HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-15; City Council; 14267; AVIARA LOT 308 MP 177-S| GPA 96-06| LCPA 96-13h
n m
hW IO
cr) mL4
a VI
*a, ou 2s
c -rl
ual sa, 4m 0- VI
G
.rl OE
2- co 50
u am
au 00
5A a C 50 G au s * .li -M
4-s dal
ma I
z .s *a Od z -rl 5 ale
Gal a& Gu
hL) 0 *r( h a& @VI
3u
00
L)
au -4
Ua,
5
u Mu
-4 ea aJ r\ a. dGC0 .I4 a, 4 0 6.4 cam 3u oms) v a5
h a \ m rl \ h
2
0 - k e3 4
J
5 0 0
i3
T.
"? 1 5 -4'
DEPT.HD. :
(FITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEN P A BILL
AB# /qi2b? TITLE:
MTG. 3-15-97 MP 177(S)/GPA 96-061LCPA 96-13 CITY ATTY. -
DEPT. PLN CITY MGR -
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. NS-4lY , amending the Aviara Master Plan ani
, APPROVING the Master Plan Amendment, Gene Resolution No. 9 1 - 5.31;
Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment for the Aviara Lot 308 land use chanc
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On June 24, 1997, the City Council heard a proposal for amendments to the Aviara Ma
Carlsbad General Plan and Local Coastal Program to allow the development of a single far
on Aviara's Lot 308 next to the golf course. This item was continued to July 15, 199i
Council, staff, the applicant, and project opponents to further discuss the potential issues.
The proposal involves a Master Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amen
establish permitted land uses and development standards for Lot 308. Also a Gen
Amendment is proposed to change the Land Use Designation on Lot 308 from Open Spac
Low Medium Density Residential (RLM) and to redesignate a separate 14.4 acre parcel in t
Master Plan from RLM to OS in order to balance the total amount of General Plan Opei
The recommended General Plan Amendment constitutes a portion of the first Gen
Amendment for 1997 and, if approved, will be consolidated with previous General Plan An
agenda items.
On May 21, 1997, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and vote
recommend approval of the Lot 308 land use change. At the Commission hearings, t
public testimony from several Aviara residents and homeowners about the development of
These residents own property within either Aviara Point (PA 13) or Sandpiper (PA 25), wt
the ridges to the east and west of the golf course and Lot 308, respectively. They were c
that there was inadequate disclosure about nearby development by the selling agents v
purchased their homes. Since disclosure of surrounding development to potential homebi
purely civil matter, it is outside of City regulation. To maintain good planning practice, Sta
Planning Commission are recommending that the improvements within Lot 308 take
intrusive form, that being one single family home.
ENVIRQN M ENTAL REV1 EW:
The potential impacts of the proposed action was already evaluated in two previous envii
documents: EIR 83-02(A) for the Aviara Master Plan and MElR 93-01 for the General Plar
The proposal is, therefore, within the scope of the prior ElRs and no new envii
documentation nor Public Resources Code 21 081 findings are required. All feasible
measures identified in the previous ElRs which are appropriate to this proposal hi
incorporated into the project. A Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance was issued
noticed on April 5, 1997, and no comments were received.
FlSCAlL IMPACT:
The fiscal impacts to the City are negligible. The Lot 308 annexation has no fiscal impac
development fees will be collected at time of building permit issuance and the additior
AVIARA LOT 308
L
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA a ILL NO. Jvj Z[Q ? 0
already accommodated in the Zone 19 Local Facilities Management Zone. There may be i
increase in property tax revenue based upon the increased property values of a developed
EXHIBITS:
1.
2. Ordinance No. A/s - 41 Y
3. Location Map
4.
5.
6.
City Council Resolution No. 9 7 -535
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4096, 4097, 4098
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 21, 1997
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 21, 1997
Y ?
t 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
l3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1 8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 97-53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MASTER PLAN
AMENDMENT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT FOR THE
AVIARA LOT 308 LAND USE CHANGE, LOCATED lN THE
SOUTHWEST QUADRANT.
CASE NAME: AVIARA LOT 308
CASE NO.: MP 177(S)lGPA 96-06lLCPA 96-1 3
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the
Commission did, on May 2 1, 1997, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed
consider a Master Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Local Coasta
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 24* da
1997, and the 15th day of July, 1997, held duly advertised public hearings to cor
Master Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amen
at that time received recommendations, objections, protests, comments of all persons
in or opposed to Mp 177(S)/GPA 96-06LCPA 96-13; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Cou
City of Carlsbad as follows:
1.
2.
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the City Council APPROVES City Council Resolution No. 97-5:
that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as SI
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4096,4097 and 4098 on file wi
Clerk and made a part hereof by reference are the findings and condit
City Council.
That an additional condition as stated at the City Council meeting b
read as follows:
3.
“Development of the single family homes on Lot 3C
restricted to a maximum building height of 25 feet to the peak of t
determined by section 21.04.065 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.”
1/11
,
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
0 0
4. That the application for Master Plan Amendment (MT 177(S)) to
permitted uses and development standards for a 1.2 acre lot in Aviara
Area 13 (Lot 308) for property located south of Aviara Parkway
Batiquitos Drive and Aviara Drive in LFMP Zone 19 is approved as
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4096 on file with the City (
incorporated herein by reference.
That the General Plan Amendment (GPA 96-06) to change a 1.2 acre pz
Open Space to Residential Low Medium Density and to change a 14.4 a
from Residential Low Medium Density to Open Space on property loc:
of Aviara Parkway between Poinsettia Lane and Black Rail Court in LE
19 is approved as shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 40'
with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference.
That the Major Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 96-13
implementing ordinance of the Mello I, Mello I1 and East Batiquitos Lai
Properties segment (Aviara Master Plan) to revise the permitted lar
property located south of Aviara Parkway between Batiquitos Drive a
Drive in LFMP Zone 19 is approved as shown in Planning Cc
Resolution No. 4098 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated
reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of I
5.
6.
Carlsbad on the 15th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard, Kulchin,
NOES: None
ATTEST:
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
ORDINANCE NO. NS-414
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE AVIARA
MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO LOT 308 IN
PLANNING AREA 13 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY
IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 19.
CASE NAME: AVIARA LOT 308
CASE NO. : MP 1776)
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as foll
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California ha:
and considered a Master Plan Amendment for future development of the site; and
WHEREAS, the Aviara Master Plan was adopted by City Council Ord
9839 on December 22, 1987 and constitutes the zoning for the subject property; and
WHEREAS, the Aviara Master Plan has been amended a total of six
since original adoption, most recently for MP 177(Q) through City Council Ordinan
on July 16, 1996; and
f WHEREAS, after procedures in accordance with requirements of lav
Council has determined that the public interest indicates that said plan amendment be a
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad does
follows:
SECTION I: That the Aviara Master Plan MP 177 as amended to datc
amended by the Master Plan Amendment relative to Aviara Lot 308 in Planning Ar
177(S), dated May 21, 1997, attached herein and incorporated by reference herein, is
The Master Plan Amendment shall constitute the zoning for this property and all deve
the property shall conform to the plan.
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
SECTION 11: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Comi
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4096 shall also constitute the findings and cor
the City Council.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty day:
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and caul
published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsli
fifteen days after adoption. Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not bl
until approved by the California Coastal Commission.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Car
Council on the 15th day of July 1997, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of 1
Carlsbad on the day of 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES: 1
ABSENT:
AB STAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
AILETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2-
Ln
@
AVIARA LGT 308
MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06/LCPA 96-1 3
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
r-
0 0 EX
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4096
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT TO
ESTABLISH PERMITTED USES AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR A 1.2 ACRE LOT IN AVIARA PLANNING
AREA 13 (LOT 308) AND ANNEX AZURE COVE AS A NEW
AVIARA PLAN”G AREA FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF AVIARA PARKWAY BETWEEN
BATIQUITOS DRIVE AND AVIARA DRIVE IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 19.
CASENAME: AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE
CASE NO: h4P 1776)
WHEREAS, Aviara Land Associates and Brookfield Carisbad, ”Dc
ANNEXATION
has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned
Land Associates and Brookfield Carlsbad, “Owners”, described as
Lot 308 of Carlsbad Tract 85-35, Unit E, according to Map No.
12413, filed June 29, 1989 in the Office of the County
Recorder, County of San Diego and all of Carlsbad Tract No
89-19, according to Map No. 12902, filed December 11,1991 in
the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Diego, State
of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Mi
Amendment as shown on Exhibit “X‘ dated May 21,1997, attached, Master Plan An
MIP 177(S), as provided by MP 177 and its amendments and Chapter 21.38 of the
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of M
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered (
relating to the Master Plan Amendment.
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
WHEREAS, on December 8, 1987, the City Council approved M
described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2594.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cc
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Master Plan Amendment MP 177
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed development as described by Master Plan Amendment MP
consistent with the provisions of the General Plan and applicable specific pla
the development standards and design criteria for the development on LC
consistent with other development standards contained within Aviara
Area 13, the redesignation of 14.4 acres of new open space is consistent
General Plan Open Space requirement of increased quality and quanti0
Space, and the open space preservation and development scheme of the Ai
development is consistent with preservation and development within th
Master Plan.
That all necessary public facilities can be provided concurrent with need and
provisions have been provided to implement those portions of the Capital Imy
Program applicable to the subject property, in that all public facilities havc
been installed for the Azure Cove planning area and are conditioned to bc
prior to, or concurrent with, development of Lot 308.
That the residential and open space portions of the community will con
environment of sustained desirability and stability, and that it will be in harmor
provide compatible variety to the character of the surrounding area, and thal
proposed for public facilities, such as schools, playgrounds and parks, are ac
serve the anticipated population and appear acceptable to the public authoritit
jurisdiction thereof, in that the geographic distribution of residential and op
portions of the master plan will continue to be compatible with adjacent
the goal of the master plan to find a balanced mix of uses and the Azi
development has a balance of residential and open space lands which is c
with the objectives and standards of the Aviara Master Plan.
That the proposed commercial and industrial uses will be appropriate in area,
and overall design to the purpose intended, that the design and development are !
create an environment of sustained desirability and stability, and that such de\
2.
3.
4.
PC RES0 NO. 4096 -2-
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
will meet performance standards established by Title 21, in that no comE
industrial lands are proposed to be added or deleted with this Ma
Amendment and approval of this Master Plan Amendment does not prc
continuation or provision of the above referenced uses.
That in the case of institutional, recreational, and other similar nonresidential
development will be proposed, and surrounding areas are protected fkom a
effects from such development, in that no adjustment to the distrit
institutional, recreational or other non-residential uses is proposed and ap
this Master Plan Amendment does not preclude the continuation of t
referenced uses.
That the streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to
anticipated traffic thereon, in that the existing local streets of Azure Cove,
through CT 89-19, remain adequate to accommodate the residential traffi
single family Lot 308 is conditioned to demonstrate adequate access
Planning Area 15.
That any proposed commercial development can be justified economically at th
proposed and will provide adequate commercial facilities of the types neede
location proposed, in that no commercial development is proposed with thi
Plan Amendment and approval of this amendment does not preclude dev
of any commercially designated areas.
That the area surrounding the development is or can be planned and
coordination and substantial compatibility with the development, in that a
surrounding residential, recreational and open space areas adjacent to Az
and Lot 308 are completely developed or, in the case of Planning Area 15,
developed in accordance with the Aviara Master Plan.
That appropriate measures are proposed to mitigate any adverse environmental
noted in the adopted Environmental Impact Report for the project, in that the 1
within the scope of EIR 83-02(A), EIR 89-01 and MEIR 93-01 and
environmental document nor Public Resources Code 21081 findings are 1
All feasible mitigation measures identified in the previous EIRs wl
appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby RECOMMEND APPROVAL of th
Plan Amendment for the project entitled Aviara Lot 308/Azure Cove Annexat
177(S) (Exhibit “X” dated May 21, 1997, attached and incorporated by this I
subject to the conditions herein set forth.) Staff is authorized and directed to
require Developer(s) to make, all corrections and modifications to the Ma
Amendment documents as necessary, to make them internally consisteni
conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur substsll
PC RES0 NO. 4096 -3-
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1 o
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially diff
this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developers shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal. state.
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Approval of MP 177(S) is granted subject to the approval of GPA 96-06, LC
and ZC 97-03. MP 177(S) is subject to all conditions contained in
Commission Resolutions No. 4097, 4098 and 4117 for GPA 96-06, LCPA !
ZC 97-03, respectively.
