HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-09; City Council; 17303; North Park at La CostaAB# 17,303 TITLE:
NORTH PARK AT LA COSTA
SDP 02-1 OlPUD 02-1 3 MTG. 9-9-03
DEPT. PLN W-
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
CITYMGR %
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 2003-235 , APPROVING a Site Develop-
ment Plan 02-10 and Planned Unit Development Permit 02-13 as recommended for adoption and
approval by the Planning Commission.
Project application(s) Administrative Reviewed by and
Final at Planning Ap p rova Is
To be Reviewed -
Final at Council
CT 02-25
SDP 02-10
PUD 02-13
On June 18, 2003, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the Northpark at La
Costa residential project located on 1.55 acres at the Northwest corner of Levante Street and La
Costa Avenue. This project includes 12 two-story detached Single Family units and two Second
Dwelling Units along a private driveway.
Commission
X
X
X
The project applicant is requesting to satisfy the projects inclusionary housing requirement through
the construction of two Second Dwelling Units. Pursuant to Section 21.85.070(A) of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, projects proposing to satisfy their inclusionary housing through the development of
Second Dwelling Units rather than the construction of new inclusionary housing require City Council
approval. Accordingly, the project's Site Development Plan (SDP 02-1 0) and Planned Unit
Development (PUD 02-1 3) permits are before the City Council for approval of this request. On June
18, 2003, the Planning Commission approved the tentative map (CT 02-25) for the project and
recommended approval of SDP 02-1 0 and PUD 02-1 3.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Section 15332(a) of CEQA exemptions (Class 32) exempts the construction of projects
characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described as follow: (a) the project is
consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as
well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; (b) the proposed development occurs
within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses;
(c) the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; (d) approval
of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water
quality; and (e) the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All required improvements will be funded by the developer. The Facility Financing Section of the
Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan lists the financing techniques being used to guarantee the
public facilities needed to serve development within Zone 6.
I
17,303 PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO.
Facilities Zone
Local Facilities Management Plan
Growth Control Point
Net Density
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS:
6
6
11.5
9.03 du/ac
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 2003-235
2. Location Map
3.
4.
5.
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5423 and 5524
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated June 18, 2003
Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated June 18, 2003.
1
L
1
c
I
E
5
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-235
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MENT PLAN AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
PROJECT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
LEVANTE STREET AND LA COSTA AVENUE IN THE
SOUTHEAST QUADRANT.
CASE NAME: NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE DEVELOP-
FOR THE NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA, SINGLE-FAMILY
CASE NO.: SDP 02-1O/PUD 02-13
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission did, on June 18, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider a Site Development Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 9th day of
SEPTEMBER , 2003, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Site
Development Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit, and at the time received
recommendations, objections, protests, comments of all persons interested in or opposed to
SDP 02-1 O/PUD 02-1 3; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of
Site Development Plan SDP 02-10 and Planned Unit Development Permit PUD 02-13 is
approved by the City Council and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission
contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5423 and 5424, on file with the City Clerk
and made a part hereof by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council.
The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial
Review” shall apply:
“NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been
made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code 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
Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in
the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the date
on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the
decision becomes final a request for the record of the deposit in an
amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is
extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the
record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney
of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the
record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of
Carlsbad, I200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA. 92008."
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 9th day of SEPTEMBER , 2003, by
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall, Packard
NOES: None
CLAUDEX. LEWIS, Mayof '
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Resolution No. 2003-235
-2-
the
4
EXHIBIT 2
SITE
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
SDP 02-lO/PUD 02-13
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
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5423
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWELVE RESIDENTIAL
LOTS, ONE OPEN SPACE LOT, AND ONE PRIVATE STREET
FAMILY HOMES AND TO CONSTRUCT TWO SECOND
DWELLING UNITS TO MEET THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
REQUIREMENT OR THE OPTION TO PURCHASE TWO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS WITHIN THE VILLA LOMA
DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF LEVANTE STREET BETWEEN
LA COSTA AVENUE AND CENTELLA STREET IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 6.
CASE NAME:
APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDP 02-10 TO
LOT TO ACCOMMODATE TWELVE DETACHED SINGLE-
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
CASE NO.: SDP 02-10
WHEREAS, Touchstone Communities, “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Levante 12, LLC, “Owner,”
described as
Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, October 18,1972
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development
Plan as shown on Exhibits “A” - “M” dated June 18,2003, on file in the Planning Department,
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA - SDP 02-10 as provided by Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 18th day of June, 2003, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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 Site Development Plan.
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 Planning
Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of NORTHPARK AT LA
COSTA - SDP 02-10, based on the following findings and subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, will
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or
traffic circulation, in that a) the site can easily accommodate the proposed twelve
detached single-family homes while complying with all of the applicable City
standards for the development; b) the project is consistent and compatible with the
existing surrounding single-family and multi-family residential developments, in
scale and design; c) the vacant site has been previously graded and devoid of any
significant or sensitive vegetation; d) the proposed density of 9.03 dwelling units per
acre is consistent with the Residential Medium High Land Use designation; e) the
project will provide housing affordable to lower income households on site or off
site; f) the project is consistent with the exterior and interior noise standards; and,
g) the additional 120 Average Daily Trips (ADT) generated by the project can be
accommodated by Levante Street and La Costa Avenue (local street and secondary
arterial) serving the project site.
2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in
that the site can accommodate the proposed 12-single family homes while providing
all required setbacks, recreation space, guest parking and the project complies with
all City Ordinances and standards, including the Levante Street Development
Standards and Design Guidelines and the Planned Development Ordinance, without
the need for a variance to any of the standards.
3. That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust
the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that the project site will be surrounded by a solid wall or
fence; will provide common landscaping along the La Costa Avenue frontage; the
proposed development meets all applicable setbacks of the underlying zone and the
7 PC RES0 NO. 5423 -2-
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
Levante Street Development Standards and Design Guidelines; and the project
architecture is compatible with the surrounding single-family and multi-family
residential uses as well as the guidelines of City Council Policy No. 44 and the
Levante Street Design Guidelines.
4. That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the project is served by La Costa Avenue, a
secondary arterial, and Levante Street, a local street, which have been designed to
accommodate the 120 ADT generated by the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to grading permit
or final map whichever occurs first.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
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 modi@ 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 Site Development Plan.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the SDP 02-10 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.
Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36,” mylar
copy of the Site Development Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final
decision making body.
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.
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
B PC RES0 NO. 5423 -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
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
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 Site Development Pian, (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. This obligation survives until
all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s approval is not
validated.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-25 and PUD 02-13 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5422 and
5424 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
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 provide and
deed restrict two (2) Second Dwelling Units as affordable to lower-income households
for 55 years, in accordance with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, or the option to purchase two affordable housing credits
within the Villa Loma apartment project, located south of Palomar Airport Road and west
of El Camino Real. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the
Planning Director no later than 60 days prior to the request to final the map. The
recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest.
Developer shall construct the required inclusionary units concurrent with the project’s
market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City and the
Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate schedule for
development.
Prior to building permit issuance, the floor plan for lot 3 shall be reversed from as
shown on the approved site development plan.
Prior to building permit issuance, the rear elevations for lots 1-7 shall be varied
architecturally to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
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 feedexactions. 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
9 PC RES0 NO. 5423 -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
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 feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of June 2003, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Heineman, Montgomery,
Segall, and White
NOES: Commissioners Dominguez and Whitton
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
t
R, Chairperson
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HO&MILL&R
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5423 -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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5424
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PUD
RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE OPEN SPACE LOT, AND ONE
PRIVATE STREET LOT TO ACCOMMODATE TWELVE
TWO SECOND DWELLING UNITS TO MEET THE
TO PURCHASE TWO AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS
WITHIN THE VILLA LOMA DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF
LEVANTE STREET BETWEEN LA COSTA AVENUE AND
CENTELLA STREET IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 6.
CASE NAME:
02-13 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWELVE
DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND TO CONSTRUCT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING RE-QUIREMENT OR THE OPTION
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
CASE NO.: PUD 02-13
WHEREAS, Touchstone Communities, “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Levante 12, LLC, “Owner,”
described as
Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, October 18,1972
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Planned Unit
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “M” dated June 18, 2003, on file in the
Planning Department, NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA - PUD 02-13 as provided by Chapter
21.45/2 1.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 18th day of June, 2003, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; 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, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Planned Unit Development Permit.
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
13, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA - PUD 02-
FindinPs:
1. That the granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent with the
Municipal Code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all
adopted plans of the City and other governmental agencies, in that the proposed project
complies with the requirements of the RD-M and Qualified Development Overlay
zones, and all applicable development standards and design criteria of the Planned
Development Ordinance and Specific Plan 208 and that the property is designated
for residential development. The project’s density of 9.03 du/acre is consistent with
the Residential Medium-High (RMH) (8 - 15 du/ac) land use designation, and the
project is consistent with the Housing Element and the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance as the developer is constructing two second dwelling units or purchasing
off site credit to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement.
2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the long-term general well-being of the
neighborhood and the community, in that the 12-unit residential planned development
provides residential housing which is compatible with the surrounding development
of residential planned developments, condominium projects and single family units;
and the project is consistent with the requirements of the Planned Development
Ordinance and Levante Street Development Standards and Design Guidelines.
