HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-03-02; City Council; 17526; Granting Appeal: Kirgis Tentative MapCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL L!9
AB# 17,526
MTG. 3/2/04
DEPT. CA
TITLE: DEPT. HD.
&E?.
CITY MGR.s
CONDITIONALLY GRANTING THE APPEAL OF
THE KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP CITY AlTY.
GPA 03-011zC 03-011LCPA 03-011CT 02-06/
PUD 02-02KDP 02-05/HDP 02-01 I
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Local Facilities Management Plan
Growth Control Point
Net density
Special Facility Fee
That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2004- 067 , and related resolutions
conditionally granting the appeal and adopt related resolutions approving the Tentative Map,
Coastal Development Permit, General Plan Amendment, Hillside Development Permit, Local
Coastal Plan Amendment and Introduce Ordinance No. NS- 697 approving
the zone code amendment.
8
1 dwelling per acre
0.91 dwelling per acre
N/A
ITEM EXP LAN AT1 0 N :
On February 3, 2004, the Council held a public hearing to consider the appeal of Brian C.
Regan of the denial by the Planning Commission of its application for a General Plan
Amendment, Zone Code Amendment, Local Coastal Plan Amendment, Tentative Map,
Coastal Development Permit and a Hillside Development Permit. The Council carefully
considered the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the evidence and
testimony presented at the hearing and the appellant's suggested additional conditions to
mitigate the overall impacts of the project.
After careful review, the Council directed the City Attorney to return with documents
conditionally granting the appeal. Those documents are attached for your consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Granting the appeal will result in development of five homes on this previously undeveloped
land and associated fees and valuation tax revenue in proportion to the increased value of
the property.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A mitigated negative declaration was prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Implementation of the project will potentially result in
impacts to biological resources, air quality, geology, soils and cultural resources. Mitigation
measures have been identified which, if implemented, will reduce those impacts to a level of
less than significant.
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 17.526
EXHIBITS:
1. Ordinance No. NS-697
2. Resolution No. 2004- 067 , granting the appeal;
3. Resolution No. 2004- 068 , approving CT 02-06
4. Resolution No. 2004- 069 , approving CDP 02-05
5. Resolution No. 2004- 070 approving HDP 02-01
6. Resolution No. 2004- 071 , approving LCPA 03-01
7. Resolution No. 2004- 072 , approving ZC 03-01
8. Resolution No. 2004- 073 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
9. Resolution No. 2004- 074 , approving PUD 02-02
IO. Appeal Form, dated November 5,2003
Department Contact: Ronald R. Ball, 434-2891
ORDINANCE NO. NS- 697
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTION 21.05.030 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AN AMENDMENT TO
THE ZONING MAP AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM MAP TO
GRANT A ZONE CHANGE, ZC 03-01 AND A LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT LCPA 03-01, FROM R-1-30,000 TO R-
1-1-30,000 AND OPEN SPACE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED NORTH OF FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN
TERMINUS OF TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO: ZC 03-01 /LCPA 03-01
WHEREAS, the Kirgis Tentative Map Zone Change and Local Coastal
Program Amendment is in conformance with the City of Carlsbad Draft Habitat
Management Plan for the subject property as well as current City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 3“ day of February 2004 hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change and
Local Coastal Program Amendment as shown on Exhibits “ZC 03-01” and “LCPA 03-
01 I’ dated September 3, 2003, incorporated herein by reference,
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as
follows:
SECTION 1: That section 21.05.030 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code,
being the zoning map, and the Local Coastal Program Zoning Map are amended as
shown on Exhibits “ZC 03-01” and “LCPA 03-01” attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
SECTION 2: That the findings and conditions set forth in Resolution No.
2004-067 constitute the findings and conditions of the City Council.
Ordinance No. NS- 697 1 of 2
i
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, upon the effective date of GPA 03-01, or upon the effective date of the
California Coastal Commission’s approval of LCPA 03-01, whichever is the last to
occur, and the City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad
within fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad
City Council on the 2nd day of March ,2004, and thereafter
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
, 2004, by the following vote, to City of Carlsbad on the
wit:
day of
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Ordinance No. NS- 697 2of2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY GRANTING
THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF
THE KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP AND RELATED
D I S C R ET I 0 NARY P E R M ITS
CASE NAME: KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO:
PUD 02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01
GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-011CT 02-06/
WHEREAS, the appeal of the Kirgis Tentative Map and related
discretionary approvals filed by Brian C. Regan on November 17, 2003 came on
regularly for hearing before the City Council on Tuesday, February 3, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the appellant had filed a verified application with the City of
Carlsbad regarding the property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “owner” described as:
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the County of San
Diego, State of California, as shown on Partition Map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, on
November 16, 1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tract Map, Planned
Unit Development, Coastal Development Permit and Hillside Development Permit, on
file in the Planning Department, Kirgis Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the gfh day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
...
...
1
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing as required by law and upon
hearing and considering all of the testimony and arguments of all persons desiring to be
heard the Commission denied the application finding that:
Findings:
1. That the development proposal is not consistent with the intent,
purpose, and requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that the
proposed hillside alteration will result in substantial alteration of a natural topography
with 61,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, with cuts up to 33 feet and fills up to 26 feet.
2. That the project design does not substantially conform to the intent
of the concepts illustrated in the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that the
easterly project pads are entirely created by fill, thereby elevating the pad above the
existing topographic elevation versus creating pads by averaging both cut and fill to
establish a pad elevation that is at the topographic midpoint, and in that the westerly
pads are larger than the minimum needed for a reasonable use of the property and
thereby creates significantly unnatural development contours.
3. That the project design and lot configuration does not minimize
disturbance of hillside lands, in that although no more than 25% of the gross site area is
within the limits of hillside alteration, development within the disturbed Brea is greater
than necessary for reasonable enjoyment of the property given the natural topography
of the site.
4. Until the issues resulting in denial of the Hillside Development
Permit are resolved the Commission does not approve or recommend approval of the
accompanying discretionary actions; and
WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision was filed
on November 5,2003; and
WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing as required by law to
consider the appeal; and
WHEREAS, staff reported that Finding No. 1 of Planning Commission
Resolution No. 5531 should be amended to reflect the actual hillside alteration of
36,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, 8,700 cubic yards of export, and with cuts up to 33
feet and fills up to 18.5 feet; and
2
Resolution No. 2004-067 page 2 4
WHEREAS, the property owner is currently required by the provisions of
the draft Habitat Management Plan and the Local Coastal Program to dedicate 75% of
its property to open space and to further require approximately 25% of the remaining
developable property to mitigate on-site habitat impacts and to pay a substantial
affordable housing fee, among other things, and the property has a maximum potential
development of 12 residential units which would be consistent with the adjacent
residential development; and
WHEREAS, the owner is proposing five units; and
WHEREAS, the owner volunteered to restrict the height of the proposed
units to single story homes on lots 1, 2 and 3 and two story homes up to a maximum of
30 feet building height on lots 4 and 5,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California,
grants the appeal upon the following conditions:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. The homes to be located on lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be single story, single
family dwellings and the homes on lots 4 and 5 may be two stories but with a maximum
building height of 30 feet.
3. Developer shall conform to and abide by the terms and conditions of
all related resolutions to effectuate the conditional grant of this appeal which are part of
this action and simultaneously adopted herewith.
4. That appellant‘s appeal fees shall be returned
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
convenience as “fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions.
If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government
3 Resolution No. 2004-067 page 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
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
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.
4. That the Clerk is directed to give notice to the applicant of this
action pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code section 1.16.01 0 specifying time limits for
judicial review which states:
"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 Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in
the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following
the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if
within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for
the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required
deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of
preparation of such record, the time within which such petition
may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth
day following the date on which the record is either personally
...
...
...
...
...
4 6
Resolution No. 2004-067 page 4
delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he
has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of
the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of
Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California
92008."
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the 2nd day of March 1
2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
z/c/
WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
5
Resolution No. 2004-067 page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-068
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CARLSBAD
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO COMMONLY OWNED
LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF
FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF
TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
TRACT CT 02-06 TO SUBDIVIDE 21.9 ACRES INTO 5
CASE NO.: CT 02-06
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative
Tract Map as shown on Exhibits “A - “D” dated September 3, 2003, on file in the
Planning Department KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP - CT 02-06, as provided by Chapter
20.12 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission
considered all factors relating to the Tentative Tract Map; and
1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interest in or opposed to GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD 02-
02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council 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, CT 02-06 is
approved, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinqs:
1. That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the
subdivision as conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the
existing General Plan, any applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public
health problems, in that the lots being created satisfy all minimum requirements of Titles
20 and 21 governing lot sizes and configuration, have been designed to comply with all
other applicable City regulations, and lot 7 will be restricted by open space easement
consistent with its open space General Plan designation.
2. That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land
uses since surrounding properties to the north are also designated for Residential Low
(RL) and Open Space (OS) development on the General Plan, the industrial property to
the southeast is separated by a significant slope preserved as open space and
surrounding development to the north is single family residential and open space.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the
development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential
development at the density proposed, in that the project site can accommodate the
proposed residential development while providing the required lot area, all required
setbacks and improvements mandated by applicable city regulations.
4. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the
proposed subdivision, in that the project is designed and conditioned to avoid conflicts
with any established easements.
2
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 2
5. That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the
Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
6. That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for
future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that lots
will have southern exposure for passive heating and all lots will benefit from ocean
breezes for cooling.
7. That the City Council has considered, in connection with the housing
proposed by this subdivision, the housing needs of the region, and balanced those
housing needs against the public service needs of the City and available fiscal and
environmental resources.
8. That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat, in that 75% of the site will be preserved for the purpose of
habitat conservation and restoration.
9. That the discharge of waste from the subdivision will not result in violation
of existing California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that lot
drainage will typically filter through the yard landscape prior to exiting to the drainage
system.
10. The City Council finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the facts set forth
in the staff report dated September 3, 2003 including, but not limited to the following:
a. Land Use - The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan
since the proposed density of 0.91 du/acre is within the density range of 0.0-1.5 du/acre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The
project’s proposed density of 0.91 du/ac is below the Growth Management Control Point
density (1.0 du/ac) 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.
b. Circulation - The circulation system is designed to provide
adequate access to the proposed lots, adjacent properties and complies with all
applicable City design standards.
3
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 3
c. Housing - That the project is consistent with the Housing Element
of the General Plan and the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance as the Developer has been
conditioned to pay the Affordable Housing In-Lieu fee.
Public Safety - Required facilities have been conditioned to be
constructed or are shown on the project plans.
d.
11. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements
Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8 and all City public facility policies
and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or
provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding: sewer
collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and other
recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space,
related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent
with need. Specifically,
a. The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the
Carlsbad Unified School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school
facilities.
b. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter
20.44, and will be collected prior to issuance of building permit.
c. The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No.
17 and will be collected prior to the issuance of building permit.
d. The Local Facilities Management fee for Zone 8 is required by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.050 and will be collected prior to issuance of
building permit.
e. The project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public
facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by
any additional requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan
prepared pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure
continued availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created
by the project.
12. This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement
approved as part of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8.
13. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP)
for the McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that as conditioned the applicant
shall record a notice concerning aircraft noise. The project is compatible with the
projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the noiselland use compatibility
matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land use is acceptably compatible with the airport, in
that it is within the 60-65 CNEL contour created by the airport.
4
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 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
14. That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual (Carlsbad
Municipal Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
15. The City Council has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions
are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the
extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by
the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final
map.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms,
to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation
to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval
of this Tentative Tract Map.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to
make, all corrections and modifications to the Tentative Map documents, as necessary
to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project.
Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any
proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this
approval.
3. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and
local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or
the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on
this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in
Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this
approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the
condition complies with all requirements of law.
5. Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
6. 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,
5
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 5
damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred
by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this
Tentative Map, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and
(c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility
of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives
until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s
approval is not validated.
7, Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x
36,” mylar copy of the Tentative Map reflecting the conditions approved by the final
decision making body.
8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide
proof to the Director from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has
satisfied its obligation to provide school facilities.
9. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit
plan check, a reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24” x 36”
blueline drawing format.
IO. The project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures
required as part of the Zone 8 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments
made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
11. 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
Building and Code Enforcement Managers 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.
12. This approval is granted subject to the approval of PUD 02-02, CDP 02-05
and HDP 02-01 and is subject to all conditions contained in City Council Resolutions
Nos. 2004-074 , 2004-069 and 2004-070 for that approval.
13. Approval is granted for CT 02-06 as shown on Exhibits “A” - “D” dated
September 3, 2003, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by
reference. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in
these conditions.
14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit and obtain
Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan for slopes and
common areas showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
6 Resolution No. 2004-068 page 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
and the City’s Landscape Manual. Developer shall construct and install all landscaping
as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and
thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. The landscape plan shall include
design and location for all perimeter fencing, gates, decorative hardscape, and
landscape.
15. This approval shall be null and void if the project site subject to this
approval is not annexed to City of Carlsbad CFD No. 1 within 60 days of the approval.
The City shall not issue any grading, building, or other permit, until the annexation is
completed. The City Manager is authorized to extend the 60 days, for a reasonable
period, upon a showing of good cause.
16. Developer shall establish a homeowner’s association and corresponding
covenants, conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Director prior to final map approval. Prior to issuance of a building
permit the Developer shall provide the Planning Department with a recorded copy of the
official CC&Rs that have been approved by the Department of Real Estate and the
Planning Director. At a minimum, the CC&Rs shall contain the following provisions:
a. General Enforcement bv the City. The City shall have the right, but
not the obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Declaration in
favor of, or in which the City has an interest.
b. Notice and Amendment. A copy of any proposed amendment shall
be provided to the City in advance. If the proposed amendment affects the City, City
shall have the right to disapprove. A copy of the final approved amendment shall be
transmitted to City within 30 days for the official record.
C. Failure of Association to Maintain Common Area Lots and
Easements. In the event that the Association fails to maintain the “Common Area Lots
and/or the Association’s Easements” as provided in the CC&Rs the City shall have the
right, but not the duty, to perform the necessary maintenance. If the City elects to
perform such maintenance, the City shall give written notice to the Association, with a
copy thereof to the Owners in the Project, setting forth with particularity the
maintenance which the City finds to be required and requesting the same be carried out
by the Association within a period of thirty (30) days from the giving of such notice. In
the event that the Association fails to carry out such maintenance of the Common Area
Lots and/or Association’s Easements within the period specified by the City’s notice, the
City shall be entitled to cause such work to be completed and shall be entitled to
reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owners as provided herein.
d. Special Assessments Levied by the Citv. In the event the City has
performed the necessary maintenance to either Common Area Lots and/or
Association’s Easements, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Association for all
costs incurred by the City to perform such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and
or Association’s Easements. The City shall provide a copy of such invoice to each
7
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 7
Owner in the Project, together with a statement that if the Association fails to pay such
invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection against the Owners
in the Project pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Said invoice shall be due and
payable by the Association within twenty (20) days of receipt by the Association. If the
Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full within the period specified, payment shall
be deemed delinquent and shall be subject to a late charge in an amount equal to six
percent (6%) of the amount of the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection
from the Association by means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies
available to the City, the City may levy a special assessment against the Owners of
each Lot in the Project for an equal prorata share of the invoice, plus the late charge.
Such special assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing
lien upon each Lot against which the special assessment is levied. Each Owner in the
Project hereby vests the City with the right and power to levy such special assessment,
to impose a lien upon their respective Lot and to bring all legal actions and/or to pursue
lien foreclosure procedures against any Owner and hidher respective Lot for purposes
of collecting such special assessment in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
CC&Rs.
e. Landscape Maintenance Responsibilities. The HOAs and
individual lot or unit owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set forth
in Exhibit
f. Balconies, trellis and decks. The individual lot or unit owner
allowances and prohibitions regarding balconies, trellis and decks shall be as set forth
in Exhibit
g. Fire Suppression. Residential lots are subject to the fire
suppression restrictions as set forth in Exhibit
h. Building Restrictions. In addition to all applicable City of Carlsbad
development standards, all structures on lots I, 2, and 3 are limited to development as
single story. Single story is defined as a maximum plate-line height of 15 feet and a
maximum building height to the roof ridge of 23 feet. All structures on lots 4 and 5 are
limited to a maximum height to the roof ridge of 30 feet and no more than two stories as
defined in Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21.04.330.
17. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall: 1) consult with the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding the impacts of the Project;
and, 2) obtain any permits required by the USWFS.
18. Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City
Council Policy #17, the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad
Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFD #I special tax (if applicable), subject to any
credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also
pay any applicable Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 8, pursuant to
8
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Chapter 21.90. All such taxedfees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the
taxedfees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and
shall become void.
19. Developer shall prepare and record a notice that this property is subject to
overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a
form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney (see Noise
Form #2 on file in the Planning Department).
20. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall record an
Avigation Easement for the property to the County of San Diego and file a copy of the
recorded document with the Planning Director.
21. Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of
Carlsbad on the final map for a trail easement for trail(s) as shown on the tentative map
within lots 1 and 7. Prior to the issuance of any residential building permits, the trail
shall be constructed as a public trail for public use. The trail may be accepted by the
City of Carlsbad upon future adoption of a Citywide Trails Program that includes
provisions for maintenance and liability. Otherwise, prior to issuance of any residential
building permits, the obligation for acceptance, construction, maintenance, and liability
of the trail shall be the responsibility of another agency designated by the City or the
responsibility of the Homeowner’s Association.
22. Developer shall dedicate on the final map, an open space conservation
easement over all of Lot 7 of CT 02-06 to prohibit any private encroachment or
development, including but not limited to decks, storage buildings, pools, spas,
stainvays and non-native landscaping. Structures that reduce the potential for localized
erosion and slide hazards, habitat restoration, habitat conservation, habitat
enhancement, designated public trail, and operation and maintenance of existing storm
water facilities are allowed.
23. Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of a grading permit,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall take the following actions to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director in relation to the open space lot (Lot 7):
a. Select a conservation entity, subject to approval by the Planning
Director, that possesses the necessary qualifications to hold title to Lot 7 and manage it
for conservation purposes.
b.
acceptable to the City for estimating the costs of management and monitoring of the
open space lot in perpetuity.