Prior to issuance of any Planning Director approved Site Development
development of Lot 308, the developer shall submit a preliminary landscal
the Planning Director for review and approval that indicates the locat
required fire suppression zones on Lot 308.
2.
3.
4.
Engineering:
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for Lot 308, the developer shall der
and receive approval for the method and design of sewer, water, access a
service to this lot. The design and method of providing these utilities
subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Planning Director.
General:
6. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their ten
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have thi
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or Mer condition issua
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of o
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted;-institute and prosecute lit
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viol
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s ap
this Master Plan Amendment.
Code Reminders:
7. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectio
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
...
..’
PC RES0 NO. 4096 -4-
..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11 10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of May 19!
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas, €
Monroy, Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
c -/s 2 -
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
\ * kbJa&&&a
' MICHAEL J. HOYZMIUER
Planning Director
-5- PC RES0 NO. 4096
1 a 0
PLANNING AREA 13: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DESCRIPTION:
This 65.4 acre planning area consists of a private gated community of single
family residential homes. The neighborhood in general is boounded by the golf
course to the east and west. Access is provided to both Alga Road and Pacific
Rim Drive. Home sites generally are located along the central ridge line. Th
remainder of the site will be reserved as open space.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: R-1-8
All development in Planning Area 13 shall conform to the standards of the R-1 one-family residential zone (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 21.10) unless otherwise noted in this chapter.
USE ALLOCATION:
Maximum of 72 residential units. (1.1 DU/AC)
PERMITTED USES:
Single family detached residential units are allowed in this planning area.
SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
Heiqht :
The maximum height allowed in this planning area is 30 feet to the peak of the
roof. All heights shall be determined per section 21.04.065 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
Lot Size:
The minimum lot size for Planning Area 13 shall be 8,000 square feet. The
minimum lot width shall be 70 feet. At least 15% of the lot area shall be
reserved for open space. This open space shall be located in the rear yard anc
shall not exceed a gradient of 5%.
Setbacks :
The minimum front yard setback for split-level lots shall be 20 feet. All othf setbacks shall maintain a minimum 25 foot front yard setback. For units that
include side loaded garages, a minimum 20 foot setback is allowed (for the
garage) as long as the section of the garage within the 25 foot setback is no
greater in width than 40% of the allowed building frontage (lot width minus sid yard setbacks); and that fhe ground floor habitable portion of the building maintain a setback a minimum of 40 feet. This reduced front yard setback is allowable for side loaded garages only. No living area is allowed inside or
above the structure within the reduced setback area. setback shall be 10 feet. All other setbacks shall be per Chapter 21.10 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Parkinq :
Parking shall conform to the standards of Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municip Code.
SPECIAL DESIGN CRITERIA:
Des iqn :
All community-wide design standards described in Section A of Chapter IV shall 1
embodied in the architecture of this planning area.
guidelines shall also be included for this planning area:
The minimum side yard
The following specific
* Development shall only be allowed along the ridgetop of this planning area except for Lot 308.
121
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4097
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND
OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN,
CHANGING A 1.2 ACRE PARCEL FROM OPEN SPACE TO
RESIDENTIAL LOW MEDIUM DENSITY AND CHANGING A
14.4 ACRE PARCEL FROM RESIDENTIAL LOW MEDIUM
DENSITY TO OPEN SPACE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED WITHIN THE AVIARA MASTER PLAN, SOUTH
OF AVIARA PARKWAY BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE
AND BLACK RAIL COURT IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 19.
CASENAME: AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE
ANNEXATION
CASE NO: GPA 96-06
WHEREAS, Aviara Land Associates, “Developer”, has filed a
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Aviara Land A
“Owner”, described as
Lot 308 of Carlsbad Tract 85-35, Unit E, according to Map No.
12413, filed June 29, 1989, in the Office of the County
Recorder, County of San Diego and Lot 36 of Carlsbad Tract
No. 90-37, according to Map No. 13188, filed in the Office of
the County Recorder, County of San Diego, State of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Gen
Amendment as shown on Exhibit “Y” dated May 21, 1997, attached, Genei
Amendment (GPA 96-06), as provided in Chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Coc
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of May 199
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all t
andl arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a
relating to the General Plan Amendment.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
m e
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A)
B)
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the
Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of General Plan Amend1
96-06, exchanging open space and residential low medium density
designations for two parcels, as shown on Exhibit “Y” dated May
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to
necessary corrections and modifications to the General Plan An
documents, as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in c
with final action on the project, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The proposed amendment to the land use element is consistent with g
objectives of the various elements of the General Pian in that it assists in
and retaining open space while still providing for an orderly balance of ianc
That the proposed open space area is equal to or greater than the area depict
Official Open Space and Conservation Map, as shown on Exhibit “Y” dated
1997, the total gain in General Plan Open Space is 13.2 acres.
That the proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or grc
that depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, in that
proposed to be removed from Open Space contains no native vegetation
area to be added to Open Space contains healthy native habitat and
successful revegetation area.
That the proposed open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space and Con
Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as shown on thr
Open Space Map, since there is Official Open Space to the east and sout
proposed open space.
2.
3.
4.
Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the
Plan Amendment for the project entitled Aviara Lot 308/Azure Cove Annt
GPA 96-06 (Exhibit “Y” dated May 21, 1997, attached and incorporated
reference), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and dj
make, or require Developers to make, all corrections and modifications to the
Plan Amendment documents as necessary, to make them internally consisten
conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur substar
shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially differ
this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
PC RES0 NO. 4097 -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
e 0
2. Approval of GPA 96-06 is granted subject to the approval of MP 177(S), LC
ZC 97-03. GPA 96-06 is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Cc
Resolutions No. 4096, 4098 and 4117 for MP 177(S), LCPA 96-13 and ,
respectively.
General Conditions:
3. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their tei
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have tl
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuz
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of (
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute li
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their vi0
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s a
this General Plan Amendment.
Code Reminders:
4. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectil
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time o
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
...
...
...
...
...
..I
...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4097 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
W
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of May 19
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas,
Monroy, Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
,/- iy L--
*/< 6
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
\
’ MICHAEL J. HOLUZMILI%R
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 4097 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e @
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4098
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE IMPLEMENTING
ORDINANCE (AVIARA MASTER PLAN) OF THE
CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO REVISE THE
PERMITTED LAND USES AND EXPAND THE BOUNDARY
OF THE AVIARA MASTER PLAN, THEREBY BRINGING
THE DESIGNATIONS ON THE LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM, GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING MAP INTO
CONFORMANCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF
AVIARA PARKWAY BETWEEN AVIARA DRIVE AND
BATIQUITOS DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 19.
CASENAME: AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE
ANNEXATION
CASE NO: LCPA 96- 13
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal
General Program, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conl
and
WHEREAS, Aviara Land Associates and Brookfield Carlsbad, “De\
has filed a verified application for an amendment to the Local Coastal Program des
regarding property owned by Aviara Land Associates and Brookfield Carlsbad, ‘‘I
described as
Lot 308 of Carlsbad Tract 85-35, Unit E, according to Map No.
12413, filed June 29, 1989, in the Office of the County
Recorder, County of San Diego and all of Carlsbad Tract
No.89-19, according to Map No. 12902, filed December 11,
1991, in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San
Diego, State of California
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “X” dated May 21,1997, and attached to P
Commission Resolution No. 4096, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
@ d
Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the Californi;
Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations: and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of May 19
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and argmnents, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review 1
any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on M
1997, and ending on May 6, 1997, staff shall present to the City C
summary of the comments received.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cox
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of LCPA 96-13 based on the following
and subject to the following conditions:
C)
Findings:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all a]
policies of the Mello I, Mello I1 and East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties
of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, in that proposed land use char
compatible with the protection of sensitive coastal resources since mor
habitat is being placed into General Plan Open Space and the developmen1
for Azure Cove matches the provisions of the Aviara Master Plan.
2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello I, Mello I1 and East Ba
Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program is re(
maintain consistency between the Aviara Master Plan and the impie
ordinances of the City’s Local Coastal Program.
PC RES0 NO. 4098 -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
e a
Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby RECOMMEND APPROVAL of tk
Plan Amendment for the project entitled Aviara Lot 308/Azure Cove Anr
LCPA 96-13 (Exhibit “X” dated May 21, 1997, attached to Planning Co
Resolution No. 4096 and incorporated by this reference), subject to the conditic
set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developers to
corrections and modifications to the Local Coastal Program Amendment doc
necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with final act1
project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhi
proposed development substantially different from this approval, shall ri
amendment to this approval.
Approval of LCPA 96-13 is granted subject to the approval of MP 177(S), GI
and ZC 97-03.
Commission Resolutions No. 4096,4097 and 4117 for MP 177(S), GPA 96-0
97-03, respectively.
2.
LCPA 96-13 is subject to all conditions contained in
General Conditions:
3. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their ter
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have th
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issua
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of c
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute lii
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viol
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s a1
this Local Coastal Program Amendment.
Code Reminders:
4. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectic
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time 0:
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
...
...
...
.-.
PC RES0 NO. 4098 -3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11 lo
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
m e
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to tht
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 21st day of May 1997, by the followi
wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioners Compas. I
Monroy, Noble, Savary and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
- ,,/e - : .*-+) : Nf
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CIAJUSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
\
MICHAEL J. H~LZM~LER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 4098 -4-
E) qe City of CARLSBAD Planning Departme d t A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIOI
Item No. @
Application complete date: March 2 1. 1997
Project Planner: Michael Grim 2 Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham
P.C. AGENDA OF: May 21,1997
SUBJECT: MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06LCPA 96-131ZC 97-03 - AVIARA LOT 308/AZUF
COVE ANNEXATION - Request for a General Plan Amendment to change t
designation of a 1.2 acre parcel in the Aviara Master Plan (Lot 308) from Op
Space (OS) to Residential Low Medium (EM), a Master Plan Amendment a
Local Coastal Program Amendment to establish permitted land uses a
development standards for this redesignated residential area within the Aviz
Master Plan and to annex the Azure Cove development into the Aviara Mas1
Plan as a new planning area, and a Zone Change from Single Family Resident
(R-1-7,500-Q) and Open Space (04) to Planned Community (P-C) to mainta
zoning consistency with he Cove and the Aviara Master Plan. The project
located south of Aviara Parkway, between Batiquitos Drive and Aviara Drive
Local Facilities Management Zone 19.
1. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4096, 409
4098 and 41 17, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a Master Plan Amendment MP 177($
General Plan Amendment GPA 96-06, Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 96-13 ar
Zone Change ZC 97-03, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
This proposal involves a General Plan Amendment to redesignate a 1.2 acre parcel (Lot 301
located adjacent to the Aviara Golf Course from OS to EM and a Master Plan Amendment an
Local Coastal Program Amendment to establish permitted land uses and development standarc
for this parcel and to annex Azure Cove, formally known as Brocatto, into the Aviara Mastc
Plan. The project also involves a Zone Change to Planned Community for the Azure COI
development to establish consistency with the Aviara Master Plan. As part of the General Pla
Amendment, 14.4 acres of Planning Area 25 is proposed for redesignation from RLM to OS i
mitigation for the loss of 1.2 acres of open space from Lot 308.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Aviara Land Associates and Brookfield Carlsbad are requesting a General Plan Amendmen
Master Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment and Zone Change. The Gener:
Plan Amendment entails two components, including: 1) changing the land use designation fror
OS to RLM on a 1.2 acre parcel (Lot 308) which is located within Planning Area 13, adjacent t
G
MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06LCP !B 6-13/ZC 97-03 - AVIARA LOT 308/AZ % COVE ANNEXATION
MAY 21,1997
PAGE 2
the Aviara Golf Course, and 2) changing the designation from RLM to OS on a 14.4 acre pa
(Lot 36) located within Planning Area 25 of Aviara. The Master Plan Amendment and LC
Coastal Program Amendment also entail two components, including: 1) establishment
permitted uses and development standards for the proposed residential Lot 308 (included as I
of Planning Area 13), and 2) annexing the Azure Cove development, formally known
Brocatto, into Aviara as a new planning area, namely Planning Area 33. The Zone Cha
involves the redesignation of the Azure Cove development from R-1-7,500-Q and 0-S to P.
The Planned Community Zone is the standard zoning designation for all master plans in the Ci
As shown on the attached location map, Lot 308 is located southwest of Planning Area 15
multifamily development known as Sea Country Homes, immediately adjacent to and east of
5th fairway of the Aviara Golf Course. Lot 36 is located north of the developed portion
Planning Area 25, extending northward to the intersection of Aviara Parkway and Poinser
Lane. The Azure Cove development is located between Aviara and Interstate 5, directly west
Aviara Planning Areas 29 and 30. Since the project can be divided into two distinct elemer
those being Lot 308Lot 36 and Azure Cove, the following project description and backgroL
are also divided to facilitate explanation.