3. That such use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons
residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity, in that the proposed use is a residential use of a scale similar to surrounding
residential uses, the project is consistent with the RMH General Plan and RD-M
zoning designations and the proposed project is conditioned to conform to all design
and development standards required by Specific Plan 208 and the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and all necessary improvements will be provided concurrent with
the development of the project.
PC RES0 NO. 5424 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. That the proposed Planned Development meets all of the minimum development
standards set forth in Chapter 21.45.090, the design criteria set forth in Section 21.45.080.
and has been designed in accordance with the concepts contained in the Design
Guidelines Manual, in that no deviations or modifications from the development
standards of Chapter 21.45 are proposed. The project satisfies all applicable
requirements for setbacks, lot sizes, lot coverage, resident and guest parking, private
and common recreation areas, and is designed to be compatible with surrounding
developments and to comply with the applicable architectural guidelines.
5. That the proposed project is designed to be sensitive to and blend in with the natural
topography of the site, and maintains and enhances significant natural resources on the
site, in that the site is a previously graded, mostly level infill lot and there are no
significant natural resources located on the site and the proposed grading
substantially follows the existing site topography.
6. That the proposed project’s design and density of the developed portion of the site is
compatible with surrounding development and does not create a disharmonious or
disruptive element to the neighborhood, in that the proposed project consists of small
lot, detached single-family residences adjacent to attached multi-family residences to
the west, and detached single-family residences to the north and east, and is
consistent with the purpose and intent of Specific Plan 208, thus maintaining
compatibility with all surrounding developments.
7. That the project’s circulation system is designed to be efficient and well integrated with
the project and does not dominate the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to grading permit
or final map whichever occurs first.
1. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-25 and SDP 02-10 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5422 and
5423 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
2. 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 Qr a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Planned Unit Development.
3. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Planned Unit Development documents, as necessary to make
them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project.
-3- 13 PC RES0 NO. 5424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed
development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
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.
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 Planned Unit Development,
(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.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to provide
school facilities.
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.
No attached or detached structure including but not limited to patio covers, trellises,
decks, balconies, sheds and/or similar structures may be constructed within 15 feet
of the rear property line for lots 1 - 7 pursuant to Specific Plan 208.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in
substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the
Directors of Community Development and Planning.
Prior to occupancy of the first dwelling unit the Developer shall provide all required
passive and active recreational areas per the approved plans, including landscaping and
recreational facilities.
l4 PC RES0 NO. 5424 -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
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 feedexactions. 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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of June, 2003, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Heineman, Montgomery,
Segall, and White
NOES: Commissioners Dominguez and Whitton
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
D
R\, Chairperson
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLkMILfER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5424 -5-
EXHIBIT 4
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
P.C. AGENDA OF: June 18,2003
ItemNo. @)
Application complete date: February 2,2003
Project Planner: Greg Fisher
Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle
SUBJECT: CT 02-25/SDP 02-1O/PUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA - Request
for approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan and Planned Unit
Development Permit to allow the development of a 14-lot subdivision consisting
of 12 single-family residential lots, one open space lot, and one private driveway
lot to accommodate 12 detached single-family dwellings plus two second
dwelling units on property generally located on the north side of Levante Street
between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street in Local Facilities Management
Zone 6.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5422
APPROVING CT 02-25, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5423 and 5424
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of SDP 02-10 and PUD 02-13, based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
The applicant proposes to consolidate and develop two vacant lots (totaling 1.55 acres) into a 14-
lot single-family subdivision consisting of 12 two-story detached single-family dwellings and
two attached second dwelling units sited along a 24’ wide private driveway with common open
space and guest parking on an infill site located at the northwest comer of the intersection of
Levante Street and La Costa Avenue. Access to the project will be taken off of Levante Street
via a private driveway. The private driveway will provide direct access to resident garages and
guest parking spaces.
The development of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) also requires the processing and
approval of a Tentative Tract Map (CT) and a Site Development Plan (SDP) due to its Qualified
Development Overlay Zone designation (Q).
The project’s proposed density of 9.03 dwelling units per acre is below the 11.5 dwelling units
per acre allowed per the Growth Management Control Point for the property’s Residential
Medium High (RMH) General Plan designation. As designed and conditioned, the project is in
compliance with the Specific Plan 208 (SP 208) - Levante Street Development Standards and
Design Guidelines, Planned Development Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and relevant
zoning regulations of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The project also meets or exceeds all of the
criteria set out by City Council Policy 44 (Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines) and
City Council Policy 66 (Livable Neighborhoods). The proposed project has been determined not
CT 02-25/SDP 02-10/PUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
Page 2
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. The project conforms to all applicable
standards, there are no outstanding project issues, and findings can be made for the approval of
the project.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The 1.55-acre project site is rectangular in shape and is located along the north side of Levante
Street between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street. The pre-graded site is ckently vacant and
devoid of any significant or sensitive vegetation. The project has frontage on Levante Street and
La Costa Avenue. These two streets are improved to their ultimate public right-of-way width and
contain curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. There are existing utilities in the public right-of-way with
service extensions to the property. Minimal grading will be necessary (1,500 cdyds cut and
3,800 cdyds fill) to reshape the two lots into the proposed 14-lot subdivision.
The site has a General Plan Land Use designation of RMH (8 - 15 ddac) with a growth control
point, which allows 11.5 units per acre. It is zoned RD-M-Q and is located within Specific Plan
208 (Levante Street Development standards and Design Guidelines).
The purpose and intent of SP 208 is to establish development standards to ensure that future
multi-family residential development on the property is designed to be attractive, harmonious,
and architecturally compatible with the existing lower density single-family neighborhoods that
are located to the north of the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan development standards are
intended to provide a transition from the higher-density multi-family land use located to the east
and west.
The proposed project includes 12 single-family homes (ranging from 2,782 square feet to 2,856
square feet in area) on individual lots (ranging from 4,025 to 4,819 square feet in area) that are
double loaded along a 24’ wide private driveway, which is accessed off of Levante Street. As
shown on Exhibit “A” - “M,” proposed lots 8-12 front to Levante Street while lots 1-7 front to
the internal private driveway. The private driveway has been designed with enhanced paving
treatments. The project includes a landscaped common passive recreation lot adjacent to La
Costa Avenue. Required guest parking will include four spaces located at the east end of the
project adjacent to the common recreation area and two spaces along the project entrance
driveway. Visitors will also have convenient access to public parking located along Levante
Street.
All 12 units will be two stories (maximum 26 feet, 11 inches) in height. The project will feature
a variety of architectural styles consisting of tile roofs, stucco exteriors with wrought iron
accents. Porches, courtyards, window treatments, wood roll up garage doors and various facades
will create interesting architectural design elements. Each house includes a private rear or side
yard area.
The surrounding development consists of an attached multi-family condominium project to the
west, single-family dwellings to the north, detached condominiums to the east and a mostly
undeveloped lot to the south. Fire Station No. 6 is currently occupying a small portion of this
undeveloped property on a temporary basis. Surrounding properties within the immediate
/7
CT 02-25/SDP 02-10PUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
Pane 3
ELEMENT
neighborhood have already been developed with a variety of residential uses, including older
single-family residences, newer single family, two-family and multi-family projects.
USE, CLASSIFICATION, PROPOSED USES &
GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR IMPROVEMENTS
IV. ANALYSIS
Land Use
The project is subject to the following plans, ordinances and standards:
PROGRAM
Site is designated for 12 single-family homes at a
A.
B. Specific Plan 208;
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
General Plan RMH (Residential Medium High) Land Use Designation;
Planned Development Ordinance (CMC 21.45);
Qualified Development Overlay Zone (Q) (CMC 21.06);
Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the CMC);
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC 21 35); and
Growth Management Ordinance (LFMP Zone 1).
Residential Medium High at 8
to 15 ddac.
This recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The project’s compliance with each of
the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. As previously discussed, the
project is located within SP 208 (Levante Street Development Standards and Design Guidelines).
All Specific Plan development standards that are more restrictive than the underlying RD-M zone
or PUD Ordinance take precedence. When a development standard is not covered in the Specific
Plan, the underlying zone/PUD Ordinance shall take precedence.
density of 9.03 ddac.
A. General Plan
The General Plan Land Use designation for the property is RMH. The RMH designation allows
residential development at a density range of 8 - 15 units with a growth control point of 11.5
units per acre. The project’s proposed density of 9.03 ddac is below the Growth Management
Control Point density (1 1.5 ddac) used for the purpose of calculating the City’s compliance with
Government Code Section 65584. However, consistent with Program 3.8 of the City’s certified
Housing Element, all of the dwelling units, which were anticipated toward achieving the City’s
share of the regional housing need that are not utilized by developers in approved projects, are
deposited in the City’s Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. These excess dwelling units are available
for allocation to other projects. Accordingly, there is no net loss of residential unit capacity and
there are adequate properties identified in the Housing Element allowing residential development
with a unit capacity, including second dwelling units, adequate to satisfy the City’s share of the
regional housing need. The project complies with all elements of the General Plan as outlined in
the table below:
COMPLY?
