HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-14; City Council; 15394; Appeal of Grading Permit at 3160 Falcon DriveU-Y OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL c iri ---y;
AB# 15: 3ciq
MTG. 9/l 4199
DEPT.
TITLE* --
APPEAL OF CITY ENGINEER’S ISSUANCE OF A
GRADING PERMIT AT 3160 FALCON DRIVE, PD 467
DEPT. HD.
CITY ATTY. bizR
ENG CITY MGR-
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 99-3&7 , denying appeal and upholding the City Engineers
decision to issue a grading permit for 3160 Falcon Drive, PD 487.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
After 1996, when the new grading ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16) was
adopted, issuance of grading permits meeting the standards set forth in the ordinance were
ministerial, not discretionary permits, and had to be issued by the City Engineer if the
standards were met. On June 18, 1999, the Acting City Engineer approved a grading permit
for Mr. Norman Walsh, owner of the property located at 3160 Falcon Drive (PD 487). The
grading permit was required because Mr. Walsh distributed spoils from excavation for his
swimming pool in his backyard in such a way that it went beyond the toe of the existing slope
in the yard. (If the spoils had been distributed in such a manner as to not go past the existing
toe of the slope, no grading permit would have been required). Because he did the grading
work prior to obtaining a permit, he was assessed a penalty as called for in the City grading
ordinance. As finally approved the grading plans show that no slopes are steeper than two
horizontal feet to one vertical foot, toes of slope are set back from property lines, and drainage
of the property remains substantially the same as the preexisting condition, all as required by
the standards, in order to issue the ministerial permit. These were the findings of the Acting
City Engineer in approving the permit, and are suggested findings for the City Council in
denying the appeal and approving the City Engineer’s decision in the attached resolution.
Two adjacent neighbors have appealed the issuance of the grading permit pursuant to
Carlsbad Municipal Code section 15.16.160 and the permittee (Mr. Walsh) and the appellants
(Mr. Deering and Mrs. Bowling) have been notified of tonight’s appeal hearing as required by
the Code.
All that is before the Council in this appeal is the issuance of a grading permit for the
distribution of the spoils from the excavation for the pool. The grading plan was prepared by
Wayne Pasco, a registered civil engineer, on behalf of the permittee, Mr. Walsh. The City’s
contractor planchecker for Berryman and Henigar was Bob Sutherlin, also a registered civil
engineer. Staff review was done by Robert Wojcik, who is also a registered civil engineer. It
is the professional opinion of these engineers that the grading work conforms with the City’s
standards set forth in Chapter 15.16, and does not have a detrimental physical effect on the
adjoining properties. Pursuant to the required standards in the Code, the spoils were
distributed in such a manner as to protect adjoining properties from any damage that could be
caused by the grading of the property. Two separate soils reports, including a geologic report,
were submitted by Geosoils, Incorporated. The geologic study showed no significant
restrictions on the property. Additionally, two drainage studies were submitted by Pasco
Engineering Inc. showing that before and after quantity and location of discharge off the
property were substantially the same. Therefore, no increase of risk of damage to adjoining
property exists.
I
Agenda Bill No. IS, 3s 4
Page 2
The joint appeal states, “the City neglected to consider how such grading would affect
adjoining properties”, and claims that the decision to issue the grading permit is not consistent
with the City’s grading and hillside ordinances, but the appeal does not specify in what manner
it is not consistent. Mr. Walsh’s position, and that of staff, is that the permit is ministerial and
must be issued if it meets the standards, and it does meet the standards with regard to the
effect on adjoining properties (as to drainage), meets all the requirements of the new Carlsbad
grading ordinance, and the hillside ordinance is not applicable, because it exempts
manufactured slopes, such as the original slope on Mr. Walsh’s property at both the Bowling
and Deering property lines.
Staff recommends that the City Council conclude that this ministerial grading permit was
properly issued by the City Engineer in conformance with City standards and deny the appeal.
The attached resolution effectuates that denial with appropriate findings.
The project is a minor land form alteration which is exempt from environmental review
pursuant to section 15304 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map.
2. Resolution k-lo. 99-323
issuance of grading permit PD
3. Appeal form, dated August 6, 1999.
denying the appeal and upholding the City Engineer’s
487.
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 99-327
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPELLANTS APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE CITY ENGINEER’S DECISION TO ISSUE A
GRADING PERMIT FOR 3160 FALCON DRIVE, PD 487.
WHEREAS, the Acting City Engineer approved the grading plans and issued a grading
ermit to Mr. Norman Walsh on June 18,. 1999 for distribution of spoils from a swimming pool
xcavation at 3160 Falcon Drive; and
WHEREAS, neighbors Deering and Bowling timely appealed issuance of this grading
ermit, and the matter was set for hearing on September 14, 1999 and the appellants given
otice thereof, by the City Clerk, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code section 1516.160; and
WHEREAS, on the 16th day of November, 1999, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
eld a duly noticed hearing as prescribed by law to consider said appeal of the City Engineer’s
ecision; and
WHEREAS, upon considering all the evidence, testimony and arguments of those
ersons present and desiring to be heard, the City Council resolves as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That’the Acting City Engineer found the grading permit for 3160 Falcon Drive to be
I compliance with City requirements in that, a) no slopes are steeper than two horizontal feet to
ne vertical foot, b) the grading is exempt from the Hillside Ordinance, c) toes of slopes are set
ack from property lines, and d) drainage of the property remains substantially the same as the
re-existing condition, and these constitute the findings of the City Council in this manner.
3. That the City Engineer’s issuance of a grading permit is hereby confirmed and the
ppeal is denied on the condition that Mr. Walsh apply for and obtain an administrative variance
) increase the height of his fence such that it meets the minimum requirements on both sides for
!nces under the City’s swimming pool code and that he comply with the terms and conditions of
rat administrative variance.
4. Since significant relief has been granted as a result of this appeal, appellant’s
ppeals fees be refunded pursuant to Policy No. 54.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by City Council. The
)rovisions of Chapter 1 .I6 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits For Judicial Review”
ihall apply:
“NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
“The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
governed by the Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6, which has been
made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter
1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the
appropriate court no later than the ninetieth 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 proceedings accompanied by the required
deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of 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, California 92008.”
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council
eld on the 16thdayof November t 1999 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Lewis, Hall, Finnila, Nygaard, Kulchin
NOES: None*
ABSENT: None.
TTEST:
f
~?HA ~E~@F@NZ, City Clerk L
AREN R. KUNDTZ, Msistant City Clerk
(SEAL)
Exhibit 1
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
SIT
ROJECT NAME
3160 FALCON DRIVE
V Rv SCOTT FVAN.$ CARI %-AI) FNCINFFRING OFPT
PROJECT EXHIBIT
NUMBER PD 487 ’ 3
Exhibit 3
I (l!Ve) appeal the decision of the Carlsbad Building & Engineering DeTt.
to the Carl&ad City Council.
Date of Decision you are appealing: Tuesday, August 3rd, 1999
Subkt c&&mat
rittiem& 4fyouonIywrttbappeaIapped-spartoMwhdeaction,pleaseetatRthath~
Ne are appealing the city's issuance of a grading permit after
the work had already 'been completed' at 3160 Falcon Prive.
Further-more, in issuing the permit, the city'neglected to
consider how such grading would affect.adjoining properties.
The same applies to the issuance of a retalnlng wall permlc.
Rason~s~ for Aweak l ~roasa )~lots l F~*sPOM9~~mmonlaapyrmmdtbdoakld
~~rppral,~puwlll~~H~to~(he~soblrd~~~e~pur~p~~ ESPFCIFfCfl~~didlhbdedsionmakarti 3Nhatabout~edecfglonIsinconsisdentw~s~~orlocal
Lfs. plans, orpollcy? . T e zss uance
~kb!r th
of bdth the grading and re&iningwall permits
' e work had been completed, did not allow sufficent
time for the city to consider what damage might result to
adjoining properties- .Furthermore, the decl9ron. LS noti consistent
with the'&lsbad grading and nlllsloe p .
Issutince of bqth of these permits' is also'in conflict with
the city's written response regarding this matter. -a ISSUranCe of ,both it these pe.mlts has Created a nea1t.h and
safety issue regarding the adjoining property as if pertains to -
the State of
SIGNATURE
Pam RowI i~na
PHONE NO. _ _ _- ___.__. Bill L,,,---, . _ _-_~ ~-._.. 3150 Falcon Drive --------a
NAME @w...w.s
o/c/00. -- O,V,>~ -45
DATE
-w 3155 Falcon Drive ADDRESS: Street Nme 8 l+h,mber
Carlsbad, Ca. 92005
Cny, state. ZJP-
Exhibit 3 page 2
November 16,1999
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Attorney
APPEAL OF CITY ENGINEER’S ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT AT 3160
FALCON DRIVE, PD 487, AGENDA ITEM NO. 11
The appellant’s appeal addresses both the grading permit and the retaining wall permit.
