HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-08-17; City Council; 15364; Kelly Ranch Area Iia > 2 a %
. .
p
2 d Y
3
ch n
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# ‘5 36 y TITLE:
KELLY RANCH AREA “I”
MTG. 8/U/99 PUD 98-04
DEPT. PLN & 1
CITY All-Y.
CITY MGR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 99 -&q?
ment, PUD 98-04.
APPROVING Planned Unit Develop-
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The project is the proposed site plan and architecture for a 71 unit small lot single family residential
development.
The homes are proposed with three floor plans. Each plan has two stories and range in size from
2,832 square feet to 3,140 square feet. Each plan has an attached two car garage with an option for
a third garage space.
The proposal satisfies all of the development standards of the Planned Development Ordinance.
The attached Planning Commission staff report provides an in-depth analysis of the projects
compliance.
The projects inclusionary housing requirement will be satisfied through the construction of the Kelly
Ranch Apartment Project. That project is subject to the adopted Affordable Housing Agreement
Imposing Restrictions on Real Property dated October 5, 1998.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at their July 7, 1999 hearing and recommended
approval by a 7-O vote. Additional detailed information can be found in the attached Planning
Commission staff report and Planning Commission minutes excerpts.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All public facilities required to serve the additional dwelling units will be constructed prior to or concurrent
with development as mandated by the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8. Since these
improvements will be constructed by the developer, no negative fiscal impacts will be incurred by the City. The applicant will also be responsible for a pro-rata share toward the cost of short term improvements to the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real.
GROWTH MANAGMENT STATUS:
Facilities Zone 8
Growth Control Point 3.2
Density Range 0 - 4 du/ac 3.0 du/ac
Special Facilities CFD No. 1
The project is 5 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 7 7 - 297
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4562
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 7, 1999
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 7, 1999.
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
I - -
RESOLUTION NO. 99-297
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
SOUTH OF CANNON ROAD AND EAST OF FARADAY AVENUE
IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KELLY RANCH AREA “I”
CASE NO.: PUD 98-04
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, on July 7, 1999, the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing to consider Planned Unit Development PUD 98-04 for 71 single family
detached homes on lots less than 7,500 square feet in an R-l zone; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution
No. 4562 recommending to the City Council that PUD 98-04 be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the day of 17
Auqust , 1999, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendation and
heard all persons interested in or opposed to PUD 98-04; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts associated with the development of the
project were previously analyzed in the Kelly Ranch Environmental Impact Report, certified by
the City Council on May 11, 1999, by City Council Resolution No. 99-182.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That impacts of the Kelly Ranch Area “I” project were analyzed in the certified
Kelly Ranch Environmental Impact Report, EIR 98-05, and that an initial study established that
there are no changed circumstances and that the project will not cause any significant impacts
not already analyzed in the certified EIR 98-05.
3. That Planned Unit Development PUD 98-04 is approved and that the findings
and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No.
4562, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
4. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial Review”
shall apply: 2
“NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been
made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code
Chapter I .16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in
the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the date
on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the
decision becomes final a request for the record of the deposit in an
amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the
record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney
of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the
record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of
Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA. 92008.”
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 17 day of Auaust 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Finnila & Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Kulchin
,
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
-2- 3
EXHIBIT 2
KELLY RANCH AREA “I”
PUD 98-04
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4562
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A 71 RESIDENTIAL LOT PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PUD 98-04 ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF CANNON ROAD AND
EAST OF FUTURE FARADAY AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KELLY RANCH AREA “I”
CASE NO.: PUD 98-04
WHEREAS, Shea Homes Limited Partnership, “Developer”, has filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kelly Land
Company, “Owner”, described as
A portion of Lot “I” of Ran&o Agua Hedionda and a portion
of Lot “F” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, all in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California according
to map thereof No. 823, filed in the office of the County
Recorder of San Diego on November 16,1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Planned Unit
Development Permit for the Planning Area “1” segment of the project as shown on Exhibit(s)
“D-Q” _ “DD-LL” dated June 2,1999, on file in the Planning Department, KELLY RANCH
AREA “I” - PUD 98-04, as provided by Chapter 2 1.45/21.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 2nd day of June, 1999 and on
the 7th day of July, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider
said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Planned Unit Development Permit.
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4
W
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of KELLY RANCH AREA “I” - PUD 98-04,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. There was an Environmental Impact Report EIR 98-05 certified in connection with the
prior subdivision of the property in CT 97-16.
2. The project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as significant in the
prior EIR 98-05.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for (PUD 9%04),
is in conformance with Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the following:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Land Use - The project proposes single family residential homes consistent with
the intent of the RLM designation.
The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the proposed density
of 3.0 du/acre is within the density range of O-4 du/acre specified for the site as
indicated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is at or below the
growth control point of 3.2.
Circulation - The project includes a portion of Cannon Road which is a
Circulation Element Roadway.
Noise - Noise studies indicate that no portion of the site will be impacted by
adjacent noise sources.
Housing - The project will satisfy its fair share of inclusionary housing
through implementation of the Affordable Housing Agreement between the
City of Carlsbad and Kelly Land Company. The project market rate
housing will provide a need for single family residences.
That the project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as the Developer has been conditioned to
enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement to provide and deed restrict 132
dwelling units as affordable to lower-income households.
Open Space and Conservation - The project’ provides extensive passive open
space through conservation easements.
Public Safety - All public safety services can and will be provided to the project.
PC RESO NO. 4562 -2- k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
H. Parks and Recreation - The project will contribute to public parks and
recreation through the payment of Park-in-Lieu fees.
That the granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent with
Chapter 21.45 of Title 21, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and
all adopted plans of the City and other governmental agencies, in that the proposed
project was designed to include common and private open space, recreational
vehicle storage, resident and guest parking in conformance with the requirements of
Chapter 21.45 of Title 21.
That such use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons
residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity, in that the development of single family homes was intended by the land use
designation of the Genera1 Plan.
That the proposed Planned Development meets all of the minimum development
standards set forth in Chapter 2 1.45.090, the design criteria set forth in Section 2 1.45.080,
and has been designed in accordance with the concepts contained in the Design
Guidelines Manual, in that subdivision follows the topography of the site and the road
does not dominate the overall design.
That the proposed project is designed to be sensitive to and blend in with the natural
topography of the site, and maintains and enhances significant natural resources on the
site, in that conservation easements have been dedicated for the preservation of
natural resources.
That the proposed project’s design and density of the developed portion of the site is
compatible with surrounding development and does not create a disharmonious or
disruptive element to the neighborhood, in that the site was recently subdivided for
single family home development.
That the project’s circulation system is designed to be efficient and well integrated with
the project and does not dominate the project, in that the roadways have been designed
to take advantage of existing topography and have been minimized consistent with
hillside development standards to reduce hillside impacts.