18
CT 02-25/SDP 02-10PUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
ELEMENT
Housing
Open Space &
Conservation
Noise
Circulation
GENERAL PLAN CON
USE, CLASSIFICATION,
GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR
PROGRAM
Provision of affordable
housing.
Minimize environmental
impacts to sensitive resources
within the City.
Utilize Best Management
Practices for control of storm
water and to protect water
quality.
Residential exterior noise
standard of 60 CNEL and
interior noise standard of 45
CNEL.
Require new development to
construct roadway
improvements needed to serve
proposed developm2nt.
LIANCE, CONTINUED
PROPOSED USES &
IMPROVEMENTS
The developer will be
constructing two rent restricted
Second Dwelling Units as part
of the Droiect.
Project site has nosignificant
native vegetation or habitat
value and no known
archaeological or
paleontological resources.
Project will conform to all
NPDES requirements and
provide a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan
The project is consistent with
the residential exterior and
interior noise standards.
(SWPPP) .
All public facilities including
curb, gutter and sidewalk.exist
along the property frontage.
COMPLY?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
B. Levante Street Specific Plan 208
The proposed project meets the intent and purpose of SP 208 in that the bulk and scale of the
proposed two-story detached single-family structures will be compatible with the surrounding
residential development. The proposed small lot, single-family residential land use will provide
an appropriate transition between the standard single-family land uses (R-1-7,500) to the north
and the higher density multi-family residential land uses (RD-M/P-C) to the east and west. A 15-
foot building setback and decorative five-foot fence/wall along the northern property line will
provide an adequate buffer between this project and the existing single-family homes to the
north. The project will provide adequate on-site parking and circulation to serve the needs of the
residents and their guests, and it will not impact the availability of offsite street parking.
The 12-unit detached single-family project meets or exceeds the development standards of
Specific Plan 208 as outlined in the table below:
CT 02-25/SDP 02-1OPUD 02-13 -NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
Page 5
Specific Plan 21
Standard
Lot Coverage
Setbacks
Building Height
Guest Parking
I Development Standards Cor
Required/Allowed
50%
Front (lots 8-15) 15 feet
Street Side 30 feet
Side Yard 5 feet
Rear (lots 1-7) 15 feet
Balconies & Second Story
Decks (lots 1-7) 15 feet
30 feet
6 on-site spaces
iliance Table
Proposed
<50%
15 feet
30 feet
5 feet
15 feet
15 feet
(See Planned Development
compliance table for all
other reauired setbacks)
24 to 27 feet in height
6 spaces
The project has been designed to comply with the Specific Plan’s general design standards, and
by doing so has created an aesthetically pleasing and compatible project with the surrounding
single-family and multi-family residential development. In summary, the project complies with
the architectural design standards as follows: 1) the project is visually interesting as the
individual units have been designed with varied and recessed entryway treatments; 2) all of the
plans exhibit a variety of roof ridges and roof heights; 3) the units have been designed with a
variety of faqade treatments including decorative roll-up wood garage doors to create a variety
and visual interest along Levante Street and the private driveway; 4) further articulation of
building faqades and roof planes have been accomplished by providing roof overhangs,
architectural projections, building face trim and recessed doors; and 5) there are a variety of
articulated shaped windows with contrasting moldings and texture creating further visual interest
to the building elevations. Overall, the project’s architecture complements the surrounding
development and is compatible with the surrounding residential land uses.
C. Planned Development Regulations
The project is being developed as a small-lot, single-family planned development and is subject
to the regulations and standards contained in the Planned Development Ordinance (PD). The
underlying RD-M zone (Chapter 21.24 of the CMC) permits single-family products as proposed.
In general, the City’s PD Ordinance regulations (Chapter 21.45 of the CMC) supersede the
development standards contained within the RD-M zone. However, where the PD regulations
are silent, the RD-M zone is in effect. The project is also subject to the development standards of
SP 208 as previously discussed. There are incidents where these development standards
supersede both the RD-M zone and the PD ordinance. Listed in the table below are the PD
standards that are relevant to the project not already discussed in the SP 208 discussion.
The proposed 12-unit’ small lot detached single family project meets or exceeds the requirements
of the Planned Development regulations as outlined in the table below:
CT 02-25/SDP 02-10PUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
Page 6
Planned DeveloDment ComDliance
Standard
Lot Sizes
Lot Width
Setbacks
Resident Parking
Architectural Design
Elements
Recreation Space (Private)
Community Recreation Space
Storage &ace
Private Driveway
RV Storage
Reauired/Allowed
3,500 square feet
40 feet
Front Yard (from Levante
Street, lots 8-12) - 15 feet
From Private Driveway:
Garage 5 feet
Residence 8 feet
Rear (lots 8-12) 5 feet
2-car garage per unit
Must comply with City
Council Policy 44
Neighborhood Architectural
Design Guidelines
18’ x 18’ of useable rear yard
area
15 ’ x 15 ’ of useable side yard
area for units with alley-
loaded garage (lots 1-8)
200 square feet of centralized
community recreational space
per unit. (12 x 200 = 2,400
square feet)
392 cubic feet Der unit
Minimum 24 feet wide
Not required for project with
less than 25 units
ProDosed
4,025 to 4,819 square feet
44.44 to 52 feet
15 feet
Garages and Residences are
setback a minimum of 12
feet
5 feet
2 car garage per unit
Complies (See Below)
Provided for each unit
Provided for each unit
A common area passive
park of not less than 2,400
square feet provided
398 to 482 cubic feet
24 feet wide
N/A
City Council Policy 44 Architectural Guideline Compliance
The City Council, via Policy 44 (Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines), established
special architectural guidelines. Similar to the Architectural Standards of SP 208, these
guidelines require the architecture to be enhanced on the project units. The proposed 12-unit,
small lot detached single family project complies with the requirements of City Council Policy
44 in that the units include single story building edges, separate building planes on all elevations,
varied roof heights, front porches, visible entry ways, recessed doors and windows and a variety
of architectural design elements such as varied window shapes, columns, exterior wood
elements, varied garage door and entry treatments, window and door lintels and accent materials
including brick, stone and shingles.
CT 02-25/SDP 02- 1 OPUD 02-1 3 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
D. Qualified Development Overlay Zone
The subject property is zoned Residential Density Multiple Zone with the Qualified
Development Overlay Zone (RD-M-Q). These lots are located adjacent to properties zoned
single-family residential (R- 1) and developed with single-family homes. The Q Overlay Zone on
the subject property requires the processing of a Site Development Plan to ensure compliance
with the purpose and intent of SP 208.
The 12-unit, small lot detached single-family project meets the required four findings for the
Qualified Development Overlay Zone as outlined below:
1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, will
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or
traffic circulation, in that a) the site can easily accommodate the proposed twelve
detached single family homes while complying with all of the applicable City standards
for the development; b) the project is consistent and compatible with the existing
surrounding single-family and multi-family residential developments, in scale and design;
c) the vacant site has been previously graded and devoid of any significant or sensitive
vegetation; d) the proposed density of 9.03 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the
Residential Medium High Land Use designation; e) the project will provide housing
affordable to lower income households on site; f) the project is consistent with the
exterior and interior noise standards; and, g) the additional 120 traffic trips generated by
the project can be accommodated by Levante Street and La Costa Avenue (local street
and secondary arterial) serving the project site.
2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in
that the site can accommodate the proposed twelve single family homes while providing
all required setbacks, recreation space, guest parking and the project complies with all
City Ordinances and standards, including the Levante Street Development Standards and
Design Guidelines and the PD Ordinance, without the need for a variance to any of the
standards.
3. That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust
the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that the project site will be surrounded by a solid wall or
fence; will provide common landscaping along the La Costa Avenue frontage; the
proposed development meets all applicable setbacks of the underlying zone and the
Levante Street Development Standards and Design Guidelines; and the project
architecture is compatible with the surrounding single-family and multi-family residential
uses as well as the guidelines of City Council Policy No. 44 and the Levante Street
Design Guidelines.
4. That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the project is served by La Costa Avenue, a
secondary arterial, and Levante Street, a local street, which have been designed to
accommodate the 120 Average Daily Trips (ADT) generated by the project.
CT 02-25/SDP 02- 1 O/PUD 02-1 3 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
STANDARD IMPACTS
Citv Administration 44.47 sa. fi.
E. Subdivision Ordinance
COMPLIANCE
Yes
The Engineering Department reviewed the proposed tentative map and concludes that the
subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s
Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code). No condition(s) will be
placed on the project regarding street infrastructure as all frontage improvements have already
been installed to City Standards. Access to the site will be from a private driveway off of
Levante Street. The proposed ample building setbacks will allow for adequate air circulation and
the opportunity for passive heating and cooling. All public facilities needed to serve the project
are or will be in place prior to, or concurrent with, development.
