HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-04-03; City Council; 16143; Buerger Subdivision0 19 CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL t@
AB# 1 b, 143 TITLE: DEPT. HD.
MTG. q3-01 BUERGERSUBDIVISION CITY ATTY. iii!sE- ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-1 OlHDP 99-08/CDP 99-17
DEPT. PLN $b& CITY MGR +--I-
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. N S -580 , APPROVING ZC 99-05 and
LCPA 00-04 and ADOPT Resolution No. X0 ) - 104 APPROVING a Negative Declaration,
ZC 99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99117.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On February 21, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended
approval (7-O) of the Buerger Subdivision. The project requires a Zone Change and Local Coastal
Program amendment to change the Limited Control (L-C) designation of the property to One-Family
Residential, 7,500 square foot lot size minimum, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-l- Q), to
implement the Residential Low-Medium (RLM) General Plan designation. The Q-overlay ensures
that the future building elevations and floor plans for the project are subject to review and approval
by the Planning Commission. The project consists of the subdivision and grading of a vacant 5.04
acre parcel into 11 standard single family lots, 1 standard single family panhandle lot, and one open
space lot located on the east side of Black Rail Road, south of future Poinsettia Lane and north of
Aviara Parkway. City Council approval of the tentative map and related permits is required due to
the proposed panhandle lot. The applicant proposes to satisfy the project’s inclusionaty housing
requirement through the purchase of two (2) credits in the Villa Loma Affordable Housing Apartment
project. The project is subject to and in compliance with the General Plan, Zone 20 Specific Plan and
certified EIR, Mello II Local Coastal Program, all applicable zoning ordinances and the Subdivision
Ordinance (Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code).
ENVIRONMENTAL:
The Planning Commission has determined that this project would not have a significant effect on the
environment since no environmental impacts beyond those previously identified by the Zone 20
Specific Plan EIR and General Plan EIR would result from implementation of the project. All
applicable mitigation measures from the previous environmental documents have been incorporated
into the project. The Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration for the project on December
12, 2000.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All required improvements needed to serve this project would be funded by the developer. The
Facility Financing Section of the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan lists the financing
techniques being used to guarantee the public facilities needed to serve development within Zone
20.
EXHIBITS:
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.
6.
Ordinance No. QS-Sl3i6
City Council Resolution No. 200 1 - loq
Location Map
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910,4911, 4912, 4913, 4914, and 4915 Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 21, 2001
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated February 21, 2001.
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
ORDINANCE NO. NS-580
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 21.05.030
OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A ZONE
CHANGE, ZC 99-05, FROM L-C TO R-l-Q ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BLACK
RAIL ROAD, BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND AVIARA
PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO.: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 21.050.30 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, being the
zoning map, is amended as shown on the map marked Exhibit “ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03” attached
hereto and made a part hereof
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as set
forth in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4911 and 4912 on file in the Planning
Department constitute the findings and conditions of the City Council.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be
effective within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 3rd April day of 2001, and thereafter.
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the of day
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
2001, by the following vote, to wit:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEW
-2- 3
d
L c
4
.
G
/
?
/
/
/
L
v I
I
(
(
I
I
(
I
I
I
(
I
‘reject Name: Buerger
-egal Description(s):
1 Related Case File No(s):
LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, CDP 99-17
The northwest and northeast quarters of the southwest
quarter of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter
If Section 27, Township 12 south, range 4 west, San
3ernardino base and meridian, in the County of San
Iiego, State of California, according to United States
Government Survey, approved April 21, 1890.
+operty:
4. 215-040-l 0,08
3.
Zone Chanae I ADDrOvak
From:
L-C
“-
To: Council Approval Date: ’ ’
R-1-7,500-Q Ordinance No:
Effective Date:
2.
3. I
Signature:
PROPERTY ZONE CHANGE zc: 99-05
draft 1x] final 0
Attach additional oases if necessarv I
H:\WORD\GPAZC\ZC9905
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LCPA: 99-03
draft q final cl
Project Name: Buerger
Legal Description(s):
1 Related Case File No(s):
ZC 99-05, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, CDP 99-17
The northwest and northeast quarters of the southwest
quarter of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of
Section 27, Township 12 south, range 4 west, San
Bernardino base and meridian, in the County of San Diego,
State of California, according to United States Government
Survey, approved April 21, 1890.
LCPA Map Designation Change
Property From: To:
A. 215040-IO,08 L-C R-l -7,500-Q
Approvals
Council Approval Date:
Resolution No:
Effective Date:
Signature:
Attach additional pages if ndcessary
H:\WORD\GPAZC\LCPA9903
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
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-I 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, ZONE CHANGE, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT TO REZONE, SUBDIVIDE AND GRADE A 5.04 ACRE
PARCEL GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
BLACK RAIL ROAD AND SOUTH OF FUTURE POINSETTIA LANE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO.: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-lO/HDP 99-08/CDP 99-l 7
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 21, 2001, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05,
LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-17 to rezone a 5.04 acre parcel from Limited
Control to One-Family Residential, 7,500 square foot minimum lot size, Qualified Development
Overlay (R-l-Q), and to subdivide and grade the parcel into 12 single family residential lots and
one open space lot, and adopted Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910, 491 I, 4912,
4913, 4914, and 4915 recommending to the City Council that they be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 3rd day of April , 2001
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Negative Declaration,
Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development
Permit, and Coastal Development Permit; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors
relating to the Negative Declaration, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment,
Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit; and
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does hereby resolve as
foilows:
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 findings of the Planning Commission in Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 4910, 4911, 4912, 4913, 4914, and 4915 constitute the findings of the City
Council in this matter.
3. That the Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, HDP
99-08, and CDP 99-17 are approved as shown in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910,
4911, 4912, 4913, 4914, and 4915 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by
reference with the addition of the following condition:
a. All streets contemplated to be through streets shall be appropriately
signed subject to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 3rd day of April t 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Finnila, Nygaard and Hall.
NOES: None.
A ABSENT: No
ATTEST: -
-2-
EXHIBIT 3
BUERGER
ZC 99905lLCPA 99=03/CT 99-l 01
HDP 99908lCDP 99-l 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
EXHlBlT 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4910
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO
SUBDIVIDE 5.04 ACRES INTO 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND
1 OPEN SPACE LOT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED EAST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD BETWEEN
POINSETTIA LANE AND AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO.: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03KT 99- 1 OkIDP 99-08
CDP 99-17
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/“Owner,” have
filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21, 1890.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said
project; and”
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of February, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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 Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration
according to Exhibit “ND” dated December 12, 2000 and “PII” dated November
29,2000, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
A. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments
thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and
B. the 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. This approval is granted subject to the approval of ZC 99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10,
HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-17 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4911, 4912, 4913, 4914, and 4915 for those other
approvals.
. . .
PC RESO NO. 4910 -2- /o
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 21st day of February, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner L’Heureux
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4910 -3- /l
City of Carlsbad
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Proiect Address/Location: The project site is located in the southwest quadrant, south of
Poinsettia Lane north of Aviara Parkway on Black Rail Road within the boundaries of the Zone
20 Specific Plan.
Project Descrintion: A proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment and zone change to
change the zone designation for the site from Limited Control (L-C) to One-Family Residential,
(7,500 square foot minimum lot size), Qualified Overlay Zone (R-l-Q), and Open Space (OS) on
a 5.04 acre parcel. Also proposed is a Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit and
Coastal Development Permit to subdivide and grade 12 single-family lots and one open space lot.
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, a
Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date
of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Anne Hysong in the Planning Department at
(760) 602-4622.
DATED: DECEMBER 12,200O
CASE NO: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08KDP 99- 17
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDMSION
PUBLISH DATE: DECEMBER 12,200O
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
EWIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03CT 99- 10 !HDP 99-OSCDP 99- 1:
DATE: November 29.2000
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Buerger Subdivision
2. APPLICANT: William and Anita Buerger
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 4668 Cvnrus Wav. Oceanside. CA
92056
4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMITTED: A~til6.1999
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A DrODOSed Local Coastal Program Amendment and zone change to
change the zone designation for the site from Limited Control (L-Cl to One-Family Residential,
/7,500 square foot minimum lot size), Qualified Overlay Zone (R-1-01. and Open Snace (OS) on
a 5.04 acre narcel. Also DroDosed is a Tentative Tract Man, Hillside Develonment Permit and
Coastal Develonment Permit to subdivide and grade 12 sinple-family lots and one onen snace lot.
The nroiect site is located in the southwest ouadrant. south of Poinsettia Lane, north of Aviara
Parkway on Black Rail Road within the boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan.
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 Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
cl Land Use and Planning Ix1 Transportation/Circulation III Public Services
cl Population and Housing cl Biological Resources q Utilities & Service Systems
q Geological Problems El Energy & Mineral Resources III Aesthetics
q Water 0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
(XI Air Quality El Noise cl Recreation
q Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96 13
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
cl
III
0
lxl
cl
I find @at the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on rhe
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
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. .4 MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
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(n) Negative
Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on 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) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of
Prior Compliance has been prepared.
/a -5-0~
Date
/a &&Vi
Date
2 Rev. 03/28/96 ILJ:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the Cir>.
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may ha1.e a siyifkant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the follo\i$ig
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 “EL4-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but & 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).
0 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.
l 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. 03/28/96 /5
l If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid prepping 311
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 re\.ie\f.. 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. 03128196 /b
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a)
b)
cl
4
e)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18; #2: Pgs III-74 -
87) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18; #2: Pgs III-74- 87)
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18; #2: Pgs III 74-87)
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or fan&n&, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18; #2: Pgs 74 - 87)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18; #2: Pgs 74 -87)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6: )
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l -
5.5-6)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
4
b)
c)
4
4
f-l
g)
h)
9
expose people to potential impacts involving:
Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-I - 5.1-15; #2: Pgs III - 112
- 118; #3)
Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs S.!-1 - 5.1-15; #?:
Pgs III - 112 - 118; #3)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l :Pgs
5.1-I - 5.1.15; #2: Pgs III - 112 - 118; #3)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l -
5.1-15)
Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-I - 5.1-15; #2: Pgs III - 112 - 118; #3)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs
5.1-I - 5.1-15; #2: Pgs III- 112 - 118; #3) Subsidence ofthe land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #2: Pgs
112-118;#3) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-I - 5.1-15; #2: Pgs III - 112-118;#3)
Unique geologic or physical features? (#l :Pgs 5. l-l -
5.1-15; #3)
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-
11 1
5
Potentlall>~ Sigmficant Impact
q
cl
q
cl
q
q
q
q
cl
cl
q
q
q
cl
q
q
El
q
Potenrlall!
Sl_cnificanr
Lhless
Mitigation
Incorporated
cl
cl
q
q
cl
q
q
cl
Cl
cl
q
Cl
q
q
cl
q
cl ‘,
Less Thsn
Stgnlfic3nr
Impact
Is]
lxl
q
q
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
q
q
q
0
cl
0
q
cl
q
III
ISI
Is]
lxl
lzl
Ix1
(XI
Ix1
El
lxl
Ix1
lxl
Ix]
Ix)
lxl
IXI
q q Ix1
Rev. 03128196 17
Issues (and Suppotting Information Sources). PotentialI> Significant
Impact
Potentdl!