Prepare a Property Analysis Record (PAR) or other method
c. Based on the results of the PAR, provide a non-wasting
endowment to the selected conservation entity in an amount sufficient for management
and monitoring of Lot 7 in perpetuity.
9
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 9 r6
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
d.
map.
24. As
Transfer fee title to Lot 7 to the selected conservation entity at final
condition of this approval, applicant must comply with the
requirements of all regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the project and any
mitigation requirements of the environmental documents for the project. Pursuant to
Government Code section 65871 and Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 20, Chapter 20.04,
section 20.04.140 applicant shall grant a conservation easement for the conservation,
protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants and the habitat necessary for
biologically sustainable populations of certain species thereof, in accordance with the
City’s adopted Habitat Management Plan.
25. All construction activities shall be planned so that grading will occur in
units that can be easily completed within the summer construction season. All grading
operations shall be limited to be between April 1 and October 1 of each year. All areas
disturbed by grading shall be planted within 60 days of initial disturbance and prior to
October 1 with temporary or permanent (in the case of finished slopes) erosion control
methods. The October 1 grading season deadline may be extended with the approval
of the City Engineer subject to implementation by October 1 of special erosion control
measures designed to prohibit discharge of sediments off-site during and after the
grading operation. Extensions beyond November 15 may be allowed in areas of very
low risk of impact to sensitive coastal resources and may be approved either as part of
the original coastal permit or as an amendment to an existing coastal development
permit.
26. If any of the responsible Resource Agencies prohibit grading operations
during the summer grading period in order to protect endangered or rare species or
sensitive environmental resources, then grading activities may be allowed during the
winter by this coastal development permit provided that appropriate best management
practices (BMPs) are incorporated to limit potential adverse impacts from winter grading
activities.
27. Removal of native vegetation other than that approved as part of the
grad i ng plan , improvement plans , biological re-veg etation program, and/or landscape
plan is specifically prohibited, except upon written order of the Carlsbad Fire
Department for fire prevention purposes, or upon written approval of the Planning
Director, based upon a request from the Homeowners Association accompanied by a
report from a qualified botanist indicating the need to remove specified plants because
of disease or impending danger to adjacent habitable dwelling units. This restriction
shall also be included in the CC&Rs established for the project.
28. At issuance of building permits, or prior to the approval of a final map
and/or issuance of certificate of compliance for the conversion of existing apartments to
air-space condominiums, the Developer shall pay to the City an inclusionary housing in-
lieu fee as an individual fee on a per market rate dwelling unit basis in the amount in
effect at the time, as amended by City Council Resolution from time to time.
10
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 10 17
Enqineerinq Conditions
Genera I
30. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed
construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from,
the City Engineer for the proposed haul route.
31. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the
requirements of the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a
program is formally established by the City.
32. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means,
CC&Rs andlor other recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within
the subdivision and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and
storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in
an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the subdivision.
33. Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install rain gutters to convey roof
drainage to an approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
34. There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project.
Fees/Ag re em en t s
35. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City
Engineer for recordation, the City’s standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless
Agreement.
36. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City
Engineer for recordation the City’s standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement
regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
37. Developer shall cause property owner to execute, record and submit a
recorded copy to the City Engineer, a deed restriction on the property which relates to
the proposed cross lot drainage as shown on the tentative map. The deed restriction
document shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and shall:
a. Clearly delineate the limits of the drainage course;
b. State that the drainage course is to be maintained in perpetuity by
the underlying property owner; and
c. State that all future use of the property along the drainage course
will not restrict, impede, divert or otherwise alter drainage flows in a manner that will
11
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 11
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
result in damage to the underlying and adjacent properties or the creation of a public
nu i sa n ce .
38. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project,
Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the
annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing
City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 and/or to the formation
or annexation into an additional Street Lighting and Landscaping District. Said written
consent shall be on a form provided by the City Engineer.
Grading
39. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities
shown on the tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall
apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a
building permit for the project.
40. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever
occurs first, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention
for the start of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board.
41. Upon completion of grading, Developer shall file an "as-graded" geologic
plan with the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by
the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and
must be based on a contour map, which represents both the pre and post site grading.
The plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist, and
shall be submitted on a 24" x 36" mylar or similar drafting film format suitable for a
permanent record.
42. This project requires off site grading. No grading for private improvements
shall occur outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and
submits a recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or
agreement from the owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain
the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that
case Developer must either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or
modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a
finding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.
Ded ications/l m provements
43. Developer shall cause Owner to execute a covenant of easement for
drainage as shown on the tentative map. The obligation to execute and record the
covenant of easement shall be shown and recording information called out on the final
map. Developer shall provide City Engineer with proof of recordation prior to issuance
of building permit.
12
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 12
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
44. Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to
the City and/or other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements
shown on the tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map.
All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and
without cost. Streets that already public are not required to be rededicated.
45. Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall
dedicate and provide or install drainage structures, as may be required by the City
Engineer, prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit.
46. Developer shall provide the design of all private streets and drainage
systems to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private
streets shall conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private
streets and drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the
standard improvement plancheck and inspection fees.
47. Developer shall execute a City standard Subdivision Improvement
Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public
improvements shown on the tentative map and the following improvements including,
but not limited to, design of all private streets and drainage systems to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform to City of
Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage systems
shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the standard improvement
plancheck and inspection fees.
48. Developer shall execute a City standard Subdivision Improvement
Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public
improvements shown on the tentative map and the following improvements including,
but not limited to, paving, base, signing & striping, sidewalks, curbs and gutters,
medians, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of utilities,
sewer, water, fire hydrants, street lights, retaining walls and reclaimed water, to City
Standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements are:
a. Twain Avenue to cul-de-sac standards
b. Twain Avenue off-site in adjacent project CT 97-16 to cul-de-sac
standards to match the proposed alignment.
A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map
per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed
above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or
development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said
agreement.
49. Twain Avenue shall be dedicated along the project frontage based on a
cul-de-sac right-of way configuration and in conformance with City of Carlsbad
13
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 13
Standards. Developer shall acquire sufficient title or interest to permit the
improvements in the adjacent project, Carlsbad Tract CT 97-16, to match the proposed
cul-de-sac alignment.
49. Developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from IO-year
frequency storms of 6-hours and 24-hours duration under developed conditions, are
equal to or less than the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under
existing developed conditions. Both 6-hour and 24-hour storm durations shall be
analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the
desired results. Drainage shall include downstream protection of drainage patterns to
prevent potential erosion.
50. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever
occurs first, Developer shall submit for City approval a “Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP).” The SWPPP shall be in compliance with current
requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region of the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carlsbad Requirements. The
SWPPP shall address measures to reduce to the maximum extent practicable storm
water pollutant runoff during construction of the project. At a minimum, the SWPPP
shall:
a. include all content as established by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board requirements;
b. include the receipt of “Notice of Intent” issued by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board;
c. recommend source control and treatment control Best Management
Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented with this project to avoid contact or filter said
pollutants from storm water to the maximum extent practicable before discharging to
City right-of-way or natural drainage course; and
d. establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up.
Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee education on the proper
procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants.
51. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever
occurs first, Developer shall submit for City approval a “Storm Water Management Plan
(SWMP).” The SWMP shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Carlsbad
Standard Urban Runoff Management Plan (SUSMP), Order 2001-01 issued by the San
Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of
Carlsbad Municipal Code. The SWMP shall address measures to avoid contact or filter
said pollutants from storm water, to the maximum extent practicable, for the post-
construction stage of the project. At a minimum, the SWMP shall:
14
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a. Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants-of-
concern ;
b. Identify the hydrologic unit this project contributes to and impaired
water bodies that could be impacted by this project;
C. Recommend source controls and treatment controls that will be
implemented with this project to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from storm water
to the maximum extent practicable before discharging to City right-of-way;
d. Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean
up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to resident education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants;
e.
perpetuity; and
Ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in
f. Identify how post-development runoff rates and velocities from the
site will not exceed the pre-development runoff rates and velocities to the maximum
extent practicable .
52. Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install streetlights along all public and
private street frontages abutting and/or within the subdivision boundary in conformance
with City of Carlsbad Standards.
53. Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install sidewalks along all public
streets abutting the subdivision boundary in conformance with City of Carlsbad
Stand a rd s .
54. Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public
street corners abutting the subdivision in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
55. Developer shall incorporate into the gradinghmprovement plans the design
for the project drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct
access road for maintenance purposes is not practical. These end treatments shall be
designed so as to prevent vegetation growth from obstructing the pipe outfall. Designs
could consist of a modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended concrete spillway
section with longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed riprap, or other means
deemed appropriate, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Final Map Notes
56. Developer shall show on Final Map the net developable acres for each
parcel .
57. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-
15
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
om
m> 13
an8 0lug $044 illLC3 14 crl= d->E 15 aN33
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3wg
zwm
E:;
ccz - aoJ
00
mapping data:
a. All improvements are privately owned and are to be privately
maintained with the exception of the following: Twain Avenue cul-de-sac
b. Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject
property unless the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are
available.
c. Geotechnical Caution: The owner of this property on behalf of itself
and all of its successors in interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City
of Carlsbad from any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground water
seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur on, or adjacent to,
this subdivision due to its construction, operation or maintenance.
d. Covenant of easement recording information.