Library
Waste Water Treatment
F. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
23.73 sq. fi. Yes
12 EDU Yes
The proposed Northpark at La Costa development involves the creation of residential units
through a subdivision and, therefore, must provide its proportionate share of housing affordable
to lower-income households as specified in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 21.85
of the Zoning Ordinance). The inclusionary housing requirement for this project is two dwelling
units. The project proposes to construct two attached Second Dwellings Units to satis@ their
lower income inclusionary housing requirement. Pursuant to Section 21.85.070 of the
Inclusionary Ordinance, this request to satisfy inclusionary housing through the development of
two Second Dwelling Units requires the approval of the City Council. The rent restricted Second
Dwellings Units will be located on lots 8 and 12 and will be architecturally integrated into the
main dwelling unit. In the event that City Council does not approve the request to satisfy
inclusionary housing through the development of two Second Dwelling Units, the Housing and
Redevelopment Director is allowing the applicant the option to purchase affordable housing
credits within the Villa Loma apartment project, located south of Palomar Airport Road and west
of El Camino Real. Since the Villa Loma development is contiguous to the quadrant in the
which the market rate units are proposed, it can provide affordable housing credits for projects
within both the southwest and southeast quadrants, subject to approval of the Housing and
Redevelopment Director. By providing two second dwelling units or having the option to
purchase credits for units within Villa Loma, the Northpark at La Costa development is providing
its fair share of housing affordable to lower income households and, therefore, is consistent with
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
G. Growth Management
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 6 in the southeast
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 table below.
a3
CT 02-25ISDP 02- 1 OPUD 02- 13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
June 18,2003
Parks
Drainage
Circulation
Fire
Pane 9
.088 acre (3,833 sq ft) Yes
4.01 CFSiBatiquitos Basin Yes
120 ADT Yes
Station No. 6 Yes
STANDARD
Sewer Collection System
Water
~~~ I Open Space I o acres I N/A I
1 elementary
1 junior high
1 high school
IMPACTS COMPLIANCE
12 EDU Yes
2,640 GPD Yes
I Schools I San DieguitoEncinitas I Yes 1
The project is 5.8 units below the Growth Management Dwelling Unit allowance of 17.8
dwelling units for the subject property.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Section 15332(a) of CEQA exemptions (Class 32) exempts the construction of projects
characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described as follow: (a) the project is
consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as
well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; (b) the proposed development occurs
within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban
uses; (c) the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; (d)
approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality; and (e) the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and
public services. A Notice of Exemption will be filed by the Planning Director upon project
approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5422 (CT)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5423 (SDP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5424 (PUD)
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Disclosure Statement
Reduced Exhibits
Exhibit “A” - “M’ dated June 18,2003
GF:bd:mh
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: CT 02-25ISDP 02-10/PUD 02-13
CASE NAME: Northpark at La Costa
APPLICANT: Touchstone Communities
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 12 single-family detached homes and two second dwelling
units located along the north side of Levante Street between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street
in the southeast quadrant of the City.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego. State of California, according to the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the
Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, October 18, 1972.
APN: 223-170-21 & 22 Acres: 1.55 acres. Proposed No. of LotsNnits: 14 lotdl2 units
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: RMH-Residential Medium High
Density Allowed: 8 - 15 units per acre
Existing Zone: RDM-O
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning
Requirements)
Density Proposed: 9.03 du/ac
Proposed Zone: N/A
Zoning Land Use
Site RDM-Q Vacant
North R1-7500 Single-Family Residential
South RDM-Q Fire StationNacant
East Planned Community Residential (Condominium ownership)
West RDM-Q Multi-family (Condos)
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: EncinitadSan Diemito Water District: Olivenhain Sewer District: Leucadia
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 12
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 0 Negative Declaration, issued
0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other Notice of Exemption
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: CT 02-25lSDP 02-10PUD 02-13
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 6 GENERAL PLAN: RMH
ZONING: RDM-O
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Touchstone Communities
ADDRESS: 11668 Sardis Place. San Dieno, Ca 92131
PHONE NO.: 858-204-1342 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 223-170-21 & 22
QUANTITY OF LAND USEBEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 1.55 acres
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: Winter 2004
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
-~
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 44.47
Library: Demand in Square Footage = 23.73
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage = .088
Drainage: Demand in CFS = 4.01
12 EDU
IdentifL Drainage Basin = Batiquitos
Circulation: Demand in ADT = 120
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 6
Open Space: Acreage Provided = NIA
Schools: Elm=3.13. JHS=.864, HS=l.63 Total=5.624
Sewer: Demands in EDU 12 EDU
Identify Sub Basin = NIA
Water: Demand in GPD = 2,640
The project is 5.8 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
- City of Carlsbad
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownershp interests on all applications which will require
discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fiaternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below.
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL, names and addresses of persons having a financial
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a comorahon or UartnershiD, include the
names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned comoration, include the
names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.)
Person K‘SPIM G ARZA CorpPart 7bL(&STONC&MMUNInES ,LLc
Title Title MAN&EtZ? ~CWY 6MZR
Address Address \\US S&@ IS putclE.<p NW
INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE T” 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-
CA q21’3\
2. 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,
partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a
comoration or DartnershiD, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES,
PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-
owned cornoration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad. CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us 8
3. NON-PROFIT uKGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonmofit oraanization or a trust. 1st the
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profiflrust Non ProfitiTrust
Title Title
Address Address
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff.
Boards, Commissions, Co&ittees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? 0 Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
?o - I-02
Signade oy&plicant/date NANh&U
L€VhPJr€ I2,Ut TOU&STO~E LOMWW Ins, LCC
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Signature of ownedapplicant’s agent if applicablejdate
Pnnt or type name of owner/applicant’s agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 a8 Page 2 of 2
3; 8;
$9
n u z z+ a -I 11
I
30
FRONT ELEVATION 1A 1 B"=1 *e
i [I
t
FRONT ELEVATION 1 B 1/8"=1'-0"
FRONT ELEVATION 1C 1 B"rl'0"
33
FAMILY CTR. CPT V
n
COURTYARD mnc P
KITCHEN NOOK ns v
I DINING ROOM 1 I 1 m
LIVING ROOM wr V
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1A lW=l'-V
34
PM3
BEDRM. 3
CPT V
/I
M. BEDRM m 0
,
HALL CPTP
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1A 1/8%1'-0"
35
FRONT ELEVATION 2A 1/8"=1'4"
b
FRONT ELEVATION 28 1 /B"rl '-0"
36
FRONT ELEVATION 2C 1Bn=lse
37
PLANE 1
I
r
L
FAMILY CENTER
CPT W
OPT. BEDRM. 5
CPT
LIVING
CK W
PUK 1
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 2A 7 mw-r
38
c
BA.2 ns e
RAN3
1
M. BEDRM
CPT e
PLANE 2
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 2A lB"=l'-O"
39
7
FRONT ELEVATION 3A 1 B*=1'-oH
FRONT ELEVATION 38 lB"=1'4Y
I
FRONT ELEVATION 3C 1 fa”-l’-o“
------- 1 RAMI I I
FAMlLY CENTER
CPI P
3 CARTANDEM GA~AGE cayc -.
'\
P
'\\ ' 8. /'
LIVING me
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3A i w=i *-on
44
BA.2 no v
PLANE 3
SITTING M
M. BEDRM cm 9
PLANE 3
M D
9 I M. BEDRM cm
BEDRM. 2 CPT V
M 1 D
I
OPEN TO BELOW
BEDRM. 4 BEDRM. 3
FUNE 3
\ L
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 3A imiw-O"
43
1 IRI
I DI IYF 1 I IW
1
II u
FRONT ELEVATION 4A 1 la% 1 '#
.
RAM 1
FRONT ELEVATION 4B 1 law '-0"
I
PLANE 1
I
I 1CARGARAGE
I I I
I I
NOOK ns c K
FAMILY CENTER HE K
DINING
CPl P
LIVING CPl c
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 4A 1 w=1 'e
45
\ PUNE 3
SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT w
KllCHM AREh
BEDRM. 2 m D
f 3 UTIL.
BEDRM. 3 m 0
LOFT mc
M. BEDRM m v
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 4A 1/8"=1'-0"
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003
5. CT 02-25/SDP 02-1OlPUD 02-13 - NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA - Request for a Tentative Tract
Map, Site Development Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit to allow the development of
a 14-lot subdivision consisting of 12 single-family dwellings plus two second dwelling units on
property generally located on the north side of Levante Street between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 6.
Mr. DeCerbo introduced Item 5 and stated that the Planning Commission’s decision would be forwarded
to the City Council for the final decision. He stated that Assistant Planner, Greg Fisher, would make the
presentation.
Chairperson Baker opened the public hearing on Item 5.
Assistant Planner, Greg Fisher, presented the Staff Report stating that Item 5 is a project called
Northpark at La Costa that needed a Tract Map, a Site Development Plan, and a Planned Unit
Development Permit. He stated that this property was located at the intersection of Levante Street and
La Costa Avenue in the southeast quadrant. It is located across the street from the Casa La Costa
project. The property is 1.55 acres and would have 12 single-family two-story homes on lots ranging from
4,025 to 4,819 sq ft. There will be one open space lot for a common passive recreational area and one
private driveway lot for the project. Mr. Fisher reviewed photos of the vacant property. He described the
site plan and stated that it would include a variety of architectural styles. He stated that the project is
subject to the City Council Policy 66, the Livable Neighborhood Guidelines that is intended to create a
neighborhood with a sense of community identity, which this project has with its overall orientation and
interesting architectural elements. The zoning of this property has a Q Overlay designated as a
Residential Density Multiple (RDM) Zone. Mr. Fisher reviewed the elements and specific plan for this
project explaining the requirements for consistency with the surrounding area. The inclusionary housing
requirement for this project is proposed to be met by two attached second dwelling units situated on Lots
8 and 12. Staff recommends approval of these units but they will need to be approved by the City
Council. He summarized that the proposed use and density of the project is consistent with the City’s
Zoning Ordinance and General Plan designation and it complies with the Planned Development (PD)
Ordinance, Specific Plan 208, City Council Policy Plan 44, and City Council Policy 66. He commented
that there were numerous ordinances that pertained to this property and is different from Casa La Costa.