Slgntficsnt
Lkless
hlqatton Incorporated q
q
Less ThJn Lo
Slylficant Imps
I IllPXl
q
q
q El
cl El
b)
c)
4
e)
f)
Id
h)
0
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
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) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11) 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)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
(#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-l - 5..2-11)
cl (XI
q lxl
q la
cl
q
q
q
q
Cl
cl
cl
0
q El
q IXI
cl El
q
q
Cl
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
El
q
cl
q
q q q
q
cl
q
q Ix1
q Ix1
q lxl
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; #2:Pgs III -58 - 69)
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 III-58 - 69)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22; #2: Pgs III - 58- 69) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22; #2: Pgs III- 58 - 69 )
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22; #2: Pgs III - 58 - 69) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l -
5.7.22)
El
q
U
q
q q
q Ix)
4
b)
cl
4
e)
0
8)
.U
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q lxl
q lxl
q lxl
q lxl
q q q IXI
Rev. 03128196 18 6
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
VIII.
a)
b)
C>
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 III
- 37 - 57; #5)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2:
Pgs III - 37 -5 7; #5)
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2: Pgs III - 37 - 57; #5)
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (# 1 :Pgs 5.4- 1
- 5.4-24; Pgs III - 37 -57)
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-l - 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:
4
b)
c)
4
e)
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-I -
5.10.1-5)
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5; #2: Pgs III - 97 -
105; #4)
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-I - 5.10.1-5; #4)
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:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-l - 5.9- 15; #2: Pgs III - 88 - 96)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9- 1 - 5.9-15; #2: Pgs III - 88 - 96)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4)
c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5)
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
0 lxl
cl-- lxl
q lxl
q 151
q lxl
q (XI
cl IXJ
q Ix)
q Ix)
q lxl
q IXI
q (xl
q [xi
q q lxl
q q lxl
q q q Ix) q q q El q q q El
7 Rev. 03128196 / y
d) Maintenance of public facilities. including roads?
e) Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7)
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
a)
b)
cl
d)
e>
r)
g)
XIII.
a)
b)
c)
XIV.
4
b)
cl
4
4
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 8:
5.13-l - 5.13-9)
Communications systems?
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-l - 5.12.3-7) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7; $2:
PgsIII- 110- 11’1)
Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8; #2 Pgs III - 110 - 111)
Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-l - 5.12.4-3)
Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-l -
5.12.3-7)
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs
5.11-l-5.11-5;#2: PgsIII-119-151)
Have a demonstrated negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs
5.11-l-5.11-5;#2: pgsIII-119-151)
Createlightorglare?(#l:Pgs5.11-1 -5.11-5)
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paieontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-
10; #2: Pgs III 106 - 107 )
Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-
10; #2: Pgs III - 70 - 73)
Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10; #2:
Pgs III - 70 - 73) Have the potential to cause a physical zhange which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8-
1 - 5.8-10; #2: Pgs III - 70 - 73) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10; #2: Pgs III - 70 - 73)
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-l -
5.12.8-7)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
III q
q
q q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q cl
q
q q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q lxl q El!
q Ix)
q lxl q Ixi
q lzl
q lxl
cl lrxl q (XI
q lz.J
q lzl
q Ix1
cl Ix1
q lzl
q 1xI
q Ix1
q El
q Ix1
cl El
8 Rev. 03/28/96 2 0
XVI.
a)
b)
cl
XVII.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGhWICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment. substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
EARLIER ANALYSES.
cl
q
q
q q lx!
q q lxl
q q lxl
Earlier analysis of this proposed single-family residential project has been completed through the
General Plan Update (GPA 94-01) and related Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-
01). The MEIR is cited as source #l in the preceding checklist. This proposal is consistent with
the applicable portions of the General Plan and is considered a project that was described in
MEIR 93-01 as within its scope. All feasible mitigation measures identified in MEIR 93-01
which are appropriate to the project have been incorporated into this project. The project site is
also located within the boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan approved by the City Council in
1994. Program EIR 90-03, which was certified for the Zone 20 Specific Plan in 1991, identified,
analyzed, and recommended mitigation to reduce potentially significant impacts to insignificant
levels. The Zone 20 Program EIR (PEIR) analyzed potential impacts to agriculture, air quality,
biology, circulation, land use, noise, pesticide residue, paleontology, public facilities,
soils/geology, and visual aesthetics that could result from development of the specific plan area.
The PEIR is intended to be used in the review of subsequent projects within Zone 20. The
project incorporates the Zone 20 PEIR mitigation measures, and through the analysis of the
required additional geotechnical, hydrology, and pesticide residue analyses, a determination has
been made that no additional significant impacts beyond those identified and mitigated by the
PEIR will result from this project. The following environmental evaluation briefly explains the
basis for this determination. The Zone 20 PEIR and additional technical studies are cited as
source documents.
9 Rev. 03/28/96 21
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is 5.04 acres (4.02 net acres) in size and is located between Aviara Park\va>* and
Poinsettia Lane, on the east side of Black Rail Roa&The entire property has been disturbed due
to past horticultural operations. The site is currently vacant except for two remaining structures
(office and shed). The project consists of the subdivision and grading of 12 standard single-
family lots (minimum 7,500 square feet) and 1 open space lot. No homes are proposed on the
lots at this time. Approximately 25,400 cubic yards of grading are proposed with 5.400 cubic
yards of import needed to create building pads.
The site is designated by the General Plan for Residential Low Medium (RLM - O-4 DU/AC)
density land use and zoned Limited Control (L-C). A zone change and local coastal program
amendment are proposed to rezone the site to One-Family Residential, 7,500 square foot
minimum lot size, Qualified Overlay Zone (R-l-Q) to correspond to the existing RLM General
Plan designation. The project also requires approval of a tentative tract map, hillside
development permit and coastal development permit.
B. ’ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
I. / LAND USE AND PLANNING:
Theiproject includes a zone change and Local Coastal Program Amendment to change the zoning
of the property from Limited Control (L-C) to One Family Residential/Qualified Overlay Zone
(R-l-Q). The change is consistent with the underlying Residential Low Medium (RLM) density
General Plan and Mello II LCP land use designation allowing 0 - 4 dwelling units per
unconstrained acre thereby creating no conflicts with existing land use plans.
v. AIR QUALITY:
In 1494 the City prepared and certified an EIR which analyzed the impacts which will result
from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concludes that
continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have
cumulative significant impacts in the form of 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 sulk, 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 build-out
as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air
quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan build-out, 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
Rev. 03128196 x4
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 projects
covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR
This document is available at the Planning Department.
VI. CIRCULATION:
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in
increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out
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 build-out.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General. Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 build-out 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 projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIIL This document is available at the Planning
Department.
A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was
certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was
certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport
Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance.
Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have
11 Rev. 03/28/96 23
been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to
review later projects.
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 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California. 92008.
(760) 602-4600.
1. Final Master Environmental Imuact Retort for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update
(MEIR 93-Ol), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
2. Final Pro-am Environmental ImDact Report for the Zone 20 Specific Plan (PEIR 90-03)
dated June 1992, Brian F. Mooney Associates.
3. “Geotechnical Investigation for Buerger Property, Carlsbad, California”, prepared by
Geocon, dated November 20, 1998 and follow-up letter dated July 15, 1999.
4. “Limited Soil Sampling and Analysis Report - Buerger Property, Carlsbad, California”,
prepared by Geocon, dated August, 1998, and “Buerger Property Carlsbad, California
Waste Classification”, prepared by Geocon, dated September 18, 1998.
5. Letter dated June 21, 1999 from Paul Walsh, Biologist, Dudek & Associates, Inc.
12 Rev. 03128196 caq
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. 4911
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM L-C TO R-l-Q ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
BLACK RAIL ROAD BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND
AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: zc 99-05
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/“Owner,” have filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as shown on
Exhibit “X” dated February 21, 2001, attached hereto and made a part herof on file in the
Planning Department, BUERGER SUBDIVISION - ZC 99-05, as provided by Chapter 21.52
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of February, 2001,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Zone Change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B)
FindinPs:
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of BUERGER SUBDIVISION ZC 99-05,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That the proposed Zone Change from Limited Control (L-C) to One-family
Residential, 7,500 square foot lot size minimum, Qualified Development Overlay
Zone (R-l-Q) is consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the
General Plan, in that the proposed zone replaces the L-C Zone which is intended to be
an interim zone designation. The proposed zone is consistent with the RLM General
Plan land use designation required by the Zone 20 Specific Plan which was earlier
found to be consistent with the General Plan.
That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan and Zoning as
mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad General Plan Land Use
Element, in that the One-family Residential, Qualified Overlay Zone (R-l-Q)
implements the property’s RLM General Plan designation.
That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity and general
welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that residential uses allowed
by the proposed zone change are compatible with surrounding and future
residential and agricultural uses.
The Q-Overlay Zone, made part of the proposed zone change, provides the City
with discretionary review over the placement of the residential units to ensure that
they will conform to all applicable regulations.
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Negative Declaration, LCPA 99-
03, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-17 and is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910,4912,4913,4914, and 4915 for those other
approvals.
PC RESO NO. 4911 -2- 26
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 tile 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. 4911 -3- d7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 21st day of February, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
Commissioner L’Heureux
ti
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~ICHAEL J.
Planning Director
PC RBSO NO. 4911 -4- 28
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. 4912
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO BRING THE
DESIGNATIONS ON THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, GENERAL PLAN, AND ZONING MAP INTO CONFORMANCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF
BLACK RAIL ROAD BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND
AVIARA PARKWAY.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: LCPA 99-03
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/“Owner,” have filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, , described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “X” attached to Planning Commission Resolution
a9
1 4911, and made a part hereof, dated February 21,200l as provided in Public Resources Code
2 Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the
3
4 California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative
5 Regulations; and
6 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of February, 2001,
7 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
8
9
10
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment. 11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A)
B)
C)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on January 11,
2001, and ending on February 22,2001, staff shall present to the City Council a
summary of the comments received.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of BUERGER SUBDIVISION - LCPA 99-03,
based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions:
22 II Findings:
23 1.
24
25
26
2. 27
28
That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements of, and is
in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all applicable policies of the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by
this amendment, in that the project is consistent with applicable policies requiring the
project to provide drainage and erosion control measures.
That the proposed amendment to the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal
Program is required to bring the designation of the City’s General Plan Land Use
Map, Mello II Laud Use Plan designation, Zoning Map (as amended), and Meilo II
Implementation (the zoning map) into conformance.
II PC RESO NO. 4912 -2- 30
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
Conditions:
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05,
CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-17 and is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910,4911,4913,4914, and 4915 for those other
approvals.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 21st day of February, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner L’Heureux
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4912 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4913
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 99-l 0 TO
SUBDIVIDE 5.04 ACRES INTO 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND
1 OPEN SPACE LOT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED EAST OF BLACK RAIL ROAD BETWEEN
POINSETTIA LANE AND AVIARA PARKWAY IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO.: CT 99-10
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/“Owner,” have filed a
verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative Tract
Map as shown on Exhibits “A” - “1” dated February 21, 2001, on file in the Planning
Department BUERGER SUBDIVISION - CT 99-10, as provided by Title 20 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of February, 2001,
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:
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 BUERGER SUBDIVISION - CT 99-10,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
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 lots
being created satisfy all minimum requirements of Titles 20 and 21 governing lot
sizes and configuration and have been designed to comply with all other applicable
City regulations.
That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for’residential development on the General Plan,
in that surrounding residentially designated properties are designated for and/or
have been approved for development with single-family homes on similar sized lots.
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 complies with all City policies and standards without the
need for a variance from development standards.
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, in
that prior to, or concurrent with, recordation of the final map, the developer will
vacate and adjust any easements that conflict with the proposed development.
That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
PC RESO NO. 4913 -2- 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
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that lots are oriented in an
east-west alignment for southern exposure and to take advantage of prevailing
breezes.
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 the project site has been disturbed and does not contain any
significant habitats.
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 project has
been designed in accordance with the Best Management practices for water quality
protection in accordance with the City’s sewer and drainage standards and the
project is conditioned to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements.
The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan and Specific Plan 203 based
on the facts set forth in the staff report dated January 17,200l including, but not limited
to the following:
A. Land Use - The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the
proposed density of 2.95 du/acre is within the density range of O-4 du/acre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan,
and is below the growth control point of 3.2 du/acre.
B. Circulation - The circulation system is designed to provide adequate access to
the proposed lots and complies with all applicable City design standards.
C. Housing - That the project is consistent with the Housing Element of the
General Plan and the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as the Developer has
been conditioned to enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement to purchase
two affordable housing credits in Villa Loma.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 20 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; fire; 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,
PC RESO NO. 4913 -3- 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
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
A. The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the Carlsbad 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.
That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
That the property cannot be served adequately with a public street without panhandle lots
due to unfavorable conditions resulting from unusual topography, surrounding land
development, or lot configuration, in that the portion of the parcel proposed for the
panhandle lot is otherwise inaccessible.
