HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-09-18; City Council; 10826; Approval 108 Dwelling Unit Condominium Aviara Planning Area 12.
s .S 3
4 . Q\
hB## /Q k2L APPROVALOFA10LOT/1O8DWELLlNGUNIT
, I TITLE:CONDOM.INIUMTENTATIVETRA~~/KANNEDUNIT gy%P- DEVELOPMENTANDTWO~ANDARDSV~CBSFOR AvIARAPLANNINGAREA12. Cr89-39/F'UD89-19/ . SV9@3/SV904-AVIARAP LANNINGAREA12.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
CIT _- OF CARLSBAD - AGEND, -31LL
Both the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare documents APPROVING the Conditional Negative Declaration, CT 89-39/PUD 89- 19/SV 90-3 and SV 90-4, as approved by the Planning Commission.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On August 15, 1990, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and approved without modification (6-1 McFadden) the Aviara Planning Area 12 condominium project, which is located at the southeast corner of Alga Road and Black Rail Court. The project consists of 108 townhome units to be developed as 36 three-plex structures over a 26.1 acre site. All of the units will include either a private patio or balcony. In addition, a variety of common recreation amenities are provided throughout the project. The project meets or exceeds all Master Plan Development and Design Standards, as well as the City's Noise Policy No. 17.
In recommending approval of this project, the Planning Commission and staff have made findings to approve Engineering Standards Variances for: (1) deletion of sidewalks along one side of internal project streets; and (2) the reduction of centerline radii on internal project streets.
No major issues were identified. Please see the attached staff report to the Planning Commission for specific details regarding the tentative map, planned unit development and standards variances.
EWVIROWMEWTAL REVIEW
On August 15, 1990 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director on July 5, 1990.
FISCAL IMPACT
As discussed in the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan, because all required improvements are to be funded by development, no fiscal impacts to the City will result from this 108 dwelling unit condominium project.
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /o, fd
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS
Facilities Zone - 19 Local Facilities Management Plan - 19 Growth Control Point - 12.1 du/ac Net Density 5.93 du/ac Special Facility Fees - N/A
EXHIBITS
1. Location Map 2. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3081, 3082; 3083; 3092 and 3093 3. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 15, 1990 4. Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 15, 1990
) >\
!l ')I A~\ \\ J II :
TclL
‘\\ \
COWLCTIJAL PL*MMIYa I.,.
‘\i fp \ ,
AVI ARA - PLANNING AREA 12 I CT 89-39
PUD 8 9-19
-
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 RJZSOLUTION NO. 3081
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP/PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO DEVELOP A 108 DWELLING UNIT
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT.
CASE NUMBER: AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12
CASE NO: CT 89-39/PUD 89-19
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of August, 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, examining the initial study, analyzing the information
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
8) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Plating
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
according to Exhibit “ND”, dated July 5, 1990, and “PII”, dated June 27, 1990,
respectively, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following
findings and subject to the following condition:
Findings:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may
have a significant impact on the environment, provided that the mitigating
conditions of approval are compliexl with.
2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis.
(EIR 83-2(A))
3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed
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
4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly
impacted by this project.
Conditions:
1. Prior to the occupancy of any of the dwelling units, the project applicant shall
construct a 6.0 foot high sound attenuation wall between Alga Road and the
proposed dwelling units 2-9 along this road. The wall shall be constructed
consistent with the recommendations of the Acoustical Study for Planning Area 12
(Mestre-Greve, 1990). Prior to the occupancy of units 2-9, the project applicant
shall incorporate all required traffic noise mitigation measure (ie: balcony barriers
and mechanical ventilation) into these units as described in the Acoustical Analysis
for PA-12.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of August, 1990, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
Erwin, Hall, Holmes and Marcus.
McFadden.
None.
None.
SHARON SCH
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. IXILZMXLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3081 -2-
.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The 26.1 acre project site is located along the
southeast comer of Alga Road and Black Rail Court.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development to
develop 108 multi-family units (in triplex structures) a private street and two recreation
areas over a 26.1 acre site.
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 th e E nvironmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a
result of said review, a Mitigated 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 Mitigated 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
within 30 days of date of issuance.
DATED: JULY $1990
CASE NO: CT 89-39tPUD 89-19 Y
APPLICANT: AVTARA PLANNING AREA 12
PUBLISH DATE: JULY 5,199O
CDD:lh
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-l 161
l
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CT 89-39/PUD 89-19
DATE: JUNE 27, 1990
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME:
2. APPLICANT:
AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12
A- M HOMES, INC.
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 7 UPPER NEWPORT PLAZA,
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
714-852-9411
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: DECEMBER 4, 1989
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 4 TENTATIV UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO DEVELOP 108 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ALONG THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND BLACK RAIL COURT.
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, llNO't 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 sionificant 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 insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings llYES-sigl' and "YES-insig" 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:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
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?
YS Ei insig) NO
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-2-
_-
. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig)
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
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?
HUUAN ENVIRONUENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sigl
17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services?
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems?
20. Increase existing noise levels?
YS CE insig)
YES (insig)
X
NO
x
x
x
x
x
NO
x
x
x
21. Produce new light or glare?
-3-
X
.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Involve a significant 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?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?
Generate substantial additional traffic?
Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking?
Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods?
Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans?
Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view?
Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
YES (sig) YES (insig) NO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
'-4-
.
UANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
yc ES sigl YE F insig) NO
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.)
35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (ffCumulatively 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
x
36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
-5-
- DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This project iS a 108 Unit (multi-family) subdivision (4 residential and 3 open space lots) located at the southeast corner of the Alga Road/Black Rail Court intersection within the Aviara Master Plan area. The project site is 26.1 acres in size and has been previously rough graded consistent with approved grading plans for CT 85-35. For this environmental analysis, staff conducted two field trips to the subject property and reviewed the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort Master Plan EIR 83-2(A) which already covered this property. The southern portion of the subject property (Lot-C) is vegetated with Coastal Sage Habitat and is under deed restriction to the California Coastal Commission. The remainder of the property has been mass graded and no sensitive environmental resources exist upon it. In that: (1) the proposed residential project is allowed by the underlying Aviara Master Plan and General Plan, (2) it is surrounded by compatible existing or future land uses including Alga Road to the north, Open Space to the south, the Aviara Golf Course to the west and the proposed Four Seasons Destination Resort Hotel Site, to the east, (3) the site has been previously rough graded and (4) the project will not encroach into the deed restricted Coastal Sage Scrub habitat to the south, no environmental impacts are anticipated. There were no public comments received in response to the Notice for a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The project requires balanced grading totaling 45,000 cubic yards. The site has been previously rough graded consistent with approved grading plans for CT 85-35. No unstable earth conditions will be created as the grading plan is required to meet City Engineering Standards.
The topography of the previously graded site will not be significantly changed from its present graded state.
Properties surrounding the project site are currently in a graded but otherwise undeveloped state. The project will not result in or be affected by erosion of soils as all necessary drainage and erosion control facilities have been or will be provided to handle runoff from the site.
Impacts to Batiguitos Lagoon (i.e. erosion and runoff) will be adequately mitigated as discussed in response to #3 above.
The project will have an incremental impact on air quality (as discussed in EIR 83-2(A)), in that it will generate 864 trips/day. However, this impact is not considered significant in itself. Long term mitigation of air quality impacts will require that dependence upon the automobile be reduced regionally and statewide.
The project has a minimum 20 foot separation between the structures. This design will provide for adequate air movement.
-6-
.
I: DISCUSS ON 0
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
The project will not change the course or flow of water as no streams are located in the immediate area and drainage waters will be handled by existing and/or proposed facilities.
Development of this project will create impervious surfaces onsite which would reduce absorption rates and incrementally increase surface runoff and runoff velocities. However, to accommodate this incremental runoff, drainage facilities will be incorporated into the project to divert the runoff to new curb and gutter along Blackrail Court, thereby mitigating this concern.
Aside from the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat located in the southern portion of the property (which will be maintained in Open Space), no natural resources exist on this previously graded site.
Implementation of this project will incrementally contribute to the depletion of fossil fuels and other natural resources during construction and operation. This incremental increase is not considered significant.
The site is currently disturbed and all identified archaeological, paleontological or historical sites have been previously mitigated.
BIOJOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Excluding the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat located with the southern portion of the site which will be maintained in open space (deed restricted) the balance of the site has been disturbed through grading activities. In accordance, no significant biological resources will be impacted through project development.
No significant impacts to the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat located in the southern portion of the site are anticipated in that the landscaping proposed adjacent to this area will be compatible fire- retardant and non-inva-sive.
Implementation of the proposed project will not reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect farmland of State or local importance.
Wrought iron fencing located between development areas and the deed restricted open space to the south will mitigate impacts of domestic pets upon the wildlife in this open space area.
In that the on site protected habitat area is linked to other undeveloped open space areas within the Master Plan and because project fencing will deter domestic pet intrusion into this protected habitat area, no impacts or barriers to the movement of wildlife is anticipated to occur.
-7-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CONTINUED):
ENVIRO-
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Development of this project will be consistent with the General Plan, Master Plan-177 and the Mello II LCP. The proposed triplex produce type is compatible with adjacent land uses.
As discussed in the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan, with the payment of all required fees, all public facilities and services will be available to meet the demands of the project.
See 18 above.
Construction of the project will not result in noise impacts upon surrounding residences since the adjacent properties are undeveloped. Otherwise, the project is compatible with surrounding future uses and will not create significant noise impacts. Alga Road, which is located along the northern property boundary will create noise levels in excess of 60 dBA CNEL. However, this noise impact is proposed to be mitigated through the incorporation of a solid noise barrier (wall) between the road and the adjacent dwelling units and through the use of other sound attenuation measures (i.e. plexiglass shielded balconies, and mechanical ventilation) as specified within the Acoustical Study for this Planning Area.
Lighting utilized onsite will be directed so as to not impact adjacent future views.
Because this is a residential project it will not involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances.
The proposed project net density of 5.9 du/acre is well below the density permitted upon the site (12.1 du/acre) per the Aviara Master Plan. In view of the reduced density, overall project environmental effects should be reduced.
The project will provide additional housing units to meet existing demand.
A total of 864 average daily vehicle trips will be generated by the project which will not significantly impact the circulation system
as discussed in EIR 83-2(A) and LFMP - 19.
The demand for parking facilities created by this project will be satisfied onsite. Two garage spaces will be provided for each unit in addition to a total of 35 guest parking spaces.
-8-
.
. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CONTINUEDi:
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
This project Will require imprOVeIWItS to Black Rail Court and completion of Alga Road from El Camino Real to its entryway. The project will add 864 ADT to Black Rail Court and other surrounding streets. This minor increase in traffic is not considered
significant.
The project site is outside of the Airport Influence Area for Palomar Airport.
One vehicular access point is proposed for the project and is not located to cause conflicts with its intersection with Black Rail Court.
The project will not interfere with emergency response plans.
The project will not obstruct any scenic vista and will create an aesthetically pleasing street scene along Alga Road and Black Rail Court through the use of adequate structural setbacks, structural relief and rich landscaping.