There are some development standards that are located within the PD Ordinance or the underlying
zoning which is the RDM and within the Specific Plan 208. This project was developed with the most
restricted development standards. He concluded with the recommendation that the Planning Commission
adopt the proposed Resolution approving the Tentative Map, recommend approving the Site
Development Plan and the Planned Unit Development.
Commissioner White asked Mr. Fisher to clarify the proposal to have two second dwelling units to satisfy
the affordable housing agreement. She stated that it was her understanding that those units would not have to be rented and the homeowner could use the unit as a guesthouse or a granny flat. Mr. Fisher
confirmed that the second dwelling unit would not be required to be rented but that if it were, the rent would be restricted by agreement with the Housing and Redevelopment Department.
Commissioner Dominguez stated his concern about this having two dwelling units that could easily get
lost in the shuffle with the other developments that have only one or two affordable housing units. He
expressed concern about the consistency of monitoring these units to ensure that they are in the intended
pool of such housing. He asked if the applicant was insistent on not buying housing credits. Mr. Fisher
replied that the applicant would like the City Council to make a judgment about the proposed arrangement
although he would have the opportunity to buy credits in Villa Loma.
Commissioner Montgomery asked about Lot 13 being designed for drainage down to Levante. He asked
what the biofilter mechanism was. Mr. Wojcik stated that it functioned as a swale and because of the limited space, it would be rectangular with retaining walls on either side. He stated that the biofilter was a
biological filter that runs the storm water through some type of vegetation to remove some of the solids
and pollutants to have it percolate into the ground. They would have fencing along that swale so if there was any depth of water during a storm, it would be fenced to prevent kids from getting to it. As it
approaches the public street, there are sidewalk underdrains.
47
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003 Page 22
Commissioner Whitton asked if the one-car garage on Lots 8 and 12 would be dedicated to the
secondary dwelling units. Mr. Fisher stated that Lots 8 and 12 were the only lots that would have three-
car garages but that he wasn’t sure that the extra space was for the additional unit. He stated that there
would be six on-site guest parking spaces in the project as well as a nearby public street that would allow
for such parking.
Mr. DeCerbo commented that under the second dwelling provisions of the Municipal Code, parking
requirements can be satisfied through tandem parking in the driveway. There is no requirement for an
additional parking space. Mr. Fisher stated that the driveway would not be big enough in this case to
accommodate a car.
Commissioner Whitton observed that there is no mention in the conditions of the second dwelling units
being rent restricted. Ms. Mobaldi replied that that condition would be included in the affordable housing
agreement when the tenant is income qualified. Commissioner Whitton countered that he felt this was
somewhat of a shell game because an affordable secondary dwelling unit is not required to be used as
such. If it is used as such, then the owner negotiates the deal with the housing authority. Mr. Fisher
stated that this was an acceptable way to meet the inclusionary housing requirement. Commissioner
Segall noted that this issue has created concern for others on the Commission every time it comes up.
Chairperson Baker invited the applicant to make a presentation.
Dennis O’Neil, 10085 Pebble Creek Lane, El Cajon, 92021, with Touchstone Communities representing
the applicant, stated that he was present to answer any questions the Commission may have.
Commissioner White asked if the City were to ask the applicant to pay credits for Villa Loma instead of
using the two secondary dwellings for inclusionary housing, if the applicant would build those dwellings
anyway because there is a market for large homes that have the extra apartment. Mr. O’Neil stated that
he believed that they would be built anyway because the architecture has already been designed. He understood that they were in compliance with the Code and they had directed the architect to design for
those secondary units, which will stand-alone.
Commissioner Whitton asked if the one-car garage would be associated with the secondary unit. Mr
O’Neil confirmed that it would be.
Chairperson Baker asked if the one-car garage was separated by a wall. Mr. O’Neil stated that there was
an option to put a wall in, but if the unit was not rented, then the wall would not be built and the home
would have a three-car garage.
Ms. Mobaldi advised that even the purchase of credits in this instance, which is different than an in lieu
fee, would have to be approved by the City Council. Theoretically, Council could say they had to build
their inclusionary housing as part of this development and it couldn’t be a second dwelling unit. As a
practical matter in a smaller development, the housing policy team has recommended that second
dwelling units or purchase of credits be allowed. The in-lieu fee is only applicable when there are less
than seven units.
Chairperson Baker asked if the elevations on the rears of the homes would be attractive for those across
the street looking at them. Mr. Fisher stated that the rear elevations have been spruced up to look good
for precisely that reason. Chairperson Baker asked where the yards would be. Mr. Fisher indicated on
the maps where the yards would be.
Chairperson Baker stated that she had been to this property that day and saw some homes being built on
another lot south of Levante and asked about that. Commissioner Segall said it was on the Q-Overlay.
Mr. Fisher indicated on the map where that was located on the north side. He stated that the owner, Mr.
Mathis, had proposed plans to develop one single-family home on each lot. Chairperson Baker asked if
those had to follow the same Q-Overlay that the rest had to follow. Mr. Fisher said that they would.
Commissioner Segall asked if the single-family home didn’t have to come before the Planning
Commission even if it’s in the Overlay. Mr. Fisher confirmed that a single-family home did not need to come before the Commission. He reported that the owner, however, was considering splitting the lot into
a subdivision in which case it would come before them.
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003 Page 23
Chairperson Baker opened public testimony and invited those who would like to speak to the podium.
Chris Young, 3308 Azahar Place, Carlsbad 92009, stated that he had lived at this address since 1985
and is one of the residents living below this proposed development in the cul-de-sac. He stated that 15
years ago he and a group of residents worked with both Staff and the City Council when the first
development on the five lots was built winning their approval to create the Q-Overlay regarding limiting
certain height restrictions and increasing setbacks and landscape buffer zones. The objective was to
prevent a wall-like fortress along the edge of the five lots for those living below those lots. He stated that
he felt the density was somewhat high for this project, but his primary concern is the rear view. He asked
if grading was planned for the lower lot to bring it to the level of the first lot, defeating the whole idea of
what the Q-Overlay created. He expressed concern about the traffic issue in the area with cars
congesting at the Levante stoplight.
Martha Baron, 331 1 La Costa Avenue, Carlsbad, stated that her property was connected to the back of
the proposed project. She stated that she had gardens that she terraced and built that cost over $50,000
and she was concerned about the grading that would take place. She stated that she wanted to be sure
that her property wasn’t damaged while the building occurred.
Chairperson Baker closed public testimony and asked Mr. Fisher to address these concerns.
Mr. Fisher reiterated that the density of the project was just over 9 units per acre, which was on the low
end of the allowed 8-1 5 per acre. Technically the developer could put 3-6 more units on this property if it
were redeveloped into an apartment or condominium project. With regard to the rear architecture, he
stated that it did have articulation and different building planes. The landscaping easement is on the
furthest lot to the west that will have a buffer zone between the project and the single-family homes
nearby. Mr. Fisher reviewed the history pertaining to this project stating that the project was approved in
the late 1980’s and it went to appeal to the City Council who denied the appeal and approved the
Planning Commission’s decision. After that, the homeowners in the area persuaded the City Council to
direct Staff to participate in adopting this Specific Plan that had its own development standards. One of
the issues was the homes that would overlook the existing single-family homes below. The standard for
the rear yard setback was increased considerably. The developer would like to work with the
homeowners with regard to the fencing. Everything proposed is within the Code.
Mr. Wojcik responded to the question about fill on the lower lot explaining that the existing elevation of the
lower lot is 288 ft. and the proposed pads are from 290.3 ft. to 292 ft. Chairperson Baker asked which lot
numbers this pertained to. Mr. Wojcik answered Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be raised 3-4 feet. Chairperson
Baker noted that La Costa Avenue slopes as it goes west and asked if these properties slope as well as
they go west. She asked how much further below the project the properties on Azahar were. Mr. Wojcik
replied that it went down to an elevation of 282 ft. making the difference 8 ft.
Commissioner Segall asked Mr. Fisher if the rear elevations would all be the same on Lots 1-7 stating
that the layout of the homes all look the same. Mr. Fisher replied that City Policy 44 says there must be
different building planes for the front and rear of the properties. He stated that these architectural
guidelines have been met in this project.
Chairperson Baker asked Mr. O’Neil to address Ms. Baron’s concerns about grading the property and
asked if there were any assurances they could give her that her gardens would remain undamaged. Mr.
O’Neil stated that they would not go on her property at all.