That subdivision with panhandle lots will not preclude or adversely affect the ability to
provide full public street access to other properties within the same block of the subject
property, in that all other lots in the subdivision will have public street access.
That the buildable portion of the lot consists of 9,150 square feet and the panhandle lot
satisfies all required development standards of Section 21.10.080(c) of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code;
That the front, side, and rear property lines of the buildable lot, for purposes of
determining required yards, are as shown on Exhibit “B” dated February 21,200l.
That any panhandle lot hereby approved satisfies all the requirements of Section
21.10.080(d) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
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.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -4- 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
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Tentative Tract Map documents, as necessary to make them
internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development
shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
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.
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,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions.
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.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its
obligation to provide school facilities.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05,
LCPA 99-03, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-17 and is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910, 4911, 4912, 4914, and 4915 for those
other approvals.
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.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -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
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as part of the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
If a grading permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be
completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the “dry season”, April
1st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th
upon written approval of the City Engineer and only if all erosion control measures are in
place by October 1st.
Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is not
being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units, the
Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to purchase
two affordable housing credits in the Villa Loma housing project in accordance with
the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Director no
later than 90 days after the California Coastal Commission action on the project.
The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest.
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 shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a
healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the
landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
Prior to the issuance of the building permit, 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, Hillside Development Permit, and
Coastal Development Permit by Resolutions No. 4913, 4914, and 4915 on the real
property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property
description, location of the tile 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.
If satisfaction of the school facility requirement involves a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District or other financing mechanism which is inconsistent with City Council
Policy No. 38, by allowing a pass-through of the taxes or fees to individual home buyers,
then in addition to any other disclosure required by law or Council policy, the Developer
shall disclose to future owners in the project, to the maximum extent possible, the
existence of the tax or fee, and that the school district is the taxing agency responsible for
the financing mechanism. The form of notice is subject to the approval of the Planning
PC RESO NO. 4913 -6- 37
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
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Director and shall at least include a handout and a sign inside the sales facility stating the
fact of a potential pass-through of fees or taxes exists and where complete information
regarding those fees or taxes can be obtained.
The Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map, or an alternative,
suitable to the Planning Director, in the sales office at all times. All sales maps that are
distributed or made available to the public shall include but not be limited to trails, future
and existing schools, parks and streets.
The developer shall 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.
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).
The Developer shall post aircraft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental offices
associated with the new development. The number and locations of said signs shall be
approved by the Planning Director (see Noise Form #3 on file in the Planning
Department).
The Developer shall provide a minimum of 25 percent of the lots with adequate side yard
area for Recreational Vehicle storage pursuant to City Standards.
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.
The tentative map approval shall expire twenty - four (24) months from the date of the
resolution containing the final decision for tentative map approval.
The Developer shall dedicate Lot 13 to the Homeowner’s Association and an open
space easement for Lot 13 to prohibit any development, including but not limited to
fences, walls, decks, storage buildings, pools, spas except as shown on Exhibit “F”,
dated February 21,200l and as allowed by the SDG&E easement.
The Developer shall dedicate to the Homeowner’s Association an open space
maintenance easement over the areas identified for common maintenance on
Exhibit “G” dated 2-21-01. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final map as
non-mapping data.
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:
PC RESO NO. 4913 -7- 38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A.
B.
C.
D.
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.
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.
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.
Special Assessments Levied by the Citv. In the event the City has performed the
necessary maintenance to either Common Area Lots and/or Association’s
Easements, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Association for all costs
incurred by the City to perform such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and
or Association’s Easements. The City shall provide a copy of such invoice to
each Owner in the Project, together with a statement that if the Association fails to
pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection
against the Owners in the Project pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Said
invoice shall be due and payable by the Association within twenty (20) days of
receipt by the Association. If the Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full
within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be
subject to a late charge in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the amount of
the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection from the Association by
means of any remedies available, at law or in equity. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available
to the City, the City may levy a special assessment against the Owners of each Lot
in the Project for an equal 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.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -8- 39
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
27.
E.
F.
G.
Common Ownership Land or Improvements. Provisions shall be established
for : 1) maintenance of all common areas, payment of taxes and all other
privileges and responsibilities of the common ownership; 2) prohibiting the
homeowners’ association from quitclaiming land in Association easement to
private property owners thus allowing the homeowners to privatize a
common area for his/her own use.
Landscape Maintenance Responsibilities. The HOAs and individual lot or unit
owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set forth in Exhibit “F”
- “I.” The common maintenance responsibility includes open space (Lot 13)
and all perimeter manufactured slopes as shown on the Landscape
Maintenance Plan, Exhibit “G,” on file at the City of Carlsbad Planning
Department. Relinquishing maintenance responsibility of HOA maintained
lots and/or slope to individual property owners shall be prohibited. The
following restriction shall be incorporated into the CC&Rs for Lots 7 - 10:
The landscape design shall incorporate fire protective landscaping for
defensible space purposes at the rear of Lots 7 - 10 for fire protection
purposes in accordance with the final Landscape Plan on file at the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department. Fire protective landscaping shall exist in an
easement dedicated to the Homeowners Association, which shall extend from
the rear property line to a point no closer than 20 feet from proposed
structures. Landscaping in this defensible space zone shall consist of
ornamental ground cover plants which will not contribute to fire spread.
Landscaping shall be irrigated and maintained free of hazard by the
Homeowner’s Association. No structures shall be placed in the defensible
space/HOA maintenance easement, and no encroachment of any kind shall
be permitted on HOA maintained slopes.
Balconies, trellis and decks. The individual lot or unit owner allowances and
prohibitions regarding balconies, trellis and decks shall be as set forth in Exhibit
“G” on file at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. Balconies,
trellises, and decks proposed on Lots 7 - 10 in the 20’ rear yard landscape
setback between the main structure and top of slope shall conform to the
Class 1 Ignition Resistant requirements of Sections 504 and 602 of the Urban
Wildland Interface Code.
To offset the conversion of non-prime agricultural land to urban land uses per the
requirements of the Mello II Local Coastal Program, the applicant shall provide
payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than
$5,000 nor more than $10,000 for each net converted acre of non-prime agricultural
land. The amount of the fee shall be determined by the City Council prior to
approval of the final map and shall be consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad’s
LCP. The fee shall be paid prior to final map or issuance of a grading permit,
whichever occurs first.
28. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall receive approval of a site
development permit in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -9- 40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul routes shall be required
during dry weather conditions.
B. All unpaved areas shall be revegetated according to approved landscape
plans as soon as possible after grading.
C. All construction-related traffic shall be restricted to routes that are dust-
controlled, and reduced speed limits shall be maintained for all haul and
construction vehicles.
D.
E.
All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high winds.
All heavy-duty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be operated
according to manufacturers suggested operating instruction (with the fuel-
injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NOx emissions, but
which would not result in excessive visible smoke emissions) in order to
control pollutant emissions.
F. Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly scheduled
maintenance/tune-ups, and be turned off when not being utilized to avoid
excessive idling emissions.
G. The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall adhere to
APCD Rules 67.0 and 67.7, to effectively control other construction-related
emissions of air pollutants.
30. The Engineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all grading
29. Compliance with APCD Rules 51 (The “Nuisance” Rule), 52 (Particulate Matter),
and 54 (Dust and Fumes) of the Air Quality Chapter would effectively mitigate dust
impacts generated during grading operations. A note shall be placed on the grading
permit stipulating that the following measures shall be required to achieve
compliance with these rules, and reduce construction-related air pollutants:
operations of the project.
31. The Homeowner’s Association shall obtain and distribute to owners and tenants
annual information from Caltrans and North County Transit regarding the
availability of public transportation, ride-sharing, and transportation pooling
services in the area. This information shall also be provided in the sales offrce of the
project. A condition so stating this shall also be placed in the CC&Rs for the
project.
32. Prior to occupancy of individual units, a solid wall or fence and landscaped
windbreaks shall be installed along the perimeter of any future developable area
that abuts property under “open field” cultivation, in order to reduce public
nuisance effects of adjacent pesticide spraying and dust generation from farm
vehicles and operations.
33. Prior to issuance of a building permit the project shall comply with the City of
Carlsbad’s standards for solid waste management.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -lO- 41
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
34. Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, the applicant shall notify, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Attorney, all owners, users and tenants of this project that this area is subject to
dust, pesticides, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations, and
that the owners, users, and tenants occupy this area at their on risk. The Developer
shall post notices to this effect in all sales/rental offices associated with the
development .
35. All grading shall comply with the recommendations incorporated by Geocon in the
preliminary geotechnical investigation and updates of the site dated August 1998
and July 15,1999 and any amendments or updates of the report, that is on file in the
Planning Department.
36. Prior to approval of a final map, improvement plans shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department showing locations and sizing of reclaimed and or urban
runoff diversion facilities, in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Water
District requirements and the phasing schedule provided in the Zone 20 LFMP.
Reclaimed water facilities shall be constructed in all major roadways within the
project.
Prior to any grading of the project site, a paleontologist shall be retained to perform
a walkover survey of the site and to review the grading plans to determine if the
proposed grading will impact fossil resources. A copy of the paleontologist’s report
shall be provided to the Planning Director prior to issuance of a grading permit.
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of the
site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of some of the fossils
present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to collect matrix samples for
laboratory processing through fine screens. The paleontologist shall make periodic
reports to the Planning Director during the grading process.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
A.
PC RESO NO. 4913
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an
exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage artifacts.
All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a
research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading activities of
the project shall be resolved by the Planning Director and City Engineer.
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 land use designation for this development is 3.2 dwelling
units per non-constrained acre.
-ll- 42
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
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
Parcels 1 - 13 were used to calculate the intensity of development under the
General Plan and Chapter 21.90. Subsequent redevelopment or resubdivision of
any one of these parcels must also include parcels 1 - 13 under the General Plan
and Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.”
The panhandle lot (Lot 4) shall have three non-tandem parking spaces with an
approach not less than twenty-four feet with a proper turnaround area to permit
complete turnaround for a forward access to the street. Said parking and
turnaround shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Structures permitted in the access portion of the panhandle lot shall be limited to
mailboxes, fences, landscape containers and nameplates. Except for mailboxes, the
structures shall not be greater than forty-two inches in height if located within
twenty feet of the property line or greater than six feet if beyond this point.
The front yard of the panhandle lot (Lot 4) shall be defined as a line that is parallel
to and twenty feet west of the eastern property line.
Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer
of dedication to the City of Carlsbad for a trail easement for trail(s) shown on the
tentative map within Open Space Lot(s) 13. Prior to the issuance of any building
permits, the trail shall be constructed as a public trail for public use and accepted
by the City of Carlsbad upon adoption of a Citywide Trails Program that includes
provisions for maintenance and liability. Otherwise, prior to issuance of any
building permits, the obligation for acceptance, construction, maintenance, and
liability shall be the responsibility of another agency designated by the City or the
responsibility of the Homeowner’s Association.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Department a recorded copy of a right-of-way use agreement with San Diego Gas
and Electric and a letter of permission of grading and construction of improvements
from San Diego Gas and Electric for the proposed encroachments into the existing
easement for the grading and construction of the improvements.
Engineering:
General
48. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the City Engineer
for the proposed haul route.
49. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of
the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is
formally established by the City.
50. Developer shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless
the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, agents, officers, and representatives, from and
against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claim and costs, including court
costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a)
PC RESO NO. 4913 -12- 43
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
51. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means, CC&Rs or/and other
recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all
the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain facilities
located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner
among the owners of the properties within the subdivision.
52. Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install rain gutters to convey roof drainage to an
approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
53. There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project.
City’s approval and issuance of this tentative parcel map, (b) City’s approval or issuance
of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with
the use contemplated herein, including an action filed within the time period specified in
Government Code Section 66499.37 and (c) Developer’s installation and operation of the
facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from
the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions.
A. Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in
accordance with Engineering Standards.
FeesiAFreements
54. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for
recordation the City’s standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement regarding
drainage across the adjacent property.