The staff report addresses the grading permit portion. If the Council wishes to include
the retaining wall permit in its decision, then its action would be:
“Amend Resolution No. 99-327 to deny the appeal and uphold the City
Engineer’s decision to issue a grading permit for 3160 Falcon Drive, PD
487 on the condition that Mr. Walsh apply for and obtain an administrative
variance to increase the height of his fence such that it meets the
minimum requirements on both sides for fences under the City’s
swimming pool code and that he comply with the terms and conditions of
that administrative variance. Since significant relief has been granted as a
result of this appeal, appellant’s appeals fees be refunded pursuant to
Policy No. 54.”
Should you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
RONALD R. BALL
City Attorney
rmh
September 51998
Mr. David Rick EngineeringTechnician CITY OF CARLSBAD Engineering Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92009
via fax: 760-438-0894
Dear Mr. Rick:
I am writing to you regarding the new home construction now undei way at 3 160 Falcon
Drive, Carlsbad. As one of the adjacent property owners, I previously expressed to city
staff, my concerns regarding the grading taking place at the rear of this property.
Specifically, I was concerned with the following:
1. Grade of the original slope being changed
2. Installation of a 34 ft. high retaining wall adjacent to my property, which has caused the water runoff from 3 160 Falcon Drive to be channeled directly across the lower portion of my property.
3. 3 foot vertical increase in height of the rear portion of 3 160 Falcon Drive (result of retaining wall and backfill).
As a result of this construction, I am also concerned with safety issues regarding my
swimming pool. What once satisfied the City of Carlsbad code requiring a five foot fence
around my property, has effectively been reduced to a 2-3 foot barrier along the lower
portion of my property.
At your earliest convenience, I would appreciate an update from the City of Carlsbad regarding this matter. Because of the potential for increased liability, I am in the process of notifying my homeowners insurance company to make them aware of the situation, and to determine what needs to be done legally to protect my interests.
Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.
3 155 Falcon Drive Carlsbad, California 92008
home 720- 1261 work 727-5100
cc. Raymond Patchett, City Manager
: b. A- ---
;--TV -'$g,
i:: k.1 -. * _ - I. _. .<<
7 E 2. e -.- y% ;: -cj 5’ : 0) .‘, c- ,i CJ - YJ ;y ,e -- 5 0 - 2 - - 5; ‘. -2
” ;; .
,.
‘5
,-’ -, --ie,,7
I, -_
:. . --,,- <; ‘:
.- ‘. - r -, -- 1 _I . . _ .’ ‘-. -2 -& ,-
,-- / -_ . ,,_ _ .‘-‘: ,‘: ;5 I;
‘.,,,, 5-V‘ ‘2, :. ‘:_ *’ ‘.-;,
,,5
*G.$?Q
~ , 5
,=: ‘.‘- ..-,--.. 7, p
fyi?’ i.: s$,;-*;
>A - L, * ‘*-
r, L. ,-. :- ;.
_ .’ ,- .I- -“,
p,-c *: -7s _ .
c-,5 > ?. ;,?.; ,- ZY : ,‘i.
,+A --
,
.’ ‘!
,, ‘, ,; -
,I .:
’ J
,
-
1 ‘-- . ..-.__ ,./
City of Carlsba&
K’01.111;111 Walsh
C!O I’mx~ I:tlgincering
Suik A
ii N Iiighway IO1
St)lilllii t3CLlCll CA 02075
RI’: I’D 487 - DWC; 36544 - WAf.SH GRADING PLAN
l>car Mr. Walsh:
1.1~ planning department has rcvic\ved the proposL J jing plan and:hased on Chapter Z 1. 05. 11~ Jjillside I)eveloptnent Kegulations of th. .,arlsbad Municipal: staff cannot
supper 1 I!:C project as proposed.
’ 5~. t*uisling 2: 1 slope at the t-ear of the property, 1~ Cated at 3 I60 Falcon Drive in
! ‘11 Ibbad, is &fined in the zoning ordinance as a do~\mhill perimctcr slope. VJ‘he slope is
also over 15 feet in height, and as such cannot be dcvcloped upon. The proposal to fill
over (on top of) the slope is unacceptable. It will hotvever! bc possible to fi;l the arc‘3
below the 40 percent slope up to the toe of the slope. No devclopmcnt of the slope with
fill material, retaining walls. patios, decks or other structures or cutting into the slope w~!l
hc pcmitted.
.l‘hc intent and purpose of the Hillside regulations is to prcscrvc and/or cnhamx rhc
,ic*<thctic qualities of natural and manufactured slopes. rJ‘his is time through (1~. .isnil+r
projects which relate to the slope of the land and ulininnize the ~IIK~U~~ grading.
If you have any questions regarding the above, plcase call me :!I j,Y- I 161, CXICIYGUI
4447.
Sincerely,
VhN LY NC14
Assistant 1’1amie~
C: C’hris Dc(lcrhti J Mr. and Mrs. I3o\iling
David Rick 3 180 I~nlcou 1% ii c‘ i
Pi11 Kelly 1 ‘~lr~l~l~;ld (‘A O’OOX I .< . L
-. ..-. - & 75.La P~lthas Or. l Carlsb;ad, Cd 92009-I S;cj . (Iti .4:3r3 1 1 ci 1 - ISAX ( /fK)) 43fI oUt)n ;
8, .95.010
Chapter 21.95
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
REGULATlONS
sections:
2L95.010
21.95020
21.95030
21.95.040
21.95050
21.95.060
21.95.070
21.95.080
21.95.090
21.95100
21.95.110
21.95120
21.95.130
21.95.140
Purpose and. intent.
DefiatiOns.
Applicability of hillside
development permit.
Exemptions from hillside
development permit.
Amendments to hillside
development permit&
~Appkation.
Review process.
Appeals- Required findings.
Minimum development of
hillside lands.
Hillside mapping procedures.
Hillside development and
design standards.
Exclusions.
Modifications to the devel-
opment and design standards.
21.95.010 Purpose and intent.
The purposes and intent of this chapter are to:
A. Implement the goals and objectives of the
land use and open spa&conservation elements of
the Carlsbad general plan;
B. Assure hillside conditions arc properly identi-
fied and incorporated into the planning process;
C. Preserve and/or enhance the aesthetic qualities
of nature hillsides and manufactured slopes by de-
signing projects which relate to the slope of the
land, minimizing the amount of project grading. and
incorporating contour grading into manufactured
slopes which are located in highly visible public
locations;
D. Assure that the alteration of natural hillsides
will be done in an environmentally sensitive manner
whereby lagoons and riparian ecosystems will be
Protected from increased erosion and no substantial
impacts to natural resource areas, wildlife habitats
or native vegetation areas will occur. (Ord. NS-446
§ 1 @art)* 1gw
21.95.020 DdiIdtiOIUL
The following definitions are established:
A. Whenever the following terms are used in this
chapter, they shall have the meaning established by
this section:
1. ‘cOllector StxWP mtanS any Street with a
minimum right-of-way width of sixty feet which
intersects with a circulation element road and pro-
vides either primary or secondary access to a resi-
dential or nonresidential project.
2. Tontour grading” means a grading concept
designed to result in earth forms which resemble
natmd termin characttristics. Horizontal and vertical
curve variations should be used for slope banks.
3. “Development” means grade, erect or con-
stmct.
-4. “Downhill perimeter slope” means a slope ’
located bctwcen a pad or gentiy~slo~ing ‘& (gradi-
ent is less than ten percent) of a single lot and the
pro@uty Iini that is at a lower level than the pad or
gently sloping area of the lot.
5. %rade” means to excavate or fill or any
combination thereof-
6. “‘Manufactured slope” means a man-made
slope consisting wholly or partially of either cut or
fill material.
7. ‘Natural slope” means a slope which is not
manufactured.
8. *‘Project” means any proposal for “develop
ment.”
9. “Slope” means ground that forms a natural or
artificial incline.
10. ‘Total graded area*’ means all areas of project
grading (both on-site and off-site) which are neces-
sary to enable the achievement of the project.
I 1. “‘Uphill perimeter slope” means a slope locat-
ed between the pad or gently sloping area (gradient
is less than ten percent) of a single lot and a proper-
ty line located at a higher level than the pad or
gently sloping ama of the lot. (Ord. NS-446 Q 1
(part). 1998)
,
cadsbad s-98) 806
Building Department 1 City c llarlsbad Page 1 of 1
city services city of carlsbad
CITY SERVICES 1 BUILDING DEPARTfulENT z= Citv Services Index
Building Permits
The purpose of a building permit and the building codes are to provide minimum construction standards to safeguard life and
property. The City also reviews permit applications for zoning
matters to ensure that the City continues to be a safe, beautiful area in which to live, work, and play. The City’s building and
zoning codes have been carefully enacted to protect the health,
safety, and general welfare, of you and your property.
:. Building Department Directory
A building permit is required for any work that physically changes
or adds structures to your property. There are many exemptions fi-om building permits, so telephone 438- 116 1, extension 433 1 or 4462 to inquire as to whether a permit is required before beginning your project. Community Development offices are open
between 7:30 a.m. and 530 p.m. Monday through Thursday and
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Friday.
If you are a homeowner preparing a do-it-yourself project (an
owner-builder), you may apply for the permit. Your general contractor may also apply for the permit. Someone acting as an agent, such as an architect or designer, may apply for an owner-
builder permit, but the homeowner must still sign the owner- builder disclaimer form before the permit is issued. Although certain accessory structures do not require a building permit, you should contact the Planning Department for information on
setbacks from property lines and other zoning regulations that apply to accessory structures. The Planning Department phone numbers are 438-l 161, extension 4325 or 4328.
TEXT-0NL.Y city hall 1 citv services 1 business resources 1 communitv links 1 visitor information 1 about carlsbad 1 directory 1 contact us 1 home
http://www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us/cserv/buiId.html 1 l/l 5/99
Council Action
0 ;i OS Y E. 3
s
~~
0 FP 3 W-
t+i
"3
5.
2 P
May 28, 1998
SC0 ENGINEERING, INC. I 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101. SUITE A
SOLANA BEACH. CA 92075
(619) 25m212
FAX (619) 259-4812
WAYNE A. PAX0
R.C.E. 29577
PE 781
C,ty of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
C&bad, CA 92009
Attn Dawd Rxk
RE: WALSH - 3160 FALCON DRIVE DRAINAGE
Dear Mr. Rick
The purpose ofthls letter IS to address the impacts that the retainmg wall and backfill
have on storm runoff
In beu of complete hydrology calculatmns the followmg 1s a bst of the findings and
assumptions used in this analysis.
EilKiiw A) Drainage Basin Area = 0.08 acres @ad drains to street)
A) Soil type “D” - to be conservative.
W Six hour precipitation 3.5 in (P6) to be conservative.
Cl Tc = 5 minutes minimum overland time allowe.
Using the above mfannation the intensity and quantxty are calculated as follows:
1 = 7 44 (P&D) ~5=7.44(3.5)5-Ms = 9.22 inlhr; therefore the conservative
quantity (Qcons): Qcons = CIA = (..55)(9.22)(.08) = O&J&
The attached capacity calculation shows that each ofthe 3 proposed 4” PVC risers can
accept 0.4 cfs with 0.4 feet of headwater depth
Assummg agam that the total runoff generated by this area IS 0.41 cfs, this will be dwided
evenly between the 3 nsers. Therefore, each riser 1s adequate to intercept 0.41 cfs i3 or
0.13 cfs
CitymE 78 I May 28.1998 Page 2
Thea risers are designed to discharge through a 4” perforated pipe installed at a level
grade. This wll serve to return the storm runoff to a less concenbated, sheet flow
condition.
It is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering that the system of risers as proposed
on the corresponding grading plan will adequately intercept, contain and convey run-off to discharge paints designed to reestablish a more natural sheet flow condltlon
It will be the owners respawbilify to protect and mamtam the nsers over tune to msure
theu correct function.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, please feel free to contact us
Very truly yours,
PAX0 ENGINEERING, INC
w~~o~~t
RCE 29577
= z.- z z ._ ZZ
CL z-
5
I.
z L - --
LL
z ZLe
r- 3, 5
z- - : 1 - . . lL
Is your pETURN ADDRESS completed on the reverse side?
? t c
E
i 0
i i c’/
Thank you for using Return Receipt Service.
u Y& F i’:- -. -.. . - City of Cvlsbad
l ’
.lunc IS. 1998
Norman Walsh
c/o Pasco Engineering
Suite A
535 N Highway 101
Solan? peach CA 92075
RE: I’D%7 - DWG 365-4A - WALSH GRADING PLAN
Dear Mr. Walsh: I
The planning department has reviewed the proposed grading plan and based on Chapter
21. 95, the Hillside Development Regulations of the Carlsbad Municipal, staff cannot
support the project as proposed.
The existing 2:l slope at the rear of the property, located at 3 160 Falcon Drive in
Carlsbad, is defined in the zoning ordinance as a do*!1 perimeter sloge. The slope is
-,.also over 15 feet in height,.*md as such cannot be developed upon.. ThF<proposal, to fill,
over (on top of) the slope is unacceptable. It will however, be possible $0 fill the area-
below the 40 percent slope up to the toe of the slope. ,?Jo .development of the slope with
?Jl ma_terial, retaining walk? patios, decks 0~. other structures ‘or-cutting into the slope $1
be permitted. ,
?e intent and purpose of the Hillside regulations is to preserve and/or enhance the
aesthetic qualities of natural and manufactured sloa This is done. ,$rough designing ’
projects which relate to the slope of the land and minimize the amount grading.
1 f you have any questions regarding the above, please call me at 43% 116 1, extension
4447.
Sincerely.
J Lh
VAN LYNCH
Assistant Planner
. . c. Chris DeCerbo
David Rick
Pat Kelly
J Mr. and Mrs. Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
LYarlsbad CA 92008
-- ---- -. - .- - __-__ ._. _- .._ -_. _ ____ _.____ .___ ----.--- .._.____. .--------- --
2(’ 75 La Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-l 576 - (760) 13% 1161 - FAX (760) 438-0694 .s
.
.
h
GRADING APPEAL
Mayor and City Council:
Please review the enclosed documents before you
make your fmal decision on the grading appeal at 3 160 Falcon Drive.
Thank you for your consideration.
Phil and Pam Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
434-056 1
We are appealing issuance of a grading permit by the Acting Engineer to
now allow this unauthorized, uninspected “hillside reconstruction” and
excessive retaining wall to now be retroactively approved ,102 years “after
the fact,” of the work being done unlawfUy (without permits) and
previously denied in letters to us. This is wrong!
Mr Wojick failed to consider the negative impacts on the adjoining
properties.
The grading work Hillside Reconstruction (filling , backfilling and pushing
out the previously pre-graded parcel was done NovDec 97 through June
99) without city approval (required permits). Complete plans were never
submitted concurrently with his building plans. The work is still in violation
of the Grading Ordinance and Hillside Ordinance, Hillside Guidelines and
neighborhood CC&R’s. Nothing exists in isolation. All adjoining properties
have been negatively impacted. We have letters from the City of Carlsbad
stating it would not be allowed.
The result of this “hillside reconstruction ” has caused significant
NEGATIVE IMPACTS to adjoining parcels with regards to:
Drainage and erosion problems,
pool safety and liability problems,
fencing issues, construction over easement
highly incompatible to each of the existing parcels, hillsides and
topography.
This hillside reconstruction goes against the original plan and intent of the
development of the minor subdivision (MS792 and HDP-89-15); to insure
these four parcels join harmoniously into our existing Olde Carlsbad
neighborhood. Preservation of the views from each lot and physical
character of the neighborhood was a factor.
We feel the most reasonable simple solution would be to require Mr. Walsh
to RESTORE the hillside back to its pre graded condition (as per MS792),
REMOVE the fill and PROHIBIT any further and future grading, filling on
top of slope, pushing out, backfilling, construction or re-construction or
development on the hillside (downhill perimeter slope) according to the
original intent of the minor Subdivision and in accordance with the Hillside
and Grading Ordinance and Hillside Guidelines in effect when he began’his
unauthorized “project.” (Nov. 97)
Please understand, we did not cause these problems. They exist today
because of the way one chose to operate. Complete plans (including
grading plans) were never submitted with his Building Permit application.