Aviara Lot 308 (PA 13) and Lot 36 (PA 25)
Aviara’s Lot 308 is an isolated, gently sloping, 1.2 acre site located in the north-south trendi
valley containing the 4th and 5th holes of the Four Seasons Aviara golf course. Uphill to the ei
lies the Sea Country Homes multifamily development (PA 15) and the Aviara Point custc
home development (PA 13), and immediately to the west is the golf course. While Lot 308 1.
remained clear of habitat, the slopes between Lot 308 and the surrounding development conti
native vegetation and are contained within lots covered by City open space easements.
Lot 308 was created by the original subdivision (CT 85-35) for the Aviara Master Plan, tht
known as the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort. During the processing of the original mas1
plan and tract map, Lot 308 was overlooked with regard to development standards and desil
criteria in the contents of the master plan because it existed as a separate lot, surrounded by opl
space (i.e. natural open space or golf course) and isolated from the developable portions of ti
surrounding residential planning areas. As a result, Lot 308 was inadvertently not assigned
any particular planning area nor were the permitted uses for the lot clearly described. The fact
the lot being surrounded by open space, its isolation from other residential lots, and the absen
of a specific residential designation for this lot within the master plan, led to a redesignation
the lot to Open Space during the City’s General Plan Update in 1994.
Aviara Land Associates now desires to sell the 1.2 acre lot as a developable, single family parcr
however several actions are required. Since the lot is now designated as Open Space in tl
City’s General Plan, a General Plan Amendment is necessary to designate the parcel for sing
family residential uses (RLM). As discussed in the General Plan Analysis section below,
compensate for the loss of 1.2 acres of Open Space, 14.4 acres of RLM designated land locatc
northwest of Planning Area 25 is proposed to be placed into General Plan Open Space.
addition to these General Plan changes, the Aviara Master Plan requires a minor revision
delete a descriptive statement regarding the exclusive location of Planning Area 13 lots on tl
.
MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06LC m 6-13/ZC 97-03 - AVIARA LOT 3OWAZ d, COVE ANNEXATION
MAY 21, 1997
PAGE 3
ridgetop and clarify the planning area map to clearly show Lot 308 as a residential lot within
13. The lot can be accessed and receive utility service through an easement traversing Plann
Area 15 and, as with other lots in Aviara Point (PA 13), would require an administrative :
development plan review and Planning Director approval of the architectural elevations and t
plan prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. The exact alignment of utilities. si
as sewer and water, will be confirmed during grading and/or building permit review, as requi
by condition number 4 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4096 for MP 177(S).
Azure Cove Annexation
The Azure Cove development is a 72 unit, single family subdivision covering approximatc
23.10 net acres, surrounded by an additional 17.85 acres of open space. The site is zoned R.
7,500-4 and 0-S and designated RLM and RM in the General Plan. The area is bounded
Interstate 5 to the west, Batiquitos Lagoon to the south and Aviara Planning Areas 29 and 30
the east. In December 1990, the City Council approved the single family subdivision, th
known as Brocatto, and its related EIR and Site Development Plan (CT 89-19EIR 89-01/SI
89-07). The project is currently under construction by Brookfield Carlsbad.
Since the Azure Cove development is directly adjacent to the Aviara Master Plan and shar
similar open space types and maintenance responsibilities, the common lands of Azure Co
(17.85 acres of coastal sage scrub and the Batiquitos Lagoon wetlands buffer) were annexed 1
the Aviara Master Homeowner’s Association in late 1996. Subsequent to this HOA annexatic
it became apparent that there were other attributes of Aviara that would be advantageous to t
Azure Cove development, such as customized fire suppression program and project marketir
Aviara’s fire suppression guidelines are more customized to the north Batiquitos Lag01
vegetation and topography than the city-wide regulations, and neighborhoods within Aviara a
afforded a multi-level marketing benefit through the addition of Master Plan advertisir
Therefore, Brookfield Carlsbad is requesting annexation into the Aviara Master Plan.
The proposal is subject to the following regulations:
A. General Plan;
B.
C. Local Coastal Program.
Aviara Master Plan (MP I77 and its amendments); and
IV. ANALYSIS
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analys
section discusses compliance with each of these regulations/policies utilizing both text ar
tables.
ELEMENT
Land Use
Circulation
Open Space
USE CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, PROPOSED USES AND COMPLIAN(
OaTECTIVE OR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
To preserve the City as a desirable
residential, beach and open space
oriented community. Open Space.
Require new development to
construct all facilities needed to
serve development concurrent or 15 and is conditioned to Yes
prior to development.
Project proposes an increase
of 13.2 acres of General Plan
Yes
Lot 308 has an access and
utility easement across PA
demonstrate adequate access
and facilities prior to
building permit issuance.
To provide public access to all open Access trails are contained in
space areas with limited exceptions. the newly designated General
Plan Open Space adjacent to
PA 25.
Quantity and quality of new
open space is greater than
existing open space.
Yes
Revisions to the Official Open
Space and Conservation Map shall
result in increased area and
environmental quality of habitat.
Yes
MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06LCP !mJ 6-13/ZC 97-03 - AVIARA LOT 308/AZ uk COVE ANNEXATION
MAY 21,1997
PAGE 5
B. Aviara Master Plan
One of the goals of the Aviara Master Plan is to preserve the community’s environmer
resources and existing topographic character. The redesignation of Lots 308 and 36 meets t
goal by preserving in General Plan Open Space a 14.4 acre area containing quality habitat
portion of which is a very successful native revegetation area on the external slopes of Plann:
Area 25. The Azure Cove annexation portion meets this intent because over 40 percent of
project area has been set aside for native open space. One of the other goals of the Aviara Mas
Plan is to provide a well-balanced and functional mix of various land uses which will creat
high quality environment. The proposed land use changes will increase the quantity and qual
of open space within the master plan area and, since the Azure Cove development is alrez
balanced between single family residential and open space, annexation into the master plan v
support the goal of a well-balanced community.
In addition to the open space requirements of the master plan, the Azure Cove annexation
consistent with the various provisions of the Aviara Master Plan in that the developmt
standards, design guidelines, housing type and architecture, fencing, entry monumentation, No:
Batiquitos Lagoon Trail access and Site Development Plan approval process for hor
construction are all the same or very similar to the corresponding aspects within the master pl
documents. The site is the only developable lands between Aviara and the Interstate 5 freew
and forms an appropriate western entry to the Aviara Master Plan community. Therefore, i
proposed amendments are consistent with the Aviara Master Plan.
C. Local Coastal Program
The Aviara Master Plan is located within the Mello I, Mello I1 and East Batiquitos Lagoon/HI
Properties segments of the Local Coastal Program, therefore, the proposal is subject to the La
Use Plan and Implementing Ordinances for those segments. The implementing ordinance ,
those portions of the Mello I, Mello I1 and East Batiquitos LagoodHunt Properties segmei
within Avilara is the Aviara Master Plan. This section addresses only conformance with the La
Use Plan, since conformance with the implementing ordinance (the Aviara Master Plan)
addressed in section B above.
The policies of the various Land Use Plans which apply to the proposed amendments involve t
preservation of environmentally sensitive lands. An example of this goal of preservation can
found in the Mello I Land Use Plan which states, “all land uses and intensity of use shall
compatible with the protection of sensitive coastal resources.’’ The proposed exchange of op
space would result in the protection of 14.4 acres of quality native habitat through a General P1
Open Space designation while losing 1.2 acres of a highly disturbed, gently sloping area fi-c
General Plan Open Space. The eventual development on the 1.2 acre parcel would be one sin€
family residence. Therefore, the proposed amendments are consistent with the sensitive coas
resource protection policies of the Local Coastal Program.
,
MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06/LCP @ 6-13/ZC 97-03 - AVIARA LOT 308/AZ !!RE COVE ANNEXATION
MAY 21, 1997
PAGE 6
V. ENVIRONMENTAL &VIEW
Earlier analysis has been conducted on three occasions. First was the Environmental Iml
Report for Brocatto at Batiquitos Shores (EIR 89-01 for CT 89-19), certified on December
1990. This document analyzed all of the potential impacts for the development and occupat
of the 78 unit single family development now known as Azure Cove. Second was
Environmental Impact Report for the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort (EIR 83-02(A)
CT 85-35MP 177, certified on December 8, 1987. This document analyzed all of the poten
impacts for the development and occupation of the over 2,000 unit residential master plan (n
known as Aviara) with its associated 18-hole golf course, resort hotel, sports club i
neighborhood commercial site. Third was the Master Environmental Impact Report for the 1 S
General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), which reviewed the potential impacts of buildout of
City’s General Plan, including transportation and air quality impacts. There will be no additio
significant effects due to this proposal that were not analyzed in the Environmental Imp
Reports and no new mitigation measures or alternatives are required. The project is, therefc
within the scope of the prior EIRs and no new environmental document nor Public Resourl
Code 21081 findings are required. All feasible mitigation measures identified in the previc
EIRs which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project. A Notice
Prior Environmental Compliance was issued and duly noticed on April 5, 1997. and
comments were received.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. Location Map
6. Background Data Sheet
7. Disclosure Statements
8.
9.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4096
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4097
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4098
Planning Commission Resolution No. 41 17
Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance dated April 5, 1997
Environmental Impact Assessment Part I1 dated April 2, 1997.
MG br
* - w City
DISCLOSL'KE ST.\TLMEX'
AF'UCAKTS ST.,'EMEK: CF CISCLCSC;F;E OF CE-AIN OWNEFISWlP ImEa7S ON AC. APO~JCATCNS wwch WIL
2SCZETICNA3Y AaON ON rd PA,? cf TAE C.V COUNCL OR ANY APWI- BCARO COMMlSSlCN SA C=MM~-
'Piease ?nnq
T'ne :cilowing information must be discfosed:
1 A 0 o i ica nt
Lst the names and addresses of all persons having a financiai tnteras; in me applicatlon.
Aviara Land Associates Limited PartnershiD
2011 Palomar Aimort Road
Suite 206
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Owner
Lst the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property tnv
Aviara Land AssocTates Limited PaTtnerSh$D
2011 Palomar Airport Road
Suite 206
- 2.
CA 92flfl9
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list t
addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the CnrpOratIOn or owning i
interest in the partnership.
WA
4 If any person identifled pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit orgmuation or a trust, lis!
addresses ot any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit orgmuation or as truste
of the trust.
A
FRM00013 8/90
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 e (619) 438-
< 0 0 IC
P - - DischXur8 Statement
- - Aave you had more than 3250 worth of business transacted wltfi any mernber cf City s: " Ccmmssrons, C , mittees and Council within the past twelve rncms?
vzs - No -- ds, please indicate person(s)
I 2,ndn I* a.hn.d Y 'Any in8tvldu.l. hrm. cac~oryhio. loim vomm LIIocrUIon. SOCd dub. trU8rn.l orFsncsuon. comarauon .stat
r.C.Iw.r ryndruts. mu an8 any othor county. cny ~d coumy. cy muniuwny. OUmQ oc o01w 301mc.1 su~wsron. or MY ornor ;
:ornomacron sang u una'
- I
1 I
Owner: Applicant:
Aviara Land Associates Limited Partnership, a Delaware Iimited
partnership partnership
Aviara Land Associates Limited
Partnership, a Delaware limited
mpany, a Delaware By Aviara Land-Gpmpany, a D
-0% General Partne
By: e+ -
By:
Scott M. MeQnsky/Ast. St
Date: Date:
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT'S STATEMENTOFDISCLOSURE OR CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTEREsrs ON ALL APPLICA'
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP
APPOINTED BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE
(Please Print)
The following infoimation must be disclosed:
1. Awlicant
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
BROOKFIELD CARLSRAD INC.
12865 Pohte Del Mar, Ste. 200
. Del Mar, CA 92014
2. Owner
List the names and addressees of all person having any ownership interest in the property ir
BROOKFIELD CARSLBAD INC.
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Ste. 200
Del Mar, CA, 92014
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the
and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or
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,
names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organiza
as trustee or beneficiary of the trust.
PAGE 1 of 2
2075 Las Palrnas Drive Carlsbad. California 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1 161
DISCLOS.F'RM 2/96
.' 0 0
Disclosure Statement
5. Have you had more than $250.00 worth of business transacted with any member of C
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No X If yes, please indicate person@)
Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal orgar
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district t
political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." I
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary)
BROOKFIELD CAliLSBAD INC. BROOKFIELD CARLSBAD INC.