-9-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) cl e)
a)
b)
cl
d)
e)
f)
9)
Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
The 108 dwelling units proposed with this project will be completed in one phase. Phasing would not result in an environmentally superior project.
This project has been designed to comply with all development standards and design guidelines of the Aviara Master Plan. The proposal creates no significant environmental impacts. In accordance, no alternate site designs would appear as environmentally superior.
The scale of this proposal (108 dwelling units) is a potentially superior improvement over the maximum of 351 dwelling units permitted per Master Plan - 177.
Any change of land use (except higher density residential permitted per MP-177) upon the subject property would recessitate a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment.
Since the site is already rough graded and, all public facilities and services will be available to support this proposed project, development at some future time would not be regarded as an environmentally preferable alternative.
There are alternative sites for the project: however, they have no environmental advantages, and this proposal is consistent with the existing land use plans.
The "no project@@ alternative is not in conformance with the General Plan/Master Plan designation for the property. Since the site is already graded, this alternative is not environmentally superior.
&lo-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) .
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
- I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
x I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
- I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date
/Date /
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE’1
1. Prior to the occupancy of any of the dwelling units, the project applicant shall construct
a 6.0 foot high sound attenuation wall, as described in the Acoustical Analysis for PA-12,
along Alga Road. Prior to the occupancy of units 2-9 the project applicant shall
incorporate all required traffk noise mitigation measures as described in the Acoustical
Analysis for PA-12, (i.e. balcony barriers and mechanical ventilation) into these units.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
-ll-
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.
&n-y0
Date Signature
CDD:lh
-12-
s ‘E E (II 3 8
z z 7s 9 *- s .= 8 -z 5 8 . . . 2 y ii n r $ z = y a E iii F 5
B a 0
u ii
ol T- ((I
s 0 c .-
6 h m ii .-
2
. . . . 2 P
25 Z
5 a
8
iJ f
Q a
-
APPENDIX P
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONlTORING CJ-IECKLIST Page 1 of 1,
P .- E s a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3082
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ATENTATIVE
TRACT MAP TO DEVELOP A 108 DWELLING UNIT CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND BLACK RAIL COURT.
CASE NAME: AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12 CASE NO: CT 89-39
~ WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
Lot 230 of Tract 85-35, Aviara, Phase I - Unit D, according to Map 12412
recorded June 29, 1989
1 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 15th day of August, 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 Planning
Commission recommends APPROVAL of CT 89-19 based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findinns:
1. The project is consistent with Master Plan 177 since the proposed net density of
5.93 du/acre is within the permitted density of 12.1 du/am as specilied within
Master Plan 177.
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
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
. . .
The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the
density proposed.
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.
The dedication of the 12.4 acre school site at the intersection of Alga Road and
Ambrosia Lane is acceptable as mitigation of the impact to existing Carlsbad
Unified School District school facilities.
The dedication of a 24.25 acre park site at the northern texmhus of Ambrosia
Lane satisfies park fee requirements.
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.
As discussed in the staiTreport, the project is: (1) consistent with the development
standards of the Aviara Master Plan 177 and the Planned Development Ordinance;
(2) in conformance with the Design Criteria of Master Plan 177; (3) in compliance
with the Citfs Noise Policy No. 17 as conditioned; and (4) is in conformance with
the Mello II Local Coastal Program.
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for Open Space and Recreational
Commercial development on the General Plan.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -2-
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
11.
12.
13.
This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on July 5, 1990,
and Recommended for Approval by the Planning Commission on August 15,199O. In recommending approval of this Mitigated 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.
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.
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 19.
Conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
. . .
. . .
Approval is granted for CT 89-39, as shown on Exhibits “A” - “O”, dated July 18,
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 final 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.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -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
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
. . .
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 fulfil1 the subdivider’s agreement to pay the public
facilities fee dated December 4, 1989, and the agreement to pay the Growth
Management Fee dated December 4, 1987, copies of which are on file with the
City Clerk and are 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 shall be void.
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
19 Local Facilities Management Plan approved by the City Council on December
22, 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 detetmined 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.
The applicant shall establish a homeowner’s association and corresponding
covenants, conditions and restrictions. Said CC&R’s shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Director prior to final map approval.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -4-
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
12. The applicant shall submit a street name list consistent with the Citfs street name
policy subject to the Planning Director’s approval prior to final map approval.
13. The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan which shall be
submitted to and approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, whichever occurs first.
14. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free
from weeds, trash, and debris.
1s. The developer shall install street trees at the equivalent of 40-foot intervals along
all public street frontages in conformance with City of Carlsbad standards. The
trees shall be of a variety selected from the approved Street Tree List.
16.
17.
Preliminary landscape plans shall be submitted.
All landscape plans shall be prepared to conform with the Landscape Guidelines
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the
Planning Department.
18. Landscape plans shall be designed to minimize water use. Lawn and other zone 1 plants (see Landscape Guidelines Manual) shall be limited to areas of special
visual importance or high use. Mulches shah be used and irrigation equipment and
design shall promote water conservation.
19. Prior to final occupancy, a letter from a California licensed landscape architect
shall be submitted to the Planning Director certifying that all landscaping has been
installed as shown on the approved landscape plans.
20.
21.
All herbicides shall be applied by applicators licensed by the State of California.
The applicant shah pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by
Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
22. The iirst set of landscape and irrigation plans submitted shall include building
plans, improvement plans and grading plans.
23. All landscape and irrigation plans shall show existing and proposed contours and
shah match the grading plans in terms of scale and location of improvements.
24. Mature trees which are removed shall be replaced one to one with minimum 36"
box specimen. Each case shall be reviewed by the Planning Director.
2s. The minimum shrub size shall be 5 gallons.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -S-
.
1
2
:
4
F &
E
7
E
S
1c
11
1Z
12
14
If
1E
17
1E
1s
2c
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
The number of trees in a residential project shall be equal to or greater than the
number of residential units.
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.
The developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map in the sales office at all times, or suitable alternative to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
All sales maps that are distributed or made available to the public shall include but
not be limited to trails, future and existing schools, parks, and streets.
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 the occupancy of any residential unit within this project, the Master Plans
recreational vehicle storage area (within Planning Area 23) with all weather access
road to it shall be available for use.
Prior to the occupancy of any of the dwelling units, the project applicant shall
construct a 6.0 high sound attenuation wall between Alga Road and the proposed
dwelling units 2-9 along Alga Road. The wall shall be constructed consistent with
the recommendations of the Acoustical Study for Planning Area 12 (Mestre Greve,
1590). Prior to the occupancy of units 2-9, the project applicant shall incorporate
all required traffic noise mitigation measures (ie. balcony barriers and mechanical
ventilation) into these units, as described in the Acoustical Analysis for PA-12.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or the recordation of the final map, the
project applicant shall receive a Coastal Development Permit that approves
development that is in substantial conformance with this City approval. The
Coastal Permit shall be required to be submitted to the City Planning Department for review prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Prior to the issuanceofagradingpermit,allCoastalDeedRestrictedareas(?totlO
as shown on Exhibit “B”) shall be staked and flagged to prohibit encroachment by
construction equipment.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -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
36.
37.
38.
39.
All units which are setback a minimum of 5 feet hm a private driveway shall be
equipped with an automatic garage door opener.
All perimeter fences/walls shall be required to be designed consistent with the
materials and style of other Master Plan approved fences/walls.
This project is approved subject to the condition that residential water
collservation measures including water eiTicient plumbing ktures in conformance
with State and Local Laws and Policies, be incorporated into the projects design.
Prior to the recordation of the East hnal tract map or the issuance of residential
building permits, whichever is ikt, the owner of record of the prom within the
boundaries of this tentative tract map shall prepare and record a notice that this
property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aira& operating fi-om
Palomar Airport in a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director and
the City Attorney.
The applicant shall post a&raft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental
offices associated with the new development. The number and locations of said
signs shall be approved by the Planning Director.
Engineering Conditions:
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
. . .
This approval is subject to all requirements and conditions of Master Plan 177,
Carlsbad Tract 85-35 and Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan, and any
amendments thereto.
This project is located within the Mello II Local Coastal Plan. All development
design shall comply with the erosion control requirements of that plan.
Unless a standard variance has been issued, no variance from City Standards is
authorized by virtue of approval of this tentative map, except the following
A. Sidewalks on one side of the street.
B. Centerline radii less than 200 feet as shown on the 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.
The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G.&E., Pacific
Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -7-
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
4s.
46.
47.
48.
49.
so.
51.
The developer shall provide an acceptable means for maintaining the easements
within the subdivision and all the private streets, sidewalks, street lights, storm
drain facilities and sewer facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of
such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the units within
the subdivision. Adequate provision for such maintenance shall be included with
the CC&R’s subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the
date of City Council 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 City Council. In approving an extension, the City Council may
impose new conditions and may revise existing conditions pursuant to Section
20.12.110(a)(2) Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Prior to approval of the final map the developer shall enter into an agreement with
the City to pay any drainage area fees established as a result of the forthcoming
Master Drainage Plan Update.
The owner of the subject property shall execute a hold harmless agreement
regarding drainage across the adjacent property prior to approval of any grading
or building permit for this project.
The applicant shall agree to utilize reclaimed water, if available, in Type I form,
on the subject property in all common areas as approved by the City Engineer.
Reclaimed water, as defined in Section 1305(n) of the California Water Code,
means water which, as a result of treatment of wastewater, is suitable for a direct
beneficial use or controlled use that would not otherwise occur.
The subject property is within the boundaties of Assessment District No. 88-l
(Alga Road). Upon the subdivision of land within the distict boundaries, the
subdivider has executed a Special Assessment District Pass-Through Authorization
Agreement. said agreement contains provisions regarding notice to potential
buyer for the amount of the assessment and other provisions and requires the
subdivider to have each buyer receive and execute a Notice of Assessment and an
Option Agreement. h the event that the subdivider does not execute the
Authorization Agreement, the assessment on the subject property must be paid off
in full bv the subdivider Drier to any subdivision of the land.
As required by State Law, prior to the recordation of a final map over any of the
subject property, a segregation of assessments must be completed and recorded for
all subdivided lots. By applying for a segregation of assessments, the subdivider
agrees to pay the fee to cover the cost associated with the segregation. A
segregation is not required if the subdivider pays off the assessment on the subject
PC RESO NO. 3082 -8-
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
52.
53.
54.
5s.
56.
57.
58.
59.
. . .
property prior to the recordation of the final map. In the event of a segregation
of assessments is not recorded and property is subdivided, the frill amount of
assessment will appear on the tax bills of & new lot.
Grading in advance of final map may be allowed subject to City Engineer approval in accordance with Chapter 11.06 Carlsbad Municipal Code and departmental
policy.
Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on
the tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. Prior to issuance
of a building permit for the project, the applicant must submit and receive
approval for grading plans in accordance with City codes and standards, be issued
a grading permit and complete the grading work in substantial conformance with
the approved grading plans.
The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to the commencement of any
clearing or grading of the site.