Chairperson Baker asked Mr. O’Neil to comment on the rear elevations. Mr. O’Neil stated that he didn’t
know the details about the rear elevations other than they complied with the design guidelines. He stated
that the project had a good color scheme and variation in roof. He didn’t know if the sidings would wrap
to the back, but the color would wrap to all four sides.
Commissioner Whitton asked what the height difference was from the rear elevations to Mr. Young’s
home below. Mr. O’Neil stated that it was more than 8 feet.
Commissioner Whitton asked if no fencing or open fencing would, therefore, be appropriate in the back
rather than a block wall. Mr. O’Neil stated that it probably would and pointed out that there was mature
vegetation on that slope currently. With regard to the grading, he added that there were two large
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003 Page 24
development pads that would be stepped along the edge with a foot difference between each one
accounting for the 3-4 ft difference of fill in the middle.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if they were cutting into a portion of one parcel to fill in the other. Mr.
O’Neil said that was correct.
Commissioner Segall stated that he needed more information about the rear elevations. Mr. Grim stated that the footprint does look similar for all the homes, but that there are differences in the windows and roof
features. Each faGade does not have a different articulation. Commissioner Segall stated concern about
that similarity.
The Commissioners then took a few minutes to examine the plans with the Staff and Engineers.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if there was any proposal for a traffic signal to be installed at Levante
and La Costa Avenue. Mr. Wojcik replied that there was a condition added to this project that the
developer pay a proportionate share based on ADT for a signal at that intersection. There is no schedule
currently as to when that signal would be installed, however. The Transportation Division has proposed
a study on La Costa Avenue because of the general concerns expressed by residents in that area.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if there was reason to believe a signal would be installed at some
point. Mr. Wojcik stated that the Transportation Division analyzes intersections for meeting the Caltrans
traffic signal warrants, including accidents, and if one or more warrants are met, the intersection could be
considered for having a traffic signal installed.
Commissioner Segall asked if Lot 3 could be reversed so that it’s identical to Lot 6 to break up the rear
fasade. Mr. O’Neil responded that he was not prepared to say that they would reverse it as they would
have to consult the civil engineer first. He stated that he wasn’t averse to it, however.
Commissioner Whitton observed that a number of them had significant concerns about this project and
stated that he would prefer to have the answers to questions about the second dwellings and the rear
elevations before voting on this Item.
Chairperson Baker suggested that they make this recommendation subject to the approval of the
Planning Director rather than continue this project. Mr. DeCerbo confirmed that they could put a condition
on the project that the rear elevations are revised to provide a variety and subject to the approval of the
Planning Director. Commissioner Segall agreed with this as long as it was clear that they didn’t have
three units in a row that look identical. Commissioner White added that they meant a different profile not
just enhanced window treatments, but rather a different roofline.
Commissioner Dominguez stated his concern that they were approving a quasi-legal document, a Site Development Plan. Ms. Mobaldi stated that she felt that it would be fine since they had expressed how
they specifically wanted it changed. She said they could clarify that if what they were requesting turned out not to be feasible that they would want to see the project again.
Commissioner Dominguez asked Ms. Mobaldi if they could recommend to the City Council that they do
not allow these secondary units to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirements. Ms. Mobaldi stated that they could.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he would like to see some real enhancements on this project and
suggested continuing the project. He wanted to adamantly recommend that the proposed inclusionary
housing credits not be accepted by the Council.
Commissioner Segall asked Mr. DeCerbo if colored rear elevations were required. Mr. DeCerbo stated
that all sides of each unit should be shown in the report but not necessarily in color. Commissioner
Segall asked to see the color rear elevations.
Mr. O’Neil stated that they had worked closely with the Staff to meet and exceed the design guidelines
with variation in architecture. He stated that they would be willing to work further with Staff, but wondered
why they would be asked to continue this if they had met the requirements. Commissioner Montgomery
3-0
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003 Page 25
replied that it was the Q-Overlay that had the Commissioners reviewing this because the Q-Overlay was
based upon the wishes of the owners below the property. The Q-Overlay is in place so that the
developments above are satisfactory, and that is subjective. Chairperson Baker confirmed that it was discretionary and up to the Planning Commission to decide.
Chairperson Baker discussed the secondary dwelling units being used as inclusionary housing when
there’s no mechanism to force those units to be rented. She didn’t feel that they should be counted for
low-income or inclusionary housing. She recommended to the City Council that they insist that the
developer buy into Villa Loma.
Commissioner White concurred and stated that she would like to hear from the Housing Office as to how
it was decided that these secondary dwelling units can be used to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirements.
Commissioner Whitton stated that he understood that the secondary dwelling units are units approved by
the City Council but felt that this was a shell game and wanted some clear guidance on this matter. He stated that he did not feel these units should be counted as inclusionary housing.
Commissioner Dominguez concurred with Commissioner Whitton.
Commissioner Montgomery stated that he felt the secondary dwelling units could be included if it was
walled off and a true separate apartment, but by not enforcing the walled-off apartment, that causes an
issue.
Commissioner Heineman asked Ms. Mobaldi if State regulations were partly at fault in their concerns with
these secondary units. Ms. Mobaldi clarified that in order to self-certify the Housing Element, which the
City of Carlsbad is working towards, certain standards must be met which she understood would be met
when they presented their next Housing Element. She believed that second dwelling units could be
counted towards affordability if they are rent restricted and income qualified. Currently they are not
mandated to allow second dwelling units to be used to satisfy the inclusionary requirement.
Commissioner Heineman stated he viewed it as an unsatisfactory situation and agreed with his fellow
Commissioners.
Commissioner Segall agreed also adding that with so many home-based offices now that even with a
walled-off unit, it is an ideal office situation and allowing credit for inclusionary housing defeats the
purpose.
Ms. Mobaldi added that secondary units are walled off in that they have to have a separate entrance, so it
is an individual unit distinct from the house. Chairperson Baker stated that it had a connecting door.
Chairperson Baker asked for a motion.
MOTION
ACT1 ON : Motion by Commissioner White, and duly seconded, that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 5422 approving CT 02-
25, and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5423 and 5424
recommending approval of SDP 02-10 and PUD 02-13 based upon the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein and subject to the Planning
Commission’s direction to the applicant that the applicant submit new rear
elevation plans subject to the approval of the Planning Director based upon the
discussion that the Commission had that evening regarding footprints and rear
elevations on units 1-7 and subject to the Planning Commission’s concern about
the use of the secondary dwellings as an acceptable means to satisfy the
applicant‘s affordable housing requirement.
Commissioner Segall stated that he would be willing to support this and not delay it for a month if part of it
is that Lot 3 is reversed so there aren’t three houses in a row and that the Planning Director ensures that
there is enough diversity in elevations between all of the homes so they don’t repeat each other.
Planning Commission Minutes June 18,2003 Page 26
Commissioner Heineman stated that he was in favor of the motion.
Commissioner Montgomery stated that he was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he would be opposing the project.
Commissioner Whitton stated that he also would be opposing the project as it stands.
Commissioner White stated that she could support the project with those conditions.
Chairperson Baker stated that she could also support the project with the conditions.
Ms. Mobaldi asked if the Commission was specifying that Lot 3 was the one that had to be reversed.
Commissioner Segall stated that it had to be Lot 3 or there would be three in a row.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he felt they really didn’t know what they were buying into with this
and that he didn’t feel the direction provided in the motion was clear enough.
Ms. Mobaldi suggested that if Lot 3 could be reversed then the Planning Director could decide its fate, but
if it could not be reversed, then the project would have to come back before the Commission.
Chairperson Baker called for a vote.
VOTE: 5-2
AYES:
NOES: Whitton and Dominguez
ABSTAl N : None
Baker, Heineman, Montgomery, Segall, and White
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200
Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, [DATE], to consider a
request for approval of a Site Development Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit to allow
the development of a 14-lot subdivision consisting of 12 single-family residential lots, one open
space lot, and one private driveway lot to accommodate 12 detached single-family dwellings
plus two second dwelling units on property generally located on the north side of Levante Street
between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 6 and
more particularly described as:
Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, October 18, 1972
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after [DATE]. If you have any
questions, please call Greg Fisher in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4629.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan and Planned Unit 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 at or prior
to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 02-1 O/PUD 02-1 3
CASE NAME: NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
PUBLISH: [DATE]
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
From: Greg Fisher
To: Ray Patchett
Date: 9/8/03 3: 1 OPM
Subject: Northpark at La Costa - CC Hearing item
Good afternoon Ray,
Cindee Hollingsworth asked me to send you this email regarding Ramona's question.
There is a proposed wall constructed of concrete block and plexiglass located behind lot 7. This wall was
required per the acoustical report (noise study) performed on the project to help mitigate noise levels
along La Costa Avenue. The top half of the wall is constructed of plexiglass because of the view amenity
towards the northwest from this site.
There is also a wall that varies in height up to a six feet located along the easterly property line (side) for
lot 7 and continues south along the guest parking area and passive park area. This wall is also required to help reduce noise impacts from La Costa Avenue. The wall height near the front of the passive park
area is 30 inches not 30 feet.
Please let me know if there are further questions.