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Planning Commission finds that:
A. the project is consistent with CEQA guidelines section 15 168(c)(2) Program EIR;
B. the project is consistent with the action in the regulations cited above;
C. there was a Program EIR certified in connection with the associated Tentative
Map;
PC RESO NO. 4562 -3- 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
D. the project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as significant
in the prior Program EIR;
E. none of the circumstances requiring Subsequent or a Supplemental EIR under
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15 162 or 15 163 exist;
12. That this project could have a potentially significant negative cumulative traftic impact
on the Palomar Airport Road/ El Camino Real intersection. However, this project has
been conditioned to pay its fair share of the “short-term improvements,” thereby
guaranteeing implementation of a mitigation measure that reduces the potential impact to
a level of insignificance.
Conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Staff is authorized-and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Planned Unit Development documents, as necessary to make
them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project.
Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed
development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the
Site Plan as approved by the final decision making body. The Site Plan shall reflect the
conditions of approval by the City. The Plan copy shall be submitted to the City
Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or improvement plan
submittal, whichever occurs first.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a
reduced legible version of the approving resolution(s) on a 24” x 36” blueline drawing.
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July 28,
1987, (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any development
fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or Facilities
and Improvement Plan and to fulfil1 the developer’s/subdivider’s agreement to pay the
public facilities fee dated August 29, 1997, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk
and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application will not be
consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will be void.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to provide
school facilities.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as’part of the Zone 8 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits, including, but not limited to the
following:
PC RESO NO. 4562 -4- 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Construction of Cannon Road
B. Availability of the South Agua Hedionda Sewer Interceptor
8. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this residential
housing project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as provided in
Government Code Section 66020. If,a.ny such condition is determined to be invalid this
approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the
condition complies with all requirements of law.
9. Approval of PUD 98-43 is granted subject to the approval of SDP 98-18 and CDP 9%
70.
10. The Developer shall establish a homeowner’s association and corresponding covenants,
conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Director prior to final map approval. Prior to issuance of a building permit the
Developer shall provide the Planning Department with a recorded copy of the official
CC&Rs that have been approved by the Department of Real Estate and the Planning
Director. At a minimum, the CURS shall contain the following provisions:
A. General Enforcement bv the Citv. The City shall have the right, but not the
obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Declaration in
favor of, or in which the City has an interest.
B. Failure of Association to Maintain Common Area Lots and Easements. In the
event that the Association fails to maintain the “Common Area Lots and/or the
Association’s Easements” as provided in Article , Section
the City shall have the right, but not the duty, to perform the necessary
maintenance. If the City elects to perform such maintenance, the City shall give
written notice to the Association, with a copy thereof to the Owners in the Project,
setting forth with particularity the maintenance which the City finds to be required
and requesting the same be carried out by the Association within a period of thirty
(30) days from the giving of such notice. In the event that the Association fails to
carry out such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and/or Association’s
Easements within the period specified by the City’s notice, the City shall be
entitled to cause such work to be completed and shall be entitled to
reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owners as provided herein.
C. Snecial Assessments Levied bv the Citv. In the event the City has performed the
necessary maintenance to either Common Area Lots and/or Association’s
Easements, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Association for all costs
incurred by the City to perform such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and
or Association’s Easements. The City shall provide a copy of such invoice to
each Owner in the Project, together with a statement that if the Association fails to
pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection
against the Owners in the Project pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Said
invoice shall be due and payable by the Association within twenty (20) days of
receipt by the Association. If the Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full
PC RESO NO. 4562 -5- 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be
subject to a late charge in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the amount of
the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection from the Association by
means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available
to the City, the City may levy a special assessment against the Owners of each Lot
in the Project for an equal pro rata share of the invoice, plus the late charge. Such
special assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing
lien upon each Lot against which the special assessment is levied. Each Owner in
the Project hereby vests the City with the right and power to levy such special
assessment, to impose a lien upon their respective Lot and to bring all legal
actions and/or to pursue lien foreclosure procedures against any Owner and
his/her respective Lot for purposes of collecting such special assessment in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Article of this Declaration.
This approval shall be null and void if the project site subject to this approval is not
annexed to City of Carlsbad CFD No. 1 within 60 days of the approval. The City shall
not issue any grading, building, or other permit, until the annexation is completed. The
City Manager is authorized to extend the 60 days, for a period not to exceed 60 days,
upon a showing of good cause.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conformance with
the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. The plans
shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director prior to the
approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first. The
Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved plans, and
maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and
debris.
The Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map in the sales office at all
times, or suitable alternative to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
All sales maps that are distributed or made available to the public shall include but not be
limited to trails, future and existing schools, parks and streets.
The Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of, all applicable
mitigation measures identified in the Supplemental Final EIR 98-05 that are found by this
resolution to be feasible.
The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Kelly Ranch Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
The Developer, or their successors in interest, shall improve the project site with the
project as described in the Final EIR 98-05, except as modified by this resolution.
The project is subject to the Affordable Housing Agreement adopted by City
Council on July 28,1998 by Resolution No. 98-257.
PC RESO NO. 4562 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19.
20.
21.
22.
One third of the residential units in Planning Area “I” shall be Plan 1 as shown on
the approved exhibits, which has a greater than 50% single story edge as defined by
Council Policy 44, also known as the Small Lot Architectural Guidelines.
Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing
water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that
adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the
time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and
facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy.
The Developer shall pay their fair share for the “short-term improvements” to the El
Camino Real/ Palomar Airport Road intersection prior to approval of the final map or the
issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first. The amount shall be determined by
the methodology ultimately selected by Council, including but not limited to, an increase
in the city-wide traffic impact fee; an increased or new Zone 8 LFMP fee; the creation of
a fee or assessment district; or incorporation into a Mello-Roos taxing district.
Approval of PUD 98-04 is subject to the approval of LCPA 97-09 by the California
Coastal Commission.
Engineering:
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
The developer shall provide an acceptable means for maintaining the private easements
within the Planned Unit Development. Private streets, sidewalks, streetlights, storm drain
facilities and sewer facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such
maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the
Planned Unit Development. Adequate provision for such maintenance shall be included
in a recorded document subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the developer shall comply with the
requirements of the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a
program is formerly established by the City.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, the developer shall submit to’ and’receive approval from the City
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and
requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit proof that a Notice of
Intention has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board.
The developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best
management practices as referenced in the “California Storm Water Best Management
Practices Handbook” to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge
to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be prepared by the developer and
approved by the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying
PC RESO NO. 4562 -7- //
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23’
24
25
26
27
28
prospective owners and tenants of the following:
A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with
established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
C.
General
Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements
29. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation
to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s, approval of
this Planned Unit Development.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition? of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from the date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions.