Water
58. Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet
with the Fire Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant
locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if
proposed, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water
mains to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
59. The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public
right-of-way or within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the
City of Carlsbad. At the discretion of the District Engineer, wider easements may be
required for adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes.
60. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees,
deposits, and charges for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the Sari
Dieqo County Water Authoritv capacity charqe(s2 prior to issuance of Building Permits.
61. The Developer shall prepare a colored recycled water use map and
submit this map to the Planning Department for processing and approval by the District
Engineer.
62. The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing
recycled water as a source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the
District Engineer.
63. The Developer shall install potable water and/or recycled water services
and meters at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of said
services shall be reflected on public improvement plans.
16
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 16 63
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
64. The Developer shall install sewer laterals and clean-outs at a location
approved by the District Engineer. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on
public improvement plans.
65. The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and
recycled water facilities substantially as shown on the Tentative Map to the satisfaction
of the District Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public
improvement plans.
66. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits
will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the District
Engineer has determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the
time of occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map, as non-
mapping data.
67. Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever is
first, the entire potable water, recycled water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in
detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the
satisfaction of the District Engineer.
68. Prior to Final Map approval, Developer shall install a total of 6 water
meters for the project. Developer shall install 5 potable water meters for residential use
and 1 irrigation meter to irrigate the common areas (Homeowner’s Association).
69. The Developer shall submit a detailed sewer study, prepared by a
Registered Engineer, that identifies the peak flows of the project, required pipe sizes,
depth of flow in pipe, velocity in the main lines, and the capacity of the existing
infrastructure. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans
for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District
Engineer.
70. The Developer shall submit a detailed potable water study, prepared by a
Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project (including fire flow
demands). The study shall identify velocity in the main lines, pressure zones, and the
required pipe sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement
plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District
Engineer.
71. The Developer shall submit a detailed recycled water study, prepared by a
Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project. The study shall
identify velocity in the main lines and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be
submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
72. The Developer shall submit detailed design drawings prepared by a Registered Engineer for the construction of the sewer force main laterals required to
17
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 17
serve the project.
Engineer.
Said plans shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District
73. Prior to the submittal of improvement plans, the Developer shall submit
and receive approval of a design study prepared by a Registered Engineer that
identifies the:
a. suggested site layout of sewer lift station;
b. size, type, and number of sewer pumps required;
c. type and availability of electricity (2 or 3 phase);
d. alignment of force main;
e. the hydraulic grade line of the force main;
f. surge analysis on force main;
g. size, type, length of force main;
h. size of wet well;
i. resident time of sewage from wet well to top of force main;
j. anticipated flow during initial occupancy of units;
k. maintenance schedule required to cycle pumps during low flows of
initial occupancy of units;
I. suggested type of chemical injection;
m. odor control;
n. corrosion protection;
0. size and type of back-up generator; and
p. schematic of Telemetry.
Said study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
- Fire
74. Perimeter slope landscape shall be designed to be compatible with fire
suppression principals and shall be of plant species that are native, non-invasive, and
drought tolerant.
75. Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner of record shall
demonstrate compliance with the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual, Section 1I.C Fire
Protection Plan to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal.
18
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 18
76. The fire hydrant at the end of the cul-de-sac shall be relocated to the north
and east to a spot near the street light along the slope to the satisfaction of the Fire
Marsh a I.
Special
77. The applicant shall cause the General Plan Amendment (GPA 03-01),
Zone Change (ZC 03-01), and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 03-01) to be
submitted to the City Council no later than 90 days of final map recordation.
Code Reminders
78. Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of
the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
79. Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as
required by Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
80. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable
sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at
time of building permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
81. The tentative map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this
tentative map approval becomes final.
82. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this
project to prevent off-site siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in
accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.1 6 (the Grading Ordinance) to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
83. Some improvements shown on the tentative parcel map and/or required
by these conditions are located off-site on property which neither the City nor the owner
has sufficient title or interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition
of title or interest. The Developer shall immediately initiate negotiations to acquire such
property. The Developer shall use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If
unsuccessful, Developer shall demonstrate to the City Engineer its best efforts, and
comply with the requirements of the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 20.16.095 to
notify and enable the City to successfully acquire said property by condemnation.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
conven ie n ce as “fees/exact ion s . ”
19
Resolution No. 2004-068 page 19
You have 90 days from date of 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
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 City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of
March , 2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
- NOES: None
ABSENT: None
I
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
20 a7 Resolution No. 2004-068 page 20
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-069
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COASTAL
ACRES INTO 5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO COMMONLY
OWNED LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH
OF FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF
TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP 02-05 TO SUBDIVIDE 21.9
CASE NO.: CDP 02-05
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “D” dated September 3, 2003, on file in
the Planning Department, KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP - CDP 02-05 as provided by
Chapter 21.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the subdivision will be subsequently developed with single
family homes; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
1
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission
considered all factors relating to the CDP; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interest in or opposed to GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD 02-
02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A.
B.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, CDP 02-05 is
approved based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local
Coastal Program and all applicable policies in that the proposed project is in compliance
with all of the development standards of the underlying zone as shown on Exhibits “A -
“D” dated September 3, 2003, the proposed residential density is within the density
range established by the Mello II segment, and is consistent with the intent of the
individual policies of the applicable Local Coastal Program overlay zones.
2. That the project is designed to include erosion and water quality control as
specified in Section 21.203.040(B)(4)(a-i) of the Coastal Resource Protection overlay
zone policy.
That the project protects steep slopes per Section 21.203.04O(A)(l)(a-c)
of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, has minimized on-site paving, and is
conditioned to prepare a Fire Suppression Plan.
3.
4. That grading is restricted to be accomplished between April 1 and October
1 of each year not withstanding the ability to extend the grading period per Section
21.203.040 (B) (4) of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone.
2
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 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
5. That the project is consistent with the Draft Carlsbad Habitat Management
Plan in that 75% of the property will be preserved in a natural state and will be protected
by an open space conservation easement.
6. That subsequent development of each residential lot with a single family
home will not have any further affect on coastal resources.
7. The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation
policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act in that the project does not prohibit access to
the Agua Hedionda Lagoon or to the Pacific Ocean.
8. The City Council has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions
are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the
extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by
the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final
map.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to
be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation
to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval
of this Coastal Development Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all
corrections and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit documents, as
necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on
the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits.
Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to
this approval.
3. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and
local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the
payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this
Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government
Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval
3
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 3 30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition
complies with all requirements of law.
5. 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
Coastal Development Permit, (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.
6. Developer shall submit to the Planning Director a reproducible 24” x 36” mylar
copy of the Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making
body.
7. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-06, PUD 02-02 and
HDP 02-01 and is subject to all conditions contained in City Council Resolutions No.
2004-068 2004-074 and 2004-070 for those other approvals
incorporated herein by reference.
8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall apply for and
obtain a grading permit issued by the City Engineer.
9. Developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from IO-year frequency
storms of 6-hours and 24-hours duration under developed conditions, are equal to or
less than the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing
developed conditions. Both 6-hour and 24-hour storm durations shall be analyzed to
determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results.
IO. Developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Developer shall provide improvements
constructed pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the “California
Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook“ to reduce surface pollutants to an
acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements
shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Said plans shall
include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of the following:
a. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work
with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
4
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 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
b. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline,
motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other
such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
c. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce
surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface
improvements
11. The Developer shall dedicate on the final map, an open space conservation
easement over all of Lot 7 of CT 02-06 to prohibit any private encroachment or
development, including but not limited to decks, storage buildings, pools, spas,
stairways and non-native landscaping. Structures which reduce the potential for
localized erosion and slide hazards, habitat restoration, habitat conservation, habitat
enhancement and operation and maintenance of existing storm water facilities are
allowed by issuance of this Coastal Development Permit (CDP 02-05).
12. Storm drain facilities consistent with the Master Drainage Plan shall be
installed as required by the City Engineer.
13. Soil erosion control practices shall be used against “on-site’’ soil erosion to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
14. Off-site drainage shall be prevented through sediment control.
methods shall be shown on the grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Control
15. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer or their successors
shall obtain approval of a fire suppression plan consistent with the Mello II segment of
the Local Coastal Program from the Carlsbad Fire Department.
16. This approval shall become null and void 24 months from the date of Coastal
Development Permit approval.
17. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City a
Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in
interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a(n) Coastal Development Permit by
note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and
all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion
in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and
record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a
showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest.
Resolution( s) No. 3004 - 069 on the property. Said Notice of Restriction shall
5
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 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
18. All construction activities shall be planned so that grading will occur in units
that can be easily completed within the summer construction season. All grading
operations shall be limited to be between April I and October 1 of each year. All areas
disturbed by grading shall be planted within 60 days of initial disturbance and prior to
October I with temporary or permanent (in the case of finished slopes) erosion control
methods. The October 1 grading season deadline may be extended with the approval
of the City Engineer subject to implementation by October 1 of special erosion control
measures designed to prohibit discharge of sediments off-site during and after the
grading operation. Extensions beyond November 15 may be allowed in areas of very
low risk of impact to sensitive coastal resources and may be approved either as part of
the original coastal permit or as an amendment to an existing coastal development
permit.