\ h /7Ar2L- Signature of applicant/d&e
K42qLQ
Signature of Owdrldate
E. Dale Gleed - Vice President Elizabeth Zepeda - Secretary
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
DISCLOS.FRM 2) 96 PAGE 1 of 2
0 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET @
CASE NO: MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06LCPA 96-1 3
CASE NAME: AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE ANNEXATION
APPLICANT: AVIARA LAND ASSOCIATES
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for a Master Plan Amendment, General F
Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to clarifv open space boundaries i
development standards for an isolated single family residential lot in Aviara Planning Area
and annexation of the Azure Cove development into the Aviara Master Plan as a new plann area.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 308 of Carlsbad Tract 85-35. Unit E, according to Map 1
12413, filed June 29.1989 in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Diego: Lot 3(
Carlsbad Tract 90-37, accordinp to Map No. 13188. filed in the Office of the County Recorc
County of San Diego; and All of Carlsbad Tract No 89-19, according to Map No. 12902, fi
December 11, 1991 in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Diego. State
California
APN: various Acres: $5.0 Proposed No. of LotsKJnits: N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: RLM/RM/OS
Density Allowed: 0.0-3.2 ddac
Existing Zone: P-CR- 1 -0
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoni
Requirements)
Density Proposed: N/A
Proposed Zone: N/A
Zoning Land Use
Site P-C/R-l-Q Vacant & Single family
North P-C Open space
south 0-s Open space
East P-C Residential
West P-C 1-5 freeway
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): N/A
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
c] Negative Declaration, issued
0
H
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Please Take Notice:
The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of t
project described below have already been considered in conjunction w
previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additior
environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed.
Project Title:
Project Location:
Aviara Lot 308/Azure Cove Annexation
South of Aviara Parkway, east of Kestral Drive, in the Avi;
Master Plan, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego.
Project Description: Clarification of open space boundaries and developme
standards for an isolated residential lot in Aviara Plannii
Area 13 and annexation of the Azure Cove development in
the Aviara Master Plan as a new planning area.
Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 L
Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invite
Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days
date of publication.
DATED: APRIL 5, 1997
CASE NO: MP 177(S)/GPA 96-06/LCPA 96-1 3
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH DATE: APRIL 5, 1997
AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE ANNEXATION
l&LibwM& 1 .I
MICHAEL J. HOG?MIL&R
Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-11 61 - FAX (61 9) 438-085
e e
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART Il
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: MP 177(SYGPA 96-06kCPA 96-
DATE: APRIL 2.1997
BACKGROUND
1.
2. APPLICANT: AVIARA LAND ASSOCIATES
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT 1
CASE NAME: AVIARA LOT 308/AZURE COVE ANNEXATION
SUITE 206, CARLSBAD CA 92008 (760) 931-1 190
4.
5.
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: DECEMBER 1 1.1996
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Clarification of ouen space boundaries and develoument standi
for an isolated residential lot in Aviara Planning Area 13 and the annexation of the Azure C.
development into the Aviara Master Plan as a new planning. area.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this projc
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact.” or “Potentially Significant Imp
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use and Planning c] Transportation/Circulation Public Services
0 Population and Housing
c] Geological Problems D Energy & Mineral Resources c] Aesthetics
0 Water 0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
D Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation
0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
a m DETERMINATION.
(To be 6ompleted by the Lead Agency)
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigal
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATI
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. anc
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment. bc
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an ear
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigal
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An is requii
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potenti;
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in earlier EIRs and pursuani
applicable standards and (b) have been voided or mitigated pursuant to those earlier E
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed proj
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
0
IXI
Planner Signature Date
Planning Director’s Signature Date
2 Rev. 03/28/96
? e ENVIRONMENTAL IMP CTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the (
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a signific
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the follou
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and hur
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with informatior
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Negal
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
0 A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following e
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced informat
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved.
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to.
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adop
general standards and policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporat
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” tc
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce
effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that
effect is significant.
Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significi
effect on the envirogment, but @ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyz
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applical
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigat
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed up
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the pr
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additioi
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily requir
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier E
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence tf
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
e
e
e
e
e
0
3 Rev. 03/28/96
I 0 0
e If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, ~
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In ’
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporat
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked. and includ
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the Potentially significant effect
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards. E
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less tl:
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact 1
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR, (3) proposed mitigation measures do not redl
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part I1 analysis it is 1
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect.
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially signific
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attent
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determin
significant.
4 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than NI
Significant Significant Significan Imp
Impact Unless t impact
Mitigation
Incorporated I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) 0 0 0 E
0 0 0 €3
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 €3
0 0 17 E
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26;
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26; #3,
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
#3, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
(#I, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26; #3, PgS 5.6-1 -
5.6-18)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26; #3,
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (#I, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1
pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
e)
- 4-26; #3, pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed oficial regional or local
population projections? (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (eg through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l, pgs 5-71 - 5-85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26; #3,
0 0 0 E
0 0 c3 €3
0 cl 0 E
1 - 4-26; #3, pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
85; #2, pgs 4-1 - 4-26; #3, pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs 4-150 - 4-
b) Seismic ground shaking? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs 4-
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (# 1, pgs
5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs 4-150 - 4-156 ; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-
15)
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#I, pgs 5-3 - 5-
e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs
f) Erosion. changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (# 1, pgs 5-
g) Subsidence of the land? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs 4-
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 Ix
cl 0 0 E
0 0 €3
0 0 0 lx
0 0 0 E
156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
150 -4-156; #3, PgS 5.1-1 -5.1-15)
13; #2, pgs 4-150 -4-156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
4-150 -4-156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
3 - 5-13; #2, PgS 4-150 - 4-156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
150 - 4-156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
5 Rev. 03/28/96
e Potentially Potentially Less Than Nc Significant Significant Significan Imp;
Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Issues (and Supporting Inform 9 on Sources).
0 0 E
0 0 0 E
h) Expansive soils? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-13; #2, pgs 4-150 -
i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l, pgs 5-3 - 5-
4-156; #3, pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
13; #2, PgS 4-150 - 4-156; #3, PgS 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
'0 ,o 0 E
0 0 0 E
0 0 E
0 0 0 €3
0 0 0 €I
0 cl 17 [x
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoft? (#I, pgs 5-19 - 5-
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (#l, pgs 5-19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4-1 10 -
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (#l, pgs 5-19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4-
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
27; #2, PgS 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
4-1 18; #3, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
110-4-118;#3,pg~5.2-1 -5.2-11)
body? (#I, PgS 5-19 - 5-27; #2, PgS 4-110 - 4-118; #3,
PgS 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (#l, pgs 5-19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-
f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (# 1, pgs 5- 19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4- 1 10 - 4- 1 18;
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (#I,
11 8; #3, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
#3, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
0 0 0 [x
cl 0 0 [x
(7 Ix
pgs 5-19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, PgS 5.2-1 -
5.2-1 1)
h)
i)
Impacts to groundwater quality.? (#l, pgs 5-19 - 5-27;
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#1, pgs
5-19 - 5-27; #2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-
11)
#2, pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, PgS 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1)
..
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l, pgs 5-
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#I, pgs 5-14
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (# 1, pgs 5- 14 - 5- 18; #2, pgs 4-
d) Create objectionable odors? (#I, pgs 5-14 - 5-18; #2,
0 0 0 (x
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 E
14 - 5-18;#2,pgS4-84-4-93;#3,pg~5.3-1 -5.3-12)
-5-18;#2,pgs4-110-4-118;#3,pg~ 5.3-1 -5.3-12)
110 - 4-1 18; #3, PgS 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
pgs 4-1 10 - 4-1 18; #3, pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
..
6 Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting lnform @ n Sources). Potentially e Potentidly Less Than N( Significant Significant Significan Imp,
Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
lncorporated VI. TRANSPORTATIONKIRCUATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l, pgs c3 [x
O 0 0 Ix
0 0 [xi
0 0 Ix
0 0 tz
0 0 E
0 o E
5-86 - 5-107; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-
22)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? (#I, pgs 5-86 - 5-107; #2, pgs
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
4-63 - 4-80; #3, PgS 5.7-1 - 5.7-22)
c) (#l, pgs 5-86 - 5-107; #2, PgS 4-63 - 4-80; #3, PgS 5.7-
1 - 5.7-22)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (#l,
pgs 5-86 - 5-107; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3, PgS 5.7-1 -
5.7-22)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (#I,
pgs 5-86 - 5-107; #2, pgs 4-63 - 4-80; #3, PgS 5.7-1 -
5.7-22)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (#I,
pgs 5-86 - 5-107; #2, PgS 4-63 - 4-80; #3, PgS 5.7-1 -
5.7-22)
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#I, pgs 5-86 -
5-107; #2, PgS 4-63 - 4-80; #3, pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7-22)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (# 1, pgs 5-28 - 5-60; #2, pgs 4- 1 19
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (#l,
cl 0 o E
0 0 0 Ix
0 0 Ix
0 0 o E
0 0 0 E
a)
- 4-149; #3, 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
pgs 5-28 - 5-60; #2, PgS 4-1 19 - 4-149; #3, 5.4-1 - 5.4-
24) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l, pgs 5-28 - 5-60; #2,
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
PgS 4-1 19 - 4-149; #3,5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
(#I, pgs 5-28 - 5-60; #2, PgS 4-1 19 - 4-149: #3, 5.4-1 -
5.4-24)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (# 1, pgs 5-28 - 5-60; #2, PgS 4-1 19 - 4-149; #3,5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#I, 0 0 o B
0 0 0 IEi
PgS 5-114 - 5-199; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, P~S
5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (#I, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-199; #2, pgs 4-
94 -4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5)
7 Rev. 03/28/96
0 Potentially Potentially Less Than NI
Significant Significant Significan Imp
Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Issues (and Supporting Informa 9 ion Sources).
0 17 B c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of hture value to the region and
the residents of the State? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-199; #2,
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
0 0 E
CI 0 D E
0 0 €3
0 0 0 E
0 0 0 E
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (#l, pg. 5-132; #2, pgs 4-94 -
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (#l, pgs 5-108 - 5-1 13;
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
4-109; #3, PgS 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3)
#2, pgs4-94-4-109; #3, pgs 5.10.1-1 -5.10.1-3)
c) hazards? (#l, pg. 5-132 #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS
5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (#l, pg. 5-132 #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109;
increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (#l, pgs 5-28 - 5-60 #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-
#3, pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3)
e)
109; #3, PgS 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-3)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (# 1, pgs 5-6 1 - 5-70;
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l, pgs 5-
0 0 0 E
0 E
#2, pgs 4-8 I - 4-84; #3, PgS 5.9- 1 - 5.9-1 5)
61 - 5-70; #2, pgs 4-81 -4-84; #3, pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-15)
Xi. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? (#I, pgs 5-108 - 5-1 13; #2, pgs 4-94 -
b) Police protection? (# 1, pgs 5-1 08 - 5- 1 13; #2, pgs 4-94
0 0 E
CI 0 €
0 0 0 E
17 D D
0 0 0 €
4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
- 4-109; #3, pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
Schools? (#I, pgs 5-108 - 5-1 13; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109;
#3, pgs 5.12.7-1 - 5.12.7-5)
C)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (# 1,
pgs 5-108 - 5-113; #2, PgS 4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS
5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
e) Other governmental services? (#I, pgs 5-108 - 5-113;
#2, pgs 4-94-4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-1 19; #2, pgs
b) Communications systems? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-1 19; #2,
0 €
CI 0 E 4-94 - 4-109; #3, 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5)
pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.8-7)
8 Rev. 03/28/96
0 Potentially Potentially Less Than Ti( Significant Significant Sipnifican Imp
Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Issues (and Supporting Informa 9 ion Sources).