No grading shah occur outside the limits of the subdivision unless a grading or
slope easement is obtained from the owners of the affected properties. If the
developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, he must either amend
the tentative map or change the slope so grading will not occur outside the project
site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved tentative map as
determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
A separate grading plan shall be submitted and approved and a separate grading
permit issued for the borrow or disposal site if located within the city limits.
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.
The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this
project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided
in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. Reference
Chap 11.06.
Ram gutters shall be provided to convey roof drainage to the driveway if required
by the City Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -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
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shah be provided or
installed prior to the issuance of grading or building permit 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 shah 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.
Direct access rights for all lots abutting Alga Road and Blackrail Court, with the
exception of the general utility and access easement at Aleutia Lane waived on the
final map.
Some improvements shown the tentative map and/or required by these conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the subdivider has
sufficient title or interest to permit the improvements to be made without
acquisition of title or interest. The Developer shall conform to Section 20.16.095
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner
shall give written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the
boundaries of the site plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and
Landscaping District No. 1. The form shall be provided by the City during the
improvement plancheck process.
Runoff from this project is conveyed to environmentally sensitive areas. The
subdivider shall provide adequate means of eliminating grease and oils from drainage prior to discharge. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of grading or building permit.
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 in accordance, with City Standards the Developer shall install, or agree to
install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, improvements
shown on the tentative and the following improvements. This obligation is not
required if it is already secured through another project in the Master Plan.
k Alga bad to major arterial Standards or better hm Mimosa street to El
Camino Real to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
A note to this effect shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the final map
per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 and 66445 of the Subdivision Map Act.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -lO-
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
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
. . .
Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 24 months of the final map
or improvement plan whichever occurs first.
The design of all private streets and drainage systems shall be approved by the
City Engineer prior to approval of the final map for this project. The structural
section of all private streets shall conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on
R-value tests. All private streets and drainage systems shall be inspected by the
City, and the standard improvement plan check and inspection fees shall be paid
prior to approval of the final map for this project. The improvements are as
follows:
A. Standard curb, gutter and sidewalk and street improvements on Aleutia Lane
and Ferilina. The sidewalk is required on the inside loop on Ferilina and on
the east side of Aleutia Lane.
B. Private storm drain system which will connect to the exkting public storm
drain system. In areas where no fail safe secondary overflow is provided, the
systemshallbedesignedtocarrya1OOyearevent.
C. The private sewer and private drainage systems.
D. A note stating these improvements are private shall be placed on an
additional sheet on the final map.
The developer shall install street lights along all public and private street frontages
in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards or equivalent subject to the
approval of the Planning Director and City Engineer.
The Fire Marshal has determined that onsite fire hydrants are required to serve this
project. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the site, the applicant must
submit and receive City and water district approval for appropriate waterline
improvement plans and easements. All improvements shall be designed in
conformance with City and Water District Standards, plancheck and inspection fees
paid and improvement security shall be posted with the Water District.
Irrigation systems to accommodate future reclaimed water shall be designed
consistent with Title 17 of the California Administrative Code. Offsite future
reclaimed water distribution systems should be anticipated by the installation of
adequately sized sleeves at crossing points to minimize street excavation.
Priortothe issuance of any building permits, full street improvements including
Black Rail Court to Aviara Drive throught to Batiquitos Lane must be constructed.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -ll-
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
Fire DeDartment:
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
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 prior to issuance of a building permit.
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 begin located on the project site.
Brush clearance shall be maintained according to the specifications contained in
the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines Manual.
Proposed security gate systems shall be provided with “Knox” key operated
override switch, as specified by the Fire Department.
Brush Management shall require that photo documentation of installed and
approved fire suppression zones be submitted to the Fire Marshal in order to
establish control for annual maintenance. Performance of annual maintenance by
Homeowners Association shall be assured through open space deed restriction or
other means acceptable to the Planning Director and Fire Marshal.
Fire retardant roofs shall be required on all structures.
Brush clearance shall be maintained according to the specifications contained in
the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines Manual.
All fie alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems, automatic sprinklers,
and other systems pertinent to the project shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for approval prior to construction.
Water District:
83. The entire potable and non-potable water system/systems for subject project shall
be evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity and pressure for domestic,
landscaping and fire flow demands are met.
84. The developer+ engineer shall schedule a meeting with the District Engineer and
the City Fire Marshal and review the preliminary water system layout prior to
preparation of the water system improvement plans.
PC RESO NO. 3082 -12-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
t
5
l(
1:
1:
1:
1,
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
15. The developer will be responsible for all fees and deposits plus the major facility
charge which will be collected at time of issuance of building permit.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of August, 1990, by
:he following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Erwin, Hall,
Holmes and Marcus.
NOES: McFadden.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
I
SHARON SCHRAMM,
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DIRECTOR
RESO NO. 3082 -13-
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
PLANNlNG COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3083
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO DEVELOP A 108 UNIT CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
ALGA ROAD AND BLACKRAIL COURT.
CASE NAME: AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
CASE NO: PUD 89-19
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
Lot 230 of Tract 85-35, Aviara, Phase I - Unit D, according to
Map 12412 recorded June 29, 1989
has been fled 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 15th day of August, 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:
Al That the above recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission recommends APPROVAL PUD 89-l 9, based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The project is consistent with the City’s Master Plan 177 since the proposed net
density of 5.93 dus/acre is within the permitted density of 12.1 dus/acre specified
within Master Plan 177.
-
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
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
. . .
. . .
. . .
The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the
site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the
density proposed.
The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition to this
project, ensured building permits will 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.
School fees will be paid to ensure the availability of school facilities in the San
Marcos School District.
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.
The proposed project is consistent with the City’s Planned Development Ordinance
and also complies with the Design Guidelines Manual.
As discus& in the staffreport, the project is: (1) consistent with the development
standards of the Aviara Master Plan 177 and the Planned Development Ordinance;
(2) in conformance with the Design Criteria of Master Plan 177; (3) in compliance
with the City% Noise Policy No. 17 as conditioned; and (4) is in conformance with
the Mello II Local Coastal Program.
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future and existing land
uses and will serve as a transitional use between the RMH designated properties
and adjacent RM properties.
PC PESO NO. 3083 -2-
.
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
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of August, 1990, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Erwin,
Hall, Holmes and Marcus.
NOES: McFadden.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. H3LZMIkER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3083 -4-
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. 3092
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
STANDARDS VARIANCE FOR A 108 DWELLING UNIT
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND BLACK RAIL
COURT.
CASE NAME: AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12
CASE NO.: SV 90-3
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of Standards Variance for deletion
of sidewalks on one side of the private streets within project boundaries along Ferihna and Aleutia
Lane and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed said request and can make the necessary findings for
a Standards Variance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and can make the
necessary findings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of CarIsbad as follows:
A)
B)
Cl
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of SV 90-3 approving
deletion of sidewalks on one side of the private streets within project boundaries
along Ferilina and Aleutia Lane.
That SV 90-3 is recommended for approval based on the following findings and for
the reasons discussed in the memo from the City Engineer, dated August 7, 1990:
The circumstances or conditions applicable to this situation are unusual.
No drainage problems wiII occur.
The proposed variance wiII not conflict with existing or future traffic, parking,
pedestrian or bicycle demands.
The public welfare or private property rights are not detrimental or injurious.
The proposed variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan.
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
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of August, 1990, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Erwin, Hail,
Holmes and Marcus.
NOES: McFadden.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
SHARON SCHRAMM, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
~ PC RESO NO. 3092
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
PLANNINGC0MMISS10NRESOLUTI0NN0.3093
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
STANDARDS VARIANCE FOR A 108 DWELLING UNIT
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND BLACK RAIL
COURT.
CASE NAME: AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12
CASE NO.: SV 90-4
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of Standards Variance for reduction
of centerline radii on 3 curves on Feriina and Aleutia Lane and to eliminate standard knuckle on
9O"ttlms.
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed said request and can make the necessary findings for
a Standards Variance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and can make the
necessary findings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
W
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of SV 90-4 approving
reduction of centerline radii on 3 curves on Ferilina on Aleutia Lane and to
eliminate standard knuckle on 90 degree turns.
Cl That SV 904 is recommended for approval based on the following findings and for
the reasons discussed in the attached memo from the City Engineer, dated August
7, 1990:
Findingx
1.
2.
3.
The circumstances or conditions applicable to this situation are unusual.
No drainage problems will occur.
The proposed variance will not conflict with existing or future traffic, parking,
pedestrian or bicycle demands.
4. The public welfare or private property rights are not detrimental or injurious.
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
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of August, 1990, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Erwin, Hall,
Holmes and Marcus.
McFadden.
None.
None.
SHARON SCHRAMM, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
Al-l-EST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
~ PC RESO NO. 3092
-
APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE:
FEBRUARY 15.1990
GW
STAFF REPORT 0 6
DATE: AUGUST 15, 1990
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: CT 89-39A’UD 89-19/SV 90-3/SV 904 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12 -
Request for a 10 lot/l08 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative Tract Map
and Planned Unit Development, located within the Aviara Master Plan Area
at the southeast comer of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Local Facilities
Management Zone 19, and two Standards Variances to (1) eliminate
sidewalks along the side of all internal project streets and (2) reduce the
centerline radii of internal project streets.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution
No. 3081 recommending APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning
Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3082, 3083, 3092 and 3093
recommending APPROVAL of CT 89-39/PUD 89-19/SV 90-3/SV 90-4 to the City Council,
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. PROJEfl DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting approval of a 10 lot/108 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative
Tract Map and Planned Unit Development, located as described above. The subject
property is located within Phase I of the Aviara Master Plan Area which is zoned PC and
which is under a Combination General Plan Designation of RLM/RM/OS/RC/N. The
specific project site (Planning Area-12) is designated for a maximum residential density of
12.1 du/acre. The property is also located within the Coastal Zone (Mello I) and will
require a Coastal Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development would be located on a
26.1 acre site (18.2 net acres) and have a net density of 5.93 du/acre. This density is well
below the site’s maximum permitted density of 12.1 du/acre.
As shown on Exhibit “B”, the proposed project would consist of 108 townhome units to be
developed as 36 three-plex structures. Each structure contains one lower level unit with two single level flats above. The dwelling units will range in size from 1,717 square feet
to 2,150 square feet. Two building types (A and B as shown on Exhibits “I” through “L”)
are proposed. Building type “A” is a two-story structure (26 feet to the midpoint of the
highest roof) and Building type “B” is the same structure with the addition of a loft in one
-
. CT 89-39/PUD 89-19 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
AUGUST 15, 1990
PAGE 2
of the upstairs units (measured at 30 feet tall to the midpoint of the loft roof). The
architecture of the proposed structures is Spanish Colonial in style, incorporating simple
building mass, with gabled and hipped roof form, light colored stucco and exposed rafter
tails. Roof and facade articulation, second story balconies and recessed entries and
windows have been incorporated into the structures to add interest and relief.