If any of the responsible Resource Agencies prohibit grading operations during
the summer grading period in order to protect endangered or rare species or sensitive
environmental resources, then grading activities may be allowed during the winter by
this coastal development permit provided that appropriate best management practices
(BMPs) are incorporated to limit potential adverse impacts from winter grading activities.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
conven ie n ce as “fees/exact io n s . ’’
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these
fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in
Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required
information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent
legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified
feeslexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity
charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service
...
...
...
...
6
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 6 33
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 City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of
March , 2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
Am&%-,
Lbf3WAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
7
Resolution No. 2004-069 page 7 4 rcc 3’
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-070
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO SUBDIVIDE 21.9 ACRES
INTO 5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO COMMONLY
OWNED LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
NORTH OF FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN
TERMINUS OF TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO: HDP 02-01
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A - “D” dated September 3, 2003, on file in
the Carlsbad Planning Department, KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP - HDP 02-01, as
provided by Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
all factors relating to the Hillside Development Permit; and
I
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did o the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to GPA 03-011ZC 03-011LCPA 03-011CT 02-061PUD
02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL
as follows:
A.
B.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, HDP 02-01 is
approved based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints
map which show existing and proposed conditions and slope percentages.
2. That undevelopable areas of the project, Le. slopes over 40%, have been
properly identified on the constraints map.
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and
requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that the proposed hillside
alteration will not result in substantial damage or alteration of a significant natural
resource area, wildlife habitat or native vegetation and has to the greatest extent
followed the natural topography.
4. That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the
undevelopable portions of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 21.53.230 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, in that none of the “undevelopable” lands identified in this
section of the zoning ordinance are present on-site.
5. That the project design substantially conforms to the intent of the concepts
illustrated in the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that project pads step
downward from the northeast to the southwest similar to the natural topography of the
site.
6. That the project design and lot configuration minimizes disturbance of
hillside lands, in that no more than 25% of the gross site area is within the limits of
hillside alteration.
2
Resolution No. 2004-070 page 2 3b
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final
map.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to
be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation
to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval
of this Hillside Development Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all
corrections and modifications to the Hillside Development Permit documents, as
necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on
the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits.
Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to
this approval.
3. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and
local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the
payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this
Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government
Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval
shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition
complies with all requirements of law.
5. 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
Hillside Development Permit, (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.
3
Resolution No. 2004-070 page 3 37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-06, PUD 02-02 and
CDP 02-05 and is subject to all conditions contained in City Council Resolutions No.
2004-068 , 2004-074 and 2004-069 for those approvals incorporated herein by
reference.
7. This approval shall become null and void if grading permits are not issued for
this project within 24 months from the date of Hillside Development Permit approval.
8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City a
Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in
interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a(n) Hillside Development Permit by
Resolution(s) No. 2004-070 on the property. Said Notice of Restriction shall
note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and
all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion
in the Notice of Restriction. The Pianning Director has the authority to execute and
record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a
showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
conven ie n ce as “fees/exact ion s . ’’
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
feedexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity
charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service ...
...
..
...
...
4
Resolution No. 2004-070 page 4
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 City
Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the 2nd day of March , 2004 by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewisr Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None m
ABSENT: None
1
L6ReAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
5
Resolution No. 2004-070 page 5
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-071
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT
TO THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM TO BRING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS IN THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE CARLSBAD GENERAL
PLAN AND ZONING MAP ON PROPERTY LOCATED
NORTH OF FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN
TERMINUS OF TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO: LCPA 03-01
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in
conformance; and
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot ‘IF” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local
Coastal Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “LCPA 03-01 - Zoning” dated
September 3, 2003 attached hereto and on file in the Planning Department, as provided
in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2,
Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal
Commission Administrative Regulations; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission
considered all factors relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review
period for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD
02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01 ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A.
B.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
The State mandated six-week review period, started on July IO, 2003, and
ended on August 21,2003. No comments have been received.
C. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, LCPA 03-01
is approved, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements
of, and is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all
applicable policies of the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal
Program not being amended by this amendment, in that the proposed land use
designation changes will be consistent with the proposed development and
conservation of the property.
2
Resolution No. 2004-071 page 2 4f
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 <:08 ow2 2045 iU, 14
crlz
15 u->g 9 "nk #a- s&%$
$$$: 16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0
a> sug
E:? aoJ
u
2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad Local
Coastal Program is required to bring it into consistency with the City of Carlsbad
General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 2nd day of March , 2004
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None - ABSENT: None
3
Resolution No. 2004-071 page 3
LCPA: 03-01
dmft @ flnel
ZONING
43
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-072
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE
CHANGE FROM ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1-30,000)
TO R-1-30,000 AND OPEN SPACE (OS) ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF FARADAY AVENUE
AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF TWAIN AVENUE IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO: ZC 03-01
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot ‘IF” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as
shown on Exhibits “ZC 03-01” dated September 3, 2003, attached hereto and on file in
the Planning Department, KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP ZC 03-01 as provided by Chapter
21 52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission
considered all factors relating to the Zone Change; and
1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to GPA 03-011ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-011CT 02-06/PUD
02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council as
follows:
A. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, ZC 03-
01 is approved based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
I. That the proposed Zone Change from R-1-30,000 to R-1-30,000 and OS is
consistent with the goals and policies of the various elements of the General Plan, in
that the zone change will establish an open space area for conservation.
2. That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan
and Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad General Plan
Land Use Element, in that the zone change will implement the land use designations of
the General Plan.
3. That the Zone Change is consistent with the public convenience, necessity
and general welfare, and is consistent with sound planning principles in that the zone
change reflects the use of the property as an open space conservation area.
Conditions:
1. Zone Change ZC 03-01 is subject to the approval of GPA 03-01 and LCPA
03-01.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
conve n ie n ce as “fees/exact io n s . ”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these
fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in
Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required
2
Resolution No. 2004-072 page 2
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
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 feeslexactions 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 City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 2nd day of March 1
2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
&&bm
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
3
Resolution No. 2004-072 page 3
PROPERTY 2ONE CHANGE
PROPOSED
02-05fHDP 02-01
All that prtbn of Lot "F of Rancho Agm Hsdio*, in the County of SaEn Diego, State of C&!Efwnia, a53 shown an Partition Mep thereof No. 823, fled in tho Office ol ths
County Recardw oi San Biago County, M Nrmembrw 16,
189fj.
47
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-073
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, AND LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION TO OPEN SPACE
AND APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE 21.9 ACRES INTO 5
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO COMMONLY OWNED LOTS
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF FARADAY
AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF TWAIN AVENUE
IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8.
CASE NAME: KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
CASE NO.: GPA 03-01 /ZC 03-01 /LCPA 03-0 1 /CT 02-
06/PUD 02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified applicatio.. with th
City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described as
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction
with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning
Commission considered all factors relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004 hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to GPA 03-OIIZC 03-OIILCPA 03-011CT 02-06/PUD
02-02lCDP 02-05lHDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council as
follows:
A.
6.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the City
Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration according to Exhibit “ND”
dated January 19, 2003, and “PII” dated January 15, 2003, attached hereto and made a
part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. It has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon
prior to approving the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program
Amendment, Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Coastal Development Permit, and
Hillside Development Permit; and
b. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the
Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
c. It reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City
of Carlsbad; and
d. Based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial
evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Resolution No. 2004-073 page 2
2 Lf9
Conditions:
1. Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Kirgis Tentative
Map - CT 02-06 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of
March , 2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
ABSENT: None
3
Resolution No. 2004-073 page 3
- City of Carlsbad
RECIRCULATED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location: North of Faraday Avenue at the southern terminus of Twain Street,
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County
Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment to reconcile the zoning and Local Coastal
Program land use designations to be consistent with the General
Plan land use map and the subdivision of 21.9 acres into five
residential lots, one open space lot, and one private street lot.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the
initial study (EM Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1 1
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City
that the project “as revised” may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration is intended to be issued for the subject project. Justification for
this action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30
days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4614.
DATED:
CASE NO:
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH DATE:
JANUARY 19,2003
GPA 03-0 1/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/HDP 02-01/CDP 02-05/PUD 02-02
KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP I
JANUARY 19,2003
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
@ 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
CASE NO: GPA 03-01 /ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD 02-02/CDP 02-O5/HDP 02-01
DATE: Seutember 25.2002
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
CASE NAME: Kirgis Tentative Map
LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad
CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Christer Westman 760-602-4614
PROJECT LOCATION: North of Faraday Avenue at the southern terminus of Twain Street
PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: c/o Brian Reaan, 1811 Rock Sprinm Road
San Marcos, CA 92069 760-480-6062
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Low (RL) and Open Space (OS)
ZONING: R-1-30,000
OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing
approval or participation agreements): N/A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
Subdivision of 21.9 acres into 5 residential lots, one open space lot, and one private street lot.