0 17 E
0 0 0 E
0 17 0 €3
0 0 0 €3
0 13 0 €3
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-1 19; #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109;
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-119; #2, pgs
e) Storm water drainage? (# 1, pgs 5- 1 14 - 5- 1 19; #2, pgs
f) Solid waste disposal? (#l, pgs 5-1 14 - 5-1 19; #2, pgs 4-
g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l, pgs 5-114 - 5-
#3, pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3)
119; #2, pgs 4-94 - 4-109; #3, PgS 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
0 0 0 lz
0 0 0 €3
0 0 0 E
a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#I, pgs 5-
120 - 5-129; #2, PgS 4-35 - 4-62; #3, PgS 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-
5) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#I, pgs
5-120 - 5-129; #2, PgS 4-35 - 4-62; #3, PgS 5.11-1 -
5.1 1-5)
c) Create light or glare? (#l, pgs 5-120 - 5-129; #2, pgs 4-
35 - 4-62; #3, PgS 5.10.3-1 - 5.10.3-2)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? (#l, pgs 5-130 - 5-
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l, pgs 5-130 - 5-
c) Affect historical resources? (#l, pgs 5-130 - 5-131; #2,
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l, pgs 5-
cl cl K
0 0 0 lx
0 0 17 E
0 13 0 (x
0 0 0 E
131; #2, pgs 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
131; #2, pgs 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
P~S 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
130 - 5-131; #2, pgs 4-157 - 4-167; #3, PgS 5.8-1 - 5.8- .. 10) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l, pgs 5-130 - 5-131; #2, pgs e)
4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
c3 0 (x
13 0 13 K
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l, pg. 5-132;
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#I, pg. 5-
#2, pgs 4-157 - 4-167; #3, pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
132; #2, PgS 4-157 - 4-167; #3, PgS 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
9 Rev. 03/28/96
0 Potentidly Potentially Less Than N
Significant Significant Signlfican Imp
Unless t impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Informa 9 on Sources).
Mitigation
Incorporated
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
0 E a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis has been conducted on three occasions. First was the Environmental Impact
Report for Brocatto at Batiquitos Shores (EIR 89-01 for CT 89-19), certified on December 11,
1990. This document analyzed all of the potential impacts for the development and occupatior
of the 78 unit single family development formerly known as Brocatto (now known as Azure
Cove). Second was the Environmental Impact Report for the Pacific Rim Country Club and
Resort (EIR 83-02(A) for CT 85-35NP 177), certified on December 8, 1987. This document
analyzed all of the potential impacts for the development and occupation of the over 2,000 unit
residential master plan (now known as Aviara) with its associated 18 hole golf course, 550 roc
hotel, sports club and neighborhood commercial site. Third was the Master Environmental
Impact Report for the 1994 General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), which reviewed the potential
impacts of buildout of the City’s General Plan, including transportation and air quality impacts
Without exception, the proposed actions have no additional impacts not previously analyzed in
the earlier environmental review and no additional review or mitigation measures are necessar]
0 0 0 E
0 CI €3
.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
9 e DISCUSSION OF ENVIR NMENTAL EVALUATION
The first component of this proposal involves a clarification of open space boundaries
development standards for an isolated, 1.2 acre lot in Planning Area 13. The lot was identi:
for development in the original master plan and has been kept clear of vegetation. however
exact development standards were not addressed. During the processing of the General F
Update in 1994, the site was erroneously designated with as open space. The first componen
this proposal reinstates the ability for the lot to develop in accordance with the original inten
the master plan (MP 177). In addition, an area totaling 14.4 acres that was previously design2
for low to medium density residential development, that contains both natural and revegeta
native habitat, is being designated as open space.
The second component deals with the annexation of an adjacent, 78 unit single fan:
development into the Aviara Master Plan (MP 177) as a new planning area. All exist
development standards, open space requirements and design criteria contained in the origi
development, and reviewed by the EIR for Brocatto (EIR 89-01) remain the same with t
annexation.
AIR QUALITY:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the upda
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle mi
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide. react
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since
San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are conside1
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in 1
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout. a varic
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisic
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measu
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Dema
Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mi
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable a
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into i
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project
located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is mark
“Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, t
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-0 1, by CI
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for ;
quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequc
projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore,
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at t
Planning Department.
11 Rev. 03/28/96
0 e CIRCULATION:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updi
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adeql
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be sevei
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. Th
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carls
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersecti
are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildou
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerc
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include
measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions
develop alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewal
pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulat
strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate
State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the Citj
control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have eit
been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approv
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of I
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefo
the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because 1
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246. includ
a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts.
Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General P1a1
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulati
impacts is required.
This “Statement
12 Rev. 03/28/96
0 EX\ e
7. MP 177(S)IGPA 96-061LCPA 96-131zC 97-03 - AVlARA LOT 3081AZURE COVE ANNEXATIOF - a request for a General Plan Amendment to change the designation of a 1.2 acre parcel in tht
Aviara Master Plat (Lot 308) from Open Space (OS) to Residential Low Medium (RLM), a Maste.
Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Amendment to establish permitted land uses anc
development standards for this redesignated residential area within the Aviara Master Plan and tc
MINUTE5
Pagc May 21,1997 a
.I
PLANNING COMMISSION.
annex the Azure Cove development into the Aviara Master Plan as a new planning area, an
Zone Change from Single Family Residential (R-1-7,500-Q) and Open Space (0-s) to plan
Community (P-c) to maintain Zoning consistency with Azure Cove and the Aviara Master PIE
The project is located South of Aviara Parkway, between Batiquitos Drive and Aviara Drive
Local Facilities Management Zone 19.
Chairperson Nielsen announced that if the Commission recommends approval of this item, it will
forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Project Planner, Michael Grim described this item as a request for a General Plan Amendment, a LC
Coastal Program Amendment and a Zone Change for two projects (a project within a project). One is
annexation of the Azure Cove development into the Aviara Master Plan and the other is a clarificatior,
the development potential of Lot 308, within Aviara and the appropriate measures needed to allow that
to develop.
Regarding the Azure Cove Annexation, Mr. Grim described this area as a developing single fan
residential neighborhood with 72 dwelling units located on the north side of Batiquitos Drive. T
development was annexed into the Aviara Homeowners Association a little over a year ago to allow t
association to cover all of their open space maintenance requirements. Mr. Grim stated that after leng
investigation, staff has determined that each and every requirement for the annexation has been compl
with and therefore recommends approval of the Azure Cove Annexation. Additionally, the Clty is 8
proposing to change the Zoning from R-1-7,500-Q and 0-S, to be consistent with the Planned Cornmur
Zoning Chapter, to PC which is consistent with the rest of the Aviara neighborhood.
Regarding the second part of the proposal, Mr. Grim pointed out that this actually goes back to the origii
sub-division CT 85-35, when lot 308 was a stand alone lot and not designated either golf course or OF
space on the final map. Mr. Grim pointed out that because of its location and the lack of any discussion
access or development potential in the Master Plan, staff has always been under the impression that tl
lot would never be developed. He went on to state that during the processing of the original master pl
and tract map, Lot 308 was overlooked with regard to development standards and design criteria and I
assigned to any particular planning area nor were the permitted uses for the lot clearly described. h
Grim stated that this lot was considered a "random" lot, so much so, that in the 1994 General Plan upda
the City assigned that lot as Open Space to coincide with the open space designation on the golf COUI?
and the native vegetation. Mr. Grim pointed out that within the past year, Aviara approached the City w
the intent to sell this lot and was surprised to find that it had been designated as General Plan Op
Space. After several meetings between Aviara's attorneys and Carlsbad's City Attorney's Office, Mr. Gr
continued, it was determined that Lot 308 was a legally created lot and buildable. Consequently, the C
had to decide what could be built there and how to change the legislation to allow it to be built. Mr. Gr
stated that it was decided that the best use was one single-family home, keeping it at the lowest level
development possible. It was also determined that it required a Master Plan Amendment, a Coasl
Program Amendment, and a General Plan Amendment to move that lot out of open space. Mr. Grim al!
pointed out that with the redesignation of Lot 308, and to replace the required Open Space, this lot Wi
exchanged for a 14+ acre parcel in the northwest comer of Aviara Planning Area 25 and this action \n
secure this new parcel as Open Space.
Mr. Grim stated that staff has found the proposal to be consistent with all of the regutations ai
requirements and recommends approval of this project.
Commissioner Heineman asked how access to the property will be attained.
Mr. Grim replied that research found that there is an existing private access easement through the Viagg
neighborhood and a new access will not be required to be created.
.
M JNUTE
' PLANNING COMMISSION. May 21,1997 0 Pa:
Chairperson Nielsen opened Public Testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Larry Clemens, Aviara Land Associates, 201 1 Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, stated their agreer
with staffs recommendation as it has always been their intention to develop Lot 308. He explained
the access easement was obtained and pointed out that the stub-outs for the utilities have been in F
for several years. Mr. Clemens stated that it was quite a surprise, to all, when they found that their lot
been inadvertently designated as Open Space. As a result of this oversight, he continued, it has t:
very difficult for the owner of the neighboring properties to understand how and why this lot is suddeni]
longer Open Space and is going to be developed. Mr. Clemens stated that he is also aware of some i
contend that full disclosure was not made when they bought their properties. This is a matter that wi!
dealt with separately. Mr. Clemens indicated that there will be more than ample space between structi
and presented photos of the property to the Commissioners to aid in the orientation.
Commissioner Monroy asked if the lot is clear of habitat and was answered affirmatively.
Commissioner Monroy also queried as to how large a home will be built there.
Mr. Clemens stated that the square footage of the home is unknown at this time.
Commissioner Welshons, regarding disclosure, asked if Aviara Land Associates should have bl
disclosing this lot.
Mr. Ciemens stated that, regardless of what some people may believe, there is no disclosure issue.
Robert Chateau, representing Brookfield Homes, stated that they do not feel that this zone change
cause any development changes and are in agreement with the staff recommendation,
Janos Beny, owner of Lot 292 on Aviara Drive, residing at 1886 Maya Court, Vista, requested denial of
General Plan Amendment, the Local Coastal Plan Amendment, and the Zone Change Amendment nc
before the Commission. Mr. Beny also presented photographs of the area to the Commission. He i
stated that he believes that if Mr. Clemens is correct in his statement that Lot 308 is 300 feet below
neighboring property, Lot 308 would be below sea level. Mr. Beny pointed out that his lot #292 has
elevation of 292 feet. Mr. Beny stated that because Aviara Land Associates had been so meticulous
their dealings with their buyers,-it is hardly believable that they could or would "overlook" a 1+ acre parc
Marie Bertossi, 7094 Aviara Dr., Carlsbad, president of the Aviara Point Homeowners Association, sta
their opposition to the redesignation of Lot 308 from Open Space to Residential. She stated that some
the homeowners feel that they were not properly informed of the existence of Lot 308.
Alan Croll, 6965 El Camino Real, Suite 105-520, Carlsbad, homeowner in the Sandpiper developm
presented a petition from ten homeowners in the Sandpiper development, opposing any change in
Open Space designation of Lot 308.
Carol Duncan, 7101 Aviara Dr., Carlsbad, stated that her property is almost directly above Lot 308 i
she feels that Lot 308 was never properly disclosed to her when she bought her property. She cited v.
impacts and disagreed with the plan to develop Lot 308.
Daryl Gest, 7051 Rockrose Terrace, Carlsbad, stated that his property is directly across from Lot 308 i
when he purchased this property, he paid a premium of $43,000 for this view lot on the golf course.
stated that he was not told that he was paying $43,000 to have a view of another house, but rather that
was paying for a view of open space. Mr. Gest also stated that if a home is allowed to be built on Lot 3
he and his wife feel that the value of their property will have been severely diminished and that if the C
approves these changes, the City and/or others should be responsible to them for the $43,000 as well
.
.
MlNUT
* PLANNING COMMISSION 0 May 21,1997 e Pagt
seeing to it that their property taxes are reduced. He, too, presented a photograph from his property.
Susan Hawks McClintic, Attorney for Aviara Point Association, 555 W. Beech St., Suite 500, Sari Die
stated that the primary concern of the, homeowners is that it will impact their views of the open space ~
the common area. She too indicated that the consensus of the homeowners is that they were led
believe that nothing would ever be built on Lot 308 and that there is a significant disclosure issue. : also stated that she has been assured by Mr. Clemens that Lot 308 is in Planning Area 13, it will
become a part of Aviara Point. Finally, if the project is approved, the association will require t
additional development guidelines be placed on anything to be constructed there, as well as the heigh
trees and other vegetation, to minimize the impact and minimize the level of impairment.
Commissioner Noble asked Ms. Hawks-McClintic if she know of any law that deals with blockage of vier
She responded that, by law, if you do not have a view granted to you by a written document, you leg
do not have a right to a view. She added however, that if a developer sells a view lot and charge
premium for it, the buyer has a different issue with the developer.
Commissioner Compas asked if she agrees or disagrees that the issue of disclosure is not in the purvi
of this Commission.
Ms. Hawks-McClintic stated that several of the non-resident property owners have not had ample time
respond to this development and it had been their hope that they could have more time in which to m
with Mr. Clemens and attempt to arrive at a mutual conclusion.