If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PC RESO NO. 4562 -8- /a
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of July 1999, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4562 -9- 13
The iity of CARLSBAD Planning Department EXHIBIT 4
z@. A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 0 3
Application complete date: October 29. 1998
P.C. AGENDA OF: July 7, 1999 Project Planner: Christer Westman
Project Engineer: Mike Shirey
SUBJECT: SDP 98-18/PUD 98-04/CDP 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I” & “J” -
Request for approval of architectural design and building placement for 154 single
family homes on lots ranging in size from 5,098 to 20,655 square feet south of
Cannon Road and east of future Faraday Avenue in Local facilities Management
Zone 8.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4560 and 4561
APPROVING Site Development Plan SDP 98-18 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 98-70
and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No.4562 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
Planned Unit Development PUD 98-04, based on the findings and subject to the conditions
contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The property was subdivided by tentative map CT 97-16, which was recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission on April 7, 1999. The proposed actions will approve architectural
styles and details as well as building setbacks and heights consistent with Chapter 2 1.45, Planned
Development, and Chapter 21.06 Qualified Development Overlay Zone of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
The- project was before the Planning Commission on June 2, 1999 and was continued at staffs
request. This report and the associated exhibits reflect some changes made to the project since
June 2, 1999. The changes do not affect Planning Area “I” which is subject to SDP 98-18, PUD
98-04, and CDP 98-70. The changes include revised architectural elevations for Planning Area
“J” as well as adjusting the setbacks within Planning Area “J” to comply with the standards for
the R-l Zone. Therefore, Planning Area “J” is no longer being processed under PUD 98-04,
since it has been redesigned as a standard R-l project. Planning Area “J” is subject to SDP 9%
18 and CDP 98-70.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The subdivision, CT 97-16, was approved by the Planning Commission with single family
residential lots ranging from 5,098 to 20,655 square feet. Within the subdivision, two distinctive
planning areas were defined. Planning Area “I” contains 71 lots with sizes between 5,098 and
12.507 square feet and Planning Area “J” contains 83 lots with sizes between 7,500 and 20,655
-
SDP 98-18/ PUD 98-04/&r 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I’& J”
July 7, 1999
Page 3
II COASTAL DEVELOPMENT COMPLIAtiCE TABLE Ii
LCP Land Use Plan RM (Residential Medium)
General Plan RLM (Residential Low Medium)
Zoning R-l-Q
Grading Permit Required No
Hillside Development Permit Required No
Native Vegetation Imuacts None
STANDARD
Front Yard Setback
REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROPOSED
1 O’-20’ 1 O’-20’+
Side/Rear Yard Setback
Building Height
Lot Coverage
5’-lO’/lO’-20’
30’
40%
5’- 1 O’+/lO’-20’+
less than 27’
less than 35%
Review of Required Coastal Findings
1. Conformance with the Certified Local Coastal Program and all am&cable policies.
The project is located in the Mello II Local Coastal Program Segment. As discussed
below, the project complies with the applicable LCP provisions.
The project proposes the construction of a single family residences in an area designated
for single family development. The LCP Land Use Plan designates the subject site for
RM (Residential Medium) density development.
The lots are proposed with a maximum of one unit each. The proposed homes will not
obstruct public views or otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. Grading
of the site has been approved with CDP 97-43; no agricultural uses exist on the site; nor
are there any sensitive resources within the proposed areas of development. Development
is not located in an area of known geologic instability. No public opportunities for
coastal access are available from the subject site and no public access requirements are
conditioned for the project.
.
2. Coastal Overlay Zones.
The subject site is located in the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, however, all
issues regarding grading within slope areas were addressed under CDP 97-43. The home
construction project will not require a grading permit. Construction of the homes may
cause erosion if not properly mitigated, therefore, the project will adhere to the City’s
Master Drainage and Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Grading Ordinance
erosion control measures during construction to avoid increased run off and soil erosion.
C. Planned Development Ordinance
The 71 lot Planning Area “I” is subject to the Planned Development. Ordinance since it contains ’
lots which are less than 7,500 square feet.. The intent of the Planned Development Ordinance is
to allow some flexibility in design of developments while providing for essential development
/x
SDP 98-18/ PUD 98-04/Cbr 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I’& J "
July 7, 1999
standards and also encouraging development which is sensitive to the natural topography of the
site. The site was previously subdivided using those concepts and created single family lots
which are generally in keeping with the site’s topography.
The project complies with the Planned Development Ordinance as follows:
l A common recreational vehicle storage area is being provided adjacent to Planning Area “D”.
’ The storage area is intended for use by all residents within the Kelly Ranch planning areas.
l Resident parking will be provided within attached two and three car garages. Guest parking
will be provided both “on-street” as well as in individual driveways. The Planned
Development Ordinance allows for “on-street” guest parking for single family detached
Planned Unit Developments.
l A minimum of 200 square feet of recreational open space must be provided for each
residential unit. The requireaent is being satisfied through individual private rear yards
which are typically greater than 1,000 square feet each, and through a common recreational
open space lot (155) which is approximately 15,000 square feet.
l Front yard setbacks for single family residences are to be 20 feet, however, the setbacks may
be varied to a 15 foot average with a 10 foot minimum. In each case that a building’s garage
faces the street, a setback of at least 20 feet is provided. Setbacks between 20 and 10 feet are
proposed for lots in Planning Area “I” which have a side loaded garage. A greater than 15
foot average is proposed.
l Side yard setbacks are proposed consistent with the R-l zoning requirement which is 10% of
the lot width. The rear yard setback requirement is 20% of the lot width or a maximum of 20
feet. Planning Area “I” proposes rear yard setbacks greater than 20 feet on all but eight lots.
The eight lots that have less than 20 foot rear yard setbacks comply with the 20% standard.
l All residences are proposed with interior storage area of at least 480 cubic feet, which is the
minimum requirement.
l Lots sizes have been approved in the range of 5,000 to 20,000 square feet. The minimum lot
size allowed is 3,500 square feet.
D. Small Lot Architectural Guidelines
Planning Area “I” is subject to the Small Lot Architectural Guidelines since there are lots less
than 7,500 square feet. The guidelines are attached. The homes have been designed to comply
with those requirements. Plan One has been designed with a single story edge greater than 10
feet in depth along one side to satisfy policy points 1 and 2. Plan One is proposed to be used for
33% of the lots and will be distributed throughout the planning area to satisfy policy point 3. All
of the homes have been designed with varying building planes on the front and rear elevations to
satisfy policy points 4 and 5. All of the homes have been designed ‘with a side elevation which
varies in depth to satisfy policy point 6. Plan One uses a double car garage, therefore only 67%
of the planning area will offer visible three car garages to satisfy policy point 7. All of the homes
SDP 98-I 8/ PUD 98-04/CDP 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I’& J"
July 7, 1999
will have door and window trim as well as multiple roof configurations to satisfy policy points S
and 9.