Greg Fisher
Greg Fisher
Assistant Planner
City of Carlsbad
(760) 602-4629 phone
(760) 602-1052 fax
gfish@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public
hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO
p.m. on Tuesday, September 9, 2003, to consider a request for approval of a Site Development
Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit to allow two second dwelling units in conjunction
with a 14-lot subdivision on property generally located on the north side of Levante Street
between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 6 and
more particularly described as:
Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, October 18, 1972
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after September 5, 2003. If you
have any questions, please call Greg Fisher in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4629.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan and/or Planned Unit 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,
Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 02-1 OlPUD 02-1 3
CASE NAME: NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
PUBLISH: AUGUST 18,2003
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
SITE
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
SDP 02-lO/PUD 02-1 3
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160@
CARLSBAD UNlF SCHOOL DlST
6225 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SAN DlEGUlTO SCHOOL DlST
701 ENClNlTAS BLVD
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AVE
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC W ORKWCOM M U N ITY
SERVICES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
GREG FISHER
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DlST
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
LEUCADIA CNTY WATER DlST
1960 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
VALLECITOS WATER DlST
201 VALLECITOS DE OR0
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE 100
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SANDIEGO CA 92123
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT
DElJNIS O'NEIL
TOUCHSTONE COI4I4LJNITI ES
EL CAJON, CA 92021
10085 PEBBLE CREEK LANE
ENClNlTAS SCHOOL DlST
101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
OLIVENHAIN WATER DlST
1966 OLIVENHAIN RD
ENClNlTAS CA 92024
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
ATTN TED ANASIS
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Laser 5160@
TOSCO CORP so LLC MAG PROPERTIES PO BOX 52085 108 KINGS CT 3838 CAMINO DEL RIO N 2 PHOENIX AZ 85072-2085 SAN CARLOS CA 94070 SAN DIEGO CA 92108-1763
BERTHOLD SCHULZ EUGENE F STEVENSON
3217 AZAHAR PL 3219 AZAHAR PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8304 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8304
CHRISTIAN KORBES TR BOYD HELGE WE1 SS IG
3030 GARBOSO ST 3028 GARBOSO ST 3026 GARBOSO ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8326 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8326 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8326
JOHN A & SUSAN ROSS ROBERT & SHIRLEY HAWLEY LOIS W ORTLIEB
3024 GARBOSO ST 3022 GARBOSO ST 3017 GARBOSO ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8326 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8326 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8328
GREGORY F FARNSWORTH THOMAS R SMILEY THOMAS & IRMA KNAPP 3019 GARBOSO ST 7701 GARBOSO PL 7703 GARBOSO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8328 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325
DAN & VICTORIA DONATI LARRY J ROMINE MICHAEL R KOZIEWICZ 7704 GARBOSO PL 7702 GARBOSO PL 3025 GARBOSO ST CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8329
KENNETH A HUBBARD TR BURZO RAYMOND NEVILLE
3027 GARBOSO ST 3316 AZAHAR PL 3314 AZAHAR PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8329 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305
HORST W & PAULA BOLTER PAUL D PETERSON CHRISTOPHER R YOUNG 3312 AZAHAR PL 10025 E ERIC ALAN PL 3308 AZAHAR PL CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305 TUCSON AZ 85748-6715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305
BIGELOW L WATTS JOHN P & LORETTA STEEN TR LANDE 3306 AZAHAR PL 3304 AZAHAR PL 3302 AZAHAR PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8305
ERENA E DUNCAN THOMAS C JERNIGAN SHARI COHEN 3218 AZAHAR PL 24 MONTCLAIR RD 3217 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8302 OAK RIDGE TN 37830-8330 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7709
AKBAR A EC SAMIYA GAYA TR FALZON RONALD BORODACH
4180 GRAYDON RD 3303 LA COSTA AVE 3305 LA COSTA AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92130-2116 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7711 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7711
LILA SOUZA DANNY & OLGA STOJIC MARTHA A ALLEN
3307 LA COSTA AVE 3309 LA COSTA AVE 3311 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7711 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7711 CARLSBAD CA 92 0 0 9 - 7 7'1 1
TR BRIGGS MICHAEL G & ELAINE SHEA GLEN N & MARA LINDERMAN
7712 FAROL PL 7714 FAROL PL 7716 FAROL PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8324 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8324 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8324
STEVEN ARMSTRONG LLOYD S TRIMBLE JEFFREY A EC LISA FREER
7718 FAROL PL 7720 FAROL PL 7705 GARBOSO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8324 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8324 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325
TR ROTHERHAM FERNANDO A SIR10 HAROLD L GOTSCHALL
200 HARBOR DR 3502 7709 GARROSO PL 7710 GARBOSO PL
SAN DIEGO CA 92101 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325
LIVIA E FAURE-GAULT THOMAS G ERWIN DONALD G WILSON 7708 GARBOSO PL 7706 GARBOSO PL 3110 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8325 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332
TR DARABI 3112 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332
SHADEE S TALEBI
7461 MERMAID LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DAVID T SOLOMON
7801 CENTELLA ST 3
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8314
SHELLY L REYNAGA
7801 CENTELLA ST 6 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8314
DENNIS C EL ROBIN MATHIS ROBERT T HELMUTH
3351 VENADO ST 7167 CAMINITO PANTOJA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7850 SAN DIEGO CA 92122-4365
JUDITH P BOGART SHARON C CABRAL
7801 CENTELLA ST 1 PO BOX 130121
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8314 CARLSBAD CA 92013-0121
VIRGIL & MAVIS COWING CYNTHIA S NELSON PO BOX 1081 7801 CENTELLA ST 5
TORRANCE CA 90505-0081 CARLSRAD CA 92009-8314
TR FLAATEN SHADEE S TALEBI
26601 AMHURST CT 7461 MERMAID LN
SUN CITY CA 92586-2234 CARLSBAD CA 92009-4693
RECINDA J WALKER LAWRENCE E BARE WILLIAM D & NANCY PRIOR
7801 CENTELLA ST 9 PO BOX 990 7802 ESTANCIA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8315 SOLANA BEACH 92075-0990 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8320
STEVE T MITCHELL RANCHO LA COSTA LLC KIRK KINDER
7804 ESTANCIA ST 28118 AGOURA RD 200 3160 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8320 AGOURA HILLS 91301 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332
SHARLENE J SIGLER RUBY T ROMERO-MILLER ANDREA T FERENTINOS 3158 LEVANTE ST 3156 LEVANTE ST 3154 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332
RICHARD B PEACOCK JULIE V JONES SAEED & ROXANA JALALI 3152 LEVANTE ST 3150 LEVANTE ST 3148 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8332
I T PARADISE ORLANDO M ERICKSON JULIE A JOHANSEN
3769 SKYLINE RD 7599 DEHESA CT 7597 DEHESA CT CARLSBAD CA 92008-2742 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704
MARIA CEFARATT DONNA L DEERING ROBERT L MCKINNON 7595 DEHESA CT 7720 EL CAMINO REAL B33 7591 DEHESA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8508 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704
MAUREEN E TAYLOR STEVEN P ROTENBERG RYERSON W DALTON 7589 DEHESA CT 7587 DEHESA CT 7585 DEHESA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704
J M & CAROL THOMPSON TR MCBRIDE JOE EL LESLIE CORONA
PO BOX 7132 7581 DEHESA CT 7579 DEHESA CT
RANCHO SANTA 92067-7132 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704
JACK B SMYER LINDA C SWENSON JON M & DANA CAMPBELL 7577 DEHESA CT 7580 DEHESA CT 7582 DEHESA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703
MICHAEL A ROSS TR MCCORMICK GARY MCCLELLAN
PO BOX 770 7586 DEHESA CT 7588 DEHESA CT CARLSBAD CA 92018-0770 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703
FRANK N & ERI BALES RANDALL K PATRYLA ELIZABETH J MACKINNON
2002 N MOUNTAIN AVE 7592 DEHESA CT 7594 DEHESA CT
UPLAND CA 91784-1282 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7703
GEOFFREY P NOONAN MATTHEW M ZYBUM BARRETT L LOSSING
3338 CUESTA PL 3340 CUESTA PL 3342 CUESTA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715
PAUL & ALISON CEVOLANI BILL & SHIRLEY ARTZ ARTURO D MANCILLA
3344 CUESTA PL 5303 CHELSEA ST 3347 CUESTA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 LA JOLLA CA 92037-7913 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715
MARK F & JANET PISKOR IDA M HORD DANIEL CALVERT
3345 CUESTA PL 3343 CUESTA PL 3341 CUESTA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715
VANORA LANGLAIS DIANE N DONALDTON ROBERT W & LINDA MACKAY
3339 CUESTA PL 3337 CUESTA PL 2608 LA DUELA LN CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7715 CARLSBAD CA 92009-9219
GENE ROMAN HILDA B KING ROBERT A STINE
3343 VIVIENDA CIR 3341 VIVIENDA CIR 971 HYGEIA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 ENCINITAS CA 92024-1768
SUSAN D WATTS STANLEY HUDSON LORINE V HALL
PO BOX 130335 3335 VIVIENDA CIR 3333 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92013-0335 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