55. Developer shall cause property owner to execute, record and submit a recorded copy to
the City Engineer, a deed restriction on the property which relates to the proposed cross
lot drainage as shown on the tentative map. The deed restriction document shall be in a
form acceptable to the City Engineer’and shall:
A.
B.
Clearly delineate the limits of the drainage course;
State that the drainage course is to be maintained in perpetuity by the underlying
property owner; and
C. State that all future use of the property along the drainage course will not restrict,
impede, divert or otherwise alter drainage flows in a manner that will result in
damage to the underlying and adjacent properties or the creation of a public
nuisance.
56. The City of Carlsbad is presently considering action to reform Bridge and
Thoroughfare District No. 2 (B&TD#2) to finance cost increases incurred and/or
estimated to complete the design and construction of Aviara Parkway and Poinsettia
Lane within the boundaries of the district. Prior to approval of a final map or
issuance of a building permit on the project site, whichever occurs first, the property
owner shall enter into an agreement with the City whereby the owner/developer
PC RESO NO. 4913 -13- +4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
agrees not to oppose the reformation of B&TD#2 and further agrees to pay their
project’s fair share contribution for the B&TD#2 facilities in accordance with the
fee schedule as may be adopted by the City Council upon reformation of B&TD#2.
In the event building permits are issued in advance of the reformation of the
district, the owner/developer shall post a cash deposit with the City in the amount of
the proposed fee as estimated in the latest revision to the B&TD#2 Fee Study Report
available at the time of building permit issuance.
57. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall
cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area
shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street
Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer.
Grading
58. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the start
of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board.
59. This project requires off site grading. No grading for private improvements shall occur
outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a
recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the
owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope
easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must
either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading
will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial
conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.
60. 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. Developer shall apply for and
obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer (prior to issuance of a building permit for
the project.)
Coastal Conditions
61. If a Grading Permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be
completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the “dry season”, April
1 st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th
upon written approval of the City Engineer, obtained in advance, and only if all erosion
control measures are in place by October 1”‘.
Dedications/Improvements
62. Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City
and/or other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements shown on the
tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map. All land so
offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost.
. Streets that already public are not required to be rededicated.
PC RESO NO. 4913 14- 4 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
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or
install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent
with any grading or building permit.
Developer shall cause Owner to waive direct access rights on the final map for all lots
abutting Black Rail Road. Lot 5 shall waive access to Street “A” and lot 11 shall waive
access rights to Street “B”.
Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall underground all existing overhead
utilities along the subdivision boundary. The regional overhead transmission system is
specifically not part of this condition. This condition affects the wooden power poles
and individual overhead electric or telephone or cable TV service runs from the pre-
developed condition.
Developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Developer shall provide improvements constructed
pursuant to 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 submitted to
and subject to the approval of 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 waste products.
B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement
to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements
shown on the tentative map and the following improvements including, but not limited to
paving, base, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, grading, clearing and grubbing,
undergrounding or relocation of utilities, drainage facilities, sewer, water, fire hydrants,
street lights, retai‘ning walls and reclaimed water, to City Standards to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
1. Half (%) Street improvements to Black Rail Road along the frontage of this
project, including offsite transitions.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -15- 46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1.2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
4.
5.
Street “A” and street L6B” as shown on the tentative map for this project.
Sewer, water and reclaimed water facilities along the frontage of this project
and internally stubbed to the adjacent properties north and south via Street Lb 79 B.
A 10” Reclaimed Water Main along the frontage of this project in coordination
with adjacent developments. Adjacent development includes but is not limited
to: Paying a fair share of costs, agreeing to a common contractor with the City
and the adjacent developers, extending the improvement to serve properties
north and south of this development.
A public drainage system along the south side of this project, intercepting
runoff from street “B” and directing it to the east, including but not limited to a
maintenance free energy dissipator.
A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map per the
provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act within 18 months of approval
of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as
provided in said agreement.
68. Prior to occupancy, the developer shall install street lights along all public and private
street frontages abutting and/or within the subdivision boundary in conformance with
City of Carlsbad Standards.
69. Prior to occupancy, the developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting
the subdivision in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
70. Prior to occupancy, the developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public street
comers abutting the subdivision in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
Final Man Notes
71.
72.
Developer shall show on Final Map the net developable acres for each parcel.
Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-mapping data
A. Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless
the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are available.
B. 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 sight distance corridors.
73. 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 Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -16- 47
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
74. The tentative map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this tentative map
approval becomes final.
Fire Conditions:
75. Applicant shall provide defensible space in rear yards of lots 7,8,9 and 10 for fire
protection purposes. The design of the defensible space shall conform to the fire
protection section of the City Landscape Guidelines, or a functional alternative. An
acceptable functional alternative would be: The applicant shall incorporate the following
fire protection measures into the landscape and building design of lots 7,8,9 and 10 as
follows:
A.
B.
C.
D.
All buildings shall be constructed in a manner that conforms to the Class 1
Ignition Resistant requirements of Sections 504 and 602 of the Urban Wildland
Interface Code.
All future improvements to the proposed structures must conform to the Class 1
Ignition Resistant requirements of Sections 504 and 602 of the Urban Wildland
Interface Code.
The landscape design shall incorporate fire protective landscaping for defensible
space space purposes at the rear of each lot. Fire protective landscaping shall
exist in an easement dedicated to the Homeowners’ Association, which shall
extend from the rear property line to a point no closer than 20 feet from proposed
structures. Landscaping in this defensible space zone shall consist of ornamental
ground cover plants which will not contribute to fire spread. Landscaping shall
be irrigated and maintained free of hazard by the Homeowners Association.
No combustible structures or materials may be placed into the defensible space
easement.
Code Reminder
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to
the following:
76. 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.
77. Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy
#17, the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section
5.09.030, and CFD #l special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable
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.
78. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
PC RESO NO. 4913 -17- 48
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
79. 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.
80. 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.
I 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 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. 4913 -18- 49
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 21st day of February, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner L’Heureux
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RBSO NO. 4913 -19- 5-0
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. 4914
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF BLACK RAIL
ROAD BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND AVIARA
PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO: HDP 99-08
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/L‘Owner,” have
tiled a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “1” dated February 21, 2001, on file in the
Carlsbad Planning Department, BUERGER SUBDIVISION - HDP 99-08, as provided by
Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of February, 2001,
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Hillside Development Permit; and
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 Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of BUERGER SUBDIVISION - HDP 99-08,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
FindinPs:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints map which show
existing and proposed conditions and slope percentages;
That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%, have been properly
identified on the constraints map;
That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and requirements of
the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that minimal 25%+ slopes (.054 acre) will be
disturbed and no coastal dual criteria slopes or 40%+ slopes exceeding 15 feet in
height and 10,000 square feet in area will be disturbed, grading quantities of 3,055
cubic yards/acre are within the acceptable range, and manufactured slopes are less
than 40 feet in height.
That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the undevelopable portions
of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 21.53.230 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
That the project design substantially conforms to the intent of the concepts illustrated in
the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that grading follows the natural
topography and all manufactured slopes are screened with a combination of ground
cover, shrubs, and trees where permitted by the fire suppression zones.
That the project design and lot configuration minimizes disturbance of hillside lands, in
that the project’s grading design is consistent with the Coastal Resource Overlay
Zone (Chapter 21.203) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code policies for the preservation
of steep slopes and would not encroach into steep slopes that are identified as
undevelopable by the Hillside Ordinance development and design standards.
PC RESO NO. 4914 -2- 52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
!2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to approval of the
final map or issuance of grading permit, whichever occurs first.
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05,
LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, and CDP 99-17 and is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910,4911,4912,4913, and 4915 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. 4914 -3- 53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of February, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compaq Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
ABSENT: Commissioner L’Heureux
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOlZMItiER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4914 -4-
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. 4915
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP 99-
17 TO GRADE AND SUBDIVIDE 5.04 ACRES INTO 12
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 1 OPEN SPACE LOT ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
BLACK RAIL ROAD, BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND
AVIA&! PARKWAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
CASE NO.: CDP 99-17
WHEREAS, William and Anita Buerger, “Developer,“/“Owner,” have
filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property, described as
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to United States Government Survey, approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the United States Government Survey approved
April 21,189O.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes
over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the south
half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12 South, Range 4
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of
San Diego, State of California, according to United States
Government survey approved April 21,189O.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “I” dated February 21, 2001, on file in the
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 Department, BUERGER SUBDIVISION - CDP 99-17 as provided by Chapter
2 1.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of February, 2001,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the CDP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of BUERGER SUBDIVISION - CDP 99-17
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
FindinPs:
1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Coastal
Program and all applicable policies in that no prime agricultural lands exist on or near
the site; no impacts will occur to environmentally sensitive habitats; no coastal
access is or will be needed through or adjacent to the project site; erosion will be
controlled by grading in conformance with the City’s Standards; grading will be
restricted to the summer season; the site contains no wetlands or dual criteria
slopes; the soils investigation performed for the property indicates that the site
including the minimal area (2,352 square feet) of steep slopes is stable, grading of
the slopes is essential to the development design, and disturbance to the area will not
alter major wildlife habitat or native vegetation; and no significant view points are
on or near the site.
2. The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3
of the Coastal Act in that the site is located over 1 mile from Batiquitos Lagoon and
over 2 miles from the Pacific Ocean and no coastal access areas or water-oriented
recreational activities exist on or near the project site.
3. The project complies with the requirements of the Coastal Agricultural Overlay
Zone as the project has been conditioned to pay the agricultural conversion
mitigation fee to develop the property with other than agricultural uses.
PC RESO NO. 4915 -2- 5th
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
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final map or
issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first.
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of ZC 99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10,
and HDP 99-08 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning commission
resolution No. 4911,4912,4913, and 4914 for those other approvals.
2. The applicant shall apply for and be issued building permits for this project within two
(2) years of approval or this coastal development permit will expire unless extended per
Section 2 1.201.2 10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
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.
. . .
..a
. . .
PC RESO NO. 4915 -3- 57
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 21st day of February 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner L’Heureux
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
AA hmHmL J. H&MI&&R
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4915 -4- 5-8
The City of Carlsbad Pl&g Department EXHIBIT 5 i
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION @
Item No. 6 0
Application complete date: May 12, 1999-
P.C. AGENDA OF: February 21,200l Project Planner: Anne Hysong
Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham
SUBJECT: ZC 99-05LCPA 99-03/CT 99-lO/HDP 99-OS/CDP 99-17 - BUERGER
SUBDIVISION - Request for a recommendation of approval for a Negative
Declaration, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract
Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit for 12
single-family lots and one open space lot on a 5.04 acre parcel located east of
Black Rail Road between Poinsettia Lane and Aviara Parkway and within the
boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4910, 4911,
49 12,4913,4914, and 49 15 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a Negative Declaration, ZC
99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT 99-10, HDP 99-08, and CDP 99-l 7 based on the findings and subject to
the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The proposed project consists of a Zone Change and Local Coastal Program Amendment to
rezone the property to R-l-Q (One Family Residential, minimum 7,500 square foot lot
size/Qualified Overlay Zone) and various permits to enable the subdivision and grading of the
5.04 acre parcel into 13 lots including 11 standard single-family lots, one standard single-family
panhandle lot, and one open space lot. City Council approval of the tentative map and related
permits is required due to the proposed panhandle lot. The proposed subdivision complies with
the R-l zoning ordinance standards for lot sizes, panhandle lots, and access from public streets.
Residences are not proposed on the lots at this time; therefore, in accordance with the “Q”
overlay zone, Hillside Development and Coastal Development Ordinances, architectural
elevations and floor plans must be approved through processing a site development plan and
amendments to the hillside and coastal development permits prior to issuance of building
permits. The applicant proposes to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing requirement
through the purchase of two (2) credits in the Villa Loma Affordable Housing Apartment project.
As designed and conditioned, the project is consistent with the General Plan, Zone 20 Specific
Plan (SP 203), Mello II LCP, Subdivision Ordinance, and relevant Zoning Chapters of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project site consists of 5.04 acres of previously cultivated land which is bounded to the east
by the Aviara Master Plan Planning Area 22 single family subdivision and open space, to the
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03KT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08/CDP 99- 17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
Pane 2
west by Black Rail Road, and to the north and south by vacant parcels also previously cultivated.