E. One-Family Residential Zone
The 83 lot Planning Area “J” has been designed as a standard single family subdivision. Lots are
greater than 7,500 square feet. Front yard setbacks of 20 feet or greater will be provided as well
as side yard setbacks equal to 10% of the lot width and rear yards equal to at least 20% of the lot
width. Each home is designed with a three car garage. Planning Area “J” complies with all of
the development standards of the R- 1 zone.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director may determine that an EIR previously certified for a connected project is
sufficient for the present project. The impacts of the Kelly Ranch Apartment Project were
analyzed in the Kelly Ranch Environmental Impact Report. An initial study established, per the
State CEQA guidelines, that additional significant environmental impacts will not occur as a
result of the implementation of this project and therefore a notice of prior compliance has been
issued and published for public review. No comments have been received from the public at
large regarding the project.
In addition, the City has received its annual Growth Management Traffic Monitoring Report.
The Report has recorded an unanticipated intersection “level of service” (LOS) failure at
Palomar Airport Road (PAR) and El Camino Real (ECR) during both the a.m. and p.m. peak
hours. This potentially creates a changed circumstance negating reliance on previous
environmental documentation. Pursuant to 9 15 162 of the CEQA Guidelines a lead agency must
prepare a “Subsequent” environmental documentation if substantial evidence (i.e., the recorded
intersection failure) determines that a changed circumstance exists. However, case law has
interpreted this section of the CEQA Guidelines to not require the preparation of a “Subsequent
EIR” if mitigation measures are adopted which reduce the identified impacts to a level of
insignificance.
A mitigation measure has been identified which, if implemented, will bring the peak hours LOS
into the acceptable range. The mitigation measure involves construction of two dual right turn
lanes-northbound to eastbound and westbound to northbound. This project has been conditioned
to pay its fair share of the intersection “short-term improvements,” thereby guaranteeing
mitigation to a level of insignificance.
/?
SDP 98-l 81 PUD 98-04/C~f 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I’& J *’
July 7, 1999
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4560 (SDP)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No.4562 (PUD)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No.456 1 (CDP)
4. Location Map
5. Background Data Sheet
6. Disclosure Statement
7. Local Facilities Impact Assessment
8. Small Lot Single Family Guidelines
9. Exhibits “A” - ‘VW” dated June 2.1999
CW:eb
CASE NO:
CASE NAME:
APPLICANT:
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
SDP 9%18/PUD 98-04/CDP 98-07
KELLY RANCH ARFA “I”&“J”
Shea Homes Limited Partnershin
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Approval of building de@ for 155 single family lots
APN: 208-020-34 and 35 Acres: 55 acres Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 155
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: RLM
Density Allowed: 3.2
Existing Zone: R- 1-O
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Density Proposed: 3.1
Proposed Zone: N/A
Zonine Land Us
Site R-l-Q Vacant
North R-l Vacant
South R-3-Q Vacant
East OS Vacant
West R-3-Q Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Municinal Sewer District:
Carlsbad Municiual
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 155
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: Mst 29. 1997
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
III Negative Declaration, issued
El Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Mav 11. 1999
cl Other,
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all appiicarions which \\ill require 1
discrerionap action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee. 1
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any individuaI, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fjatemal
organization. corporation, estate, txust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other cotm~‘, city and county. tip
municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agents may sign this document; however, the kegal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be
provided below.
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of& persons having a financial
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a comoration or uarmershiu. include the
names. title. addresses of al! individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDlCATE NON-
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a pubiiclv-owned coruoration, include the
names. titles. and addresses of the corporate offken. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.)
Person
Title
Address
Carp/Pan Shea Homes Limited Partnership
Title (see attached)
Address 10721 Treena Street, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92131
7 -. OWNER CNot the owner’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of m persons having any ownership
interest in the property involved. Also. provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e,
pannership. tenants in common. non-profit. corporation. etc.). If the ownership includes a
corooration or oannershie, include the names. title. addresses of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES,
PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) ,IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a pubiiclv-
owned corporation. include the names. titles. and addresses of the corporate offkers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person CorplPart Kelly Land Co.
Title Title (see attached)
Address Address 2011 Palomar Airport Road Carlsbad, CA 92009
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161. FAX (760) 438-0894
_I 1. NON-PROFIT i ANECATION OR TRUST
If an>. person id\ .ied pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a non. *fit orcanlzat1on or n trust. ltst tw
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-prof’lt
organization or as trustee or beneficiv of the.
Non Profit/Trust N/A Non Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
4. Have you had more than %250 worth of business transacted with any member of Gin. staff.
Boards. Commissions. Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months’?
El Yes El . No If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
1 certify hat a l the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. n
.’ I 9-14-98 :- (: 9-9-98 cc -
Siparure of owmerldate Kelly Land Comany, a Delaware Corporation D.L. Clemens/Vice President
Print or type name of owner
Sighature of applicant/date
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
by: Dale Holbrook
Print or type name of applicant /&f&p.... 9014098
/Sirnature of owner/applicant’s a
3
ent if applicable/date
Scott Medansky/Secretary Treasurer
Print or type name of owner/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT S/99 Page 2 of *’ ’
CAROL ,. CUSICK RILC? WCC .““lDL”r r-0 rLL6clrrC CC”CU‘co”lsc December 18, 1997 .I r: 3x+3640
VIA FACSIMLLE & FEDERAL EXPRESS
Christopher B. Ncils, Esq.
Sheppard, Mull@ Richert & Hampton
501 West Broadway, 19th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101-3598
Mr. Lany Ckmens
AviaraHilfmanProperti~~
Pdomar Triad COrpOAtC Park
2011 Palomar Airport Koad, Suite 206
Cadsha& CA 92009
Re: Kelly Land Company, a Delaw;ut corporation
Dear Chxis~and Lanyz
The Disclosure Statement we discussed for the Cily of C&bad Planning Department states
in paragraph 3 that we are to list all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the
corporation (Kelly Lard Company) if any person idcnticd in paragxaph 1 and 2 is a corporation.
As we discussed; Kelly Land Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wilmingon Securities,
Inc., a Delaware corpordlion, which, in turn, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wilmington Investments, Inc., a Delaware carporation, which, in rum, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The
Hi 1 lman Company, a Pennsylvania corporation. Only one shareholder of The HiIlman Company
owns more than 10% of the voting securities of The Hillman Company. That shareholder is the
following trust:
Henry L. Hillman, Elsie Hilliard Hillman and C-G. Grcfenstcttc, Trustees of The
Hary L. Hillman Trust, Under Agreement dated November 18,198s.
This is a rev&able trusf whose grantor is Mr. Henry L. Hillman.
Please let us know if you need any further information.
very truly yars,
bee: Scott Medansky Carol J. Cusick Riley
H. Vaughan Blaxrer, III Bartley J. Rahuba
The following persons/entities have a financial interest
in Shea Homes Limited Partnership
General Partner:
J.F. Shea Co., Inc.