Paul Klukas, Planning Systems, 21 11 Palomar Airport Rd., Carlsbad, representing Brookfield Hon
expressed their support of both proposals before this Commission and pointed out that all of the C
policies continue to be met and that the only contention seems to be a disctosure issue. He indicated tt
disclosure is a private issue and not a City policy issue and should be handled privately. He also stat
that in the event that the issue of Lot 308 does not proceed, he and Brookfield Homes wish to enmura
the annexation of Azure Cove.
Jeff Robbins, 6923 Wild Rose Terrace, Carlsbad, stated his opposition to the proposed changes regardi
Lot 308.
Mr. Clemens stated that, as he had predjcted, most of the neighboring homeowners feel that there i5
disclosure issue and that he fully intends to meet with them in an effort to gain mutual satisfaction.
conclusion, Mr. Clemens urged the Commission to approve this agenda item.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Clemens to comment on Planning Area 13.
Mr. Clemens explained that inside the Master Plan, the developer must meet the requirements of Planni
Area 13. relative to architectural guideline. He stated that it is not, nor ever has been, the intent that tl
be a part of the sub-association.
Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Nielsen closed the Public Testimony.
Commissioner Monroy asked for clarification of the legal issues.
Mr. Grim stated that the legal issue that the City is having to comply with is that a lot was created by virti of Carlsbad Tract No. 85-35, Unit E, and that lot is buildable. He also stated that it is fortunate for the C
that this lot was never placed under a deed restriction by the Coastal Commission, has never been grou
over by habitat that would force U.S. Fish and Game, or had any other environmentally sensitive resour1
protection agencies to get involved, and it was not designated with the City Open Space easement, tl
..
MINUTI
Page 0 PLANNING COMMISSION 0 May 21,1997
only open space the City is losing IS General Plan Open Space and the City is taking this oppofiunlv
designate some new open space areas to replace it
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Rudolf if he concurs that the disclosure issue is one of a private natu
and not in the purview of this Commission
Mr. Rudolf concurred.
ACTION: Motton by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, to adopt Plannir
Commission Resolutions No 4096, 4097, 4098, and 41 17, recornmendm
approval of a Master Plan Amendment MP 177(S), General Plan Arnendmei
GPA 96-06, Local Coast Program Amendment LCPA 96-13 and Zone Change Z
97-03, based on the findings and subject to the condibons contained therein
Nielsen, Noble, Heineman, Savary, Monroy, Weishons, and Compas
VOTE: 7-0
AYES:
NOES: None
FROM :PROCOPIO. CORY
'' Procopio r7
235 0398
530 B ShM, Mtc 2100
sm Diego, CA mrn-(469 leiephont 619,'23&19w Faimile 619NM9.9 hnp:/hm..praopio.com
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
and JMembers of the City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Theodore I. G~iswuld
UifM Did 61915 15-3277 July 15, 1997
VIA FACSlMlLE
U.S. MAIL.
RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR CHANGE OF DESIGKATION OF 1.2
ACRE PARCEL IN THE AMARA MASTER PLAN (:LOT 308) FROM OPEN
SPACE (OS) TO RESDENTIAL LOW MEDILJM (RLM); MASTER PLAN
AMENDMENT AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT; CITY
COUNCIL HEARJ3G DATE: JUNE 24,1997
Dear Mayor Lewis and Members of the Council: ...
This firm represents Welton and Carol Whann in connection with the above-referenced
matter. Mr. and Mrs. Whann are the owners of the singlr-fwily residence located at Lot 288, on
Aviara Drive, Carlsbad, California. On June 24, 1997 you received a letter from our ofiice on
behalf of our clients protesting the above-referenced agenda item and asking the City to eithcr
deny or continue this item. On June 24. 1997 the City Council agreed to continue the item until
July 15, 1997. Our clients also sent a Public Records Act request in to the City regarding the
above-referenced matter. .*
In response to our Public Records Act request and in response to the letter of protest, we
have had subsequent discussions with the Planning Department and with the project applicant
regarding this matter. Based on these discussions the applicant has agreed to ensure my clients
that the proposed dwelling unit on Lot 308 will be limited to a single-story structure and will be
located at the northern end of the property to amelioraLe some of the view conccms ofthe area
property owners. Additionally, the applicant has indicated that they will work with the area
homeowners to ensure that the property is attractive to the view shed areas. Based upon these
discussions and the cooperation of the project applicant, Mr. and Mrs. Whann hereby withdraw
I1
613 23s 0398 129~-1!5 15:30 #742 P. 0 F~OM :PROCCPI@, CORY
1
iAv OFFfCES OF
PRoCOPIO, CORY, HAR6REA-S 0 SAVITCII LLP
Mayor Lewis
Page 2
July 15, 1997
their opposition to the General Plan Amendment and -ill not be appearing at tonight's hearing.
We greatly appreciate the cooperation of the applicant, City of Carlsbnd and its planning staff in
helping to resolve this difficult situation. Should you or City Staff have any questions, please dp
not hesitate to contact the undersiped.
Very truly yours,
Procupio, Cory, Hargreaves
& SavitchLLP
TJG/se
cc; Mr. Mike Grimm (via facsimile)
6..
I_ . ..*'
1.1 I
0 A+em & u RECE
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON L~P e-: em
NINETEENTH FLOOR c A ce
i ~ uirEO LIPB~LITI DLITNERSMID I'ICLUOING PPOFESSIONAL COPPOPITIONS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
501 WEST BROADWAY
Lo10 C'*G SAN OIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101-3ssa
WRITER'S DIRECT -.NE TELEPHONE (619) 338-6500 3UR FILE N -
FACSIMILE (619) 234-3615 (619) 338-6530 CRB-
cnctls@smrh.com
juiy i5. 1997
VIA HAND DELIVERY
_Mayor Claude "Bud" Leurls
and Members of the City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad California 92008- 1989
Re: General Plan Amendment Re Aviara Master Plan (Lot 308). ana
Related Matters: Citv Council Hearing Date Julv 15. 1997
Dear Mavor Lewis and Members of the Council:
e, -
As you know. our firm represents Aviara LanckAssociates Limited
Partnershp in connechon with the Aviara master planned community.
A number of issues have been raised concerning the general plan
amendment for Lot 308, many of which seem to have been based upon erroneous
understandings as to the hstory of this partxular property. &hs letter is presented or
behalf of Aviara Land Associates Limited Partnership ("Avkra") to address and cl~:
the facts. and present infomation for your consideration. Ths letter is accompanied.
by a booklet prepared by Aviara which contains a number of documents whch furthe
substantiate the facts with respect to Lot 308. On several instances in thls letter, we
will refer to identified materials which are part of the booklet.
SUMMARY OVERVIEW
Lot 308 was originally developed by Aviara as a building lot for single
family housing as a part ofthe Aviara master planned communiry. It was so entitled
by the approval actions ofthe City of Carisbad and the California Coastal Commissic
Its eventual sale for construction of a single family house has always been part of the
-95 ANGELCS m a'74NGE COUNT" m SAN OIEGO m SPN FRANC
0 0
SHEPPARD, MULLIN. RICHTER & HAMPTON LL~
Mavor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 2
marketmg plan of Aviara, and it has been the reasonable expectaoon of Aviara that
they would be able to do so.
Ths amendment has been processed by City staff as a means of
correcting an inconsistency whch was mistakenly introduced into the Carlsbad city-
wide general plan in 1994. (This will be discussed in greater detail below.)
Some opponents of Lot 308 have suggested, mistakenly, that th~s
amendment is just a classic case of a developer wantmg to "convert" open space into
buildmg lot. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Such
assemons by opponents, although well intentioned, proceed from misunderstandmgs
about the hstorical background of Lot 308.
In order to appreciate the merits of the current amendment it is import2
that the historical perspective be accurate. We would llke you to consider the
following points.
1. Lot 308 Was Validlv And Legallv Created As A DeveloDment
Site For Single Family Housing. A brief review of the approval process by the City
and the Coastal Commission, together with the actions taken'"oy Aviara in reliance
upon those approvals. should leave no doubt about the identity of Lot 308 as a home
site.
a. 1987 Citv Action. In December 1987, the City approved
the initial package of entitlements relamg to the Aviara ma&& planned community
(then known as Pacific Rzm County Club and Resort). Thesf enbtlements included.
among other hgs, the Master Plan, a Master Tentative Map, and Tentatwe map-
Phase I (Map CT85-35). These approvals show Lot 308, in its present configuration,
as an approved lot for a single family house. The lot is large (at 1.1 acres it is the
largest single family lot in the entire Awara project), and is unique in that it is adjace:
to one of the fairways of the golf course. This combination of circumstances has
always made it special.
In order to provide access to Lot 308, it was necessary to create an
easement. The location of that easement is clearly identified on the project approvals
including CT85-35. which label the easement road as "30' public utility easement and
private access easement." (See attachment no. 1 in Booklet.)
b 0 0
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
-Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 3
At the same tune, those entitlements also identified specific lot number
as being designated for open suace. That was in fulfillment of con&tions imposed in
the approval resolutions by the Ckj-. Tai ample, besides the golf course, a specific
open space designation (relative to habitat resources) was attached to Lots 306 and
307.
b. EnvironmentaVCEOA Review. As you may recall, the
enme project was subjected to rigorous environmental review pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as well as the City ordinances and
procedures. Lot 308 was not environmentally constrained, and its inclusion as a hon
development site within the entitlement approvals referenced above was part of the
overall CEQA certification granted by the City in December 1987.
In the hstorical context. it is interesting to recall that in an early
proposed version of the project tentahve naps, the developer had proposed ten other
fairway-adjacent lots dodl1 from Lot 308 towards the lagoon (along fairway 4, fo
example). As part of the environmental review process, habitat andor other resourcl
were identified as being present on each of the other ten lots, to varylng degrees.
Xccordmgly, and consistent with the environmentally sensitive approach adopted by
Larry Clemens and the deveiopment team on behalf of the project applicant those
other ten proposed lots were eliminated from the list of development sites withm the
project application as a result of the environmental review, and became part of open
space on the tentative map. Lot 308 was treated dfferently, and ultimately approved
because it was not environmentally constrained and was otherwise consistent with th
applicable criteria for a home site. ,;ji..
,2
(For reference to CEQA review, see page 7 in the Booklet.)
c. Coastal Commission Action. As approved by the City, tl
project went before the Coastal Commission for action in April 1988. The staff of tl
Coastal Commission conducted their own rigorous analysis of a wide range of issues
whch potentially constrained development. including environmental and habitat
concerns as well as other rationale for open space. (In addition to deedmg the porho
it owned of Batiquitos Lagoon to the state as part of the project approval exactions.
you will recall that the approval documents for the Aviara Master Plan identified a
total of 248 upland acres of the master plan as permanent natural open space.
L 0 0
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LL~
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13. 1997
Page 4
In connechon with the Coastal Development Permit. the Coastal
approvals included references to a color coded map of the Development Plan, at page
of the materials for the Pacih ?h-i C;im;~i GiiS and Resort. (A capy of that color
coordinated Development Plan, as presented to the Coastal Commission, is attached i
page 5 in the Booklet.) The identity of Lot 308 as the lot for single family residential
development is clearly indicated.
d. Final MaD 85-35. The final map for the area which
includes Lot 308 was approved by the City and recorded in the Official Records of Si
Diego County on June 29, 1989. Consistent with CT85-35, the presence of Lot 308
and the easement road are clearly indicated.
e. Gradmg Permit and Grading Plan. Aviara submitted a
v nading plan consistmg of multiple pages for a variety of earthwork and gradmg,
including, among other bgs (i) grading of the access road wib the access easeme:
to Lot 308 and (ii) grading of Lot 308. See the grading plan map dated May 8, 1989.
prepared by P&D Technologies. for tract 85-35. Phase I, Unit E. as attachment no. 1
the Booklet, sheets 4 and 5. Said grading pian clearly shows Lot 308 and the gadmg
contemplated and permitted for such lot, together with the adjoining easement road.
Please also note that several of the adjoining lots have tablei'on them indxatmg that
they are coastal resource areas. or other constraints and limitations. Those are not
present for Lot 308.
The gadmg plan shows that it was approved by the City by the signatu
of City Engineer Lloyd Hubbs. dated May 12, 1989. In conffection therewith, Aviara
applied for and obtalned a grading permit.
i 1.
Y
Performance of Grading. Commencmg in 1989 and over
the course of the succeeding two years a large variety of earthwork was performed.
