The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000-01-25; City Council; 15592; Rancho Carrillo Village "N"3 l-l 7-l 2 Y 8 CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENwA BILL dl AB# ,(,sfA TITLE: IV\*’ DEPT. HD. d%@ MTG. l/25/00 RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE “N” CITY ATTY. @ * CT 99-09/CP 99-06 DEPT. PLN # CITYMGR e RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 2000 -31 APPROVING a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prog;am, Tentative Tract Map, CT 99-09 and Condominium Permit, CP 99-06. ITEM EXPLANATION: On December 15, 1999, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” project located within the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan and Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan boundaries, west of Melrose Drive along the southern boundary. The Planning Commission approved (7-O) the Master Plan Amendment (MP 139(H)), determining it to be minor, and recommended approval (7-O) of Tentative Tract Map, CT 99-09, and Condominium Permit, CP 99-06, for the development of 105 attached airspace condominium units. One resident of an adjacent development spoke in opposition to the project due to concern over noise and views. The project consists of 105 attached airspace condominium units proposed as 35 triplex structures on a 12.9 acre parcel that has been previously graded as part of the Ranch0 Carrillo mass grading. The proposed grading design will alter the site by eliminating the existing terraced building pads and creating a single large building pad that is somewhat higher along the northern boundary and lower along the southern boundary. The Residential Medium High (RMH) density General Plan designation and Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan would allow a maximum of 119 dwelling units. The project design consists of a single private gated entry from Melrose Drive and a circular private street that provides access to individual units and motor court driveway entries. Each proposed triplex condominium structure is designed so that the majority of garage doors face interior motor courts. Each motor court serves two triplex structures, one on each side. The proposed architectural style is California Mediterranean and structures are varied through the provision of four different elevations and color schemes. The street scene is further enhanced by off-set building planes and variation in front yard setbacks. The project includes a 12,300 square foot common active recreation area consisting of a pool and jacuzzi located near the entrance. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Assessment performed for the project revealed that potentially significant traffic and noise impacts require mitigation. Mitigation includes payment of fees for the short term improvements to the Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real intersection and the construction of a combination berm and 6 foot high noise wall along Melrose Drive. Based on this agreed upon mitigation, the Planning Director issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration on September 30, 1999. FISCAL IMPACT: All public facilities required to serve the additional dwelling units will be constructed prior to or concurrent with development as required by the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan. The project is also conditioned to enter an agreement with CMWD to construct a portion of an offsite 8” water line that will be extended from the project to Carrillo Way. Since these improvements will be constructed by the developer, no negative fiscal impacts will be incurred by the City. As noted above, the applicant will also be responsible for a pro rata share of the cost for short term improvements to the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. Development of the / P “\ PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /5,59 3 multi-family condominium project will increase land values thus creating a positive fiscal impact in the form of increased property tax revenues. GROWTH MANAGMENT STATUS: Facilities Zone 18 Growth Control Point 11.5 Net Density* 10 du/ac Special Facilities CFD No. 1 Melrose Drive Assessment District San Marcos Unified School District Mello Roos * The project is 14 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Resolution No. Bob -31 2. Location Map 3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4680, 4682, and 4683 4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated December 15, 1999 5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated December 15, 1999. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 2606-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO DEVELOP 105 AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUMS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF MELROSE DRIVE AT THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE RANCH0 CARRILLO MASTER PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 18 CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N CASE NO.: CT 99-09/CP 99-06 The City Council of the City of Carfsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code the Planning Commission did, on December 15, 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Minor Master Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium Permit to subdivide 105 airspace condominium units on a 12.9 acre parcel in the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan. The Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4680, 4682, and 4683 recommending to the City Council that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit be approved and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 4681 approving the Minor Master Plan Amendment, determining to be minor; and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 25th day of January , 2000, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said matters and at that time received recommendations, objections, protests, comments of all persons interested in or opposed to CT 99-09 and CP 99-06; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. That the City Council approves Planning Commission recom endations on CT 99-09/CP 99-06 and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as set forth in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4680, 4682 and 4683 on file with the City Clerk and made a part hereof by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City, with the addition 01 the following Conditions: a. “Prior to the recordation of the first final tract map 0 r the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney (Noise Form #2); and b. ‘Prior to the approval of a grading permit or final rn ,ap, whichever occurs first, a pedestrian trail that provides emergency egress from Street “B” to Melrose Drive at the southeasterly end of the project shall be shown on the grading plan. The design of the trail shall be to the satisfaction 01 the Planning Director. The trail shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any ,unit.” 3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the Ci J Council. The provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial Review” shall apply: I “NOTICE TO APPLICANT” The time within which judicial review of this decision must be soug tit 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 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the d~ate 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 Citv Clerk. Citv of Carlsbad, 1200’Carlsbad Gillage Drive, Carlsbad, CA. 92008.” - - -2- - PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 25th day of January , 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Hall, Finnila, Nygaard and Kulchin NOES: Council Member Lewis ABSENT: None ATTEST: -3- EXHIBIT 2 RANCH0 CARRILLO iilLLAGE “N,, cr 9%OWCP 99-06 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. 4680 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TO SUBDIVIDE 12.9 ACRES INTO 105 AIR SPACE coNDoMINIuM UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN THE RANCH0 CARRILLO MASTER PLAN WEST OF MELROSE DRIVE ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE MASTER PLAN lN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 18. CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N CASE NO.: Ml’ 139(H)/CT 99-09KP 99-06 WHEREAS, D. R Horton San Diego, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by D. R. Horton, San Diego Holding Company, Inc., “Owner”, described as Lot 164, Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04, Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” Phase 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13800, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on June 10,1999. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared in conjunction with said project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of December, ‘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, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. b 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 as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program according to Exhibit “ND” dated September 30,1999, and “PII” dated July 25,1999, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findiws: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: A. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and B. the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and C. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad; and D. based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Conditions: 1. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of the Ranch0 Carrillo Village N Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PC RESO NO. 4680 -2- 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 .- ,- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of December, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HtiZMItiER Planning Director PC RESO NO. 4680 -3- dity of MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: The project site is Village N of the Rancho, Carrillo Maste; Plan located at the southern boundary of the master plan just west of Melrose Drive and to the north of Alga Road in the southeast quadrant of the City. Project Description: The project site is Village N of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan located at the southern boundary of the master plan just west of Melrose Drive and to the north of Alga Road in the southeast quadrant of the City. The site has been previously disturbed as part of the Master Plan mass grading that established the boundaries of the various planning areas. The existing terraced pads range in elevation from 446’ to 480’ from north to south and the proposed grading design would create one large pad which increases the pad elevations along the northern and western project boundaries and reduces the pad elevations along the eastern and southern boundaries. The project consists of 35 three-unit triplexes, each with two three-story units and one two-story unit ranging in size from 1,349 to 1,544 square feet, for a total of 105 units. The project also includes an amendment to the Village “N” Master Plan development standards to reduce required building setbacks to a minimum of 10’ and to reduce private driveways to a minimum of 24’. The City’ of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EL4 Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project “as revised” may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075’Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Anne Hysong in the Planning Department at (760) 438- 116 1, extension 4477. DATED: September 30, 1999 CASE NO: MP 139(H)/CT 99-09/CP 99-06 CASE NAME: Ranch0 Carrillo Village N PUBLISH DATE: September 30, 1999 Planning Director 2075 Las Palmas D-r. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 l (760) 438-l 161 l FAX (760) 438-0894 ENVIRONMENTAL, IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: MP 139(H)/CT 99-09/CP 99-06 DATE:7-25-99 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” 2. APPLICANT: Hofman PlanninP Associates 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5900 Pasteur Court, Carlsbad CA 92008 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: March 24.1999 :5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ‘The project site is Village N of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan located at the southern boundary of the master plan just west of Melrose Drive and to the north of Alga Road in the southeast quadrant of the City. The site has been previously disturbed as part of the Master Plan mass grading that established the boundaries of the various planning areas. The existing terraced pads range in elevation from 446’ to 480’ from north to south and the proposed grading design would dreate one large pad which increases the pad elevations along the northern and western project boundaries and reduces the pad elevations along the eastern and southern boundaries. The project consists of 35 three-unit triplexes, each with two three-story units and one two-story unit ranging in size from 1,349 to 1,544 square feet, for a total of 105 units. The project also includes an amendment to the Village “N” Master Plan development standards to reduce required building setbacks to a minimum of 10’ and to reduce private driveways to a minimum of 24’. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant.Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation IncorpoI’ated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Land Use and Planning El Transportation/Circulation 0 Public Services cl Population and Housing cl Geological Problems 0 Bio1ogica.l Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems El Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics 0 Water III Hazards 0 Cultural Resources q Air Quality lxl Noise 0 Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03128196 .- - DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) 0 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. lxl I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an ’ attached sheet have been added to the project. A M.ITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find’that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. The project site is Village N of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan located at the southern boundary of the master plan just west of Melrose Drive and to the north of Alga Road in the southeast quadrant of the City. The site has been previously disturbed as part of the Master Plan mass grading that established the boundaries of the various planning areas. The existirig terraced pads range in elevation from 446’ to 480’ from north to south and the proposed grading design would create one large pad which increases the pad elevations along the northern and western project boundaries and reduces the pad elevations along the eastern and southern boundaries. The proposed pad ranges in elevation from 463’ to 470’. The adjacent development to the north and west is approximately 80’ - 90’ below the proposed development and the adjacent development to the south is approximately 38’ - 40’ above the proposed development. The project consists of 35 three-unit triplexes, each with two three-story units and one two-story unit ranging in size from 1,349 to 1,544 square feet, for a total of 105 units. All units are three bedroom. The triplexes are designed around auto courtyards that provide access to a two car garage and two one car garages on each side of the courtyard. Each triplex has an additional two car garage that is accessible from the street outside of the courtyard. The project also includes an amendment to the Village “N” Master Plan development standards to reduce required building setbacks to a minimum of 10’ and to reduce private driveways to a minimum of 24’. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. cl I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Master Environmental Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) and the Ranch Carrillo Master Plan EIR 91-04 pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-01) and Ranch Carrillo Master Plan EIR 91-04, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. 9/a+ q Date #-z/e Date Rev. 03/28/96 - - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. l A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is.based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. l “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there ‘is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. l “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. l “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. 0 Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but fl potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon , the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). l When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. 0 A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. Rev. 03128196 a If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. l An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the .impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. 4 . . Rev. 03/28/96 /3 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. 4 b) c) 4 e> Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18, #2 Pg. 122-143) q Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the q project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18 #2 Pg. 122-143) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18 #2 Pg. 122-143) q Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible q land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18, #2 Pg. 122-143) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or q minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18 #2 Pg. . 1222143) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: 4 b) c> Cumulativeljr exceed official regional oi local population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6 #2 Pg. q 122-143) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area q or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6 #2 Pg. 122-143) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6 #2 Pg. 122-143) q III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or 4 b) c) 4 e) f) d h) 9 expose people to potenti impacts &Olving: Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-l 11) Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs 5.1-I - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-111) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1.15, #2 Pgs 102-l 11) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-I 11) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-l 11) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-l 11) Subsidence of the land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-111) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102- 111) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l :Pgs 5.1- 1 - 5.1-15, #2 Pgs 102-111) q q q q q q q q q IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2- q 11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated q q q q q q q q q q q 0’ q q q q q q Less Than Significant Impact q 0 q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q No Impact Ix] Is] lxl lxl txl lxl Ix] IXI lxl lxl Ix] IXI Rev. 03128196 /s/ - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) c) 4 e) fl g) h) 9 Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95- 101) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2- 11, #2 Pgs 95-101) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11, #2 Pgs 95-101) V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: 4 b) c) 4 Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- 1 - 5.3-12, #2 Pgs 112-121) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12, #2 Pgs 112-121) Alter air movement, .moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12, #2 Pgs 112-121) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12, #2 Pgs 112-121) . VI. TRANSPORTATIONKIRCULATIdN. Would the 4 b) g) proposal result in: Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188, #3) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22, #2 Pgs 164-188) Potentially Significanl Impact q q q q q q q q lxl q q q lxl q q q q q q ‘Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated cl q q q q q q q El q No Impact q q lxl q q lxl q q lxl q q q q q q q q q cl q 0 q 0 q q q q q q q q q q ISI lxl Rev. 03/28/96 - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). VII. BIOLOGICAL RBSGURCES. Would the proposal result 4 b) cl 4 4 VIII. a) b) cl in impacts to: Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24, #2 Pgs 54- 81) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24, #2 Pgs 54-81) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24, #2 Pgs 54-81) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24, #2 Pgs 54-81) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#l :Pgs 5.4- 1 -. 5.4-24, #2 Pgs 54-81) Potentially Significant impact ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 &5.13-l - 5.13-9) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13- 1 - 5.13-9) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals orradiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5, #2 Pgs 126) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5, #2 Pgs 218)’ c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-I - 5.10.1-5) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5, #2 Pgs 47) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: 4 b) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l :Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9- 15, #2 Pgs 189-207) q Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9- 1 - 5.9-15, #4) q q q q q q q q q q cl q q q - Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Impact Unless impact Mitigation Incorporated q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q Ix) Ix] Ix1 Ix1 (XI lxl El IXI q q lxl q q lxl q q IXJ q q Ix1 q q El q q lx. q Ia q XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: 7’ Rev. 03/28/96 A Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-l - 5.12.5-6, #2 Pgs 208-22 1) b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4, #2 Pgs 208-221) c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5, #2 Pgs 208-221) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (1, pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7, #2 Pgs 208-221) e) Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7, #2 Pgs 208-221) XII.UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the a> b) c> 4 d f) g) XIII. a> b) cl XIV. 4 b) cl 4 e) proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-l - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9, #2 Pgs 208-221) Communications systems? (#l; Pgs 5.12.1-l - 5.12.8-7, #2 Pgs 208-22 1) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-I - 5.12.3-7, #2 Pgs 208-221) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-I - 5.12.3-7, #2 Pgs 208-221) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8, #2 Pgs 208-221) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3, #2 Pgs 222-224) Local or regional water supplies? (#l :Pgs 5.12.2-I - 5.12.3-7, #2 Pgs 219) AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs 5.11-l - 5.1 l-5, #2 Pgs 145-163) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1 - 5.11-5, #2 Pgs 145-163) Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.11-l - 5.11-5, #2 Pgs 145-163) CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: Disturb paleontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8- 10, #2 Pg 93,94) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8- 10, #2 Pg 82-93) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10, #2 Pg 82-93) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10, #2 Pg 82-93) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10, #2 Pg 82-93) Potentially Significant impact q q cl q q q q q 0 q q q q 0 q q q q q q XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-I - q 5.12.8-7, #2 Pgs 210) - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q Less Than No Significant Impact Impact q q q q q q q q q q q 0 q q q q q q q q q Ix) .8 Rev. 03128196 - Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b) XVI. a) b) c) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l :Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7, #2 Pgs 210) q q q lxl MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the q habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, . threaten to eliminate a plant or animal cotinnunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or nrehistorv? q q IXI Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but curnulativelv considerable? 0 q q Ix] (“Cumulatively considerable” -means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? q q Ix1 9 Rev: 03128196 - XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Referenced in the above checklist are the earlier environmental analysis that have been conducted for the project site. Source #l is the Master Environmental Impact Report for the City’s General Plan Update (GPA 94-01) and related Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01) which reviewed the potential impacts of buildout of the City’s General Plan, including transportation and air quality impacts. Source #2 is the Environmental Impact Report for the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan (EIR 91-04) for MP 1390;) certified on July 27, 1993, analyzed all the potential impacts for the development and occupation of the over 1800 unit , residential master plan. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is Village N of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan located at the southern boundary of the master plan just west of Melrose Drive and to the north of Alga Road in the southeast quadrant ofthe City. The site has been previously disturbed as part of the Master Plan mass grading that established the boundaries of the various planning areas. The existing terraced pads range in elevation from 446’ to 480’ from north to south and the proposed grading design would create one large pad which increases the pad elevations along the northern and western project boundaries and reduces the pad elevations along the eastern and southern boundaries. The proposed pad ranges in elevation from 463’ to 470’. The adjacent development to the north and west is approximately 80’ - ,90’ below the proposed development and the adjacent development to the south is approximately 38’ - 40’ above the proposed development. The project consists of 35 three-unit triplexes, each with two three-story units and one two-story unit ranging in size from 1,349 to 1,544 square feet, for a total of 105 units. All units are three bedroom. The triplexes are designed around auto courtyards that provide access to a tie car garage and two one car garages on each side of the courtyard. Each triplex has an additional two car garage that is accessible from the street outside of the courtyard. The project also includes an amendment to the Village “N” Master Plan development standards to reduce required building setbacks to a minimum of 10’ and to reduce private driveways to a minimum of 24’. I II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS B. Environmental Impact Discussion Air Duality The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions ‘are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. 10 Rev. 03128196 To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the ~Planning Department. TransuortationKirculation The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is required. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 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 $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. Noise Noise levels along Meh-ose -Drive adjacent to Units 1 through 6 and 23 are projected to exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL noise standard without mitigation. In accordance with the “Noise Technical Report for Ranch0 Carrillo Village N” prepared by RECON dated May 12, 1999 and letter dated July 12, 1999, noise levels will be reduced to the City’s standard through construction of noise barriers that are 10’ in height for Units 1 through 6 and 7’ in height for Unit 23. Mitigation for this impact includes a combination of berm and 6’ noise walls, as shown on the tentative map, to attenuate noise at these locations to the City’s 60 dBA CNEL standard. III. EARLIER ANALYSES USED The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92009, (760) 438- 116 1, extension 4447. 1. Final Master Environmental Imnact Renort for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-Oi), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. . 2. Final Environmental Imnact Renort for the Ranch0 ‘Can-i110 Master Plan and General Plan Amendment (EIR 9 l-04), dated February 8, 1993, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 3. 1998 Traffic Monitoring Renort for the City of Carlsbad, Valley Research and Planning Associates. 4. “Noise Technical Report for Ranch0 Carrillo Village N:’ prepared by RECON dated May 12, 1999 and letter dated July 12, 1999. 12 Rev.03/28/96 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) 1. The Developer shall pay their fair share for the “short-term improvements” to the El Camino Real/ Palomar Airport Road intersection prior to issuance of a building permit. 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 18 LFMP fee; the creation of a fee or assessment district; or incorporation into a Mello-Roos taxing district. 2. The developer shall construct and ensure maintenance of the combination berm and maximum 6’ high noise walls as shown on the approved Ranch0 Can410 Village “N” ’ ‘tentative map. ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) S.ee Attached 13 Rev. 03128196 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. ym3/4Ej Date 8 / Rev. 03/28/96 g* 3. P 0” II f 3 znm EC- a -. 0 033 ~cDc-3 gs--, = ‘I, 8 = / 2 0% 8 nl(DyP EECP J zaoa . 3c.. 23 r. c al $z (g? s r .’ ,,.: z 5 ,QD ‘, P) g ,;g E ‘> E “.;a ,(,, $1 ‘,. ‘:,I;: .z :_ .,.“:’ C 40 C afied :lSll)133H3 9NIUOlINOUU NOllV9lllW lVlN3WlNOMAN3 A$! 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4682 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL’OF CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 99-09 TO SUBDIVIDE 12.9 ACRES INTO 105 AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN THE RANCH0 CARRILLO MASTER PLAN WEST OF MELROSE DRIVE ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE MASTER PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 18. CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N CASE NO.: CT 99-09 WHEREAS, D. R Horton San Diego, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by D. R: Horton, San Diego Holding Company, Inc., “Owner”, described as Lot 164, Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04, Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” Phase 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13800, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on June 10,1999. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative Tract Map as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “BB” dated December 15, 1999, on file in the Planning Department, RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N - CT 99-09, as provided by Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 15th day of December, 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 Tentative Tract Map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 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 W That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N - CT 99-09, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FindinPs: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the Subdivision as conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan, any applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in that the project is consistent with all Title 20 and 21 regulations governing airspace subdivisions and the design of multi-family condominiums. That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding existing and future land uses since surrounding properties are designated by the Master Plan and General Plan for residential single family and multi-family land uses that are adequately separated and buffered and existing development to the south consists of multi- family development at a similar density and design. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the density proposed, in that the project is limited to the building pad created by the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan mass grading, below the maximum number of units permitted by the Master Plan, and consistent with all applicable development standards and design criteria. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the, Ltid Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act). That the design of ihe subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that the development will consist of triplex structures with adequate separation to ensure air circulation within and surrounding residential units. That the Planning Commission has considered, in connection with the housing proposed by this subdivision, the housing needs of the region, and balanced those housing needs against the public service needs of the City and available fiscal and environmental resources. That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that all applicable biological mitigation measures required by Final EIR PC RESO NO. 4682 -2- al 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 91-04 and MEIR 93-01 have been incorporated into the project and/or added to the project as conditions of approval. 9. That the discharge of waste from the subdivision will not result in violation of existing California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that the sewer and drainage requirements of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master’ Plan and EIR 91-04 have been considered and appropriate sewer and drainage facilities have been designed to accommodate the project. In addition to City Engineering Standards and compliance with the City’s Master Sewer and Drainage Plans, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards will be satisfied. 10. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan and Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated December 15, 1999, including, but not limited to the following: A. B. C. Land Use - The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan Residential Medium High (RMH) land use designation for the site since the proposed density of 10 dwelling units/acre is within the density range of 8-15 dwelling units/acre and below the Growth Management Growth Control Point of 11.5 dwelling units/acre. Circulation - The project is served by the Melrose Drive prime circulation arterial roadway which has been completed and the project is conditioned to complete all necessary onsite roadway improvements prior to occupancy of any unit. Noise - Project noise levels that exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL standard along Palomar Airport Road have been mitigated to the standard through the use of a combination berm and solid 6’ masonry wall. 11. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the applicable local facilities management plan, and all City public facility policies and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements: regarding sewer collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; tire; schools; parks and other recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space, related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need. Specifically, A. The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the San Marcos School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities. B. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and will be collected prior to issuance of building permit, C. The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No. 17 and will be collected prior to the issuance of building permit. PC RESO NO. 4682 -3- J7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 12. That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B). 13. 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. Conditions: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final map or issuance of grading permit, whichever occurs first. 1. If any of the following 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 Tentative Tract Map. 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the project 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. 3. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. 5. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Tentative Tract Map, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non- discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, PC PBS0 NO. 4682 -4- 098 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 including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. 6. The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the Tentative Map reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. 7. 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. 8. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. 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. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map. 10. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Ranch0 Carrillo Village N Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 11. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and CP 99-06 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4680 and 4683 dated December 15,1999. 12. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. The Developer shall .construct and install all landscaping as sho&n on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. A maintenance responsibilities plan for the common area (to be maintained by the Homeowner’s Association) and for the exclusive use areas (to be maintained by the individual airspace unit owner) in accordance with the Tentative Map/Condominium Site Plan shall be included in the final landscape plan. 13. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the landscape plan check process on tile in the Planning Department and accompanied by the project’s building, improvement, and grading plans. 14. The enhanced paving shown on Sheet 3 of the conceptual Landscape Plan (Exhibit “F” dated December 15, 1999) at the entrance to each motor court shall be expanded to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to approval, of final landscape plans. The plant sizes identified on Exhibit “F” shall be upsized to 15 gallon for Pittosporum Tobira, Rhaphiolepis Indica and Jasminum Polyanthum. a9 PC RESO NO. 4682 -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 15. 16. 17. The developer shall submit a “Trellis/Patio Cover Plan” subject to approval of the Planning Director. All entry monumentation, perimeter walls and/or fencing shall be in conformance with the approved Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan. The noise wall proposed along Melrose Drive shall be in accordance with the Community Theme Wall. 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 CC&Rs 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. Notice and Amendment. A copy of any proposed amendment shall be provided to the City in advance. If the proposed amendment affects the City, City shall have the right to disapprove. A copy of the final approved amendment shall be transmitted to City within 30 days for the official record. C. 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. D. PC&SO NO. 4682 Suecial 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 Associatidn. If the Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be 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 - 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 prorata 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. E. Landscane Maintenance Resnonsibilities. The HOAs and individual lot or unit owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set *forth in the approved final Landscape Plan. F. Balconies. trellis and decks. The individual lot or unit owner allowances and prohibitions regarding balconies, trellis and decks shall be as set forth in the approved Trellis/Patio Cover Plan. I G. No parking shall be allowed in the courtyard areas. 18. Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit by Resolutions No. 4682 and 4683 on the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. 19. The developer shall post a sign in the sales office in a prominent location that discloses which special districts and school district provide service to the project. Said sign shall remain posted until ALL of the units are sold. Engineerinp: 20. 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. 21. There shall be one final subdivision map recorded for this project. 22. The developer shall provide an acceptable means for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all the private: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain PC RESO NO. 4682 -7- 31 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 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the. subdivision. Adequate provision for such maintenance shall be included with the CC&Rs subject to the approval of the City Engineer. All concrete terrace drains shall be maintained by the homeowner’s association. An appropriately worded statement clearly identifying the responsibility shall be placed in the CC&Rs (if maintained by the Association) and on the final map. The developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, offricers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an approval of the City, the Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the City within the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map Act. 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. Rain gutters must be provided to convey roof drainage to an approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following statement on the Final Map (and in the CC&Rs). “No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.” Fees/APreements . 28. The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property. 29. 30. The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner shall give written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 on a form provided by the City. Grading 31. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. The developer must submit and receive approval for grading plans in accordance with City codes and standards prior PC RESO NO. 4682 -8- 32 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 to issuance of a building permit for the project. 32. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 33. Upon completion of grading, the developer shall ensure that an “as-graded” geologic plan is submitted to the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. This plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist. The plan shall be prepared on a 24” x 36” mylar or similar drafting film and shall become a permanent record. Dedications/ImDrovements 34. 35. 36. Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be provided or installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as may be required by the City Engineer. 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 approved by the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying 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 wasmproducts. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon .compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards, the developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, improvements shown on the tentative map within the publicly dedicated easements. A list of the improvements shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the final map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision May7A;t. PC RESO NO. 4682 -9- 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The improvements shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the secured improvements agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. A. Private Streets B. Private Streets “B”, “C”, and “D” C. Sewer and water facilities. A list of the above improvements shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the final map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the secured improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. 37.. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Developer shall execute an agreement satisfactory to the Director of Public Works and approved by the City Attorney as to form, along with an appropriate bond, to design and construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Melrose Drive and the project entrance. The agreement may be executed on behalf of the City by the Director of Public Works, shall be recorded, and include provisions for automatic termination if the Director of Public Works has not made demand upon the Developer for design and construction within five years from the date of issuance of the first building permit for the subdivision. The Director of Public Works is authorized to execute and record an appropriate release of the agreement when satisfied or terminated pursuant to those provisions. 38. The applicant shall apply for and obtain a City right-of-way permit for connecting to the public storm drain system and for joining the project entrance improvements to the existifig Melrose Drive street improvements. 39. The design of all private streets and drainage systems shall be approved by the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. The standard improvement plan check and inspection fees shall be paid prior to approval of the final map for this project. Final Mar.) Notes 40. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the final map as non-mapping data: A. All improvements are private and are to be privately maintained with the exception of water and sewer facilities. B. Geotechnical Caution: The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad from any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground water seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur on, or adjacent to, this subdivision due to its construction, operation or maintenance. PC RESO NO. 4682 -lO- 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C. D. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition. The Developer shall provide the following note on the final map of the subdivision and final mylar of this development submitted to the City: “Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code established a Growth Management Control Point for each General. Plan, land use designation. Development cannot exceed the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapter 21.90. The RMH land use designation for this development allows 11.5 dwelling units per non-constrained acre. 41. The subject property is within the boundaries of Assessment District No. 96-l (Ranch0 Carrillo). Upon the subdivision of land within the district boundaries, the owner may pass through assessments to subsequent owners only if the owner has executed a Special Assessment District Pass-through Authorization Agreement. Said Agreement contains provision regarding notice to potential buyers of the amount of the assessment and other provisions and requires the owner to have each buyer receive and execute a Notice of Assessment and an Option Agreement. In the event that the owner does not execute the Authorization Agreement, the assessment on the subject property must be paid off in full bv the owner nrior to final man annroval. 42. As required by state law, the subdivider shall submit to the City an application for segregation of assessments along with the appropriate fee. A segregation is not required if the developer pays off the assessment on the subject property prior to the recordation of the final map. In the event a segregation of assessments is not recorded and property is subdivided, the full amount of assessment will appear on the tax bills of each new lot. Water: 43. All District pipelines and appurtenances required for this project by the District shall be within public right-of-way or within minimum 20’ wide easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad. 44. Sequentially, the Developer’s Engineer shall do the following: A. State Health Department approved backflow prevention devices shall be installed on all automatic fire sprinkler systems. B. Prepare and submit a colored recycled water use area map and submit this map to the Planning Department for processing and approval by the District. 45. The following note shall be placed on the final map. “This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not, be issued for development of the subject property unless the District serving the development has adequate water and sewer capacity available at the time of development is to occur, and that such water and sewer capacity will continue to be available until time of occupancy.” PC RESO NO. 4682 -ll- 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 46. 47. 48. - All potable water and recycled water meters shall be placed within public right of way at locations approved by the District. Developer shall construct and dedicate to the Carlsbad Municipal Water District a looped water pipeline system with a hydraulic grade line of 700-fee as shown on the map. The looping system shall include connections to the existing pipeline at Melrose Drive and at Carrillo Way. The pipeline from Carrillo Way to Private Drive “B” shall be contained within a 20-foot wide easement dedicated to the District for water operation and maintenance purposes, parallel to a private 10’ drainage easement. The easement and water pipeline shall cross existing Open Space Lot 52 of Village “0,” Open Space Lot 165 of Village “N” and Lot 164 of Village “NY’ (from Street “B” to Carrillo Way). Developer shall enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with Carlsbad Municipal Water District to obtain reimbursement for Developer construction from Carrillo Way to the northerly boundary of Open Space Lot 165, as well as oversizing the pipeline from 8 to 10 inches (approximately 1,000 feet). The Reimbursement Agreement shall be executed by both parties prior to approval of the final map. The Developer shall be responsible for coordinating with the District to establish that the minimum easement width of 20’ is adequate for sewer maintenance. The Developer shall obtain District approval for this easement prior to recordation of the final map. The Develop shall also be responsible for construction of a 12’ wide all weather surface along the length of said easement for access purposes. Fire: 49. All buildings classified as R-l occupancies must be protected by automatic fire sprinklers designed in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 50. Entry gates must be equipped with a “knox” emergency entry system and must disengage upon interruption of power. CODE REMINDERS 51. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. 52. Building address numerals must be clearly visible from private drives. 53. The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 54. Developer shall pay the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFD #l special tax (if applicable), and the Citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy #17, subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable PC RESO NO. 4682 112- 34 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 - Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 20, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. ‘All such taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void. 55. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 56. Some improvements shown on the tentative map and/or required by these conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of’title or interest. The developer shall conform to Section 20.16.095 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 57. All Streets, water mains and fire hydrants must be approved and operational before construction framing can begin. General 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requirements pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Directors of Community Development and Planning. The Developer shall submit a street name list consistent with the City’s street name policy subject to the Planning Director’s approval prior to final map approval. Addresses, approved by the Building Official, shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color, as required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.04.320. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. The Developer shah be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application for any meter installation. PC RESO NO. 4682 -13- J. 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 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 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of December, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HxZMItiER Planning Director PC RESO NO. 4682 38 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4683 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDOMINIUM PERMIT CP 99-06 FOR 105 AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN THE RANCH0 CARRILLO MASTER PLAN WEST OF MELROSE DRIVE ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE MASTER PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 18. CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N CASE NO.: CP 99-06 WHEREAS, D. R Horton San Diego, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by D. R Horton, San Diego Holding Company, Inc., “Owner”, described as Lot 164, Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04, Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” Phase 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13800, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on June 10,1999. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Condominium Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “An - “BB” dated December 15, 1999,0n file in the Planning Department, RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N - CP 99-06, as provided by Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 15th day of December, 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 Condominium Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1’1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N - CP 99-06, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. That the granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent with the Municipal Code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all adopted plans of the City and other governmental agencies, in that the project density of 10 dwelling units/acre is consistent with the RMH General Plan Designation and Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan which designates the property for a maximum of 119 multi-family triplex units. 2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the long-term general well-being of the ‘. neighborhood and the community, in that the multi-family condominium units in Village N provide a mix of housing types in the area in accordance with the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan 3. 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 project is conditioned to conform to all design and development standards required by the Carlsbad Municipal Code and or the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan (as amended). 4. That the proposed Planned Development meets all of the minimum development standards set forth in Chapter 21.45.090, the design criteria set forth in Section 21.45.080, except as modified by the Master Plan, and has been designed in accordance with the concepts contained in the Design Guidelines Manual, in that all development standards for building height, setbacks, separation, recreational .requirements, off-street resident parking and guest parking, and private street widths are satisfied. The project is designed with usable open space that is centrally located, buildings are setback from the top of slope and natural open space surrounding the development is preserved, and the California Mediterranean architectural style with 4 different elevations is compatible with the surrounding development. 5. 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 the development is limited to the Village N building pads created by the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan mass grading thereby ensuring that surrounding open space is preserved. 6. 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 project density is below the Growth Management Growth Control Point and maximum number of units permitted by the General Plan, and Master Plan and consistent with the Master Plan PC RESO NO. 4683 -2- 4a 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 - development standards as amended to ensure compatibility throughout the Master Plan as well as adjacent properties. The development consists of triplex structures to ensure compatibility with the existing multi-family units to the south. 7. 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 internal gated street system provides direct vehicular and pedestrian access to residential units and includes driveway entrances to garages designed around internal courtyards serving each triplex, on-street guest parking, and a common recreational area. Conditions: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final map or issuance of grading permit, whichever occurs first. 1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, MP 139(H) and CT 99-09 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4680,468l and 4682 for those other approvals. 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 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. 4683 13- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of December, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons . NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. H Planning Director PC RESO NO. 4683 -4- 43 *- - The City of Carlsbad Plan&g Department EXHIBIT 4 A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: December 15,1999 Item No. 3 0 Application complete date: r October 8, 1998 Project Planner: Anne Hysong Project Engineer: Bob Wojcik SUBJECT: MP 1390IYCT 99-09/CP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRiLLo’ VILLAGE N - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Master Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium Permit to subdivide 12.9 acres into 105 airspace condominium units on property generally located within the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan west of Mehose Drive along the southern boundary of the Master Plan in Local Facilities Management Zone 18. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4681 APPROVING MP 139(H) and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 46’80,4682 and 4683 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, CT 99-09 and CP 99-06 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The Ranch0 Carrillo Village N project consists of a minor amendment to the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan to allow reduced front yard setbacks and driveway widths, and a tentative map and condominium permit for the airspace subdivision of the 12.9 acre site into 105 ,airspace condominium units. The overall development consists of a gated entry from Melrose Drive, 35 triplex buildings which are developed around motor courts that serve units located on each side of the motor court, and a central pool and spa recreation area. As designed and conditioned, the project is in conformance with the General Plan, Ranch0 Can-i110 Master Plan, Title 20 (Subdivision Ordinance) and Planned Development Ordinance. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The Village N project is located within the boundaries of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, which was approved by the City Council on October 21, 1997. The purpose of the Master Plan is to provide for the orderly development of Ranch0 Carrillo, while preserving the environmental resources of the area. Grading for the entire Master Plan area was approved under Hillside Development Permit HDP 91-17. For planning purposes, the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan is divided into Villages “A”- “T”. The Master Plan identifies the allowable type and intensity of land uses in each village and provides general development and design standards, and the method by which the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan will be implemented. The proposed Village N project consists of: 1) a minor Master Plan Amendment to allow front requirements, MP 139(H)/CT 88098/CP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15, 1999 Page 2 yard setbacks to be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet and motor court driveway widths to be reduced to 24 feet; and 2) a Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit for the airspace subdivision of 105 condominium units. Village N is a 12.9 acre site located at the southern boundary of the Master Plan and is bounded on the north by an open space easement which separates the property from Village 0, Melrose Drive on the east, an open space easement on the west, and an existing multi-family project .to the south. The property is designated by the General Plan for Residential Medium High (RMH) density development and zoned Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M) allowing multiple family development. The Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan calls for multi-family development with a maximum of 119 three and four-plex units based on 10.4 net developable acres. The proposed project density is 10 dwelling units per acre. The project site has been previously graded into large terraced building pads as part of the Ranch0 Can-i110 mass grading and is therefore devoid of vegetation except for the surrounding slopes. The site is surrounded by an open space lot (portion of Open Space Area OS-8) that provides buffers on the northern, western and southern sides. The existing terraced pads range in elevation from 446 feet to 480 feet f?om north to south, and the proposed grading design would eliminate the terraced buil.ding pads and create one large building pad which increases the pad elevations along the northern and western boundaries approximately 5 to 10 feet and reduces the pad elevation along the southern and eastern boundaries approximately 4 to 10 feet. The proposed grading is balanced so that no import or export will be required. Proposed fire suppression zones that surround the building pad and encroach into existing slopes will require selective thinning and removal of natural vegetation, however, this is recognized by the Master Plan and disturbance to sensitive native vegetation has been previously mitigated. As shown on Exhibits “A” - “BB”, the proposed project consists of 35 three-story triplex buildings, each with 3 three-bedroom condominium units ranging in size from approximately 1,349 to 1,544 square feet. Two of the units have living area on the first and second floors, and the third unit has living area on the second and third floors. The buildings. vary between four different elevations and are all variations of the California Mediterranean architectural style, i.e., stucco with tiie roofs. The proposed architectural design offers four color schemes, a great deal of variation in roof and building planes, wood shutters, iron and wood rail trim elements, and recessed entry doors. Offset building planes along with variation in front yard setbacks from a minimum of 10 to 18 feet behind sidewalks provide street scene interest. All units are provided with either a two-car garage or tvyo one-car garages which will be equipped with garage door openers. Each triplex condominium structure is designed so that the garage doors for two of the units face an interior motor court and the third two car garage, which is setback a minimum of 20 feet, fronts on a private street. Each motor court serves two triplex structures, one on each side. The project includes a 12,300 square foot common active recreation area consisting of a pool and jacuzzi located near the entrance. Private passive recreation space will be provided by small rear yards for the two units located on the ground floor and a 70 square foot balcony deck for the third unit. Access to the project is provided from Melrose Drive by Private Drive “A” which is gated and has a divided entry with a 24 foot wide ingress and 24 foot wide egress. The project is served by thirty-six foot wide private streets with guest parking on both sides of the street with the exception of one 32’ wide street (Street D). The private streets provide access to driveway entrances into motor courts. These driveway entrances, which are proposed to be reduced to 24’ by the Master Plan amendment, widen to a minimum of 45 feet in width within the motor courts 44 MP 139(H)/CT 88098XP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15,1999 to enable residents to back out of ‘garages. Pursuant to the City’s adopted Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, 15% of the base dwelling units in the Master Plan must be provided for lower income households. The affordable housing requirement has been satisfied for the Ranch0 Car5110 Master Plan through the provision of 198 affordable units in Village B as well as 50 second dwelling units dispersed in various villages. The project is subject to the following land use plans, policies, programs and zoning regulations: A. B. C. D. E. General Plan; Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan (MP- 139 and its amendments); Planned Development and Residential Density-Multiple Zone Ordinance Standards; Subdivision Ordinance; Growth Management Ordinance (Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) and the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan. IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project’s consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis section discusses compliance with each of these regulations/policies in tables and project specific discussions. A. General Plan The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. Table 3 below indicates how the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan which are particularly relevant to this proposal. - *- MI’ 139(H)/CT 88098KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15, 1999 TABLE 3 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE ELEMENT USE CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USE AND, COMPLIANCE IMPROVEMENTS Land Use Site is designated for Residential- Medium High Density uses which allows 8 - 15 dwelling units per acre and 11.5 du/ac GCP. The project consists of multi- family residential units at a density of 10 du/ac Yes Ensure that all hillside development is designed to preserve the visual quality of the pre-existing topography. Grading is consistent with the approved HDP for the Ranch0 Can-i110 Master Plan. Yes Permit the approval of discretionary actions and the development of land only after The project is conditioned to construct/install all public adequate provision has been made facilities necessary to serve the for public facilities and services in development. Citywide and accordance with the Growth quadrant wide public facilities Management public facility are adequate to satisfy the standards. additional demand, therefore, the project is consistent with the Zone 18 LFMP. Yes Housing Ensure that .master planned The affordable housing Yes communities and all qualified requirement for the Ranch0 subdivisions provide a range of Carrillo Master Plan has been housing for all economic income satisfied through the provision ranges. A minimum of 15% of all of 198 multiple family units units approved in master planned and 50 second dwelling units. communities shall be affordable to lower income households, Circulation Noise Require new development to The project is conditioned to Yes construct all roadways necessary to complete all necessary street development prior to or concurrent improvement prior to with need. occupancy of any unit. 60 dBA CNEL is the exterior noise The project is conditioned to Yes level and 45 dBA CNEL is the comply with the 45 dBA interior noise level to which all CNEL interior noise standard residential units should be and the 60 dBA CNEL mitigated. exterior noise level standard through the construction of a noise wall designed in conformance with the community theme wall. - MP 139(H)/CT 88098KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15,1999 B. Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan The Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan requires that projects be developed to the Planned Development standards unless an alternative standard is stated within the specific Village special design criteria. The project requires a Master Plan amendment to the Village N standards to allow front yard setbacks to be reduced from the minimum 20 foot standard required by the Planned Development Ordinance to a minimum of 10 feet and to allow the private driveway width standard to be reduced from 30 feet to a minimum of 24 feet for driveway entrances into motor courts. In accordance with the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, amendments determined to be minor by the Planning Commission may be approved and implemented administratively by the Planning Director. Staff recommends that the proposed Master Plan amendment is “minor” because the addition of two development standards to the special design criteria for Village N will not affect allowable density, and boundary or use changes are not being proposed. The Master Plan permits 119 triplex or fourplex units, and 105 triplex units are proposed. If the Planning Commission determines that the amendments are “minor” the proposed graphics and text changes can be incorporated into the Master Plan without either a public hearing or further City action. It should be noted that the project including the amendment is being considered in a public hearing context. Therefore, conversely if the Commission determines that the amendments are “major” or otherwise a matter requiring a public hearing, its action would be to forward a recommendation on both the project and the amendments to the City Council. Reduced Setback Justification for the reduced front yard setbacks is based on the project’s somewhat unique design. The proposed triplex units are designed around interior motor courts whereby only one two-car garage within each triplex will front on the street. Each of these garages will be setback 20 to 3 1 feet from the street thereby enabling automobiles to be adequately .parked within driveways. Otherwise, the proposed triplexes will have varying front yard setbacks ranging from a minimum of 10 to 18 feet from the private street. The overall variation in setback (10 to 3 1. feet) creates a much more interesting street scene than a consistent 20 foot setback with garage doors along the entire street scene. The project’s looped circulation pattern in which not more than seven triplex buildings front a private street before the street changes direction avoids a linear or “tunnel” design that would demand greater setbacks to mitigate. The buildings also exhibit great variety and interest due to both good building articulation and variation in roof line and direction. Reduced Drivewav Width Justification for the reduced driveway width to 24 feet is also based on the project’s design. The proposed amendment would reduce the private driveway entrances into each motor court to 24 feet, however, the entrances are only 10 to 25 feet deep: The motor courts beyond these entrances are approximately 39 to 48 feet in width. Although technically the 30 foot wide Planned Development standard for private driveways applies to the proposed driveways, the intent of the standard is to allow private streets that are defined as private driveways to be 30 feet in width because they serve 12 or fewer units. The proposed driveways are not designed as 4 7 MP 139(H)/CT 88098KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 151999 Page 6 private streets; they are entrances into interior motor courts that have a minimum width of 39 feet. Within the project, the proposed private streets that provide access to these driveways conform to the Planned Development Ordinance private street standards, i.e., 36 feet wide with parking on both sides and 32 feet wide with parking on one side. As described below, the proposed project complies with the applicable Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan requirements including: 1) product type and density; 2) approved Hillside Development Permit HDP 9 1 - 17; 3) Master Plan Community development standards and Village development standards; and 4) Master Plan infrastructure requirements. 1. The Master Plan designates Village N for multi-family development with a maximum density of 119 dwelling units based on the Growth Management growth control point of 11.5 dwelling units/acre for the applicable RMH General Plan designation. The proposed project consists of 105 multi-family condominium units on 10.4 net developable acres for a density of 10 dwelling units per acre. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the approved Hillside Development Permit (HDP 91-l 7) in that the rough-grading that has been done on the site is consistent with the approved mass grading design for the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, area. The proposed grading scheme is also consistent in that overall pad grades are not higher than the existing upper terrace or lower than the lower terrace thereby enabling balanced grading. 3. The project will not adversely impact the overall cohesiveness and appearance of the Master Plan area. The California Mediterranean architectural style is one of the styles permitted by the Master Plan and the proposed materials and colors are similar to other single family and multi-family developments in the neighborhood. The project will provide onsite parking and recreational facilities to adequately serve the project, and it is buffered from surrounding development by open,space to the north and west and existing landscaped slopes to the south. 1 As required by the Master Plan community development standards and Village N development standards and special design criteria, the proposed development is consistent with development to the south and a 50’ building setback is provided along Melrose Drive to screen the units from the roadway and to buffer residential units from traffic noise. The existing landscaping within this setback area is consistent with the Master Plan landscape requirements, and a proposed berm and 6 foot high noise wall will reduce exterior noise levels to 60 dBA or below as required by the General Plan. Streetscape landscaping, community theme walls and fences, and villages fences, as well as a village entry monument at the project entrance; will be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Master Plan. The access to Village N from Melrose Drive has been laid out in accordance with the requirements of the Master Plan. Internal streets have been designed to City private street standards and will consist of curb, gutter, and sidewalk to the right-of-way widths specified in the Master Plan. 4. The project is conditioned to require that all public facilities necessary to serve the project are provided prior to, or concurrent with, development in accordance with the Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan. The developer is conditioned to post a bond for #8 MP 139(H)/CT 88098KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15, 1999 Page 7 design and construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of the project entrance and Mehose Drive in the event such an improvement is warranted following buildout of the Ranch Carrillo Master Plan area. All project related off-site public street and storm drain improvements are already installed. Surface runoff will drain to a private storm drain system within the project limits that will connect to an existing public storm drain located at the northwest comer of the project site, and sewer lines will gravity flow and connect to an existing 8” sewer main located at the north end of the site. C. Planned Development Ordinance and Residential Density-Multiple Zone The development standards of the Residential Density-Multiple @D-M) zone are replaced by the same or more restrictive requirements of the Planned Development Ordinance. Table 4 below summarizes the project’s compliance with the applicable development standards from the Planned Development Ordinance (PD) and/or Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M) zone: TABLE 4 - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMPLIANCE REQUIRED 7G-i STANDARD Dwelling Unit Setback from Palomar Airport Road and Melrose Drive Street Widths: Driveway Widths: Setbacks: Multi-family:’ Building