Limited Partners:
Shea Investments
Tahoe Partnership I
Balboa Partnership
John F. Shea, Trustee
John F. Shea Family Trust
Peter 0. Shea
Edmund H. Shea, Jr. Trustee
Edmund and Mary Shea Real
Property Trust
Address
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 9 1789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 91789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 9 1789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 9 1789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 91789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 91789
655 Brea Canyon Rd.
Walnut, CA 91789
A3
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
h
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
“ 99 ,, ,, FILE NAME AND NO: Kelly Ranch Area I & J . SD P 98-l 8IPUD 98-04lCDP 98-70
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: __8_ GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: R- 1 -Q
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Shea Homes Limited Partnershin
ADDRESS: 10721 Treena Street Suite 200 San Diego CA. 92131
PHONE NO.: 619 549-3156 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 208-020-34 and 35
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 55 acres/l55 units
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 539
Library: Demand in Square Footage = 287
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) J55 EDU
Park: Demand in Acreage = 1.08
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin =
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. =
Open Space: Acreage Provided =
Schools:
Sewer: Demands in EDU
Identify Sub Basin =
Water: Demand in GPD =
N/A
1.550
ff5
16.
41 E/11 JrH/21 HS
155
N/A
34.100
The project is 5 units under the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. .
Page 1 of?
ClTY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
General Subject: SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES
Policy No. 44
Date Issued a/26/9
Effective Date 8 I26 / 9 i
Cancellation Date n/a
Supersedes No. 44
dated 10/10/89
Specific Subject: ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
SMALL LOTS
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File
PURPOSE
To provide guidelines to encourage the quality development of small-lot (less than 7500 sq.
ft.) single family projects. The intent of the guidelines is to ensure that units have sufficient
building articulation as not to appear “boxy” or as ‘row” housing. They are primarily designed
to apply to projects where there is a predominance of two-story units.
POLICY
Guidelines for Small-Lot Sinale Familv Proiects
1. In projects where there are three 2-story units in a row situated less than 15 feet
apart. at least one of the three units shall have a single story building edge. The
depth of the single-story edge shall not be less than 10’ and shall run the length of the
building pad. The roof covering the single story element shall be substantially lower
than the roof for the 2 story element to the unit (this is not intended to preclude long
shed-type roofs falling to a single-story element).
2. In projects where there are three 2-story units i; a row situated between 15 and 20
feet apart, at least one of the three units shall have a single story building edge with a
depth of not less than 5 feet running the length of the building pad. The roof of the
single story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the two story
element of the building (this is not intended to preclude long shed-type roofs falling to
a single-story element).
3. On a project basis, thirty-three percent (33%) of all units shall have a single story
eUge for forty percent (40%) of the perimeter df the building. For the purpose of this
guideline the single story edge shall be a minimum depth of three feet (3’). The units
qualifying under the 33% shall be distributed throughout the project. The main
purpose of this guideline is to ensure some building relief on the front and sides of
each unit.
a
Pqc 2 of .:
CITY OF CARLSBAD Pohcy No. 44
Date Issued 8/26/97
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
General Subject: SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES
Effective Date 8 ! _ 6 ! 9 7
Cancellation Date -L- Supersedes No. 44
dated lo/lo/89
Specific Subject: ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
SMALL LOTS
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney. Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File
4. For at least 50% of the units in a project, there shall be at least three separate building
planes on street side elevations of lots with 45 feet of frontage or less, and four
separate building planes on street side elevations of lots with a frontage greater than 45
feet. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include but not be
limited to building walls, windows and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of
the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 10 feet and a
plane must be a minimum of 30 sq. ft. to receive credit under this section.
5. Rear elevations shall adhere to the same criteria outlined in number 4 above for front
elevations except that the minimum depth between front and back planes on the rear
elevation shall be 3 feet.
5. At least 50% of the units in a project shall have one side elevation where there are
sufficient offsets or cutouts so that the side yard setback averages a minimum of 7 feet.
7. Projects with an average lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. or less shall limit the number of units
with three car garages to 75% of the plan in the project. Project units with three car
garages shall be a mix of two door garages, three door garages, and offset (2 planes
min. 12”) two door garages.
3. Fifty percent (50%) of exterior openings (doors/windows) shall be recessed or projected
a minimum of 2” and shall be with wood or colored aluminum window frames (no mill
finishes).
3. The predominant roof framing for each floor plan in a project shall exhibit directional
variety to the other floor plans and to the street.
1
‘ROCEDURE
I. Applicants - Design projects so that they comply with the guidelines to the greatest
extent feasible. Fully justify any deviations from the guidelines.
? _. Staff - Review projects for compliance with the guidelines. Make recommendations to
decision-makers as to compliance with the guidelines and whether any deviations are
justified and whether the intent of the guidelines would still,be achieved.
-
CITY OF CARLSBAD Policy No. 44
Date Issued -9 8/26/g/
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT ::e,C,S:t:ti
Supersedes No. 44 dated 10710/89
General Subject: SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES
Specific Subject: ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF _
SMALL LOTS
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File
3. Decision-Makers - On a case by case basis determine whether the project complies with
the intent of the guidelines to ensure that the project does not appear “boxy” as “row
housing”.
Notes: a) For the purpose of these guidelines a single story element shall be
defined as a plate line maximum of 12 feet (10 feet preferred).
b) In addition, when a percentage of units is described in the guidelines
the intent is to have that percentage spread throughout the entire project.
cl intersection.
‘In a row” shall include curves and shall terminate at a 90 degree street
.
June 17, 1999
Job No. 981047
Mr. Joe McMahon
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576
Re: Centerstone Pad Certification
Lots l-15, inclusive, CT 96-08, Dwg. No. 3752A
Dear Mr. McMahon:
Based on our field survey on June 16, 1999 the grading of the pads for the referenced lots has
been substantially completed in accordance with the approved grading plan, to the approximate
final elevations. The final elevations are certified to a tolerance of LO.1 foot, and the horizontal
location is certified for approximate location.
PNO/th
cc: Kirk Evans, Centerstone Co.
Dave Cunningham, Centerstone Co.
W:\MSOFFICE\WINWORD\98IO47\mcmahon.ltr.doc
Very truly yours,
O’DAY CONSULTANTS, INC.
President
-,k,Jfl() !‘,),r(.;;‘v ( : t .!\.,.’ hi~~::i‘~illl!.!:
\iii;: ,‘ih ’ /‘ltl!l:lii/‘:
\ .i: i>i,.i.. i.,,;!~,,y’!,i -‘z:i/t’. -,;:- i’lt,C’:‘i;iil’,
‘,,(‘.G : .-‘i:,; .\!i!, i ;‘!:;:
: .r ‘<.,: ‘2,. ,\,,..i
,.’ ,’ ;’
PUT F SHOW PAD C.RTiFKtAA80N
ClN JUNE 16, 1999
SW I OF I
I
-1
r pF*T d II s4 *s, 6g
4b’ j-j-j %J 4 I 1 I a0 5 '40 II 9 8
X 4v X
5
,I “30 %j 0 I I 3 %4
:L
4i?