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to reconcile the
zoning and LCP land use designations to be consistent with the General Plan land use map. The
site is currently an undeveloped hilltop adjacent to a developing parcel to the north. The site has
a significant presence of coastal sage scrub, the majority of which has been identified in the City
of Carlsbad Draft Habitat Management Plan as part of a biological preserve. Properties
immediately to the west, east and south are part of the preserve and will not be developed.
so2/ Rev. 07/03/02
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project.
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
0 Aesthetics 0 Geology/Soils Noise
0 Agricultural Resources [7 Hazards/Hazardous Materials c] and Housing
Air Quality 0 Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Public Services
Biological Resources 0 Land Use and Planning Recreation
Cultural Resources 0 Mineral Resources 0 TransportatiodCirculation
Mandatory Findings of 0 Utilities & Service Systems Significance
2 53 Rev. 07/03/02
DETERMINATION.
0
Ixl
0
0
0
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have “potentially significant impact(s)” on the environment,
but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed
project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
AG? m3 Planner Signature
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the
environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a
checklist. Ths checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by
the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved
EIR or Negative Declaration.
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately
supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No
Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be
explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors
as well as general standards.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential
impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and
policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than
Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the
mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant
level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significantly adverse.
Based on an “EM-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse
effect on the environment, but fl potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed
project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present
and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been
incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required.
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR
if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding
Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the
project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment.
If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the
appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
Rev. 07/03/02 4
0 An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not
limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been
discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does
not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a
“Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant adverse impact has not been made
pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to
less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Part I1 analysis it is not possible to determine the
level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation
measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form
under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to
discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant.
5 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and hlstoric
buildings withm a State scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Potentially Significant
Impact
0
0
0
3
Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigation Incorporated
0
0
0
Less Than
significant
Impact
[XI
0
[XI
0
No
Impact
El
E4
0
[XI
11. AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES - (In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agncultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would
the project:
0 UIXI Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
0 nix1 Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
0 ow Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations.) Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 om
o 0 cim
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
6 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on. any riparian,
aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by California Department
of Fish and Game or US. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Impact tributary areas that are environmentally
sensitive?
Potentially Significant Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I7
cl
0
Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigation Incorporated
0
0
0
IXI
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than Significant Impact o
0'
0
0
0
0
0
NO
Impact
Is]
IXI
Ixl
0
IXI
IXI
IXI
Ixl
IXI
IXI
7 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -Would the project:
Cause a Substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in 9 15064.5?
Cause a Substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologi-
cal resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
Expose people or structures to potential Substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
1.
11.
... 111.
iv.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
Substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
Strong seismic ground shaking?
Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
Landslides?
Result in Substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
Substantial risks to life or property?
Potentially Significant
Impact
0
I7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
17
IXI
IXI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
IXI
[XI
[XI
IXI
8 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact impact
0 0 om e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater'?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
environment?
For a project within an airport land use plan, or
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OB
OEI
OB
OB
EIO
0 0 ON a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
9 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources)
Substantially deplete
interfere substantially
groundwater supplies or
with ground water recharge
such that there would be a-net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local ground water table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for whch permits
have been granted)?
Impacts to groundwater quality?
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in
a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation
map?
Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface
waters.
Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals,
pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics,
nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash)
into receiving surface waters or other alteration of
receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
Potentially
Significant Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
incorporated
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significanl
Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ho
ImpJcl
El
IXI
[XI
[XI
[XI
Ixl
Ixl
Ixl
Ixl
Ixl
Ixl
IXI
10 Rev. 01/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
0
n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or
wetland waters) during or following construction?
0) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list?
0 p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater
receiving water quality objectives or degradation of
beneficial uses?
IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
El
'0
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
0 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
0 a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State?
0 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
XI. NOISE - Would the project result in:
0 a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of
other agencies?
El b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise
levels?
0
0
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact
Unless Less Than
0 0151
ow
0 0151
0 0151
0 om
0 OH
0 0151
0 om
11 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
For a project located witlun an airport land
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
use plan
within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, a
need for new or physically altered government
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Potentially Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated impact
0 0 151
0' 0 0
0 0 rl
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I7
0
0
0
0
0
0
12 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehcle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Result in inadequate emergency access?
Result in insufficient parking capacity?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus tum-
outs, bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which would
cause significant environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
13
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
0
El
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0
0.
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated lmpact lmpact
0 0 om e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider. which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
0 0 OH 0
0 0 ON g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
0 0 a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
(XI0
o 0 ON b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumula-
tively considerable” means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects?)
Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
0’0 OH c)
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Em, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on
attached sheets:
a)
b)
Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for
review.
Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
c)
14 Rev. 07/03/02
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
AESTHETICS:
The site is not part of a significant scenic vista or significant view shed. Grading of the property is
proposed to generally follow the existing topography consistent with the City’s Hillside Development
Ordinance. Future residential construction will be reviewed for consistency with city design policy.
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:
There are no agricultural resources on-site.
AIR QUALITY-Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-
attainment area for ozone (03), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to
10 microns in diameter (PMIo). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards
(AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that
a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San
Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies
(RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association
of Governments (SANDAG).
A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the
1991 state-mandated plan, This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-
attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November
9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for
approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog
problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996.
The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that
are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each
city’s and the County’s general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan,
then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such
consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact.
Section 15 125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains
specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the
applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS.
The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal
ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining
whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following:
0 Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area?
Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan?
The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is
being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City’s General Plan and
the RAQS. Therefore. the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way
conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City
of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air
quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and
2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state
standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been
recorded recently. (Add the following text addressing short-term emissions, if there is grading
associated with the project.) The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with
grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures
such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions
associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be
associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard
(comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than
significant.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and
suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively
considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however.
emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions
potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not
the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 (a)(4), the
proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minirnus. Any impact is
assessed as less than significant.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
No Impact. As noted above, the proposed project would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or
concentrations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the
vicinity of the project. No impact is assessed.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a Substantial number of people?
No Impact. The ConLhction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of
construction equipment, whin b may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would
be short-term or transient. In aO%hn, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not
considered substantial.
I L-
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
The property has been surveyed for sensitive biological resources and quantified in a report prepared by
Dudek and Associates, Inc. The report is on file with the City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
Based on species and general physiognomy, two native plant communities were identified on-site. They
are coastal sage scrub and southern maritime chaparral. No State or Federally listed threatened or
endangered plant species occurs on-site. Two pairs of California gnatcatchers, San Diego pocket mouse,
and orange throated whiptail were detected during focused surveys for Pacific pocket mouse.
Impacts to the California gnatcatcher and its coastal sage scrub habitat are considered significant and
must be mitigated through onsite preservation. Impacts to the gnatcatcher will also require a “take”
permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
CULTURAL RESOURCES:
A surface survey was conducted and no significant cultural resources were identified. Further testing is
required to determine if there are subsurface artifacts of importance. Standard testing procedures for
archeological and paleontological resources are required. If resources are discovered additional measures
for the preservation of the data will be implemented.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS:
A geotechnical resources report was prepared by Christian Wheeler Engineering. No geologic hazards of
significant magnitude were discovered onsite and soils conditions are considered acceptable for
development. Several grading and construction techniques are recommended in the report and have been
incorporated into the Mitigation Measures, Monitoring, and Reporting Program.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL:
Residential development is not typically considered a source of public hazards. The site is also not one
which is known to contain hazardous materials pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The site
is near a general aviation airport. Because of the site’s proximity to the airport some risk of aviation
hazard can be expected, however, given existing airport flight patterns, operations, and history the risk is
less than significant.
Risk of wildland fire exists because the project includes an open space conservation lot dominated by
native scrub. However, development includes removal of some native plant materials and replacement
with native, more fire resistant species. Management of the fire suppression zones between the
development and the native habitat reduce the potential of wildland fire to a level of less than significant.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY:
The project is designed to satisfy the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards regarding urban
pollutants. The site has been designed to limit 10 year storm flows to existing levels.
LAND USE AND PLANNING:
The proposed project does not divide an established community. It serves as an extension of the Kelly
Ranch subdivision to the north. The proposal is consistent with the City’s zoning and General Plan in that
both documents identify single family residential development and open space as desirable land uses at
this location. Additionally, the City of Carlsbad’s draft habitat management plan identifies this site for
75% conservation. As designed, the project achieves the required 75% conservation.
A General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Local Coastal Program Amendment are included in the
project applications for the sake of reconciling differences between the land use maps. The net effect is
the establishment of a greater portion of the property as Open Space on the General Plan land use map
and Zoning Map. The map changes will not intensify development of the site or change the pattern of the
proposed development.
MINERAL RESOURCES:
No significant mineral resources have been found onsite.
NOISE:
There are no significant sources of noise on or near the project site. Residential developments are not
typically known as significant noise generators. There is the potential for aircraft overflight because of
the proximity of the Palomar-McClellan Airport and therefore associated aircraft noise. However, the
frequency of overflight is less than significant.
POPULATION AND HOUSING:
The project itself is the infill development of the last remaining developable parcel in the immediate
vicinity. Because the site is
undeveloped, it cannot displace either housing or substantial numbers of people.
Development of the project cannot therefore be growth inducing.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
Public services are available and can be provided to the proposed subdivision.
RECREATION:
Being that the project is the subdivision of property into five single family residential lots, a conclusion
must be drawn that it will not generate use of existing regional and neighborhood parks such that they
would be substantially deteriorated, or accelerate their deterioration.
TRANSPORTATIONflRAFFIC-Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate 50 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This traffic
will utilize the following roadways Cannon Road, El Camino Real, and Faraday Avenue. Existing traffic
on this these arterials are 29,389 ADT on El Camino Real, 8,749 ADT on Cannon Road, and 7,058 ADT
on Faraday Avenue, (2001 and 2002). The design capacities of the arterial roads effected by the proposed
project are 40,000 vehicles per day on El Camino Real, 20,000 - 40,000 vehicles per day on Cannon
Road, and 2,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day on Faraday Avenue. The project traffic would represent less
than 0.007% and 0.005% of the existing traffic volume and the design capacity respectively. While the
increase in traffic fkom the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been
designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of
Carlsbad. The proposed project would not, therefore, cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the proposed
project are, therefore, less than significant.
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has
designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway
segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The Existing and Buildout average daily
traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS on these designated roads and highways in Carlsbad is:
Existinp ADT* - LOS Buildout ADT*
Rancho Santa Fe Road 15-32 “A-C” 28-43
El Camino Real 21-50 “A-C” 32-65
Palomar Airport Road 10-52 “A-B” 29-77
SR 78 120 “F” 144
*The numbers are in thousands of daily tips.
1-5 183-198 “D” 2 19-249
The Congestion Management Program’s (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is “E”, or
LOS “F” if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS “F” in 1990).
Accordingly, all designated roads and highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable
standard LOS.
Note that the buildout ADT projections are based on the full implementation of the region’s general and
community plans. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan and, therefore, its traffic was
used in modeling the buildout projections. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS)
“E” standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacities of
the designated roads and highways and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at
acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at buildout.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is consistent
with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore,
result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. No impact assessed.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses?
No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed to City standards;
and, therefore, would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City’s
general plan and zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact
assessed.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire
and Police Departments. No impact assessed.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact. The proposed project is not requesting a parking variance. Additionally, the project kvould
comply with the City’s parking requirements to ensure an adequate parking supply. No impact assessed.
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks, etc.)?
No Impact. The project is not served by or not located in an area conducive to public transportation.
UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS:
The project is designed to satisfy the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards regarding
urban pollutants. New community or regional water or wastewater facilities are not required as a
result of the project. Existing water and wastewater treatment facilities have current capacity to serve
the project.
EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad
Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008.
1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MER
93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994.
2. Initial Studv/Environmental Checklist Wilson Residences prepared by Dudek and Associates. Inc.
dated October 200 1 with technical appendices.
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
All grading shall conform with the guidelines presented in the Uniform Building Code, the
minimum requirements of the City of Carlsbad, and the Recommended Grading Specifications
and Special Provision included in the 2001 Christian Wheeler Engineering Report. Prior to
grading, a geotechnical engineer shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to provide
additional grading guidelines, if necessary, and to review the earthwork schedule.
A geotechnical consultant shall be onsite during the mass grading operations to confirm
conditions and allow adjustments in design criteria to ensure that grading proceeds in accordance
with the recommendations described in the 200 1 Christian Wheeler Engineering Report.
The site grading shall include clearing and grubbing of all vegetati.on and other deleterious
materials. The material shall be deposited offsite.
Site preparations shall include the removal of all existing topsoil, subsoil and slopewash from all
areas to receive fill and/or improvements. The materials should be removed to the contact with
competent terrace deposits or material of the Santiago Formation, as determined in the field by
the project geologist, engineer, or fieId supervisor. Where necessary to achieve planned site
grade, the removed materials may be replaced as compacted fill provided they are thoroughly
mixed and moisture conditioned prior to placement.
The cut portion of the building pad that is traversed by a cut/fill transition line should have the cut
portion undercut at least three feet. The bottom of the over-excavated areas should be sloped in a
manner that water does not become trapped in the over-excavated zone. Prior to replacing the
excavated materials, the soils exposed at the bottom of the excavation should be scarified to a
depth of six inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction.
Prior to placing any new fill soils or constructing any new improvements in areas that have been
cleaned out to receive fill and approved by the geotechnical consultant or representative, the
exposed soil should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to
at least 90 percent relative compaction.
All structural fill placed at the site should be compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90
percent of its maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM Laboratory Test D1557-91.
Fills should be placed at or slightly above optimum moisture content, in lifts six to eight inches
thick, with each lift compacted by mechanical means. Fills should consist 0.f approved earth
material, free of trash or debris, roots, vegetation, or other materials determined to be unsuitable
by a soil technician or project geologist. Fill material should be free of rocks or lumps of soil in
excess of twelve inches in maximum dimension. However, in the upper two feet of pad grade, no
rocks or lumps of soil in excess of six inches should be allowed.
Portions of the Santiago Formation that are to be used as fill material should be mixed with other
onsite soils to produce a nondetrimentally expansive mixture of soil, or should be placed at least
five feet below finish pad grade. Samples of the mixed fill material placed at the foundation level
should be tested to verify that a nondetrimentally expansive mix has been achieved. Where the
mixture of soil does not produce a nondetrimentally expansive fill material, special considerations
for heaving soil will need to be incorporated into the foundation design. In addition, where
detrimentally expansive soil is determined to occur naturally within four feet of finish pad grade.
it should be removed and replaced with nondetrimentally expansive fill material.
The placement of cohesionless soils at the face of slopes should be avoided. Sloughing, deep
drilling and slumping of surficial soils may occur if slopes are left unplanted for a long period of
time. especially during the rainy season.
Irrigation on and adjacent to slopes should be carefully monitored to ensure that only the
minimum amount of water is used necessary to sustain plant life
The existing topsoil, subsoil, and slopewash materials will need to be removed from arras to
support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements, and, where necessary to achieve planned
site grades, be replaced as properly compacted structural fill.
Portions of the Santiago Formation that are to be used as fill material should be mixed with other
onsite soils to produce a nondetrimentally expansive mixture of soil, or should be placed at least
five feet below finish pad grade. Samples of the mixed fill material placed at the foundation level
should be tested to verify that a nondetrimentally expansive mix has been achieved. Where the
mixture of soil does not produce a nondetrimentally expansive fill material, special considerations
for heaving soil will need to be incorporated into the foundation design. In addition, where
detrimentally expansive soil is determined to occur naturally within four feet of finish pad grade,
it should be removed and replaced with nondetrimentally expansive fill material.
The portions of Lots 1 and 2 that are underlained by the moderately expansive clayey portions of
the Santiago Formation will need to be either “select” graded, or structures proposed for these lots
will need to be supported by foundations designed for heaving soils. Foundations supported by
moderately expansive soil should consist of deepened conventional foundations with additional
reinforcement or a post-tensioned slab/foundation system.
Differential settlement resulting from the cut/fill transition for Lot 3 shall be mitigated by
adherence to the “Transition Building Pads” recommendation described in the 200 1 Christian
Wheeler Engineering Report. The cut portion of the building pad that is traversed by a cut/fill
transition line should have the cut portion undercut at least three feet. The bottom of the over-
excavated areas should be sloped in a manner that water does not become trapped in the over-
excavated zone. Prior to replacing the excavated materials, the soils exposed at the bottom of the
excavation should be scarified to a depth of six inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to at
least 90 percent relative compaction.
The northern cut portion of Lot 3 that is underlain by the moderately expansive clayey portions of
the Santiago Formation will need to be either “select” graded at the time of the transition undercut
so that the pad will be capped by a mat of nondetrimentally expansive fill material. If “select”
grading cannot be accomplished, foundations supporting the structures proposed for Lot 3 will
need to be designed for heaving soils.
Fills of up to 20 feet for construction of building pads for Lots 4 and 5 shall have the expansive
onsite materials mixed with the onsite terrace deposits to obtain a nondetrimentally expansive
material. If “select” grading cannot be accomplished, foundations supporting the structures
proposed for Lots 4 and 5 will need to be designed for heaving soils
As depicted on the project plans, storm water runoff will be directed to each lots’ onsite drainage.
Each lot will be equipped with a drainage systems which will allow for onsite oil/water separation
prior to discharge offsite. With the storm water systems conveying the runoff and the volume and
energy dissipators controlling the velocity of runoff, it is anticipated that the proposed
development would not adversely impact existing drainage patterns or create adverse conditions
within offsite drainages or Agua Hedionda Lagoon.
Minimize project related short term impacts to air quality by implementing the following:
a.
b.
Use adequate water and/or other dust palliatives on all disturbed areas.
Terminate soil excavation, clearing or grading when wind speeds exceed 25 mph for an
hourly average.
Cover all vehicles hauling dirt or spoils on public roadways unless additional moisture is
added to prevent material blow-off during transport.
Minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes from construction equipment or activities.