He proceeded at his own peril, with complete disregard and flagrant
violations of Carlsbad municipal codes, Universal Building Codes, City
Ordinances, stop work orders, and without required permits, or
neighborhood approval. He knew what his plans were all along, The 2: 1
hillside at the rear of the pre-graded pad was not part of the buildable lot.
The code in effect at the time he began his %nauthorized project” did not
allow for hillside development. The Carlsbad General Plan Land Use
Element, The Grading Ordinance, Hillside Ordinance and Hillsides
Guidelines are still in effect! The Building /Engineering department should
adhere and enforce the very codes that are written for alJ
This sets the wrong precedent for our neighborhood which was designed on
views, space, openness and privacy. The very reason we all chose to
purchase and live here.
More importantly, allowing this, sets the wrong precedent for the entire city
of Carlsbad! This infill situation has caused harm to all adjoining property
owners. How can the city now retroactively permit un-inspected “hillside
reconstruction.” Wall and that was previously not allowable and done in
flagrant violation of city and state building codes?!?
Permits should not be issued for retroactive grading that causes harm to &
adjoining parcels!
RE: Walsh Parcel 167 112 33
3 160 Falcon Drive
REASONS:
Violates Carlsbad Grading Ordinance codes and requirements
Violates Carlsbad Hillside Ordinance
Violates Subdivision Ordinance (goes against Original Intent and Design
Of the Minor Subdivision (MS792)
Violates neighboorhood CC&R’s City of Carlsbad required in Developing
the Minor Subdivision
Violates the General Plan Land Use and Open Space Conservation Elements
1. Land Use Element Policy C.3
“Ensure that grading for building pads is accomplished in a manner
that maintains the appearance of natural hillsides.”
2. Open Space and Conservation Element Policy C.3.
Assure that development on hillsides relates to the slope of the land
in order to preserve the integrity of the hillsides.”
3.Open Space Consevation Element C. 12.
Require that grading be accomplished in a manner that will
maintain the appearance of natural hillsides and other landforms
4. Open Space and Consevation Element C. 14. Implement
ordinances limiting the density, intensity and character of the
development of hillside areas
Reasons:
Violates cities own Grading Ordinance Chapter 15.16
15.16.20 1. To maximiz e safety while protecting the surrounding natural
enviroment
2. Ensure compatibility of graded land development sites with
Surrounding land forms and land uses
3. Prevent unnecessary and unauthorized grading
6. Promote rapid restoration of graded slopes
7. Protect public and private property by controlling soil
erosion, sedimentation and other potential adverse impacts
Caused by grading operations or which result as a
consequence of the increased rate of surface water runoff
from graded sites
15.16.60 6.(b) no fill material placed on an exisiting slope steeper that
five units horizontal to one vertical.
(c) The grading work does not adversly affect the existing
drainage pattern.
7. No danger to to private or public property can now or
hereafter result from grading operations
8(a) The proposed grading work complies with all the
enviromental protection procedures described in Chapter
19.04
was a CEQA ever done?
The land has significanlty been changed and there are
adverse direct and indirect impacts.
3. A completed enviromental impact assesssment form or submittal of other
enviromental documentation which demonstrates compliance with the Calif.
Enviromental Quality Act and Title 19 of this code.
We have not seen and documentation on this or justification of
exemption for this. This is a state requirement.
15.16.070 (b) grading work to be consistant pursuant to the sites existing
general plan land use classifiation.
This project (infill situation) is not in agreement with the sites existing plan
(MS92) and the development of the parcels into our olde Carlsbad
neighborhood.
15.16.170 (B) 1. Grading in such a manner as to become a hazard to life and
limb or to endanger property or adversely affect the safe use or
stability of a public property, place, or way.
2. leave any bank, slope or earthen material to be deposited upon or wash
over the premises of another without the express consent of the owner so
affected in writing and in a form acceptable to the city engineer.
Per Section 106.4.3 Universal Building Code,
The approval of plans does not permit the violation of any state. countv or
citv law.
Reasons: Violates Hillside Ordiance
At the time the unauthorized grading (Hillside reconstruction) began
(Nov/Dec 97) a grading permit was required, A hillside Development Permit
and a CEQA review. The hillside was graded, cut into, and fdled on top of
without city approval. Work was being done without Permits.
Now, 1 ‘/z years later, A permit has been issued retroactively for the grading
that is not in compliance with the City’s Hillside ordinance. We received
letters from the city stating it was denied and out of compliance.
City staff is now telling us that single family residences are exempt with the
new ordinance
This parcel was previously developed with a Hillside Development Permit -
to preserve and/or enhance the natural and aesthetic qualities by designing
projects which relate to the land.
The new ordinance clearly states (21.95.070) Exemptions- satisfying the
Hillside Development Permit exemptions, set forth in 21.95.040(A) shah be
evaluated for compliance with Section 2 1.95.120 and the Hillside and
Development Design Guidelines through required grading plan and/or
building review process. This has not been done.
The Hillside Guidelines state:
5.b. That the development is consistent with the Purpose and Intent
provisions (Section 21.95.010) of the Hillside Ordinance
5 (b3) Preserve and/ or enhance the aesthetic qualities of natural hillsides
and manufactured slopes by designing projects which relate to the slope of
the land, minimizing the amount of project grading (this “hillside
reconstruction” does neither!)
Hillside and Hilltop Architecture (guidelines p. 10)
The following architectural elements should be avoided:
4.Overhanging decks on downhill slopes
B. Manufactured slopes of greater than 40% gradient which are greater than
15 ft in height are regarded as important aesthetic (visual) resources in that
they provide vertical open space, separation between developed pads.
Building Setbacks All building that are developed on hilltops or upon pads
created on downhill perimeter slopes (greater than 15 feet in height) shall be
setback so that the building does not intrude into a .7ft horizontal to 1 foot
vertical imaginary diagonal plane that is measured from the edge of slope to
the building. The house does not comply with these rear yard slope edge
setbacks according to this new ordinance. Why haven’t the setbacks been
enforced? Why has he been allowed to push out his pad and build outside
the original building envelope that went with the pre-graded parcel?
an Enviromental Review (CEQA) was never prepared. The enviroment
(land has been physically change) There are significant direct and indirect
impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable:
1. Drainage and Erosion Problems Present and Future
2. Safety and Liability Issues Present and Future
3. Incompatible with surrounding topography
’ 4. Not in agreement with Original Development of Subdivision into our
existing Olde Carlsbad neighborhood
5.
2.
3.
4.
Per Sec. 106.4.3:
The approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any, state, county
or city law.
City of Carlsbad
Community Development
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
May 20,1998
RE: Walsh Building Site APN 167 112 33 00
3160 Falcon Dr, Carlsbad
Dear
I am an adjacent property owner to the Walsh Building Site on Falcon Drive. I have
expressed my concerns to various people and departments at the planning department
numerous times and have not received any clear cut answers. This has been a very
exasperating experience ! ! ! I have been repeatedly shuffled from various people and
departments, which has left me to do my own research.
Mr. Walsh’s parcel was previously graded (1 out of 4) and leveled in 1990 as a
Minor Subdivision. (MS792). A 2 acre parcel was Subdivided into four buildable
pads with 2: 1 hillsides at the rear of the pads. They were graded at a certain level with
the 2: 1 slope so as to preserve the views, privacy and space of the adjoining
properties; the very reason we chose to purchase our home here. The hillside was not
part of the original building envelope. The plan was to have these four parcels
developed in harmony with the existing olde Carlsbad neighborhood. The City of
Carlsbad also required the four parcels to record, incorporate, and cotiorm to the
same CC&R’s that exsist on Falcon Hill Unit 1 (Falcon Drive). [Document
90/553786, recorded 10/10/90.] Mr. Walsh has chosen to ignore the CC&R’s at his
own peril. My understanding is, the city of Carlsbad will not enforce the very
conditions, codes, and restrictions that they required. Numerous Carlsbad Municipal
Building Codes have also been ignored. I
In Nov/Dec97, Mr.Walsh illegally graded the hillside, without a permit. He erected
an illegal retaining wall, at the lower half of property, and backfilled on both sides
below the hillside, without a permit. At that time. the Hillside Development Permit
was reauired, with a CEQA permit. This hillside was not part of the original building
envelope. He was told to put it back to original level until he had the required permits. He never did. Why? He was also required to remove huge piles of soft fill
stored on the edge of slope and pad. Soon after, more huge piles of soft fill were
conveniently placed on the complete back edge of the pad and hillside. It has been
sitting there for over six months, throughout the “El Nino” season, while the hillside
erodes away, and has lost its original integrity. The runoff drains into the adjoining
parcels and erodes those parcels. Why has this been allowed? It’s been over five
months! This was not the purpose or intent of the hillsides when they were originally
developed; or they would not have been graded and leveled the way that they were.