*;12
X
4l.?
X
S? *?6 S??
F:\.OS\9ElM7\PASCERTL 6-23-99 649d, .CI CfT
+ 54.34 s4 - **a -
Q, -+L
0 9 “S ‘13, 4
~ 53.33
--
% 1 +
-63 k!z-(
‘3, % %J% -- % *?9 1 $1 % *?? -
0 7 %Sl SJ.2 *?o % --
%9 %S S 0 96 I “s 6-J 9e4 *5Q- 598: %
%> ? %S916 0 2
%, 0
+ 59.”
% *%9 0 %,
3
4
+ 59B4= +jQ?
Y
%SS ? 29 *; 0 4 %s* *?? ah *5Q* $Q$
%
*se *99 0 %ssf
%sqs
%?+y5d
ss
O x9
- - CHlNQUiPi~ik--
w 120'
SCALE: 1" = 60'
a?%&
59w Po*taur court civil Engimring suite ISCJ Corlrbod. Califom$ 92008 Plonninq Prosesmp
760-9,1-7700 S”fW+llg
Fo~:760-931-.3690
rCI.
DkAFT EXHl6lT 5
3. SDP 98-18/PUD 98-04/CDP 98-70 - KELLY RANCH AREA “I” & “J” - Request for approval of
architectural design and building placement for 154 single family homes on lots ranging in size
from 5,098 to 20,655 square feet south of Cannon Road and east of future Faraday Avenue in
Local Facilities Management Zone 8.
Mr. Wayne announced that the action of this Commission regarding Resolutions No. 4560 and 4561 is
final unless appealed within 10 calendar days, while the Commission’s action on Resolution No. 4562 is
not final and will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Mr. Wayne introduced Associate Planner, Christer Westman, who presented the staff report as follows:
Planning Areas I and J are two distinct single-family products within one project. Planning Area I is a
small lot subdivision with lots ranging in size from 5,000 to 12,000 square feet and there are 71 lots in that
subdivision. This portion of the project is subject to the planned development ordinance as well as the
Site Development Plan and the Coastal Development Permit and is also subject to the small lot
architectural guidelines. This project meets all of the requirements of the Planned Development
Ordinance. The project is proposing reduced front yard setbacks, setbacks that go down to as low as 10
feet. However, the overall average setback is 18 feet throughout the entire project. The homes will have
2 or 3 car garages. In Planning Area J is a project with 83 lots ranging in size from 7,500 to 20,000
square feet and is subject to the Site Development Plan and the Coastal Development Permit. This
portion of the project complies, entirely, with all of the R-l development standards and is considered a
typical R-l development. The front yard setbacks are 20 feet and the side yard setbacks and back yards
are determined by the lot width (20% of the width of the lot for rear yards/lo% of the lot width for side
yards).
Commissioner Welshons asked if Mr. Westman was familiar with a letter (a copy of which is on file in the
Planning Department) received from the owner’s of 1600 Faraday Avenue, in which they stated their
concerns regarding the impacts of the this project on the industrial park. In particular, they asked if this
project should be conditioned to have adequate screening walls and deed restrict the home on the parcels
adjacent to their property to preclude the construction of two-story homes or additions.
Mr. Westman replied that staffs response to that letter is that staff does not feel it would be appropriate to
place any kind of deed restriction on a property because the distance between the industrial lots and the
residential lots is quite significant. Also, the type of development that is being proposed (single-family
residential) have relatively low buildings and significant setbacks are provided between the edge of slope
and the buildings. Staff does not feel that there will be any visual impact from the industrial area toward
the residential area, in that the industrial area is far enough away (approximately 1,500 to 2.000 feet) that
there does not seem to be a need to protect the residential area with a block wall.
Mr. Westman showed a small aerial photograph of Areas I and J to each of the Commissioners and
identified the proposed residential area as well as the adjacent industrial area. He further pointed that in
addition to the almost 2,000 feet between the subject adjacent areas, the proposed residential area is
conslderably higher in elevation than the industrial area. Based on the aerial photograph, staff does not
believe that there will be an impact that needs to be mitigated by either a block wall or a restriction on the
PLANNING COMMISSION July 7, 1999
properties.
Commissioner Welshons pointed out that there is a notation in the staff report, regarding Planning Area I,
which states that a common recreational vehicle storage area is being provided adjacent to Planning Area
D and the storage area is intended for use by all residents within the Kelly Ranch planning areas, and
asked what Planning Area I’s proportional share of that storage area is and what is the standard.
Mr. Westman replied that the requirement would be 20 square feet per unit (1,400 square feet for Planning
Area I) and the recreational vehicle facility is well over 20,000 square feet. It is the same recreational
facility that was previously discussed.
Commissioner Welshons asked if there will then be an understanding that each of these Planning Areas
has a proportionate share.
Mr. Westman replied that the shares are implied and it is stated that it is for all of the planning areas within
the Kelly Ranch project. However, there is no mention of a specific number of square feet for each
individual planning area.
Commissioner Welshons asked who will regulate the use of the storage facility and if there is a Master
Homeowners Association.
Mr. Westman replied that regulation will come through the homeowners association and the management
company in charge of the apartment project. He added that there is no Master Homeowners Association
(to his knowledge).
Mr. Wayne asked Commissioner Welshons if her concern is that the RV storage be maintained or is her
concern that each planning area have its own delineated proportionate share.
Commissioner Welshons replied that she is not looking for a delineated proportionate share. She is
concerned, however, that without someone to oversee the area, a resident who may wish to park a
vehicle in the storage area only to find there is no room, would not have anyone to approach that could
solve the problem. Also, without a body to regulate who parks in the area, anyone could park in there and
no one would be the wiser.
Mr. Wayne pointed out that the Archstone Communities project (the previous agenda item) is conditioned
to essentially control and maintain the RV storage area.
Russ Haley, representing Shea Homes, 10721 Trina Street, San Diego, responded to the question
regarding the RV storage area by stating that there is an agreement with Archstone to manage and
maintain the RV site. He further stated that -Villages I and J will have one combined homeowners
association which will work with Archstone should a problem arise with the RV storage area.
Commissioner Compas asked if this project will be constructed in phases.
Mr. Haley replied that it will be constructed in phases (12 to 16 homes) and that Shea Homes will be doing
all of the approval work for the entire Kelly Ranch project.
Commissioner Compas asked, assuming that they receive all of the approvals, when they would start,
when they expect to make their first sales, and what will be the sale prices for the two different groups.
