HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-08; City Council; 14126; Appeal Of Planning Commission Approval- II3
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# 14; I!& TITLE:
MTG. 4/8/97 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION ON SDP 95
05(A), HDP 95-06(A), AND CDP 96-07 DEPT. PLN
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 93 - r3.3 UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION’S APPROVAL of SDP 9506(A), HDP 95-05(A) and CDP 96-07.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On February 5, 1997, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and voted 6-I to approve a
Site Development Plan Amendment (SDP 9506A), Hillside Development Permit Amendment (HDP 95-
06A) and Coastal Development Permit (CDP 96-07) for the project known as Emerald Ridge West. The
amendments to the subject permits were required for the following reasons:
1. Conditions of approval for the Emerald Ridge subdivision (CT 95-03, SDP 9506, HDP 9506) required Planning
Commission approval of a new or amended site development plan and hillside development permit for the
purpose of reviewing the architecture and building placement on all lots to ensure compliance with the Qualified
Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.06 of CMC) and the Hillside Development architectural guidelines.
2. Proposed revisions to the approved site development plan for 9 second dwelling units which require compliance
with the Affordable Housing Ordinance Site Development Plan requirements (Section 21.53.120(b) of the CMC).
The Planning Commission’s approval of the project was appealed by Mike Schlehuber, who is a resident
of Carlsbad and serves as Chair of the Housing Commission, and John Blair, of the Carlsbad Unified
School District (CUSD). The CUSD appeal was subsequently withdrawn on February 27, 1997. Mr.
Schlehuber is appealing the Planning Commission’s decision for the following reasons:
1. The changes to the second dwelling units approved by the Planning Commission result in an unacceptable
reduction in size of the units and the loss of a bedroom.
1 2. The amendment was not reviewed by the Housing Commission as required for affordable housing projects.
3. The public notice for the Planning Commission hearing did not state the proposed affordable housing change nor
the elimination of Housing Commission review.
1 A staff response to each of the issues raised by Mr. Schlehuber is provided below.
1 Change to the Size of the Second Dwellinn Unite
The original site development plan (SDP 95-06) approved by the City Council designated a total of nine
(9) single family lots for Second Dwelling Units (SDUs). The prototypical plan for these SDUs indicated
that the units would provide for one bedroom and be a total of 640 square feet in size. The amended site
development plan (SDP 95-06A) approved by the Planning Commission indicates that the units will be
studios (no bedroom) and 439 square feet in size. The units were, in fact, reduced in size and the product
type was changed to a studio unit rather than a 1 bedroom unit. It is important to note, however, that there
are no standards set forth for SDUs which create a minimum size or bedroom requirement. The amended
project, with the smaller units, does comply with the existing standards set forth for SDUs and staff
believes that they satisfy an affordable housing need.
.-
AB# jyJ2h
Page 2 ’
On January 28, 1997, the issue of a minimum standard for SDUs was raised to the City Council via the
appeal on the Brookfield Meadows project. The Planning Commission approved a minute motion
requesting that staff be directed to prepare an ordinance amendment to establish a minimum size for
SDUs greater than that established by the Uniform Building Code, which is 220 square feet for an
efficiency unit. The City Council denied the Planning Commission’s request. Consequently, there has
been no change in the SDU ordinance which sets forth a minimum size or bedroom requirement. This
information was discussed with the Planning Commission on February 5’” as part of the public hearing.
Requirement for Affordable Housing Projects to be Reviewed by Housing Commission
Per Chapter 21.40 of the Municipal Code, the Housing Commission’s function is to advise and make
recommendations to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission and/or the City Council. The
Ordinance also provides that “where appropriate” the Housing Commission shall advise and coordinate
with the Planning Commission.
Because the Commission’s primary role is advisory to the Commission/Council, the standard processing
practice has been that projects which do not proceed to the City Council for final action are not presented
to the Housing Commission for a recommendation. Basically, this has meant to date that the Housing
Commission has reviewed all housing projects which are larger than 50 units and include affordable
housing units (of any number) and/or those projects which request city assistance or incentives.
Although the affordable housing component of the Emerald Ridge West project was only 9 units, the
Housing Commission reviewed the original project and recommended approval because the entire
housing project was greater than 50 units and final approvals on various permits related to the project
were required by the City Council. The processing becomes more complicated when the complete set of
permits required for a housing development is broken down into individual units, specifically when
individual permits are amended. There are some permits and/or amendments which can be approved
solely by the Planning Commission. For example, per the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission has
the authority to approve a site development plan permit for a multi-family residential project or affordable
housing project with fifty units or less. The Emerald Ridge West project is the first project to date which
includes affordable housing units and has processed amendments to individual permits (SDP, HDP) which
impact those affordable units.
Initially, a staff determination was made that the amendments to the Emerald Ridge West project wculd
require Council approval because the entire housing project was larger than 50 units. Therefore, the
permit amendments were scheduled for review by both the Planning and Housing Commissions for
recommendation purposes. However, as a result of the applicant’s request to the City Council on February
4, 1997 for a reconsideration of staffs procedural determination, staff researched the matter further and
determined that the applicant was technically correct. The Planning Commission has the authority to
approve the permits that were submitted for amendment. Therefore, on February 5, 1997, staff advised
the Planning Commission that the Commission, and not the Council, was the final decision maker for the
SDP amendment, which includes the 9 affordable second dwelling units. The Planning Commission took
action to approve the permit. The decision was then appealable to the City Council.
The Housing Commission received the report on the Emerald Ridge West on February 13, 1997 and was
informed by staff that the Planning Commission was authorized, and did, approve the amendment on
February 5 and that a recommendation for action was no longer required from the Housing Commission.
The Housing Commission expressed dissatisfaction with the review process and approved an action to
appeal the decision made by the Planning Commission. The Housing Commission recommended that the
project amendments be subsequently denied by the City Council.
d
F
AB# )Y, /uQ
Page 3
Incorrect Public Notice for Plannincl Commission Hearing
The notice for the public hearing before the Planning Commission on the Emerald Ridge West Project
included a statement that the amendment represented a “revision to the architecture, size, floor plan, and
location of inclusionary second dwelling units.” It has not been the City’s policy to include statements in
the notice as to whether or not the project has been, or must be, reviewed by the Housing Commission.
Therefore, it would not be necessary to notice the fact that the Housing Commission would not be
reviewing the subject permit amendments. Staff can find no evidence that the noticing errors specified in
the appeal are valid.
Staff Recommendations
Based on the information provided above, staff does not believe that there are appropriate grounds upon
which to deny the subject permit amendments and that the City Council should uphold the decision of the
Planning Commission.
Alternatively, the City Council may take one of the following actions:
1. If following its review of the matter, the City Council finds that the size of the second dwelling units,
as amended, are inconsistent with the intent of the City’s Housing Element, then the Council should
approve the appeal and deny the permit amendments.
2. If the Council is concerned that procedural errors are evident, return the permits to the Planning
Commission with instructions to staff to issue a revised notice for the public hearing which provides
information on the Planning Commission’s authority to approve the permit amendments with or without
review and more specific recommendations from the Housing Commission.
In addition, the Council may wish to instruct staff to work with the Housing and Planning Commissions to
recommend appropriate changes (if any) to the SDU Ordinance and policy regarding their use for
inclusionary housing purposes.
In order to avoid further issues in the future, staff will prepare a report for City Council review which will
clarify the procedural roles and responsibilities of the Housing Commission. At a future date, the Council
may then take action to make any revisions which may be deemed appropriate for processing purposes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution N0.97~1/33 upholding the Planning Commission’s decision to approve SDP
95-06(A), HDP 95-05(A) and CDP 96-07
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 4051, 4052 and 4053 approving SDP 95-06(A), HDP 95-05(A)
and CDP 96-07
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 5, 1997
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated February 5, 1997
6. Housing Commission Resolution No. 97-02, recommending denial of SDP 95-06(A), HDP 95-05(A)
and CDP 96-07
7. Planning Commission Decision Appeal from Michael Schlehuber.
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
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 9 7 - 4 3 3
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AP
APPEAL AND UPHOLDING
COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF SITE DEV
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. SDP 95-06(A
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMENDMENT NO.
AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 61
HOMES ON PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED
95-03, AND TO REVISE THE ARCHITECT
D LOCATION OF NINE ED SECOND
G UNITS ON PR
HIDDEN VALL
ROAD AND CA AS ONDAS IN THE
SPECIFIC PL LOCAL FACILITIES
ENT ZONE 6.
n for a tentative map for certain property to
land delineated and designated as
acres” on record of Survey Map No.
of the County Recorder of San Diego
9, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of
onda, according to map thereof No. 823,
e of the County Recorder of San Diego
er 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the
d, all being in the County of San Diego, State of
o described as Parcel 2 in that certain certificate
recorded June 27,1996 as File No. 1996-0232496
has been filed with ty of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
AS, the Planning Commission did on February 5, 1997, hold a duly
aring as prescribed by law to consider said application for a Site
4 Development,, lan Amendment (SDP 95-06(A), Hillside Development Permit Amendment
(HDP 95-06(A), and Coastal Development Permit (CDP 96-07); and
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
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 5, 1997, after hearing
and considering all the evidence and testimony of all people desiring to be heard adopted
Resolution Nos. 405 1,4052, and 4053 approving SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06
and
WHEREAS, an appeal of this approval was timely filed on
and
WHEREAS, on the
City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed public h ng as prescribed by law
to consider said appeal an
and argument of those persons present and desiring to be hear e City Council directed the
City Attorney to prepare
Commission’s decision,
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the foregoing recitations true and correct.
2. That the findings and ons of the Planning Commission in
Resolutions No. 4051,4052 an on file with the City Clerk and made a
part hereof, constitute the findi and decision of the City Council.
3. That the Planning Co ission’s approval of SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-
06(A)/CDP 96-07 is her confirmed and the appeal of that decision is
denied based upon the fa et out in the Planning Department Staff Report
dated February 5, 199 evidence before the Planning Commission, the
evidence as set forth i ouncil Agenda Bill No. , and the
testimony before th Council all of which are incorporated herein by
reference.
1 is denied without prejudice since no procedural error
square foot “studio” second dwelling units are consistent
using Element to provide appropriate housing opportunities
-2-
1 consistent with need, that Council denies the appeal and upho
Commission’s approval of the Emerald Ridge West project. 2
3
4
5. This action is final the date this resolution is
Council. The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad
“Time Limits for Judicial Review” shall apply:
5 “NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
6
7
8
“The time within which judicial review of this decisio
governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6,
applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Mun
1.16. Any petition
9
10
11
12
13
14
the appropriate court no later than the ninetieth d owing the date on
which this decision becomes final; however, if in ten days after the
decision becomes final a request for the re of the proceedings
accompanied by the required deposit in an am sufficient to cover the
estimated cost of preparation of such record time within which such
petition may be filed in court is extended to er than the thirtieth day
following the date on which the record is er personally delivered or
mailed to the party, or his attorney of r if he has one. A written
request for the preparation of the record proceedings shall be filed
with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad Carlsbad Village Drive,
Carlsbad, California 92008.”
15 . . .
l6 . . .
17 . . .
18 . . .
19 . . .
20 . . .
21 . . .
22
23 *‘-
24 “’
25 *”
26 “’
27 **’
28 -3-
has been made
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
EFFECTIVE DATE: This resolution shall be effective upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the
1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
day of
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
-4- 7
EMERALD RIDGE - WEST
SDP 95=06(A)/HDP 95=06(A)/
CDP 96-07
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
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4051
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 95-06(A) TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 61 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON
PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED LOTS WITHIN CT 95-03, AND
TO REVISE THE ARCHITECTURE, SIZE, FLOOR PLANS
AND LOCATION OF NINE APPROVED SECOND DWELLING
UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF
HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD BETWEEN PALOMAR AIRPORT
ROAD AND CAMINO DE LAS ONDAS IN THE ZONE 20
SPECIFIC PLAN AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO.: SDP 95-06(A)
WHEREAS, Ladwig Design Group, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by UDC Homes, “Owner”,
described as
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as
“Description No. 1,103.91 acres” on record of survey map no.
5715, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of
Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, November 16,1896, a portion of which lies within the
City of Carlsbad, all being in the County of San Diego, State of
California, also described as Parcel 2 in that certain certificate
of compliance recorded June 27,1996 as File No. 1996-0232496
of official records
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development
Permit Amendment as shown on Exhibits “A”-“ X” dated February 5, 1997, on file in the
Planning Department, SDP 95-06(A), Emerald Ridge West as provided by Chapter 21.06 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 5th day of February 1997,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
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
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 Site Development Plan.
WHEREAS, on April 2, 1996, the City Council approved, SDP 95-06, as
described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3881.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
W
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
APPROVES Site Development Permit Amendment, SDP 95-06(A) based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
FindinPs:
1. All findings of SDP 95-06 as stated in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3881
shall apply as findings of SDP 95-06(A).
2. That the Planning Director has determined that the project is exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15 182 of
the state CEQA Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant impact on the
environment.
3. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, will
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or
traffic circulation, in that the single family units on previously subdivided lots are
compatible with surrounding single family development, separated from Poinsettia
Park, and designed in accordance with Specific Plan 203 and Hillside Development
Ordinance architectural standards to ensure architectural variety and exterior
colors and textures which blend with the surrounding natural landscape.
4. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in
that the four floor plans for single family units can be accommodated within the
building envelope of each previously subdivided lot as shown on Exhibits “A’‘-“C”
dated February 5,1997.
. . .
PC RESO NO. 405 1 -2- /D
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.
-
That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust
the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that the placement of single family structures adhere to
all setback requirements of the R-l One Family Residential Zone as well as the 60’
fire suppression and habitat preservation setback required by CT 95-03 (Emerald
Ridge West Subdivision Map), and architectural elevations adhere to the
architectural standards of the Zone 20 SP 203 and Hillside Development Ordinance.
Additionally, uniform fencing around the perimeter of each lot which is consistent
in color and texture with the surrounding natural landscape will aesthetically
enhance the development.
6. That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the 61 single family units and 9 second dwelling
units on previously subdivided lots would not generate additional traffic beyond
that analyzed and approved as adequate by CT 95-03 (Emerald Ridge West
Subdivision Map).
Planning Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby APPROVES the Site Development Plan
Amendment for the project entitled Emerald Ridge West (Exhibits “A’‘-“X” dated
February 5, 1997 which supersede Exhibits “A, ” “E” and “F,” dated January 17,
1996) on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, subject to
the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require
Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Site Development Plan
document(s), as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with
final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the
approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval,
shall require an amendment to this approval.
2. Approval of SDP 95-06(A) is granted subject to approval of HDP 95-06(A) and CDP
96-07. SDP 95-06(A) is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 3881 for SDP 95-06 except Condition No. 52 which is amended by
Condition No. 3 below, and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4052, and 4053,
for HDP 95-06(A) and CDP 96-07.
3. Prior to approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is
not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to deed restrict 9 second
dwelling units (including: Lot 2,7,13, 19,24,31,42,49 and 58) and the purchase of
1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma, as appropriate, in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Zone
20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58 dated September 12, 1985.
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a signed Affordable
Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The recorded
Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors
in interest.