The hillside was not part of the original building envelope. Why has Mr. Walsh been
allowed to violate the requirements and codes of the city? Why was he not required to submit complete plans first. before he had his building plans approved? Not after the
fact, and in violation thereof The original Hillside Ordinance and permit was always
required.
I have just found a “memo,” dated 4 months after the violations, telling Mr. Walsh if
he waits until after April 1998, the Hillside Development Permit is not required. The
Hillside Ordinance requirements will have changed. This is outrageous! Why were
m not notified? The city knew we were adjoining properties and very concerned
about this project and hillside (since Aug/97).
I have just become aware that the Hillside Ordinance has changed. This greatly
effects my property, my view and what we paid l& money for. The ordinance has
been completely rewritten. Much of the protective wording has been changed and
deleted. And in the bigger picture, it will greatly effect Carlsbad . I am sure most
residents and property owners of Carl&ad are not even aware of this change. One
notice, in a newspaper, is hardly adequate notification for the entire community
that will be directly impacted by it.
Mr. Walsh is an experienced and competent builder. He knew he needed the permits,
but he proceeded any way without them. He did what he wanted to do without city
approval. He came in for the permits after the work was done in violation! His
illegal, unpermitted lower hillside retaining wall, and illegal backfilling to raise his
pad, has caused harm to adjoining properties with regards to property liability and
drainage. The code in effect at the time did not allow for hillside encroachment. ‘This
hillside was not part of the original building envelope. He should not benefit by the
less restrictive new ordinance.
The project’s density of the developable portion of the site and the hillside is not
compatible with the surrounding home sites. How can the city allow a 5932 sq.
ft.(covered structure) house to be built on a site that was developed for a home half
that size. This is not Orange County. This is an olde Carlsbad neighborhood. The
code in effect at the time, did not allow for hillside encroachment. A deck and fence
(accessory structure) off the hillside (that was not buildable) is visually incompatible,
disharmonious and disruptive to the adjoining properties with regards to view, space
and privacy, and liability. Does a swimming pool count as a structure? (with regards
to density sq.ft. and lot coverage? Are there setbacks?) This is not a zero lot line
neighborhood. The code in effect (at the time he did the illegal grading) did not allow
for hillside encroachment. It is an olde Carlsbad neighborhood built on views, space,
. . . .- .:.:.; : .-;..‘- _ . . . . ,, _’
-
and privacy. We would like to see it remain that way. This project is already in
conflict with existing CC&R’s that the City of Carlsbad required. And in conflict
with existing Carlsbad Municipal Codes! Had Mr. Walsh complied with the CC&R’s and the city codes; we would not be having to deal with these problems now.
Please understand, I am not a builder, nor an engineer or a city planner.
I am just a very concerned homeowner who cares deeply about my property. We
want to preserve what we bought into. This project does not go in harmony with the
existing neighborhood, the neighbors, or the overall character of Falcon Drive.
One simple solution would be to require Mr. Walsh to restore the hillside back to
original grade, remove the fill, and not allow any further grading, backfilling,
constructing or development on the hillsides according to the original plan for
development of the subdivision.
I need your help. I urge you to seriously address these conflicts, and our concerns.
Adhere to the written Carlsbad City Code; to protect life and property and preserve
the character and integrity of the community. Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely,
Pamela and Phillip Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Ph: (760) 434-0561
,..... i’,-2,. ..*.e.:. -. _,,_,,..... :.. . ..
Here are some of my findings:
CMC 15.16.170
CMC 15.16.020(#1-7)
CMC 15.16.050 Grading permit required
CMC 15.16.030
W’,W
maintain records of actions against violators, monitor
compliances
CMC 15.16170
(A l-4, B l&2)
Failed to first file for grading application. Unlawful acts.
( Backfilled illegally on both sides of lower half of
retaining wall, not consistent with sites existing
general plan)
CMC 15.16.190
(1-8)
No permit or City Approval for lower slope retaining wall
(Over 4 feet) Dee/97
No permit to clear existing vegetation off hillside
Prevent unnecessary unauthorized grading
Protect private property from downhiil drainage
(graded hillside without permit) Dee/97
Enforcement, Record of Violation (Where is it?)
Ordered to stop, Where is notification in writing? City engineer to record violation with county recorder.
Property with grading violation shall be prohibited from
Using any development permit until corrective actions
Are taken. (illegal backfilled site was never put back to
original. Why?)
See “Memo” (dated 3/l 6/98)
CMC 15.16.060.(6- 10) All grading should be in comnliance with Title 19,20,21
CMC 15.16.080 Documents to be supplied with comnliance to-all citv codes
and Standards
CMC 15.16.180
CMC 15.16.120
CMC 15.16.1 IO
(A 5&6, B)
Investigation, fee ?
Only do work described on annlication
Valid nroof of other required permits, CEQA , Hillside
Development Permit, and Documentation
(How can you get a building permit without other reauired
permits?)
CMC 15.16.120
CMC 15.16.130
CMC 15.16.190
CMC 21.53.230
CMC 21.95.010
CMC 2 1.95.030
CMC 2 1.95.070
CMC 2 1.95.090
CMC 21.95.120
Insure safety and welfare to public p& to release of
Issuing Building permit
Protection of adjacent properties from damage caused
grading
Enforcement measures; Why were none taken?
Undevelopable - Slopes with an inclination of 40% or more
Preserve or enhance hillsides, implement objectives of the Land
Use and Open Space/Conservation of Carlsbad General Plan.
(Minim& project grading! ( grading the lower half and sides,
backfilling and running the bulldozer down and through the
middle is not minimum. There is not a part of that hillside
(what is left of it) that has not been graded.
No person shall grade, or erect, or construct into or on top of a
Slope (15% gradient or more) without PIRST obtaining a
Hillside Develonment Permit pursuant to the Hillside
Development Ordinance.
Hillside Development Permit shall be processed
CONCURENTLY with other PERMITS Titles 11 ,18,20,21.
No permit shall be approved unless the project complies with
The Purpose and Intent provisions of section 21.95.0 10
Complies with 21.95.120 and design substantially conforms to
Hillside Develonment Guidelines manual.
All hillside development shall be consistent with all applicable
Policies and provisions of Local Coastal Programs
D.
I.
Volume of earth moved for cuts and fills shall be minim&d
Slope Edge Building setbacks to reduce views of vertical
building forms (.7 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical,
measured from the edge of the slope (original) which
existed prior to regrading (filling)
4. Fencing should be of a open design which does not
visually extend the height of the slope ( a 6 ft. retaining wall, with a fence on. top is
visually incompatible to adjoining properties).
..t : ,. .a. ,.. .- .; _ . .~ .- . -
c
CMC 21.95.140 Modifications - only if the proposed modification will result in
siPnificantlv more ooen soace or undisturbed area
Hillside Develooment
And Design Guidelines Manual
(Page 11)
Hillside Drainage
Hillside development should utilize and enhance
natural hillside drainage networks (a 5 retaining
wall at the bottom of the hillside, which is
backfilled neither enhances or utilizes natural
hillside drainage. It just creates problems for
adjoining properties.
,.,. *;i .,.;.i..;:,.; ,.-,_. -, I,.). . . . _ . . . ..s .__. .-.. .
of Carlsbad
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKUST
RETAINING WALL
BUILDING PIANCHECK NUMBER: CB 9 7- 283 1
BUILDING ADDRESS: 3 160 FLI~cIA Did
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Retaining Wall
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: l67* \IZ- 33
/v 7qL
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
APPROVAL DENIAL
The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information
and/or specifications provided in your submittat; therefore, any changes to these items after this date,
including field modifications, must be reviewed by this
office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached,
Please see ached
tt!Y
report of deficiencies :!
marked wi 0. ake necessary corrections to
plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected I
plans and/or specifications to this ofice for review.
with instructions in this report can of permit to build.
BYz@L, Date: !s/s/s )
I
ATTACHMENTS
0 Right-of-Way Permit Application
By:
By:
Date:
Date:
ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON
NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
DAVID RICK
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(619) 438-l 161, ext. 4324
o:uIBRAR~cucc~Lsnn~vm# wmd &icong -06,FmM1.Dc RW. hrzam
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576’0 (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894 6a
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST A;
RETAINING WALLS &GO’ \ --_ . .