Height: Building Separation (PD) Recreation space: Recreational vehicle storage (PD) 50 feet minimum 36 feet (Parking on both sides) 32 feet (Parking on one side) 30 feet (No parking) 20 feet 35 feet 10 feet minimum 200 square feet per dwelling unit Private passive: Common active: Required to provide 50 feet minimum 36 feet 32 feet *24 feet 12 feet minimum dimension patio/rear yard 70 square foot second story balcony deck Swimming pool w/ pool building at 12,300 sf Provided in Village T per Master Plan 49 MP 139(H)/CT 88098KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15,1999 *The reduced driveway width is proposed as a Master Plan amendment to the special design criteria for Village N. Justification for this reduction is provided under Section B, Ranch0 Carrillo M’aster Plan - reduced driveway width. **The reduced setbacks are proposed as a Master Plan amendment to the special design criteria for Village N. Justification for this reduction is provided under Section B, Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan - reduced setback of this report.. D. Subdivision Ordinance The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and has concluded that the subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. As noted in Section A and B above, all inf?astructure improvements are installed or will be installed concurrent with development. The proposed building setbacks and structure separation will allow for adequate air circulation and the opportunity for passive heating and cooling. E. Growth Management Ordinance - Zone 18 Local Facilities Management Plan The project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 18 in the City’s southwest quadrant and is subject to the conditions of the Zone 18 LFMP. The 105 units proposed are 14 units below the Growth Management control point allowance of 119 units for the 10.4 net developable acre site. The Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan has mitigated all facilities impacts created by this subdivision. GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE City Administration 365.1 square feet Yes Library 194.7 square feet Yes Waste Water Treatment Parks Drainage 105 EDU .3 acres Batiauitos Watershed Yes Yes Yes Circulation 840 ADT Yes Fire . Stations 2, 5, and 6 Yes Open Space 189.9 acres (Master Plan Yes Performance Standard Open Space) Schools San Marcos Unified Yes 28.14 elem; 10.3 jr. high; 105.1 high school Sewer Collection System 105 EDU Yes Water 23,100 GPD Yes * The project is 14 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. . MP 139(H)/CT 88098XP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N December 15, 1999 Paee 9 V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The initial study @A-Part II) prepared in conjunction with this project determined that the , project would not have a significant impact on the environment. The project falls within the scope of the City’s MEIR for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (EIR 93-01) certified in September, 1994, in which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for cumulative impacts to air quality and traffic, and the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-04). An Average Daily Trip (ADT) of 840 would be generated by the proposed project. This ADT is consistent with the generation rate analyzed for the site in the MEIR. 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. To mitigate the situation, the City Council passed an Urgency Ordinance placing a moratorium on LFMP Zone 18 and others unless the affected property owners agreed to a condition requiring their fair share payment for necessary road improvements. This project has been conditioned to provide its fair share contribution for such improvements. In consideration of the foregoing, on September 30, 1999 the Planning Director issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4680 (ND) Planning Commission Resolution No. 468 1 (MP) Planning Commission Resolution No. 4682 (CT) Planning Commission Resolution No. 4683 (CP) Location Map Background Data Sheet Local Facilities Impact Assessment Summary Disclosure Statement Reduced Exhibits Exhibits “A” - “BB” dated December 15, 1999 AH:cs:mh CASE NO: MP 139(H)/CT 99-09/CP 99-06 CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N APPLICANT: D. R. HORTON SAN DIEGQ. INC. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Subdivide 12.9 acres into 105 airsnace condominium units in the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan west of Mehose Drive alone the southern boundarv of the Master Plan . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 164. Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04. Ranch0 Carrillo Village N Phase 3. in the Citv of Carlsbad. Countv of San Dieeo. State of California. according to Man thereof No. 13800. filed in the office of the Countv Recorder of San Dieao Countv on June 10, 1999. APN: 222-01 O-44 (PORTION Acres: 12.9 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 105 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING . Land Use Designation: RMH Density Allowed: 11.5 DU/ACRE Density Proposed: 10 DU/ACRE Existing Zone: RD-M Proposed Zone: SAME Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use: Site North South East West Zoning RDM OS ” RDM-Q R-l OS General Plan OS RLM OS Current Land Use VACANT VACANT MULTI-FAMILY MELROSE DRIVE/VACANT VACANT PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: SMUSD Water District: CMWD Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 105 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT lxl Negative Declaration, issued Sentember 30. 1999 Ll Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated u Other, .- h CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: MP 139(H)/ CT 99-09KP 99-06 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 18 GENERAL PLAN: RMH ZONING: RD-M DEVELOPER’S NAME: D. R. HORTON, SAN DIEGO HOLDING COMPANY, INC. ADDRESS: 1010 SOUTH COAST HIGHWAY. SUITE 101. ENCINITAS. CA 92024 PHONE NO.: (760) 634-6700 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 222-010-44 (PORTION) OUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC.. SO. FT.. DU): 12.9 ACRES1105 DU ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: UNKNOWN A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 365.1 SO. FT B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = 194.7 SO. FT. c. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 105 EDU D. E. F. Park: Demand in Acreage = Drainage: Demand in CFS = IdentifjrDrainage Basin = (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) Circulation: Demand in ADT = .3 ACRES Batiauitoswatershed 840 ADT G. (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 2. 5. 6 H. I. J. K. Open Space: Acreage Provided = Schools: (Demands to be determined by staff). Sewer: Demands in EDU Identify Sub Basin = (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) Water: Demand in GPD = 189.9 ACRES SMUSD 105 EDU 23,100 GPD L. The project is 14 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT I Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionav action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee. 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 individual, firm, co-parmership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organisation, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county. city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other vup or combination acting as a unit.” Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided belaw. I : 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 corooration or rxu-tnershk include the names. title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN IO% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation. include the names. titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Job 0. Kew Jr. covjpart D.R. Horton San Diego, Inc. Title Div. Pws. Title Address Address io?o s. coast Hwy 101, Ste 101 Encinitas, CA 92024 7 a. OWNER (Not the owner’s agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having any ownership interest in the’ property involved. Also, provide $he nature of the lebal ownership (i.e. partnership. tenants in common, non-p&it. corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or uartnershio, 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 publiclv- owned comoration. include the names. tit@. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Zakfl 0. arc sr. Corp1Pat-t D.R. Horton San Diego Holding Title D;v, Prrc Address Title Company, Address 1010 S. Coast Hwy 101, Ste Encinitas, CA 92024 Inc 101 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161 l FAX (760) 438-0894 3. A NON-PROFIT ORG - ‘ZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonurofit orEani=tion or a trust. list ihe names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust Non Profit/Trust Title Title Address Address 3. Have you had more than $250 worth of. business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards. Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? cl Yes El No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. Signature of applicant/date ;f Okh 13. l(QPr &. CJllL n. 1&w J-k Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant’s agent if applicable/date Print .or type name of owner/applicant’s agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ‘i/98 Page 2 of 2 55 c B Y5 5 $ 2 d ! L E i z a- -u W’ i -.. 4 r .>! ,,,.1 i’ a s I e* I ?I i / I % I ! + I I j I -. - y- --- -L 77 - h’ Jy ; - 3: f- B hT&p ;’ z I : .- : -_ ik?L--l - 2 -.- ,r *-. \ k - ;1 x la, : \ - L----L I c - .a,.? 6-s - -- - ( - ----_- ,A------_- --2 r- r- 59 - ..- 1; . L p -r da- ‘, ‘: i ..- “: 4-e’ t’ +-. .--.-,I ! 1 0 I... A by I ‘\ L A i \ -5 I Bb . T I -.- _ ; , y,&$ ----- h - -------- !\ \ ---- ’ , , d d El c- -5 a \ /’ / m ‘\ / ,/ l ‘\ ‘Jo \ ,/ ,, / - ~-____ -._.__-_-_-_.___ -__-- --- 1 j! FRCNT ELEVATIONS llC_ (4 CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE fi D.R. HORTON w:> ,- !zl \. r; , . ‘,,\ l. ‘1 \ ~~\‘\-; 1 A \ i- -----a -. ~- - --..A 1 i TWCAL-UATOULS _ .-o..cmmjPO-l. 1.1 , o.cN.~-.., i ...vP.*..s~ j. .csY a”- : .Y._ ..rn- L_C - L -.._ - T...U. ; -....n- . . m.c--.““.-m 5 -aPmL..“. *.,q. u_ F ..ILMC.--- 7 am,..- ? CA.-.......3 - . ..cezv. 7 ..l~“” :.. _ .-L-T- -. -XL “.z -.I_ CL,-..., .*” -.*-: FRCNT ELEVATIONS Irn3umws) I,#- 1* CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON wt . . TYRCAL - *1*wus .-5&m-. * .1 1 ,.-s-Ass -. ..r 1 -....w.*... -. -, mu.- 2 .~.I...e‘“D*~Y- 7 -s. . ..*.._ ; . . ..*.I 1 2 c.e-T...E.-w i .TU zm W... -...v.-. Y : -a... *Z.-w - 2 -7n...r- . C^,.,UI 6 ..A-: -. - .,...L31C _..c.zr W...C,m~r.~~e....P.: -4 FRONT ELEVATKDNS I,.‘- l-9 CARFULLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON 9w52 41 0, k 3- . .---d=Tp-~ ‘ly-q ,a i q==; !,T.;, ;, r \\A4 ,, f j=Iczzz&’ /--, II ippJj+~Zijj< ‘i I ;:I---- ,.-ii ,wL--- I- - :,----- I d )-L--.-.--i I I T--M- e-am-n..” ? -..T-lu z . ..v.....e- . -..- p ,.c,ze...~&-~ -.A. 5 ..,&I_ F -A.-- z ,DO--.-mc... = .la.s~c..,..... - =_ .L-U-’ / . ..&I---- I -S.-s : %a..“- i .,-m. I . ..rsO”.- f .*-..AY. L.-UZ~L-,..“.“.Ts FRONT ELEVATIONS ~~-I CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON G i j / 4-j --+-Y-q 7, ’ ./i :,I P-L- + 2G t : - t k - T-- ,k-yY- .- , ;/ $4 1, <L-e--. + =+I ! ;; 1, I & ,-$ (! I! I, : :z ai , +g ,&f-y -7 I- \I ,I/ r I/ ~ i,, I +&Ljt / I c -,r- c +A- ,-i- - rt’ ,, . “1 ,i*. C: .I L-L- 1 !.i 3 + a /& +,,-. 41 I- y”-- - - v--771 dy- WlllALRpIT -% $b PNmu- : g; p.i7nALR)IT i I)- ELEVAllCM lw- ,* CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON a012 67 : / ‘b / gYv 7; I 1 j’ i--I IL- - /-+-- - _--- --I: -.-A -I- ,. A. .- ---- I -cl - .i .’ I------ - f, -, - : ! G; L- *jJJLY : I - -+>* 17 - ---ye-;=-- -,r=x ---._- .~;;. ~ +dzL -7’ -+- LL; c --. -.‘_ ,J.‘( ,--,Fj ;: yTsfi-f;*~.‘?;, .,~ ,; : /j ii I1 /j if{? ,iJ-!.; ._ ’ /-.y- :I icy l,~;Lo&*y-.y., y y.“,, ;, - . . _. _. . _- ._ 4-.-.- _.._..._ . .._-_ !: ,_ -_ c -I -2. -A- :T- *‘“: , i z ZT-;, --I _-., -. I-.+ 1. , - _v-.-. ” .* --. - ,-‘A---.. ,‘+ & L :. _ -- ” -_. ELEVATCWS iwmarrw*bowsl CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON *w* - -. - -- - ELEVATIONS ,su- >q CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON a012 - ,;’ :! )! :’ ,. I b-4 1 I I, -- i I-3. ELEVATIONS wlmcur sJuwwsl ,/.‘- 10 CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON ems - -- -- -- -- -I -?---I --A--+ UEU3 _---_ ELEVATIONS ,a - 1.7 CARRILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON wx> - /-*-’ ,.-y-p+-- / -p---Y----‘. ~3-~p,~ ,/-T-- Iq:g; ( i -*-y+; / .; ;; ~$Tyg&~ _ _,__ ‘._. ~- / * ____ .- i -- *-- - -7 ---.7 - W-Y _.- - --- - -- --, -- _ --- / L . -~..- _. --------( / r ,l--y--!r--Y .~--~ - .--y :’ .x A/ ,- :,;j.: ::: ‘__i -’ 1- _ _ ._-- REM - . . .._ ~. . . a’$ /IT.? ,/ :i i i/ '; i ', i!, '( : -----L---A .- c 6 -$q-Jq$;*T,r, _i-I~<~~=+-,-~, :, I’ jl 1’ : ’ ,’ 1:’ Ij /’ ’ f% : I*-?--+?>. - ,/----\~; !: ; :, j; !j !, ; < + ;I -- y ,,~ --- *_* ___ __ .--?.-, -- __ c--._--_ ! _;A z-1 +; ; F-$.y-= & --i - / ! -i-4 & +A- --A T= +J j’ ! r=; Lfl _. __.._ ---A 4 -... -- .-<._ .._. - --- -.-- ~. --.. i my., .._ ..- --- ------ -- - -_-- y--7- CT! I ;j ‘I -- cm- -_ - 1 1 1 -7 .!t_i / : i i / .-.- - __-_---. .-- __-__. .-.--L ._... -- _ .--A----- -EMI ,5m - occips *IfEz - PncM - Ae&sEE WE RW A: ELEVATKPLS WlTKuT sb@mwSl I,#. ,a CARIXILLO RANCH VILLAGE N D.R. HORTON eYl,l =-, i”z, 1 zz.z= - II :A = - -=====? - - &T, jj z=zz=z _ z==z =: - = ,=. ZZZ.=- zr== =-.- -- -~ ~- 5-- - I 1 : i i I i L ‘g-V s--i=== - ; -- - Z====Z - - --.. -- = d hi r Y \ 1: ,I: 1 ‘I : ,: 2 8 % 8 2 P f z I ;: zig ?$ -b- --_, L---Y -FG- x- 4 ,-g; = ; rp J- -..