All of the ground story dwelling units will include a minimum 600 square foot private patio
area and each of the second story units will include a private balcony ranging between 125
square feet and 160 square feet in area. In addition, the project includes a community
active recreation area, (pool, spa and pool cabana) at its entrance, which is linked by an
open space corridor through the site to a secondary recreation area (7,000 square foot
look-out plaza) located at the southern perimeter of the developable portion of the site.
Access to the project site would be from Alga Road to Black Rail Court. The project is
proposed as a cul-de-sac subdivision served by Black Rail Court. From Black Rail Court a
40 foot wide, gated project entry street (Aleutia Lane) is proposed. This entry street
intersects with a proposed 30 foot wide private street, thereby providing the internal circulation system for the project.
As shown on Exhibit “E”. the project site has already been pregraded, consistent with the
approved grading plans for Phase I - Aviara (CT 85-35). In addition, approximately 65,000
unpermitted cu/yds of earth have been removed from the site. This graded condition is
reflected as the existing site grades on the proposed tentative tract map (see Exhibit “B”).
The site is surrounded by Alga Road to the north, open space and the future Four Seasons
Resort Hotel to the south and east and the Aviara Golf Course to the west.
ANALYSIS
Planninn Issues
1. Does the proposed project conform to the development standards of the Aviara
Master Plan and the Planned Development Ordinance?
2. Does the proposed project conform to the design criteria of the Aviara Master Plan?
3. Is the proposed project as designed in compliance with the City’s Noise Policy No.
171
4. Is the proposed project in compliance with the Mello II Local Coastal Program as
implemented through the Aviara Master Plan - 177?
5. Is the proposed project consistent with the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management
Plan?
. CT 89-39/PUD 89-19 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
AUGUST 15, 1990
6. Is the proposed project consistent with City Engineering development Standards?
7. Are all conditioned offsite improvements necessary for the development of the
project?
DISCUSSION
MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
As proposed, the project complies with all Planning Area specific development standards
of the Aviara Master Plan and all other development standards of the Planned Development
Ordinance. Specifically, all structures are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Separated by a minimum of 20 feet,
Setback a minimum of 50 feet from Alga Road,
Setback a minimum of 30 feet from Black Rail Court,
Setback a minimum of 20 feet and 5 feet from fronting private residen
streets and driveways respectively, and
5. Setback a minimum of 30 feet from the Planning Area boundary.
:ial
As discussed earlier, all structures will be below the maximum permitted 35 foot height
limit. All of the units will have a two-car garage with a minimum dimension of 400 square
feet. This will provide the adequate space to fulfill the Planned Development Ordinance
storage requirements as well as provide parking for two cars. Adequate guest, bay parking
(32 spaces) will be provided along the interior of the proposed 30 foot wide private street.
Each unit will include either a private patio (600 square foot minimum) or balcony (113-
166 sq. ft.). Two common recreation areas, totaling 19,815 square feet in area and
including a s wimming pool, spa, pool cabana benches and a viewing telescope will also be
provided. With regard to R.V. parking, staff has conditioned that the Master Plans
recreational vehicle parking area (Planning Area 23), with an all weather access road to
it, be available prior to the occupancy of any residential units within this Planning Area.
MASTER PLAN DESIGN CRITERIA
The proposed project also complies with the Aviara Master Plan design criteria regarding
site design, open space preservation, landscaping, entry treatments, fencing, trails and noise
mitigation. Specifically, the project has been laid out to provide more than adequate
building separation while providing golf course or open space views for most of the
dwelling units. The enhanced building separations, in concert with the proposed active
recreation areas, which are linked by an internal open space belt, will function to open the
project up. The above mentioned design treatments, incorporated with rich project
landscaping and enhanced pavement treatments throughout, function to create a
comprehensive, innovative and desirable living environment. The project as proposed, also
preserves the Master Plan delineated open space area (Lot 10 as shown on Exhibit “B”)
within the southern portion of the site.
. CT 89-39/PUD 89-19 - AVIAFtA PLANNING ARF.A 12
AUGUST 15, 1990
NOISE POLICY - 17
The project is located within 500 feet of Alga Road and in accordance, is subject to
compliance with the Cit+ Noise Policy No. 17. The Noise Policy requires that noise be
mitigated to 60 dB(A) five feet inside the project’s property line at six feet above finished
grade and, above the first floor/story if usable exterior space is provided. In this project,
the rear-yards and balcony areas for units 2-9 along Alga Road would be impacted by traffic
noise. The acoustical study for the project (see Attachment “A”) presents required noise
mitigations (barrier heights) for three different project grading options. The reason for
analyzing three different grading options is associated with the aforementioned
unpermitted grading of the property as discussed below. During the processing of this
application, Hillman Properties requested permission from the City Engineering and
Planning Departments to allow the removal of 77,500 cubic yards from Planning Area 12
prior to the approval of the proposed project. However, because (1) the removal of this
77,500 cubic yards of earth from the site was not in substantial conformance with the
existing approved grading plans for CT 85-35 (Phase I Aviara) and (2) the removal of this
earth in association with the development of this proposed project would necessitate the
construction of a noise mitigation wall up to 9.5 feet in height along Alga Road, Planning
and Engineering staff were unwilling to support the removal of this 77,500 cubic yards of
earth. Subsequent to this decision, due to a field miscommunication the City discovered
that approximately 65,000 cu yds of earth had been removed without a valid permit.
Accordingly, Hillman Properties was directed to restore PA-12 to its pregraded condition.
In the interim, acknowledging that the removal of comparable yards of earth from this site
would likely be necessary in order to create appropriate grades for development, Planning
Staff requested that A-M Homes submit an acoustical analysis under the scenario of the site
being illegally graded with the exception of a maximum 8 foot tall fill slope along Alga
Road being replaced. This scenario is included in the acoustical analysis, as Option 3. The
other two grading scenarios include: Option 1 - the graded condition of the site prior to
the unpermitted grading (77,500 cubic yards of earth removed); and Option 2 - the site’s
graded condition after the illegal grading (removal of + 8 vertical feet or 77,500 cubic
yards of earth across the site. As shown in the acoustical study for the proposed project
(Option - 3) required noise barrier walls which would need to be placed at the top of the
proposed maximum 8 foot high fill slope along Alga Road in order to reduce rear yard noise levels to 60 dB(A) would be 5.5 to 6.0 feet tall. The other two grading options
would necessitate the construction of walls measuring 5.5 to 9.5 feet in height. The
proposed project grading alternative‘ (Option -3)) would also result in other project
benefits: (1) reducing the visibility of project dwelling units from along Alga Road; (2)
increasing the amount of landscaping along Alga Road; and (3) creating an overall better
rear yard noise environment than the other two grading options for these structures along
Alga Road.
However, should the Planning Commission or City Council decide not to approve this
proposed project, then all graded soil shall be returned back to the site. The City has
required Hillman Properties to bond for this grading should it be necessary. Otherwise the
acoustical analysis specifies that compliance with Noise Policy 17 shall require that balcony
CT 8939/PUD 89-19 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
AUGUST 15, 1990
barrier heights for units 2-9 range from 5.5 to 6.5 feet in height, and that mechanical
ventilation shall be required for units 2-9. All above mentioned noise mitigations have
been conditioned to be incorporated into the project design.
MELLO I LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
As proposed, this project is consistent with all policies of the underlying Mello I Local
Coastal Program as implemented through Master Plan - 177. Specifically, all portions of
the property which were placed under open space deed restrictions by the California
Coastal Commission (Lot 10 on Exhibit “B”) are being preserved in open space.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
The project is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 19 in the southwest quadrant.
At the project dwelling unit count (108 units) the proposed project is 243 dwelling units
below that allowed per Local Facilities Management Zone 19. All public utilities and
services will be available to serve the project.
The impacts on public facilities created by the proposed project and compliance with
adopted performance standards are summarized below:
FACILITY
STANDARD
IMPACTS
City Administration 400.30 sq. ft.
Library 213.62 sq. ft.
Wastewater 108 Edu’s
Parks .80 acres
Drainage N/A Circulation 864 ADT
Fire Station #2 & #4
Schools N/A Sewer Collection System 108 EDU Water Distribution System 23,760 GPD
Open Space N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Standards Variances
The project applicants have requested approval of variances to Engineering Standards for:
(A) The elimination of sidewalks along one side of all proposed streets (Aleutia Lane
and Ferihna), and
(B) The reduction of centerline radii for Aleutia Lane and Ferilina.
.
CT 8%39/PUD 89-19 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
AUGUST 15,199O
PAGE 6
The Engineering Department is recommending approval of both Standards Variances as
discussed Below.
A. Standards Variances for Sidewalks
Engineering standards currently require that sidewalks be provided along both sides of all streets or driveways. The project applicants have requested
that this project be approved with sidewalks along only one side of the
proposed streets (Ferilina and Aleutia Lane). The City Engineer has
determined that the elimination of sidewalks on one side of Ferilina and
Aleutia Lane would be acceptable in that; an alternative pedestrian pathway
(through the center of the site) is provided, and this pathway in concert with
the proposed sidewalk will provide adequate and safe internal pedestrian
access within this gated community.
B. Standards Variance for Centerline Radii
Per City Engineering standards minimum street centerline radii are required
to be 200 feet. The project applicants have requested a reduction in
centerline radii for Ferilina and Aleutia Lane to as low as 40 feet. The
Engineering Department is recommending support of this variance because;
the streets are private, do not contain thru traffic and will serve a limited
number of multi-family units. Adequate sight distance will also be
maintained at the reduced radius curves in conformance with City Standards.
Approval of both Standards Variances will also (1) result in no substantial
drainage problems, (2) will not conflict with existing or future traffic and
parking demands or pedestrian or bicycle use, (3) will not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity,
and (4) will not adversely affect the General Plan.
Iv.
Attached to the Staff Report is a memo from the City Engineer to the
Planning Commission recommending approval for the Standards Variances,
and resolutions containing findings for the Commission to approve the
request.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project with the implementation of
mitigation measures, will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore,
has issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration on July 5, 1990. The environmental analysis,
along with the field checks by staff identified that because: (1) the project site has already been reviewed within the Aviara Master Plan EIR 83-2(A); (2) the site has been previously
rough graded; and (3) the project will not encroach into the deed restricted Coastal Sage
Scrub habitat to the south, no project specific environmental impacts are anticipated.
However, mitigation measures (ie. sound attenuation wall, balcony barriers and mechanical
ventilation as described in the Acoustical Analysis for PA-12) for traffic noise impacts from
.
.
CT 89-39/PUD 89-19 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
AUGUST 15, 1990
PAGE 7
Alga Road shall be required to be incorporated into the project design prior to the
occupancy of any project dwelling units. There were no public comments received during
the public review period for this Mitigated Negative Declaration.
In summary, since the proposed project is: (1) in conformance with the development
standards of the Aviara Master Plan and the Planned Development Ordinance; (2) in
conformance with the Design Criteria of the Aviara Master Plan; (3) in compliance with
the City’s Noise Policy No. 17 as conditioned; is (4) in conformance with the Mello II Local
Coastal Program and Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Plan, and the findings can be
made to approve the Standards Variances, staff recommends approval of CT 89-39/PUD
89-l 9/SV 90-3/SV 90-4.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
2:
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3081
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3082
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3083
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3092
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3093
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Disclosure Form
Local Facilities Impacts Assessment Form
Response to Notice for a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Memos to Planning Commission from the City Engineer, dated August 7, 1990
Attachment “A”, Revised Noise Analysis for Aviara Planning Area 12
Exhibits “A” - “O”, dated July 18, 1990.