1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. SI
North Arrow Easements
Existing & Proposed Structures Retaining Wail
4
(dimensioned from street) (location and height)
Property tines
2. Show on site plan:
C. Existing Topography
cl 3. Include on title sheet:
A. Site Address
B. Assessor’s Parcel Number
-pII) WA'@- s*ttJ qp+ h y-y
pw:' AUS+ be oiw,ed -f6r 61
on sbpey 0% a 5:1 y&d-t *f
3 h+?f . !!
Legal Description
Grading Quantities Cut Fill L%,v Import/Export
(Grading Permit and Haul Route Permit may be required)
Hf 0 cl 4. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of
approval for Project No.
Conditions were complied with by: Date:
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS
# Cl 0 5. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way
and/or private work adjacent tot he public Right-of-Way.
A separate Right-of-Way issued by the Engineering Department is required
for the following:
.
Please complete attached Right-of-Way application form and return to the
Engineering Department together with the requirements on the attached
Right-of-Way checklist, at the time of resubmittal.
Page 1
5w3 PLAN I”%&
Q3
Np\EH p=gi=q=q-y
?%O FALahl ‘X.
~%lt&S8v%LJ, GA 4@..$
PPt-4: lb70 tr”,-s5
630 -lr717
---we---- -----------------------------------. ____----we--- ----a-_ ----
CITY OF CARLSBM BUILDING INSPECTION
NOTICE NO. i;;; dwa Awa/dbL I owNERORPEmurEENMlE MAaAomEss~ /
I OOWNEFl,OR
OcoNTRAcroR
IJosADmEss
CENUS TRACT No. PBUIT NUMBER RAN FILE NUMSER
VIOLATION READ F NO PERMIT - STOP WORK - REMOVE CONSTRUCTION, OR OBTAIN PERMIT AN0 MAKE ANY WORK COMPLY plTH ButLmNG LAWS. (See comment8 on reverse side regarrling penalty fees).
REVERSE •J CONSTRUCTION NOT IN ACCORDANCE WlTH APPROVED PLANS AN0 PERMIT- STOP WORK
SIDE MAKE EXlSTlNG WORK COMPLY WITH APPROVED PIANS AND PERMIT OR REMOVE IT.
NOTE: q CALL PLANING DEPARTMENT AT 4381181. CONCERNING VIOLATION OF ZONING REGULATlON USTED BELOW. . PRESENT THIS NOTICE WHEN
MAKING APPLICATION FOR PERMIT STOP WORK - UNTIL AlJTHOm TO CONTINUE BY THE INSPECTOR.
q CONTACT CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AT 438-l 161.
q CORRECTIONS REQUIRED q CONTACT INSPECrOR AND ARRANGE FOR APPOINTMENT AT 4384550.
cl CORRECTlONS USTED BELOW t&T BE MADE BEFORE WORK CAN BE APPROVED. q PAY RflNSPECTlON FEE(See Sack); THEi q CALL FOR REINSPECTION AT 4384101.
q PARTIAL APPROVED 0 WORK DESCRIBED SELOW HAS SEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED. *
THE ACTlONS OR CORRECTTONS INDICATED ABOVE ARE REQUIRED WlTHIN, DAYS. THE CARLSSAD MUNICIPAL CODE UIRES PENALIY FEES WHEN YORK HAS BEEN STARTEO WITHOUT PERMIT.
Roe A.M. TO Loo A.M.
IN-13 (Rev. 2MJ 3m P.M. TO 4Eoa P.M.
MONDAY THRlJ PRIDAY . _. - -. _ - _., -. _ . . _ _ __ _.._ _ . . . . ..- - ,...-... y ..-,.. :..~iI-... ..-..,~s.l.w.-.-.-. -;-... ..-
’ of Carlsbad
August 17,1998
Pamela and Phillip Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: PI) 487 - Walsh Rctaini;lg ‘,X-d~
Dear Mr. And Ms. Bowling:
I thank you for your letter dated May 20,1998 informing us of your concerns regarding this
project. I apologize for the late response, but it would have been premature to respond to your
letter before the Planning Department had a chance to adequately analyze the grading application for zoning compliance. In addition, our work load at the City has been overwhelming lately
causing longer than desired response times.
As you are well aware, the Engineering Department is currently checking plans for the proposed
grading of property at 3 160 Falcon Drive. The plans consist of tilling the rear portion of the lot
with approximately two vertical feet of soil at the base of the existing slope. This soil would be
retained by a maximum three foot high wall aligned along a portion of the rear and side property
line. Most of the work that is proposed has already been completed without City authorization.
Since we have received your letter, the City’s position on this project has been established. As
you are aware, the Planning Department has determined that the proposed grading plan does not
comply with the City’s Hillside Ordinance (Chapter 2 1.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code). The
applicant was notified of this issue and given the opportunity to either redesign his proposed
grading to comply with the Hiilside Ordinance or withdraw his application and reestablish the
proper-t- to its orginal condition. He was given a deadline of Ju!:i 25’ to make his decision or
accept the denial of his application for grading permit. As of today, no action has been taken
and the City is in the process of drafting his letter of denial. He will have an opportunity to
appeal the City Engineer’s denial to the City Council.
Although the proposed grading does not comply with the City Hillside Ordinance, it is in
compliance with the City Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code).
An explanation for each grading issue or question addressed in your letter follows:
“Mr, Walsh illeeallv graded the hillside, without a uermit. He erected an illeva retaining wall,
at the lower half of the nrouertv, and backfilled on both sides below the hillside. without a
permit.”
As you indicated in your letter, the property owner did grade the rear property without a permit. However, contrary to a statement regarding construction of the wall without City authorization,
he did receive a building permit to build the wall on November 4*, 1997. The wall, which was
2075 Las Palmas Dr. 0 Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 l (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894
June 7,1999 .
NORMAN WALSH
420 FOUSSAT ROAD
OCEANSIDE CA 92064
RE: 3160 FALCON DR
Dear Mr. Walsh,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the site conditions on this lot on June 3,
1999 with representatives of the City Manager’s office, the Public Works Department, l
and myself representing the Building Department. We observed the as-built conditions
on the property and have compared those conditions to the approved plans for the
three permits you currently have to build onthe property. There are some as-built
conditions which need to be addressed as follows:.
The lower portion of the south part of the property has been filled in.excess’of
three feet, and the fill section covers the toe of the slope. This fill grading triggers the
requirement for a grading permit. You must secure a grading permit or remove soils
such that .fill does not exceed the amount exempt from a grading permit, and no fill is
place on the existing graded slope.
The approved site plan for retaining wall permit (CB 97-2831) shows the
maximum retaining wall height at the Southeast comer of the property was not to
exceed three feet. This wall is currently constructed in excess of three feet, and you
admitted such in the visit to my office on May 28, 1999. Retaining walls in excess of
three feet, measured from the top of the footing, require a building permit. You must
secure a building permit for this wall or remove portions of the wall in excess of three
feet. No building permit will be issued for this retaining wall until such time as a grading
permit and plan has been approved by the City Engineer. Upon receipt of a retaining
wall permit for this wall, you will need to demonstrate to the inspector of record that the
wall was constructed to the standard specification for retaining walls.
The site plan for the swimming pooi permit (CB 991615) shows the pool set back
from the top of the slope four feet. The Southeast comer of the pool, as currently laid
out, is at the top of the slope with no setback. The pool must be moved away from the
top of the slope to comply with the approved plan, or the approved plan must be revised
and resubmitted for approval by the Planning Department.
The fence atop the retaining wall violates the City Zoning Code (Section
21.46.130). This section of the Municipal Code prohibits walls or fences in excess of six
feet in residential zones. This was pointed out to you during the grading permit
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (760) 438-11610 FAX (760) 438-0894 @
^ M
application process last year by the City. You are directed to remove that portion of the
wooden fence above the retaining wall that exceeds six feet from grade as measured
from the lower adjacent natural grade surface. The Planning Department may consider
an application for a fence variance pursuant to the aforementioned Code section.
To summarize your requirements and options:
1. A grading permit is required for as-built site conditions. You must secure a grading
permit or remove excess soils below the levels which require a permit to be issued.
2. A building permit is required for the retaining wall in excess of three feet above the
top of the footing. You must remove’ that portion of the wall above three feet or
secure a building permit for that wall. No permit for this wall will be issued until a
* A 4
grading plan is approved and a grading permit is issued by the City Engineer.
. The pool is not constructed per plan relative to the top of the slope. You must have
your pool plan modified or relocate the pool as per the approved plan.