- : - d- - *’ ,__’ --Ii& *e-z r---- 3 --. __-_ - $1 ’ *--‘- i’ -” 1 5; 5: ” : il ---- 3:: [_‘IT Wii#, . u=s--cl u=s--cl -b--d -b--d 3----q 3----q 8 ‘Z y b EXHIBIT 5 3. MP 139 (HI/CT 99-09/CP 9996 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Master Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium Permit to subdivide 12.9 acres into 105 airspace condominium units on property generally located within the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan west of Melrose Drive along the southern boundary of the Master Plan in Local Facilities Management Zone 18. Anne Hysong, Associate Planner presented item 3 as follows: The project is a request to amend the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan design criteria for Village N and to grade, subdivide and develop 105 airspace condominium units on a 12.9 acre parcel located west of Melrose Drive at the southern boundary of the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, also identified as Village N. The site is bounded by an open space easement on the north and west, Melrose drive on the east and an existing multi-family development to the south. The site is a previously graded. and vacant parcel, which is currently terraced into three pads, which rise in elevation from north to south from 446 feet to 480 feet. The proposed grading design would eliminate the terraced building pads and create a single pad which increases the pad elevations 5 to 10 feet along the northern boundary, and reduces the pad elevation 4 to 10 feet along the southern and eastern boundary. . . Ms. Hysong stated that the project consists of 35 three-story triplex buildings, 105 three bedroom condominium units, interior motor courts, private rear yards, a common pool and spa area, a gated entry, 32 and 36 foot wide private streets, with on-street guest parking, California Mediterranean architectural style with’four different elevations and color schemes, 24 foot wide private driveway entrances to motor cOurts and a minimum of lo-20 front yard setbacks. The applicant is requesting Planning Commission approval of a minor Master Plan Amendment and a recommendation of approval for a Tentative Tract Map, a Condominium Permit and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The project is subject to and consistent with the General Plan, Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Planned Development Ordinance and Growth Management Ordinance through consistency with the Zone 18 Local Facility Management Plan., The General Plan and Master Plan designate the site for residential minimum high density allowing a maximum of 11.5 dwelling units per acre and the proposed density is 10 dwelling units per acre. Village N is designated by the Master Plan for a maximum of 119 multi-family dwelling units to be designed within triplex of fourplex structures that are developed in accordance with Planned Development Ordinance standards, unless the Master Plan - PLANNING COMMISSION December 15,1999 Page 11 modifies the standard. The Master Plan designates a single point of access from Melrose Drive to the development and requires a 50 foot setback from Melrose Drive as well as noise attenuation measures to reduce noise levels to the City’s standard. The proposed Master Plan Amendment would modify the Village N special design criteria and in turn modify the Planned Development standard to allow front yard setbacks to be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet and the motor court driveway entrances from private streets to be reduced to 24 feet. These reductions in the Planned Development .Ordinance standards are based on the proposed design in which the majority of the garages in the development front on interior motor courts. The reduced front yard setback from a unifonn.20.feet.i~ also based on the proposed design in which one third of the garages would front on the private street. The proposed design results in setbacks that range from a minimum of 10 feet to 20 feet. The project is conditioned to require up-sized front yard landscaping and enhanced paving within the motor courts. Ms. Hysong stated that the environmental assessment revealed that potentially significant traffic and noise impacts require mitigation. Mitigation includes the payment of fees for the short term improvements to the Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real intersection and the construction of a combination berm and 6 foot high noise wall along Melrose Drive. In conclusion Ms. Hysong stated that since the findings required for the various permits can be made, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the minor Master Plan Amendment and recommend approval of CT 99-09/CP 99-06 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Staff also provided an errata sheet recommending that Resolution 4682 be revised to add two standard Engineering conditions; revise Engineering condition 36 to delete the improvement list and reference the improvements shown on the tentative map; and revised Water condition #145. Mr. Rudolf proposed new wording to condition #45 as follows: “Developer shall construct and dedicate to the CMWD a looped water pipeline system with a hydraulic grade line of 700 feet as shown on the map. The looping system shall include connections to the existing pipeline at Melrose Drive and at Carrillo Way. The pipeline from Carrillo Way to Private Drive “B” shall be contained within a 20-foot wide easement dedicated to the District for water operation and maintenance purposes, parallel to a private lo-foot drainage easement. The easement and waterline pipeline shall cross existing Open Space Lot 52 of Village “0”, Open Space Lot 165 of Village “N” and Lot 164 of Village “N” (from Street B to Carrillo Way). Developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with CMWD to obtain reimbursement for developer construction from Carrillo Way to the northerly boundary of Open Space Lot 165 as well as over-sizing the pipe from 8 to 10 inches’(approximately 1,000 feet). The agreement shall be executed by both sides prior to approval of the final map.” The applicant and staff indicated agreement on the condition as read by Mr. Rudolph. Mike Howes, Hofman, Planning Associates, 5900 Pasteur Court, Carlsbad, stated the proposed project is in conformance with all applicable City ordinances and policies and the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan. The Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan has designated the site for multi-family development since 1993. The goal in the Kancho Carrillo Master Plan is to provide a wide variety of housing types. He further stated that he had reviewed the errata sheet and has no objections to the conditions as contained therein. In addition he accepted Mr. Rudolf% condition revision as stated earlier. Commissioner Segall asked if the turning radius.in the courtyard was large enough to allow turning into the 90 degree parking spaces with minimum effort. He also wanted to know what kind of restrictions would be placed in the CC&KS to restrict parking in the courtyards. He wanted to know if the wider size vehicles had been taken into account when the project was designed. Mr. Howes responded that the Engineering Department, which felt the movements could be made, had reviewed the turning radius. The CC&KS have not been written at this time and a condition could be written into the CC&KS to prohibit parking in the courtyard areas. The width of the single car garage is 12 by 20 and the two car garage is 20 by-20 which meets the City’s requirements. Commissioner Compas asked the selling price of the proposed dwellings.. It was stated that the selling price would be $200,600+. PLANNING COMMISSION December 15,1999 Page 12 ’ PUBLIC TESTIMONY: John Kobles; 6390 Paseo Espota, in the Ranch0 Carrillo development, expressed concern on two points. Regarding the issue of noise, would the sound wall be limited to Melrose Drive or would it include the area bordering the Open Space as well? He expressed a concern regarding the line of sight for his property as well as the property of 3 additional homes. that would be affected by the development of the proposed condominiums. He indicated that he paid a premium price for his property and the view of the open space, the proposed 30 feet tall dwellings will change the view of his backyard. He asked that trees or landscaping be installed to buffer the view of the condominiums from his backyard. Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Robles to point out on the map where his property was located. Mr. Kobles indicated that the map did not allow for the showing of his property, but pointed to an area on the map where his property would have been lf the map were to scale. Ms Hysong stated that the noise wall would be located along Melrose and along proposed structure identified as airspace condominium number 23. With respect to the view, she stated that between the Village N project and Mr. Koble’s property there was an open space Lot 165 as well as an open space lot along the boundary of Village 0. The slopes will be landscaped with scrubs and trees. Mr. Kobles was concerned that the noise from the condominiums would enter into his property. Ms. Hysong explained that Staff did not consider a residential project of this size as a noise generator and noise would not be mitigated for other projects. Commissioner Trigas wanted to know the distance between Village N and Village 0. Ms. Hysong stated that the approximate distance was approximately 300 feet, which was a very good separation. Chairman Heineman closed public testimony. Commissioner Segall requested that a condition referring to a No Parking restriction in the courtyard area be placed in the CC&KS. He asked the applicant if this met with his approval. Mr. Howes indicated that it was acceptable. Mr. Wayne referred to Resolution No 4682, page 7 indicating that a G item could be added, stating No parking in the courtyard. MAIN MOTION: ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Compas and duly seconded, the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution 4681 approving MP 139(H) and adopt Planning Commission Resolution 4680, 4682, 4663 recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CT 99-09/CP 99-06 and the errata sheet and the revised condition #45, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. AMENDMENT: ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded, that a condition be added’to Resolution No. 4682, page 7 as item G, that No Parking will be allowed in the Courtyard area. PLANNING COMMISSION December 15,1999 Page 13 VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: 7-o-o Heineman, Compaq L’Heureux, Segall, Trigas, Nielsen, Welshons None None VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION: VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: 7-o-o Heineman, Corkpa;, L’Heureux, Segall, Trigas, Nielsen, Welshons None None MEMORANDUM Date: January 25,200O To: CITY COUNCIL From: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N The Planning Department recommends that the following condition be added to the Council Resolution for the subject project: Prior to the recordation of the first final tract map or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney (see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department). PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San Diego County; 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: Jan. 14, 2000 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at San MArcos , California this 14th day of Jan. 2000 / Signature / This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of Public Hearing Those pwsons wishing to speak on this pfopoaal am cordk#yWBad to attend the public hearing. Copfaaof lhe staff report will ba waffable on or after January 21,200& tf you %!a any-questions ragardia&Ws,maUar, ac wki Ma to b&w af ts6 dsclslon, pleasa wtact Anna w”“. (760) 4334161, extenslon44 , In ths City t-4 CaMad Hppp,b~!rt, 2 (‘, ., , _, NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CT 99-09KP 99-06 - RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday January 25, 2000, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium Permit to subdivide 12.9 acres into 105 airspace condominium units on property generally located within the Ranch0 Canillo Master Plan west of Melrose Drive along the southern boundary of the Master Plan in Local Facilities Management Zone 18 and more particularly described as: Lot 164, Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04, Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” Phase 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13800, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on June 10,1999. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after January 21,200O. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Anne Hysong in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department at (760) 438-l 161, extension 4477. The time within which you may judicially challenge the Tentative Tract Map, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Tract Map, and/or Condominium Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk’s Office, at, or prior to, the public hearing. APPLICANT: D. R. Horton, San Diego, Inc. PUBLISH: January 14,200O h A . RANCH0 CA.RRlLLO VILLAGE “N” CT 99=09/W 99-06 (Form A) TO: CI1.Y CLERK’S OFFICE FROH: PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notide CT 99-09/CP 99-06 - Ranch0 Carrillo Village %" for a public hearing before the City Council. Please notice the itern for the council meeting of First Available Hearing . Thank you. Asslatant Clty Man Januarv 3, 2000 Date city of - FILE COPY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 15, 1999, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, v w, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium Permit to subdivide 12.9 acres into 105 airspace condominium units on property generally located within the Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan west of Melrose Drive along the southern boundary of the Master Plan in Local Facilities Management Zone 18 and more particularly described as: Lot 164, Carlsbad Tract No. 93-04, Ranch0 Carrillo Village “N” Phase 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, - State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13800, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on June 10.1999. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after December 9, 1999. If you have any questions, please call Anne Hysong in the Planning Department at (760) 438-l 161, extension 4477. The time within which you may judicially challenge this m, Tentative Tract Map, .and Condominium Permit, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the w, Tentative Tract Map, and Condominium 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 at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CT 99-09/CP 99-06 CASE NAME: RANCH0 CARRILLO VILLAGE N PUBLISH: DECEMBER 2,1999 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 l (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 63 . . Smooth Feed SheetP - Use template for 5160@ CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST CITY OF ENCINITAS 801 PINE AVE 1 CIVIC CENTER DR 505 S VULCAN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF SAN MARCOS CITY OF VISTA CITY OF OCEANSIDE 1 CIVIC CENTER DR PO BOX 1988 300 NORTH COAST HWY SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 VISTA CA 92085 OCEANSIDE CA 92054 VALLECITOS WATER DIST SD COUNTY PLANNING U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE 788 SAN MARCOS BLVD STE B 2730 LOKER AVE WEST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 5201 RUFFIN RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LAFCO AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST 1600 PACIFIC HWY 9150 CHESAPEAKE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92101 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505 CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME REGIONAL WATER QUALITY SANDAG STE 50 STE B STE 800 330 GOLDENSHORE 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD 401 B STREET LONG BEACH CA 90802 SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 D.R. HORTON SAN DIEGO INC STE 101 1010 SO COAST HWY ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY SERVICES CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER ANNE HYSONG CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT CITY OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT m A AVERY@ Address Labels laser 5160@ - MYUNG S & WHA HONG 6345 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 DONALD L SCHEMPP 6371 PASEO CORONO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONTINENTAL RANCH INC 2237 FARADAY AVE 100 CARLSBAD CA 92008 DANIEL D SULLIVAN 6325 PASEO CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRIAN P & MARY MCKEON 2930 PASEO CAZADOR CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM H BURGESS 1720 KINGLET RD SAN MARCOS CA 92069 KOTFICA STEVEN S 7456 BRIDGE WAY WEST BLOOMFIELD M 48322 INTER V FISCHER 1710 KINGLET RD SAN MARCOS CA 92069 MARY C BURGESS 1704 KINGLET RD SAN MARCOS CA 92069 DONALD G HARWELL 2575 NAVARRA DR C CARLSBAD CA 92009 RANDALL RWALTON 1832 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 JOSEPH H & DONNA BROWER 1828 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 TERRY HENDERSON 1824 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 LILIA & HAYNES OSPINA 1812 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 DAVID E GILMORE 1820 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 MARK C & PATRICIA MOYER 1816 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 KATHRYNM JUDD ._ _-. 