Mr. Haley replied that they will probably be starting during the Summer and sales would commence in the
Fall of the year 2000. Village I will range in price from the mid $300.000 and Village J will range in price
from the high $300,000 to the low $400,000.
Chairperson Heineman opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak.
Linda Richardson, 475 W. Bradley Avenue, El Cajon, representing Hammond Construction, stated that
3/
PLANNING COMMISSlwI July 7, 19% Page 13
Hammond Construction is located in the industrial area adjacent t0 this project. She stated that their
concern is that at some time in the future a homeowner might look over his back fence and not like seeing
industrial buildings which, in turn, might cause Hammond to be required to change their buildings in some
manner or that the uses may be restricted. She suggested that a screening wall and deed restrictions be
imposed for the homes along that slope between the industrial area and the residential project.
Commissioner Welshons asked Ms. Richardson if there are certain restrictions tied to their operation, to
which Ms. Richardson replied that all of their buildings have the same restrictions regardless of their uses.
Mr. Wayne stated that Hammond Construction occupies Lot 100 in that industrial park and that Lot 100
already has restrictions because it is adjacent to residential and they are required to mitigate. Also, there
is no nexus for the Commission to place restrictions on the residential project. However, if the
Commission wishes to do so, they may require that an appropriate disclosure be made to all prospective
home buyers.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if Hammond Construction area has any Conditional Use Permits, to which
Ms. Richardson replied negatively. He went on to point out that since the buildings are already there,
there does not appear to be any need for a disclosure.
Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Heineman closed Public Testimony.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Westman if the fact that this project is going to be built in phases
affects how the infrastructure is put in, in terms of any special requirements on roads and is there a
condition requiring that infrastructure. Also, if there is such a condition, where is it and is it cross
referenced.
Mr. Westman replied that it is his understanding that the applicant will construct all of the roads first and
there is a condition in the original subdivision. However, that condition is not cross referenced but Tract
Map No. 97-16, which subdivided the lots, has a condition that states that prior to construction of any of
the single fami/y homes and prior to occupancy, the infrastructure must be in.
Mr. Wayne stated that grading, etc., is not before this Commission, and is something that was taken care
of quite a long time ago. He further stated that all of the improvements that go with that subdivision will be
put in with the subdivision tract map. He added that Shea Homes is going to build the infrastructure as
they build the buildings. However, if they stop building buildings, they will still have to complete the
infrastructure as part of the map requirement.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Compas, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commissioner Resolutions No. 4560 and 4561, approving Site Development Plan
SDP 98-18 and Coastal Development Permit 98-70, and adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4562, recommending approval of Planned Unit
Development PUD 98-04, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions
contained therein.
Commissioner Segall stated that there does not seem to be any cause for concern, based on the fact that
the industrial buildings already exist, and voiced his support for the project
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
7-o
Heineman, Compas, L’Heureux. Segall, Trigas, Welshons, Nielsen
None
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 8 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid: t am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the pnncipal clerk of the printer of
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Trmes-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of-
California, under the dates of June 30. 1989
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen)
and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate)
for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Cartsbad,
Solana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; that the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller than
nonpareil), has been published in each regular and
entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
----- f &A, w&
----_-__------------------ *rap-* -Tvm --I 71 ““mu-r - I 0-w
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: October 29,1996
DESCRIPTION Request for approval of a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development PermR for a 494 unft ap.%bnent &ect on 36 3 acres of land.
L!XAU!X This project is within the City of Carkbad’s Coastal Zone located south of Cannon Road and east of Faraday Avenue in L&xl Facilities MaMgement Zone 6.
R’S PARCEL&&$j& 206-020.Sl
APPLICANT. Secmty Capeal Pea6c Twst 217 Technology Drive, Ste 210 Irwne, CA 92616
A pubhc hearing on tie above proposed protect WIII be held by the C&bad City Council, I” the Coum~l Chambers. 1200 Cadsbad Wage Drive, Carlsbad. Cahfomla. on August 17, 1999 at 6 00 p.m.
Persons are cordrally invited to attend the publrc heanng and provide the decklon makers with any oral or wnlten comments they may have regardmg the pro]ect The pro ect WIII be described and a staff recommendation gwen, followed by publrc tesbmony, questlons and a dewron L August 13.1999. opres al the staff repal wll be availaMe on or after
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
.sarl Marco!3
Dated at California, this & day A
of aA% /psy
--------A-&g -------- Signature
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of A
If you have any questions, or would like to be mtified of the decision, please contact Chdster Wesbnan at the Cii ot C&bad Planning Department, Monday thmugh Thursday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:X p.m., Friday 6:OO am. to 5:00 pm. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, C&bad. California 92@09, (760) 438-1161, edension 4446.
APE&$ If you challenge the Sm Development Plan ard/or Coastal Development Permd in mud. you may be llmlted to rarsrng only those woes you or someone eke rased at the wtte” mnespondance delivered to the City of C&bad Cdy Clerk’s & ubllc hearlng descnbed in thus notice. or m ice at, or pnor to, the public hearing.
to the city Council, appeals must be filed in
\ \ /
2. Coastal timmlssw Ameelable Protea Th!s site is not located wdhm the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the dewion IS appealable to the Coastal Cwnmtssion. aweak must be filed with the Coastal Commwon wdhm ten (ib) working days after 6% Coastal Commission has received A Notice of Fmal Action from tk city of Carkbad. Applicants will be not&d by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego Office ot tie Coastal Commission is located at 3111 Camino Del Rio North, S&e 3W, San Diego, California 92106-1725.
CASE FILE: SDP %.WCDP 96.66 CASE NAME. KELLY RNACH APARTMENT PROJECT
KELLY RANCH APARTMENT PROJECT
SDP 9%CWCDP 98-86 A
Legal 64010August 6,1999
0 \.
(Form A)
.
TO: C1T.Y CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM:
RE:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
SDP 98-04/CDP 98-66 - Kelly Ranch Apartment Project
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please nOtiCe the itern for the council meeting of First Available Hearing
. in August if Possible
Thank you.
July 29, 1999
Date
City 0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: October 29,1998
DESCRIPTION:
Request for approval of a 494 unit apartment project on 36.3 acres of land.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located south of Cannon Road
and east of Faraday Avenue in Local Facilities Management Zone 8.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
208-020-30
APPLICANT:
Security Capital Pacific Trust
217 Technology Drive, Ste. 210
h-vine, CA 92618
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Planning Commission in the
Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on June 2, 1999 at 6:00
p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described
and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision.
Copies of the staff report will be available on or after May 27, 1999.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Christer
Westman at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Friday 8:OO a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009,
(760) 438-l 161, extension 4448.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
2075 La Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894
APPEALS
-.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit in court, you may
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad prior to the public
hearing.
