Loading...
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