The northern portion of the parcel rises in elevation from west to east from approximately 338’ to
376’ while the southern portion rises from 338’ to 370’ and then drops to the east and south to
approximately 348’ at its lowest point. Approximately one (1) acre of the site is constrained by a
major 150’ wide SDG&E power line easement that traverses the property at the western end, a
transmission tower located within the easement, and .054 acres of 25%+ slopes. The site has
been previously cultivated for horticultural operations and occupied by greenhouses. There are
no native habitats occupying the site. Although the site has been formerly occupied by flower
fields and horticultural plantings (birds of paradise), the horticultural operations have been
terminated, and the site is currently occupied by two remaining structures and non-native
vegetation.
The property is designated by the General Plan for RLM (Residential Low-Medium3.2 du/acre
Growth Control Point) density development and zoned L-C (Limited Control). The parcel is
regulated by the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Mello II LCP which require the site to be rezoned to
One Family Residential/Qualified Overlay Zone (R-l-Q) to implement the RLM General Plan
designation. The entire site is proposed to be rezoned to R- 1 -Q.
The proposed development consists of 12 standard single-family lots ranging in size from 7,830
square feet to 19,800 square feet and one 25,880 square foot open space lot which encompasses
the power line easement. One of the 12 single-family lots is a panhandle lot. The proposed
density for the 4.06 net acre site is 2.95 du/acre and the inclusionary housing requirement based
on 12 market rate units is 2.11 units. The applicant proposes to satisfy this requirement through
the purchase of credits in the Villa Loma Affordable Housing Apartment project. As shown on
Exhibit “B,” the subdivision is designed to take vehicular access from Black Rail Road, a Zone
20 collector street, and to provide access to adjacent properties in accordance with the Zone 20
Specific Plan.
The proposed project is subject to the following land use plans, ordinances, and standards:
A. Residential Low Medium density (RLM) General Plan Land Use Designations;
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
C. Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program
D. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 20 (Subdivision Ordinance)
E. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Chapter 2 1.10 - One Family Residential Zone
Chapter 2 1.06 - Qualified Overlay Zone
Chapter 21.85 - Inclusionary Housing
Chapter 21.95 - Hillside Development Regulations
Chapters 21.203 and 21.205 - Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone and Coastal
Resource Protection Overlay Zone
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03KT 99-lO/HDP 99-08/CDP 99-17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
Pane 3
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 the regulations/policies utilizing both text and tables:
A. General Plan
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The table
below indicates how the project complies with the elements of the General Plan which are
particularly relevant to this proposal.
GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
Land Use
Housing
Circulation
Park and Recreation
Public Safety
Proposed residential density of 2.95 dwelling units/net acre in the
RLM designation is within the allowed density range of O-4 du/acre
and consistent with the growth control point of 3.2 du/acre.
Inclusionary housing requirement of 2.11 units is proposed to be
satisfied through the purchase of credits in the Villa Loma Affordable
Apartment project.
Required roadway and intersection improvements of local public
streets in accordance with City standards as shown on the tentative
map.
Project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
Project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and fire
hydrants as shown on the tentative map or included as conditions of
approval. Additionally, single-family structures on lots proposed
with less than 60’ fire suppression zones must be constructed in
accordance with the ignition resistant standards of the Urban
Wildland Interface Code.
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan
The Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203) provides a framework for the development of the vacant
properties within its boundaries to ensure the logical and efficient provision of public facilities
and community amenities for future residents. SP 203 requires project compliance with all
applicable land use plans, policies, and ordinances, except as modified by the Specific Plan. The
following discussion describes the proposed project’s conformance with the relevant Specific
Plan regulations which include Affordable Housing, Land Use, Zoning, Circulation, Open Space,
and Architectural Guidelines.
Affordable Housing
The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires compliance with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
(Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) requiring that 15% of the total number of
proposed units are made affordable to low income households. The inclusionary housing
requirement for the proposed 12 lot subdivision is 2.11 dwelling units. When feasible, the
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08KDP 99- 17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
affordable units are required to be constructed onsite, however, the purchase of housing credits in
an offsite combined inclusionary project within the same quadrant may be approved by the City
Council. Since it would not be feasible to construct inclusionary units onsite due to the limited
number of lots proposed, the project is proposing to purchase 2.11 affordable housing credits in
the Villa Loma Affordable Apartment project, also located in the southwest quadrant.
Land Use/Zoning/Architectural Guidelines/Circulation/Open Space
The project is located within Area E of the Specific Plan, which requires that the site be rezoned
from L-C to R-l, allowing single-family development at the density permitted by the RLM
General Plan designation (O-4 dwelling units/acre). As previously stated, the project includes a
zone change to R-l-Q (the Qualified Overlay Zone (Q)) is proposed to be added to the R-l
zoning consistent with previous Zone 20 approvals). The Q zone requires approval of a site
development plan showing building placement, architectural elevations, and floor plans. Since
the actual residential units are not proposed at this time, the project is conditioned to require
approval of a site development plan prior to construction of units within the subdivision.
Compliance with the Zone 20 Architectural Guidelines, requiring roof and building articulation,
as well as variation in roof, wall and accent materials and colors, roof heights and masses,
windows, doors, and garage designs will be ensured as part of the site development plan review.
Projects within Area E are required to take vehicular access from local streets intersecting with
Poinsettia Lane at specified locations. In conformance with the Specific Plan, the project would
take access from Poinsettia Lane via Black Rail Road, an approved collector street. SP 203 also
requires that projects provide through vehicular access to adjacent properties where feasible. In
compliance with this provision, the project provides a connection (Street B) to the adjacent
vacant parcels to the north and south.
The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires the project to preserve the constrained lands, including the
SDG&E easement and steep slopes in open space. The proposed project, which disturbs minimal
areas of 40%+ slopes, will dedicate an open space easement over a .59 acre parcel that includes
the SDG&E easement. Additionally, as required by the Specific Plan, an 8’ wide trail, improved
with decomposed granite, is proposed through the easement from the southern property boundary
to Black Rail Road. Since the Specific Plan requires a private trail system within the easement
through Area E, the Landscape Plan, Exhibit “E,” identifies a private trail within the easement.
C. Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP)
The project is located within and subject to the Mello II LCP segment and is designated for
Residential Low-Medium (RLM) density land use and Limited Control (L-C) zoning. Although
the Mello II Land Use Plan is consistent with the subject parcel’s RLM General Plan designation,
the implementing zone (L-C) specified by the Mello II LCP is not consistent with the proposed
zone change to R-l-Q. Since the California Coastal Act specifies that all rezonings related to
land use regulation or administration within the coastal zone, which occur after the certification
of a local government’s local coastal program, require LCP amendment in order to be effective,
the project includes a Local Coastal Program Amendment to change the implementing zone from
L-C to R-l-Q.
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08KDP 99- 17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
Page 5
The project is consistent with Mello II LCP policies for conversion of agricultural land to urban
use and limiting grading to the summer season (April - October). The project is conditioned to
require payment of an agricultural mitigation fee which will mitigate the loss of agricultural
resources and to restrict grading of the site to the summer season.
The project is also consistent with coastal policies requiring the preservation of steep slopes
(2 25% gradient) since the property contains a very minimal area (.054 acre) of steep slopes and
no dual criteria slopes exist on the property. The soils investigation performed for the property
indicates that soils are stable and there would be no impacts to wildlife habitat or native
vegetation.
Mello II hydrology standards require that drainage systems are designed to ensure that runoff
resulting from a 10 year frequency storm of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed
conditions are less than or equal to the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration
under existing conditions. The proposed drainage system complies with this standard.
D. Subdivision Ordinance
The proposed tentative map complies with the requirements of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance
(Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code). The subdivision will not conflict with any easements
for access through or use of the property. The project’s proximity to the ocean will enable
natural heating and cooling opportunities. Primary access to the property would be provided by
Black Rail Road via Poinsettia Lane and/or Aviara Parkway, which are both circulation arterial
roadways. The proposed local public streets have adequate public right-of-way and would be
constructed by the developer to full public street width standards with curb, gutters, sidewalks,
fire hydrants, and underground utilities in accordance with City standards. The proposed street
system is therefore adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
To reduce drainage impacts from the project site, the developer is required to provide adequate
drainage and erosion control. The drainage requirements of the Zone 20 Specific Plan, City
ordinances, and Mello II LCP have been considered and appropriate drainage facilities have been
designed and secured. In addition to City standards and compliance with the City’s Master
Drainage Plan, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards will be
satisfied to prevent any discharge violations
E1&2. Chapter 21.10 - R-l (One Family Residential Zone)/Chapter 21.06 - Q (Qualified
Overlay Zone)
As shown on the following table, the project meets or exceeds the R-l zone standards for lot size
and width, and panhandle lot size and driveway access configuration. Although the proposed
project is a standard single-family subdivision which would not otherwise require Planning
Commission approval of the actual single-family units, the Q zone requires the approval of a site
development plan including building footprints and architectural elevations to ensure that the
proposed units are consistent with the R-l zone standards. This enables the Planning
Commission to make the necessary findings-that the project will not adversely impact the site or
surrounding uses and that the site is adequate to accommodate the proposed use.
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08KDP 99- 17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
Pane 6
STANDARD PROVIDED
Use: Single-family Lots/Units 12 Single-family Lots, 1 Open Space Lot
Lot Area: Minimum 7,500 Square feet
Lot Width: 60 Feet Minimum
Panhandle Lot: *
7,830 - 25,880 Square Feet
72 - 165 Feet
20 feet wide public access drive (14’ driveway)
Max 150’ driveway length
Lot Area: >8,000 square feet
Lot Width: Minimum 60 feet
Three non-tandem parking spaces
Limited structures in access drive
structures in the access drive.
*Panhandle lots require approval by the City Council.
20’ wide public access (14’ driveway)
95’ driveway length
Lot Area: 9,150 square feet
Lot Width: 73 feet
The project is conditioned to require three
non-tandem parking spaces and limited
E3. Inclusionary Housing
See discussion Under B. Zone 20 Specific Plan - Affordable Housing above.
E4. Chapter 21.95 - Hillside Development Regulations
As shown on the following table, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable Hillside
Development regulations for development of steep slopes, slope height, grading volumes, and
slope screening. The project will disturb a minimal area of natural slopes exceeding 40%,
however, the area of disturbance (174 square feet) does not meet the criteria (minimum 10,000
square feet) necessary to prohibit development by the Hillside Ordinance. Since residential units
are not proposed on the lots, the Hillside Development Permit will have to be amended prior to
issuance of building permits to ensure compliance with the Hillside Development Guidelines
Manual. The following table indicates compliance with the applicable development standards:
STANDARD COMPLIANCE
Development prohibited on 40%+ Slopes Area of 40% Slopes disturbed are Less than
Exceeding 10,000 Square Feet 10,000 Square Feet in Area
Grading Volumes: Acceptable - 7,999 cubic 3,055 cubic yd/acre
ydfacre
Slope Height: Maximum 40 Feet Maximum
Slope Screening
Slope Height: 20 Feet
Landscaping consisting of a combination of
trees, shrubs, and groundcover.
E5. Chapters 21.203 and 21.205 - Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone and Coastal
Resource Protection
See the discussion under C. Mello II Local Coastal Program above.