4. The yard fencing and walls violates the City Municjpal Code which prohibits fences
in excess of six feet in residential zones. That portion of the fence and wall which
exceeds six feet (measured aggregately) must be removed. Or alternatively, you
must secure a fence variance.
Note that due to the violations and deviations from the approved plans relative to
the pool and the pool yard fencing, no inspection of the pool will be made by the city
until corrective action as detailed in this letter is completed. Do not gunite this pool in
it’s present location. Additionally, no final inspection of the house will be approved until
such time as the grading issue, and the retaining wall height issue have been-resolved.
Patrick Kelley
Principal Building Inspector
c: City Manager
Principal Civil Engineer, Wojcik
Principal Planner, Decerbo
Inspector Paul York
-.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST
.
Plan Check NO. CB 47-z 31
Planner . Van Lvnch
APN: I67- I/2-33
Address 3160 /&& M.
Phone (619) 438-l 161, extension 4325
Type of Project and Use: &.6X WAtc Project Density: N’,
Zoning: P---f General Plan: EW Facilities Management Zone: /
CFD fi’: a It # - Date of participation: i-c Remaining net dev acres:-
(For non-residential development: Type of land used created by
this permit: - 1
Leaend: El Item Complete 0 Item Incomplete - Needs your action
Environmental Reyiew kequired: YES NO TYPE
DATE OF COMPLETION:
Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action.
Conditions of Approval’:
Discretionary Action Required:
APPROVAURESO. NO.
PROJECT NO. a&/r
OTHER RELATED CASES:
YES NO -TYPE Bbp ,AwLWP~W
DATE
Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action.
Conditions of Approval:
Coastal Zqne Assessment/Compliance
Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES NM-
CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES- NO
If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite
200, San Diego CA 92108-l 725; (619) 521-8036
Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt):
Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO
If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now.
Coastal Permit Determination Log #:
Follow-Up Actions:
1) Stamp Building Plans as “Exempt” or “Coastal Permit Required” (at minimum
Floqr Plans).
2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed.
,bo
1 .
q pp
q pqn
q Ctdn
lnclusionary V- sing Fee required: YES
lEffective date of lnclusionary Housing Ordinance - May 21,cJ NOpC
Data Entry Completed? YES NO
(Enter CB t; UACT; NEXT1 2; fhSWUCt ho=YIN; Em= Amount (See fee schedule for amount); Return)
Site Plan:
1. Provide a fully dimensional site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow,
property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing
street improvements, right-of-way width, dimensional setbacks and existing
topographical lines.
2. Provide legal description of property and assessor’s parcel number.
Zoning:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Setbacks:
Front:
Interior Side:
Street Side:
Rear:
Required
Required
Required
Required
Shown
Shown
Shown
Shown
/
Accessory structure setbacks:
Front: Required
Interior Side: Required
Street Side: Required
Rear: Required
Structure separation: Required
Shown
Shown . ‘)
Shown /
Shown
Shown /
Lot Coverage: Required Shown
Height: Required AK1 Shown 6 r
Parking: Spaces Required - Shown
Guest Spaces Required Shown
OK TO ISSUE AND ENTERED APPROVAL INTO COMPUT
,
.
I c s’Y * . f
* $t : 2 ..% . ..$” :, .: ;; ? .s.;* h Li : .’ : ‘$’
cl
D
E a
s
0
0
L
:: a
s
u
s
I
E Ll
E
9 % : ii
1 I
L
I
’ I
,
I
I
I
I
i I
I I
I
I
?
I
I
ci
1 I
i I
I I
4 I
I
l
- -
/ 2 f? ri 3 5-4 \ c
.
>
‘..
V
3
_,~
UJ
1
;
:
‘.
fT$ :-ir
c I
<... 2.L . ..:
@ ^i
0 ;r’ --
I-
+ / 1 i .’ 3 A 4
d
City of Carlsbad
October 1, 1999
Mr. and Mrs. Phillip Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad CA 92008
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bowling:
Purusant to your request please be notified that your Appeal has been continued to
November 9,1999.
Should you have any further questions, please feel fkee to contact me at 434-2821.
RAY&ND R. PATCHETT
City Manager
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 @
City of Carlsbad
October 1, 1999
Mr. Norman Walsh
4055 Oceanside Boulevard
Oceanside CA 92056
Dear Mr. Walsh:
The appellants, Mr. and Mrs. Phillip Bowling, have requested a continuance of their
appeal. Please be notified that the Appeal has been continued to November 9,1999.
Should you have any further questions, please feel fi-ee to contact me at 434-2821.
Sincerely,
City Manager
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad. CA 92008-l 989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 @
October 1, 1999
Mr. and Mrs. William Deering
3 155 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad CA 92008
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Deering:
Pursuant to the request of Phillip and Pamela Bowling, please be notified that your
Appeal has been continued to November 9,1999.
Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 434-2821.
Sincerely,
City Manager
.
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 @
City of Carlsbad %’
September 13, 1999
Mr. & Mrs. Phil Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Mr. & Mrs. Bill Deering
3 155 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Bowling & Mr. & Mrs. Deering:
We are in receipt of your requests to continue your item scheduled for the September 14*, 1999
City Council meeting. I understand there are scheduling conflicts with back-to-school night at
Magnolia School in which you indicated you both want to attend.
As a result of your request, I will recommend to the City Council that this item be continued
until October 5, 1999. While asking for a continuance cannot be guaranteed, it is my belief that
the Council will agree to this action and the October 5’ scheduling.
Should you have any questions concerning this, please feel free to contact me. I am enclosing a
copy of the agenda bill which addresses your appeal for your review.
Sincerely,
City Manager
RP/ch
enc.
cc: Mr. Norman Walsh
-All Receive-xgouoa iiem # a*
For the Information of the:
CITY COUN
As+l-..CA-CC~ F
Date$3 City Mana-
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 @
t
l mpletenetns1rrdlor2forddWbnJsuviou. IdUlwbhtorOCOlWthe
compkt~itoms3,4&md4b. folIowIng servioes (for an
mP~ntyounMle~add~onthereveneofthis~~omatwecan~wnthl8 e-fee):
osrd to you. ~Atlechthisformtothefrontofthemal~,oronthebadcif~~doeclnot 1. 0 Adcfressee’s Address ti
.~~*~R~~Rsquasted’w,theme)lpiecebekwIheutide number. 2. cl Restrlded Delivery Ii ~~~~ReccliptwinlhowtorrhomthearMsw~ssdsYversd~thsdsle Consult postmaster for fee. $
3. Arkle Address6d to: I4a. Article Number
Carlsbad, CA 92008
on ths reveme of this fen so that we can return this
iormtothefrontofthemailpiece,oronthebadcifsp*cedoesnot
ffeceipt Requested’on the mailpiece below the article number. ecaipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date
Carlsbad, CA 92008
City
September 1, 1999
Mr. & Mrs. Phil Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING
In accordance with Section 15.16.160 (B) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, this letter is to inform
you that your appeal of the grading permit issued for the Walsh property, located at 3 160 Falcon
Drive, is scheduled for the City Council Meeting of September 14, 1999.
The agenda for the meeting and copies of the staff report will be available in the City Clerk’s
Office on Friday, September 10,1999, by 12:00 Noon.
c: Joe Garuba, City Manager’s Office
Bob Wojcik, Engineering Dept.
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 - (760) 434-2808 43
2 096 5 q75 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided.
Do not use for tntemationat fhit see f8v8rs8
fii
P-W $
f Certlfled Fee
I I I
Spadal Delivery Fee
Reslrtcted Deliiry Fee In g Return Receipt Showing to - Whom (L. Date Detfvered
.E FletumRsce$tSfMngteWhem, a Date, EL Addressee’s Address
d 0 TOTAL Postage& Fees
24
$
Postmark or Date
E
If
-I
l
’ Stick postage stamps to article to cover FIrsMass postage, certttled mail fee, and
charges for any selected optional services (See front).
1. It you want this receipi postmarked, stick the gummed stub 10 the righi of the return
address leaving the receipt attached, and presenl the article at a post office set-&e ?i?
window or hand it to your rural carrier (no extra chafge’ge). r
P 2. If you do not want thii receipt postmarked, stick the gummed dub to the right of the
return address of the article, date, detach, and retain the receipt, and mail the article.