1831 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 MICHAEL J & JANE KURTH 1819 TOWHEE ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 DOUGLAS J KIBBE 1825 TOWHEE ST SAN M?iRCOS CA 92069 LLOYD & SANDRA REED 1714 REDWING ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 MARYEBOYLES 1708 REDWING/ST SAN MARCOS CA 92069 TLG 1819 VIA GAVILAN SAN MARCOS CA 92069 MARIO R DEMARTINO 6537 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 FROST TR 6535 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 LISA A TAVARES 6539 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 CINDY I MARZOLF 6529 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 RITA D JAYCOX 994 SHORE CREST RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 VIRGINIA T BONAGURA 6533 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 .- A RICHARD M & SUSAN STAPA KATHLEEN L PROBST LEILA M HEYLAND 6534 CORTE VALDEZ 6536 CORTE VALDEZ 6538 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 - CLARENCE G LAMBERT 6540 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 STEVEN J HENDRICKS 6546 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAMES F &MARY BROWER 6552 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHARLES R KNISLEY 6543 CORTE VALDEZ 83 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KATSUKO ENTERPRISES INC BARBARA-E SCHULTZE 2509 LA GOLONDRINA ST 6544 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SHARON K TOL BOURBEAU 6548 CORTE VALDEZ 6550 CORTE VALDEZ CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CLINTON L PETERSON WILLIAM H CAHOONE 3702 JACKSON ST 206 6545 CORTE VALDEZ OMAHA NE 68105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GRANA LA COSTA MEADOWRIDGE CO 6541 CORTE VALDEZ 5670 EL CAMINO REAL F CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008 WILLIAM H WEAVER VICKY A WAGNER JULIE K ANDERSON 2154 WARMLANDS AVE 3106 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3108 AVENIDA CHRISTINA VISTA CA 92084 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 THOMAS A FITZGERALD .--BRENDA G HOOVER ALANCFULMER 3110 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 989 HONEYSUCKLE DR 3114 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROGER J KNIGHT KENNETH H FLOYD 1646 S DITMAR ST 7740 SALIX PL OCEANSIDE CA 92054 SAN DIEGO CA 92129 ROBERT A & MARY MENUSAN 3120 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 RICHARD E & MARY RIEDEL ROBIN L ANDERSEN KRISTA M HENKELS 6502 VIA OSTRA 6504 VIA OSTRA 6506 VIA OSTRA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 YVONNE L CARLSON JOHN B & LISA BLEVINS ROBERT J RICH 3159 AVENIDA TOPANGA 4534 FERN DR 3155 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SCOTTS VALLEY CA 95066 CARLSBAD CA 92009 - JOSE J & DOROTHY ROCHA PO BOX 9000 CARLSBAD CA 92018 DELANEY 6509 VIA OSTRA CARLSBAD CA 92009 MONICA A STEPHENS 6510 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 PATRICIA M SNYDER 3107 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 BARBARA T BANCROFT 3113 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 LANCER INDUSTRIES INC 1591 AVENIDA LA POSTA ENCINITAS CA 92024 DOMINIQUE J ZIHLA 4820 SUN VALLEY RD DEL MAR CA 92014 NOLL 1120 NIKI LYNN PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 JOHN A tic SUE SCHMITT 680 MOSAIC CIR OCEANSIDE CA 92057 LAUREL A PLAGGE 420 S MADISON AVE PASADENA CA 91101 TESFAYE HAILEMICHAEL MARY M WAITE 2285 VISTA LA NISA 1350 STRATFORD CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DEL MAR CA 92014 OATES MASAKO FLORES 6511 VIA OSTRA 1574 VILLAGE VIEW RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENCINITAS CA 92024 LANCE & MIRANDA POLZIN CAROL BERGEN 3105 AVENIDA TOPANGA 3109 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARILYN T HENLEY LYLE & DARLENE HUBBARD 3111 AVENIDA TOPANGA 3115 AVENIDA TGPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT L & INESE SPOTTS MARGARETWU 3117 AVENIDA TOPANGA 855 SANTA ROSITA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 LORI A LEE 3123 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JASON A EDWARDS. 3129 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SYLVIA B BOLTON 3135 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 DOROTHIE BLETH 3141 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CAROLYN GARAPICH 3148 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLOS & CARLA JOHNSON 3127 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 RICKY W ALDRICH 3133 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHN & PETE BESSEY 3139 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JILL D SKINNER 3145 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 HECTOR & SUSANA AGUIRRE 3152 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHRISTIAN F OSTERGAARD ROGER REHNSTROM DAVID H & MARIE WEBSTER 3150 AVENIDA TOPANGA 3154 AVENIDA TOPANGA 3158 AVENIDA TOPANGA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JACOB WEIL LA COSTA MEADOWRIDGE CO CONRAD P LINDBERG 3156 AVENIDA TOPANGA 5670 EL CAMINO REAL F 6569 CAMIKNO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KERR 1252 VIA PORTOVECCHIO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 PAUL J MILLER 3112 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM G MALONEY 3112 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 HELEN M BALAS GOLDSTEIN JEAN L & ROSANNA MARTIN 3116 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3120 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3124 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM L & KATHY NEFF ARMANDO & ANALUZ PALOMO SHIRLEY L NORLING 3329 CORTE ESPLENDOR 3132 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3136 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAQUETTA F MONTGOMERY 3140 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOLYNE K SAMPLEY 3144 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JUDITH M LAIRD 3148 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM F KORETKE JOANN B MICHAEL JOHN C & KAREN SZILLAT 3152 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3154 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3158 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DANAALCANTAR DAVID R WISNER PATRICIA A SNOW 2504 LA GOLONDRINA ST 5609 RED RIVER DR 3155 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN DIEGO CA 92120 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DAVID P GOODMAN 3157 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 ADAM J & HOLLY KELLER JAMES V PHILLIPS 3153 AVENIDA OLMEDA 2022 VISTA GRANDE DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 VISTA CA 92084 JANETEHORAN 3151 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SHERIE & MARIANNE KAINZ GREGORY P BARNETT 3147 AVENIDA OLMEDA 788 BROWNLEE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAWRENCEVILLE GA 30044 _- -. RICHARD L MOFFETT 3145 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAURA LAROSE 3139 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARKVAHL 3133 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAREN E UTLEY 3127 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOANNEMFRANCO 3564 PASEO DE LOS CALIF OCEANSIDE CA 92056 WENDY LANDRY 3115 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRUCE M & JANET ANSELM 9559 VISTA TERCERA SAN DIEGO CA 92129 DAVID R SPIELMAN 3103 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONRAD P LINDBERG 6569 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 TAMARA V'FIELDING 1 SIR KENNETHS CT NORTHPORT NY 11768 STEPHANIE A DINEEN MARK S & MARIA COHEN 456 E 22ND ST 3137 AVENIDA OLMEDA UPLAND CA 91784 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARL J BOGDAN KELLY A BUTTERWORTH 6513 33RD ST 3131 AVENIDA OLMEDA BERWYN IL 60402 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MICHAEL J HILTON 3129 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 ELIZABETHAWAGGENER PO BOX 2585 RANCH0 SANTA FE C 92067 SONNY CHUIDIAN GREGORY L WALLACE 3123 AVENIDA OLMEDA 3119 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 FAIRGATE FINANCIAL LLC SUZANNEPBURDA 1738 SIENNA CANYON DR 3113 AVENIDA OLMEDA ENCINITAS CA 92024 CARLSBAD CA 92009 EDWARD S PASCHALL CAROL A FORSYTH 1932 LAHOUD DR 3107 AVENIDA OLMEDA CARDIFF BY THE SE 92007 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAIED & NORANIEH ATAIE TIMOTHY S MINJARES 3378 WATERFORD DR 3101 AVENIDA OLMEDA OCEANSIDE CA 92056 CARLSBAD CA 92009 EMILY B CODELLA SCOTT A GERMAIN 6567 CAMINO CAPISTRANO 6571 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KATHLEEN A BARRES VAN J & TONI INGLE 6573 CAMINO CAPISTRANO 6577 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 HOLIDAY C GEIGER 4315 TRIESTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 JANET L DAVIS 6583 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 THOMAS G & TINA GATZ 6581 CAMINO CAPISTRANO CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOYCE A RICHARDSON PO BOX 86923 SAN DIEGO CA 92138 MARGARET A ADELIZZI 6545 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALAN D &LYDIA CLARK 2299 PASEO SAUCEDAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 STANLEY KELTS PO BOX 2766 LA JOLLA CA 92038 CAROL A LINDSAY 6540 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 LESLIE A LAWING 3014 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JEFFREY M HARSTAD 3020 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 DOAL & AKIKO MILLER 247 AVENIDA ESPERANZA ENCINITAS CA 92024 ROBERT & OLGA BASSINSKI 337 NOTTINGHAM WAY UNION NJ 07083 JASON A FELDMAN JOSEPH F GROSSHART 6585 CAMINO CAPISTRANO 7328 MUSLO LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GARY R & MICHELE MAY BARBARA K SOLE 6549 PASEO ADELANTE 6547 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CLARENCE P OWEN CURTIS ENG 6543 PASEO ADELANTE 6541 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DALE L CARDER 6550 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 GALASSO 6548 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 CULVER H NELSON 1611 W MYRTLE AVE PHOENIX AZ 85021 PEGGY A ALDERMAN 6542 PASEO ADELANTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 FEDERICO VERA LOUISE VIRGINIA LAMBILLOTTE 1941 SUMMIT DR 3016 AVENIDA CHRISTINA ESCONDIDO CA 92027 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ELWOOD J& LINDA HIGLEY CHAMBERLIN TR- 3018 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3022 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 EILEEN ZIRPOLO CURT L GOLDSTEIN 3024 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3028 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LOIS A LEE CAROL ZEENKOV 3030 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3034 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 NANCY S SEXTON AUDREY MCGOVERN 3036 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3040 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 , 1 * MARC BODEMER CARLOS E JARA-RATAJSCZA BARRY E LOCKWOOD 3038 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3042 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3046 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ELIZABETH HOUGHTON KEITH W & JAN COX ALLEY MAXINE 3044 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3048 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3052 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARIANN BILLINGSLEY STEVEN FISHER LONNA K HOWARD 4878 GLENHOLLOW CIR 3054 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 10050 BOULDER KNOLLS DR OCEANSIDE CA 92057 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ESCONDIDO CA 92026 ROBERT F 6c SHARON RIEDY SARVARY F &M WENDY J MACDONALD 3056 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 3305 SPRING MOUNTAIN RD 3064 AVENIDA CHRISTINA CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAS VEGAS NV 89102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 OFELIA JIMENEZ BRODSKY 3062 AVENIDA CHRISTINA 6539 CALLE VALPERIZO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BARBARA P BALDWIN 6541 CALLE VALPERIZO CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALEXANDER H PAPE CARLA G TOLBERT KARILYN E MONTANTI PO BOX 7640 6545 CALLE VALPERIZO 6547 CALLE VALPERIZO MAMMOTH LAKES CA 93546 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 .-.VENTuRA M DELAROSA MICHAEL LIMBER STROUD GEORGIA J 6549 CALLE VALPERIZO 6551 CALLE VALPERIZO 10961 TREESIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ESCONDIDO CA 92026 LEONID 6. RACHEL REZNICH HAZEL H NETHERTON GREGORY RAMSEY 6548 CALLE VALPERIZO 6546 CALLE VALPERIZO 6544 CALLE VALPERIZO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALBERT 6: MARY RAGAZZI ISAK & LIMA KHANIS WILLIAM M & MARY KORTGE 401 CANDLEWOOD TRL 6540 CALLE VALPERIZO 6538 CALLE VALPERIZO CARY IL 60013 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHRISTOPHER S MYERS RUTH T WASSERMAN NANCY S SEXTON 6537 VIA ALCAZAR 6539 VIA ALCAZAR 6541 VIA ALCAZAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SERVATKA J D & GLENNA MILLER * MARTHA L TILL 6543 VIA ALCAZAR 6545 VIA ALCAZAR 6547 VIA ALCAZAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOAN E PETER MARK & JUDY CAUGHTHRAN GALE F & RUTH JENSON 6549 VIA ALCAZAR 6551 VIA ALCAZAR 6552 VIA ALCAZAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANNE DEWOLFE MARY I SPAN0 7926 W 4TH ST 2347 TERRAZA RIBERA LOS ANGELES CA 90048 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROYCE & SHARON GOULD 6546 VIA ALCAZAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAY A SUTHERLIN GREGORY J GORDON MICHAEL J GURLEY 6544 VIA ALCAZAR 6542 VIA ALCAZAR 6540 VIA ALCAZAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CREEK & CARLSBAD DARBY RICHARD G DANIELS LUKE L & MAUREEN STUART 3103 VILLA WAY 6379 PASEO CORONO 6383 PASEO CORONO NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANTHONY J CRIVELLO 6387 PASEO CORONO CARLSBAD CA 92009 KIMCEE L MCANALLY PO BOX 682908 PARK CITY UT 84068 HASKELL E & RAE FULLER 6395 PASEO CORONO CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOSEPH SCHIAVONE 6399 PASEO CORONO CARLSBAD CA 92009 CERRY N & TINA TAYLOR JO S & MYRAKIRKENAER 6373 PASEO ASPADA 6377 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 L & INVESTMENTS INC EDWARD M MORTENSON EDWARD P CHRISTIAN 12230 EL CAMINO REAL 30 6389 PASEO ASPADA 6393 PASEO ASPADA SAN DIEGO CA 92130 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 L & INVES KEN R & KIMBERLY MUNSON JOHN R & CAROLYN ROBLES 6394 PASEO ASPADA 6390 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHN P WAGNER 6386 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CLIFFORD R LIPMAN 6382 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 NICOLE MACALUSON 6378 PASEO ASPADA CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAISER L & INVESTMENTS INC PETER N ANDREWS 5 SANTA LUCIA 12230 EL CAMINO REAL 30 6362 PASEO ASPADA DANA POINT CA 92629 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 CARLSBAD CA 92009 RANCH0 CARRILLO MASTER 12636 HIGH BLUFF DR 300 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 *** J&$ Printed *** z+ .