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-1 O/I-IDP 99-08KDP 99-l 7 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 21,200l
Page 7
F. Growth Management
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 20 in the southwest
quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance
with the adopted performance standards are summarized in the following table.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE
STANDARD IMPACTS
City Administration 41.72
Librarv 22.25
COMPLIANCE
Yes
Yes
Waste Water Treatment
Parks
Drainage
12 EDU
.08
Basin D
Yes
Yes
Yes
Circulation
Fire
120 ADT
Station No. 4
Yes
Yes
Open Space
Schools
.59 acres
Carlsbad Unified
Elementary 3.1 students
Junior High .86 students
Hinh School 1.63 Students
Yes
Yes
Sewer Collection System 12 EDU Yes
Water 2,420 GPD Yes
*The project is .992 units below the Growth Management dwelling unit allowance
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a
potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA guidelines and the
Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The direct,
indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts from the future development of the Zone 20
Specific Plan area were analyzed by the Zone 20 Program EIR (EIR 90-03). Additional project
level studies required by EIR 90-03 have been conducted and no additional impacts beyond those
previously analyzed and mitigated have been identified. The project also 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 were adopted for
cumulative impacts to air quality and traffic. MEIR’s may not be used to review projects if
certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project except under
certain circumstances. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is
still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five
years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have
occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified. The only
potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Road and El Camino
Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is
no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time
the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. All
feasible mitigation measures identified by EIR 90-03 and the MEIR which are appropriate to this
project have been incorporated into the project. No additional ADT would be generated by the
ZC99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-lO/HDP 99-08/CDP 99-17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION
February 2 1,200l
project and no additional mitigation, in the way of roadway improvements, is necessary. There
are no impacts to any sensitive species or habitats as the existing developed site does not contain
any sensitive flora or fauna. In consideration of the foregoing, on December 12, 2000, the
Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration for the proposed project. The environmental
document was noticed in the newspaper and no public comments were received during the 30-
day public review and comment period.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4910 (Negative Declaration)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 49 11 (ZC)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4912 (LCPA)
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4913 (CT)
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4914 (HDP)
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4915 (CDP)
7. Location Map
8. Background Data Sheet
9. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
10. Disclosure Statement
11. Reduced Exhibits
12. Full Size Exhibits “A” - “I” dated February 2 1,200l
AH:cs:mh
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99- 1 O/HDP 99-08/CDP 99- 17
CASE NAME:
APPLICANT:
Buerger Subdivision
Bill and Anita Buerger
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request to rezone, subdivide and grade a 5.04 acre narcel into 12 standard
single family lots and 1 open space lot on proper-& located east of Black Rail Road between Poinsettia Lane and
Aviara Parkwav within the boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Zone.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Parcel 1: The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section
27, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of
California, according to United States Government Survey, approved April2 1, 1890.
Parcel 2: The northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section
27, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of
California, according to the United States Government Survey approved April 2 1, 1890.
Parcel 3: An easement for road and public utility purposes over, under, upon and across the westerly 30 feet of the
south half of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 12
South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according
to United States Government survey approved April 2 1, 1890.
APN: 215-040-08; -10 Acres: 5.04 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 12 Single Family Residential Lots/l Onen Space
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: RLM
Density Allowed: 0 - 4 DU/AC Density Proposed: 2.95 DU/AC
Existing Zone: L-C Proposed Zone: R-1-0
Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use:
Site
North
south
East
West
Zoning
L-C
“
“
P-C
L-C
General Plan
RLM
RLM
RLM
RLM/os
RLM
Current Land Use
VACANT
“
“
“
“
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: &SD Water District: CMWD Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 12 EDU
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Ix1 Negative Declaration, issued December 12.2000
cl Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
I7 Other
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: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-lO/HDP 99-08/CDP 99-l 7.
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 20 GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: L-C (Limited Control)
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Bill and Anita Buerger
ADDRESS: 4668 Cvprus Way, Oceanside, Ca 92056
PHONE NO.: ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 215-040-10; -18
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 5.04 Acres/l2 lots
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: Unknown -
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 41.72
Library: Demand in Square Footage = 22.25
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 12 EDU
Park: Demand in Acreage = .08
Drainage: Demand in CFS = 28.6
Identify Drainage Basin = Basin D
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. =
Open Space: Acreage Provided =
Schools:
120
Station #4
.59 Acre
CUSD:Elem-3.1/
MiddleSchool-.86/
High School: 1.63
Sewer: Demands in EDU 12 EDU
Identify Sub Basin = 20B
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD = 2,420 GPD
The project is 0 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on ail appiicatiotls wi~ici~ will rcquirc
discretionaT 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. Sour pro&~ cannot
bc reviewed until this infomlation is completed. Plcase print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association. social club. fntcmal
organiwfion, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county. tit)
municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agcnls may sign this documcnl; however, the legal name and entity of lhe applicant and propcny owner must bc
provided below.
I. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL, names and addrcsscs of AL_L persons having a financial
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a cornoration or nnrtncrship. include the
names. title. addresses of all individuals owning more than Id% of the &arcs. IF NO
INDlVlDUALS OWN MOr& THAN 10% OF f’%E SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON-
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corooration, include the
names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A scparatc page may be attached if
necessary.)
PersonLG\\ush A hJ+A L3~~~&
Title c)u tiiqs
Address \ lG$ Cyti L-I \ ~CC--==, CA q2o>5
CorpIPart
Title ’
Address
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 the nature of the legal ownership (i.e.
pamxrship. tenants in common. non-profit. corporation. etc.). lf the ownership includes a
corporcltion or onrtnershin. 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 puhliclv-
nwncd cornorrrtion. include the names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
’ * Person l/l,\j,(gm Ql-vl;% bxr 4 ef @c Carp/Part
Title OLctYle<S Title
Address qfn L f3 CurlAs I&V Address
b * 19
2075 Las Palmas pr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 l (760) 438-11610 FAX (760) 438-0894 @
3.
4.
NON-PROFIT ORGAN. rTION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit orennization or n trust. list the
names and addresses of ANY person servitq as an officer or director of the non-profit
or~;lniwtion or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non ProWTrust Non Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
. _
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of Cit>* staff.
Boards. Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve ( 12) months?
0 Yes No If yes. plcasc indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
Signature of owner/date
L!mh%h A BL4.%4Gm
I%/* fl. BuE&&
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicanl \
Signature of owner/applicant’s agent if applicablc/datc
Print or type name of owner/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COlJNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5199
b
t
Page 2 of 2 70
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l DRAFT ,i-Z:T 6
6. ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03KT 99-IOlHDP 99-08KDP 99-17 - BUERGER SUBDIVISION - Request
for a recommendation of approval of a Negative Declaration, Zone Change, Local Coastal
Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit and Coastal
Development Permit for 12 single-family lots and one open space lot on a 5.04 acre parcel
located east of Black Rail Road between Poinsettia Lane and Aviara Parkway and within the
boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan.
Mr. Wayne introduced Item 6 and stated it was a number of actions to allow for a subdivision of land that
is called the Buerger Subdivision which is located in Zone 20. He went on to introduce Associate Planner
Van Lynch, who was filling in for the project planner, Anne Hysong, who is ill. Also available tonight is
Clyde Wickham, the project engineer.
The property is located on the east side of Black Rail Road, north of Aviara Parkway and south of
Poinsettia Lane, in the Zone 20 Specific Plan Area. The applicant is requesting a zone change from the
LC Zone, which is an interim zoning designation given to properties annexed into the City of Carlsbad.
The proposed zoning is R-1-7500-Q, that is single-family, 7,500 square foot lot size minimum with a
qualified Overlay Zone. The request for the Local Coastal Program Amendment is to revise the Coastal
documents to reflect the same zone change. The project is for 13 lots, 11 of which are standard single-
family lots with one other lot, which is a panhandle lot and one open space lot. There is an exhibit on the
board with a colored plot plan that shows all the lots (in the brown tone). The open space lot is the larger
lot that is in green. The largest open space lot is covered by an SDG&E transmission easement and is
basically undevelopable. The proposed zone change is in compliance with the Residential Low Medium
General Plan Designation, and also the Specific Plan for Zone 20 requires it to be compatible. The Zone
20 Plan also calls for an Affordable Housing requirement as well as the Zoning Ordinance. The project is
required to provide two Affordable Housing Units, which will be provided in the Villa Loma Residential
Affordable Apartment Project.
The project’s subdivision complies with the Subdivision Ordinance, in that the lot size meets the 7,500
square foot minimum. The panhandle lot is required to have a square footage of 8,000 square feet, which
it exceeds. There are some constraints on the property in the form of steep slopes that require the
Hillside Development Permit. On the eastern edge of the property you can see a green band on the
exhibit. In that area are some of the steep slope areas. That steep slope area is basically disturbed and
does not have any habitat, although it has the constraints to require a Hillside Development Permit. The
Hillside review at this time is for design of the lots. The lots comply with the Hillside Development
Requirements. There will be a subsequent requirement for the project to amend the Hillside Development
Permit when the residential homes are proposed on the site to comply with the Hillside guidelines. That
would be basically design considerations, roof orientation and setback from tops of slopes. The General
Plan for the designation again is RLM, which allows 3.2 units per acre. The project is proposing 2.95 units
per acre--below the Growth Control Point. The applicant is also requesting approval of the Negative
Declaration. The Zone 20 Plan addresses numerous environmental constraints. Among them are
paleontological resources, soil mitigation for potential impact from agricultural uses and notice information
for over flight to Palomar Airport. The initial Soils Report shows that there are no significant levels of
residue from previous agricultural uses, although there is a trace amount, but is not considered significant
for this project.
There is an errata sheet that was handed out to you for the project. The first revision would be to
Condition Number 24. The previous Condition was very restrictive as to the use of the open space Lot 13
that basically precluded any use of the property. The open space lot will have some use of the property
as a green turf area, probably a play area. We don’t want 100% preclusion of use of this area. The
revision has included the use of the property as shown on the Landscape Exhibit and precludes any other
significant structure such as fences, walls, decks and storage buildings. There is still allowance for
SDG&E. They have an easement over the property. SDG&E is going to want some rights to use that
property for maintenance or addition of power line easement utilities. We are recommending to add a
Condition for Lot 13. There is an Open Space Trail requirement. The property is providing a trail through
the open space corridor and there is a condition to construct the trail. We are proposing to add a
Condition, which is to require that the applicant provide to us an approval letter from SDG&E for the
grading and construction of improvements within that easement. And lastly, to delete Condition 46, which
Planning Commission Minutes February 2 1,200l Page 6
is redundant to Condition 42, which is the requirement of a submittal of a street name list prior to final
map approval.
Chairperson Segall asked if Mr. Cunningham is the Applicant and pointed out to Mr. Cunningham there
were only six Commissioners present and would he like to continue or wait.
Mr. Cunningham stated he wished to continue.
Commissioner Heineman addressed Mr. Lynch saying, in briefing they were unable to find any way to get
into Lot 5, nor does any show on the map and have they since found where it is to be?
Mr. Wickham agreed that it was correct. He explained on Lot 5 the access would be off Street B and that
it is not shown on the Tentative Map.
Commissioner Compas asked if they could refresh the Commission when upon leaving the development
at street B, where does it connect up to?
Mr. Wickham showed the anticipated route of the neighborhood circulation plan. And as the parcels have
been coming in, they are piece by piece and they are trying to put the puzzle together with the circulation
plan in mind. The cul-de-sac at the bottom of the Exhibit, is Planning Area 23, which is already approved,
designed and being graded today. That could provide a T-connection straight up through the subdivision
(he pointed out) and continuing straight up through the Tabata Subdivision and then making a hard right,
going to A Street that is already approved called Cabela, straight up to Docena and eventually over to
Ambrosia, which is a back access to the school.
Commissioner Compas asked if eventually they planned to T into that cul-de-sac?
Mr. Wickham confirmed this.
Commissioner Baker said that was her question, but she also asked how they would notice people, since
Yamamoto and Sugino are not currently being developed, how will future residents in those areas know
that those could possibly be through-streets?
Mr. Wickham stated that what they are doing as a new policy, when they are building new streets with
barricades, they are putting a sign. It is a traffic operations sign that says, “This street will be continued.”
So that, nobody buying a house can think or be led to believe a cul-de-sac would appear.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if any of those lots were padded up as he did not see any cuts through any
of them to show what the topo would be in relation to the street with the pad.
Mr. Wickham pointed out on the Tentative Map that there are pads shown and that a lot of them come
into grade with the street at one point to get a level driveway. It is a Hillside Condition. So they are
stepping those lots as they go up the street up Lot A and across Lot B. There are pads and there are a lot
of slopes. One of the sides of the lot would have a slope on one side and an at-grade pad on the other.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if the average would be at street level?
