most signifi- cantly, the project amendment does have impacts which seem individually limited but are cumulatively considerable (c). This conclusion was also reached by the environmental study for the project. (Exhibit “Bg pages 50 through 54) V. We concur with staff and the developer See Exbibit .C” dated August 17, 1988, of the staff report - (enclosed) that the 45/50 foot buffer zone should be measured from the bluff edge of the manufactured slope, as indicated on the drawing. However, in reality, the setback area is NOT measured from the edge of the manufactured bluff. Therefore: VI. Staff EXHIBIT ‘C’ is misleading. The drawing on Exhibit “C” of the City of Carlsbad Planning Staff Report indicates that the 45’ setback area is measured from the top of the manufactured bluff edge. This is not correct. Instead, for the majority of a’l.1 lots,’ the 45’ setback area is measured from the top of the remaining natural bluff edge--that is, the lowest edge. We have enclosed a corrected drawing. (See Corrected staff report Exhibit ‘C’ attached) Measurements which are calculated from “the bluff edge” can be misinterpreted, and should be restated so that there is no room for misunderstanding among staff, builder, and public as to wh bluff edge is indicated--the natural bluff edge or the -far:- tu bluff edge. - - Please see column “C” of Exhibit “C.” There is no reason to allow these structures to be built within 3’ from either bluff edge. Again, we stress that putting structures this close to the bluff edge and within the 45/50 foot setback/buffer area does two things: 1) It violates the Coastal Commission permit condition which requires the builder to set aside 10’ for a public access trail, and 2) it eliminates the purpose of the setback as mitiga- tion for loss of view and for protection of the wetlands. None of the Accessory Uses suggested on Exhibit “C” should be allowed within the buffer area. The builder should be required to honor the development standards of his blaster Plan. For these reasons therefore, we object to the granting of a negative declaration on this proposed amendment and request a supplemen ta1 Environmental Impact Report as required by the California Environmental Quality Act to evaluate proposed changes in the Master Plan. This amend men t is a request for a substantial change in the project. It signifies a substantial change in the circumstances under which the project was approved. This amendment is not the only concern that needs to be addressed regarding this project. Since the approval of the original Master Plan 175, Sammis has asked for and received many amendments and spec ial considerations. In the first year following approval of his Master Plan, Sammis asked for the following amendments Exhibit E: Memorandum dated October 28, 1986, to Dick Chick, city council): 1. That the proposed gymnasium and sports complex be moved closer to the hotel 2. That the size of the sports complex be increased from 29,200 square feet to 88,900 3. That the gymnasium be reduced from’.60,000 square feet to 24,600 4. That the hotel be accessed by an additional road on to Carlsbad Blvd - in addition to Ave. Batiquitos - - 6/7 5. That the educational facilities be separated from office and R and D uses, parking structures be eliminated, natural open space and other design amenities be reduced 6. That all references to the “law school” requirement be changed to read “educational entity.” 7. That cominercial uses within Planning Area “I” be increased from 22,000 square feet to 52,000 8. That space for the student cafeteria be added to these totals 9. That the daycare ten ter be moved from the south of Planning Area “I” to a spot adjacent to Lakeshore Garders, and that its size be increased by 4,800 square feet Sammis is considering further ammendments to put before you for your consideration: 1) A one-year ex’tens ion to attempt to come up with a prestigious graduate school. 2) Relocation of Carlsbad Blvd. in order to accommodate his hotel. 3) A reduction in the amount of square feet dedicated to educational purposes. 4) A revision of the uses allowed in the industrial research sections of his project. 5) An elementary school as the cornerstone for his promised prestigious graduate school. All these amendments are a piecemeal approach intended to modify the Master Plan. As the project continues, Sammis is making piecemeal amendments to the Master Plan which result in a substantial change in the project. This procedure is against the law in California. Piecemeal revisions which result in a substantial change in the project are not allowed under the California Environmental Quality Act. While individually each request for a change in the Master Plan requirements may appear to have a small effect, the cumulative impact is enormous. This present amendment request may appear to have a small effect, but the 45-foot-setback was a mitigation-for the visual impact of this whole project. Puttipg structures in the setback and treating this area as if it were intended to be the homeowner’s back yard eliminated the mitigation measures for the visual impact of this project. Allowing structures in the setback while not enforcing the trail allowance requirements and visual mitiga- t ion requirements of the Coastal Commission Permit makes the conditions of approval meaningless. The Sammis amendments are an attempt to change the nature of this entire project. 7/7 Sammis must not be allowed to continue to come before the City of Carlsbad every couple of months for changes which individually seem to be minor, but which in essence change the nature of the entire project. This procedure violates CEQA regulations. At this point in the process, before Sammis is allowed to ’ encroach further upon the required setback, construction should be halted, and the Master Plan should be reviewed as a whole and be dealt with as a whole, as required by the California .Environ- mental Quality Act. I officially request a supplemental Environmental Impact Report as required by CEQA to evaluate proposed changes in the Master Plan. Very truly yoursI t,. &>EC.J “.l I 5. e Dolores Welty 4 942-‘9897 Copies to: City of Carlsbad Planning Commissioners California Coastal Commission Chris DeCerbo, Planning Dept. Carlsbad 0’ Blacketer and Hile, attorneys - A ) I ,.ihb,;/ Y ’ /%? // B. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1. Traffic a. I,mpacts. The Weston Pringle and Associates report’ (1985) (Appendix 6) indicates that a total of 26,500 daily trip ends would be generated by the uses associated with the proposed project. This total exceeds the traffic volumes indicated for the project area in the City of Carlsbad traffic model by 12,780 trips. However, the net increase to the external, road system is 2,700 trips when internal trips are accounted for. This traffic volume will not exceed the capacities of any of the project area roadways. Peak-hour impacts at various intersections will result from implementation of the project and will require improvements to mitigate the potentially adverse effects. The Weston Pringle and Associates report (1985) indicates’ that the proposed project can be accommodated by the planned road system with the improvements outlined below. b. Mitigation. Mitigation measures to avoid potkntial impacts at various intersections include ( 1) signalization and dual southbound left-turn lanes at the Poinsettia Lane/Avenida Encinas inter- section, (21 improvements to Avenida Encinas, and (3) evaluation of the Carlsbad Boulevard/project access intersection, l-5 ramp intersections, and Poinsettia Lane should be completed when plans are available. Other measures recommended in the Weston Pringle and Associates report include monitoring of possible land use changes which could affect the traffic volumes and analysis of the internal roadway system when the design is available. 2. Land Use a. Impacts. The proposed industrial and research devel- opmen t associated with the university-type institution would not be allowed under the PC zone, since the underlying general plan designation is not compatible. The greatest potential land use incompatibility is between the proposed project and Batiquitos Lagoon and the e’xisting residential use (Lakeshore Gardens) along the northern property boundary. b. Mitigation. Design measures which have been incorporated into the project to reduce these potential impacts include 45- and SO- foot setbacks from the bluff edge at the southern part of the property; 25-foot height limitations for buildings adjacent to the bluff; and a. 15- foot landscaped buffer along the northern property boundary. 3. Topoqraphy and Visual Aesthetics a. Impacts. Approval of the proposed master plan and PC zone would allow a higher density development on the property than is currently allowed by the existing zoning. Consequently, the development will result in significant visual impacts associated with the height of structures adjacent to (within 50 feet of) the bluff. The future devel- opment will also affect the natural scenic views of @atiqUitOS Lagoon . ‘ E, .&it yh /w+y p- from Carlsbad Boulevard, a potential scenic highway in the City of Carlsbad General Plan, and from l-5, which is part of the state scenic highway system. b. Mitiqation. Several design controls have been incor- porated- into the .project to reduce visual impacts. Among them are bluff edge setbacks, building height limitations adjacent to the bluff, and an extensive landscaping program. In addition, it is recommended that building height in the area adjacent to the bluff be limited to 15 feet and maximum building height be limited to 40 fee,t instead of 75, which is proposed in the plan. 4. Archaeoloqical and Paleontoloqical Resources Impacts. Archaeological sites have been discovered on the subject ;ioperty as a result of previous surveys performed by WESTEC. Loss of these resources from future grading will result in a potentially. significant impact. Potential impacts to paleontology resources is not known since specific grading plans are not available. However, the Santiago Formation, which lies about ten feet beneath the surface, is -. likely to contain fossils. b. Mitiqation. Potential impacts to archaeological re- sources on the subject property are currently being mitigated through a salvage excavation program under the supervision of Brian Smith. Docu- mentation of this effort will require City of Carlsbad approval before the potential impacts can be considered mitigated and the project ap- proved. Since there would be a potential for impacts to significant paleon tological resources, it is recommended that a qualified paleon- tologist monitor grading in the vicinity of the identified stratum during project development. 5. loloqy s a. Impacts. Potential significant indirect biological impacts will occur as a result of the proposed passive and active recre- ation areas: trails adjacent to the lagoon; viewpoints; picnic areas; interpretive centerfs); and the amphitheater. These facilities will result in increased levels of human activity adjacent to the lagoon, which will have a direct effect on the lagoon’s productivity. Nesting of several shorebird species and foraging and resting of a variety of bird species, including three listed as rare and endangered by state and federal agencies, would probably be inhibited. b. Mitiqation. The potential impacts to biological re- sources can be mitigated by moving the proposed active and passive recre- ation facilities to the top of bluff and deleting or moving the amphi- theater. In addition, it is recommended that the lagoon wetland habitat on the property should be deeded to the State of California to be incor- porated into the Ecological Reserve administered by the Department of Fish and Game. This would insure preservation of this important biologi- cal resource. AGRICULTURE 0lSfUR6E0 FLOWER f IELO 1 INCH=500 FEET (APPAOX.‘1 ‘,$y : !’ I ,’ l .=. d..” -...,. .* ?. \. l * \ ..- . . . . -. ‘....\’ \ 1 FRESHWATER/BRACKISH MARSH 2 DISTURBED ~ARPOSROT~ DOMIN 3 LAGOON: COASTAL SALT MARSH/ MUD FLAT 4 COASTAL SAGE SCRUS 5 RIPAR~AN ‘ATEI: 6 EUCALYPTUS t II FIGURE 10. VEGETATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. - .- California black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura californica), a subspecies with a population that is declining within its range, have been observed in the coastal sage scrub habitat on the bluff. The dense coast cholla may also provide habitat for the locally declining coastal cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillum) . Below the coastal sage scrub-covered bluffs, the property includes wetlands habitats within the lagoon, including coastal salt marsh, brackish marsh, mudflats, and open water. These habitats provide important feeding, nesting, and resting habitat for a high diversity of water-dependent. bird species and important habitat for fish and aquatic invertebrates. Because of the importance of coastal lagoons to wildlife and because of the small proportion of originally existing lagoon habitat that has not been destroyed or degraded, this habitat requires special consideration for preservation. . A number of sensitive species have been observed in the vicinity of the project location or on the site. Three species listed by state and federal agencies as threatened or endangered are reported to use the wetland habitats on the site: California least tern (Sterna albifrons browni) and California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus) forage in the open water and rest on mudflats and Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldinqi) was observed in the salt marsh vegetation. The California least tern has nested at the lagoon mouth to the immediate south of the project site in recent years. 2. Impacts # Implementation of the master plan as proposed would result in the removal of current agricultural land, the small area of riparian habitat, and the eucalyptus grove. The loss of these resources would not have a significant effect on the biological resources on the property. The master plan calls for development in areas VI I I, IX, and X which would include passive and active recreation areas including trails, view- Lo&t;, public access, interpret& l center(s) , . . . outdoor entertainment facilities, bike/pedestrian trail adjacent to lagoon, . . . (and] picnic areas . . . . All of these uses would be below the level of the bluff on the slope or adjacent to the wetland. These activities would result in the removal of coastal sage scrub habitat and an undeterminable amount of wetland habi- tat. This would be a significant loss. The loss of adequate buffer and the resultant indirect impacts associated with the increased levels of human activity directly adjacent to the lagoon would have a significant effect on the biological productivity of the lagoon. These uses would also be potentially damaging to the adjacent ecological reserve managed by the California Department of Fish and Game. Nesting of several shorebird species in the lagoon habitats on and adjacent to the site and foraging and resting of a variety of species’, including three birds listed by state and federal agencies, would probably be inhibited. . Any grading activity that contribut:s to runoff or erosion and sedimentation into the lagoon would have a significant adverse effect on the biological resources of the lagoon. .The development as proposed would not be cpnsistent with the long-term goals of the City of Carlsbad for the lagoon and its resources. The City of Carlsbad Draft Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan [August 28, 1984) identifies the portion of the property below the top of the bluff and including the fill bench in the southwestern corner of the property as a “lagoon resource” area. Policy statements that characterite the intent of the plan are as follows. 301.03 Development should not take place within the lagoon resource line until satisfactory investigation can be accomplished to identify mitigation that reduces impacts to. an insignificant level. This would include any proposed bicycle or pedestrian trails, which should be located outside of the Lagoon Resource Line and in the Critical Planning Area, as discussed below. 301.04 Active recreation should not be allowed on the lagoon. 301 .OS Passive recreation on the lagoon should only be allowed if there is no substantial adverse impact to wildlife. (In other words, habitat protection has priority over recreation). Much of the remainder of the property is within a Critical Planning Area. Within the Critical Planning Boundary (CPB), the goals for future development include 201.00 Minimize impacts on wildlife habitats that are function- ally related to the lagoon resource. Policies for development within the CPS include 201.02 Human activity should be designed/controlled so that it will not substantially adversely affect wildlife habitats that are functionally related to the lagoon. 202.04 Development should be setback from surrounding bluff edges. 203.03 There should be ‘limited public access to the wetlands shoreline. Access should only be at locations where there could be minimal impacts on the lagoon ecosystem. 204.01 Human uses of. the ciitical planning area should be com- patible with the primary use of the wetland as a natural wildlife environment. 205.01 There should be a bicycle trail or lane around the lagoon. On the north, a bicycle trail adjacent to the lagoon may not be possible. It is the policy of this plan to have a bicycle trail extending from El Camino Real. to Carlsbad Boulevard as near to the north shore of the lagoon as possible. The limited access points mentioned in policy 203.03 above should be accessed by * bicycle, auto and foot, and should be properly signed. Additional guidelines are provided in the management plan for development standards: 201.021 All structures shall be setback a minimum of SO-ft. from the Lagoon Resource Line (LRL) (see Figure 10). 202.040 All structures shall be set back from bluff edges and ridgelines a minimum of 45 feet. No portion of any structure within 100 feet of a bluff edge shall exceed one story (15 feet) maximum height from the elevation of the bluff. 203.021 Public viewing points and a trail system (bicycle and hiking) shall be established around the lagoon within the Critical Planning Area. California Department of Fish and Game shall be allowed to restrict public access to sensitive habitat areas. 205.011 Large scale recreational facilities that require fencing or structures or that attract large concentrations of people shall be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the Lagoon Resource Line. 2OS.021 Small scale active recreational facilities (eg. family tennis courts and swimming pools) shall be set back a minimum of 150 feet from the LRL. 205.022 All active recreational facilities shall be screened by landscaping. 205.031 Passive recreational facilities shall not require a setback from the landward edge of the LRL. (Fencing may be necessary to restrict access to sensitive habitat areas). 3. Mitiqation Mitigation of impacts to biological resources resulting from implementation of the proposed master plan for the property can be accom- plished through incorporation of the policies and goals of the Batiquitos Lagoon Management Plan into the project design. The following specific measures would substantially reduce the impacts of the project. -<w “0 I’ J=“ir s-4 a. No development, including bicycle and pedestrian trails should occur below the top of the bluff. The proposed bicycle trail should be located at the top of the bluff along the entire length of the property. In addit ion, this trail should be set back at least five feet from the edge of, the bluff between the western edge of the drainage canyon’to Highwa’y 101. The setback would provide minimum buffering for a high bird activity area within the wetlands habitat of the lagoon. The construction of any structures or grading and filling in the floodway could require a Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Because ofethe use of the property by federally endangered bird species, the 404 Permit process would also involve consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. Also, diversion of natural flow or change in the channel, bed,* or banks of any river, stream, or lake will require notification to the California Department of Fish and Came in accordance with Sections 1601-1603 of the Fish and Came Code. b. The area of disturbed sea-fig covered fill in the south- west corner of the property should not be developed for either active or passive uses because of its proximity to sensitive wildlife and foraging habitat. In addition, this acea should be analyzed for feasibility of restoration as a California least tern or Belding’s Savannah sparrow nesting area. Jb/ All buildings should be set back a minimum of 45 feet from the edCge of the bluff. Construction should include measures to minimize the impact of increased noise and light levels on the lagoon habitat. The area between the bluff top and development should be land- scaped to minimize the apparent presence of human activity to wildlife on the lagoon except at certain limited view access points. d. The amphitheater proposed for location in the small north-south drainage in the south-central portion of the property should be located at least 300 feet outside the lagoon resource area to minimize the effects of noise and high levels of activity on the wildlife in the lagoon. The freshwater marsh habitat lost during construction of the detention basin in the drainage should be reestablished. e. The grading plan should incorporate measures to prevent runoff or erosion and sedimentation into the lagoon during construction and a design to permanently control these potentially damaging impacts to the lagoon, including the prohibition of grading from October 1 through April 1. Also, native drought-tolerant vegetation is recommended for landscaped areas. f. The lagoon wetland habitat on the property should be deeded to the State of California to be incorporated into the Ecological Reserve administered by the Department of Fish and Came. This would insure permanent preservation of this important biological resource. BATIQUITOS LAGOON EXHIBIT 'C' DATED AUGUST 17, 1988 Setback Area I I C :%A: I I I I *Maximum 5' high wrought iron fence to be constructed by ACCESSORY USES PERHITTED SETEIACK AREA "A" (8') Landscaped Trellis 1. Hax 9’6” Ht. 2. Per approved bldg plans. 3. Anything per- mitted in Areas "8" s "C". “6” (IS’) Spas Barbecues Planter Boxes Gardkn Ualls Spa Equipment Enclosures 1. flax 3jV Ht 2. Anything permitted in Area ” c ” . (UP TO 3' FROtf,! “C" (BLUFF EDGE) Decks Spas (ihall be 5,' from bluff edge) Patios - tiardscape 1. flax 10" Ht h . EXHI8IT ‘C’ DATED AUGUST 17, 1988 Setback Area 1 I I C ! %A: I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I l I I I 1 ' I I ' I 1 I I I 1 I ! A* 8' iv EMTIQUITOS LAGOON *Maximum 5' high wrought iron fence to be constructed by developer. ACCESSORY USES PEFMITTED SETBACK AREA "A" (8') Landscaped Trellis 1. flax 9'6" Ht. 2. Per approved bldg plans. 3. Anything per- mitted in Areas "8" s "C". “6” (15’) Spas Barbecues Planter Boxes Garden Walls Spa Equipment Enclosures 1. Hax 35" Ht 2. Anything permitted in Area " c " - (UP TO 3' FROM) "C" (BLUFF EDGE1 Decks Spas (shall be 5 from bluff edge) Patios Hardscape 1. Max 10” Ht I . nP= m. _,. \ CaSTAL 6EVELOPHkNT PERHI NO. 6 -e!i-407 age9of 10 SPECIAL CONDITIONS - continued: option of paying such fees in accordance with the three (3) phases of the project as specified in the Uastet Plan. Such evidence shall be submitted prior to the transmittal of the coastal development permit and shqll be subject to the review and written approval of the Executive Director. 12. Siqnaqe. Prior to the transmittal of the coastal development penit, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign program for the project which shall include the use of freeway directional signs and other cormnunity identification or directional signs to direct traffic to the site via the Avenida Encina access rather than the Carlsbad Boulevard access proposed for implementation in Phase 3 of the Haster Plan. The sign program shall be subject to the review and written approval of the Executive Director.. 73. Public Access. Prior to transmittal of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall submit a public access plan for the project which assures compliance with the following requirements: (A) The public access vista point proposed for area C shall be maintained for public use and shall be appropriately marked with public access identification signs at the vista points and other areas to direct the public to those sites. (6) To provide access to the public access vista points proposed in area C, Navigator Circle shall not be limited to private use as currently indicated on project plans. (C) A continuous public access path shall be provided along the north shore of Batiqu?tos Lagoon. T_he location of such access path m be determined subsequent to Commission review of the Batiqultos Lagoon Enhancement Plan. Should the approved enhancement me rne aerermination thaZ public access along the base of the bluffs is appropriate, provision of a path in that alignment shall be the responsibility of the applicant or. at the discretion of the accepting-agency, the agency which accepts the offer to dedicate an open space easement over the area pursuant to Special Condition #2 of the penit, or. any other party identified as resposible for such improvements in the Enhancement Plan as approved by the Commission. * Should the approved Enhancement Plan include the determination that a continuous public access path along the base of the bluffs would - lnterfere with the habitat value of the laaoon resources, a my C6fItinUOUS Dath shall be provided within the bluff-top setback area along the tbp of the laqoon bluffs in areas L H, K and L rer case. a aa Gspectively. I n eltt +h of adequate width (minimum 74 feet) shall be fmc! with sufficient improvements to provide reasonable access along the north shore of the lagoon. ‘-* MEMORANDUM DATE: OCTOBER 28, 1986 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR VIA : CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATION PARK - Revisions requested. This memorandum addresses the proposed Master Plan and other tentative map/site development plan revisions that Sammis Properties is requesting since the City Council approval of this Master Planned project in October of 1985. These requested revisions are briefly discussed below. (1) A general plan amendment and amendment to MP-175 and CT 85-37 to make major land use changes whereby the proposed gymnasium and sports complex would be moved southward into Planning Areas "G" and "I", where the proposed student housing and teachers condominiums were formerly located. The teachers condominiums would be deleted and the student housing would be relocated to Planning Area "I", adjacent to the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Rome Park within the northwest corner of the site. This change has been requested in order to locate the proposed sports complex in closer proximity to the hotel. It is noted here that the applicant is also requesting to increase the size of the sports complex from a maximum of 29,200 square feet to 88,900 square feet. The gymnasium has been reduced in size from a maximum of 60,000 square feet to 24,600 square feet. (2) Amendment to MP-175 and to CT 85-38 to allow the construction of an additional project access from Carlsbad Boulevard into the proposed hotel which is located west of the railroad tracks within the southwest cot-ner of the property: This access from Carlsbad Boulevard onto the property would be in addition to the one proposed at Avenida Batiquitos. .- Jk4;~,ih “g ” a3 / (3) (4) (5) (6) Amendment to CT 85-14/CT 65-37/SDP 85-S/SDP 85-15 to reorient educational, office, research and development structures within the center of the approved ring road (Windrose Circle). This reorientation would result in all educational structures being located within a node in the immediate center of Planning Area “A”. Parking lots would surround the educational structures with office, research and development structures located adjacent to Windrose Circle. This change would result in: (a) segregation of educational uses from office, research and development uses, (b) elimination of parking structures, (c) increased pavement coverage, and (d) a reduction of natural open space and other design amenities within the inner circle. Amendment to Master Plan 175 to delete all references to the applicants requirement to provide a "law school".as the primary educational component of the educational institute. The project applicant is unable to reach agreement with a law school at this time and has requested that all references to a law school be replaced with the wording "educational entity". In accordance with this request, the applicant has submitted letters of intent from five other schools which may satisfy the requirement that an educational entity will occupy Phase I of the project prior to residential building permits being issued. In association with this requested change, Condition No. 17 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2487 may also have to be amended. This Condition currently states: "The proposed law school must be constructed and operating prior to the issuance of building permits for the other proposed office, research and development facilities." Amendment to MP-175 to increase commercial uses within Planning Area "I' from a maximum of 22,000 square feet to 52,000 square Eeet. In addition, the applicant is requesting to develop a student cafeteria which staff contends was originally included as a portion of the 22,000 square feet of commericial approved with the Master Plan. Amendment to MP-175 to move the proposed daycare center from the southern extremes of Planning Area "I" to the northern extremes of Planning Area "I", adjacent to the Lakeshore Garden Mobile Home Park and the condominium approved in Planning Area "F". The applicant is also requesting that the daycare center be increased from a maximum area of 10,000 square feet to 14,800 square feet. . /. ’ l / /: . I /‘, (7) Revirion to Planning Area "B" (CT 85-14/PVD 90) in order to: (a) change the product type from stacked flats to a combination of townhomes and stacked flats, (b) reduce the height of the dwelling units from three-story to two-story and, (cl relocate the approved recreation area. CDzdm - ksiVI8ED EXHIBIT "B" DATED MARCH 15, 1989 CHAPTER IV - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION B - SPECIAL PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: PAGE 33 PRESENTLY READS AS: Setbacks: All structures shall be setback a minimum of between 45' and 50' from the south facing Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge. Amended Page 33 shall read as: Setbacks: All structures with the exception of those structures or uses described below, shall be setback a minimum of between 45' and 50' from the south facing Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge. (A) Landscaped Wood Trellis - to be constructed by the developer, as shown on approved building plans for the model units. Specific dimensions of the trellis shall be: (1) a maximum height of 9'6 I1 from the finished grade of the lot upon which the trellis is to be located; (2) a maximum width of 8' from the outside edge of the posts supporting the trellis; and (3) the trellis shall not extend out more than 8' from the exterior of the rear wall of the residential structure. (B) The following structures or uses are permitted to be constructed within 15' of the exterior of the rear wall of the residential structure, provided that: (1) the uses are located a minimum of 3' (excluding spas which shall be a minimum of 5') from the Batiguitos Lagoon bluff edge (either manufactured or natural, whichever is closest to the residential structure); and (2) the uses do not exceed a height of 36" above the finished grade of the lot nor require excavation of greater than 36" below grade. (Cl 1) spas (maximum 10' in diameter) 2). barbecues 3) planters 4) garden walls 5) spa equipment enclosures The following structures or uses, provided that they do not exceed a height of 10" above finished grade, are permitted to be constructed within that area of any lot between the exterior rear wall of the residential structure to within 3' (excluding spas which shall be a minimum of 5') from the closest bluff edge (natural or manufactured) or the inner edge of the 10 foot trail easement (see trD1@ below). - 1) decks 2) spas (maximum 10' in diameter) 3) patios and hardscape (D) As shown on Exhibit "Cm, dated March 15,1989, the project applicant shall be required to construct the following: 1) A five-foot wide lagoon public access trail (constructed of decomposed granite) to be located within a 10 foot wide trail easement, dedicated by the applicant to an appropriate State or local agency or nonprofit organization. 2) A uniform wrought iron fence (maximum 4' high on top of a solid block barrier, one foot above grade) and located at a distance of 10 feet from the northern perimeter of the lagoon public access trail.* 3) A uniform wrought iron fence (maximum 3' high) and located along the southern perimeter of the lagoon public access trail or on downhill side of trail along desiltation basin, whichever applies. Note: The restrictions on accessory structures noted above apply to the 45 to 50 foot setback area overwhich the deed restrictions apply* Several bluff top structures are setback a greater distance than 50 feet from the natural bluff edge. Any accessory structures or structural additions or modifications in the rearyard between the structure and 45-50' setback will require City and possibly Coastal Commission approval prior to construction. *In the area adjacent to the desiltation basin at the westerly portion of Planning Area "CW, the trail may (if approved by the California Coastal Commission) be placed along the lower slopes as depicted on Exhibits "AM and llBU dated March 15, 1989. If the trail is so located, then a fence as noted above may be placed 10' from the rear property line (to accommodate a 10' drainage easement) in-lieu of the up-slope fence required for the trail (if so approved by the California Coastal Commission). There are generally 3 I nt blufftopllot configuration scenarios as depicted In ~hddiagrams below. REVISED EXHIBIT ‘C’ DATED MARCH 15, 1989 SETBACK AREA SETBACK AREA *Maximum 4' high wrought iron fence over 1' high block wall to be constructed by developer. **Maximum 3' high wrought iron fence to be constructed by developer. LAQOON SETBACK AREA Note: These restrictions apply to the 45-50' setback area described in the LAGOON Coastal Permit, Master Plan and deed restrictions. On lots where the structure is setback greater than 50', accessory structures, structural modifications, and/or additions will require approval of the City and possibly the California Coastal Commission. SETBACK AREA ACCESSORY "A" (8’) Landscaped Trellis 1. Max 9'6" Ht. 2. Per approved bldg plan. 3. Anything per- mitted in Areas "B" B "C". IS PERMITTED I "8' (15') Spas Barbecues Planter Boxes Garden Walls Spa Equipment Enclosures 1. Max 36" Ht. 2. Anything permitted in Area "C". w TO 3’ FROW CLOSEST BLUFF E&X NATUW W “c” IIARUFACTURED DR INNER EDGE OF THE IO’ TRAIL EASEMENT UHICIWER IS CLOSER TO STRUCTIRE) Decks Spas (shall be 5' from the edge as defined above.) Patios Hardscape 1. Max 10" Ht. I ‘c -CITY OF CARLSBAD - AWNDA BILL EXHIBIT “D” ’ AB# yd-a r- TITLE: ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT DEED FOR THE MTG. o/9/88 PURPOSES OF A 45 FOOT OPEN DEPT. CDD SETBACK EASEMENT ALONG BATIQUITOS BLUFF. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. JSn* accepting the Grant Deed for the purpose of establishing a 45 foot setback easement in Phase I of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan. ITEM EXPLANATION As part of the mitigation plan adopted by the City Council relative to the lots facing Batiquitos Lagoon, SAMMIS Properties, Inc. was required to provide the City a Grant Deed establishing a 45 foot easement for setback and open space purposes. This easement will be recorded against lots 6 through 35 in Phase I of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan. This easement will be recorded against all of these properties in Phase I and will specifically restrict placing any structures in the setback area. Staff has received this easement and it has been reviewed by the Planning Department and City Attorney's office and is acceptable. Therefore, staff is recommending that the City Council accept the Grant Deed for the purposes of establishing a 45 foot setback easement. FISCAL IMPACT None. EXHIBITS 1) Grant Deed - Easement. 2) Resolution No. P2% accepting the Grant Deed. . . p 0 4 A G 5 8 - : , a r t c 1c 11 12 1: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 88-2go A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED FOR EASEMENT PURPOSES. WHEREAS, SAMMIS Properties, Inc. has submitted a Grant Deed conveying an easement to the City of Carlsbad for the purposes of establishing a 45' setback in Phase I of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park Master Plan along the Batiquitzos Lagoon; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad has determined it to be in the public interest to accept said deed: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows: 1) That the above citations are true and correct. 2) That the Grant Deed from Batiquitos Bluff, a California limited partnership acting on behalf of the SAMMIS Properties, Inc. and executed by Donald F. Sammis and dated July 25, 1988, conv.eying an easement for open space purposes over a portion of property located along the north shore of the Batiquitos Lagoon and within the first phase of the SAMMIS Master Plan to the City of Carlsbad and which is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by reference, is accepted. 3) That the City Clerk is authorized to cause the original deed to be recordqd in the office of the County Recorder of the San Diego County, State of California with the appropriate Certificate of Acceptance attached. . I I 1 2' 31 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 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the day of I 1988 by the. following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CLAUDE A LEWIS, Mayor ATTEST: ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANTZ, City Clerk CC RESO NO. 88-290 -2- ’ /’ i il /. i -> w . ,i ,:’ / RECORDIN~c’lESTED BY r- *No W”LN “ICO”OED MAlC 1lilS DLL0 ANO, “HLC,, OT”L*WI*I ‘“OWN BLLOW. “*IL TAX S,AIC”~H,‘ 70, NAY.r sms1, A0D"I.S 1 CIT". Irlll xtc L J Tide Order No . . . . . . . . ..___......_ Ewrow No. ._ I This WC. for R~order’s vy PARTNERSHIP GRANT DEED < EASEMEN’Z‘: THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTOR(s) DECLARE(I) VOCULIENTARY TMNSFER TAX is t 0 , o- -unmco~Porrlcd arca & c,,~~, City of Cnrlsbad PlKCl iv” 0 cumputrd on full x,Iuc ol proyrty ronrcycd. or 0 ccmpuwd en lull \IIUC Icss value of IIC~S or rncumbrrnw rrmamq II tame 0, I,IC. and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION. receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, BATIQUITOS BLUFF, a California limited partnership, heaeby GRANT(S) 10 City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation, Ihe following described real pro,,my in Ihe City of Carlsbad, cnun,y of San Diego , slate of Calilornia: An in gross easement for setback and open space purposes over, upon and across the 45-foot setback portion shown on recorded final subdivision Map No. 11616 as affecting Lots 6 through 35, inclusive, of Carlsbad Tract No. 85-14, Phase I (Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park). in the City of Carlsbad. County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 11616, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, September 12, 1986. This conveyance shall be subject to all of the limitations, restric.tions, covenants, conditions, reservations, easements and equitable servitudes set forth in that certain Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for RosaLena of Batiquitos recorded June 8, 1988, at File/Page No. 88-273675, Official Records of San Diego County, California, which Declaration is incorporated herein by reference. This conveyance shall also be subject to all covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, easements, agreements and other rights of record as of the date of this deed. Dated July 25, 1988 BATIQUITOS BLUFF, a California STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF-sAN D1ECo ) ss. On this %!!! day of July , in the year .1988. before me. Ihe undersigned. a Notary Public in and lor said County and SW. pr,dty lppcared Donald F. Samis . ~~~ .personallytnownlome (or proved I me pn the basis of wtisfaclary evidence) to be 44~ psrlnerf of the partnerrhlp that executed !he wthm inrlrumcn[. and acknowledged to me that such partnerah#p cxecured the same. yy*fP$; ,;y” ’ -) L Name (Typed or Printed) Notary Public in and for alid Cnvnty and State (Spacr abare for obicial notarial wall MA,L TAX STATEMENTS TO PARTY SHOWN ON FOLLOWING LINE: IF NO PAXTY SO SHOWN, MAIL AS DIRECTED MOVE NWl* 1 100 IE” 6163 PRIHICO Strre’ Addrw crv k sum i,’ i,’ ,/I ,/I ! ! ,Y ,Y /- - /- - i’ i’ ,/ ,/ : : - : ’ . CERTIFICATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DEED This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the deed or grant dated from to the City of Carlsbad, California, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California pursuant to resolution No. I adopted on 1 and the grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. DATED: 0 By: &h.d- A? b?a ALXTHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, Citi Clerk CASE rx3: MP 175(A) ~ANDUXA!TION: Resuestforapprovalof an amendmmttoMaster Plan 175 (Batidtos IaqccmEcfucational Park) toallcx~typi~ minor amry structures within the rearyards of all sinqle family lots (Plannirq Area "c" and 'IH") located on the south side of Naviqator Circle alotuq the smth facins Batiouitos Lagoon bluff edqe. LBZL D.SCFUPI'ICN: All of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Parcel Map No. 13653, to- . gether with a portion of the best half of Section 33, T&m&~p 12 south, rarqe of San Dieso, State of California. 216-140-20 20.2 Prqnsed No. of I.ots/Uni~: 58 lots GENERALEJIANANDZONING ~UseDesignation FM/RMH 4-8 dq/ac Densify Allcwed 8-15 du/ac Density Pmpos& N/A Existing Zone N/A Ftrpsd zone N/A !tmmdhg zcning and Land use: zonina Land use Site Sitmle Family North P Vacant salti m Batiouitos Lamon East I-5 RSFRailmad EUBLJC! FACILJTIES SchoolDistrict Carlsbad Water Carl&ad Sewer Carl&ad EUJ’S Public Facilities Fee Agmzm&nt, R&e X Negative Declaration, issued November 2, 1988 . E.I.R. Certified, dated “-4~ &JCL -- L dco fy.. BATIQUITOS LAGOON FOUNDATION - P. 0. BOX 3103 Carlsbad, CA 92009 May 15, 1989 Mayor Claude Lewis City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mayor Lewis: Thank you for the opportunity to comment of the Sammis Properties Public Access Trail. On behalf of the Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation, please be advised that with regard to the Sammis Properties Public Access Trail, it is the position of the Board of Directors that: a) The trail along the lagoon should be located at or near the bluff edge at the top just south of the proposed fence; b) Either the City or the Developer should prepare plans showing the trail and submit said plans to the public for review; 0) A condition should be included in this Master Plan by amendment that would establish the precise alignment of the trail on Sammis property prior to approval of any other permits on the entire site; d) No further construction of the project of any kind should be permitted until the trail is constructed. 4 No structures of any kind should be allowed within the 45-foot setback, that the setback areas should be retained as open space, and that it should be fully restored through a sevegetation program to serve as a natural buffer. (This position is in agreement with the State Department of Fish and Game position as stated in their letter of September 19, 1988.) v Thank you for your consideration of the Foundation's concerns. Sincerely, e/w Masily . Buck President cc: Members, City Council SAMMIS May 15,1989 Building Better Environments Councilman John Mamaux City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARK MP 175(A) ALLOWABLE BACKYARD STRUCTURES Dear Councilman Mamaux, A lot of hardwork has been put into resolving the delicate issues encompassing what allowable structures Rosalena Homeowners may construct in their backyards along the lagoon bluff edge. I believe we have most of the issues agreed upon except for the double sided fencing of the public access trail and the low concrete block wall on the northern side of the access trail. These conditions are discussed in the Planning Staff Report, Revised Exhibit " B " dated March 15, 1989, paragraph (D) items 2 & 3. First the requirement for the southern side of the public access trail to be fenced is an unprecedented and visually disturbing request. No other public access trail along local San Diego County lagoons or estuaries have visually obtrusive fencing separating the public access trail from the public environment. This fencing was not required on the Aviara Project (Hillman Properties) east of our project and it seems unreasonable and unfair to place this awkward requirement on Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park. I have attached signed petitions from Carlsbad citizens within Rosalena protesting this second fence requirement. Second, to require a concrete block wall which is visually objectionable and for the purpose of slope protection (even though the slopes are at an acceptable 2:l ratio) could be accomplished some other way. We hope you will give these protests serious consideration especially in light of the visual impacts to the lagoon bluff slopes. Sincerely, \/Jonathan W. Delling Project Manager cc: Don Sammis Rosalena Homeowners 2650 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 100, San Diego, California 92108 (619) 298-7112 PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This raq-uirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. -3-/I-~ /cfy DATE ' PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. : ; ., 7 ,’ I’ ,: ’ , 1 ,, ” ,’ ., ,,.’ / ,A “1 ‘- I,., ’ ,* <I ,;. : ’ _I ,, i.’ “ ,/ (r” t!4- ,. c , /” i , “I’ SIGNATURE ' -' I $(” /i f &? I I' ADDRESS PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This req.uirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. NATURE ' \f q DAT$ / - . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD my 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. 75z4t7&m 6ikz ADDRESS / DATE PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. (p/4 M ts&tzf I~DDRESS 12 /e , @ATE _- . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the CITY OF CARLSBAD public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. . . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD my 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. jy 7q / ADDRlQ% /' -- PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. /- 753 8 fi@&f+q?~ / ADDRESS C. - PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. -- 61\. /hdpi, s PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD my 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. ’ . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. -- \,/ ., TtiRE' ti&$ ADDRESS 5-Y- / / ).j c DATE PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the . . CITY OF CARLSBAD public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requ iremant is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. / SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE 4 PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. . .~ . . (& .c+,- (T&& Ld ch ,: V~DDRESS . %xq~ _,*‘.., .I:1 yqy %‘i ,.. * ; *>, . ..-..n.i... ( .h7,c ‘““+-“‘-;,.“;*g$r *:-&;+, ; ’ 1.. ; I 8 - * p:- ; DA"d$ ,.._, , (Ij_ i ‘- .;. jr.&. , ,:.;:.. :,. . . ” PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD my 2, ,I989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request HP 375A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. I- - PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. . ., ,_ PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. c / -’ 7527 ?z!&!&& PLLL Lz&g Pm SIGNATURE /ADDRESS I .- PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. ST Li. { -. --p 7 DATE 7-- _- PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unp recedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. DATE m3 Ah-vI~& q-- ADDRESS ciaa-Lsw . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the 'requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. ., . : .-. r .-. PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. 77 3 CLX, /‘f, / ? q-7 bake / _- PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. Le.: ” i,& h&a,*- - (&53 k~4~tCG~=QR, CcxxLTy- SIGNATURE ADDRESS s- \c;>- 27 DATE C PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. J “‘--‘1_.-, // ,.... ()a DATE F PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. ADDRESS DATE - PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. v SIGNATURE MQ/ 0q DATE PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. DATE - . PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CARLSBAD MAY 2, 1989 We understand the requirement of the public access trail along the bluff edge North Shore, Batiquitos Lagoon as described in Request MP 175A by Sammis Properties. We strongly protest the requirement of a second fence on the lagoon side as described in the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution 2768. This requirement is unprecedented anywhere a public access trail presently exists and find it excessive to require it along this public access trail. fy&? /&/J4&5h? chG!L~ ADDRESS s-a-239 DATE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING MP-175(A) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold .I hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, a a public : 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, May 16, 1989, to consider an application for an Amendment to a Master Plan on property generally located on the west and south sides of Navigator Circle, along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge and overlooking the desiltation basin and more particularly described as: I All of lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Parcel M p Number 13653, togetherlwith a portion of the west half of Section 5 3, Township 12, South, Range 4 West, S.B.B.M., all in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. If you have any questions regarding this matter I , please call the Planning Depa tment k at 438-1161. I If you challenge the master plan amendment in court, you may be limited to rai 6 ing only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in thi notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Of ice at or prior to the public hearing. APPLICANT: Sammis Properties PUBLISH: May 5, 1989 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL SAMMIS City d CMd MI’- 175(A) . -- (Form A) I TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FROM: Planning Department . . . RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice MP-175(A) - SAMMlS for a public hearing before the City Council. Please notice the item for the council meeting of 5& ’ Thank you. Assistant City Man-- . 4111189 ’ Date OWNERSHIP LIST BATIQUITOS POINTE, C/Q TOPEKA ATCHISON & SANTA FE SAMMLS PROPERTIES RAILROAD 2650 CAMINO DEL RIO N. SE.-100 NO MAILING ADDRES FOR THIS SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 OWNER PATIQUITOS POLNTE, C/O STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAMMIS PROPERTIES NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS 2650 CAMINO DEL RIO N STE.lOO OWNER SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 BATIQUITOS POINTE, C/O SAMMIS PROPERTIES 2650 CAMINO DEL RIO N STE.10 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 STATE OF CALIFORNIA NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER JOHN M. LAMB & CONSTANCE S DALE L & DONNA K SCHREIBER DALE L & DONNA K SCHREIBER SAMMIS, N LA CIENEGA BLVD, 1457 CREST DRIVE 1457 CREST DRIVE STE. H, LOS ANGELES, CA ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 90069 SECURITY NATIONAL, LTD. ELSA CANNON. MR. MARK L.'.LEIDER 983 LOMAS SANTA FE DRIVE, STE 7250 PONTO DRIVE, P.O. BOX 147-A WEST GLAUCUS F, SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 1214, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 LEUCADIA, CA 92024 EUGENE c 6r MARGARET M. CHAPPEE, 654 N HIGHWAY 101 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 JOHN D & SON LUSK CORP 17550 GILLETTE AVENUE IRVINE, CA 92664 TOPEKA ATCHISON & SANTA FE RAILROAD NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER STATE OF CALIFORNIA NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER DALE L & DONNA E SCHREIBER 1457 CREST DRIVE ENCINITAS, CA 92024 CHARLES & JILL I.BRONSON C/O MORGAN & MARTINDALE, 10780 SANTA MONICA BLVD.,t280, LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 PONTO STORAGE INC P.O. BOX 23 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 STATE OF CALIFORNIA NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER TOPEKA ATCHISON 61 SANTA FE RAILROAD NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER CHARLES 6 JILL I BRONSON, C/C MORGAN & MARTINDALE, 10780 SANTA MONICA BLVD., #280 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 WILLIAM C & BETTY J SAVAGE DELBERT L & HARRIET B ET AL STOLESBARY, P.O. BOX 773 RANCH0 SANTA FE, CA 92067 TOPEKA ATCHISON & SANTA FE RAILROAD NO MAILING ADDRESS FOR THIS OWNER * r .