Included with that earthwork was sigmficant grading by Aviara on Lot 308. Aviara
created a building pad. as well as an access road. This was done at significant expen
and in reiiance upon the permits and entitlements which Avlara had received.
c. Aviara Also Voluntarily Did Aesthetically Sensitive
Landscaping. Having created building pad for Lot 308, Avlara then voluntarily
planted natural matenals around the edges. Its desire was the aesthetically sensitive
motive to shield the building pad from direct view fiom the goif course. pending suck
0 0
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LL~
Ahlayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 5
time as the lot would be sold and a house constructed on the pornon of the lot suitabl
for the actual building pad.
h. Citv Approval of Completed Grading. When the grading
authorized by the gradmg permit and grading plan discussed above was completed, pi
City requirements Aviara submitted a set of "as built" grarlmg plans to the City. It is
customary for the City to require ths, so that the appropriate engineering officers of
the City will examine the grading and determine whether it has been done consistent
with the grading permit and the gading plans incorporated into the permits. In th~s
instance, the gradmg plan whxh included Lot 308 (referenced above) was approved 1
signature of the City on December 23, 1991.
i. Master Association. Although not directly part of the
entitlement approval process, the development scheme for the Aviara Master Plan
contemplated that Aviara would create a master association and adopt Covenants,
Condltions and Resmctions (CCRs) for the master association. Ths was done, and
the CCRs for the master association established a set of archtectural review
procedures and development limitations which are applicable to single family housin!
lots withm the master plan. including Lot 308. (Ths will beddiscussed Mer below.
In addition, a number of lots withm the master plan were specifically-set aside and
designated as open space, consistent with the language of the approving resolutions
and requirements from the City as well as the Coastal Development Permit. Lot 308
not designated for open space.
***St w
#'
In summary, there can be no question that the project entitlement
approvals from the City and the Coastal Commission clearly contemplated that Lot 3
was designated for single family residential development. Some have referred to
Lot 308 as being, in effect. an "island" in the midst of open space. That is probably a
good analogy. This special "island" home site was specifically developed as a island
by Aviara, in light ofthe special characteristics of the lot. It is the largest single fami
residential lot in the entire Aviara Master Pian. it is situated adjacent to a golf fairWa!
and was intended by Aviara to be among the last of the single family residential lots t
be sold because of its special size and special locahon.
0 0
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13. 1997
Page 6
2. The Citv Has Taxed Lot 308 As A Development Site. Avlara ha
consistently paid the annual real estate taxes levied on Lot 308. As such, the land ha!
been valued for reai estate txx: ;;~qxscs x a development site.
Further, concurrent with the payment of real estate taxes, the City has
imposed and Aviara has paid various distnct fees including (i) the Alga Road
Assessment District; (ii) the City-wide Community Facilities District; and (iii) the
AMello-Roos District for the Aviara Oaks School. Each of those assessments has beer
levied on the basis that Lot 308 is a development site, and not open space.
3. Aviara's Disclosure Information To Buyers. As sales began
wib the Aviara Master Plan one feature was a pattern of disclosure information.
Some of the disclosure was the result of mandates from the City, such as specific
disclosures with respect to the district assessments for the school, the CFD. and Alga
Road. Other disclosures resulted from the regulations of the California Department c
Real Estate.
Many of the planning areas withm Aviara were sold by Aviara to varioi
merchant builders who. in turn. constructed their products and sold them dxectly to
purchasers. However. one of the planning areas retained byXvlara was Pleg
Area 13. whch has become known as Avlara Point and which runs along both sides c
the ridge top which is immediately to the east of Lot 308 and directly to the south of
Planning Area 15. (The access road to Lot 308 runs near the edge of Aviara Point an
actually goes through a pomon of Planning Area 15.) The Aviara Point location is
important because several of the outspoken opponents of thwcurrent amendment for
Lot 308 own homes in Aviara Point. (For example, Mr. and*CMrs. Whann. represente
by attornev Theodore Griswold. own Lot 288.)
The Aviara Point area is for sale of custom lots, meaning that the
purchasers are allowed to design and build their own houses, subject to the various
limitations. Those limitations include (i) the architectural review and approval
consistent with the Master Plan CCRs: and (ii) most importantly, approval from the
City Planning Director or, at his election. the City Planning Commission. as to the
specifics of their proposed house.
Having those limitations and restnctions in mind. Aviara adopted a
consistent series of procedures in its purchase agreements with buyers for il\viara
0 0
SHEPPARD. MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLp
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 7
Point. Those procedures included obtammg from the buyers a specific sign-off in
whch the buyer acknowledged hs receipt and review of the Master Plan, Departmeni
of Real Estate documents, and tk fik. !,!CST NOTEWORTHY, for purposes of th~
amendment, is an addendum attached to each of the purchase agreements whch
specifically lists, by lot number. all of the open space with (1) the Master Plan and
(ii) the Aviara Point subdivision whch are set aside as open space. The reference to
such a list is discussed in the purchase agreement as a disclosure of where and how
much open space there will be. ;ii copy of the open space list as attached to the sales
papers for Lot 288 is set forth as attachment no. 2 in the Booklet. Lot 308 is not on t
list.
Further. as home sales were completed, Aviara began the practice of
sending mformation packages to the buyers. An example of ths practice is the letter
dated in 1992, which is set forth as attachment no. 3 in the Booklet. That same letter
has been sent to each homeowner: including the purchasers of custom lots in Aviara
Point. Please note the drawing attached to such letter which clearly inhcates the
presence of a development lot adjoining the golf course, at the location of Lot 308.
4. City Action in 1994. In 1994 the City undertook,an update of it:
b Oeneral plan. Included wittun that update was, among other 'thmgs, an: update of the
map of Open Space witlm the City General Plan. As adopted, that update showed
Lot 308 as being subject to an open space designation.
Aviara believes that this was done as a result of an honest mistake.
When the materials relative to the 1994 hearings were circulated, the Aviara staff
(includmg Lany Clemens) had verbal conversations with Ciq staff in whch AvIara
asked if the matters being processed represented any "changes" with respect to the
Aviara Master Plan. &Mistakenly, they were told and understood that no "changes"
were being made. Xviara believes that this was an honest mistake. In fact, the
inclusion of Lot 308 on the 1994 open space map was a sipficant change from the
clear development approvals which had existed since 1987. which have been
summarized above.
Certainly, from the standpoint of fair play and due process, if the City
had tmlv intended to make such a change, the proposal for such a change would have
been advertlzed as part of the matters being undertaken in connection with the 1994
0 0
SHEPPARD. MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 8
"update." Had that been done. then obviously the Aviara team would have pointed o
the inconsistency.
In fairness, the inconsistency and the mistake could have been caught b
the Aviara team had they more carefully reviewed and considered the details in the
whole package of materials. including the new map of City Open Space whch was
included in the hck package of general plan update materials.
Unfortunately, as a result of these mistakes, there was no discussion of
the issue at all in 1994. .Accordingly: since adoption of the general plan update in
1994, there has been an inconsistency between the general plan and the entitlements
whch Aviara had regarding Lot 308.
Contrary to what has been suggested by some opponents of ths
amendment, Aviara &d not "mislead" the City, nor was Aviara the cause of the
inconsistency. It is unfortunate that the inconsistency has existed, but it is not the
result of any mismforrnation submitted by Aviara.
5. Ths Amendment. The processing of tlals amendment is the resu
of dscussions between Aviara and City staff, whch followt?d the discovery by Aviar
in the fall of 1996 ofthe inconsistency with the 1994 General Plan Update.
The business plan withm the Aviara organization had always
Contemplated that Lot 308 would be sold some time after the Resort Hotel is
completed. However. in the autumn of 1996 an unsolicited:&fer was received. In
working with the proposed purchaser and making applicatioiffor City review of the
proposed home. it was discovered by Aviara that City staff (because of the 1994
General Plan Update) rehsed to process an application because of the 1994
designation as open space.
Discussion then followed between Aviara and staff about how to resoli
this inconsistency. Aciara agreed to the processing of a General Plan Amendment to
eliminate the inconsistency. That is the amendment which you have before you.
Therefore. as discussed at the outset, this is not a classic case of
"conversion" by a developer of open space into a building lot. Aviara had permits an
entitlements from the outset for a single family residential development on Lot 308.
a e
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON L~P
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13, 1997
Page 9
Aviara spent sipficant money to create the building pad for Lot 308 as well as the
access road withm the access easement all consistent with and subject to City approv
" a-admg plans. Aviara created wd nzs rllaintained tbs special development site, mad'
all the more special by its proximity not only to the golf course but to other resource
and open space areas. Aviara has paid taxes and assessment fees.
The lot is available for sale. .%lthough the purchaser who made the offi
in fall of 1996 withdrew hs interest in light of the inconsistency problem, within the
last month Aviara has received two more unsolicited offers for purchase of Lot 308.
The lot is available for sale. If project opponents and/or the City would llke the
property to be open space. it is available-for sale and could be purchased from Aviari
With that aside, however, -4viara believes that the merits of its position are clear, anc
that the appropriate action for the City Council is to make the land use decision to
correct the inconsistency in the City General Plan, and approve the current general p:
amendment as proposed.
6. What Can Be Built On Lot 308? Lot 308 has always been
designated for a single family house. Since it is the largest single family lot in the
entire Aviara Master Plan. Aviara has always envisioned that an expensivehome is tl
llkely result of a bmldmg proposal from a purchase. (As a side note;Aviarapoints 0'
that the creation of a rnagmficent, estate home on such a lot would llkely be very
expensive. and would be llkely to have a positive impact on the values of nearby
properties, includmg the other single family custom lots in Aviara Point.)
Any proposed house will be subject to the arc&tectural controls,
landscape rules and other limitations as set forth in the Mast& CCRs. There is a
design review comrmttee whxh exists under the auspices of the Master Association
which. among other dungs, approves housing proposals and enforces the archtectura
and landscape rules. Homeowners (including those in Aviara Point) who have been
through hs process can attest to the fact that the regulations are rigorous and the
controls are taken seriously.
In addrtion, the proposal for any house is also subject to approval by th
City. This approval is vested with the Planning Director, although the Planning
Director may refer the decision to the Planning Commission.
0 e
SHEPPARD, MULLIN. RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
.Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13. 1997
Page 10
7. A Further Compromise Prouosal From Aviara. Although not
obligated to do so, Aviara is willing to impose some further development restrictions
as a compromise. and as a means of having he amendment approved without further
delay. The willingness to make this compromise has been communicated to Mr. and
Ms. Whann through their attorney, Theodore Griswold. The limitation whch woulc
be acceptable to Aviara would be to impose the restriction that any residence to be
constructed will be no hgher than a single story above ground (maximum 25' to peak
8. The Claim Bv Omonents That Thev Were "Misled." Some
opponents have suggested that they have believed that location of Lot 308 was open
space itself and part of the open space whch surrounds it. Vocal opponents have
claimed that they were misled, and have tned to attribute the responsibility for that tc
actions of Aviara. Whether or not they were truly misled, or just failed to pay attenti
to materials in their own due diligence packages, is unresolved and open to discussio
and possible debate. (For example, should that issue ever be raised by them in an
actual claim, Aviara would remind the deciding tribunal of the relevant matters such
the pornon of the disclosure materials identified above in Section 3 of ths letter.)
Aviara believes that such a claimant would face challenges in showing that it was
actually misled. and perhaps an even greater challenge in sbwing that there is any
negative impact on the value of their lot.
In any event. anv such claims should not properly be part of the
proceedings before the City Council. Any such claim is a matter of private contract
dispute. It is not a relevant part of the City's land use decisions.
"'2' Aviara believes that a claim of that sort is inevitably one whch would
handled through litigation or arbitration. It is no more the City Council's responsibili
to act as a deciding court in a claim for breach of contract, than it is to enforce privat
CCRs.
The City council has before it a land use question. The issue is whethei
or not to change the general plan to make it consistent with the longstandmg and
original concept of the entitlements for Lot 308. and eliminate the inconsistency whic
has existed since 1993.
9. Summarv and Recommendation. In summary, and for the reaso;
listed above, request and recommend that the City Council take action to approve the
0 e
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
July 13. 1997
Page 11
proposed amendment consistent with the staff recommendahon. We ask that th~s
acbon be taken on your scheduled heanng date of July 15. without further delay.
Xmara believes, and we COMCUT. 3at ;~.lch scticin by the City Council is not only lega
correct, but also fm. We submt that any contrary decision by the Council would no
be fair to the nghts of Awara, and would be an mcorrect land use decision. We
respectfully request that you approve the Commwty Plan Amendment consistent WI
the staff recommendahon and the request of Amara.
Thank you for your kmd and thoughtful attenbon.