Mr. Wickham said not the average, but one point of each lot would be close to street level.
Commissioner Nielsen then asked if there was a negative or positive infill on that one, wondering if they
have that yet, not seeing anything in the report on it.
Mr. Wickham read that this is an import of 6,900 cubic yards.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if they were going to be padding up then, as that is quite a bit of fill.
Mr. Wickham said there is an existing terrain that rolls across that site.
79
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l Page 7
Commissioner Nielsen also asked if there is any relationship with the other developments up there,
asking if Hadley has been approved? He also asked how those pads front with Hadley and the other
developments. Are they above, below, substantially above?
Mr. Wickham explained the entire terrain is typical of this subdivision. That it is stepping up, stepping
back down and stepping back up and it is just rolling through this knoll. None of these lots have ever
completely padded out. So the development of each is trying to meet grade on one side and meet grade
on the other while they are padding across.
Commissioner Nielsen was concerned and asked, that as far as they know this will not look down on
Hadley, they won’t pad way above Hadley?
Mr. Wickham answered that they would not.
Mr. Lynch explained that the trend of the ridge is from Hadley, slowly stepping down all the way to Black
Rail to the bottom of the Exhibit.
Commissioner Trigas, for clarification, asked if everyone who buys homes in there, that SDG&E has an
Easement and if there will be a Notice in some way?
Mr. Wickham said there was not a specific noticing condition for the easement.
Mr. Wayne suggested that only Lot 1 (in the Title) would have that notice, because it runs across that lot
and not the other ones.
Mr. Lynch also replied there would be an obscure reference through the CC&Rs because that lot will be
maintained by the Association and since there is an easement on that property--Lot 13. Lot 1 would have
an easement recorded against that property. The others would be a very obscure reference in the
CC&Rs and the Title of the property because they have part responsibility of the open space lot that does
have an easement on it for SDG&E. It would be very obscure though. They don’t require conditions of
other projects that are adjacent to power lines to notice them of their proximity, so these are adjacent and
a proximal to. But they, typically, wouldn’t condition them to notify that they are adjacent to a transmission
easement.
Chairperson Segall addressed Mr. Lynch on a follow-up on Commissioner Compas’ comments on the
streets--it appears that there is almost as much pavement in all these projects as there are lots, with all
these streets going in different directions and he is concerned from the overall planning. He realizes a lot
of these projects are already in and have been approved, but when you look at it, it is probably not the
best planned circulation. But in following up on the question, as we approve this project with the street,
the top of the T, can we be assured that Yamamoto is going to have that street going through. I guess it
will come back before us and if it is not there we don’t have to go further with it. But, can we be assured
that that is where that street will continue?
Mr. Lynch said it is going to be a design issue that both Engineering and Planning will review when they
come in for a project submittal. It will be their goal to connect those streets through that property.
Chairperson Segall added that it is the same going south too. Because Mr. Lynch is talking about in
Aviara Planning Area 23, there is a cul-de-sac now and, as he was understanding, that Mr. Lynch is
planning to bring that up to the Planning Area 22 at some point and where would that go through then?
Mr. Lynch said no, that from the cul-de-sac it goes due north through the Sugino property, through
Buerger, straight through Yamamoto property, exactly parallel to Black Rail Road.
Mr. Lynch continued that with the subdivision design of single-family lots, you need “X” amount of street
frontage. So it is a shuffling game between how do you provide access and how do you get the maximum
number of lots. If we had wider width requirements, you would probably see fewer roads. And, if we had
smaller roads, you would see less pavement, but possibly more lots.
80
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l Page 8
Chairperson Segall added that we are only seeing part of it because we haven’t looked on the west side
of Black Rail to see what kind of situation we are going to have there in terms of circulation.
Mr. Lynch replied that is one property owner, so it will be pretty much cohesively planned.
Chairperson Segall asked if we have approved that one yet, the one south of Carnation(?) and Mr. Lynch
said no. Chairperson Segall stated his other question on Lot 13--could Mr. Lynch point out where is this
right-of-way for the trail?
Mr. Lynch said it is actually a trail easement. It will occur on the southern portion of the easement. He
pointed out the whole easement that goes through the property, the SDG&E easement. Pointing out
where the trail traverses, he said the Citywide trail network is proposed to provide trails throughout the
City. And, one of the optimal locations, since the easement exists, is to follow the SDG&E easements.
So, this property, having the SDG&E easement, provides its given small share from Black Rail through
the property to connect to the supposed trail south of the adjacent property.
Chairperson Segall asked for clarification if that is just that one little segment that we are talking about on
this amendment or Errata Sheet?
Commissioner Baker asked--since we have been improving these small projects-Carnation, Hadley,
Tabata, this one and those two empty lots-how are we ensuring that there will be some continuity in all
these separate developments, not only in the housing products, but in streets and the general area so
that there is some continuity and consistency?
Mr. Lynch said there are some general guidelines in the Zone 20 Specific Plan regarding architectural
requirements, but they are not to the extent where you are going to get a cohesive development as far as
product type, as far as what the home is going to look like.
Commissioner Baker replied that she didn’t know that that was her concern so much as is all the things
we have been discussing tonight, the roads, not so much that the housing stock is going to be look-a-like,
but that there will be some flow in the fact that we are approving these separately. We’ve been approving
separate parcels and she wants to make sure that there will be some integration between these separate
parcels so that it flows and makes sense.
Mr. Wickham pointed out that what we have conditioned on this project is an easement along the north
property line against Yamamoto and it is an easement to re-grade this site should Yamamoto want to
change their pads, exactly for that reason. We are kind of land sculpting and trying to do it piece by piece.
You are meeting grade every time you hit a boundary and then you go back up again for the next lot.
What we’ve conditioned this project for is a grading easement should the adjacent property wish to re-
grade. It is a little bit of an inconvenience if somebody buys a house and part of their lot could be re-
graded, but it would allow for a better conforming land sculpture.
Commissioner Baker guessed that the net-effect is when all of these are developed there will be some
smooth flow and they are following the contour of the land.
Mr. Wickham agreed that that is exactly what they are trying to do. We are trying to follow it up and follow
it back down and it does have a roll to it. So we are trying to ensure that that does happen.
Commissioner Baker asked if Docena cutting through to Ambrosia is going to be creating another
raceway through a quiet neighborhood as people will be cutting over to get to the school?
Mr. Wickham stated Cabela Place is the little cul-de-sac which is 32 feet wide. That is a relatively narrow
street and there is a lot of (more-than-normal) 90 degree turns. So it will not be a thoroughfare in the
sense of a neighborhood shortcut. It will be more of a neighborhood-used route and only the people that
know where it is will know how to get through it. Docena is at 15% grade. It is not going to be a very
comfortable street to drive. One way will be very steep down hill and the other way is very steep coming
up hill. Again, he thinks this will serve its purpose for a neighborhood access only.
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l Page 9
Chairperson Segall said one thing to point out from the school district standpoint is Zone 19, which is the
Aviara Planning Areas, are all Aviara. He is not sure if the School Board has made a decision on the
Zone 20, but that is generally Pacific Rim. So there may be a natural split just on that issue.
Commissioner Nielsen wanted to follow up on Commissioner Baker’s question-is there going to be
integration and are these going to be blended? When you look at one do you look at what is there now
and the future ones, so they kind of integrate together rather than having five different neighborhoods that
do not flow together.
Mr. Wickham replied that from a grading standpoint they are looking for that-street connectors -- widths
of streets. He stated that they are trying to make it flow like it was master planned. And they do have a
problem between Hadley and Tabata. It doesn’t meet real well and that is just a condition where one
project was a year and a half ahead of another project and there is a combination slope. From Hadley it
drops down about 12 feet down to Tabata. That, to us from a land sculpting, is a little excessive. We
would have rather have had it go 8 feet, 8 feet, 8 feet-smoother. But that was not our condition. There
was too much of a time lag.
Commissioner Nielsen asked of the ones showing on the map, which ones have we approved projects
on-obviously not Yamamoto.
Mr. Wickham replied they were Hadley, Tabata, Buerger (tonight), Aviara Planning Area 23, and Aviara
Planning Area 22 are all approved.
Commissioner Nielsen confirmed that the only one not approved there is Yamamoto?
Mr. Wickham concurred and added Sugino.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if they are aware of the problems?
Mr. Wickham said that as soon as they see a design of it, they will be aware of it. We will comment when
we see it.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if they are telling them in advance though to give them a clue?
Mr. Wickham replied that Sugino came in with a Preliminary and we did advise him of the connection and
the road access issues.
Commissioner Nielsen asked about Yamamoto, because it looks pretty key.
Mr. Wickham said they have not come in for any subdivision request or any design. He thinks Yamamoto
will actually have the best deal of all the design considerations. They will not have to waste roadway
getting access to Black Rail. They will be able to just put a cul-de-sac in line with the name (on the map)
Yamamoto and serve all the houses off of it. So they will get the most land use with the least road use.
Mr. Lynch added that these property owners have been notified through the public hearing process. So
they had an opportunity to come down and meet with us to see what the project is.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if we noticed property owners within 300 feet?
Mr. Lynch responded that we use a 600 foot radius for noticing.
Chairperson Segall asked if the builders are similar on some of these projects. He questioned who is
doing Hadley and Tabata?
Mr. Lynch replied that Ryland Homes is developing the Carnation and Hadley projects as a project called
Encantata. That has been before you for Site Development Plans. The Tabata property and Planning
Area 22 is the Brehm Aviara Premier Collection. We assume that they will be built cohesively as one
product type, and a Site Development Plan will come forward for both of those properties. Tabata and
Area 22 will be the same. Tabata has just been approved as a map. You have not seen the architecture.
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l Page 10
That will be coming forward and as the Buerger project is conditioned with a “Q” Overlay you will see the
Site Development Plan for the architecture on that one.
Commissioner Compas asked if Mr. Lynch could make a statement about the ones that have been built
so far--would he say that they blend in?
Mr. Lynch stated he hasn’t actually seen a unit constructed up there personally, in any of those.
Chairperson Segall asked confirmation that PA 23 is being constructed right now.
Mr. Wickham confirmed and added that PA 23 is a different product type. It is a condominium, a very tight
PUD, a dense multi-family.
Commissioner Compas stated that from his driving around there, he doesn’t see a big problem of not
blending in, that it looks pretty good to him.
Chairperson Segall asked if there were any other comments and questions of the staff? Seeing there was
none, he asked the Applicant, Mr. Cunningham, if he would like to come up and make any comments.
Dennis Cunningham, Applicant, 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100. He introduced Bill and Anita Buerger,
who are here as one of the old property owners in the Zone 20 area. His engineer is available for
questions as well from Civ Corn. He has an adjoining neighbor as well here, Miss Muroya, who does a lot
of Palm growing. Going back a few years, there are a few in the room who probably recall the Zone 20
Specific Plan, EIR and LFMP, as it was being moved through. That was not an easy task for either the
project applicant at that time, whoever the consultant was, and also a lot of the land owners. Because
there was a lot of infrastructure that needed to be put in, a lot of issues with roads and bridge and
thoroughfare districts or whatever. The reason that he mentions it is that Bill and Anita Buerger, with what
his records show and his involvement with them in the last three years, have participated in a positive
way. Some of the meetings that were held outside of the City were not always pleasant-different
opinions on what needs to happen. But they did dedicate part of their property for the Black Rail Road to
go through. In return, there were certain facilities that were put into Black Rail that now allow us to move
through. They recently, within the last 12 months, have relocated their Orchid and Bird of Paradise
business that was operating out of the Floral Trade Center and as well was growing up in there just to the
last year. He recalled that their property was fairly clean when he was doing some soil samplings up in
that area.