CHRISTOPHER T HORTON EVELYN E HAKANSON MARC W & JOANNE PRICE ,
3331 VIVIENDA CIR 3329 VIVIENDA CIR PO BOX 231759
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 ENCINITAS CA 92023-1759
TR CORNWELL ALBERT G EDWARDS ROBERTA L HADDEN
7035 ELFIN OAKS RD 3323 VIVIENDA CIR 3321 VIVIENDA CIR
ESCONDIDO CA 92029-5906 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
WAYNE E & CHERYL PAGES CAROL A WHITTINGTON SARJIT SINGH 3319 VIVIENDA CIR 3317 VIVIENDA CIR 7328 EL FUERTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-6409
TERRILL L FLANAGAN
3313 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
KIRK & PATRICIA KING
3307 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
MARK MAWAZINI 3301 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
JAMES M & LISA SINGER
3340 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7712
JONATHAN NERENBERG
3204 CARVALLO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702
KATHLEEN A SCHRADER
3210 CARVALLO CT CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702
MICHAEL EPPERLY ADAM & DASA GUZIK
3311 VIVIENDA CIR 1374 WINDSOR RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARDIFF CA 92007-1347
BOLAND & PARKE COMMUNIT JAMES W ARSLANIAN
3305 VIVIENDA CIR 3303 VIVIENDA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7713
POOYA & NIKKI DARUGAR MICHAEL A BERRIER
5546 CARRIAGE LN 3342 VIVIENDA CIR
SANTA ROSA CA 95403-1369 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7712
TR CORNWELL JEFF ADAMOFF
7035 ELFIN OAKS RD 3202 CARVALLO CT
ESCONDIDO CA 92029-5906 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702
TR MCGREGOR THOMAS M SOULLIERE
3206 CARVALLO CT 3208 CARVALLO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702
H J & ELLEN HAINES ROBERT PORTER
3212 CARVALLO CT 3217 CARVALLO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702
MARGARET A KORNACKER GILBERT M DINGLEY TR KERNS
3215 CARVALLO CT 3213 CARVALLO CT 1844 HAYMARKET RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702 ENCINITAS CA 92024-1017
TR DEHUFF CHRISTOPHER M HINSHAW BARRY J NIMAN
1036 CALAVERAS DR 3207 CARVALLO CT 7585 DELGADO PL
SAN DIEGO CA 92107-4126 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7702 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705
LOUIS N & MARY PAQUIN DAVID L TREPANIER MARJORIE T ACQUISTAPACE
7583 DELGADO PL 7581 DELGADO PL 7579 DELGADO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705
ALONZO E HUNTER GREGORY S KEPPLER PHILIP & PAULA KACSIR
7577 DELGADO PL 781 S NARD0 AVE 06 7573 DELGADO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705 SOLANA BEACH 92075-2339 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705
MARY E HORNER JASON T & JAMIE PATTON CONCEPCION M GARCIA
7571 DELGADO PL 7599 CALOMA CIR 7597 CALOMA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7705 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
' FRED L & ANNE EADY TR GILL SONNY ZANTUA
7595 CALOMA CIR 7593 CALOMA CIR 7591 CALOMA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
LEONID GORNIK MITSUHIRO UCHIMURA JEFFREY COHEN 7589 CALOMA CIR 7587 CALOMA CIR 7585 CALOMA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
GARY K & KAREN SAUNDERS ROBERT L FELL JAMES P & JUDY PINPIN
7583 CALOMA CIR 7581 CALOMA CIR 7579 CALOMA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
DAMON R WEISSER MARILYN MARTINEAU GREGORY J CARROLL
7577 CALOMA CIR PO BOX 632722 7573 CALOMA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 SAN DIEGO CA 92163-2722 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
ROBERT W & TAMARA KEEFE MARVIN L CRENSHAW TR SCHMIDT 7571 CALOMA CIR 823 MORNING SUN DR 7336 CADENCIA ST CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 ENCINITAS CA 92024-1935 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7624
JERRY & SHERYL PORTNOY RENEE FANNIN ANTHONY C NENKO
7565 CALOMA CIR 7563 CALOMA CIR 2436 SACADA CIR A
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8041
SAM & MAY MORISHIMA MARILYN A & DANA SHERTZ MARIA C RODRIGUEZ
2540 DONNER WAY 7557 CALOMA CIR 7555 CALOMA CIR SACRAMENTO CA 95818-3933 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
SUBHASH NANGIA WILLIAM L SARATI TOMISLAV PETROVIC 7578 CALOMA CIR 7580 CALOMA CIR 7582 CALOMA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7714
TR MCDOWELL WILLIAM L KING ROXANNE P CORNEJO 7567 AGUA DULCE CT 7565 AGUA DULCE CT 2533 THISTLE CREEK ST CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 SANTA ROSA CA 95404-7739
YU PA1 ANDREW & KAREN MALKIN DEBRA A PATANELLA
3699 BARNARD DR 734 7559 AGUA DULCE CT 7557 AGUA DULCE CT
OCEANSIDE CA 92056-4025 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701
LOWELL E & AGNES GATES KIP R MEMMOTT MARY L CAMPBELL
7555 AGUA DULCE CT 914 SEA CLIFF DR 7551 AGUA DULCE CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-1139 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701
RUSSELL A KURTZ TR RUBINS DOUGLAS W MCBAIN
7550 AGUA DULCE CT 7552 AGUA DULCE CT 7554 AGUA DULCE CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701
JOSEPH M MARSHALL DAVID A CHRISTIE STANLEY D JONES
1445 ROXBURY DR 7558 AGUA DULCE CT 118 3308 DORADO PL LOS ANGELES C 90035-2814 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7701 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706
KEVIN & KAREN THOMSON F D CALLISON MARIA T DECASTRO
3310 DORADO PL 3312 DORADO PL 3314 DORADO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706
LOUIS A STORROW JANE S BEVERIDGE ROBERT & BARBARA ONEIL
3316 DOMDO PL 3318 DORADO PL 3320 DORADO PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706
DAVID L & KATHLEEN HERR JUDITH A WHITE WENDY LOFTIN 3321 DORADO PL 3319 DORADO PL 3317 DORADO PL CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706
CHRIS R LADEN KENNETH S LAKE GEORGE W WALKER
3315 DORADO PL 7240 CARPA CT 1048 HYGEIA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7812 ENCINITAS CA 92024-1708
REZA SIRY MIKE M FARSHCHI BRIAN K BACHI" 3309 DORADO PL . 6758 LOS VERDES DR 4 3305 DORADO PL CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 RANCHO PALOS 90275-7609 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706
DORIAN S LINKOGLE LAURA A GARVER JOHN A SELLS
41720 CALLE CABRILLO 3301 DORADO PL 3336 DEL RIO CT TEMECULA CA 52592-9201 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7706 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7815
TR OLSON JOHN R DELAND SCOTT FELD
7045 LLAMA ST 3350 DEL RIO CT 3352 DEL RIO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-6520 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7815 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7815
CHARLES M BERNSTEIN JOHN B & JANE DORE DEBRA L WILSON
3354 DEL RIO CT 3353 DEL RIO CT 3351 DEL RIO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7815 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816
JAMIE M PREVOST JOSEPH G CHAREST JOSE A GONCALVES 3349 DEL RIO CT 3347 DEL RIO CT 3345 DEL RIO CT CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816
TR DAVIDSON JORDAN & JUNK0 SCHUCKIT ABBY M GOLDEN
4925 RANCHO GRANDE 3341 DEL RIO CT 3339 DEL RIO CT
DEL MAR CA 92014-4243 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816
TR MURPHY WENDELL H BEVERIDGE DORIS N KERR
3337 DEL RIO CT 3335 DEL RIO CT 7808 ESTANCIA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7816 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8320
SAN D PRESBYTERY TR WRIGHT CHRIST PRESBYTERIAN CHU
8825 AERO DR 220 7806 ESTANCIA ST 7807 CENTELLA ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-2292 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8320 CARLSBAD CA 92009-8316
*** 228 Printed ***
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public
hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO
p.m. on Tuesday, September 9, 2003, to consider a request for approval of a Site Development
Plan and Planned Unit Development Permit to allow two second dwelling units in conjunction
with a 14-lot subdivision on property generally located on the north side of Levante Street
between La Costa Avenue and Centella Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 6 and
more particularly described as:
Lots 227 & 228 of La Costa Vale Unit No. 1, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
the Map thereof No. 7457, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, October 18, 1972
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after September 5, 2003. If you
have any questions, please call Greg Fisher in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4629.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan and/or Planned Unit 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,
Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 02-10/PUD 02-13
CASE NAME: NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
PUBLISH: AUGUST 18,2003
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
SDP 02=1O/PUD 02-13
PROOF OF PUBLIC'TION
(2010 & 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the
printer of
North County Times
Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of San Diego,
State of California, for the City of Oceanside and
the City of Escondido, Court Decree number
171349, for the County of San Diego, that the
notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
the following dates, to-wit:
I certify (or declare) under penalLy of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at SAN MARCOS California
This 1 Sth Day of August, 2003
- This space is the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
fLw-td s-a0-03
Proof of Publication of
~~ 1- I
QD
I NORTHPARK AT LA COSTA
SDP 02-1WUD 02-13
%$E FlUk SDP 02- 1O/PUD 02-13
%B8MM:NOR?HPARKATIAcosTA
MloflGT 18.3W.S
I
Signature
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising