Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-22; City Council; 10641; West PalmCIT OF CARLSBAD - AGEND - BILL AB#a TITLE: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MT& 5122190 APPROVAL OF CT 89-32 - WEST PALM DEPT. RN r- RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council ADOPT City Council Resolution No. 90-155 , DENYING the appeal and UPHOLDING the Planning Commission decision to APPROVE CT 89-32 without additional studies requested by the appellant. I ITEM EXPLANATION On April 18, 1990 the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map CT 89-32 to subdivide a 1.51 acre parcel into five single- family residential lots on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley Street. The five lots range in size from 7,565 square feet to 8,923 square feet. Access to the project is provided by a new 60 foot wide public street that connects to Buena Vista Avenue and cul-de-sacs at the project's northern boundary. The property is zoned R-1-7500 and is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the City's northern quadrant. The appellants have appealed the Planning Commission decision in an effort to reduce the project's density and delay the Tentative Map until an alignment and traffic study are completed for the new public street. The appellants also request that the City Council mandate a study to clarify under what circumstances a residential project should be allowed to exceed the Growth Control Point and if net lot area should be used to calculate density rather that gross lot area, (gross lot area includes the area used for dedication of streets and improvements). Finally they would like the City Council to initiate a study to determine if the Wilsonia Tract that includes the proposed project should be rezoned to R- l-9500. The project meets all standards of the underlying zone and the subdivision ordinance and findings have been made by the Planning Commission allowing the project to exceed the growth control point pursuant to the provisions in Section 21.90.045 of the Growth Management Ordinance. The project is conditioned to provide full street improvements on the new cul-de-sac street and half street improvements on the frontage along Buena Vista Avenue. These improvements will include additional pavement for widening plus curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The applicant will also be required to pay public facility and school fees prior to approval of the final map which will mitigate impacts to public facilities. The alignment of the new street is fixed at its current location as it enters Buena Vista Avenue due to intersection spacing requirements between Arland and Valley Street. This project will generate 50 average daily trips which is considered minimal and will not have a significant impact on traffic circulation in the area thus a traffic study was not required. . . 1 I i PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /Q 6 w -\ On December 29, 1989 the Planning Director determined that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore issued a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission adopted the Negative Declaration Resolution on April 18, 1990. FISCAL IMPACT None. EXHIBITS 1. City Council Resolution No. 90-155 2. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. -3011 and 3012 3. Staff Report dated April 18, 1990 w/attachments 4. Appeal Form dated April 30, 1990 w/Appellants request 5. Letter from Stephen E. Blaine requesting continuance of the matter. t RESOLUTION NO. go-155 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 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.51 ACRE PARCEL INTO FIVE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUENA VISTA AVENUE BETWEEN ARLAND AND VALLEY STREET. APPLICANT: WEST PALM * CASE NO: CT 89-32 WHEREAS, on April18, 1990, the Carlsbad Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 3011 and 3012 approving the Negative Declaration and Tentative Map 89-32: and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on May 22, 1990, considered an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve CT 89-32; and WHEREAS, upon considering the request, the City Council considered all factors relating to the Tentative Map appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission in Resolution Nos. 3011 and 3012 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings Council in this matter. 1 . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the 22nd day of May I 1990 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine and Mamaux NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Council Member ATTEST: Z&&HA b(&TEpJ$RANZ, City Clerk KAREN R. KUNDTZ, Assistant City Clerk (SEAL) 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3011 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CAIVSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO DEVELOP A 5 LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUENA VISTA AVENUE BETWEEN ARLAND AND VALLEY STREET. CASE NAME: WEST PALM CASE NO.: CT 89-32 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of April, 1990, 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, ex amining the initial study, analyxing 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 APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit “ND”, dated December 24, 1989, and “PII”, dated December 7, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findims: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed project. 3. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly impacted by this project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 1c 11 12 12 14 15 lf 1’ 11 l! 2( 2: 2; 2; 21 21 2t 2’ 2l PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of April, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schlehuber. ABSTAIN: None. Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Holmes, McFadden, Erwin, Marcus & HalI. SHARON SCHRAMM, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION All-EST: MICHAEL J. HOEMILtiR PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RFSO NO. 3011 -2- NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Buena Vista Avenue between Arland Road and Valley Street, Carlsbad, California, APN: 156-42-31, 32 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 lot single family subdivision on a level of gently sloping lot. 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 10 days of date of issuance. DATED: December 29, 1989 CASE NO: CT 89-32 Planning Director APPLICANT: George Marhoefer PUBLISH DATE: December 29, lgag JG:lh 2075 Las Palmas Drive l Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 l (619) 438-l 161 . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CT 89-32 i DATE: DECEMBER 7. 1989 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: WEST PALM 2. APPLICANT: GEORGE G. MARHOEFER 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 4437 MAYFAIR COURT CARLSBAD. CA 92008 (6191 434-6440 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 1, 1989 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 LOT SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON A LEVEL TO GENTLY SLOPING LOT. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, '*NO@@ will be checked to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sicnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insianifisant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insigl' respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. , PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. a. 3. 10. 11. (519) _- Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? YES (Ins:g) NO x x x x x x x x x x X -2- BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (s1g) 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. YS F Inslg) __ Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. YES (sit31 YES (Insig) Alter the present or planned land use of an area? Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? Increase existing noise levels? Produce new light or glare? NO x x x x x NO x x x x x -3- HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 22. 23. Involve a seignificant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. 26. Generate substantial additional traffic? Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. 29. 30. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? 31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? existing transportation systems or _ . YES is191 YES (inslg) NO x x x x X x x x x x x -4- MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 34. 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.) YES (Slcl) YE ij ins lg) NO 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (lqCumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) x 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? x -5- . . I DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION This project entails the subdivision of a 1.51 acre parcel into 5 single- family residential lots. The topography is relatively level and the site has been utilized for agricultural purposes for many years. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT - _ The subject property is relatively level and the project proposes minimal grading (2500 cubic yards), therefore there will be little appreciable change in topography. Drainage and erosion control facilities will be incorporated into the project and no unstable earth conditions or unique geologic features are located on the project site or general vicinity. Development of the project would create impervious surfaces on site which would reduce absorption rates and increase surface runoff and runoff velocities, however, drainage facilities will be provided. Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally contribute to the depletion of fossil fuel and other natural resources, increase local and regional air emissions: however, this is not regarded as a significant impact in view of the limited scale of the project. Residential development for this site is planned for in the City's General Plan, as well as the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan, therefore the above mentioned impacts to physical resources have been anticipated and planned for. The site has been previously disturbed by agricultural uses, therefore no cultural resource impacts are anticipated. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Past agricultural uses of the site have greatly disturbed any natural plant or animal communities, therefore the site has limited biological value. The site is surrounded by single family residential development so there is no threat of introducing new species into a natural area or limiting the movement of native animal species. The project will reduce the availability of agricultural land but the parcel is so small that it is an insignificant reduction. The General Plan designates this area for residential uses therefore the loss of this site as agricultural land has been accounted for. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Traffic impacts, increase to population, increased public facility demands and the planned use of the area have all been accounted for and planned for in the General Plan and Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan. The project will be required to pay public facility fees that will be used to adequately mitigate any impacts upon utilities and public facilities. The proposed project will incrementally increase noise levels in the area a*ue to traffic and contribute to light and glare in the project vicinity, however these impacts are considered insignificant due to the small nature of the project. The development will be compatible with surrounding land uses and the addition of landscaping will help reduce glare. This project is required to meet all City standards, ordinances and policies therefore no safety impacts or human health concerns are anticipated. -6- &ALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH As: 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. The small nature of this five lot single-family subdivision located on a level and disturbed lot prohibits any phased development and the proje-t does not lend itself to alternative site design or scale of development. This is an infill development, the property is zoned for residential uses, and the project conforms to the adopted residential density for the area, therefore alternative uses or alternative sites are not appropriate in this case. Development of the site at some future time or the no project alternative is not a viable solution because the area is zoned for the use and delay only postpones the inevitable development of the site. -7- 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. -1 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. -1 find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. P i-WC\ bfic ZI ! ‘i’J“1 Y. --r/-2... ; Date I-t] z&q ' Dat'e LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLEL ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IIF APPLICABLE) -a- . ‘APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION 'OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature JG:lh -9- 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3012 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A FIVE LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF BUENA VISTA AVENUE BETWEEN ARLAND -AND VALLEY STREET. CASE NAME: WEST PALM CASE NO.: CT 89-32 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit: Portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Wilsonia Tract, Map 2169 City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. 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 18th day of April, 1990, 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, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A> That the above recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission APPROVES CT 89-32, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. The project is consistent with the city’s General Plan since the proposed density of 3.3 du’s/acre is within the density range of o-4 du’s/acre specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Ekment of the General Plan. 2. The project is consistent with the City’s Growth Management Ordinance even though de density of 3.3 du’s/acre exceeds the Growth Control Point of 3.2 du’s/acre because there have been sufficient developments approved in the Northwest Quadrant at densities below the Growth Control Point. Approval of this project will not exceed quadrant limits and sufficient public facilities are in place to accommodate the project . . . 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 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. The project will provide sufficient additional public facilities for the density in excess of the control point to ensure that the adequacy of the City’s public facilities plans will not be adversely impacted. All necessary public facilities required will be constructed concurrently with the need for them created by this development and in conformance with adopted City standards. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the density proposed. The project is in compliance with the development standards of the R-l Zone. The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition to this project, ensured that the final map will not be approved unless the City Council finds that sewer service is available to serve the project. In addition, the Planning Commission has added a condition that a note shall be placed on the final map that building permits may not be issued for the project unless the City Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains available, and the Planning Commission is satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project. Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of approval. All necessary public improvements have been provided or will be required as conditions of approval. The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the General Plan. Assurances have been given that adequate sewer for the project will be provided by the City of Carlsbad. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since surrounding properties are designated for Single Family Residential development on the General Plan. This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on December 29, 1989 and Approved by the Planning Commission on April 18, 1990. 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. PC RESO NO. 3012 -2- . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 14 15 16 17 1e 19 20 21 22 2t 24 25 26 27 28 14. The applicant is by condition, required to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan prepared pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project. 15. This project is consistent with the City’s Growth Management Ordinance as it has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1. Standard Conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Approval is granted for CT 89-32, as shown on Exhibit “A”, dated March 27, 1990, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions. The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the Tentative Map as approved by the Planning Commission. The Tentative Map shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The Map copy shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to building, grading or improvement plan submittal, whichever occurs first. A 500’ scale map of the subdivision shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to the recordation of the tial map. Said map shall show all lots and streets within and adjacent to the project. This project is approved upon the express condition that the final map shall not be approved unless the City Council finds as of the time of such approval that sewer service is available to serve the subdivision. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map. This project is also approved under the express condition that the applicant pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July 28,1987 and as amended from time to time, and any development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or facilities and improvement plan and to fulfill the subdivider% agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated September 1, 1989, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will be void. PC RESO NO. 3012 -3- . 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 7. The applicant shall pay spark-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 8. The applicant shall provide school fees to mitigate conditions of overcrowding as part of building permit application. These fees shall be based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit application. Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Water Service agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, dated May 25, 1983. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation required by the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan approved by the City Council on September 1, 1987, incorporated herein and on file in the Planning Department and any future amendments to the Plan made prior to the issuance of building permits. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 65913.5. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. PC PESO NO. 3012 The applicant shall provide the following note on the final map of the subdivision and final mylar of this development submitted to the City: “Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes a Growth Management Control Point for each General Plan land use designation. Development cannot exceed the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapter 21.90. The land use designation for this development is (RLM) O-4 du/acres. The Growth Control Point for this designation is 3.2 dwelling units per nonconstrained acre. The applicant shall submit a street name list consistent with the City’s street name policy subject to the Planning Directois approval prior to final map approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color. -. -4- r L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. As part of the plans submitted for building permit plan check, the applicant shall include a reduced version of the approving resolution/resolutions on a 24” x 36” blueline drawing. Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any applicable Coastal Development Permit and signed approved site plan. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever comes first, a soils report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Carlsbad. If the soils report indicates the presence of potential fossil bearing material then a standard two phased program, on file in the Planning Department, shall be undertaken to avoid possible significant impacts on paleontological resources under the direction of the Planning Department. The front yard setback for the panhandle lot shall be measured from the property line which runs perpendicular to James Drive and closest to Lot 1. A Master Plan of the existing onsite trees shall be provided to the Planning Director as part of the final grading plan to determine which trees shall be required to be preserved, relocated or replaced prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs firsL Those trees which are approved for removal shall be replaced on a tree- for-tree basis as required by the Planning Director. The applicant shall submit a street name list consistent with the Citis street name policy subject to the Planning Director’s approval prior to final map approvaL A deed restriction shall be recorded on all lots, which states that the street sekng this fwe lot tentative map is a temporary culde-sac street and may be extended further north in the future. Engineering Conditions: 23. All required fire hydrants, water mains, and appurtenances shall be operational prior to combustible building materials being located on the project site. 24. Additional public water lines and onsite fire hydrants may be required, prior to development of the project, subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. 25. The owner of the subject property shall execute a Hold Harmless Agreement regarding the panhandle lot prior to approval of the final map. 26. The owner of the subject property shall execute a Hold Harmless Agreement regarding drainage across the adjacent property prior to the approval of the final map for this project 27. This project has been reviewed for confonnancy with the grading ordinance and found to be a project for which a grading permit is required. Prior to any building permits being issued for the site, a grading plan in conformance with City Standards and Section 11.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, must be submitted, approved and grading work PC RESO NO. 3012 -5- r . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1c 11 12 1;5 14 15 1C 17 1E 19 2c 21 22 22 24 25 26 27 28 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. must be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. All slopes within this project shall be graded no steeper than two horizontal to one vertical unless specifically approved otherwise pursuant to these conditions. No grading permits shall be issued for this subdivision prior to recordation of the final map. The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to the commencement of any clearing or grading of the site. The grading for this project is defined as “controlled grading” by Section 11.06.170(a) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Grading shall be performed under the observation of a civil engineer whose responsibility it shall be to coordinate site inspection and testing to ensure compliance of the work with the approved grading plan, submit required reports to the City Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter 11.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. No grading shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision unless a letter of permission is obtained from the owners of the affected properties. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any proposed construction site within this project the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation. Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shall be provided or installed as may be required by the City Engineer. The developer shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and easements required by these conditions or shown on the tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map for this project. All land so offered shall be granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost to the City. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated. Buena Vista Avenue shall be dedicated by the developer along the subdivision frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 30 feet and in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards prior to occupancy of any buildings. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Prior to approval of the final map, the Subdivider shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, improvements shown on the tentative map and the following improvements to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A. Full haktreet improvements along the project frontage along Buena Vista Avenue, including transitions to exist& pavement PC PESO NO. 3012 -6- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 37. B. Full improvemen6 along both sides of James Drive along the project frontage. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 12 months of final map approval and/or improvement plan approval, whichever occurs first. Unless a standard variance has been issued, no variance from City Standards is authorized by virtue of approval of this tentative map. The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations and design requirements of the respective sewer and water agencies regarding services to the project. This project is approved specifically as 1 (single) phase. The Subdivider shall provide separate sewer, water, gas, and electric services with meters to each of the units. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G.&E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities. Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire twenty-four months (24) from the date of Planning commksi on approval unless a final map is recorded. An extension may be requested by the applicant. Said extension shall be approved or denied at the discretion of the Planning Commissi on. In approving an extension, the Pkinning Commission may impose new conditions and may revise existing conditions. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. PC RESO NO. 3012 The developer shall enter into an agreement to pay fees for future undergrounding of all existing overhead utility lines along the boundary of the subdivision prior to final map approval. The design of the improvement plans for James Dive shall incorporate and include engineering studies address@ the proper sizing, locations and elevations of all facilities (sewers and stonu drains) for their futuxe northerly upstream tie-ins and service areas. These studies shall he submitted con currently with improvement plan submittal and review. The developer shall pay the current local drainage area fee prior to approval of the final map for this project or shall construct drainage systems in conformance with Master Drainage Plan and City of Carl&ad Standards as required by the City Fqineer. The developer shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay any additional drainage area fees established as a result of the forthcoming Master Drainage Plan update. Prior to the approval of the final map the developer shall submit a cash deposit for the future removal of the temporary culde-sac and the construction of the ultimate curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project frontage on both sides of James Dive to the northerly boundary of the project -7- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 22 24 25 26 27 28 48. No grading shall be allowed within 5 to 10 feet of’and adjacent to the entire length of the easterly property line of lot 1 as required by the City Engineer. This is to provide a secondary outlet for drainage from the sump in James Drive in the event the storm drain would become plugged. A note to this effect shall be placed on the fmal map. 49. . This project has been identified as a proper&y being served by the Buena Vi Valley Sewer Main. City Council resolution No. 7720 established a sewer main reimbursement fee (line cost fee) of $1815.00 for each EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) developed in the benefited area. Each new lot (FDU) created by this subdivision (5 lots) will be required to pay this $1815.00 sewer main reimb- entfeeatthetimeof issuance of a building permit for each lot. 50. The owner shall pay for and submit an application for the vacating/quit&king of the existing 30 foot wide road easement that runs through portions of proposed lots 1,2, and 3. Prior to final map approval, the issue of vacating/quitclaimkg is to be heard and decided by the City Council Fire Conditions: 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional public and/or onsite fire hydrants shall be provided if deemed necessary by the Fire Marshal. The applicant shall submit two (2) copies of a site plan showing locations of existing and proposed fire hydrants and onsite roads and drives to the Fire Marshal for approval. An all-weather access road shall be maintained throughout construction. All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtenances shall be operational prior to combustible building materials being located on the project site. Fire retardant roofs shall be required on all structures. Lot 2 requires an additional hydrant to be located 150 feet east of driveway intersection WithJameSDliW!. PC RESO NO. 3012 -8- . 1 2 3 4 8 9 10 11 12 1: 14 1: 1C 17 lf 1: 2c 21 24 2: 27 2E PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of April, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Holmes, McFadden, Erwin & Marcus. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schlehuber. ABSTAIN: None. A’ITEST: MICHAEL J. HOCZMILLFR PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RESO NO. 3012 -9- SHARON SCHRAMM, CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE: SeDtember 1, 1989 STAFF REPORT DATE: April 18, 1990 0 4 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: CT 89-32 - WEST PALM - Request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a I.51 acre parcel into 5 single family residential lots on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley Street, in the R-1-7500 Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RF.COMMF.NDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3011 APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3012 APPROVING CT 89-32 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. IL PROJECX D ESCIWTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 1.51 acre parcel into 5 single family residential lots on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley Street. The proposed project is subject to the following standards and policies: i: Residential Low-Medium (RLM) General Plan Designation Growth Management Ordinance C. Single Family Residential Zone (R-l) d. Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1 e. Subdivision Ordinance The subject properry currently contains several greenhouses and accessory buildings, and in the past the site has been utilized for agricultural purposes. The surrounding area is developed with single family residences. Several adjacent vacant lots are being utilized for agriculture. The topography of the subject site is relatively level with an elevation differential of four feet. Estimated grading quantities consist of 2,500 cubic yards of cut and fill to create James Drive which will cul-de-sac at the site’s northerly boundary and to create level building pads for 4 standard R-l lots and 1 panhandle lot. ‘CT 89~32 WEST PALM April 18, 1990 Pane 2 The irregular shape of the subject parcel mandates that Lot 2 be created by utilizing a panhandle lot configuration. This panhandle lot will have 30 feet of frontage on the proposed James Drive and contain -8,758 square feet of net acreage, excluding the access portion of the lot. The remaining four lots average 8,133 square feet in size. The 1.51 acre project will result in a development density of approximately 3.31 du/acre. III. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1. Does the proposed project comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance? 2. Does the proposed project comply with the development standards of the R-l Zone? 3. Does the project comply with Growth Management and the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1 in the Northwest Quadrant? DISCUSSION SUBDMSION ORDI>ANCE The proposed Tentative Map complies with all requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20. All the lots meet the requirements for lot width and depth, and adequate drainage is provided. Lots 2-5 will drain towards James Drive and Lot 1 will drain towards Buena Vista Avenue. Grading quantities consist of 2,500 cubic yards of cut and fill to accommodate the public street and to provide level building pads for the five lots. Permission to grade offsite has been granted by the property owner to the west of the project. This offsite grading will be required for the construction of James Drive. Access to the project is provided by James Drive which is a new 60 foot wide public road segment that connects to Buena Vista Avenue. Lot 1 of the project fronts on Buena Vista Avenue and half-street improvements will be provided along this frontage. James Drive will consist of full street improvements to include sidewalks on both sides. This new segment of James Drive is aligned to accommodate adequate intersection spacing and line-up at the project’s northern boundary with an existing 30 foot wide road easement that continues north. Currently the City has an irrevocable offer of dedication for future James Drive on the three parcels directly north of the subject parcel, (See Exhibit “Y”). The portion of this existing road easement that runs through the subject parcel but which is not necessary for the construction of James Drive will be vacated by the City. James Drive will cul-de-sac at the project’s northern boundary, however, it will be a public street and provide the link to future development north of the project site. Future northerly extensions of James Drive will require an alignment study to determine the most efficient and effective alignment necessary to accommodate future development within the block. CT 89-32 WEST PAL~I April 18, 1990 Pane 3 R-l ZONE The proposed 5 lot single family subdivision complies with all the development standards of the R-l Zone. All the proposed lots exceed the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet required by the underlying zone. In addition, all the lots except Lot 2 have at least 60 feet of frontage along the proposed James Drive cul-de-sac. Lot 2 is a panhandle lot with 30 feet of frontage on James Drive. The required findings can be substantiated to support the approval of Lot 2 as a panhandle lot. The irregular shape of the subject parcel along its eastern boundary dictates the utilization of a panhandle lot to effectively subdivide this portion of the site. Subdivision with a panhandle lot will not preclude or adversely affect the ability to provide full public access to other properties within the same block. Lot 2 meets all the R-l Zone development standards for panhandle lots as follows: a) The lot has at least 8,000 square feet of buildable net acreage exclusive of the access portion of the lot, and the applicant has submitted a site plan illustrating that a dwelling unit can be situated on the lot and comply with all the standards of the underlying R- 1 Zone. b) The buildable portion of the lot exceeds the lot width requirement of 60 feet. d The access portion of the lot has at least 20 feet of frontage on a public street and it’s length does not exceed 150 feet. d) The lot has adequate space to accommodate 3 non-tandem parking spaces with an approach of at least 24 feet in length with proper turnaround area to permit complete turnaround access for forward access to James Drive. GROWTH MANAGEMENT The subject property is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1 in the City’s Northwest Quadrant. The impacts on public facilities created by the proposed project and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summarized below: FACILITY IMPACTS COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARD City Administration Library Wastewater Treatment Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Schools Sewer Collection System Water Distribution System 18.5 9.8 N/A .037 N/A 50 Fire Sta. #l N/A 5 EDU’S 1100 GPD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - \ . CT 89-32 WEST PALM . April 18, 1990 Pane 4 The project is proposing a density of 3.31 du/acre which is one-tenth of a unit above the 3.2 du/acre Growth Control Point for the site. The proposed subdivision therefore exceeds the density permitted by City Council Resolution No. 8703 and Proposition E, however the required findings to exceed the Growth Control Point can be made as specified in Section 21.90.45 of the City’s Municipal Code under the Growth Management Ordinance. The density of the project will not adversely affect the dwelling unit allowance for the Northwest Quadrant because there have been sufficient projects in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 approved below the adopted growth control points, thus creating surplus dwelling unit allocations. Sufficient public facilities to serve the proposed density of the project are being provided so that the City’s public facility plans will not be adversely impacted. SUMMARY The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zone Designation, meets all requirements of the R-l Zone and the Subdivision Ordinance, and complies with Growth Management, therefore staff recommends approval of CT 89-32. ENvIRoNMENTALREvIEw The Planning Director has determined that no significant environmental impacts will result from this project, and a Negative Declaration was issued on December 29, 1989. This project entails the subdivision of a 1.51 acre parcel on land that is relatively level and has been utilized for agricultural purposes for many years. The site has been previously disturbed, therefore it has limited cultural and biological value. This decision was based on findings of the initial Environmental Impact Assessment Form and a field review by staff. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3011 Planning Commission Resolution No. 3012 Location Map Background Data Sheet Disclosure Form Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form Exhibits X & Y Exhibits “A”, dated March 27, 1990 JG:lh. March 9, 1990 - ‘It/ P B \ % CPA 8 n 9% 0 WEST PALM CT 89-32 City of h&d BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: 89-32 CT APPLICANT: WEST PALM REQUEST AND LOCATION: 5 LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDMSION ON BUENA VISTA AVENUE BETWEEN ARIAND STREET & VALLEY STREET. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PORTION OF LOTS 3 AND 4 OF WILSONIA TRACT ACCORDING TO MAI’ NO. 2169. APN: 156-142-31 & 32 Acres 1.51 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 5 LOTS/S UNITS GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RLMI Density Allowed 3.2 DU/AC Density Proposed 3.31 DU/AC Existing Zone R-1-7500 Proposed Zone R-1-7500 Sunounding Zoning and Land Use: zoning Land Use Site R-1-7500 AGRICULTURAL North R-1-7500 AGRICULTURAL South R-1-7500 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL East R-l -7500 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL West R-1-7500 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES School District CARLSBAD Water CARLSBAD Sewer CARLSBAD EDU’s LPublic Facilities Fee Agreement, Date SEPTEMBER 1. 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT x Negative declaration, issued DECEMBER 29. 1989 E.I.R. Certified, dated DISCLOSURE FORM APPLICANT: GEORGE G. MARHOEFER Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) 4437 Mayfair Ct., Carlsbad, CA 92008 6usincss Address (619) 434-6440 Telephone Number AGENT: Name Business Address Telephone Number MEMBERS:. * Name (individual, partner, joint Home Address venture, corporation, syndication) Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number Name Home Address Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number . (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We understand that if this project is located in the Coastal Zone, I /we will apply for Coastal Commission Approval prior to development. I /We acknowledge that in the process of reviewing this application, it may be necessary for members of City Staff, Planning Commissioners, Design Review Board members, or City Council members to inspect and enter the property that is the subject of this application. I/We consent to entry for this purpose. I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this disclosure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be relied upon as being true and correct until amended. BY Agent, Owner, Partner . L A. 6. C. 0. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. CITY OFCARUBAD GROWTH IMANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESS~ FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO.: W’=T PAT .M - f?r 89 13 - LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT’ ZONE: -GENERAL PLAN: RI.M ZONING: Bl-75~1 DEVELOPER’S NAME3FnRc,FFHnFFFR ADDRESS: 4437 MAmAr PHONE NO.: 61 %A~-fidbn ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 156-i-147-31 .a 37 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): - City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 18 Library: Demand in Square Footage = ,9.8 Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) Park: Demand in Acreage = Drainage: Demand in CFS = NA Identify Drainage Basin = N/A (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) Circulation: Demand in ADTs = 5a (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 1 Open Space: Acreage Provided - Schools: --- (Demands to be determined by staff) Sewer: Demand in EDUs - e; Identify Sub Basin - 1E (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) Water: Demand in GPD - llnn The project is .l units above Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. A ’ ;‘&&m4G& /klilkL Aiitlii &M&7 ., ._-- \ ..- .-:I -I JrpE m=Elrl~ ~zpwo &>/97/ 4 x 4zw87 - . ia- - 3 1 2-L L -. 1 I ‘.: - 7 -r.,i ,-- k“ r’ I i%,. f I . . I -7 b iX--Al’rl J-$~!&~.,~~o* ~,” ;jy 2 -- . ~~- EXHIBIT ‘Y’ 3/9c Existing irrevocable offer of dedication BUENA VISTA AV -I’ ,\ City of Carlsbad . I. .- 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92006 OIlice of the City Clerk aitg of aarlsbab - ;I;,j-cr“7;; cjj-‘{ cl,gp,r,‘ry ;j,‘i;-;[;,,_TELEpti0N~ (619) 434-2808 APPEAL FORM I (We) appeal the following decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council: Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): CT 89-32 West Palm Tentative Tract Map; Resolution Numbers 3011 and 3012 Date of Decision: April 18, 1990 Reason for Appeal: --See Attached Pages-- April 28, 1990 5’7~ Phcrv 6. GLA,~WE '72 9- E//8 Date Addrersyi,i c c \ f--cGt k .-iLLJL t~;y~;~;;~ s* ~Jd’+y C 0 .- Telephone Number , REASONS FOR APPEAL: 1. VIOLATION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT LIMITATIONS--subject area is Residential Low-Medium (RLM) with growth control of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. Prcposed project calls for five dwelling units on a net buildable area of less than one acre. Utilizing a gross buildable area of 1.51 acres, the project still exceeds the 3.2 du/acre limitation by approximately 4000 square feet. REQUEST: A) Findings be required if the project is to exceed the growth control point of 3.2 du/acre. B) Approval of tentative map be delayed pending the above findings. Cl Council mandate a study, to clarify whether, and under what circumstances, the growth control test be made on net buildable area, versus gross project dimensions. 2. ALIGNMENT STUDY NEEDED Proposed cul-de-sac, James Drive was first conceived nearly 25 years ago, Since then, adjacent residential lots have been developed utilizing a dwelling unit to lot ratio far in excess of the proposed Rl-7500, Proposed project will significantly alter the present land use in the immediate adjacent area, resulting in lot sizes incompatible with those presently in existence, These mini- mum sized lots will substantially alter the population density in the area, and will serve as a precedent for future development of the proposed cul-de-sac, The proposed lots will also be aesthetically offensive to the public in general, and to the present local residents in particular, whose own property values will be diminished as a result of the "crunch" of smaller lots in the middle of a relatively lower density, rural neighborhood. Furthermore, the logical extension of this new cul-de-sac will be in violation of policy set by City Engineering for single-entrance developments (Policy No. 1; effective g-5-84), which limits the cul-de-sac length to 600 feet. The Planning Commission has recognized this problem, and has called for a lot line adjustment study before the cul-de-sac is further developed. . . . * REQUEST: A) B) An alignment study be mandated.at this time, to avoid the inefficient, ineffective "piece-meal" placement and extension of the James Drive cul-de-sac, and to insure a comprehensive plan providing for the development of James Drive consistent with the existing neighborhood. Approval of tentative map be delayed, pending the above study. 3. TRAEFIC SXUDY,NEEDED Theproposed cul-de-sac will exit upon the presently under sized Buena Vista Avenue. Buena Vista Avenue is currently at minimal width, lacks sidewalks, and yet of necessity, is utilized daily by scores of grade school children bicycling or walking to Buena Vista Elementary Sohool. The street, as currently improved, is inadequate to handle the existing traffic safely, and is in any event dangerous, due to the un- controlled, "blind" intersection at Buena Vista Avenue and Valley Street, The additional traffic caused by this proposed project, and that resulting from the future development and extension of the cul-de-saa will increase the already significant risk of grave bodily harm to cyclists and pedestrians, especially school-aged children. REQUEST: A) That a traffic study be mandated. B) That approval of the tentative map be delayed, pending the above study, and recommended public road improvements. 4 .* POTENTIAL LONG-TERM CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OUTWEIGH SHORT-TERM "MINIMAL EFFECTS" OH THH PROPOSED PROJECT, Theprojects limited short-term environmental.impact will damage long term environmental goals, due .to considerable cumulative effects of probable future projects which will result from the cul-de-sac's placement and future extension, The precedent to be set by this project will logically and likely lead to additional violations of the growth control point by other developers who wish to place minimum sized lots down the spine of this subject low-density, rural neighborhood, and will further tax the already dangerous BUena Vista Avenue and the Buena Vista Elementary School itself, . . - I - REQUEST: A) That the findings and studies referred to above be mandated. B) That the tentative map not be approved pending those findings and studies. C)' That the Council initiate a study to determine whether and under what conditions the Wilsonia Tract be down zoned (ie. 9500 sq. ft.), to insure that future development of the immediate area will be consistent with past development and be done in acoordance with applicable laws, ordinances and policies, including the City's cul-de-sac length limitation standards. _. MFlY 15 ‘90 15:05 ZORRILLFl LFlW CORP P.2 STEPHEN AND CHERYL BLAINE 2755 WrLSON STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 . May 15, 1990 VIA FACSIMILE Ray Patch&t, City Manager l.200 Elm Aveaue Cmlrbad, CA 92008 ATTN: Marilyn RE: Tentative Tract Map 89-32 West Palxn Subdivision Ap#al Hearing Date3 s/22/90 Dear Marilyn: This letter is sent aa a follow-up to our conversation this afternoon, Pleaas accept this lmttet us the appellanta’ request that the above hearing be continued to the next available hearing date. Thia request is based upon intervening circmstances beyond the appellants’ reasonable control. Additionally, at the time the appeal was filed, we were advised that we would receive a minimum 14 days notice of the hearing date. However, it appears that the notice was published in the local paper and mailed only 12 days before the hearing. Whether ruuh notioe coatpliea with applicable procedures, the ahortenad notice period has left appellants with less time than originally anticipated to prepare for the hearing. Thank you very much for your oourtesy and cooperation.. Please aal. at your earliest convenience to advise whether the matter will be continued. Very truly yours, ;;s,&Lhe& . l SEB:tks EXHIBIT ‘Y’ BUENA VISTA Existing irre vocable offer of dedication Gitv of Carisbad I 3190 ------ - May 21, 1990 Carlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Tentative Tract Map 89-32 West Palm Subdivision Appeal Hearing Date: 5/22/90 Dear City Council Members: I recently signed a petition requesting that the above appeal be dismissed and that tentative tract map 89-32 be approved, upon the terms recommended by the City Planning Commission. While I believe the proposed James Court cul-de-sac should be extended north of Buena Vista Avenue, I request that the present "rural" character of the neighborhood be maintained by requiring that all new homes built adjacent to the cul-de-sac and the rest of the new lots in this particular portion of the Wilsonia Tract have a minimum 9,500 sq. ft. lot size. In light of the foregoing, I hereby revoke my signature on the petition requesting that the City approve tentative tract map 89- 32 as proposed, and add my name to the neighborhood petition sponsored by appellants Blaine, Thompson, Mulligan and Tell. Thank you very much for your assistance in this regard. Very truly yours, /78u i&e?4& LIs/7c k;lny fcY%w!SD~D CfRi’ Address I /:tks . .- Whereas we enjoy d desire to maintain the & -Isent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia 9500 square feet. City of Tract to DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS .- -. Whereas ye enjoy a- desire to maintain the pr sent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS . - Wherea we enjoy . Id desire to maintain the &..esent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS . .- . Whereas. we enjoy i. LI desire to maintain the p--sent "rural" . character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME AD1 Whereas we enjoy a , desire to maintain the pr sent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. PRINT NAME ADDRESS A Whereas we enjoy a- i desire to maintain the pr,sent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS JtgW tit Csdn 8 - WhFreas we enjoy i J desire to maintain the p-.-sent "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS A 5 6 7 8 Whereas we enjoy and desire to maintain the present "rural" character of our neighborhood, and whereas we are concerned about the health and safety of the residents of our neighborhood, particularly in light of restricted access and services afforded the area, now therefore, we the residents and homeowners of Wilsonia tract, and neighbors, do hereby petition the City of Carlsbad to increase the minimum lot size in Wilsonia Tract to 9500 square feet. DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME ADDRESS J Fb-m;\~ zwc 1 1; tp Sk. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 May 17, 1990 Carlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: CT 89-32 West Palm Properties In response to the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the CT 89-32 West Palm Properties tentative tract map I would like to state my support of the Commission's action. As executor of the Estate of Gloria Gamble, 2778 Arland Road, I have been aware of the City's plans to develop the proposed James Drive. Opening this street will contribute to the orderly development of the increasing valuable land in the Wilsonia Tract. The petitioners claim that the development of James Drive will ruin the rural nature of the area. Carlsbad is no longer a rural community, but a fast growing area in desperate need of good long range planning. By seeking to prevent the highest and best use of these properties, the petitioners will condemn further development in this area to the very type of "dogleg" property alignments that the petitioners own. By approving well planned subdivision maps, traffic can be routed in a generally safe direction, while power, sewer, sidewalks and the like can be mandated to adequately serve the area. Without the development of James Drive, the property owners in that area will be forced to create odd lots with long driveways and a nightmarish array of lot splits. Support your Planning Commission's decision for good city planning and deny the appeal to CT 89-32. Linda G. Salter, executor Estate of Gloria Gamble TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 1200 ELM AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RE: SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF CT-89-32 WEST PALM PROPERTIES We the undersigned are residents and/or property owners in the City of Carlsbad. We have property interests within the close proximity of the proposed project. We request your consideration of the following statements. 1. We have no interest in changing the existing zoning in this area. 2. We do not support any action by others which denies the ability in the future to subdivide properties in conformance with the existing zoning. 3. We support the extension of James Dr. to provide access for future development. 4. We support the proposed CT-89-32 subdivision and request the City Council to approve the same. mm : ADDRESS : EXHIBIT ‘Y Exk ting irrevocable offer of dedication City of larkbad 3190 - J I l-71 I . -\ _- / rpL‘ 4 , :, / I# & .( lY -’ 127.9’ --Y it 3.; i . -r 1 I i ’ w ‘- I n.r I / ’ ,p \ .-u);‘;i” n ‘lb- ii g / b -. -. 7343 i,g:E 3 . , 0 4% I - // -,-. .-, T u‘ I .- I , I -II, - -. I i,. Y --t-q- t-y ,i --,- ._‘! L - -+---l :h ‘x -:b *I 3‘ . I \‘I- _..: . I I /’ I ,:’ - TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 1200 ELM AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RE: SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF CT-89-32 WEST PALM PROPERTIES We the undersigned are residents and/or property owners in the City of Carlsbad. We have property interests within the close proximity of the proposed project. We request your consideration of the following statements. 1. this area. We have no interest in changing the existing zoning in i 2. We do not support any action by others which denies the ability in the future to subdivide properties in conformance with the existing zoning. 3. We support the extension of James Dr. to provide access for future development. 4. We support the proposed CT-89-32 subdivision and request the City Council to approve the same. NAP!!2 ; ADDRESS: . . .‘. I\*-. I I - 1.b* .-,. -- ____ __ McCONJdELL FOUNDCITION TEL No.916-243-8944 . SENT BY:GRbSSE DEVELOPMENT SD -- j-17-98 . 3:i0PM ; \ :. . . 4 . yr +HE HONORIIBLE: CITY CCWNCZL--- .-- 1200'EW AVE. ' CARISBAD, Ch 92008 May 18,90 8:OO No.002 P.02103 6194. -- 515-, 9i6 243 B94u: u 3 -.. - me.. . . .- . . . RE: support Ak?D APPROVAL OF CT-'B98'-3Z tQcII*, Palm Propekiiies we the umWxxi.g~ad are residents and/or property awnar:?l in the city ot carlsbad. We havr gropesty interests within the cl068 pgoxfmity of the proposed project.. We request your consideration of the following otatoments. 1. !We have no interest in changing the axisting zonfn$ in this araai 2. We do not supputi any action by df;hafs which denies our ability in the future to %ubdivide our property in confomance with the whiting tuning, We support the extendan at 5hmra Dr, to provide access 20r &am dwelopment. We support the proparsd CT-32 subdivieion and request th8 & councU to approve thr mm. . c * . . : : ; : i : . . r .’ : *. I - . , I . . m- . * . .* , . . l * h, r a - . . . I 6 ’ YL, . , b . : . . . - SENT; Eh : GFIXSE DECrELOFMENT SD - S- 18-90 1:03FPl ; ’ . . ’ * , .’ ,., . . . pa t!m ItOtlORABtrE CZTY com?~L 1300 ‘ELM Am o fi&RzmW, CA OJOOfl _ -. Rz: SWPPQRT Mb APPROVA& OP CT-W-32 WWb- Palm Prape%ies CCITT Ci3:U 3 WI thr, undarrignrd 8to rssldants and/or propwty ovnera in the City ot Cartlrrbrdt proxiaity OL th8 We havr proparty hterrrtcr within the tlora pro at thr iollo8dng rta ? 0886 project. W4 rrqmst ydut conflidsrat~on cmanth a, ‘We have no intrxrrt: ln changing the exhtling toning in Urn wea4 1 2, We do not muppart an action by others whloh drnirs our ability in thh LLUtatrr to rub ividr ow proprrty in conformanca f with the rxhlthq coning. 3. w4 iox 8U gezt the extenrion ot itabs PI, ta provbM lCCB88 fiharlr drvr P ol;macnt, 1. We ruppart thr pro oud CT-32 subdivision and ¶W$Ubrlt - tbr city ceunau ao rpprovr tl 4 I&B@.’ 9 . . *Ly- 8 A- I * 1 . , . . ,*, ’ .& ..I’. . t. . . \ ! ..g , ‘:;*’ , 2. ‘I. . . . ;$,: \:.; > l .‘# TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 1200 ELM AVE. _ CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RE: SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF CT-89-32 WEST PALM PROPERTIES We the undersigned are residents and/or property owners in the City of Carlsbad. We have property interests within the close proximity of the proposed project. We request your consideration of the following statements. 1. this area. We have no interest in changing the existing zoning in i 2. We do not support any action by others which denies the ability in the future to subdivide properties in conformance with the existing zoning. 3. We support the extension of James Dr. to provide access for future development. 4. We support the proposed CT-89-32 subdivision and request the City Council to approve the same. . . TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 1200 ELM AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RE: SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF CT-89-32 WEST PALM PROPERTIES We the undersigned are residents and/or property owners in the City of Carlsbad. We have property interests within the close proximity of the proposed project. We request your consideration of the following statements. 1. We have no interest in changing the existing zoning in this area. 2. We do not support any action by others which denies the ability in the future to subdivide the existing zoning. 3. We support the extension for future development. properties in conformance with of James Dr. to provide access 4. We support the proposed CT-89-32 subdivision and request the City Council to approve the same. ADDRESS: TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 1200 ELM AVE. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RE: SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF CT-89-32 WEST PALM PROPERTIES We the undersigned are residents and/or property owners in the City of Carlsbad. We have property interests within the close proximity of the proposed project. We request your consideration of the following statements. 1. this area. We have no interest in changing the existing zoning in 2. We do not support any action by others which denies the ability in the future to subdivide properties in conformance with the existing zoning. 3. We support the extension of James Dr. to provide access for future development. 4. We support the request the City Council to proposed CT-89-32 subdivision and approve the same. ADDRESS: .,-, - MCCONNELL FOUNDQTION TEL No.916-243-8944 SyT BY: G(tJsSE DWELOPMENT SD :7-90 3:icM ; :. i.. .*' . ' 1 . . : ‘_ \ . 70: +HE HONORAB~ CITY COUNCZL 1200'EI&¶ AYE. CAXSBAD, CA 92008 May 18,90 8~00 No.002 P.02103 - 6194 '5~ 916 243 89U;u 3 'u . ._ .._ - - - . . . . . . _ . . .--.. , BE: suppQRT hND APPROVAL OF CT- W-32 Wee*. Palm Propetiies we the undwsigned are residents and/or property awnrrr in the city of carlsbad. We have property interest8 within the clam proxinity of the proposed project. We rrquest yOUr considemtion of the following atatmantsa $?a have no interest h changing the existing zonin$ in this :;*a.~ 2. We do not ruppoti any action by athe? which deniao ouz ability in the future to subdivide our property in confomance with the wciating zoning. WQ support the extension of Saner Dr. to pravtde accests for &ure devrloptn8nt. 4. We support the proporrd CT-32 subdivision and request thr City Councjf. to approve the (I-8. 8 , . . e 9’ , c e , : .I l * I, . , a . . , . . RC’J ,yy:m~J~ TELECD=IER 7010 ; S-18-90 8:03?FIM ; McCOh.JNELL FOUNDATION T" h'o.916-243-8944 916 243 8944j 6194387615; # 3 t+.1,'8,90 8:00 No.002 P.0310: May 17, 1990 Catlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Ave. Carlabad, CA 92008 REI CT 89-32 West Palm Properties fn response to the appeal of the Planning Commlsalon’s approval of the CT 89-32 West Palm Properties tentative tract map I would like to utate my support of the Commfssion’s action. As executor of the Eetate of Gloria Gamble, 2778 Arland Road, I have been aware of the Cfty’a plane to develop the proposed James Drive. Opening this street will contribute to the orderly development of the increasing valuable land in the Wllsonia Tract. The petitioners claim that the development of James Drive will ruin the rural nature of the area. Carlsbad ier no longer a rural community, but a fast growing area in desperate need of good long rang8 planning. By seeking to prevent the highest and best use of these properties, the petitioners will condem further development in this area to the very type of “dogleg” property alignment8 that the petitioners own. ! By approving well planned subdivision maps, traffic can be routed in a generally safe direction, while power, sewer, sidewalks and the like can be mandated to adequately serve the area. Without the development of James Drive, the property owners in that area will b8 fOrC8d to create odd lots with long driveways and a nightmarish array of lot splits. Support your Planning Coamirrion’e decision for good.clty planning and deny the appeal to CTq:,89-32, k- Linda G. Salter, executor Estate of Gloria Gamble “T . . - \,.. . . 7. ‘, -+, . I; , .ii . . ‘: 1. ” $5 .- ‘2 t -‘_ i;.‘1 >.; 3) :$ :..;j : G; -2 I ..; i.T$ -.I .,-‘Z . . . -.*- -r; / -.,. ) .: _-. “. ‘. ‘...j :-5 a’ . . RCV 3Y:xEROX TELECOPIER 7010 ; S-18-90 8:033M ; _ ~McCQhNEL~, FOUNDQTIOW TF' No.916-243-8944 916 243 8944+ 6194387615;# 3 Mp%.r 18990 8:00 No.002 P.03103 _ _ - _ . _ - _ .__ __. _ May 17, 1990 Carlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Ave. Carl&bad, CA 92008 I I RR: CT 89-32 West Palm Properties Xn response to the appeal of the Planning C6mmission’ts approval of the CT 89-32 West Palm Properties tentative tract map I would like to state my support of the Commission’s action. AEI executor of the Estate of Gloria Gamble, 2778 Arland Road, I have been aware of the City’s plans to develop the proposed James Drive. Opening this street will contribute to the orderly development of the increasing valuable land in the Wilsania Tract. The petitioners claim that the development of James Drive will ruin the rural nature of the area. Carlsbad Is no longer a rural community, but a fast growing area in desperate need of good long range planning. By seeking to prevent the highest and best use of these properties, the petitioners will condemn further development In thig area to the very type of “dogleg” property alignments that the petitionera own. ! By approving well planned subdlvieion maps, traffic can be routed in a generally safe direction, while power, sewer, sidewalks and the like can be mandated to adequately serve the area. Without the development of James Drive, the property owners in that area will be fOrC8d to create odd lots with long driveways and a nightmarish array of lot splits. Support your Planning Commission’s declslon for good.city planning and deny the appeal te CT2.89-32, ‘\>. Linda G. Salter, executor Estate of Gloria Gamble .*.’ Ctirltibad Journal Decreed A legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Son Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543 ,’ Proof of Publication ,~i %. $0 ,-I 1 II_ -pm. .,-‘I,* “‘y” STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a oeriod exceeding one year next -??%%E OF PU HEARING APPEAL CT 89-32 - WEST PALM and in Local Facilities manage- ment Zone 1 and more particularly described as: Portions of Lots 3 and 4 of Wilso- nia Tract. Mao 2169. Citv of Csrls- ’ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carls- ‘bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (Elm Ave- ‘nue), Carlsbad. California. at 6:OO ‘P.M., on Tuesday. May 22. 19QO. to consider an appeal of the Plannine Commission approval of a Tental tive Tract Mar, to subdivide a 1.51 ‘acre parcel i&o 5 single family re-’ lsidential lots on property generally located on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley Street, in the R-I-7500Zone. bad, County ok San Diego. If you have any questions regard- ing this matter. please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the tentative tract map in court. you may be li- mited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspond- ence delivered to the City of Carl- sbad City Clerk’s OtTke at or prior to the public hearing. Appelants: Blaine, Thompson, Mul- ligan and Tell CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL preceding ;he date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: MAY 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199Q.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.... I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and ~“,l~,“~~i,‘x~~ute~~~~~~~ County of San Diego, State of Clerk of the Printer ” . CltY OF CARLSBAD I *- ‘I+ L \ . . 1200 ELi ,VEN”E CARLSBAD, CALIFOKNIA 92008 * , 438.5621 4t,lU&U PG . ,. .’ 6 I u L., ;jpj bjkJitrii -FL REC’D FROM. jx u rd l-d -f H i) !-“I bs 1’) iJ DATE Ll y3 &,I. 7 i_> ACCOUNT NO. I DESCRIPTION I AMOUNT RECEIPT NO. 98587 -,-..-._-I__---_,.-.-~-^.- __.“..._ _._ ..“..~ ___..-- _I__,.l..-.. --- ..~ -- . l \ . . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL CT 89-32 - WEST PALM NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (Elm Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, May 22, 1990, to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 1.51 acre parcel into 5 single family residential lots on property generally located on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley Street, in the R-1-7500 Zone, and in Local Facilities Mangement Zone 1 and more particularly described as: Portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Wilsonia Tract, Map 2169, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the tentative tract map in court , you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing. APPELLANTS: BLAINE, THOMPSON, MULLIGAN, and TELL PUBLISH: May 10, 1990 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL 4 City of Chsb~l WEST PALM I CT 89-32 , . . 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Office of the City Clerk DATE: April 30, 1990 TO: Bobbie Hoder FROM: Karen Kundtz TELEPHONE (619) 434-2808 RE: CT 89-32 - West Palm Tentative Map THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by all parties.) Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- should be scheduled for the City Council 5-L 9s . Date - 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Office of the City Clerk ;; y*.-- s ‘-;- ;‘,,:g+&j g &,rj APPEAL FORM I (We) appeal the following decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council: Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): CT 89-32 West Palm Tentative Tract Hap; Resolution Numbers 3011 and 3012 Date of Decision: April 18, 1990 Reason for Appeal: --See Attached Pages-- April 28, 1990 Date Naevct) -,. . (/q-&g+ 2.977 tLc/sG, Telephone Number REASONS FOR APPEAL: 1. VIOLATION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT LIMITATIONS--subject area is Residential Low-Medium (RLM) with growth control of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. Proposed project calls for five dwelling units on a net buildable area of less than one acre. Utilizing a gross buildable area of 1.51 acres, the project still exceeds the 3.2 du/acre limitation by approximately 4000 square feet. REQUEST: A) Findings be required if the project is to exceed the growth control point of 3.2 du/acre. B) Approval of tentative map be delayed pending the above findings. Cl Council mandate a study, to clarify whether, and under what circumstances, the growth control test be made on net buildable area, versus gross project dimensions. 2. ALIGNMENT STUDY NEEDED Proposed cul-de-sac, James Drive was first conceived nearly 25 years ago. Since then, adjacent residential lots have been developed utilizing a dwelling unit to lot ratio far in excess of the proposed Rl-7500. Proposed project will significantly alter the present land use in the immediate adjacent area, resulting in lot sizes incompatible with those presently in existence. These mini- mum sized lots will substantially alter the population density in the area, and will serve as a precedent for future development of the proposed cul-de-sac. The proposed lots will also be aesthetically offensive to the public in general, and to the present local residents in particular, whose own property values will be diminished as a result of the "crunch" of smaller lots in the middle of a relatively lower density, rural neighborhood. Furthermore, the logical extension of this new cul-de-sac will be in violation of policy set by City Engineering for single-entrance developments (Policy No. 1; effective g-5-84), which limits the cul-de-sac length to 600 feet. The Planning Commission has recognized this problem, and has called for a lot line adjustment study before the cul-de-sac is further developed. REQUEST: A) An alignment study be mandated .at this time, to avoid the inefficient, ineffective *piece-meal" placement and extension of the James Drive cul-de-sac, and to insure a comprehensive plan providing for the development of James Drive consistent with the existing neighborhood. B) Approval of tentative map be delayed, pending the above study. 3. TRAEFIC SZUDY,NEEDED -- The proposed cul-de-sac will exit upon the presently under sized Buena Vista Avenue. Buena Vista Avenue is currently .at minimal width, lacks sidewalks, and yet of necessity, is utilized daily by scores of grade school children bicycling or walking to Buena Vista Elementary School. The street, as currently improved, is inadequate to handle the existing traffic safely, and is in any event dangerous, due to the un- controlled, "blind" intersection at Buena Vista Avenue and Valley Street. The additional traffic caused by this proposed project, and that resulting from the future development and extension of the cul-de-sac will increase the already significant risk of grave bodily harm to cyclists and pedestrians, especially school-aged children. REQUEST: A) That a traffic study be mandated. B) That approval of the tentative map be delayed, pending the above study, and recommended public road improvements. 4 . . POTENTIAL LONG-TERM CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OUTWEIGH SHORT&TERM "MINIMAL EFFECTS" OK THE PROPOSED P.ROJECT. -. The projects limited short-term environmental.impact will damage long term environmental goals, due to considerable cumulative effects of probable future projects which will result from the cul-de-sac's placement and future extension. The precedent to be set by this project will logically and likely lead to additional violations of the growth control point by other developers who wish to place minimum sized lots down the spine of this subject low-density, rural neighborhood, and will further tax the already dangerous Buena Vista Avenue and the Buena Vista Elementary School itself. REQUEST: A) That the findings and studies referred to above be mandated. B) That the tentative map not be approved pending those findings and studies. Cl That the Council initiate a study to determine whether and under what conditions the Wilsonia Tract be down zoned (ie. 9500 sq. ft.), to insure that future development of the immediate area will be consistent with past development and be done in acoordance with applicable laws, ordinances and policies, including the City's cul-de-sac length limitation standards. NOTICF OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, I200 Carlsbad Village Drive (Elm Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 18, 1990, to consider approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 1.51 acre parcel into 5 single family residential lots on property generally located on the north side of Buena Vista Avenue between Arland and Valley street, in the R-1-7500 Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 and more particularly described as: Portion of Lots 3 and 4 of Wilsonia Tract, Map 2169 City of Carlsbd, County of San Diego. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. If you challenge the in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CT 89-32 APPLICANT: WEST PALM PUBLISH: APRIL 5, 1990 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION v- -c - “0 copleaf T -- _ . t-S OF LfJAMiS HITlilt; 600 FEET CF NW 156-142-31 6 A PORTIA Of rlpN: : 3: : ‘c:!: -, ‘~‘1: :<? - I!%-142-?2 ,.:!.- _ ~. ‘_ .; i .: y;, _ .;,, -~pzj~~~; NO. APN (‘I~tJcR NO. WN wllle”“““----w-‘- J 1 iJ J3 d J 6 \;r J 8 J 9 4 $13 t14 ld 5 P 7 J 18 / 19 z @ x 1 42 156-t&? ?.!I 156- 1 A,?-- ‘J5 156-l4;- 36 156-142 -39 156-142--M l56-142-15 156-142-13 156-142-12 156-142.-06 156-142-07 156-142 08 156 1 .I? I 1 156-142-09 156-142-10 156-142-32 156-I 42-04 156-1.12--03 156-142-02 156-14;’ 01 156-1.30. 07 156-130-26 156-1.11--u? 156-141.-06 156-l ,I I -(!I! M’I’IILLU. Vi I‘ t or ” ‘35 Wilson ;:wlsbad. Ca St. 92008 U"tJAWAY. Jack T. 2‘65 Wilsorr St. I:.3r lsbad. Ca 92008 NIMSTRONG. Gregory J. 21’71 Wilson St. Cwlsbed. Ca 92008 Ml ‘ILLIGAN. Thomas T. z-77 wi Ison St. C,lrlsbad. Ca 92OOP QIIANDOW. Bradley %fJr)3 Wilson St. Car 1 sbed, Ca 92008 Fl-AMING. Rudger L. ?(‘I5 Wilson St. Car lsbad. Ca 92008 EZELL. Eugene A. ;H35 Wilson St Cwlsbad. Ca 92006 TI:CL. Darryl t-4. 17170 Buena Vista Way c:,-lr*lsbad. Ca 9;!oom IY.WTER Clarence R. f 710 Buena Vjsta Ave. (.‘,lr 1 sbad. Ca 92008 ,4JI LY. Ilrnry II. l,e-10 fherin Vista Ave. t air, Isbad. Ca 9iuun fJ’ ILONG. s’oltr, I! ;‘fJJifj Wf Ir;rJfl !it c‘,tr*lsbad. Ca 9;!ooH f!l.llM, f?ober t f, l,:OO Buena Vista Ave. L’?r 1 sbad. Ca Y2008 SUELL. Thelma L. 2Pt35 Wilson St Cwlsbad. Ca 92008 DIX. Charles 1600 Buena Vista Ave. Car lsbad. Ca 92008 fIELTUN. ClacJd R. 27174 At-land Ild. Cnrlsbad. Ca 92008 FU-FENG NI 27.10 Arland Rd. C;lr* I shad. Ca 9?008 Mr‘I WAN. Mrrioh A. I’. 11. Box 10~’ Car‘lsbad. Ca 92008 FI I- TCIfER. Lkbra %;‘.W Highland UP. C;1’,lsbad. Ca 92UUH L.I’.‘!;STCJN. Jtlhri W. 7,’ !.I HighJarrd [If.. I:.?r 1 sbad. ccl 9CTUlJ Ail’IY. A~rdrr) FI ,7!’ c HiphlJflrl 0. r. 1’ I shad. (103 ‘7;‘I)ufl J 48 J :; 57 )/51 156- 152-32 156-200-01 156-200-02 156-200-15 156-200-03 J 52 J 53 J 54 J 55 J 56 J 58 59 156-200-04 156-200-05 156-200-06 156-200-07 156-200-08 156.-200-12 1.56 .;?ou 16 l!j6- 200 30 156-200-29 156-200-31 156-200 -28 156-200-23 J 63 ‘64 f56-200-22 156-200-21 J 65 J 66 $67 156-200-20 I!%-200- 19 156-mo-18 J68 156-ZOO- 17 J 71 1‘,6-220-02 156-152-33 2060 hllschi St. Car Isbad. Ce 92008 KULB. Theodore N. 2890 Wilson St. Carlsbad. Ca 92006 ; ; MEUINA. ConStantin Jr’. : 1677 Buene Vista Ave. ;” Carl sbed. Cs 92008 1 , PRINCE. Carl f. “, 2935 valley St. Carlsbad. Ca 92008, WINKLE. John 9.~ 2945 Valley Carlsbad. Ca 8E~u07. Melodic E. 2955 Valley St. Car lsbad. Ca 92008 j. MC COY. Daniel ! 2965 Valley St. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 GINN, Buneva C. 2969 Valley St. Carlsbad. Ua YARBEHI?Y. Nora E. 1975 Valley St. r r-37 Carlsbed, Ca 92008 e RlJfJ70. ,lamcs E. T. P.O. Box 717 Car Isbad. Ca 92008 01 I Y 01 CA111 WAD SWAB. ,Ltnter; I?. 2924 Hiyltlarld Or Carlsbad. Ca 92008 SCHROCK. Ual lace A. 2828 Highland Dr. CarIsbed. Ca 92008 LEWIS, Deborah C. -% 2840 Highland Dr. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 JOHNSTON. Richard 8. P.U. Box 123 Carlsbad. Ca 92008 ,* : LAWSON, Marie C. 2862 Hi ghl arid Dr. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 ” MEtJlJO?A. A 1 her t 2870 Il i qh 1 ahd Ur . Csrlsbad. Ca. 92008 BHEHER. Myron 0. 2880 Hj shlahd Or. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 zrwmu~. Vincent H. Jr. 28FIO Hiqhland Dr. Car lsharl. Ca 92008 MILES. I’?r-r) w. 1833 Bur,rra Vista Ave. Car. 1 sbarl, (;a 92008 * I+ . . -, .i -, A.-. 1 J 2.3 J 24 J 25 J2c J 2R J 30 J 31 J 32 v43 J 34 Jxi v&i J 39 J 40 J41 J 42 J 43 Jo4 J.15 J ‘If; /* -- -,-- 151;--141 03 fff:tiAS. T. Mark ,“,‘.57 Arlmd Rd. Car 1 sbad. Ca 92006 156.- 14f vg I AII~(:~IILII. Helen G. Zi’Y2 HIghland Or. Car Isbad. Ca 92008 156-242-25 I%- f 30 06 ELAINE. Stephen E. 2755 Hi 1son St (:.~r* 1 shad. Ca 92008 MI )ONE Y. Ilsrbert S. ~(84 Illghland Dr. Car Isbad. Ca 92008 156-130 18 nr~lwE. Pierre N. Jr. 2F/5 Wi l5On St. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 156-130 20 GILf331L Wf Iburn D. 2697 Wilson St. Car Isbad. Ca 92008 156-130-21 PAHL. Archie W. 2717 Wilson St. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 156- 13Om rF’2 u ‘137nUY. Juliet te f 2725 WiJson St. Car Isbad. Ca 92008 156-152. 12 GUFVAHA. Louis P. 2710 Wilsnn St. Car. Isbad. Ca 92008 156-I!=2 14 156 - 1 !j;’ 1 ‘j 156-15~’ 17 tIrrJf s. Wj Illam F-211 s Milifl St. llDB Gi, I In t. 1 II. MO CALcAlfA. Carl C. 27X Wilson St. Car Ishad. Ca 92008 KlJ/. Ik. Nicolai 2i.11 Pest Ur. Carlshad. Ca 92008 156-l!i<? - 1’7 P+~L!.frlUIST~. Gerald 0 277f10 Wi lscm St. Car 1 f;bad. Ca 92008 156-152 ‘1 CARTER. Vivian S. 27135 Crest Dr. Car lsbad. Ca 92008 156-152-71 RumEN. Thomas P. 2790 Wilson St. Carlsbad. Ca 92008 156-152- :2 MAC GUf1N. t?ichard 8. 2900 Wi lsorr St. Carl sbad. Ca 92OOf3 156-l,‘i2- 7.1 SIMS. Jams S. 2820 Hilton St. Car lsbad. Ca 92008 156-152- ;‘.l LANI;. William A. 2844 i~il.sofl St. ~~f-~r;h~,d. CO 92008 1 !jlj- If;;’ I!j ~f2i--1.~,‘- I.1 WI II!. L'alc w. Il5r;O La Grange Rd. ,lanlf 5 t 0 wn. [‘a AL!d\ J 1:. .~Ilhfl u jf?jti ftrrrra i’ista Ave. C3r.J ~~.l:l. (13 92008 -- J ---- 72 156-220-01 YAOA. Henry 5538 El Csmino Reel Carlsbad. Ca 92008 c/73 I JL 156-200-24 156-200-25 HUNTER Kimberly J. 920 Ave. Oe Sen Clement Enc ini tee. Ca MILLER Consuelo 2816 Hfghlend Dr. Carlsbsd, Ca 92008 . t- * f i 1. : .,