Before you tonight is a 124ot subdivision and he thinks there are a few questions that were asked and he
doesn’t know if there is a real easy answer. But, the one of how to connect Yamamoto and Sugino
through the Buerger piece, if you were to walk from Yamamoto on the future road south to Sugino, you
are sitting on Yamamoto about this high (pointing out visually) and then all of the sudden the terrain gets
down here to Sugino. So what we are trying to do, as well as the City, is to make some type of
reasonable connection there. What happened was there had to be some cut and fill and the fill is really
going into that lower area to allow the transition into Sugino. For us, we would have rather cul-de-saced
the road and not have any road taken up, but understanding that the Zone 20 Specific Plan was trying to
provide circulation throughout some of those neighborhoods, we ended up with that configuration. Maybe
defending a little bit of the City and the Zone 20 Specific Plan, right now along Black Rail-he thinks they
have done a good job and have tried to minimize the access points into these neighborhoods which does
start to benefit the consistency of design and what is going on. We don’t have a road and an entrance for
everyone of these little neighborhoods, but we start to minimize that along Black Rail. As you can see
there are only two before you get up to Hadley--Carnation. Other than that, that is our project before you.
We don’t have a builder right now that we have put into escrow. There has been some interest, but right
now our task at hand was to try to get the entitlements and get the property owner to this point and then
move on to the second phase.
Chairperson Segall asked if there are any questions. Seeing there was none, he Opened the Public
Testimony. Seeing there was no one, he Closed Public Testimony.
Mr. Wayne, for the record, wanted to point out on the errata sheet, the second item which talks about the
trail-if you look at the Tentative Map exhibit itself, it does not show a trail on it. The trail is shown on the
Landscape Exhibit and for everybody’s information, the Tentative Map is amalgamation of all of those
Planning Commission Minutes February 21,200l Page 11
exhibits, so it is referenced in the Resolution. Even though it is not specifically on that first sheet, that is
the Tentative Map that is on the Landscape Plan and so it is part of the Tentative Map exhibits. If there
are any question about that or if the applicant had any question about that, that is the intent to require the
dedication of that easement.
Chairperson Segall asked Mr. Wayne if they needed any further wording in this?
Mr. Wayne replied he didn’t think so at this point.
DISCUSSION
None
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Trigas and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4910, 4911, 4912, 4913, 4914, and 4915
recommending approval of a Negative Declaration, ZC 99-05, LCPA 99-03, CT
99-10, HDP 99-08 and CDP 99-17 based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein and including the errata sheet revising Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4913 to modify Condition No. 24 as submitted.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
6-O-O
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Trigas, Nielsen, Heineman, Baker, Compas
None
None
Chairperson Segall closed the Public Hearing
City of Carlsbad
Records Management Department
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of approval for a Negative Declaration,
Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside
Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit for 12 single-family lots and one
open space lot on a 5.04 acre parcel.
LOCATION: This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located east of
Black Rail Road between Poinsettia Lane and Aviara Parkway and within the
boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: 215-040-08
APPLICANT : WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING
2385 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE, SUITE 107
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
A public hearing on the above-proposed project will be held by the Carlsbad City
Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on
Tuesday, April 3, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. Persons are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may
have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendation
given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the staff report
will be available on or after March 30, 2001.
If you have any questions or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact
Anne Hysong at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday
7:30 a.m. to 530 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., at 1635 Faraday Avenue,
Carlsbad, California 92008 (760) 602-4622.
APPEALS
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Zone Change, Local Coastal
Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Coastal
Development Permit, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and
is very short. If you challenge the Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment,
Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit in
court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
of Carlsbad prior to the public hearing.
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 * (760) 434-2808 a9
COASTAL COMMISSION APPEALABLE PROJECT: This site is not located within
the Coastal Zone Appealable
Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed
with the Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission
has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be
notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude.
The San Diego Office of the Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive,
Suite 103, San Diego, California 92108-4402.
CASE FILE: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03KT 99-l O/HDP 99-08KDP 99-l 7
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
PUBLISH: WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21,200l
_--._ f?ALoM,-- ce’ RD / SmE -1~- - .-i- ;- w ..-..a ,- -2 - ‘_
BUERGER *
;r c
L
1
\
4
c
\
b 1
\
l
ZC 999OULCPA 99903lCT 99-l 0
HDP 99=08/CDP 99-l 7
FILE COPY City of Carlsbad
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: May 12,1999
DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of approval for a Negative Declaration, Zone Change,
Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit,
and Coastal Development Permit for 12 single-family lots and one open space lot on a
5.04 acre parcel.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located east of Black Rail Road
between Poinsettia Lane and Aviara Parkway and within the boundaries of the Zone 20
Specific Plan and Local Facilities Management Plan.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
215-040-08
APPLICANT:
Western Pacific Housing
2385 Camino Vida Roble, Ste. 107
Carlsbad, CA 92008
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Planning Commission in the
Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on at 6:00 p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be
described and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a
decision. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after 01.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Anne
Hysong at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 500 p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008,
(760) 602-4622.
. . .
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 - www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @
APPEALS
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Zone Change, Local Coastal Program
Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Coastal Development
Permit, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you
challenge the Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside
Development Permit, and Coastal Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad prior to the public hearing.
Appeals to the City Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council,
appeals must. be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the
Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
cl This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
lxl This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the
Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a
Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, California
921084402.
CASE FILE: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-l O/HDP 99-081CDP 99-17
CASE NAME: BUERGER SUBDIVISION
PUBLISH: FEBRUARY 82001
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 510?-
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST CITY OF ENCINITAS CITY OF SAN MARCOS
801 PINE AVE 505 S VULCAN AVE 1 CIVIC CENTER DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008 ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
SD COUNTY PLANNING CITY OF OCEANSIDE
STE B 300 NORTH COAST HWY
5201 RUFFIN RD OCEANSIDE CA 92054
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST SANDAG
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR STE 800
SAN DIEGO CA 92123 401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
STE 50
330 GOLDENSHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE CA COASTAL COMMISSION
2730 LOKER AVE WEST STE 103
CARLSBAD CA 92008 7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY
SERVICES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
ANNE HYSONG
Address La bets Laser 5160@
Smooth Feed SheetsT” Use tempiate Fo; ! 12:
MUROYO FAMILY TRUST 05-18-98 6521 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92009
BREHM AVIARA GROUP LLC
5770 OBERLIN DR. SAN DIEGO, CA 92121
DORIS YAMAMOTO P.O. BOX 372 LAFAYE-ITE, CA 94549
YUJIRO YAMAMOTO 1201 VIA IA JOLLA SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92672
MS. LINDA SUGINE-SHIMOKAJI 1 MAHOGANY RUN COT0 DE CAZA, CA 92679
WILLIAM & ANITA BUERGER
4668 CYRUS WAY OCEANSIDE CA 92056
. .._.. ,_.. r. . . .-_ ._ -. -._.. ~. . . . . . . .- _ -..._- ._ -._ . _. ., _. c-. . .._. *...... -. . .
CALTRANS DISTRICT 11
BILL FIGGE
MAIL ST 50
P 0 BOX 85406
SAN DIEGO CA 92186-5406
REG WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD
STACEY BACZKOWSKI
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN WESTERN REG BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8 RONALD M JAEGER
PO BOX 92007 2800 COTTAGE WAY LOS ANGELES CA 90009 SACRAMENTO CA 95825
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
PATRICIA W NEAL DEPUTY SEC HOUSING STE 103
STE 2450 7575 METROPOLITAN DR
980 NINTH ST SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK SUPERINTENDENT
1901 SPINNAKER DR SAN BUENA VENTURA CA 93001
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
CHAIRMAN
722 JACKSON PL NW
WASHINGTON DC 20006
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
STE 1100
1330 BROADWAY OAKLAND CA 94612
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
GARY RESOURCE CONSER
STE 102
2121-C SECOND ST DAVIS CA 95616
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LOS ANGELES DIST ENGINEER
PO BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES CA 90053
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
STE 400
611 RYAN PLAZA DR
ARLINGTON TX 7601 l-4005
DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIV
P 0 BOX 944246 SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIR COORD
P 0 BOX 944246 SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
RM 700
IIOWESTAST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
DEPARTMENTOFDEFENSE
COMMANDANT, 1 ITH NAVAL DIST, DIST CIVIL
ENGR
SAN DIEGO CA 92132
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIR
STE 350
901 MARKET ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD & AGRICULTURE
STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
RM 100 1220 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVE
DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REG ADMIN
450 GOLDEN GATE AV SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RM 5504
1120NST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51ti;;’
ENERGY RESOURCES, CONSERVATION &
DEVELOPMENT COMM
CHUCK NAJARIAN
1516 NINTH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
OFFICE OF PLANNING & RESEARCH
OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
PO BOX 3044
SACRAMENTO CA 93044
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION &
DEVMT COMMISSION
BILL TRAVIS
STE 2600
50 CALIFORNIA ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 9411 I-4704
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
STE 1005
100 HOWE AV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
U S BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
LOWER COLORADO REG
PO BOX 427
‘BOULDER CO 89005
AVERY@ Shipping Labels
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, SPR
350 GOLDEN SHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
NATIONAL OCEANIC &ATMOSPHERIC
ADMIN OCRM,55MC4
N/ORM - 3
1305 EAST-WEST HWY
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
SO REGION TECHNICAL SERVICES
JOHN WALSTROM 8885 RIO SAN DIEGO DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
U S BUREAU OF LAND MGMT
STE RM WI 834
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
U S BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
MID-PACIFIC REGION
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
Laser 5163@
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template fo: 51Ssi
U S FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
STE W-2605
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-l 888
USDA - RURAL DEVLOPMENT
DEPT 4169
430 ST
DAVIS CA 95616
CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCIES
STE 1311
1416 9TH ST SACRAMENTO CA 95814
REG WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD
REGION (9) SAN DIEGO
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
Shipping Labels
U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
LILY ALYEA
STE 702
333 MARKET ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-2197
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BD
PO BOX 100
SACRAMENTO CA 95801
SANDAG-LAND USE COMMISS
JACK KOERPER
STE 800
401 “B” STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
Laser 5163@
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
JAN SOBEL
5620 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
REG WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD
STACEY BACZKOWSKI
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
CITY OF ENCINITAS
COM DEV DEPT 505 S VULCAN AV
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SANDAG-EXEC DIRECTOR
KENNETH E SULZER
STE 800
1 ST INT’L PLAZA 401 “B” ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
GUY MOORE JR
6503 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ANTHONY & DICKY BONS
25709 HILLCREST AV
ESCONDIDO CA 92026-8650
U S FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
JOHN MARTIN
2730 LOKER AV WEST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338 CARLSBAD CA 92018-I 338
SIERRA CLUB S D CHAPTER
CRAIG ADAMS
3820 RAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LESLIE ESPOSITO
1893 AMELFI DRIVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CYRIL/MARY GIBSON
12142 ARGYLE DRIVE
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702
LANIKAI LANE PARK
SHARP SPACE 3
6550 PONTO DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SPIERS ENTERPRISES
DWIGHT SPIERS
STE 139
23 CORPORATE PLAZA
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
MARY GRIGGS
STE 100 S
100 HOWE AV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
PERRY A LAMB
890 MERE POINT ROAD
BRUNSWICK ME 04011
LAKESHORE GARDENS
BILL MCLEAN
7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOHN LAMB
1446 DEVLIN DRIVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90069
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
KIM SEIBLY
P 0 BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112
COUNTY OF SD SUPERVISOR BILL HORN
ART DANELL
RM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
S D CO PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT
JAON VOKAC STE B-5
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CRA PRESIDENT
LEE ANDERSON
5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FLOYD ASHBY
416 LA COSTA AV ENCINITAS CA 92024
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
RICHARD RETECKI
STE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DALE/DONNA SCHREIBER
7163 ARGONAURA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009
GEORGE BOLTON
6583 BLACKRAIL ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
Smooth Feed SheetsTM ;z ~p-j~‘~‘:’ F:?- ; - -..A.. tc -_
MUROYO FAMILY TRUST 05-l 8-98 8521 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92009
BREHM AVIARA GROUP LLC 5nO OBERLIN DR. SAN DIEGO, CA 92121
DORIS YAMAMOTO P.O. BOX 372 lAFAYElTE, CA 94649
YUJIRO YAMAMOTO 1201 VIA LA JOLLA SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92672
MS. LINDA SUGINE-SHIMOKAJI 1 MAHOGANY RUN COT0 DE CAZA, CA 92679