CDD:km
July 9, 1990
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
. CASE NO: CT 8939/PUD 89-19
APPLICANT: AVIARA - PLANNING AREA 12
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Tentative Tract MaD and Planned Unit Development to
develon 108 Condominium Units along the southeast corner of Alga Road and Black Rail
court -*
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 230 of Tract 85-35. Aviara. Phase I - Unit D, according
to Man 12412 recorded June 29, 1989.
26.1 gross acres
APN: 215-040-16 Acres 18.2 net acres Proposed No. of Lots/Units 7/108
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation Combination District RM/RLM
Density Allowed 12.1 DU/AC Density Proposed 5.93 DU/AC (Net)
Existing Zone P-C Proposed Zone P-C
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning Land Use
Site P-C VACANT AND GRADED
North P-C VACANT (Future Commercial)
South P-C VACANT (Future Golf Course/Hotel
East P-C
West P-C
VACANT (Future Hotel)
VACANT (Future Golf Course)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District CARLSBAD Water CARLSBAD Sewer CARLSBAD
EDU’s 108 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, Date DECEMBER 4, 1989
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
x Mitigated Negative declaration, issued JULY 5. 1990
E.I.R. Certified, dated
. . I’ . sitj/ Ir of Cklsbad /
DISCLOSURE STATEMEM .,’ . .
ApPuCANrS STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPIJCA~ONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCREI-IONARY ACTlON ON THE PART OF WE Cm COUNCIL OR ANY APPOINTED
BOARD. COMMISSION OR COMMI-I-RX
(Please Print)
The following information must be disclosed:
- 1. ADplicant
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
A-M Homes 125 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101
2. owner
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
A-M Homes
125 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names a
addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partners1
interest in the partnership. 81% of A-M Homes
Jenninqs Operations (USA) Inc. 3501 Jamboree Road, South Tower
Suite 400 NewDort Beach, CA 92660
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names a:
addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficlz
of the trust.
(Over)
Disclosure statemerrt Page 2
5. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Scare
Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
yes - - No x tf yes, please indicate person(s)
Person is defined as: ‘Any individual. firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal I
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, cQ and county, crty
municiDal&. district w other pditicz! su&!ivision, c-r any other group or Combination acting as a umt.’ I
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)
-_
. . . 8-6-90
Signature of Owner/date
RHONDA L. HJZACOCK, Authorized Agent
:., . ,.
. ,. ,.
Print or type name of owner*--,
Signature of applicant/date
Print of type name of applicant
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWI’H MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACLlTIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO.: AYIARA PT.ANNIN&iWA 12 - (TT 89-.?9A’UR 89-l 9
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 1 9 GENERAL PLAN:
ZONING: PC
DEVELOPER’S NAME: A-M YQMES
ADDRESS: 7 UPPER NEWPORT PT.AZA
PHONE NO.: 714-852-9411 ASSESSOR’S PABCF.1. NO.. . 3.15 041) 16 - _
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): l&AC/lQ8 IXJ
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage =
Library: Demand in Square Footage = ?I-
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage = 80
Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A
Identify Drainage Basin = N/A
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = ?&4
Open Space: Acreage Provided - N/A
Schools: N/A
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demand in EDUs - 108
Identify Sub Basin - ISA
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD -
The project is 243 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
AITACHMENTlO
One letter of comment was submitted in response to the Mitigated Negative Declaration
issued for Aviara - Planning Area 12 (CT 89-39/PUD 89-19) (see attached letter from the
Department of Water Resources, dated July 25, 1990). The specific comments and
responses to these are listed below:
LETTER FROM DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
(1) COMMENT: Recommendations, as they relate to water conservation and flood
damage prevention, are attached.
RESPONSE: The project has been conditioned to incorporate applicable residential
water conservation measures into the projects design. Due to the
proposed projects location and design no flood damage impacts are
anticipated.
(2) COMMENT: We would also like to recommend that you further consider
implementing a comprehensive program to use reclaimed water for
irrigation purposes.
RESPONSE: The project has been conditioned to utilize reclaimed water, if
available, for irrigating common landscaped areas.
itats of California . The ROSOWC~ Agency
Memorandum
Date : 3oL 2 5 1990
1. Gordon F. Snow, Ph.D. To : Assistant Secretary for Resources
2. City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Car&bad, CA 92009
Attention: Chris Decerbo
From Deportment of Wotor Rasourcos
Los Angeles, CA 90055
Subject : DEIR for Aviara Planning Area 12. for 108 Units, dated July 1990, SCH 9001OM3
Your subject document has been reviewed by our Department of Water Resources: staff. Recommendations, as they relate to water conservation and flood damage* prevention, are attached.
After reviewing your report, we also would like to recommend that you further
consider implementing a comprehensive program to use reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for beneficial uses requiring high quality water supplies.
For further information, you may wish to contact John Pariewski at
(213) 620-3951. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this report.
Sincerely.
Charles R. White, Chief
Planning Branch
Southern District
Attachments
Department of Water Resources Recommendations for Water Conservation and Water Reclamation
To reduce water demand, implement the water conservation measures described
here.
Required
The following State laws require water-efficient plumbing fixtures in structures:
Health and Safety Code Section 17921.3 requires low-flush toilets and urinals in virtually all buildings as follows:
"After January 1, 1983, all new buildings constructed in this state shall use water closets and associated flushometer valves, if any, which are water-conservation water closets as defined by American National Standards Institute Standard A112.19.2, and urinals and associated flushometer valves, if any, that use less than an average of l-1/2 gallons per flush. Blowout water closets and associated flushometer
valves are exempt from the requirements of this section."
Title 20, California Administrative Code Section 1604(f) (Appliance Efficiency Standards) establishes efficiency standards that give the maximum flow rate of all new showerheads, lavatory faucets, and sink faucets, as specified in the standard approved by the American National Standards Institute on November 16, 1979, and known as ANSI A112.18.1M-1979.
Title 20, California Administrative Code Section 1606(b) (Appliance Efficiency Standards) prohibits the sale of fixtures that do not comply with regulations. No new appliance may be sold or offered for sale in California that is not certified by its manufacturer to be in compliance with the provisions of the regulations establishing applicable
efficiency standards.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code Section 2-5307(b) (California Energy Conservation Standards for New Buildings) prohibits the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the CEC compliance with the flow rate standards.
Title 24, California Administrative Code Sections 2-5352(i) and (j) address pipe insulation requirements, which can reduce water used before hot water reaches equipment or fixtures. These requirements apply to steam and steam-condensate return piping and recirculating hot water piping in attics, garages, crawl spaces, or unheated spaces other than between floors or in interior walls. Insulation of water-heating systems is also required.
0 Health and Safety Code Section 4047 prohibits installation of residential water softening or conditioning appliances unless certain conditions are satisfied. Included is the requirement that, in most instances, the installation of the appliance must be accompanied by water conservation devices on fixtures using softened or conditioned
water.
0 Government Code Section 7800 specifies that lavatories in all public
facilities constructed after January 1, 1985, be equipped with self-closing faucets that limit flow of hot water.
Recommendations to be implemented where applicable
Interior:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Supply line pressure: Water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) be reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure-reducing valve.
Drinking fountains: Drinking fountains be equipped with self-closing valves.
Hotel rooms: Conservation reminders be posted in rooms and restrooms.* Thermostatically controlled mixing valve be installed for bath/shower.
Laundry facilities: Water-conserving models of washers be used.
Restaurants: Water-conserving models of dishwashers be used or spray emitters that have been retrofitted for reduced flow. Drinking water be served upon request only.*
Ultra-low-flush toilets: 1-l/2-gallon per flush toilets be installed in all new construction.
Exterior:*
1. Landscape with low water-using plants wherever feasible.
2. Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn-dependent uses, such as
playing fields. When lawn is used, require warm season grasses.
3. Group plants of similar water use to reduce overirrigation of low-water-using plants. 4. Provide information to occupants regarding benefits of low-water-using landscaping snd sources of additional assistance.
"The Department of Water Resources or local water district may aid in
developing these materials or providing other information.
-2-
5. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied on top of
soil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soil by reducing
evaporation and soil compaction.
6. Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs. Established plants are
often adapted to low-water-using conditions and their use saves water
needed to establish replacement vegetation.
7. Install efficient irrigation systems that minimize runoff and
evaporation and maximize the water that will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods of increasing irrigation efficiency.
8. Use pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff and to aid in ground water recharge.
9. Grade slopes so that runoff of surface water is minimized.
10. Investigate the feasibility of using reclaimed waste water, stored rainwater, or grey water for irrigation.
11. Encourage cluster development, which can reduce the amount of land being converted to urban use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created and thereby aid in ground water recharge.
12. Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This aids ground water
recharge.
13. To aid in ground water recharge, preserve flood plains and aquifer
recharge areas as open space.
-3-
Department of Water Resources Recommendations for Flood Damage Prevention
In flood-prone areas, flood damage prevention measures required to protect a
proposed development should be based on the following guidelines:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
It is the State's policy to conserve water; any potential loss to ground water should be mitigated.
All building structures should be protected against a loo-year flood.
In those areas not covered by a Flood Insurance Rate Map or Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the loo-year flood elevation and boundary should be shown in the Environmental Impact Report.
At least one route of ingress and egress to the development should be available during a loo-year flood.
The slope and foundation designs for all structures should be based on detailed soils and engineering studies, especially for hillside
developments.
Revegetation of disturbed or newly constructed slopes should be done as soon as possible (utilizing native or low-water-using plant material).
The potential damage to the proposed development by mudflow should be assessed and mitigated as required.
Grading should be limited to dry months to minimize problems associated with sediment transport during construction.
-4-
-
ATTACHMENT 11
August 7, 1990
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: City Engineer
A-M HOMES REQUEST FOR STANDARD VARIANCE - CT 8QWPUD 89-19 - SV 90-03
The A-M Homes Developer has requested a variance from City Design Standards. In accordance
with Section 18 of the Street Design Criteria of the City Standards, the Planning Commission shall
have the authority as an administrative act to grant variances to the City Standards provided the
following findings can be met:
1. That there are extraordinary or unusual circumstances or conditions applicable to
the situation of surrounding property necessitating a variance of the Standards.
2.
3.
That the granting of such variance will not cause substantial drainage problems.
That the granting of such variance will not conflict with existing or future traffic and
parking demands or pedestrian or bicycle use.
4. That the granting of such variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the variance is
granted.
5. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive
general plan.
City staff has reviewed the variance request and is making the recommendation that follows in
these memorandum.
Location: Southeast corner of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Aviara
Request: Deletion of sidewalk on one side of private street within project
boundaries along Ferilina and Aleutia Lane.
Reason:
Staff
Recommendation:
Explanation:
To open the project site up to provide additional landscape and
building setback from street.