1. eals to the Ctty Co@: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council.
appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the
Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
0 This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area. q This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the
Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a
Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 3111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California
92108-1725.
CASE FILE: SDP 98-04/CDP 98-66
CASE NAME: KELLY RANCH APARTMENT PROJECT
PUBLISH: MAY 20,1999
C
KELLY RANCH
APARTMENT PROJECT
SDP 989041CDP 98-66
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
DESCRIPTION:
COMPLETE DATE: October 29,1998
Request for approval of a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit for a 494 unit apartment project on
36.3 acres of land.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located south of Cannon Road and east of Faraday Avenue in
Local Facilities Management Zone 8.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
208-020-30
APPLICANT:
Security Capital Pacific Trust 2 17 Technology Drive, Ste. 2 10
Irvine, CA 92618
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Carlsbad City Council, in the Council Chambers,
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on August 17, 1999 at 6:00 p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written
comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendation given,
followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after August 13,
1999.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Christer Westman at the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 500 p.m. at 2075
Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009, (760) 438-l 161, extension 4448.
APPEALS
If you challenge the Site Development Plan and/or Coastal Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk’s Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
1. Anneals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council, appeals must be filed in
writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project: 0 This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
q This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within
ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad.
Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego
office of the Coastal Commission is located at 3 111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California 9210%
1725.
CASE FILE: SDP 9%04/CDP 98-66
CASE NAME: KELLY RANCH APARTMENT PROJECT
PUBLISH: August 6,1999
KELLY RANCH
APARTMENT PROJECT
SDP 98-04lCDP 98k66
Smooth Feed SheetsTM __ Use template for 5160@
( CA COASTAL COMMISSION SD COUNTY PLANNING CA DEPT OF FISH 81 GAME
STE 200 STE B STE 50
3111 CAMINO DEL RIO NO 5201 RUFFIN RD 330 GOLDENSHORE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-I 725 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LONG BEACH CA 90802
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY BRD
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
SANDAG
STE 800
401 BST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KELLY LAND COMPANY
STE 120
1530 FARADAY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TOM HAGEMAN PLANNING SYSTEMS
STE 100
1530 FARADAY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
a & AvEKY@ Address Labels laser 5160@
____ ~_ -.--. . . .---___~ . . ,
;: ‘i JOHNL&ANNWOOD
! 5238 MILTON ROAD
( CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3852 I
i WILLIAM C HORNUNG
23 10 BYRON PLACE
j CARLSBAD, CA 92008-383 1
TIMOTHY & KELLY HUCKABY
5154 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
--~.-^-
DAVID & LORI RESETCO
5 142 FROST AVENUE
1 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
L..- ~__ _ ___. ~~-.._-_- -
KENNETHB & CINDY KENG
5132 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
---
1 MICHAEL AROTH
5 120 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
‘h -..-___--. ---.--. .
JEROME
) 5110 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
I WAYNE CALLAGHAN
38 REDHAWK
1 IRVING, CA 92604
/ I
I KIRGIS
4452 HOCKADAY DRIVE
DALLAS, TX 75229-2909
-~ ~---__ ~~~~~ ! I
j CRAIG T & CHERYL ISOBE
1545 FARADAY AVENUE
’ CARLSBAD, CA 92008-7319
r- ’
-.-
ROY E VARTABEDIAN
5242 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3852
_. -~-~- .~ -.
WALTERE ALBRIGHT
PO BOX 1376
TEMECULA, CA 92593-1376 : I 1 __._..~ __..- _ __.~~ mu,,
JEFFREY G GARDNER ROBERT C NOWAKOWSKI
23 14 BYRON PLACE 5158 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-383 1 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
ROBERT J WILSON ; JOHN W SCHOENIG
5150 FROST AVENUE 5 146 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
-__-- ~-
CURTIS S WOOLEY ~ ’ RICHARD & LOU ROSENFELD
5138 FROST AVENUE 5 134 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837 I
ERIC & DIANA HANDOJ
5 128 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
I ’ ’ PAUL A CERVONE
j 5124 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
-. --___~___ -< - ____---
DAVE S & KATHLEEN THOMAS FRED B HOLZWORTH
5118 FROST AVENUE i 5114 FROST AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837 ) CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3837
-___ -- ‘b--
EVANS POINT HOMEOWNERS ~ SHEA HOMES LTD PARTNERS
1072 1 TREENA STREET 10721 TREENA STREET
SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92131-1039
j, suITE200
SANDIEGO, CA 92131-1039 \
MARVIN H & LUCIA SIPPEL
1287 VERA CRUZ
OCEANSIDE, CA 92056-5663
I
SIGNAL H. BLACKMORE
PO BOX 424
i RANCH0 SANTA, CA 92067
CRC PROJECT ONE LP BLACKMORE
475 WEST BRADLEY AVENUE 12780 HIGH BLUFF DRIVE
EL CAJON, CA 92020- 1209 SUITE 160
SAN DIEGO, CA 92130-2068
A
, --- .____- -- .~___ - .--. ~~~~ ~~-
; WJLLIAM F & LISA DRYER TERRELL A OYAMA EUGENE W MITCHELL
524 1 MILTON ROAD 5237 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
I 5249 MILTON ROAD
, CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
! -. ____-. -__.- -, ‘i-- -,
MOA INC
5 190 GOVERNOR DRIVE
SUITE 203
SAN DIEGO, CA 92122-2848
MARSCHA D GILLES
5229 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
RICHARD T BOCIM
5225 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
I
L \ __--- -.d i
1
STEVEND & MAIUAEMERY
’ 5221 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
JEAN H BLACK
5217 MILTON RQAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
: ’ RICHARD P BREYER
i 5213 MILTON ROAD
1~ CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
\ ! i
GARY A& LINDANEFF
5209 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
JEFFERY W KNOWLES
5210 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
~ JOHNJBrLIZALUM
52 14 MILTON ROAD
; 1 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853
: \ (1’ <,I i
1 i
ANTON-IO F PIRACCI
I 5218 MILTON ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3853 I
i
8, ROBERTD & YUMIROSE j
22 14 MASTERS ROAD
I CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845 ; 1
WILLIAM J RICE
22 15 MASTERS ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845
\ > -\
, I
1 MICHAEL T OLAUGHLIN (~ MIYOKO YAMAUCHI I
; 2211 MASTERS ROAD I ) 2209 MASTERS ROAD
1 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845 ,
FRANK R VISCARRA
2205 MASTERS ROAD
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845
z ‘p------- -4
YANG
5230 MASTERS ROAD
’ CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3845
I
: RICHARD J VASS 1 ) CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY
SERVICES
5234 MILTON ROAD I
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-3852 ~
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
CHRISTER WESTMAN
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT.
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
,--- -__- _-__ __-. -. -...- _-. -__~ -- - ..- --~.--..___-
I