Very truly yours, --
---\ I /- ,( AT+&-/ p / ' er rd . eils
~
€or SHEPPARD, IMULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLI
SDI Dkll\LETCRB\51043577 1
cc: Ronald R. Ball. Esqulre. Carlsbad City Attorney
Mr. D.L. Clemens *\ -
"f
@
I7 * 0 0
1
l
R
I L0~308
1 INFORMATIONAL BOOKLET
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
II
3
i
I
I
a AVIM
1. * @ 0
t
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
D
AVIARA LOT 308
ith the original land planizing of Aviara (then the Pacific Rim Country Clzl rw and Resort), a single-family residential lot with Golf Course frontage, was
signed just westerly of Planning Area 15. This lot was identified and approved on
subdivision map as Lot 308.
his booklet is intended to provide a brief summay of the histoy of Lot 308, ar T its present status. In addition, the booklet contains computer-simulated gap,
an exampled residential house developed on Lot 308 for reference of the reader.
I TABLE OF CONTENTS
LOCATION OF LOT 308 ................................................. Page 3
APPROVAL HISTORY Page 4 ...................................................
HISTORICAL EXHIBITS ................................................. Page 5
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/TAX HISTORY .............................. Page 7
COMPUTER-SIMULATED GRAPHIC ANALYSIS Page 9
HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY ........................................... Page 15
BUILDING CRITERIA Page 15
...........................
...................................................
UNIT E, PAGE 4 & 5 - GRADING PLAN .Attachment 1
OPEN SPACE LOT LIST. ....................................... Attachment 2
HOMEOWNER LETTER .Attachment 3
.........................
.......................................
AVIARA"
2 w W
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
4
E,L,-I,:>t-,:T, 5
AviARA"
E* ' a 0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I LOT 308 - ILLUSTRATIVE
1
AviARA"
4 w W
APPROVAL HISTORY
&I PZANNING
Lot 308 is, and has always been planned as a singlefamily residential lot.
A MASTLR PLAN APPROVAI
The Aviara Master Plan (page 122) demonstrates that the single-family residential Planning
Area 13 stretches northwesterly to include this lot,
d TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
Lot 308 was approved as a residential lot through the City of Carlsbad tentative subdivision
map CT 85-35 (Pacific Rm Phase I), December 22,1987 and California Coastal Commission
Coastal Development Permit No. 6-87-680, April 12,1988.
A FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP APPROVAL
Lot 308 was officially created as a residential lot when it was recorded through the City of
Carlsbad approval of Unit E of Carlsbad Tract CT 85-35, June 29,1989.
A COASTAL REQUIREMENTS
Coastal Commission Permit No, 6087-680 required that all Aviara preserved open spaces be
placed under an open space deed restriction. Lot 308 was not placed under such restriction.
ib ACCESS TO SITE
Access to Lot 308 was approved on the approved hinal Map CT-85-35 and secured perma-
nently through a private access easement, and provided for the Planning Area 15 CC&R's.
A SITE UTILITIES
All required utilities have been installed to the site to accommodate a residential structure.
A GRADING OF SITE
Lot 308 was fully graded in accordance with a City of Carlsbad Grading Permit, to
accommodate a future residential structure at the same time (1990) that the adjacent (hlf
Course and Planning Area 13 was graded.
Q PROTECTION OF SITE
Erosion control and temporary landscaping of 1,ot 308 was completed in 1991 in order to
maintain the site in an attractive and natural manner. Although Lot 308 temporary land
scape is of the drought-tolerant variety, it is not vegetated with native coastal California
vegetation.
k ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT
The development on Lot 308 of a single-family home will be sensitive, and in compliance
with the Aviara architectural and landscaping guidelines, and the City of Carlsbad setback
and height restrictions.
b CC & R REQUIREMENTS
Lot 308 is included in the Axriara Master Homeowner's Association and will be required to
comply with the Master CC & R's.
AVIARA
1, 1 0 0
I
1
I
B
I
I
It
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
B
I
1 1988 HISTORICAL EXHIBIT
COLlMUNlTY PARK
ALGA ROAD - -~
AVIARA
6 w W
OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT - 1990
PRESERVED NATURAL
GOLF CQURSE
F4CTUREIl OPEN SPACE
BLITIQUITOS LAGOON
PaRK SI'E
-.I-..
~~L*ooow
AVIARA
1. ’ 0
8
1
8
1
I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Development of Lot 308 with a single family home has been determined by the Planning Directo
result in any significant environmental impacts;
& It does not disturb any existing or proposed wildlife corridors. No obstruction to wildlifc
passage will result due to the width of the surrounding unobstructed corridor.
& It does not create any adverse visual impact. Architectural requirements dictate that it WI
fully in scale with the area. Its view from the west will be largely hidden by existing the
course and domestic landscape.
It is not incompatible with surrounding land uses. It is a single family home, within a res
tial planned community which accommodates a diversity of housing types, in the middl
s I city.
4 contain sensitive vegetation.
1 documents affecting the area.
s It does not affect existing biological quality. It is a previously graded site, which does no
& It & consistent with the Local Coastal Program and all other applicable regulatory land u
1
1
I
1
I
I
i
1
1
I
TAX AND ASSESSMENT HISTORY
& Lot 308 has been assessed on taxes on a residential Drupertv status since 1989. The propert
current on its payment of taxes.
ircn Lot 308 is current on its Master HOA dues.
AWAW
U
AERIAL PHOTO m 1990
, :. _.
. :..?
'.I
AVIARA~
_~_~ ~
e a INTRODUCTION TO 1. '
II COMPUTER-SIMULATED GRAPHICS
On the following pages, computer-simulated graphics of an exampled house placed on Lot 308 i
demonstrated. These graphics are to horizontal and vertical scale, and provide view analysis frc
variety of locations, as shown on the View L,ocation Map below. 1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
It
I
1
I
I
I VIEW LOCATION MAP
- LOT 308 1-1 LOT 292
LOT 300 LOT 289
LOT 297 SANDPIPER
AVIARA"
w W iD
LOT 300
Two STORY - LOT 297
~
W - m
TWO STORY = LOT 292
~__ ~_____
Two STORY - LOT 289
2
CD
(v a W d
&
c;j s
(3 z z z
I
a
I * pe 0
+
3 2
i* ’ 0 0
I
t
1
1
i
I
I
8
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
ONE STORY - LOT 297
ONE STORY - LOT 292
i
(0
(v
4 W 4
: Ii
6
6
u Z z I
I > [r: 0
W
1' 0 e
I
I
1
I
1
8
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
CHRONOLOGY
1987 MASTER PLAN APPROVAL
1988 LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
1989 FINAL MAP APPROVAL
1990 SITE GRADED
1994
1996
TENTATIVE MAP APPROVAL
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO OPEN SPACE
AVIARA / CITY RECOGNITION OF GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NEED
1 AVIARA BUILDING CRITERIA
a ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS
a LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
a CC&R'S
a CITY / COASTAL REQUIREMENTS - SETBACKS - HEIGHTS
a P R o P E RTY VA LU E DICTATES Q u A L ITY
AVIARA"
.*.*I, I. ’ 0 m
I
1
1
I
8
1
I
1
1
1
1
8
I
1
8
I
AVIARA
\ LkTS 4hA’CI AT (’\
May 11, 1992
Dear Homeowner,
As you may be aware, the Planned Community of Aviara is situated in an ,
environmentally sensitive coastal setting. Approval of the community required extensive
environmental review, including a 400 page EIR, and concurrence from 18 separate agencie
As you can imagine, this process took some 5 years to achieve.
The result is a unique community in which large acreages of natural habitats are
preserved as native open space. In addition to the Batiquitos Lagoon wetlands, Coastal
chaparral, eucalyptus groves, oak groves and similar wildlife habitats are preserved betweer
and amongst the neighborhoods of Aviara. 1
These scenic resource areas have been protected and preserved from the impacts of
intensified use of the property by way of an Open Space Deed Restriction Agreement betwe
the Aviara developers and the California Coastal Commission on behalf of the State of
California. This agreement is irrevocable and benefits the property, runs with the land and
binding to all it’s assigns or successors. i
The Open Space Deed Restriction prohibits any alteration of landforms, removal of
vegetation or the erection of structures of any type without the written approval of the
California Coastal Commission.
Maintenance programs have been established to ensure the vitality of the environmen
for these sensitive areas. Approximately three and a half million square feet (Phase I) of d
restricted protected open space has now been turned over to the Master Association to own
maintain.
It is of utmost importance that the Master Association maintain these areas within the
guidelines and at the levels prescribed by the Coastal Commission and the City of Carlsbaa
-
:,‘!! I’AL\’‘[ :I’ \lRI‘(’KTF(’IL1 >[ lTi’,‘b t 4RL.r‘; &L;-?’\IA J???Q
\hiu)o:; 11;; ’ {\ (I’ I, ,’I --):L
I* ' 0 0
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
1
II -
R
May 11,1992
Page 2
Please do not affect or impact these native areas. Should you have any questions or
concerns regarding these areas, please feel free to contact Adrian McKibbin at the Walters
Management Company at 296-6225.
Thank you for your cooperation in maintaining the integrity of the Aviara open spacc
program.
Sincerely, t
Pamela Whitcomb
President
8 openspac.ahz
I* ' a e
1
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
1
1
I
-
,, .,,,. 9 7 .:. z . i
- . . - - . . - . . - . _.._. .._ - . . - - . - .
_. - -
-. . - . . - . - . . . - . - . . - . . - - . - . . - . - . . - . . - . - . - . - . . - . - . - . - . . - . .
-. - . _..-.._.._ - - . - . - - -- . - . - . - . - . .
L3 ,i\ 3 1 i3 IJ I 'I <I) S I P <.> i2 C7 'J
LH;EM
~co"sTALlE#K€AEA
~e-Gwn6GRs/E @
AVlARA
[ ! COASTAL RESOURCE /
.- . . .. 1,‘ *) ‘a’ 0 Attac,
mime AI>DENDUM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I ‘)
1
I
I
‘1‘0
P U RCI I AS E AGREE M EN?’ AND ES CR 0 W I NSTR U CI‘I 0 NS
(COMMON AIIEA 1.0’15)
I. Master Association Corninon Areq:
A. Master Open Spice Lot 3 of City of Carlslxid Tract 85-35, Phase I-Unit A, as shown on
Map 14209;
Master Open Space Lot 11 of City of Carls1)ntl Tract 85-35, Pliase I-Unit A, as shown
on Map 12400;
Master Opeji Space Lot 99 of City of Carlsbad Tract 85-35, I’Ii;~se I-Unit C, as shown
on Map 12411;
Master Open Space Lot 100 of City of Carlslxid Tract 85-35, I’hase I-Unit C, ;IS sliown
on Map 12411;
Master Open Space Ix~t 227 of City of Carlslxid Tract 85-35, 1’Ii;m I-Unit C, ;is shown e on Map 12411;
11.
C.
D.
E.
F. Master Open Space ht 228 of City of Carlslmf Tract 85-35, 1’h;ise I-Unil c, ;IS showii
oii Map 124 11;
Master Open Space Lot 229 of City of Carlst)atl Tract 85-35, I’liase I-Unit C, as sliowii
on Map 12411;
Master Open Spice Lot 231 of City of Carlslxid Tract 85-35, 1)liase I-Unit D, ;IS sliown
on Map 12412;
Master Open Spxc ht 232 of Cily of C:ii-lsl)atl Tract 85-35, 1’li:ise I-Unit I), ;is sliown
011 Map 12412;
Mtisler Open Space L*)t 306 of City of C;irlsli:id Tract 8.5-3.5. 1’li;ise I-Unit E, ;is sliowii
G.
11.
I.
J. I 011 Map 12413; and
K. Masler Open Space Lot 307 of City of Carlsl)ad Tract 8.5-35, 1’li;ise I-Unit E, as sliowii
oil Map 12413.
1 I. I’roiect Association Coin mori Arec:
1-01 303 of City of Carlsl)ad Tract 85-35, Pliase I-Unit D, as sliown on Map 12412.
\ Seller:
n i t i ;i Is 1niLi;iis
-. Lot 285 - Ettinger
Duyer: +
UJl0160.AB2 1 1/08/93 JCi1:etl m06m
'I >
July 22, 1997
Aviara Land Associates LP
201 1 Palomar Airport Road
Suite 206
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Re: Aviara Planning Lot 308
The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of July 15, 1997, adopted Resolution No. 97-53.
approving the Master Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Prograi
Amendment for the Aviara Lot 308 land use changes.
As a courtesy, enclosed please find a copy of Resolution No. 97-535 for your files.
I
*J&MC Assistant City Clerk
KRK: ij p
Enclosure
_________- ----____ 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-1 989 - (760) 434-28(