Approve
Staff believes the five findings can be made for this standard
variance request as follows:
A. The Planned Development Ordinances provides flexibility for
innovative site design. Aviara Planning Area 12 is a private
gated community which combines large open space areas
with a village concept and dense landscaping. The design
August 7,199O
A-M Homes Request for Standard Variance
Paae: 2
provides a reduction of required sidewalks to one side of
the street, thereby, attempting to minimize the hardscape
and maximize the landscaped area. This concept along
with a curvilinear streetscape results in both visual and relief
and interest consistent with the planned development
concept. In addition, curvilinear streets promote greater
safety and reduced speeds as compared to wider streets
which tend to encourage higher speeds.
B. The granting of the variance will have no affect on
proposed drainage courses.
C. The sidewalk plan is designed to enhance internal
pedestrian needs as it related to destination areas within
the gated community, such as guest parking, recreation
facilities, and entrances to dwelling units.
D. The design provides a pedestrian circulations system
throughout the project that is both safe and effective. The
sidewalk is located on the side of the street where there are
few driveway cuts to minimize conflict between pedestrians
and automobiles. As designed, sidewalk access to reach
public areas is available to everyone with minimum street
crossings. The sidewalk access from Black Rail Court is
located only on the east side of Aleutia Lane. A pedestrian
gate will be provided only on that side of the street.
E. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the
City’s adopted General Plan, Zoning, and Master Plan (M.P.
177).
/a P LLOYD B. HUBBS
City Engineer
LBH:rz
August 7,199O
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Cii Engineer
A-M HOMES REQUEST FOR STANDARD VARIANCE - CT 89=39/PUD 89-l 9 - SV 90-04
The A-M Homes Developer has requested a variance from City Design Standards. In accordance
with Section 18 of the Street Design Criteria of the City Standards, the Planning Commission shall
have the authority as an administrative act to grant variances to the City Standards provided the
following findings can be met:
1. That there are extraordinary or unusual circumstances or conditions applicable to
the situation of surrounding property necessitating a variance of the Standards.
2.
3.
That the granting of such variance will not cause substantial drainage problems.
That the granting of such variance will not conflict with existing or future traffic and
parking demands or pedestrian or bicycle use.
4. That the granting of such variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the variance is
granted.
5. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive
general plan.
City staff has reviewed the variance request and is making the recommendation that follows in
these memorandum.
Location: Southeast corner of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Aviara
Request: Reduce centerline radii on 3 curves on Ferilina and Aleutia Lane
and to eliminate standard knuckle on 90” turns.
Reason:
Staff
Recommendation:
Explanation:
To develop a street plan within the confined area of the project site
to provide for looped traffic circulation.
Approve
Staff believes the five findings can be made for this standard
variance request as follows:
A. The project area is a gated community within a confined
rectangular shaped lot. The proposed streets are to be
privately owned and maintained. The highly curved streets
have been designed to reduce traffic speeds internal to the
August 7,199O
A-M Homes Request for Standard Variance
Paae: 2
project site while still maintaining City standard sight
distance requirements. The standard knuckles have been
eliminated as they are normally required to provide
additional frontage for units adjacent to the knuckle area.
Since this is an airspace condominium no such need exists
to provide the knuckle.
B. The variance request will have no impact on proposed
drainage courses.
C. The project area is a self contained gated community and
does not provide access or parking to outside areas,
thereby eliminating conflict with existing or future traffic,
parking demands and pedestrian or bicycle use in the area.
No onstreet parking is allowed within the project. Parking
is to be provided at the various proposed parking bays.
D. The granting of a variance will not be harmful to the public,
property, or improvements for the following reasons: (1)
Adequate site distance is maintained; (2) This is a gated
community. The majority of the people using this road
would be people who live here and are familiar with the
streets; (3) The addition of the curves is intended to slow
down on site speeds.
E. The project area as designed, complies with the City’s
adopted General Plan, Zoning and Master Pan (M.P. 177).
P LLOYD B. HUBBS
City Engineer Dw
LBH:rz
ATTACHMENT “A”
REVISED NOISE ANALYSIS FOR
AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
(For Grading Options 1, 2 and 3)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Report # 90-178 July 12, 1990
Prepared For:
AM HOMES 7 Upper Newport Plaza Newport Beach, CA 92660
Prepared By:
Vincent Mestre, P.E . William Bloomer MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES 280 Newport Center Drive Suite 230 Newport Beach,.CA 92660-7528 (714)760-0891
NOISE ANALYSIS FOR AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12 (For Grading Options 1, 2 and 3)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to demonstrate compliance of the Aviara Planning Area 12 with the noise related ‘Conditions of Approval’ placed on the project by the City of Carlsbad for three different grading alternatives (Options 1,2 and 3). This report is a revision to our previous report for PA-12: “Noise Analysis For Aviara Planning Area 12, City of Carlsbad”, June 20, 1990. The project calls for the development of multi-family dwelling units. The report addresses the future exterior noise levels at the rear yards and at the residences for three different grading options. Option 1 represents the initial no-grading alternative for the project. Option 2 represents the initial grading concept reduced in elevation by eight feet. Finally, Option 3 represents the alternate edge condition for grading (see Exhibits 2A, 2B and 2C).
The project is located in the City of Carl&ad, east of Interstate 5 and along Alga Road as shown in Exhibit 1. Exhibit 2A, 2B and 2C show the Site Plan for grading Options 1,2 and 3 respectively. The project will be impacted by traffk noise from Alga Road which borders the northern portion of the project. This study determines any mitigation measures required to meet the City’s exterior and interior noise standards.
2.0 NOISE CRITERIA
The City of Carlsbad specifies outdoor and indoor noise limits for residential land-uses. Both standards are based upon the CNEL index. CNEL or Community Noise Equivalent Level is a 24 hour time weighted annual average noise level based on the A-weighted decibel. A-weighting is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency of the human ear. Time weighting refers to the fact that noise that occurs during certain sensitive time periods is penal&d for occurring at these times. The evening time period (7 PM to 10 PM) penalizes noises by 5 dB while nighttime (10 PM to 7 AM) noises are penal&d by 10 dB. These time periods and penalties were selected to reflect peoples sensitivity to noise as a function of activity.
The City of Carl&ad has recently adopted an exterior noise standard of 60 CNEL for a six foot observer located five feet from the edge of rear yard. In addition the City has decided upon an interior noise standard of 45 CNEL.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
The traffic noise levels projected in this report were computed using the Highway Noise Model published by the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model”, FHWA-RD-77-108, December 1978). The FHWA Model uses trafIic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute the “equivalent noise level”. A computer code has been written which computes equivalent noise levels for each of the time periods used in CNEL. Weighting these noise levels and summing them results in the CNEL for the traffic projections used.
Page 1
\ Y’
\
1, \
#
~ &I‘Tc!
+
\ *
\
-. a-
I \
I I I ME!TTRE GREVE A!XGCIATES Exhibit 1 - Vicinity Map
-
L
1
.
L
CNEL contours are found by iterating over many distances until the distance to 60,65, and 70 CNEL contours are found. noise emission curve was used in the modeling process which represents the Southern California area. Caltrans has produced vehicle emission curves for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks based on a survey of vehicles in the State of California. These noise emission curves are called the “Calveno” curves (“California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels,” Caltrans, Report Number 54328604214, January 1987). The analysis was modeled using a proprietary spreadsheet version of the FHWA-RD-77- 108 procedure developed by Mestre Greve Associates using Microsoft Excel Version 2.2.
Mitigation through the design and construction of a noise barrier (wall, berm, or combination wall/bum) is the most common way of alleviating traffic noise impacts. The effect of a noise barrier is critically dependent on the geometry between the noise source and the receiver. A noise barrier effect occurs when the “line of sight” between the source and receiver is penetrated by the barrier. The greater the penetration the greater the noise reduction. The PHWA model was also used here in compute&d format to determine barrier heights.
4.0 ROADWAY NOISE EXPOSURE
The future (year 2010) trafRc volume for Alga Road was obtained from our noise contour study for the Noise Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan dated April 26.1990. The future average daily trafI% volume for Alga Road between Poinsettia Lane and Pacific Rim Drive is 25,400. A vehicle speed of 40 miles per hour was utilized. Truck mixes for each of the time periods used in the CNEL calculation are presented in Table 1. The traffic distribution estimates are based upon traffic surveys, and are considered typical for arterials in Southern California.
Table 1 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PER TIME OF DAY
IN PERCENT OF ADT
VEHICLETYPE MY EVENING NIGHT
Automobile 75.99 11.69 9.74 Medium Truck 1.44 0.22 0.18 Heavy Truck 0.58 0.09 0.07
Using the assumptions presented above, the future noise levels were computed The results are reported here in Table 2 in terms of distances to the 60,65, and 70 CNEL contours. These represent the distances from the centerline of the roadway to the contour value shown. Note that the values given in Table 2 do not take into account the effect of intervening topography that may affect the roadway noise exposure. Topographic effects are included in subsequent analyses to determine the actual noise exposure on the project site. In addition, these projections do not include any future vehicle noise reduction assumptions to take into account the effects of legislation requiring quieter vehicles in the future.
Page 2
Table 2 DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOURS FOR FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
ROADWAY SEGMENT 96 GRADE DISTANCE TO CNB& CONTOUR (FT) -7O- -60
Alga Road (Units 1 through 5) <3% 46 98 212 (Units 6 through 9) 5% 48 103 222
The results in Table 2 and the site plans (Exhibits 2A, 2B and 2C) indicate that some of the rear yard areas along Alga Road will be exposed to traffic noise levels in excess of 60 CNBL. Rear yard observers along Alga Road will experience a worst case traffic noise level of 68.0 CNEL at Lot 6. The balcony observers in the project will be exposed to a worst case traffic noise level of 65.0 CNEL at this lot for Options 2 and 3. The same worst case conditions also will exist for Gption 1 assuming that homes are located a minimum of 20 feet from top of slope and a minimum of 50 feet from roadway right-of-way. Therefore mitigation measures will be required for a number of yards and balconies along Alga Road for all three grading options to meet the 60 CNEL outdoor standard. Mitigation is also required should a 65 CNEL noise level be desired at these outdoor areas.
Page 3
.
5.0 EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION
The rear yard and balcony observers will be exposed to worst case traffic noise levels of 68.0 CNEL and 65.0 CNEL respectively regardless of the grading option chosen. Therefore exterior noise mitigation is required for rear yard areas and for balconies along Alga Road for grading options 1,2 and 3 (see Exhibit 2A, 2B and 2C). Representative cross-sections along the roadway (see Appendix for analysis &ta) were analyzed utilizing the FHWA Model to determine the necessary sound wall and balcony baker heights. Required noise barrier heights and locations to meet the City’s 60 CNEL outdoor noise standard are shown in Tables 3,4 and 5 and Exhibit 3A, 4A and 5A for grading Options 1,2 and 3 respectively. In addition, Tables 3,4 and 5 and Exhibit 3B, 4B and 5B show the sound wall heights required to meet a 65 CNEL rear yard noise level for Options 1, 2 and 3 respectively. It should be noted that the noise barrier heights to meet the 65 CNEL are given only for comparison. Tables 3, 4 and 5 also include required balcony noise barriers.
Table 3 REQUIRED NOISE BARRIERS FOR GRADING OPT’ION 1
CROSS-SECTION
REQUIRED BARRIERHEIGHTS (FT) ** To Meet City’s 60 CNEL, Standard To Mat 65 CNEL
REAR YARD MITIGATION A
B, C D,EandF
ii
BALCOk BARRIER MITIGATION
ii C, D, E, F G’ H I
6.5
f :i
5.5 6.0
*
f-iii
6:0
6.0 * * z-z ; *
* noise barrier not required ** Noise Barriers may be a wall, berm or wall berm combination
Page 4
.
Table 4 REQUIRED NOISE BARRIERS FOR GRADING OPTION 2
REQUIRED BARRIER HEIGHTS (FI’)** To Meet 60 CNEL To Meet 65 CNEL
REAR YARD MITIGATION
i 5.5
; i:: 5:5
ii:; ;:;
(: 2;
8, 9 !:“o 5:s BALCONY BARRIER MITIGATION 2, 3 *
495
:5
697, 8 9 56::
* noise barrier not required ** noise barriers may be a wall, berm or wall/berm combination
Table 5 REQUIRED NOISE BARRIERS FOR GRADING OPTION 3
REAR YARD MITIGATION
REQUIREDBARRIER HEIGHTS (FQ To Meet 60 CNEL To Meet 65 CNEL
2, 3,4 5
4
t BALCONY BARRIER MITIGATION
293 4 5,6,7, 8 9
:*z 610 ** 6.0 ***
56::
5;
;*3 5:s 5.5
* noise bamer not reqnred ** 6.0’ exposed wall on top of a 2.5’ (minimum) berm *** 6.0’ exposed wall on top of a 1.0’ (minimum) berm Note: Top of wall elevations shown in Appendix in Table A-l
Page 5
&* 4’ * I i /’ , .4’ /I
-) J
) i % .’ I / I ( / ‘L ‘7 / =,F ()(u
p&# : : 3
,
.
b d Is 1-f’
,-4 IO ,-I cn
;n
d
4 A
d
0
2 .I 4
B m
k
ui
P
i
ai i
irr fi. La2
4
-T
5 s 3 s E g Y 2 u 5 : : : : : : : .
The project will meet the City’s 60 CNEL standard (of the 65 CNEL level if desired) with the above sound walls and balcony noise barriers. The noise barriers are required to have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and have no openings or cracks. They may be constructed of wood studs with stucco exterior, l/4 inch plate glass, 5/8 inch plexiglass, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials. Wood and other materials may be acceptable if properly designed as a noise barrier. The required sound wall may also consist of a wall/berm combination so that the total height of the wall plus the berm amounts to the required noise barrier height.
7.0 INTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION
The project must comply with the City of Carl&ad indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet the interior noise standard, the buildings must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building attenuation to reduce the noise levels down to acceptable levels. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements which make up the building. Each unique building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units, the critical building elements are the roof, walls, windows, doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent on the transmission loss of each element and the area of that element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the final factor used in determining the total noise reduction.
The proposed dwelling units will be exposed to a worst case noise level of 64.8 CNEL at Lot 6. Therefore homes will require a maximum outdoor to indoor noise reduction of 19.8 to meet the 45 CNEL indoor noise for Options 2 and 3 and Option l(assuming homes are a minimum of 20 feet from top of slope and a minimum of 50 feet from roadway right-of-way). The homes in the project will provide at least 20 dB of noise attenuation and therefore the project will comply with the City’s Indoor Noise Standard without building upgrades with windows closed.
With windows open, the outdoor to indoor noise reduction of a building falls to 15 dBA. Thenfore for those homes experiencing a noise level greater than 60 CNEL windows must remain closed to meet the indoor noise standard. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per Uniform Building Code. This can be achieved with mechanical ventilation to provide fresh air. The system must supply two air changes per hour to each habitable room including 20 % fresh make-up air obtained directly from the outside. The fresh air inlet duct will be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct, or six feet plus one sharp 90 . . * degree bend. &&&al v-be tq&red for those own in Table 6 @ Exm 4 and &
Page 6
-
L
Table 6 LOTS REQUIRING MECHANICAL VENTILATION
FOR OPTION I Cross-Sections A though I **
FOR OFTIONS 2 AND 3
Lots 1 through 10
** see Exhibit 2A
Page 7
APPENDIX DATA USED TO DESIGN NOISE BARRIERS ALONG ALGA ROAD FOR OPTION 1
DESIGN DATA - YARD AREA WITH A 6 FT. OBSERVER
REAR YARD MITIGATION
Road Distance Base Of Dist. To Pad Cross-Section Elevation To Wail Wail Observer Elevation
A 297.5 23 304 86 304
B 298.4 ;z iii ;i 304
C 297.8 304 . . L D 295.5 70 304 75 304
Cross-Section E
0’ H I
Road Dista Elevation To Wp Base01 Dist.To Wail Observer Eievation
SE 74 304 79 304
E 304 z 304
286.5 304
261.6 110 iii 115 306
278.6 160 306 204 306
BALCONY BARRIER MITIGATION
I Cms-Bection Elevation To Wail Wall Observer Elevation A 297.5 115 314 120 314
B 298.4 102 314 107 314
C 297.8 100 314 105 374
D 295.5 100 314 105 314
Road Dkta CmwBsctbn Ehwation To Wz t
286.5. z 108 ii;
314 102 314
: 314 314 102 113 314 314 7 281.6 279.6 200 130 316 316 225 135 316 316
Page 8
.
APPENDIX (Continued) DATA USED TO DESIGN NOISE BARRIERS
ALONG ALGA ROAD FOR OITION 2
DESIGN DATA - YARD AREA WITH A 6 FT. OBSERVER
REAR YARD MITIGATION
Cross-Bection
1
Road Distance Bass Of Dist. To Pad
Elevation To Wail Wall Observer Elevation
297.5 80 297.5 115 289
2 298 63 298 82 290
3 298 62 298 80 291.5
5 296 59 296 71 294.5 \
Road Di Base Of Di T Pad l Cross-Ssctbn Elevation T%? Waii Ob&zr Elevation,
6B 292 64 69 295.5
7 267.8 297 77 297
8 287 z 298.5 87 298.5
9 281.6 66
10 278.6 170 297 i.ii 297 .
BALCONY BARRIER MITIGATION
Cross-Bectlon 1
Road Distance Bass Of Dist. To Pad
Elevation To Wall Wail Observer Elevation
297.5 200 299 205 299
2 115 300 720 300
: 105 301.5 110 301.5
102 304.5 107 304.5 \
D- Base Of Dirt. To CmMectbn EI:sn To Wall Wall Obsewer Ek%!ion 68 292 too 305.5 105 305.5
B’ 287.8 287 too 102 308.5 307 105 107 308.5 307
9 281.6 125 :zF 130 309
to. 278.6 215 220 307
Page 9
APPENDIX (Continued) DATA USED TO DESIGN NOISE BARRIERS ALONG ALGA ROAD FOR OPTION 3
DESIGN DATA - YARD AREA WITH A 6 FT. OBSERVER
REAR YARD MITIGATION
Road Distance Base Of Dist. To Pad Lot Elevation To Wall Wall Observer Elevation
For 60 CNEL - yard
: 297.5 298.4 ii 289.2 300.5 196 87 289.7 261.8
"5 297.8 2955 :i 299.8 297.5 83 74 292.7 293
Lot Eievatbn To Wall Wail Observer Elevation,
For 60 CNEL.9 yard 6 60 295 294.6
i
z
63
;i
286.5 9 281.6 i?
iii
z 297 297 295 10 279.6 130 ii 204 295 ,
BALCONY BARRIER MITIGATION
i Road Distance Base Of Dirt. To Pad I Lot
1
Elevation
297.5
To Wall
202
Wall Obsewer Eievatlon 299.7 207 299.7
2 298.4 112 301.8 117 301.8
5
297.8 103 302.7 108 302.7
295.5 102 304.3 107 304.3
Road Distance BsseOf Dist. To Lot Elevation To Wall Wail Obsewer Ezon 6 101 305.6 106 305.6 291 101 307.2 106 307.2 286.5. 102 307.5 107 307.5 9. 281.6 122 307.5 127 307.5 10 2796 215 306.7 220 306.7
Page 10
.
*-
APPENDIX (Continued)
A-l
REQUIRED SOUND WALLS TO MEET 60 CNEL FOR GRADING OPTION 3 SHOWING TOP OF WALL ELEVATIONS
REQUIRED BARRIER HEIGHTS @?I’) TOP OF WALL To Meet 60 CNEL ELEVATION
REAR YARD MITIGATION 2, 3 306.0 4 2 5:s 305.5 5 303.0
4 6.0 60*** . .+* 303.5 305.0
ii ::i 304.0 301.5
Tt *I* 610’ exposed wall on top of a l:O’ (minimum) bexm 6 0’ exposed wall on top of a 2 5’ (minimum) berm
I
Page 11
-.
MlNUTEs
August 15, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 COMMISSIONERS \:
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:13 p.m. and reconvened at 8:20 p.m.
6) CT 89-39/PUD 89-19/SV 90-3/SV 90-4 AVIARA PLANNING
ARFA 12 - Request for a 10 lot/108 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development, located within the Aviara Master Plan Area
at the southeast corner of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Local Facilities Management Zone 19.
Chris DeCerbo, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the applicant is requesting approval
of a 10 lot/l08 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development within Planning Area 12 of the Aviara Master Plan. The project applicant is also requesting approval of two engineering Standards Variances to eliminate sidewalks along one side of all internal project streets and
to reduce the centerline radii of internal project streets.
The project is located south of Alga Road immediately to the
west of the recently approved Four Seasons destination hotel resort site. The proposed Tentative Tract Map and PDD would be located on a 26.1 acre site with a net density of 5.93
dufacre. This density is well below the site's maximum permitted density of 12.1 dufacre.
The project site has already been pregraded consistent with
the approved grading plan for the first phase of the Aviara master map. In addition, approximately 65,000 cubic yards of
earth has been removed from the site.
The 108 townhome units will be developed as 36 three-plex
structures. Each structure contains one lower level unit with two single level flats above. The dwelling units will range in size from 1,717 s.f. to 2,150 s.f. Two building
types are proposed. One is a two-story structure (26 ft. to the midpoint of the highest roof) and the other is the same structure with the addition of a loft in one of the upstairs
units (measured at 30 ft. to the midpoint of the loft roof). The architecture is Spanish Colonial in style, incorporating simple building mass, with gabled and hipped room form, light
colored stucco, and exposed rafter tails. Roof and facade articulation, second story balconies, and recessed entries
and windows have been incorporated into the structures to add interest and relief.