8 L
3. lf you want a return receipt, write the certified mail number and your name and address 8 cr,
on a return receipt card, Form 3811, end attach it to the front of the article by means of the -
gummed ends if space permits. Otherwise, affix to back of artide. Endorse front of article
RETURN RECOPT RECUESTED adjacent to the number. a c
4. It you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an aulhorfzed agent of the 8
addressee, endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article. t2
5. Enter fees for the services requested in th&approprfate spaces on the front of this
receipt. If return receipt is requested, check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 3811.
E
2
6. Save this receipt and present it if you make an inquiry. 102595-97-B-0145 2
City of Carlsbad
September 1,1999
Mr. & Mrs. Bill Deering
3 155 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING
In accordance with Section 15.16.160 (B) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, this letter is to inform
you that your appeal of the grading permit issued for the Walsh property, located at 3 160 Falcon
Drive, is scheduled for the City Council Meeting of September 14, 1999.
The agenda for the meeting and copies of the staff report will be available in the City Clerk’s
Office on Friday, September 10,1999, by 12:00 Noon.
c: Joe Garuba, City Manager’s Office
Bob Wojcik, Engineering Dept.
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 - (760) 434-2808 @
I ‘7b 935 42L
US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided.
10 not use for International Mail (See reverse) sent to Mr. and Mrs. Bill Deering
&tided Ddivery Fee I I
Uum Receipt Showing to Vhom 8 Date Delivered
lelumRexiptStawkgicWnan, lale,6Adrkes&sAddress
KlTAL Postage & Fees
‘ostmark or Date
$
-.- _ --- I-
.
I Stick postage stamps to article lo cover First-Class postage, certified mail fee, and
1 chargas for any selected optional services (See front).
! i 1. Ii you want this receipl postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the .rigM of the return address leaving the receipt attached, and present the article at a post office service
window or hand it lo your rural carrfer (no extra charge). , I 2. If you do not wanl this receipt postmarked, slick the gummed stub to the right of the
return address of the article, date, detach, and retain the receipt, and mail the article.
3. ff you want a return receipt, write the certified mail number and your name and address
on a return receipt card, Form 3611, and attach ii to the front of the artida by means of the
gummed ends if space permits. Oiherwise, affix to back 01 attide. Endorse front of at-tide
1 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED adjacent to Ihe number.
/ 4. If you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an authotized agent of the
addressee, endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article.
5. Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriale spaces on the front of this
receipt. If return receipt is requested, check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 3611.
6. Save this receipt and present il if you make an inquiry. 102595-97-B-0145
.
City
September 1,1999
Mr. Norman Walsh
4055 Oceanside Blvd.
Oceanside, CA 92056
RE: NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING
In accordance with Section 15.16.160 (B) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, this letter is to inform you that the appeal of the grading permit issued for your property, located at 3 160 Falcon Drive,
is scheduled for the City Council Meeting of September 14, 1999.
The agenda for the meeting and copies of the staff report will be available in the City Clerk’s
Office on Friday, September 10,1999, by 12:00 Noon.
c: Joe Garuba, City Manager’s Office
Bob Wojcik, Engineering Dept.
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 l (760) 434-2808 @I
-
Z 076 935 422
US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided.
10 not use for International Mail (See reverse)
Sent to Mr. Norman Walsh
Street & Number 4055 Oceanside Blvd.
Post OHice, State, I ZIP Code Oceanside, CA 92056
Postage
Cerfified Fee
$
Special Deiiiry Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Return Receipt Showing to Whom & Date Delivered
RetumRec#ptShowitqtoWnmi, Date, &Addressee’s Address
TOTAL Postage & Fees
Postmark or Date
$
c
Stick postage stamps to article to cover First-Class postage, certified mall fee, and
charges for any selected optional services (See front).
1. tf you want this receipt postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the right of the return
address leaving the receipt attached, and present the articie at a post office service
window or hand it to your rural carder (no extra charge).
2. If you do not want this receipt postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the rttht of the
return address of the article, date, detach, and retain the receipt, and mail the article.
3. Ii you want a return receipt, write the certified mail number and your name and address
on a return receipt card, Form 3611, and attach it to the front of the article by means of the
gummed ends if space permits. Otherwise, affix to back of artide. Endorse front of article
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED adjacent to the number.
4. If you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an authorized agent of the
addressee, endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the artide.
5. Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the tronl of this
receipt. If return receipt is requested, check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 3611. 4
6. Save this receipt and present it if you make% inquiry. 102595-97-B-0145
Id
August 4, 1999
Mr. & Mrs. Phil Bowling
3 180 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Bowling:
This letter is intended to clarify that any appeals that you may file with regard to the
development of the Walsh property, located at 3 160 Falcon Drive, Carlsbad, CA is due to the
City Clerk no later than Friday, August 6, 1999 by 5:00 p.m. Based upon our numerous
conversations and research regarding the development of this property, we have tried to resolve
these issues to the fullest extent of staff authority. However, if you feel that an appeal to the City
Council is necessary for further consideration of your concerns, please submit the appeal
addressing these matters to the City Clerk.
If you have any further questions or comments, please contact our Management Analyst, Joe
Garuba at 434-2893.
City tianager
RF’/ch
cc: City Clerk’s Office
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 @
City of Carlsbad
August 4,1999
Mr. & Mrs. Bill Deering
3 155 Falcon Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Deering:
This letter is intended to clarify that any appeals that you may file with regard to the
development of the Walsh property, located at 3 160 Falcon Drive, Carlsbad, CA is due to the
City Clerk no later than Friday, August 6, 1999 by 5:00 p.m. Based upon our numerous
conversations and research regarding the development of this property, we have tried to resolve
these issues to the fullest extent of staff authority. However, if you feel that an appeal to the City
Council is necessary for further consideration of your concerns, please submit the appeal
addressing these matters to the City Clerk.
If you have any further questions or comments, please contact our Management Analyst, Joe
Garuba at 434-2893.
Sincerely,
3 Raymond R. Patchett
City Manager
RP/ch
cc: City Clerk’s Office
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 l (760) 434-2821 l FAX (760) 720-9461 49
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
DATE:
TO: Bob Wojcik, Engineering
FROM: Karen Kundtz, Clerk's Office
RF,: GRADING PERMIT FOR 3160 FALCON DRIVE
August 9, 1999
TELEPHONE (619) 434-2808
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.)
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of .
Signature Date
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 CARLSBAlr dILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, LALIFORNIA 92008
434-2867
REC’D FROM
ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION
RECEIPT NO. f$$PJ~~ NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY TOTAL
@ printed on recycled papa. CASH REGISTER
AMOUNT
08/06/99 16:52 al 760 727 1583 - . . *
CERTIFIED k!l001/001
I (We) appeal the decision of the Carlsbad Building & Engineering DePt.
to the Carl&ad City Council.
Date of Decision you are appealing: Tuesday, August 3rd, 1999
Subbct Qf&neal :
BE SPEClFlC Examples: if the action .is a City Engine&s Decision, please say so. If a project has
muttipleeknents, (such as a General ,Plan Amendment, ,Negaflve hda&ion, Sp&tk plan, &c) plqw
iiittiwtmd. Iyouolslywenttoappeal~partofthe.whdeadian,ple;ase~thathere.
We are appealing the city's issuance of a grading permit after
the work had already been completed at 3160 Falcon Drive.
Furthermore, in issuing the permit, the city'neglected to
consider hov7 such grading would affect adjoining properties-
The same applies to the issuance Of a retalnlnq Wall permlC*
k3a~miSl for hD9al: l ~PkMO NO&8 0 Fdh h~spO&f# I~WHBSO~.~ rwult On doald d
Ihe 8ppIsrl, rrd y0u.M be#lmM~to.()ld -s-StMod ha~vm wh~#t -mung your appeal,
BE SPFCIFIC How did the decision maker en? -what about the decision is inconsistent with state or local
laws, plans, or policy? ,’ T e issuance of both the g ' g and retaining,wall permits
$/gj&g&i the woik had been coi;tznted, did not allow SufficeIlt
time for the city to consider what damage might result to
adjoining properties- .Furthermore, the declslon, 1s not Consistent
with the'carlsbad gradzng ana nllLslmnd1 .
Issuknce of bqth of these permits' is also in conflict with
' the city's written response regarding this matter. -+ Assurance of both or these permits has created a nealt,h and
safety issue regarding the adjoining Property as it pertains to
SIGNATURE Pam Bowling
NAME (please @IQ
8/6/99'
DATE
3150 Falcon Drive 3155 Falcon Drive -ADDRESS: Street Nme & Number Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
mf* stabe. WJ-