PC RESO NO. 4051 -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
4. Building footprints shown on Exhibits “A”-“ C” shall represent the preferred floor
plan except on Lots 22 and 23 which shall be developed with the approved single
story structure (Plan 1) only, and Lots 2,7,13,19,24,31,42, 49, and 58 which shall
be developed with second dwelling units (Plan 4) only unless an offsite inclusionary
housing option is approved in accordance with Condition No. 3 above. Prior to the
issuance of building permits, an alternate approved floor plan may be approved by
the Planning Director on any lot except Lots 2,7,13,19,22,23,24,31,42,49, and 58
which is consistent with the following: a) observes all fire suppression and habitat
preservation setbacks required by CT 95-03; b) complies with R-l zone standards;
c) driveways do not exceed 24’ maximum width; d) retaining walls do not exceed
42” in the front yard setback; e) retains the RV spaces shown on Exhibits “A -C”; f)
where possible, accommodates the optional patio covers/balcony decks shown on the
approved building elevations; and g) the exterior color scheme variation is
maintained in accordance with the color board and color scheme on file in the
Planning Department.
5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for model units or the first phase of units,
whichever occurs first, the Planning Director shall require that the approved Plan 4
floor plan with the second dwelling unit shall be included in the model units or first
phase of units to be constructed.
Fire Conditions:
6.
7.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
Prior to occupancy of buildings, all wildland fuel mitigation activities must be complete,
and the condition of all vegetation within 60 feet of structures found to be in conformance
with an approved wildland fuel management plan.
The landscape plan must be approved by the fire department prior to building permits
being issued.
PC RESO NO. 4051 -4- /a
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 5th day of February 1997, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas, Heineman,
Monroy, Noble and Welshons
NOES: Commissioner Savary
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMkI%ER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 405 1 -5-
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. 4052
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMENDMENT TO
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 61 SINGLE FAMILY
UNITS ON PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED LOTS ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF HIDDEN
VALLEY ROAD BETWEEN PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD
AND CAMINO DE LAS ONDAS IN THE ZONE 20 SPECIFIC
PLAN AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: HDP 95-06(A)
WHEREAS, Ladwig Design Group, Inc., has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by UDC Homes, “Owner”, described as
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as
“Description No. 1,103.91 acres” on record of survey map no.
5715, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of
Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, November 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the
City of Carlsbad, all being in the County of San Diego, State of
California, also described as Parcel 2 in that certain certificate
of compliance recorded June 27,1996 as File No. 1996-0232496
of official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit Amendment as shown on Exhibits “A’‘-“X”, on file in the Carlsbad
Planning Department, HDP 95-06(A), Emerald Ridge West, as provided by Chapter 21.95 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of February 1997,
consider said request; and
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
WHEREAS, at said 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 Hillside Development Permit Amendment; and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 1996, the City Council approved HDP 95-06 as
described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3882.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
APPROVES Hillside Development Permit Amendment, HDP 95-06(A), based
on the following findings and subject’to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. All findings of HDP 95-06 as stated in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3882
shall apply as findings of HDP 95-06(A).
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and requirements of
the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that the single family residential structures
will be setback from the top of slope a minimum of 15’ and single story units will be
required for units located along the northern bluff that are most visible from
Palomar Airport Road.
3. That the project design involving building placement and architecture substantially
conforms to the intent of the concepts illustrated in the Hillside Development Guidelines
Manual, in that sufficient setbacks from adjoining downhill slopes will be provided,
dominant roof and hillside slopes are parallel, exterior material and colors are
consistent with the natural landscape, and walls/fences located at the top of slopes
will follow the hillside contour, be consistent in color with the hillside landscape,
and be in scale and proportion to the hillside landform.
Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby APPROVES the Hillside Development Permit
Amendment for the project entitled Emerald Ridge West (Exhibits “A’‘-“X” dated
February 5, 1997 which supersede Exhibits “A,” “H” and “I,” dated January 17,
1996) on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, subject to
the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require
PC RESO NO. 4052 -2- /5
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
Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Hillside Development Permit
document(s), as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with
final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the
approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval,
shall require an amendment to this approval.
2. Approval of HDP 95-06(A) is granted subject to approval of SDP 95-06(A) and CDP
96-07. HDP 95-06(A) is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolution 3882 for HDP 95-06 except as amended herein, and Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4051, and 4053, for SDP 95-06(A) and CDP 96-07.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of February 1997 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas, Heineman,
Monroy, Noble and Welshons
NOES: Commissioner Savary
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMLLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4052 -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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4053
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. CDP 96-07 TO
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 61 SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES ON PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED LOTS WITHIN CT
95-03, AND TO REVISE THE ARCHITECTURE SIZE, FLOOR
PLANS, AND LOCATION OF NINE APPROVED SECOND
DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
WEST OF HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD BETWEEN PALOMAR
AIRPORT ROAD AND CAMINO DE LAS ONDAS IN THE
ZONE 20 SPECIFIC PLAN AND LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO.: CDP 96-07
WHEREAS, Ladwig Design Group, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by UDC Homes, “Owner”,
described as
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as
“Description No. 1,103.91 acres” on record of survey map no.
5715, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of
Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, November 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the
City of Carlsbad, all being in the County of San Diego, State of
California, also described as Parcel 2 in that certain certificate
of compliance recorded June 27,1996 as File No. 1996-0232496
of official records
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A”-“ X” dated February 5, 1997, on file in the
Planning Department, CDP 96-07 as provided by Chapter 21.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code; and
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
WHEREAS, on July 1 2, 1996, the California Coastal Commission approved
Coastal Development Permit 6-96-53, dated July 12, 1996. All conditions of CDP 6-96-53 are
applicable to this project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 5th day of February 1997,
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 CDP 96-07.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
APPROVES Coastal Development Permit, CDP 96-07, based on the following
findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Coastal
Program and all applicable policies in that the structural placement, second dwelling
units, and architecture of single family residential structures are consistent with the
applicable R-1-7500-Q implementing zone standards.
2. The project is subject to and consistent with the Mello II LCP Segment Agricultural
Overlay Zone in that it is required to offset the conversion of non-prime agricultural
land to urban land uses through the payment of an agricultural mitigation fee and
all sedimentation, erosion, and drainage measures were previously approved
through the issuance of a Coastal Development Permit for CT 95-03 by the
California Coastal Commission.
Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby APPROVES the Coastal Development Permit
for the project entitled Emerald Ridge West (Exhibits “A’‘-“X” dated February 5,
1997) on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, subject to
the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require
Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit
document(s), as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with
PC RESO NO. 4053 -2- /f
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.
final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the
approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval,
shall require an amendment to this approval.
Approval of CDP 96-07 is granted subject to approval of SDP 95-06(A) and HDP 95-
06(A). CDP 96-07 is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 4051 and 4052, for SDP 95-06(A) and HDP 95-06(A).
To offset the conversion of non-prime agricultural land to urban land uses per the
requirements of the Mello II Local Coastal Program, the applicant shall provide
payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than
$5,000 nor more than $10,000 for each net converted acre of non-prime agricultural
land. The amount of the fee shall be determined by the City Council prior to
approval of the final map or issuance of any building permit, whichever occurs first
and shall be consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad’s LCP.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of February 1997, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas, Heineman,
Monroy, Noble and Welshons
NOES: Commissioner Savary
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
sl
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. I%L&ILLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 4053 -3-
EXHIBIT 4 de City of CARLSBAD Planning Departmeu
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 3 0
Application complete date: October 13, 1996
P.C. AGENDA OF: February 5,1997 Project Planner: Anne Hysong
Project Engineer: Mike Shirey
su ‘BJECT: SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06(Al/CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST -
Request for a Site Development Plan Amendment, Hillside Development Permit
Amendment and Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of 61
single family homes on previously subdivided lots in the R-1-7500-Q zone and to
revise the architecture, size, floor plan, and location of inclusionary second
dwelling units, on property located within the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local
Facilities Management Plan area west of Hidden Valley Road between Palomar
Airport Road and Camino de Las Ondas.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 405 1,4052, and
4053 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SDP 95-06(A), HDP 95-06(A), and CDP 96-07
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The project proposes architecture and building placement of 61 single family homes, and
revisions to the architecture, floor plan, size, and specific lot locations of nine second dwelling
inclusionary units approved on standard single family lots in the R-1-7500-Q Zone by the
Emerald Ridge West Subdivision Map (CT 95-03), Site Development Plan (SDP 95-06), and
Hillside Development Permit (HDP 95-06). As conditioned, the project complies with the Zone
20 Specific Plan and Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards and the R-l Zone
development standards which includes second dwelling units .
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
UDC Homes is requesting approval of a Site Development Plan Amendment, Hillside
Development Plan Amendment, and Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of 61
single family structures including 9 second dwelling units on standard single family lots ranging
in size from 7,570 - 19,201 square feet. The site was previously subdivided as part of the
Emerald Ridge West Subdivision Map (CT 95-03) and is located west of Hidden Valley Road
and north of Poinsettia Park in the R-1-7500-Q Zone within Planning Area B of the Zone 20
Specific Plan. The proposed single family units located along the bluff above Palomar Airport
Road and Hidden Valley Road will be partially visible from these roadways.
The Emerald Ridge West project approvals included a Site Development Plan (SDP 95-06) for
nine second dwelling units to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement, and a
C
SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06tA)lCDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE WEa T
FEBRUARY 51997
Hillside Development Permit (HDP 95-06) for hillside grading. Except for the units containing
second dwelling units, architecture and building placement were not proposed or approved as
part of the original project, and CT 95-03 and HDP 95-06 were conditioned to require Planning
Commission approval of a Site Development Plan and Hillside Development Permit Amendment
to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Qualified Overlay Zone, consistency with the
Zone 20 Specific Plan and Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards, and the R-l
Zone development standards. The proposed project is also subject to the Mello II LCP segment
which is now within the City’s permit jurisdiction. The project therefore requires approval of a
Coastal Development Permit which includes the proposed architecture and building placement
on each single family lot, as well as proposed revisions to the approved second dwelling unit
conceptual architecture, floor plans, size, and specific lot locations.
As approved, SDP 95-06 included prototypical preliminary building elevations for units
containing second dwelling units, floor plans, and the specific location of nine second dwelling
units to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement. The proposed project amends
that approval by: 1) proposing architectural elevations for all units which differ from the
approved conceptual architecture for units containing second dwelling units; 2) reducing the size
and floor plan of the second dwelling units from a 640 square foot one bedroom unit to a 439
square foot studio unit; and 3) relocating two of the second dwelling units to different lots within
the subdivision.
Since no revisions to the approved subdivision map or grading are proposed, Planning
Commission review is limited to the architecture and placement of single family homes on each
of the approved lots with respect to hillside architectural standards, building coverage, setbacks,
and building height, and to the amended architecture, floor plans, size and location of second
dwelling units.
The proposed architecture consists of four floor plans (models) ranging in size from 2,376 to
3,408 square feet each, with three different facade treatments. In addition, Plans 2 and 3 provide
the option of a two car front loaded garage in lieu of a three car side loaded garage. This option
is necessitated by the smaller building envelope of some lots which would not accommodate the
side loaded garage. Plan 1 is single story, Plans 2,3 and 4 are two-story, and Plan 4 contains the
proposed 439 square foot second dwelling unit above a separated third car garage from which
interior access to the unit is provided. Architectural features include recessed, arched, and paned
windows, stucco walls with wood and stone trim, and flat and barrel tile roofs. The visual
impact to the street scene of continuous garage doors will be reduced by the Plan 2 & 3 provision
of the side loaded garage option on the majority of lots that can accommodate them.
Although Exhibit “A” identifies a preferred floor plan on each lot, UDC Homes is requesting
that the Planning Director be given authority to approve building permits for alternate floor plans
(Plan 1, 2, 3, or 4) on each lot in the subdivision. A matrix of the proposed mix on each lot is
attached to the staff report.
The proposed project is subject to the following adopted land use plans and regulations and
project approvals:
at
SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06&CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE W& r
FEBRUARY 5,1997
A. General Plan;
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan 203;
C. Mello II Local Coastal Program; and
D. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance), including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Chapter 2 1.06 - (Q) Qualified Overlay Zone;
Chapter 21 .lO - (R-l) One Family Residential Zone/Second Dwelling
Units
Chapter 2 1.53 - Site Development Plan for Affordable Housing
Chapter 2 1.95 - Hillside Development Regulations
IV. ANALYSIS
The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis
section discusses compliance with each of these regulations/policies utilizing both text and
tables.
A. General Plan
The project consists of proposed architecture and structural placement of single family units
proposed on lots approved by subdivision map CT 95-03, and revisions to the architecture, size,
and location of second dwelling units approved by SDP 95-06 to satisfy inclusionary housing
requirements. The Emerald Ridge West subdivision, grading, and second dwelling units were
approved based on findings of conformance with the General Plan Land Use, Circulation,
Housing, Open Space, Noise, Park and Recreation, and Public Safety Element policies. Since no
revisions to the approved subdivision map, grading, or number of approved second dwelling
units have been proposed and the project adheres to the fire suppression and biological habitat
buffers approved as part of CT 95-03, the project is consistent with the previously approved
General Plan conformance findings of CT 95-03 and SDP 95-06 and remains consistent with the
RM General Plan land use designation as stated below:
GENERAL PLAN
PERMITTED USE t PROPOSED LAND USE
Land Use Site is designated for Project consists of 61 single
medium density residential family units and 9 second
(RM) development at a dwelling units on previously
density of 4-8 dwelling subdivided 7,500+ square
units/acre. foot lots at a density of 3 .Ol
dwelling units/acre.
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
Except for a determination of consistency with the SP 203 architectural standards, the proposed
project is consistent with the policies and development standards of Specific Plan 203 as
determined by City Council approval of CT 95-03, SDP 95-06 and HDP 95-06. The proposed
SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06\4CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE WbT
FEBRUARY 5,1997
placement of structures and architecture are consistent with the architectural standards as
specified in the following table:
DESIGN CRITERIA
10% of units visible from Palomar
Airport Road shall be one story
Variety of roof, wall, and accent
materials/colors;
Variety of one and two story
structures
Variety of building architectural
accent features
Roof Heights and Masses
Window and Door Enhancement
Variety of garage designs, facades,
and orientations
COMPLIANCE
All structures visible from Palomar Airport will be
single story (100% of units)
Four tile roof styles and colors;
and six exterior color schemes for wall, trim, and accent
which will blend into the natural hillside landscape
Four floor plans: 1 single story and three two-story
(15% proposed as single story)
Stone trim, shutters, eaves, fascia, rafters
Combination of one and two story roof elements with
combination of hip and gable roofs
Recessed, arched, and paned windows on all elevations
Combination of two and three car garages including
front and side loaded garage plans and separated single
Articulated building forms
and double garage doors
Recessed entries, doors, windows, and balconies;
popouts, multiple building planes along front elevations;
multi-level roofs; one and two story exterior elements
Walls and fences Uniform fencing around the entire perimeter of project
consisting of a combination of 5’-6’ concrete block
wall, 4’ concrete block wall with 18” wrought iron, and
5’ wrought iron fence
C. Mello II Segment of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program
A Coastal Development Permit for the Emerald Ridge West project which included the
subdivision of single family lots, grading, and provision of second dwelling units to satisfy
inclusionary housing requirements has been issued by the California Coastal Commission based
on findings of consistency with the Mello II Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone and
Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone policies, and Chapters 21.10, 21 S3, and 21.85 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code regulating inclusionary housing/second dwelling units. The proposed
project must receive approval of a second Coastal Development Permit for the placement and
architecture of proposed units to ensure compliance with the underlying R-1-7500-Q
implementing zone and for revisions to the approved conceptual architecture, size, floor plans
and location of second dwelling units on lots throughout the subdivision. As shown in the table
provided in section D below, the project is consistent with all applicable sections of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code
4
SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06&CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE ‘&/LaT
FEBRUARY 5,1997
.
D. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance):
1. Chapter 2 1.06 - Qualified Overlay Zone
The Qualified Overlay Zone requires approval of a Site Development Plan prior to the
construction of units on the lots created by the Emerald Ridge Subdivision Map. The project
includes a request for approval of an amended Site Development Plan, SDP 95-06A, which
shows the proposed structural placement and architecture of 61 single family units including
revisions to the approved nine second dwelling units.
2. Chapter 2 1.10 - One Family Residential Zone/Second Dwelling Units
The project, including the revised floor plans for second dwelling units, complies with the
applicable R-l zone development standards as shown in the following table:
STANDARD I REOUIRED
Lot Coverage Maximum 40%
Front Yard Setback 20’
Street Side Yard Setback 10’
Side Yard Setback
Rear Yard Setback
10% of Lot Width
2 X Required Side
Building Height
Second Dwelling Unit
Maximum - 30’
One Additional Space
Parking Space
Second Dwelling Unit Floor 1 Maximum 640 Square Feet
Area
Second Dwelling Unit
Entrance
Separate Entrance
Second Dwelling Unit
Architecture
I 1 Architectural Compatibility
with the Main Unit
I ir 1 he proposed size and floor plan of the second dwelling umt has beer one bedroom unit which was approved as a conceptual design by SDP 5 ?5-
PROPOSED
<40%
Minimum 20’
10’
10% of Lot Width
2 X Required Side and a
60’ fire suppression and
habitat preservation
setback on Lots 1 - 23 as
required by CT 95-03.
Maximum - 26.5’
Proposed: Separate
Single Car Garage
Approved: Separate
Single Car Garage
Proposed: 439 Square
Feet*
Approved: 640 Square
Feet
Proposed: Separate
Entrance Through Garage
Approved: Same
Proposed: Second
Dwelling Unit Within
Main Structure Above
Garage
Approved: Same
:duced from a 640 square feet 06 to a 439 square feet studio unit integrated into the proposed Plan 4 second story floor plan. The Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance does not specify a minimum allowable area.
--gi<j’
SDP 95-06(A)iHDP 95-06(A)/CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE W&T
FEBRUARY 5,1997
3. Chapter 21.53 - Site Development Plan for Affordable Housing
SDP 95-06 was approved by the City Council for the prototypical preliminary floor plans and
building elevations to illustrate the parking arrangement and how the second dwelling units
integrate into residential structures. Due to the preliminary nature of the approved building
elevations and floor plans, UDC Homes is requesting approval of revised floor plans and
building elevations for the approved nine second dwelling units and the relocation of two of the
second dwelling unit from Lots 36 and 52 to Lots 49 and 58. Second dwelling units are proposed
in the Plan 4 floor plan, and the proposed relocation of second dwelling units is requested based
upon lots which would best accommodate this floor plan. The project has therefore been
conditioned to restrict the lots proposed for second dwelling units to the Plan 4 floor plan. As
shown in the table provided in Section 2 above, the proposed second dwelling units, which are
reduced in size from 640 square feet to 439 square feet, are consistent with the Second Dwelling
Unit Ordinance standards.
4. Chapter 2 1.95 - Hillside Development Regulations
HDP 95-06 was conditioned to require Planning Commission approval of an amendment to the
Hillside Development Permit to ensure that future architecture is consistent with the Hillside
Development Ordinance architectural standards. The proposed building placement and
architecture are consistent with architectural standards as shown in the following table:
hillside slope are the same
2)Exterior material and colors are and single story units will
consistent with natural landscape be required for units that are
the most visible from
Palomar Airport Road.
2)Exterior materials and
colors include cement tile
roofs, stucco exterior walls,
stone trim, and accent colors
which are consistent with
the natural landscape.
roportion to the hillside
with 18” wrought iron; or 5’
wrought iron located at the
top of slopes which follow
SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06(Ai)/CDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE W.l$ I
FEBRUARY 5,1997
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that the proposed residential project is pursuant to and in
conformance with Specific Plan 203 for which an Environmental Impact Report was prepared;
therefore, the project is exempt under Section 15 182 of the California Environmental Quality Act
and upon project approval, a Notice of Exemption will be filed by the Planning Director.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
AWbk
Planning Commission Resolution No. 405 1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4052
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4053
Location Map
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3880 (CT 95-03), 3881 (SDP 95-06), and 3882
(HDP 95-06(A)
Background Data Sheet
Disclosure Statement
Reduced Exhibits
“Emerald Ridge West Product Mix” dated December 19, 1996
Full Size Exhibits “A’‘-“X” dated February 5, 1997.
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3880
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP
TO SUBDIVIDE A 56.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO SIXTY-ONE
SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF
7,500 SQUARE FEET, ONE 8.3 ACRE OPEN SPACE LOT,
A 27.4 ACRE REMAINDER PARCEL, AND ALLOW NINE
SECOND-DWELLING UNITS, ALL ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: CT 95-03
WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain /
property to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,103.91 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San &ego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels “A”, “B”, “c” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Offke of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Offkial Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and /
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative i
Map to subdivide a 563 acre parcel into sixty-one single-family lots with a minimum lot 1
size of 7,500 square feet, one 83 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder parcel, and j
I allow nine second-dwelling units as shown on Exhibits “A-M”, dated January 17, 1996, on i
file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference (“Tentative Map for ,
Emerald Ridge West” CT 95-03) as provided by Chapter 20.12 of the Carlsbad Municipal /
Code; and
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
c L
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996.
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and I
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 i
factors relating to the Tentative Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Carlsbad Tract CT 9503, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Emerald Ridge West project, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments thereon,
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, on file in the Planning
Department, prior to recommending approval of the project. Based on the EIA
Part-II and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that there is no
substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and
hereby recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the Emerald Ridge West project and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection
Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Emerald Ridge West project reflects the independent judgment of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
4. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for CT 9503
is in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the
following:
a. The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dus/acre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dus/acre
PC RESO NO. 3880
I
I -2-
P, k, c"- 6 I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
c
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the Genera 1
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 dus/acre.
b. Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
right-of-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road’ which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
C. Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffic noise from
Palomar Airport Road does not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is
required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL.
d. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable housing units and has been conditioned to enter
into an Affordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second
dwelling units and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9
second dwelling units and purchase 1 Affordable Housing Credit from Villa
Loma subject to the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and
final approval by the City Council. The remaining .754 fraction of an
inclusionary dwelling unit will be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal
to the fraction (.764) times the average subsidy needed to make affordable to
a lower-income household, one newly constructed typical housing unit.
e. Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 83 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize
gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Cherry Blossom Road alignment is
the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as follows:
1) The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning Areas (PPAs);
2) The habitat ioss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
. . . .
PC RESO NO. 3880 -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.
3)
4)
5)
6)
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of the acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat oii the MSP California LLC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore,
large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and;
The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be’
more important.
f. Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street
lights, and fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the
applicable local facilities management plan, and all City public facility policies and
ordinances since:
a. The project has been conditioned to ensure 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 project is conditioned such that a note shall be
placed on the final map that building permits may not be issued for the
project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer service is available,
and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains
available, and the District Engineer 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.
b. Prior to final map approval the developer is conditioned to enter into an
agreement with the appropriate school district to ensure that adequate school
facilities are available to serve the project.
C. Park-in-lieu fees are required.
PC RESO NO. 3880
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
c- / I
d. All necessary public improvements have been provided or are required as
conditions of approval. I
e. The developer 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.
6. The project has been conditioned 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 i
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.
7. This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part I
of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 20. I
8. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April, 1994 in that the developer is conditioned
to record a notice concerning aircraft noise and an avigation easement. The project
is compatible with the projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the
noise/land use compatibility matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible
with the airport, in that residential development is conditionally compatible within
the 60 to 65 CNEL and the project has been conditioned to mitigate interior noise
levels to 45 dBA CNEL.
9. That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual, adopted by City
Council Resolution No. 90-384.
10. That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdivision
as conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan,
any applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and
the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in
that the proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and fire
hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval. The
local streets have adequate public right-of-way and connect to Hidden Valley Road
which is a non-loaded collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets
within this area would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have
curb, gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate
emergency vehicles.
11. That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for residential development less than 4 to 8
dus/acre in the General Plan, in that the proposed residential land use is buffered
from the park, compatible with the residentially designated property to the west; and
PC RESO NO. 3880
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.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
consistent with the CLUP. Public street improvements would be provided to
accommodate traffic generated by the project. A local street would separate the
residential lots from the community park, and the residential land use is compatible
with the RM residential land use designation on the property located directly west.
That 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, in that the residential development complies with all city policies j
and standards, including zoning, without the need for variances from development I
standards.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with j easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the / public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, j in that the project has been designed and structured such that there are no conflicts :
with any established easements. I
That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land i
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act);
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive
or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that the 7,500+
square foot lot sizes allow for a variety of building placement alternatives, including
the adequate placement and separation of the homes, in combination with the
proposed variety of future floor plans and the dominant western wind patterns/solar
radiation patterns, will allow utilization of natural heating and cooling opportunities.
That the Planning Commission has considered, in connection with the housing
proposed by this subdivision, the housing needs of the region, and balanced those
housing needs against the public service needs of the City and available fiscal and
environmental resources;
That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat, in that all feasible mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and certified Final EIR
93-03 which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project
and no significant impacts to fish, wildlife or their respective habitats will occur.
That the discharge of waste from the subdivision will not result in violation of
existing California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that the
drainage requirements of Specific Plan 203, City ordinances, and Mello II have been
considered and appropriate drainage facilities have been designed and secured. In
addition to City Engineering Standards and compliance with the City’s Master
Drainage Plan, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 1
standards will be satisfied to prevent any discharge violations. /
PC RESO NO. 3880 -6-
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
19.
20.
21.
22.
c : L. I
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the ;
exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the I
project, and the extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to j
the impact caused by the project.
That the property cannot be served adequately with a public street without panhandle I
lots due to unfavorable conditions resulting from unusual topography, surrounding 1
land development, or lot configuration, in that steep slopes to the north and the east, I
and a property line to the west both created an isolated area of buildable land that
is not feasible to access with a full width public street.
That subdivision with panhandle lots will not preclude or adversely affect the ability
to provide full public street access to other properties within the same block of the
subject property, in that the lots are located between two cul-de-sac bulbs and are
bordered by the western subdivision property line.
That the buildable portion of the panhandle lot consists of a minimum of 8,000 sq.
feet, which meets the requirements of Section 21.10.080(d)(l) of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code;
Planning Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Tentative Map
for the CT 95-03 project entitled “Emerald Ridge West”. (Exhibit “A” - “M” on file
in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, dated January 17,
1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to
make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the
exhibits/or documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and conform
to City Council’s final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially
as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development substantially
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
2. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Maps and Exhibits:
3. The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the
Tentative Map as approved by the final decision making body. The Tentative Map
shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The Map copy shall be submitted
to the City Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or
improvement plan submittal, whichever occurs first.
4. The Developer shall provide the Planning Director with a 500’ scale mylar of the
subdivision prior to the recordation of the final map. Said map shall show all lots
and streets within and adjacent to the Project.
PC RESO NO. 3880
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.
Far
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan
check, a reduced, legible 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.
ies & Services:
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July ;
28, 1987 (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any 1
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 1
management system or Facilities and Improvement Plan and to fulfil1 the subdivider’s I
agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated May 26, 1995, a copy of which is on ~
file with the City Clerk and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not ’
paid, this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for 1
this project will be void. I I
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.
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless
the District 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. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final map.
Prior to approval of a final map or the issuance/approval of a building permit, which
ever occurs first, the Developer shall submit evidence to the Planning Director that
impacts to school facilities have been mitigated in conformance with the City’s
Growth Management Plan to the extent permitted by applicable state law. If the
mitigation involves a financing scheme such as a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District which is inconsistent with the City’s Growth Management Plan including
City Council Policy Statement No. 38, the Developer shall disclose to future owners
in the project, to the maximum extent possible, the existence of the tax and that the
school district is the taxing agency responsible for the financing district.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are
required as part of the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan and any
amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
General Conditions:
Il. 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 residential housing project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as
provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined
to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the
project without the condition complies with all requirements of law.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -8- /
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.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Approval of CT 95-03 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, SDP 95-06, and HDP 95-06. CT 95-03 is subject
to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874,
3879,3881, and 3882.
The Developer shall establish a homeowner’s association and corresponding
covenants, conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Director prior to final map approval. The CURS shall
include provisions specifying Homeowner’s Association maintenance responsibility
for all natural open space (Lot 62), slope maintenance and landscape easements
(Lots 1-17, and 22-23), as shown on the approved Tentative Map and landscape plan
which is on file in the Planning Department, or as conditioned by this resolution.
Prior to approval of the final map the Developer shall establish slope maintenance
and landscape easements along the rear yard slopes facing Palomar Airport Road
and Hidden Valley Road, including Lots 1-17, and 23.
Prior to approval of the final map the developer shall dedicate Open Space Lot No.
62 to the Homeowner’s Association and dedicate a perpetual open space easement
over Open Space Lot No. 62 to the City of Carlsbad.
Removal of native vegetation and development of Open Space Lot No. 62, including
but not limited to fences, walls, decks, storage buildings, pools, spas, stairways, and
landscaping, other than that approved as part of the tentative map for the sewer line
and drainage facilities as shown on Exhibit “C”, is specifically prohibited, except
upon written order of the Carlsbad Fire Department for fire prevention purposes,
or upon written approval of the Planning Director, and (California Coastal
Commission if in Coastal Zone), based upon a request from the Homeowners
Association accompanied by a report from a qualified arbor&/botanist indicating the
need to remove specified trees and/or plants because of disease or impending danger
to adjacent habitable dwelling units. For areas containing native vegetation the
report required to accompany the request shall be prepared by a qualified biologist.
Prior to approval of a final map the Developer shall establish an open space
easement, as shown on the Tentative Map, and deed restriction along the rear of
Lots 1 thru 23 for purposes of native habitat protection and fire suppression as
shown on the tentative map. No development shall be permitted in this-buffer/open
space easement, including; future regrading of the building pad and manufactured
slopes, the construction of habitable and non-habitable accessory structures, patio
covers, pool rooms, solariums, and second-story decks and balconies, wooden decks
and spas 42 inches above grade, and any other structures that require a building
permit. Screen walls/fences, landscaping in accordance with the approved fire
suppression plan for the project, hardscape features such as brick or cement
walkways and patios, pool equipment, and grade level pools and spas shall be permitted. In addition, the CC&Rs for the project shall stipulate the above
mentioned restrictions.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -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
18.
19.
22.
23.
24.
25.
. . . .
Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer
of dedication to the City of Carlsbad for a trail easement for trail(s) shown on the
tentative map within Open Space Lot No. 62. If the City of Carlsbad accepts
dedication of the trail easement the City shall assume responsibility for maintenance
and liability. If the City of Carlsbad does not accept liability and maintenance
responsibility for the Citywide Trail System, prior to recordation of the final map,
the Developer will not be required to construct the trail(s).
Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, the developer shall notify, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Attorney, all owners, users and tenants of this project that a community park site
is located adjacent to this project to the south.
The Developer shall provide a minimum of 25 percent of the lots with adequate
sideyard area for Recreational Vehicle storage pursuant to City Standards. The
CC&Rs shall prohibit the storage of recreational vehicles in the required front yard
setback.
Prior to issuance of any building permits for the project the Developer shall receive
approval of a Site Development Plan (SDP) by the Planning Commission in
accordance with Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The single-family
homes within this tentative map shall be developed consistent with the project’s
approved SDP. Unless otherwise approved through the future Site Development Plan
process, the lots shall not be sold for the purpose of developing individual custom
homes on each separate lot.
The applicant shall submit a wall and fencing plan subject to Planning Director
approval prior to issuance of building permits. Prior to occupancy of Lot Nos. 1
thru 12 the developer shall construct a 6 foot high solid screen wall/fence along the
top of the berm that separates the City Wide Trail from the residential building
pads.
The Developer shall provide bus stops to service this development at locations and
with reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and
the Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall at a minimum include a ’
bench, free from advertising, and a pole for the bus stop sign. The bench and pole j
shall be designed to enhance or be consistent with the basic architectural theme of I
the project. I ,
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.
i 1
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.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -lO-
3’6
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
c. ‘r
Landscape:
26. The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conformance
with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual.
The plans shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director
prior to the approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever
occurs first. The Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on
the approved plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition.
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
27. The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompanied
by the project’s building, improvement, and. grading plans.
28. Prior to approval of the landscape and irrigation plans, the plans shall show all
manufactured off-site slopes created by this project, landscaped to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director, and shall include at a minimum, landscaping to control
erosion and to provide visual screening of the slopes.
29. All building pad and street areas that are graded and remain vacant or undeveloped
for a period of more than 6 months after the grading operation is completed shall
be seeded and adequately irrigated to reduce erosion and visual impacts. If grading
is phased, the six month time period shall start at the completion of each individual
grading phase, subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director.
30. All landscaping shall comply with the Landscape Requirements of Specific Plan 203.
Contingency Permits/Other Agencies:
31. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall receive approval of a Coastal
Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission that substantially
conforms to this approval, A signed copy of the Coastal Development Permit must
be submitted to the Planning Director. If the approval is substantially different, an
amendment to CT 95-03 shall be required.
32. Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall be required: (1) to consult
with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding the impact of
the project on the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat;
and, 2) obtain any permits required by the USWFS.
Environmental:
33. The Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of, all
mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR 90-03 that are found by this
resolution to be feasible.
34. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of the Final EIR and
Mitigated Negative Declaration’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -ll-
3 -7 24 : I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Paleontology:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
Prior to any grading of the project site, a paleontologist shall be
retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the
grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil
resources. A copy of the paleontologist’s report shall be provided to
the Planning Director prior to issuance of a grading permit;
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic
inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small
nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be
necessary to collect matrix samples for laboratory processing through
fine screens. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the
Planning Director during the grading process;
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the
area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if
necessary, salvage artifacts;
All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution
with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural
History Museum;
Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading
activities of the project shall be resolved by the Planning Director and
City Engineer.
Prior to the recordation of the first final map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this
property may be subject to noise impacts from the proposed or existing
Transportation Corridor in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and
City Attorney.
Prior to the recordation of the first final map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this
property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from
McClellan-Palomar Airport in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director
and the City Attorney.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall record an Avigation
Easement for all lots located within the 60 to 65 CNEL contour, including Lots 13
thru 35 to the County of San Diego and file a copy of the recorded document with
the Planning Director.
The Developer shall post aircraft 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.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -12- 4, *, .T/ /
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
f, :
40. Prior to issuance of a building permit the developer shall mitigate the interior noise j
levels of the homes to 45 dBA CNEL, in accordance with the policies of the Noise I
Element of the General Plan and the recommendation of the project’s noise study I
prepared by Pacific Noise Control, dated May 24, 1994, and on file in the Planning I
Department. If openings to the exterior of the homes are required to be closed to 1
meet the interior noise standard then mechanical ventilation shall be provided.
41. To offset the conversion of non-prime agricultural land to urban land uses per the /
requirements of the Mello II Local Coastal Program, the applicant shall provide \
payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than ;
$5,000 nor more than $10,000 for each net converted acre of non-prime agricultural
land. The amount of the fee shall be determined by the City Council prior to
approval of the final map and shall be consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad’s
LCP.
42. Compliance with APCD Rules 51 (The “Nuisance” Rule), 52 (Particulate Matter),
and 54 (Dust and Fumes) of the Air Quality Chapter would effectively mitigate dust
impacts generated during grading operations. A note shall be placed on the grading
permit stipulating that the following measures shall be required to achieve
compliance with these rules, and reduce construction-related air pollutants:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
I!.
The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul routes shall be
required during dry weather conditions.
AII unpaved areas shall be revegetated according to approved
landscape plans as soon as possible after grading.
All construction-related traffic shall be restricted to routes that are
dust-controlled, and reduced speed limits shall be maintained for all
haul and construction vehicles.
All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high
winds.
All heavy-duty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be
operated according to manufacturers suggested operating instruction
(with the fuel-injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NO,
emissions, but which would not result in excessive visible smoke
emissions) in order to control pollutant emissions.
Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly scheduled
maintenance/tune-ups, and be turned off when not being utilized to
avoid excessive idling emissions.
The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall
adhere to APCD Rules 67.0 and 67.7, to effectively control other
construction-related emissions of air pollutants.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -13-
';.", t ;
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
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
t I
h. The Engineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all
grading operations of the project.
The Homeowners Association shall obtain and distribute to owners and tenants
annual information from Caltrans and North County Transit regarding the
availability of public transportation, ride-sharing, and transportation pooling
services in the area. This information shall also be provided in the sales office of
the project. A condition so stating this shall also be placed in the CC&Rs for the
project.
Prior to occupancy of individual units a solid wall or fence, and landscaped
windbreaks shall be installed along the perimeter of any future developable area that
abuts property under “open field” cultivation, in order to reduce public nuisance
effects of adjacent pesticide spraying and dust generation from farm vehicles and
operations.
Prior to approval of a final map or issuance of a building permit, which ever occurs
first, an infrastructure improvement plan shall be submitted to the Planning and
Engineering Departments for review and approval by the Planning Director and City
Engineer. This plan shall illustrate the temporary road connections required to
maintain continued access to adjacent agricultural properties that could be impacted
by future roadway improvements.
Drainage water from buildings, streets, parking lots, and landscaped areas within
the project shall be disposed of through stormdrains or otherwise in a manner that
will avoid any runoff onto agricultural areas whether planted or fallow. All runoff
agricultural and urban shall conform with the National Pollution Discharge and
Elimination System Permit requirements pursuant to San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board Order No. 90-42, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 90-
235.
Prior to issuance of a building permit the project shall comply with the City of /
Carlsbad’s standards for solid waste management. I
Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs !
first, the applicant shall notify, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City /
Attorney, all owners, users and tenants of this project that this area is subject to 1
dust, pesticides, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations, and that /
the owners, users, and tenants occupy this area at their on risk. /
I . All grading shall comply with the recommendations incorporated by Ceosoils, Inc in
the preliminary geotechnical assessment of the site dated September 6,1994 and any
amendments or updates of the report, that is on file in the Planning Department.
Prior to approval of a final map, improvement plans shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department showing locations and sizing of reclaimed and or urban
runoff diversion facilities, in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
PC RESO NO. 3880 -14-
I
I
‘;p / r-i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
requirements and the phasing schedule provided in the Zone 20 LFMP. Reclaimed j
water facilities shall be constructed in all major roadways within the project. I
51. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan for the project, as required by
Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, a visual analysis of the project shall
be conducted by Che Developer. This analysis shall consist, at a minimum, of
computer-enhanced photo-modifications showing development conditions proposed
by the development of homes as viewed from Palomar Airport Road. The purpose
of this analysis is to determine the specific visual impacts that the proposed project
could have on the Palomar Airport Road Viewshed. If the Planning Director
determines, based on future visual analysis, that there is a potentially significant
visual impact created by the construction of homes, mitigation to reduce this impact
shall be consistent with Section 3.133 of Final EIR 90-03 and may include, but not
be limited to, the following measures: (1) reduced building height along the top of
the bluff; (2) varying rooflines and roof massing; (3) enhanced rear building
elevations that are visible from Palomar Airport Road; (4) increased landscape
screening; (5) earth tone roof and building wall material and colors; and (6)
increased building separation.
Housing:
52. Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map
is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to
provide and deed restrict 9 lots for second dwelling units (including: Lots 2, 7, 13,
19, 24, 31, 36, 42, 52) and one three-bedroom home as appropriate, in accordance
with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. The draftAffordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the
Planning Director not later than thirty (30) after the final map submittal. The
recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest; OR
Prior to approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is
noC being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the developer shall enter into an agr_eement with thg City to c&xi restrict 9 second
dwelling units (including: Lot b.0; @,~9,~~$$&and~) and the purchase
of 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma, as appropriate, in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Zone
20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58 dated September 12, 1985.
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a signed Affordable
Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The recorded
Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors
in interest; OR
Upon showing by the developer that an onsite contribution is not appropriate for the
project, a second inclusionary housing option available to the developer shall be that
prior to final map approval, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
PC RESO NO. 3880
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
!r- /
City to purchase affordable credits from Villa Loma or participate in an offsite
combined inclusionary project within the southwest quadrant and as appropriate, in ;
accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad I
Municipal Code, the Zone 20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58
dated September 12, 1985.
I
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall 1
submit a signed Affordable Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment
Director. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future
owners and successors in interest.
53. Prior to City review and approval of the offsite option, the approval of a Specific I
Plan amendment to SP 203 shall be required to designate the proposed offsite i
combined inclusionary project as an approved location for the provision of affordable /
units to satisfy the inclusionary requirements of Zone 20 properties. 1
54. The Developer shall construct the required inclusionaty units concurrent with the
project’s market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City !
and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate
schedule for development. 1
EnPineering Conditions:
Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering conditions,
upon the approval of this proposed major subdivision, must be met prior to approval
of a final map.
55. The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intersections in
accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following statement in
the project’s CC&Rs:
“No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches
above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area
identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard
Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B3. The underlying property owner
shall maintain this condition.”
The above statement shall be placed on a non-mapping data sheet on the final map.
56. Drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct access road
for maintenance purposes is not provided, shall be designed and incorporated into
the grading/improvement plans for the project. These end treatments shall be
designed so as to prevent, vegetation growth from obstructing the pipe outfall.
Designs could consist of a modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended
concrete spillway section with longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed rip-rap,
or other means deemed appropriate, as a method of preventing vegetation growth
directly in front of the pipe outlet, to the satisfaction of the Community Services
Director and the City Engineer. I
PC RESO NO. 3880 -16-
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
57. This project is approved specifically as 1 (single) unit for recordation.
-. I
58. The developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, I
officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its /
agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an approval of the I
City, the Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the
City within the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
I
Fees/Agreements
59. A funding mechanism for the full improvements for Poinsettia Lane and Alga Road
must be approved or fees paid, in conformance with the updated Zone 20 Local
Facilities Management Plan funding program.
60. The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City
harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
61. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
62. The developer shall construct desiltation/detention/urban pollutant basin(s) of a type
and a size and at location(s) as shown on the Tentative Map and as approved by the
City Engineer. The applicant shall enter into a basin maintenance agreement and
submit a maintenance bond satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to the approval
of grading, building permit or final map whichever occurs first for this project. Each
basin shall be serviced by an all-weather access/maintenance road.
63. 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 on a form provided by the City.
Grading:
64. The developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to
the State Water Resources Control Board.
65. NO grading shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision unless a grading or slope
easement is obtained from the owners of the affected properties. If the applicant is
unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, no grading permit will be issued. In
that case the applicant must either amend the tentative map or modify the plans 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.
66. 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. The developer must
submit and receive approval for grading plans in accordance with City codes and
PC RESO NO. 3880
.
-17-
Y?
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
L ;
standards.
I
67. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from the site, the developer shall j
submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. I
The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer ;
may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
68. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project j
to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in 1
accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. /
,
69. Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be 1
provided or installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as I
may be required by the City Engineer.
Dedication/Improvements:
70. The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and
easements required by these conditions or shown on the tentative map. The offer
shall be made by a certificate on the final map for this project. All land so offered
shall be granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the City. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated.
71. The developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best
management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to
discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the
City Engineer. The plans shall include, but not be limited to the following, which
shall be included in the project’s CC&Rs:
a. The homeowner’s association shall coordinate the use of the City’s established
program to assist residents with the removal and proper disposal of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
b. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm
drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides,
fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical
treatments shall meet Federal, State, County, and City requirements as
prescribed in their respective containers.
C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface
pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
. . . .
PC RESO NO. 3880 -1%
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
L :
72. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards, ;
the developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as I
provided by law, improvements shown on the tentative map and the following :
improvements:
a. Hidden Valley Road full width improvements (68’ Right of way/48’ Curb to I
curb width) from Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) to Palomar j
Airport Road, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. I
. Concrete Curb and Gutter. I . Concrete Sidewalk on one (1) side. I I . Street Light Standards on both sides. . Traffic Signal at Palomar Airport Road and Hidden Valley Road. i
. Retrofit/Open Existing Raised Median in Palomar Airport Road.
Hidden Valley Road secondary access width improvements (68’ Right of
way/28’ Berm to berm width) from Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom
Road) to Camino De Los Ondas, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Asphalt/Concrete Berms.
Note: The City will enter into an agreement with the developer to obtain
proportionate share reimbursement from benefitting property owners to the
north of Camino de Las Ondas and to the south of the project, for the
Hidden Valley Road secondary access improvements.
b-l. Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) full width improvements (60’
Right of wayl40 Curb to curb width) from Hidden Valley Road to the
southwest corner of the property, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Concrete Curb and Gutter. . Concrete Sidewalk on both sides. . Street Light Standards. . On-Site/Off-Site Calle Serena Asphalt/Concrete Transition.
-OR-
b-2. Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) secondary access width
improvements (72’ Right of way/52’ Curb to curb width) from Hidden Valley
Road to “A” Street, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Concrete Curb and Gutter.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -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
Note:
C.
d-l.
d-2.
e.
61 4
. Concrete Sidewalk on both sides. . Street Light Standards.
Roadway Improvement B-2 above will only be required if Poinsettia Park is
not constructed prior to building permits being issued for Emerald Ridge
West. If Poinsettia Park is constructed, prior to building permits being
issued for Emerald Ridge West, then this widened roadway section will not
be required (site specific secondary access will be gained through the park as
indicated on the tentative map.)
“A” Street full width improvements (60’ Right of way/40’ Curb to curb width)
from Calle Serena to the northern terminus, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Concrete Curb and Gutter. . Concrete Sidewalk on both sides. . Street Light Standards.
“A” Street off-site, site specific secondary access improvements (30’
Easement/28’ Berm to berm width) from the westerly property line to the “A’
Street /Calle Serena (Mar Vista) intersection, including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Asphalt/Concrete Berms. . On-Site/Off-Site “A” Street Asphalt/Concrete Transition.
Calle Serena (Mar Vista) off-site, site specific secondary access improvements
(30’ Easement/28’ Berm to berm width) from the “A” StreetKalle Serena (Mar
Vista) intersection to the westerly property line (located at the southwest
comer of the property), including:
. Asphalt/Concrete Pavement. . Asphalt/Concrete Berms. . On-Site/Off-Site Calle Serena Asphalt/Concrete Transition.
Sewer and Drainage Alternative “A” or as determined by the CMWD District
Engineer and City Engineer. Note: Prior to approval of the final map the
developer shall revise the map to eliminate SewedStormdrain Alignment “B”.
A list of the above improvements shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the
final map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the
secured improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -2o-
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
Special Engineering Conditions:
73. Tentative map easement items number’s 7 and 14 shall not be vacated. These
easements shall remain and this shall be indicated on the conforming tentative map.
74. Preliminary Title Report (PR) (PR dated 3/22/95) Item No. 6 shall be shown on the
conforming tentative map with the future disposition of the easement indicated.
75. An Adjustment Plat shall be processed for the 37 acre “triangular” area located at
the proposed detention/desilting basin west of Hidden Valley Road.
76. The developer shall enter into an “Agreement for Reimbursement of Costs for the
Construction of Poinsettia Park Off-Site Sewer, CMWD Project No. 94-404” for a ’
proportional share of the total construction cost.
Water Conditions:
77. The entire potable water system., reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be
evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can
be met.
78. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application
for meter installation.
79. Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following:
a. Meet with the City Fire Marshall and establish the fire protection
requirements. Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs
from appropriate parties.
b. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning
Department for processing and approval.
C. Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement i
plans, a meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review, :
comment and approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages (ie -GPM /
- EDU). ! I
80. This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not /
be issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the 1
development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are available
at the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to
1
be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -21-
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
81. The Developer shall be required to participate in either: 1) the construction of a
gravity sewer pipeline in Hidden Valley Road extending from Palomar Airport Road
south to Cherry Blossom Road or 2) the construction of a gravity sewer pipeline in
Calle Serene (Sewer Alignment “A”), which is a future street proposed for the Mar
Vista Tract CT 94-11.
82. The Developer shall construct a 12” potable water line (375’ H.G.) in Hidden Valley
Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cherry Blossom Road. Also. a water analysis
shall be required to establish the size of water lines in Cherry Blossom Road, Streets
A, B and C. In any event, 8” diameter water lines will be minimum size installed.
83. The Developer shall construct a 12” reclaimed water line (384’ H.G.) in Hidden
Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cherry Blossom Road and shall install
reclaimed water lines deemed necessary after the colored use map is reviewed and
needs established.
84. Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted
to and approved by the Fire Department.
Fire Conditions:
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
. . . .
Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted
to and approved by the Fire Department.
Additional onsite public hydrants are required.
Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval, which depicts
location of required, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydrants. The
plan should include off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project.
Applicant shall submit a site plan to depicting emergency of access routes, driveways
and traffic circulation for Fire Department approval.
An all-weather unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicles shall
be provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fire
Chief, the access road has become unserviceable due to inclement weather or other
reasons he may, in the interest of public safety, require that construction operations
cease until the condition is corrected.
All required water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be operational before
combustible building materials are located on the construction site.
Prior to final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access shall be
equipped with “Knox”, key operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall contact
the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to installation.
PC RESO NO. 3880 -22-
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
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
Prior to building occupancy, private roads and driveways which serve as required
access for emergency service vehicles shall be posted as fire lanes in accordance with
the requirements of Section 17.04.020, Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Native vegetation which presents a fire hazard to structures shall be modified or
removed in accordance with the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual. Applicant shall
submit a Fires Suppression plan to the Fire Department for approval.
Plans and/or specifications for fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, automatic fire
sprinkler systems and other fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for approval prior to construction.
An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in buildings having an
aggregate floor area exceeding 10,000 square feet.
The applicant shall provide a street map which conforms to the following /
requirements: A 400 scale photo-reduction mylar, depicting proposed improvements /
and at least two existing intersections or streets. The map shall also clearly depict
street centerlines, hydrant locations and street names.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be !
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail to be so 1
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right i
to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance I
of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of 1
occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and 1
prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages ;
for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in /
interest by the City’s approval of this Resolkion. -
Planning Code Reminders:
Fees:
98. The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the
final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
99. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by j
Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. I
Final Map Notes:
100. The Developer shall provide the following note on the final map of the subdivision
and final mylar of this development submitted to the City:
“Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes a Growth Management
Control Point for each General Plan land use designation. Development cannot )
PC RESO NO. 3880 -23-
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
101.
102.
103.
i i
exceed the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapter 21.90. The land use
designation for this development is RM. The Growth Control Point for this
designation is 6 dwelling units per nonconstrained acre.
Parcels 1 thru 62 were used to calculate the intensity of development under the
General Plan and Chapter 21.90. Subsequent redevelopment or resubdivision of any
one of these parcels must also include parcels 1 thru 62 under the General Plan and
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.”
The following note shall be placed on the Final Map: “Prior to issuance of a building
permit for any buildable lot within the subdivision, the Developer shall pay a one- i
time special development tax in accordance with the City Council Resolution No. 91- ,
39.”
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of I
the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of i
building permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provide herein.
The Developer shall submit a street name list consistent with the City’s street name
policy subject to the Planning Director’s approval prior to final map approval.
Landscape:
104. All landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared to conform with the Landscape
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the
Planning Department.
Signs: I
105. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in 1
conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval 1
of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. I
. . . .
PC RESO NO. 3880 -24-
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, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Erwin, Monroy, Nielsen,
Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZhkkLER .
Planning Director
/ La&&&& @#2&J !
WILLIAM COMPAS,‘Chairperson j
CARLSBADPLANNIN G COMMISSION 1
I
PC RESO NO. 3880 -25-
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. 3881
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF I
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE I , DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 9 SECOND DWELLING
UNITS WITHIN A 61 LOT SINGLE-FAMILY
SUBDIVISION AND DEED RESTRICTION OF 1 THREE-
BEDROOM HOME OR THE OPTION TO PURCHASE 1
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDIT IN VILLA LOMA
SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL, ALL TO
SATISFY THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING I
REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 21.85 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, ALL ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: SDP 95-06
WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain
property to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,103.91 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Aqua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, flied
in the Offtce of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, Bled in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74.230326
of Official Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site
Development Plan to subdivide a 563 acre parcel into 61 single-family lots with a minimum
lot size of 7,500 square feet, one 83 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder parcel, and
allow 9 second-dwelling units as shown on Exhibits “AM”, dated January 17, 1996, on file
in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference (“Site Development Plan
52..
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
for Emerald Ridge West” SDP 95-06) as provided by Chapter 21.53 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and I
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and : I
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony I
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Site Development Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of SDP 95-06, based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for SDP 95-
06 is in conformance with. the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the
following:
a.
b.
C.
The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dus/acre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dus/acre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 dus/acre.
Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
right-of-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffk noise from
Palomar Airport Road would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is
required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL.
PC RESO NO. 3881 -2-
53
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
d. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable units and has been conditioned to enter into an
Affordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second dwelling units
and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9 second dwelling
units and purchase 1 Affordable Housing Credit from Villa Loma subject to
the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and final approval by
the City Council. The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary dwelling unit will be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction t.764)
times the average subsidy needed to make affordable to a lower-income
household, one newly constructed typical housing unit.
e. Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 83 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road)
alignment is the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as
follows:
i.
ii.
. . . 111.
iv.
V.
PC RESO NO. 3881 -3-
The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning
Areas (PPAs);
The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high
habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat on the MSP California LLC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore,
large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and,
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. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
use, in that the lots are a minimum of 60 feet wide and the second-dwelling units
would have exterior access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary
home, and utilize a portion of the three-car garage for parking.
3. That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will
be provided and maintained in that the second dwelling unit would be integrated into
the primary dwelling units and meet all the development standards of the R-1-7500
Zone.
4. The second dwelling unit is located above a new three car garage and does not
exceed the 30 foot height limit.
5.
6.
The total floor area of the second dwelling unit does not exceed 640 square feet.
The second dwelling unit is architecturally compatible with the primary dwelling unit
and retains the appearance of a single family dwelling within the project.
7. Since the second dwelling unit complies with all of the applicable development
standards of the R-l zone, has been designed to appear as a single family residence
when viewed from the street, and should generate very little additional traffic, it will
not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
8. The second dwelling unit has a separate entrance.
vi. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS j
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be j
more important. j
f. Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees. 1
g* Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street
lights, and fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
Planning Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Site Development
Plan for the SDP 95-06 project entitled “Emerald Ridge West”. (Exhibit “A” - “M”
on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, dated
January 17, 1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and
directed to make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications
to the exhibits/or documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and
conform to City Council’s final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development
substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this
PC RESO NO. 3881 -4- n*
5-6
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
approval. I
2. Approval of SDP 95-06 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative ;
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 95-03, and HDP 95-06. SDP 95-06 is subject 1
to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874, j
3879,3880, and 3882. (
3. Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map
is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to
provide and deed restrict 9 lots for second dwelling units (including: Lots 2, 7, 13,
19, 24, 31, 36, 42, 52) and one three-bedroom home as appropriate, in accordance
with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the
Planning Director not later than thirty (30) after the final map submittal. The
recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest; OR
Prior to approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is
not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to deed restrict 9 second
dwelling units (including: Lot 2,7, 13, 19, 24,31,36, 42, and 52) and the purchase
of 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma, as appropriate, in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Zone
20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58 dated September 12, 1985.
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a signed Affordable
Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The recorded
Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors
in interest; OR
Upon showing by the developer that an onsite contribution is not appropriate for the
project, a second inclusionary housing option available to the developer shall be that
prior to final map approval, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City to purchase affordable credits from Villa Loma or participate in an offsite
combined inclusionary project within the southwest quadrant and as appropriate, in
accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, the Zone 20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58
dated September 12, 1985. Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall
submit a signed Affordable Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment
Director. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future
owners and successors in interest.
4. Prior to City review and approval of the offsite option, the approval of a Specific
Plan amendment to SP 203 shall be required to designate the proposed offsite
combined inclusionary project as an approved location for the provision of affordable
units to satisfy the inclusionary requirements of Zone 20 properties.
PC RESO NO. 3881 -5-
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
C
5. The Developer shall construct the required inclusionary units concurrent with the
project’s market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City
and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate :
schedule for development. I I
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the i
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the / I
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Erwin, Monroy, Nielsen,
Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
WILLIAM COMPAS, &hair-person
CAIUSBAD P LANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. #OL&ILLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3881 -6-
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
b 27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3882 ,
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNIN G COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO GRADE AND SUBDIVIDE
A 56.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 61 ONE SINGLE-FAMILY
LOTS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE 7,500 SQUARE
FEET, DEVELOP NINE SECOND DWELLING UNITS,
CREATE A 8.3 ACRE OPEN SPACE LOT AND LEAVE A
27.4 ACRE REMAINDER PARCEL, ALL ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20;
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: HDP 95-06
WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain property
to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No.
1,103.91 Acres” on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, tiled in the Offke of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Ranch0 Aqua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
It lying within Parcels A “, “B”, “C” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Offke of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Official Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit to subdivide a 56.3 acre parcel into 61 single-family lots with a
minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet, one 8.3 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder
parcel, and allow nine second-dwelling units as shown on Exhibits “A-M”, dated January
17,1996, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference (“Hillside
Development Permit for Emerald Ridge West” HDP 95-06) as provided by Chapter 21.95 of
5’2
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
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
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 1
I and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all I
factors relating to the Hillside Development Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning i
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Hillside Development Permit HDP 95-06,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for HDP 95-
06 is in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the
following:
a. The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dus/acre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dus/acre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 dus/acre.
b.
C.
Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
right-of-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road which ‘is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffic noise from
Palomar Airport Road would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is
required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL.
PC RESO NO. 3882 -2-
1
2
3
4
k
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
d. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionaty Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable units and has been conditioned to enter into an
Affordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second dwelling units
and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9 second dwelling
units and purchase 1 Affordable Housing Credit from Villa Loma subject to
the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and final City Council
approval. The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary dwelling unit will
be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction (.764) times
the average subsidy needed to make affordable to a lower-income household,
one’ newly constructed typical housing unit.
e. Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 8.3 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize
gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Cherry Blossom Road alignment is
the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as follows:
i.
ii.
. . . 111.
iv.
V.
The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning
Areas (PPAs);
The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high
habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of the acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat on the MSP California LLC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore,
large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and,
PC RESO NO. 3882 -3- t.zJ
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Vi. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be
more important.
f.
g*
Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street
lights, and fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints map Exhibit
“J”, dated January 17,1996, which show existing and proposed conditions and slope
percentages;
That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%, have been properly
identified on the constraints map Exhibit “J”, dated January 17, 1996, and placed
into a 83 acre Open Space (Lot 62);
That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and
requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that the grading avoids
steep slopes, manufactured slopes do not exceed 30 feet in height and follow the
natural contours, grading volumes do not exceed 7,900 cubic yards per graded acre,
the roadways are curvilinear and follow the natural contours, and the future homes
would be setback from the bluff top;
That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the undevelopable portions of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 21.53.230 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, in that steep slopes and riparian areas are preserved in open space;
That the project design substantially conforms to the intent of the concepts illustrated in the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that the roadways are
curvilinear, grading follows the natural contours, the future homes would be setback
from the bluff top, and ail the manufactured slopes will be screened with
landscaping that includes a combination of ground cover, shrubs, and trees;
That the project design and lot configuration minimizes disturbance of hillside lands,
in that project’s grading and development does not encroached into steep slopes.
Planning Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Hillside
Development Permit for the HDP 95-06 project entitled “Emerald Ridge West”.
(Exhibit “A” - “M” on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this
reference, dated January 17, 1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff
is authorized and directed to make or require the Developer to make all corrections
and modifications to the exhibits/or documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and conform to City Council’s final action on the project. Development
PC RESO NO. 3882 . 4 .&*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
t6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
shall occur substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed
development substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
Approval of HDP 95-06 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 95-03, and SDP 95-06. HDP 95-06 is subject
to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874,
3879,3880, and 3881.
Prior to issuance of building permits on Lots l- 61 for single family residential
structures, an amendment to this Hillside Development Permit shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission to ensure that architecture is
consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Erwin, Monroy, Nielsen,
Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None.
WILLIAM COMPAS, &hair-person CARLSBAD P LANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
.
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3882 -5-
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET -
CASE NO: SDP 9506(A)/HDP 95-06(A)/CDP 96-07
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
APPLICANT: LADWIG DESIGN GROUP. INC.
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 61 Single-Familv Units and 9 Second Dwelling Units on ureviously
subdivided lots within the Emerald Ridge West (CT 95-03) subdivision
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that certain parcel of land delineated and desirmated as “Description No.
1.103.9 1 Acres” on Record of Survey mau No. 57 15. filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego
Countv. December 19. 1960. being a portion of Lot G of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, according to Mau thereof No.
823, filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Dieno Countv, November 16. 1896. a uortion of which
lies within the Citv of Carlsbad, all being in the Countv of San DiePo, State of California. Excepting therefrom
that uortion lving within Parcels “A.” “B.” “C,” and “D” of Parcel No. 2993 in the Citv of Carlsbad, County of
San Diego, State of California. filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,
1974 as File No. 74-230326 of Official Records
APN: 212-040-32 and 36
Dwelling Units
Acres 56.3 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 61 Single Family and 9 Second
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation Residential Medium
Density Allowed 6 dus/acre Density Proposed 3 .O 1
Existing Zone R-1-7500-Q Proposed Zone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning Requirements)
Zoning Land Use
Site R-1-7500-Q Agriculture
North OS Vacant
south PC Park
East R-l-10-Q Residential
West R- 1-7500-Q Agriculture
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 70 EDUs
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated Seutember 13, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued
- Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Exemution uer Section 15 182
63
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT’S STATEMENTOFDISCLOSURE OR CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR AN-Y
APPOINTED BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE
(Please Print)
The following information must be disclosed: ,’
1. Apnlicant List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
UDC Homes, Inc.
438 Camino De1 Rio South
Suite 112-B
San Diego, CA 92108
2. Owner
List the names and addressees of all person having any ownership interest in the property involved.
l _
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the trust.
DISCLOS.FRM 2/96 PAGE 1 of 2
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-l 576 - (619) 438-l 161 @a
4%’
.,
Disclosure Statement (fier) Page 2
5. Have you had more than $250.00 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff.
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No r/ If yes, please indicate person(s)
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and uxmty, city municipality, district or other
political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessav)
UDC Homes, Inc.
Print or type name of owner
UDC Homes, Inc.
Print or type name of applicant
DISCLOS.FRM Z/96 PAGE 1 of 2
I- CT) LLJ
2:
LLI (3 Q 13c
cl -I a CT LLI z LLI UJz P
&T b P ““. I” I “I. . I ” g E! I “l”“” ” ““““..“““““” “I.““.“” v i! P ii 0.
‘.
s *‘-
$3 ,.
,I
i > G. I
i
i;
i
. .
;. L -z e -t
_ ;i i 7. $ ‘= _ - “2
__ _ -c_
_.___ _-a- ----~,-i *.:i ._.,._ .a
///
7 -- ___. ., .I
r_ ,A’ 1 .
* .Y
. .i. ,
/ , u l-
2 -
= .”
--z .-z=
c L-. _s -_. _._ --- .z== I.
*,
= z> ’
_- :.
.,‘.’ - c
0
?:
P
r"im
c
@I -i- + fv I----f ; I/ -,.t t/- &, I 1, ,_I% III i L;=-L 1
.! : .4
!
:
i
:
3
i
I I
; ‘1
71
x 3
h
72
jm , - ! I - W? r. Ii- II- I/ 7-- ’ d II/ ‘Tt- ?ti,.l “1
I ’ i
/I
J L;n 7-7 II ,(I
1 ! 0 /;I; : f ,-+=
i %
73
f--F k
I f
g + ,a’-,~Z 8
I 0 ri ““., ,
.
I ag;i;;gg,s, 3 SE 5r$3$gfzi$g S’EEECTp:E rc 7s; 5 1 1 c 74.1 Jr 4 E.
q.......... s t
i E 5 a 3 Y
2. * jr! ru ::f rz
2
i - . ii/
. g ;:i
Pi E- $2 ES ft . .
-75
j : . 1
1
:3 ;2
3
$ (:: II::’ ,:lhu I I. : 411 I I
il
1 12 ;il :,: (11 j:. ‘1 IL ‘i;i$ibH /,:i. ,,:, ,;
76
-7-l
e----___
-n-i --- --
Z[ i f $1: : z i 1 sl:-E b:.$P$ >(.*:.:<:>i: ‘,:?:$B!:f$z $1’$5~2~~-?: B;i...:‘gf:: -itfEf::i>IE +, . . . . . . . .
i
t
78
4
I:
I
I
I
I
i & t_t ___,
BIZfir A \r/ Ii --ii
,I- -7-q _ 4 , .-$I I-L,
::
I- :. I /
51.. , $
;j;-; ;,.i,i
:<-+-- $-;>>*gP~-- ---$f:-.?’ $:;-‘-----r* &a:~r~~!~CZ .(~5:I::zziP %!. . . . . . . .
2:
-,
'21- , B g
g 5 : z c
r-,$G: I;;:: :a:+:: e,,r;aaaa3$Z >;;.sz:c*;. (,';;iLL-:;; &z.*..:a:i.. -(:ilL:::rfs
D! . . . . . . .
I! rf
f:” L---.-,
-i
pi L----+
r ,O-,bl I P,b r I!
I
I
I
I ,
I
I
r0->51 IV4 j
I I
/!))I - 1 --- L- r-? I- ji’ *: i ir-7 i i
i . ! .
,i y ! \ ‘r I :.
@I .: ;q . . II 4 .
: s : h 1 I : j :
i
i-2, 53 3 9
8: 2 ;
k-y-
‘Sf “tz::s s:;Easaq‘c’ :~::-$>:$53 r- $p$pckg’5$
:crrrEEElnz
* . . . . . . . . . .
; : 8; -‘. *. ” 2; 2
3;:: i ?P* ;qzg,s x:p41sssg :‘::cg;‘z‘. :=;$;-?.q:;;
$$;;;I$:$;;
7 . . . . . . . . . .
ldwig Design Group, Inc.
ATTACHMENT 9
EMERALD RIDGE WEST
Product Mix
L- 1034
12119’96
Page 1
J = Plan Fit S = Second Dwelling Unit
R = Reverse 2% = 2% Car Garage
MOD = Modified - No Rear Pop-out STR = Straight in Driveway
STD = Standard
Plan I = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in
Plan 2 STD = 3 Car Garage - Turn-in
Plan 2-2X = 2% Car Garage -Turn-in
Plan 2 STR = 2 Car Garage - Straight-in
703 Palomar Airport Road + Suite 300 + Carlsbad, California 92009
(619) 438-3182 FRX (619) 438-0173
EMERALD RIDGE WEST
Product Mix
L-1034
I 2! 19!96
Page 2
J = Plan Fit S = Second Dwelling Unit
R = Reverse 7% = 2% Car Garage
MOD = Modified - No Rear Pop-out STR = Straight in Driveway
STD = Standard
Plan 1 = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in Plan 3 STD = Z Car Garage - 2 Turn-in, I Straight-in
Plan 2-2s = 2% Car Garage -Turn-in Plan 4 = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in
I Plan 2 STR = 2 Car Garage - Straight-in
703 Palomar Rirport Road + Suite 300 4 Carlsbad, California 92009
(619) 438-3182 FAX (619) 438-0173 7.2
EMERALD RIDGE WEST
Product Mix
L- 1034
12.‘19:96
Page 3
J = Plan Fit S = Second Dwelling Unit
R = Reverse 2% = 2% Car Garage
MOD = Modified - No Rear Pop-out STR = Straight in Driveway
STD = Standard
I Plan 1 = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in I I Plan 3 STD = 3 Car Garage - 2 Turn-in, 1 Straight-in
I Plan 2 STD = 3 Car Garage - Turn-in I I Plan 3 STR = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in, 57.5 & 60’ Depth I
Plan 2-2% = 2% Car Garage -Turn-in Plan 4 = 3 Car Garage - Straight-in
Plan 2 STR = 2 Car Garage - Straight-in
703 Palomar Airport Road + Suite 300 + Carlsbad, CaIiFornia 92009
(619) 438-3182 FAX (619) 438-0173 2.3
EXHIBIT 5
3. SDP 9%06IAYHDP 9506lA)ICDP 96-07 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST - A request for Site
Development Plan Amendment, Hillside Development Permit Amendment and Coastal
Development Permit to allow the construction of 61 single family homes on previously subdivided
lots in the R-1-7500-Q zone and to revise the architecture, size, floor plan, and location of
inclusionary second dwelling units, on property located within the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local
Facilities Management Plan area west of Hidden Valley Road between Palomar Airport Road and
Camino de Las Ondas.
Chairperson Nielsen announced to the applicant, Commissioners and the public that the Commission’s
action on this item is final and will not be forwarded to the City Council unless it is appealed within ten (10)
calendar days.
Project Planner, Anne Hysong outlined the project which consists of a total of sixty-one (61) single family,
one (1) and two (2) story homes and nine (9) second dwelling units which are oriented on the lots to
satisfy all R-l zone standards. She described the proposed homes, which range in size from 2376 sq. ft.,
to 3408 sq. ft., each having three (3) different facade treatments. Ms. Hysong stated that the nine (9)
second dwelling units previously approved by the City Council, were conceptual 640 sq. ft. one (1)
bedroom units and the proposed amendment is for nine second dwelling units which are 439 sq. ft. studio
units. She went on to point out that each second dwelling unit will have a separate single car garage and
a private entrance. Ms. Hysong, referring to the relocation of two (2) of the second dwelling units, stated
that the relocation of these units will ensure that second dwelling units are equally dispersed throughout
the subdivision. Ms. Hysong continued by saying that the project is subject to and consistent with the
Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance, Zone 20 and Hillside architectural guidelines, the General Plan, the
Zone 20 Specific Plan, Mello 11 Local Coastal Program, R-l Single Family Zone, Affordable Housing
Ordinance, Hillside Development Ordinance and the project is exempt from any further environmental
review. Ms. Hysong concluded her presentation by stating that Staff is recommending approval of the
project, as conditioned.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION February 5,1997 Page 5
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne addressed the Commission in an effort to clarify the change in
recommendations by stating that this project was originally approved by the City Council. The City
Council approved the site development plan and the item before the Commission is, technically, an
amendment to the site development plan. Mr. Wayne went on to explain that the Planning Department is
treating this and its companion project, Mar Vista, somewhat differently, causing some inconsistencies.
He stated that, in the spirit of the ordinance, Staff feels that having the Planning Commission be the final
decision maker on this item, meets the intent of the ordinance and, therefore, the recommendations were
changed so it can stop at this point.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Wayne to explain at what point projects are required to go before the
City Council and is the limit fifty (50) or sixty (60) homes.
Mr. Wayne responded by stating that a project of fifty (50) or fewer home are approved by the Planning
Commission for tentative maps and affordable housing site development plans. In this case, the tentative
map was approved by the Council and that means the HDP was also approved by the Council. He went
on to say that it seemed appropriate, at the time, to take the site development plan as well, to the City
Council. However, he continued, site development plans normally stop (under Section 2106) at the
Planning Commission, Mr. Wayne then explained that “special” site development plans processed under
Section 2153.1.20 basically sets out the next parameter, which is affordable housing units and in this case
there is room for a number of interpretations. Mr. Wayne declared that, in the spirit of streamlining and
quality control, all of the quality control has been met with the Council’s original action and they’re
delegating their authority regarding architecture to this Commission.
Commissioner Welshons asked when Staff made the decision to change its recommendation.
Mr. Wayne stated that the decision had been made within the last forty-five (45) minutes after having
worked on it for the past twenty-four (24) hours.
Commissioner Welshons inquired if there had been some impetus that prompted this decision.
Mr. Wayne responded that during a review of the ordinance, they were questioning their interpretation of
the ordinance and since the department is in the process of developing new techniques for streamlining.
This topic came up at last nights Council meeting. Council’s thoughts and staffs seemed to be
converging and this change in recommendations resulted.
Commissioner Welshons queried the City Council’s direction to Staff.
Mr. Wayne stated that Council referred it to Staff and that Code allows the action he has taken and no
permission is needed.
Assistant City Attorney, Rich Rudolf interjected by stating that Council had directed Staff to look into the
issue raised by Mr. Ladwig, and as a result were able to resolve the issue of having to return to the
Council for final approval. He explained that the joint staff determination was that it is within the
parameters of the ordinance; that there is enough ambiguity that bears either interpretation and under the
circumstances no intelligent review that is desired by the City is going to be evaded and no neighbors or
others would be hurt by the decision to have it stop at the Planning Commission. He pointed out that it
made sense and is consistent with the basic desire to streamline the process.
Commissioner Welshons asked if, when the Council instructed Staff to look into the issue, did they imply
that they wanted Staff to bring their findings back to the Council with a recommendation.
MINUTES 95
PLANNING COMMISSION February 5,1997 Page 6
Mr. Rudolf said that his understanding is, after a conversation between Mr. Ladwig and the City Attorney,
that if Staffs interpretation and the subsequent change of recommendation is the solution to the problem,
Mr. Ladwig’s purpose will have been served, there will be no need to go back before the Council and he
will withdraw his request. Mr. Rudolf added that Staff will inform the City Council of their determination.
Chairperson Nielsen invited the applicant to step forward.
Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group, Inc., 703 Palomar Airport Rd., Suite 300, Carlsbad, representing the
applicant, UDC Homes, Inc., concurred with Staffs conclusion and the conditions in the report as they will
be amended. He reported that the grading is nearing completion and they are anxious to get the
necessary approvals to begin construction and urged the Commission’s approval.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Ladwig why that had changed the previous second dwelling unit size
from 640 sq. feet to 439 sq. feet.
Mr. Ladwig stated that the original approval was for a conceptual design and based on the footprint of the
garage below, the final size is as presented.
Commissioner Savary questioned why the second dwelling unit, in Plan No. 4, has direct access to the
entire house considering that it is going to be an affordable housing rental unit.
Mr. Ladwig deferred the question to one of his colleagues, Roger Bassinger.
Roger Bassinger, Case Group, Architects, 437 S. Highway 101, Solana Beach, stated that the second
dwelling unit in question has a lockable door and can be secured from access to the rest of the house.
Commissioner Savary asked if the occupant of the second dwelling unit would be required to go through
the garage to get to the outside.
Mr. Bassinger’s answer was no. He pointed out that there is a separate entrance next to the garage but
that the garage can be accessed from that small area at the bottom of the stairs.
Commissioner Savary expressed her displeasure at the seven different levels of roof line at the front
elevation of Plan 2; that the design is excessive.
Commissioner Welshons, referring to the changes in recommendations regarding this project, asked Mr.
Ladwig if the project is under any particular time constraints, i.e., if this project had been required to go
back through Council, would that have had financial or other effects upon this project.
Mr. Ladwig responded by saying that it would delay getting the building permits, as it would take a
minimum of six (6) weeks before it could be scheduled before the City Council again.
Since no one else wished to speak on this item, Chairperson Nielsen closed Public Testimony and opened
Commission discussion.
Anne Hysong, in response to Commissioner Savary’s reference to the seven (7) different levels of roof
line, stated the Planning Department encourages a lot of roof line variation. She also pointed out the
separation of building plane between the garage and the rest of the house.
Chairperson Nielsen asked if there is any minimum size required for an affordable housing unit.
Ms. Hysong stated that she believes that the building code limits the size to a minimum of 220 sq. ft.
Chairperson Nielsen closed Public Hearing.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION February 5,1997 Page 7
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Motion by Commissioner Noble, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4051, No. 4052 and No. 4053, approving SDP 95-
OG(A)/HDP 95-06(A)/CDP 96-07, based upon the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
6-1
Nielsen, Monroy, Heineman, Compas, Welshons and Noble.
Savary
None
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
. 28
EXHIBIT 6
G CqhaMISSION RJ$SOLUTION NO. 97-O@ I
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TO
DENY THE REQUEST FOR kw AMENDMENT ~0 THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
CONSTRUCTION AND LOCATION OF A TOTAL OF
NINE (9) SECOND DWELLING UNITS AFFORDABLE TO LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
WITHIN THE EMERALD RIDGE WEST PROJECT
GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF HIDDEN
VALLEY ROAR, NORTH OF POINSET’I’IA PARK
AND SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD.
APPLICANT: UDC HOMES, INC
CASE NO.: AHP-974OZ(SDP #95-06A3
WHEREAS, an Affordable Housing Project (AHP) Application (No. 97-
002) has been submitted to the City of Carlsbad’s Housing Commission for review and
consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Project Appkation (AHP 97402)
requests an amendment to a previously approved site development plan (SDP 95-06)
approved by the Housing Commission; and
WHEREAS, said Housing Commission did, on the 13th day of
February, 1997, hold a public meeting to consider said application for an amendment;
and
WHEREAS, at said public meeting, upon hearing and considering all
testimony, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the application.
. ..I . . . .
. . . . . . . .
.’ .
I
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
HC Resolution No. 97-002
Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Housing
Commission of the City of C&bad, California, as follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct.
2. That based on the information provided within the application and testimony
presented during the public meeting of the Housing Commission on
February 13. 1997, the Commission hereby recommends DENIAL of
Affordable Housing Project (AHP) No. 97-002 which amends the previously
approved site development plan (SDP 95-06) to contain nine (9) smaller
second dwelling units (439 square feet) to be affordabte to low income (80%
or below of county median) households,
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Housing Commission of the City of Cadsbad, California, held on the 13th day of
February, 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Cake&y, Rose, ScarpeIIi, Schlebuber, W&m, Wellman
NOES: Noble
ABSENT: Sat0
ABSTAIN: Escobedo
-9 EY, Chairperson, H&sing Commission
WAN BECKER, Housing and Redevelopment Director
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
DATE: Februarv 18. 1997
EXHIBIT 7
L
TELEPHONE
(619) 434-2808
TO: Bobbie Hoder, Planning Dept.
FROM: Karen Kundtz, Clerks Office
RE: EMERALD RIDGE WEST - SDP 95-6(A)
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.) .
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of .
Signature Date
FEB-I 8-97 TL!: 3’ ?F 24 BO?U!U~ h RED, *i ’ .F1u. - ,.,. DIY~L’JL,;.
I (We) appeal the decision of the PI Qnninq Co mmiSStoti
to the Carisbad City Council. J
Date of Decision you are appoeling: F ebruary 5, 1597 I
meet of A~eepl :
PF SPECIFIE Exsmpiti: if the adon is a City Engineer’s De&ton, please ssy so If a project has:
muttlple elements, (such as s General Plan Amendment Negative Dee&raUon, Specific Plan, etc.) please
list them all. If yw only want to appeal a part of the whole action, plasse state that here.
cpmcndmwt * "3DP 95-N Chj , ph J u-t; c.tA\czrrl\l t&A!
Rersodsf for Amea[: . PIem. Not*. hlluro to l po8lfy a mason mry remwIt In denhI of
Uw l ppoal, und you wlil bo limited to tba ground8 rtrtod bore when presmtimg your l ppd.
BE! How did the decision maker err? What about the decision is inconsrstent with state or local laws, plans, or policy?
rdabie hxAs; nu Gm4po
g . I US’ Vni.5 ;0 +I
4-b c&r’ Q@tr; 1 4-b t%qrA CJ-w Ad& (b& h&?c! i&)
G 31% :LdLtC-tiOn in Size ad +k [OS; af d\ ~r06W6.
SK3NATURE PHONE NO.
/$hLw%L 3. Scw~t4%9EIJL
NAME (please print) ADDRESS: Street Name b Nurnb~r
2( 18 147 CM~rqfm CA 9=9
DATE City. st8te, zip cod0
-- .~ 1200 Cartsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-l 989 - (619) 434-2808 @
-l-o:
Company :
Fax No.
From:
Re:
Date:
SI’lil.\L\N - _-.-.-e- :-.?. .-... .
FacsimiIo Cover Sheet
C + Clevk I
C+, of Caf \rbad * I
43Y- 1987
/Ii I fG SctiLE;tfIiSR
Total Fqes (induding cover sheet): z -------------------------------------------------M------------ --------------------------------------------------------------
Spclman & co., Inc.
9191 TOWne Ccnfre Drive, Suite 175 1 San Dirgo, Catifornia 92122
(619) S,r8-4949 1 Fnx(619) W-4942
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
DATE: February 18, 1997
TELEPHONE
(619) 434-2808
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Bobbie Hoder, Planning Dept.
Karen Kundtz, Clerk's Office
EMERALD RIDGE WEST - SDP 95-6(A)/HDP 95-6(A)/CDP 96-7
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.)
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of .
Signature Date
Cit.y of Carlsbad -.
I (We) appear the decision of the PI 61m7ll11~ l! OT)t?llC~“>, 377
to the Carlsbad City Council.
Date of Declslon you are appealing: &. 17 i (,(CC /4 ?I , 1 c14 7 1
~kpias:
mulllple elementb, (au& as
of the action is a City Engineer’s Oecision. please say SO. If a project haa
a General Plan Amendment, Negative Oeclaratlon. Speclfk Plan, etc.) pkase
list them all. If you onty want to appeal a part of the whole &Ion. pleese state that here.
At the Planning Commission meeting on February 5, 1997, a decision was made that the amendment to the
Emerald Ridge West project could be approved by the Plbnning Commission and the amendment was
subsequently approved. As a result of the Planning Commission’s action on February 51h, the amendment to
the Emerald Ridge West Project no longer requires City Council approval, unless the decision is appealed to
the Council.
The original Site Development Plan (SDP 9506) for the Emerald Ridge West Project which included the
construction of the total of nine (9) second dwelling units to satisfy the developer’s lnclusionary Housing
Requirement with the purchase of one housing credit within the Villa Loma Project to meet the 3 bedroom
requirement. As approved, SDP 9506 included prototypical preliminary building elevations for units
containing second dwelling units, floor plans and the specific location of each of the nine (9) second swelling
units to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement.
The proposed project, currently amends the previous approval by: 1) proposing architectural elevations for all
units which differ from 640 square feet, 1 bedroom to a 439 square foot studio unit; and 3) relocating two of
the second dwelling units to different lots within the subdivision. The developer again intends to purchase
one housing credit in the Villa Loma Project to meet the 3 bedroom requirement.
1 for Aooq& l Ploma Note 0 falluro eo rpoc,ify a roraon may ramult In danlal of
lhe appeal, and YOU ~111 bo llmitmd to thr ground8 stat& hen whrn proaantlng your rppOai.
m How dld the declslon maker err? What about the decision is inconsistent with state Of lOCal laws. plans. or pollcy’l
Purpose of the appeal is to ascertain that the City applicaiion of.§chool fiitigation Policy is consistent with the
agreement between Carlsbad Unified School District and the applicant.
Carlsbad Unified School District believes there has been inadequate input which ignored consequences to
CUSD and we relied on the full approval process and sequence to finaiize the project through further
(&y, fg.-=; $I -06 z(;;
PHONE N6.
I 8
DATE 1 n
DRESS: Street Name 8 Number
t4&slMJ~, flvj .
City. She,
1989 l (6 1 S) 434-28Of3
20’ d SCIO'O~J 7P:lT 26481 a33 ?PG'TV?f7:flT
1
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notlde
APPEAL EMERALD RIDGE WEST - SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06(A)/CDP 96-07
for a public hearing before the Clty Council.
Please nOtiCe the item for the Council IRestIng Of First Available Hearing
Thank you.
Assistant City Man-- .
March 24, 1997
Date
-1
‘1
L
m--m
$L
‘1
G
2
: * . f
!
!$ ;4
.-.
-
6
CZ:
3 -; ; 2: : “I 5:
i=i 6;
--.
i
s
f
I 4
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008-l 989
MR. MICHAEL J. SCHLEHUBER
2809 ATADERO COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008-l 989
MR. GEORGE R. BOLTON
6519 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008-l 989
MR. GUY S. MOORE, JR.
6503 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DRIVE
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 200
3111 CAMINO DEL RIO NO
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I_
CMWD
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ANNE HYSONG
CARLTAS ASSOCIATES
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
SUITE 100
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JAMES UKEGAWA JAMES UKEGAWA
6145 LAUREL TREE ROAD 4218 SKYLINE ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008
PACWEST LTD MONARCH COMMUNITIES OF CA
550 WEST C STREET 30012 IVY GLENN DRIVE
SUITE 1750 SUITE 270
SAN DIEGO CA 92101 LAGUNA NIGUEL CA 92677
TY OF CARLSBAD UDC HOMES INC
438 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH
SUITE 112-6
SAN DIECO CA 92108-3546
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RICHARD & ROBERT KELLY
2770 SUNNY CREEK ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SIM USA INC 1400 FLAME TREE LANE CARLSBAD CA 92009
SAMBI SEASIDE HEIGHTS LLC
8649 FIRESTONE BLVD
DOWNEY CA 90241
MSP CALIFORNIA
650 SOUTH CHERRY STREET
SUITE 435
DENVER CO 80222
PROPERTY OWNER’S LIST - EMERALD RIDGE WEST (CT 95-03)
1
211-040-14
UDC Homes,Inc.
438Camino Del RioSouth
#112-B
San Diego,CA92108-3546
2
211-040-33 Carltas Associates
5600Avenida Encinas #IO0
Carlsbad,CA92008
3
212-040-35,48, and 49
Richard & Robert Kelly
2770SunnyCreekRoad
Carlsbad,CA92008
4
212-040-39
JamesUkegawa
6145 LaurelTree Road
Carlsbad,CA92009
5
212-040-39
JamesUkegawa
4218Skyline Road
Carlsbad,CA92008
6 212-040-47
Sim USA, Inc.
1400FlameTree Lane
Carlsbad,CA92009
7
212-040-41
PACWEST LTD
550WestC Street #I750
San Diego,CA92101
8
212-040-53 Monarch CommunitiesofCA
30012IvyGlenn Drive #270
Laguna NigueLCA92677
9 214-140-07
Sambi Seaside Heights LLC
8649 Firestone Blvd.
DowneyCA90241
IO
214-140-13 and 39
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad,CA92008
11
214-300-09
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad,CA92008
12
212-040-52 UDC Homes, Inc.
438Camino Del RioSouth
#112-B
San Diego,CA92108-3546
Page 1 L-1034
PROPERTY OWNER’S LIST - EMERALD RIDGE WEST (CT 95-03)
13
212-040-54
MSP California
650 S. Cherry Street #435
Denver, CO 80222
Note: There are no occupants within 100’ of Emerald Ridge West.
Page 2 L-1034
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: October 13.1996
DESCRIPTION:
Request for a Site Development Plan Amendment. Hillside Development Permit
Amendment and Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of 61 single
family homes on previously subdivided lots in the R-1-7500-Q zone and to revise the
architecture, size, floor plan, and location of inclusionary second dwelling units.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone: on property located within the
Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan area west of Hidden Valley
Road between Palomar Airport Road and Camino de Las Ondas.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No. 1,103.91
acres’* on record of survey map no. 5715. filed in the office of the County Recorder of
San Diego Counv, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of Ranch0 Aqua
Hedionda, according to map thereof No. 823. filed in the Office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County. November 16. 1896. a portion of which lies within the City of
Carlsbad, all being in the County of San Diego, State of California. also described as
Parcel 2 in that certain certificate of compliance recorded June 27. 1996 as File No. 1996-
0232496 of official records.
APPLICANT:
Ladwig Design Group Inc.AJDC Homes, 438 Camino De1 Rio South, Suite 112-B, San
Diego, California 92 108
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Planning Commission in the
Council Chambers. 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive. Carlsbad, California, on February 5, 1997 at
6:00 p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described
and a staff recommendation given. followed by public testimony, questions and a decision.
Copies of the staff report will be available on or after January 30, 1997.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Anne
Hysong at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m.. Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009,
(619) 438-l 161. extension 4477.
2075 Las Palmas Dr. * Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1161. FAX (G19) 438-0894 @
APPEALS
If you challenge the Site Development Plan Amendment. Hillside Development Plan
Amendment and/or Coastal Development Permit in court. you may be limited to raising onl!.
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 prior to the public hearing.
1. Anneals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council.
appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the
Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
0 This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area. q This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the
Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a
Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 3 111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200. San Diego. California
92108-1725.
CASE FILE: SDP 95-06(A)/HDP 95-06(A)/CDP 96-07
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
PUBLISH: JANUARY 23.1997
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
SDP 95-6tAYHDP 956fAVCDP 96-7
DESCRIPTION:
COMPLETE DATE: October 13,1996
Request for a Site Development Plan Amendment, Hillside Development Permit, and
Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of 61 single family homes on
previously subdivided lots in the R-1-7500-Q zone and to revise the architecture, size,
floor plan, and location of inclusionary second dwelling units.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone on property located within the
Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan area, west of Hidden Valley
Road, between Palomar Airport Road and Carnino de Las Ondas.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Description No. 1, 103.91
Acres” on record of survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of
San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot “G” of Ranch0 Agua
Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County, November 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the City of
Carlsbad, all being in the County of San Diego, State of California, also described as
Parcel 2 in that certain Certificate of Compliance recorded June 27, 1996, as File No.
1996-0232496 of official records.
APPLICANT:
Ladwig Design Group Inc.KJDC Homes, 438 Camino De1 Rio South, Suite 112-B, San
Diego, California, 92 108.
APPELLANT:
Michael J. Schlehuber, 2809 Atadero Court, Carlsbad, CA 92009.
A public hearing to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of the above
referenced project will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on Tuesday, April 8, 1997, at 6:00 p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described
and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision.
Copies of the staff report will be available on or after April 4, 1997.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Anne
Hysong at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009,
(619) 438-l 161, extension 4477.
APPEALS
If you challenge the Site Development Plan, Hillside Development Plan and/or Coastal
Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or
someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk’s Office at, or prior to , the public hearing.
1. Anneals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council,
appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the
Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
III This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
0 X This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the
Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a
Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 3 111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California
92108-1725.
CASE FILE: SDP 95-6(A)/HDP 95-6(A)/CDP 96-7
CASE NAME: Emerald Ridge West
PUBLISH: March 29,1997
EMERALD RIDGE-WEST
SDP 9506(A)/HDP 9506(A)/
CDP 96-07
PROOF OF PUBLIC. .ON
(2010 4% 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have beer
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State c
California, under the dates of June 30, 1989
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen)
and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate)
for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad,
Solana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; that the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller than
nonpareil), has been published in each regular and
entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
March 29, 1997
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Oceanisde
Dated at California, this
of March, 1997 d
/
31st day
_____ ~e$.G$$ --------
)r
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space is the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
Notice of public Hearing-APpeaIL
~-~----------~------~-----
I -)i.
i’4OTlCk QF PUBLlC HEARING ’
APPEAL.- EhlERALD;RIDOE W&T
SDP 95-6(Aj/HbP 9CG(A!/CDt’ 96-7
COMPLETE DATE; October 13,lSoc DESCRIPTION: Request for a Site Dev&pmenl Plan Anwidment, Hillsidg Davelop”& Permit. and Coastal Deveiopmenf Pwmit to allow the cwstructioq of 61 sl”gk family homes on p+wiously subdivided lots in the R:l-75&X1 zone and ta revise the architecture, size. Row pbn. and location of inclusionaty end dwelling unit%
LOCATION: TN5 pmject I$ wKhl”‘6m city of Carkbad$ .@dal zone an prupwty lc&e+i within the i@w 20 Specaie plea and Losal Fadliis Mahagemem Pie” a@, . we&$ Hidderr Wley Raad. b&we” P&mar Alrpvrt Road a”d Cami”~ I% La8
LEGAL DEStRIPTiON: All that certain parcel of bnd delineated and desigrated as %es&ptM Na. .t! 103.91 Acres” on recordof survey Map Np. $715, fited itithe GlIic~ of the County Recorder of San Diego County, decembw 19.196B. being a pm’t& of Lot ‘6” of Rancho Agua Hedlanda. accordI?@ Map thereof Na 623, Rled I”
the Oftice of the County Recorder of San DQ C$~$,$wenen$~~~~; porti d which llqs with@ We Ctty of Cads Diga State of Calbmia. al&o described as Pat’& 2% that cef@iwCW%cate of Compliant recorded June 27, 1996, asl?lep, f9@-0232496 ofoflicial mmrds.
APPLlW Lad&g Design Group I”c.AlDC Homes, 436 Cmnbur Ckl Rb S&h, $iuite 1?2- 6, San DIego, Califor”la, 92106.
APPELLANT: ’ Michael J. S&ehuk 2809 Atadem Court, .CartsbM. + 92009.
A pub&z hearing to arnsider the appeal of the Pkmning Commission ap~oval of tie above refereoced project will be held by the Cii Coundl in the Coundl Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Cadsbad. California. M Tuesday. April 6. 1997. at 6:M) pm.
-are~erdiaUy&~t~bib~&-pfuvids&~ makers with any pml or written mmmedts they r&y havd mgafdi”g the p@bct. TW project will be degczibed and a staff rexemmendation given, blkwed by publii testimony; questions and a de&ion. Copies of 61e staff report will be available cm or after &nil 4. 1997.
Kyou h&e any questions, or would like to be notlkd of the dedslo”, pleasa oontaci Anne Hysang at the City of Cerlsbad Planning D@artment. Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5XIp.m.. Friday 6:W am, to 5:CQ p.m. at 2076 Las Palmas Ddw, Cadsbad, Cali(or”ia 92009. (619) 436,-1161. ekWisfo” 4477.
APPEALS If ybu chal!e”ge the SRe development Plan, HillsIde Development Plan and/or Coastal Dweiopment Permit in court, you ma be knited tu raising onty those losues iaisad by you or soi#me else at Ihe pubI& eanng dasaibed in’ this notice, or iri witten K mwndense delivered to the Cl%y of CarlsbadXXy Clerk’s Offica at, or prior fo. the public lMari”9.
1. de&bn is appealable b the CRy Ccunbll,
the Planning Ccmmissicm. ten (10) cabndar days after a decision Ly
2. Coastal CcmmiPdon Appealebie Project
p This site is hkated within the Coastal Zone AppealaMe+%ea.
@ +hiS sit& is not located withintie Coastal Zpnr, AppM@fa Area.
Where the decision is appealabka to the Coastal Commission. appeals must ix Med wM the Coastal Commission within ten (19) Working days after the Coastal Comtissb” ha9 r&&fed a Notice of Final Action horn the Cii of Cadsbad. Applicanfs will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal psrbd will conclude. The San Diega office of the Coastal Commission is !oxded at 3111 Camlno Llel Rio. North, Sulk 200. San Diego. California 921081725.
CASE FILE: SDP 96-6(A)/HDF 9$-6(AYCDP 96-7
CASE NAMF Emerald R&e W,ekt
Lealw&~a9,199_7_
-
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
DATE:
TELEPHONE (819) 434-2808
Februarv 18, 1997
TO: Bobbie Hoder, Planning Dept.
FROM: Karen Kundtz, Clerks Office
RE: EMERALD RIDGE WEST - SDP 95-6(A)
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.) L !
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
--________------------------------------------------------------------------
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of .
Signature Date
_. 02/18/'07 16:47 'EfSlo 558 4042
.
SPELQLIN & Co.
SI'111.\I*\N - ____.---.___: __..! ..-... .
a001
Facsin~ite Cwer Sheet
Company : C+ 0-f Carr Mad \ I
FaxNo. w- vu37
From: /II IKE SCtiL~kwx
Re:
Total Pages (induding cover sheet): 2 -------------------------------------------------m--u--------- --------------------------------------------------------------
Spclmarl & Co., Inc.
9191 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 175 j San Dicgo, Catifornh 92122
(619) M-4949 1 Fax(619) 5584942
02/18/'07 16:47 f%alo 668 4042
FEB-18-97 ‘NE 3108 PM AOUSLUrr h RED, SPELAiAN & co.
FAX NO. 6192202037
I (we) appeal the decision of the PI Qnninq Co mmiSSra~
to the Carisbad City Councit. J
Date of Decision you are appeeling: f e~rucwq 5, IS47 I
S_ubkct PF SPEClFlG tiarnpk Hthe a&n is a City Engineer’s Oeccislon, please say so, If a pr@ct has
multiple elemer~b, (such as a Genera! Plan Amendmerk Negative l%YaraUon, Specific Plen, etc.) pteass
lirt them all. If you oniy wnt to appeal B part of the whore action, ple8se state that hers.
I re9uivemeYl* 4~ tke EmuhevA\& R&e WtZSt gw~icef, J
U f . 4
~on(sl form: l Pfwr8 Nob. Falkn to @pal& 8 mason may rrmdt In dotvIal of
On l ppell, and yau will br, limited to the grounda l tstmd blrn whrn prumntlng your eppmd.
BE SPEGIF1C How did ths decision maker err? What about the decision is incenslslent wlfh state or iocel
laws, plens, or poky?
%Z
iy cR^vye djrCkQ\inivdiOnUfkhk reJiar3.
( 1 619 s50-499,9 ‘“)
PHONE NO.
2805 M-fq?Elko CT
ADDRESS: Stt’cet FJarBr 8 Numb;
2110 I47 c.Afu$ATJ CA 4=w
DATE City, state, zip cede
1200 Car&bad Wtage Drive - Carlsbad, Califomia 92009-l 989 - (819) 434-2808 @
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
DATE:
Mttu uf (Ilarlshati
February 18, 1997
TELEPHONE (619) 434-2808
TO: Bobbie Hoder, Planning Dept.
FROM: Karen Kundtz, Clerk's Office
RE: EMERALD RIDGE WEST - SDP 954(A)/HDP 95-6(A)/CDP 96-7
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.) ;
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of .
Signature Date
CITY’QF CARLSBAD - .# 1200 CARLSBAD ,rLLAGE DiikiE CARLSBAD, Cn-tLIFORNIA 92008 . 434-2867
---r
^, i’- !-- p.. 1, I \ -I-- i r
REC’D FROM , /J ,i ! 1 ::I’ G. I \ ,
ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION I AMOUNT
,: .' i' K! "5 9 ,r.
1 "/ ,..+ ( (y L-1 ',: \ j /' I , '- /IF C:.;_i i c.-. f i.. . I
c-‘ I , (’ / I .’ : ,’ ’ I
RECEIPT NO. ~~~3$ NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY TOTAL I @ PrilKmd on recyckd paper. CASH REGIST_ER
.
.
Cit.y of Carlsbad . .
I (We) appeal the decision of the PI m-mnq Gl mrlJr5’i/ am
to the Carlsbad City Council.
Oate of Decision you are appealing: !&-&7 f LICC ~4 5 I J 94 7 I -of ESPFC.IFIC. Examples: If the actlon is a City Engineer’s Decision. please say SO. If a project has
multiple elements, (such as a General Plan Amendment, Negative Declaration. Specltlc Plan, etc.) plea3k
list them all. If you only want to appeal a part of the whole &on, please state that here. - At the Planning Commission meeting on February 5, 1997, a decision was made that the amendment to the
Emerald Ridge West project could be approved by the Pl$nning Commission and the amendment was
subsequently approved. As a result of the Planning Commission’s action on February 5’h, the amendment to
the Emerald Ridge West Project no longer requires City Council approval, unless the decision is appealed to
the Council.
The original Site Development Plan (SDP 9506) for the Emerald Ridge West Project which included the
construction of the total of nine (9) second dwelling units to satisfy the developer’s lnclusionary Housing
Requirement with the purchase of one housing credit within the Villa loma Project to meet the 3 bedroom
requirement. As approved, SDP 9506 included prototyp!cal preliminary building elevations for units
containing second dwelling units, floor plans and the spkific location of each of the nine (9) second swelling
units to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement.
The proposed project, currently amends the previous approval by: 1) proposing architectural elevations for all
units which differ from 640 square feet, 1 bedroom to a 439 square foot studio unit; and 3) relocating two of
the second dwelling units to different lots within the subdivision. The developer again intends to purchase
one housing credit in the Villa Loma Project to meet the b bedroom requirement.
1 for AD& . Ploaso Note l F~IIWO to rpodty P remain mmy result ln d@nlal of
the appoml, and you will bo llmitod ta the grounds stated hero when prommntlng your rppoaL
BE SPECIFK How did the decision maker err? What about the decision is inconsistent with state or local
laws, plans, or pollcy?
Purpose of the appeal is to ascertain that the City applicaiion of&hool%tigation Policy is consistent with the
agreement between Carlsbad Unified School District and the applicant.
Carlsbad Unified School District believes there has been inadequate input which ignored consequences to
CUSD and we relied on the full approval process and sequence to finalize the project through further
6’4, 43+ -(l(&zG
PHONE N6.
c= AJt~w treet Name 8 Number
FL26 1% &xD. czd . DATE I - State,
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carkbad. Cahfornra 92b08-1989 l (619) 434-2808
ZO’d 800’oN ZP:TT L6‘8T 833 L86TQ$P:III E)NISWHC)?!nd
March 19,1997
.
TO: CITY MANAGER
VIA: -Financial Management Director
FROM: Finance Director
APPEAL OF EMERALD RIDGE WEST PROJECT
f
The attached memo from the City Clerk explains the current status of the
appeal by the Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD) and Housing
Commission Michael Schlehuber. After researching the situation, my
recommendation is to refund the appeal fee to CUSD and to request Mr.
Schlehuber to submit the appeal fee if he is still interested in having the appeal
move forward. Please indicate your approval or disapproval of the
recommendation below and we will process it accordingly.
Thank you.
Lisa Hildabrand
Citv Manaver Resolution and/or Comments:
+2-s7 pJw duA-Aiu & Ro, jJ4 \ L 2-J c-L-L& -Ma
%
0, A--J--Lrlp” - +$..&,#zL+% A/#kuhbsw”“’ 3
--+i- -----a ~J-Q-,a%“-
4JLduAcc (+f-.
March 14,1997
TO: LISA HILDABRAND, FINANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: City Clerk
RE: CUSD REQUEST FOR REFUND
The appeal of the Emerald Ridge West project to City Council has been very unusual, and
the Clerk’s office was directed by the City Attorney’s Office on how to handle the
situation. As a result, following is the scenario:
1. The Planning Commission took action on Emerald Ridge West on 2/5/97
2.
3.
The Clerk’s Office received a call on 2/6/97 from Housing Commissioner requesting
info on appeal process. They were told process and fee amount.
The Clerk’s Office received call from City Attorney’s Office stating if one party
appeals something, we should not collect fee twice, but if another party wants to
appeal, we should take their appeal form.
4. The Clerk’s Office received call from CUSD regarding appeal process and fee.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
More confusing phone calls were received from both sides, and all were told that the
first appellant to file had to pay!the fee.
On the last day for the appeal to be tiled (and following many more confusing phone
calls from Housing Commissioner(s) and School District), Mr. Blair appeared at
counter and wrote personal check and filed an appeal.
Shortly thereafter on the same day, a second appeal form was received from Michael
Schlehuber, a member of the Housing Commission, and no fee was charged per the
Attorney’s instructions.
Over time, more confusing phone calls were received. In addition, the Clerk’s Office
was instructed by the Attorney’s office that if the CUSD withdrew their appeal, it
should still move forward because the second appellant was appealing a different
issue (even though no fee was paid).
On February 27, 1997, Mr. Blair appeared at the counter and presented the Clerk’s
Office with a letter withdrawing their appeal and requesting a refund of the appeal
fee.
Page 2 - Request for refund
This is coming to you because basically it’s a “Request for Refund”, but there is
insufficient room on the form to explain the entire situation. Section 3.32.030 of the
Municipal Code says written requests for refunds shall be filed with the Finance Director.
The Finance Director is to then investigate the request and forward a recommendation to
the City Manager. In summary, if the refund is granted, then we still have Housing
Commissioner Michael Schlehuber’s appeal moving forward with no appeal fee being
paid. If it is not granted, then the School District has paid for the Housing
Commissioner’s appeal.
If you need any more details or information on this matter, please feel free to call me.
&%E%
City Clerk
Attachment: Letter from CUSD
- arlsbad Unified School District
801 Pine Avenue. Carlsbad, CA 92008
(619) 729-9291 l FAX (619) 729-9685 . . .a world class district
February 27, 1997
City Clerk’s Office
City of Carlsbad
1200CarlsbadVillageDrive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: Appeal filed February 18, 1997
Please accept this letter as a formal request that the appeal filed on February 18, 1997 regarding
the Planning Commission’s decision of February 5, 1997 be hereby withdrawn. A copy of the
Appeal Form is attached. In addition, I request that the $490 appeal fee be refunded.
The District Offtces were closed February 14-17, 1997, due to the President’s holidays.
Consequently we only had a few hours on February 18th in which to assess the Planning
Commission’s decision and its impact on the mitigation of school facility needs. Unfortunately,
we were unable to gather all the information needed, and therefore had no choice but to file the
appeal.
Although we are lifting the appeal, we respectfully request that the City of Carlsbad require all
developments to be processed through regular channels, which allows review by all applicable
departments. This will help the District ensure that all school facility mitigation requirements are
correctly and appropriately fXfilled.
Thank you for your assistance on this matter.
Business Services
JHB/jt