All of the ground story dwelling units will include a minimum 600 s.f. private patio area and each of the second story
units will include a private balcony ranging between 113 s.f. and 166 s.f. in area. In addition, the project includes an active recreation area (pool, spa, and cabana) at its entrance, which is linked by an open space corridor through the site to a secondary recreation area (approximately 7,000
s.f. look-out plaza) located at the southern perimeter of the developable portion of the site.
Since the proposed project is in compliance with the various
performance standards and the findings can be made to approve the standards variances, staff recommends approval with the amended conditions outlined in staff memo dated August 15,
1990.
Commissioner Erwin disclosed for the record that he spoke
with Rhonda Heacock.
MINUTE;,
August 15, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 COMMISSIONERS ’
Commissioner Erwin inquired about reducing the center radii
on three curves and eliminating the standard on the 90 degree turns. Mr. Wojcik replied that the standard requirement for
centerline curve radius would be approximately 200 ft., usually needed for site distance. In this projeat the centerline radius can be eliminated and still retain the site distance. As regards the knuckle, the intent is geared more
towards a standard subdivision where minimum frontages are required. The knuckle is usually put in to increase the home
frontages but these homes do not have that requirement for frontage. Staff can accept the variance because the project still meets the intent for the safe travel.
Commissioner McFadden cannot see where a traffic signal has been included at Black Rail Court and Alga. Mr. Wojcik
replied that the signal is included in the assessment district and will be installed when the City Engineer warrants that it is necessary.
Commissioner McFadden inquired what the Master Plan mandates for the space between buildings. Mr. DeCerbo replied that a
minimum of 20 ft. is required between structures.
Commissioner McFadden inquired where the interior walkway is
located. Mr. DeCerbo replied that there is an opportunity to create a walkway through the center of the project. There is
no actual walkway but the area can be used by pedestrians.
Commissioner McFadden inquired if there is fencing other than
the private patios. Mr. DeCerbo replied that there is no fencing except some perimeter fencing.
Chairman Schramm opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Rhonda Heacock, A-M Homes, 7 Newport Plaza, Newport Beach, addressed the Commission and stated that the staff report pretty much covered everything but she reiterated that this
project will be an upscale luxury townhouse product. In many
instances the building separations around the loop road are double the required 20 ft. In addition, they are providing
over 197,000 s.f. of open space.
Commissioner Erwin inquired why they decided not to put in a
second sidewalk. Ms. Heacock replied that they did not want people to walk across the extensive driveway cuts.
Commissioner Erwin is concerned about the second floor noise impacts of persons living on the first floor. Ms. Heacock replied that they will not be installing ceramic or hardwood
floors on the first floor, which should take care of the problem.
Commissioner McFadden is interested in the walkway; she thinks something is needed if there will be no sidewalks.
She inquired if Ms. Heacock could accept a condition for a walkway to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Ms.
Heacock replied that they did not consider putting in a specific walkway due to the patios and because their engineer has indicated that in some areas it would require a 4 ft.
elevation because the walkway would have to go around some curves.
Commissioner Holmes inquired what happened to the 65,000
cubic yards of dirt which was removed. Gary Wayne replied
MINUTE4,
that it was moved to Planning Area 24 which received a
stockpile permit by the City Council prior to laying down the road.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman Schramm declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion
among the Commission members.
Commissioner Schlehuber thinks it is a good project; he can support it without a walkway.
Commissioner Marcus thinks it is an excellent project. She had some problem with the grading but can accept staff's
explanation. She thinks a walkway would present a privacy problem. Most people don't necessarily use a walkway and she thinks it will work okay.
Cotmnissioner Erwin would like to hear from the noise
engineer.
Chairman Schramm reopened the public testimony to hear from the noise engineer.
Vince Mestre, Acoustical Engineer, 280 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, addressed the Commission and stated that although stacked flats usually present noise problems, they have provided extra insulation to inhibit and absorb noise.
Ceramic tile floors are the biggest nightmare and they have provided twice as many safeguards in the floor and cormnon wall. Although it will not be totally soundproof, it will not be possible to hear someone walking up and down the
outside stairs inside a unit.
Commissioner Erwin can support the project. He thinks that
Unit 35 was added as an afterthought. He does think there should be a walkway. He added that this is the last time he will vote for a variance to eliminate sidewalks.
Commissioner McFadden feels the project looks interesting but she thinks there needs to be a pathway since it is not a
senior citizen area. For this reason, she will be voting against it. She thinks everyone should be aware that the open space was provided for in the Master Plan and this
applicant should not take responsibility for it.
Commissioners Holmes feels it is tight but it does meet the
PUD Ordinance. He can support it.
Commissioner Hall can support it.
Chairman Schranxn likes the layout because many of the buildings were moved around. She also likes the guest
parking. Although she thinks the project is very crowded, she will support it. She would prefer to see it less crowded and she is not happy that 65,000 cubic yards of dirt was removed without a permit. She doesn't want to see that
happen again.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3081 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3082, 3083, 3092 and 3093 recommending approval of CT 89-39fPUD 89-19/SV 90-3/SV 90-4 to the City Council
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein with the inclusion of the recommended revisions outlined in staff memo dated August 15, 1990.
CORRECTED
August 15, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 COMMISSIONERS
Erwin Hall
Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber
Schramm
x
x
x
x
X
X
SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
TO: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
VIA: CITY MANAGER
FROM: Planning & Engineering Department
MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FORAVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
When the City Council considers the project, staff is recommending that several adjustments be made in the appropriate Council resolutions of approval. The modifications are as follows:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3083 - Approval of a Planned Unit Development
Findings 4 and 5 are incorrect as stated. They should be identical to findings 4 and 5 in Resolution No. 3082. (Approval of the Tentative Tract Map).
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3082 - Approval of the Tentative Tract Map
a. Finding 9, last sentence: Mello II_ should be Mello z.
b. Condition 6, eighth sentence:
C. Condition 41: Mello TI should
d. Condition 67, second sentence: after word *lplanW1.
1987 should be 1989.
be Mello I.
Insert word l*approvalll
e. Condition 81: Duplicate of Condition 77; causes renumbering.
The Engineering Department is also recommending that the Council Resolution of Approval for the Tentative Tract Map be amended by the addition of the following conditions:
1. Condition No. 44 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3082 adds the phrase "prior to final map" to the end of the condition.
2. Any phasing of this project shall be to the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Director.
.
Council Members
September 17,199O
Page: 2
3 This project shah have a total of nine (9) lots. Lot “7” recreation area as shown on the
tentative map shall be combined with Lot “6”. The open space lots shall be renumbered Lot
7, 8 and 9. These changes shah be made on the approved tentative map.
4 The following areas shall be granted as covenant for easement to all owners of
condominium units (not the Homeowners Association). These covenants for easements shall
be conveyed by separate document and recorded concurrent with the final map.
A. A common area in perpetuity as a covenant running with the land over the
area shown as Lot “7” on the tentative map, being the common area for
recreational purposes.
B. A common area in perpetuity as a covenant running with the land over all
paved areas and sidewalks, except individual concrete driveways being the
common area for vehicular access, parking and private utilities.
C. A common area in perpetuity as a covenant running with the land over Lots
1 through 6 inclusive, being the common areas.
These covenants for easement shah be binding upon all successor, assigns and transfers of
covenantor.
5. The three open space lots - lots 7, 8 and 9 shall be deeded over to the Aviara Master
Association concurrent with final map recordation per the agreement between the developer
and Hilhnan Properties.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
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 (previously Elm
Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 18, 1990, to consider
an application for a 7 lot/108 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative Tract Map and
Planned Unit Development on property generally located within the Aviara Master Plan
Area at the southeast comer of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Local Facilities
Management Zone 19 and more particularly described as:
Lot 230 of Tract 85-35, Aviara, Phase I - Unit D,
according to Map 12412 recorded June 29, 1989
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 Tentative Tract Map/Planned Unit Development 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 89-39/PUD 89-19
APPLICANT: AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
PUBLISH: August 6, 1990
City of Carlsbad
City Council
a = a - :
AVlAFtA-PWWWGAREA12 PUD 89-19
-_
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
RE:
Planning Department
PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
CT 89-39/PUD 89-19/SV 90-3/SV 90-4 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
Thank you.
,
Assistant City Man--
8/23/90
Date
. . . .
I
.
AVIARA LAND ASSOCIATJ?S 2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD SUITE 206
CARLSBADI CA 92009
A-M HOMES ATTN: RHONDAHEACOCK 7 UPPERNEWPORTPLAZA NEWE'ORT BEACH, CA 92660
BRAMALEA CALIF. INC.
One Park Plaza, #l 100 Irvine, CA 92714
c
.
NOTICE 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, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (formerly Elm
Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 15, 1990, to consider
approval of a 7 lot/l08 dwelling unit Condominium Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit
Development on property generally located within the Aviara Master Plan Area at the
southeast comer of Alga Road and Black Rail Court in Local Facilities Management Zone
19 and more particularly described as:
Lot 230 of Tract 85-35, Aviara, Phase I - Unit D,
according to Map 12412 recorded June 29,1989
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-l 161.
If you challenge the Tentative Tract Map/Planned Unit Development 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 89-39/PUD 89-19 APPLICANT: AVIARA PLANNING AREA 12
PUBLISH: AUGUST 2,199O
CITY OF CARLSBAD ; PLANNING COMMISSION
AVIARA-PUMWG AREA 12 PUD 8 9-19
c Carlsbad Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
N.C.C.N. Inc. P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543
Proof of Publication
STATI
cou
I am a citizen of the United states ana a resraenr or me cuumy
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 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 period exceeding one year next pm’ - ,w...-. - 1F -1. WP ., ‘-?-=- ‘.-‘_’
NOTICE OF-PUBLIC 12412 recorded June 29,lW.S.
HEARING Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially in-
preceding the date of publication of the
notice hereinafter referred to; and that the
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that vited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please notice of which the annexed is a printed
the City Council of the City of Carls- call the Planning Department at bad will hold a public hearing at 43%1161. copy, has been published in each regular
the City Council Chambers, 1205 Carlsbad Village Drive (previously If YOU challenge the Tentative and entire issue of said newspaper and not Elm Avenue), Carlsbad, California, Tract Map/Planned Unit Develop- atS:OfI P.M., on Tuesday, September mentincourt,youmaybelimited to in any supplement thereof on the follow- 18, lW5, to consider an application raising only those issues you or for a 7 lot/103 dwelling unit Con- someone else raised at the public dominiumTentative Tract Map and hearing described in this notice, or ing dates, to-wit:
Planned Unit Development on in written correspondence deli- property generally located within _ Vered to the City of Carlsbad at or the Aviara Master Plan Area at the prior to the public hearing. southeast corner of Alga Road and Case File: CT S%WPUD 8910 BlackRail Court in Local Facilities Applicant: Aviara Planning Area Management Zone 10 and more par- 12 titularly described as:
SEPTEMBER 6 1990
1Q
Lot 230 of Tract 35-35, Aviara, Phase I - Unit D, according to Map CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
A’-
I9-
I9-
G, d-30 PUD 8 S-10
i9-
I certify under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed at
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Cali-
fornia on THE 6TH
day of SEPTEMBER, 1990
Clerk of the Printer
September 6,lWO