C.
d.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
e. Street sweeping should occur if silt is carried over public thoroughfares.
f. During construction, the Applicant will:
1)
ii)
use water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas where vehicles move damp
enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day
19. Impacts to 4.9 acres of coastal sage scrub will be mitigated through onsite conservation of 11.0
acres of coastal sage scrub and 4.9 acres of onsite re-vegetation. The 15.9 acres will be
dedicated as a biological reserve and will be managed for the benefit of habitat and species
conservation.
Impacts to 0.05 acres of southern maritime chaparral will be mitigated through the preservation of
the majority of the maritime chaparral onsite within the open space lot dedicated as a biological
reserve and managed for the benefit of habitat and species conservation.
Impacts to California adolphia will be mitigated through the preservation of the majority of the
adolphia onsite within the open space lot dedicated as a biological reserve and managed for the
benefit of habitat and species conservation.
Take of federally-listed species, pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act, requires
authorization under Section lO(a)(l)(B). The applicant shall consult with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and obtain the appropriate Federal permit(s) prior to the issuance of a grading
permit.
Prior to site grading, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to carry out an appropriate
mitigation program. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with an MS or Ph.D.
in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.)
a. The qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult
with the grading and excavation contractors.
A paleontological monitor shall be on-site a minimum of half-time during the original
cutting of previously undisturbed sediments to inspect cuts for contained fossils. In the
event that fossils are discovered, it may be necessary to increase the per/day in field
monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be
reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in
the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work
under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.
When fossils are discovered the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover
them. In most cases, this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time.
However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may
require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or
paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to
allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the
recovery of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in
certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site.
Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation
program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged.
Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall
either be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent
paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum or retained by
the City and displayed to the public at an appropriate location such as City Hall.
A final summary report shall be completed and retained on file at the City that outlines
the results of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the
methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of
recovered fossils.
20.
21.
22.
23.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
25.
Testing to determine significance is recommended for sites CA-SDI-8793 and CA-SDI-9097.
The testing program will need to be completed in compliance with City of Carlsbad and CEQA
guidelines. The program should include collection of surface artifacts to determine site size;
excavation of shovel test pits across each site to determine the presence or absence of prehistoric
deposit; and excavation of two to four 1x1-meter units to determine site depth, content, integrity
and potential to address important research questions. If the site(s) within the project area are
determined to be significant, then mitigation of impacts will be necessary. Mitigation of impacts
can be achieved through avoidance and preservation. or through the completion of a data
recovery program. If the site(s) are identified as not significant, then no additional work' will be
required.
Monitoring of brushing, grading, and trenching by a qualified archeologist shall be required
during the construction of the project in order to identify any significant archeological
components of the site. Monitoring will also focus on any potential to discover sites that were not
identified in previous surveys due to them being buried or masked from view. Any previously
unrecorded sites discovered during brushing, grading, or trenching will require significance
evaluation and, if found to be important, mitigation applied before grading can resume at the
location of the discovery. A data recovery program shall be completed for any significant
archaeological site impacted by the project in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's Cultural
Resource Guidelines Criteria and Methodology for completing a Data Recovery Program Phase
I11 (December 1990). All artifacts and data collected from the testing and mitigation work for the
project will be submitted to the San Diego Archaeological Center for permanent curation.
26.
27.
28.
All vegetation clearing shall take place outside of the gnatcatcher breeding season, which is
considered to extend from February 15 through August 3 1.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall cause a raptor survey to be conducted.
If there are nesting raptors onsite, no grading shall be allowed until the nests are vacated.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
City of Carlsbad for all slopes adjacent to the open space conservation lot which incorporates
native plants that are fire resistant and avoids invasive exotics.
Depredation of sensitive species by domestic cats is a concern. Fencing shall be included at the
edge of the pads designed to deter domestic cats from entering the open space conservation lot.
A biological monitor shall be present onsite during grading.
29.
30.
74
/I 82 Ea c
>u
-
a C
a C a C W
.- z
.- .
e 0 a
a
.- E
a C
a C a S W
.- &
.-
e 0 a
a
.- 2
P) C
Q) C
13) K w
.- b
.-
c 0 Q)
Q
.- 2
13) C
Q) K
P) C w
.- b
.-
c 0 a
Q
.- 2
P) C
Q) K
13) K w
.- b
.-
c 0 Q) .- 2 a
* 0 Q,
a
.- e
w 0) C C w .-
Q)
C
C 5 C
0-J w m
C
.- f ti
15 w
.- C Q)
h .- .-
w C
Q) c m
.- ti
15
.-
c 0 Q) .- 2 a
Q,
0 YI
Is, C
a, C
Is, C W
.- 5
.-
Is, C .- b
.- E
0-l S W
' 0 Q)
a
.- e
Is, Is, C .g Is, .-
Q) .r & E .- c3 .-
5 Fa
Q)U
Is,
W
m
L P
c s s
vi
n
c m -
a
Y C
Is) C
C C m
.-
h
c 0 a
a
.- P
m C
0 Is)
.-
6
I%
m C
C C m
.-
h
m C
0 m
.-
Ei
m C
C C m
.-
h
m C .- 8 Ei
m
Is) C
C C m
.-
ii
* 0 a .- E n
m
0 m
Q, EI 0
IC
n
G v) i Y 0 W I 0
0 z z 0 != z 0 I z 0 F a c3 F f a I- z W s z 0 PL
z W
5
a C C C m
.-
E
a a C C
f t C C m m
.- .-
h h
a a
L e
W
v) C
v)
B
B
e!
P - I? a c 0 s E v)
v) .-
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-074
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANNED UNIT
ACRES INTO 5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO COMMONLY
OWNED LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH
OF FARADAY AVENUE AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF
TWAIN AVENUE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 8
CASE NAME: KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PUD 02-02 TO SUBDIVIDE 21.9
CASE NO.: PUD 02-02
WHEREAS, Pergola, Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Kirgis 1996 Trust, “Owner,” described
as
All that portion of Lot “F” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, as shown on
Partition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, on November 16,
1896
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Planned
Unit Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A - “D” dated September 3, 2003, on
file in the Planning Department, KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP - PUD 02-02 as provided by
Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 3rd day of September
2003, on the 17th day of September 2003, and on the 5th day of November 2003 hold
duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings, 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; and
I B
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on the 3rd day of
February, 2004, hold a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD
02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A.
B.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, PUD 02-02 is
approved, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That the granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent
with the Municipal Code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master
plans, and all adopted plans of the City and other governmental agencies, in that
the project is consistent with the Residential Low density (RL) General Plan
designation as it has a density of less than one dwelling per acre; the project
complies with the development standards and design criteria of the Zoning
Ordinance for detached single family homes.
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 project site is
designated for single-family units in the General Plan and provides for a diversity
of housing types within the City.
That such use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, in that the project design conforms to all design and
development standards applicable to the property and public improvements will
be provided prior to, or concurrent with, the development of the project to meet
all City standards.
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 the project provides the required recreation
area for each lot; guest parking can be accommodated on each lot throughout
the project, traffic calming and livable street features are proposed, and the street
design does not dominate the project.
2
Resolution No. 2004-074 page 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
5. That the proposed project is designed to be sensitive to and blend in with the
natural topography of the site, and maintains and enhances significant natural
resources on the site, in that the development is confined to 25% of the gross lot
area conforming to the draft Carlsbad habitat management plan standards area
criteria.
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
single family residential product type and density are consistent with the General
Plan's single family residential land use to the north.
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:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to final
map.
If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the
right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition
issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all
certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted;
institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions
or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or
a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Planned Unit Development.
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. 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.
3
Resolution No. 2004-074 page 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
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
IO.
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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-06, CDP 02-05 and
HDP 02-02 and is subject to all conditions contained in City Council Resolutions
No. 2004-068 , 2004-069, and 2004-070 for those approvals incorporated
herein by reference.
This approval shall become null and void if CT 02-06 is not recorded as a final
map.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain approval from the
Planning Director of the design and location for all perimeter fencing, gates,
decorative hardscape, and landscape.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any and/or each individual
residential lot, the applicant shall obtain approval of a Minor Planned Unit
Development Amendment, consistent with the procedures and requirements of
Chapter 21.45 (Planned Development Ordinance), for building locations,
elevations, and floorplans.
In addition to all applicable City of Carlsbad development standards, all
structures on lots 1, 2 and 3 are limited to development as single story. Single
story is defined as a maximum plate-line height of 15 feet and a maximum
building height to the roof ridge of 23 feet. All structures on lots 4 and 5 are
limited to a maximum height to the roof ridge of 30 fee and no more than two
stories as defined in Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21.04.330.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for
convenience as “fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these
fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in
Resolution No. 2004-074 page 4
4
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 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 City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of March 1
2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
L(8FiRd INE M. WOOD, City Clerk
5 Resolution No. 2004-074 page 5
.-eo 720 egi7
.- ' "Ye) appeal the decision of the planning Commission
IO ihe Carlsbad City Council.
November 5,2003 Date of Decision you are appealing:
Subiect of ApBstF11: BF SPFCIFG Examples: V the actlon is a City EngiWs Decision. please say so. If a project has
mullble drmmnts. (such 8s a General Plan Amendmt. Neaative Dede9tkn, SpecMc Plan, ctc.) please
Ibt them aU. rr youbnty want to epp6e) a pert of the whole acbkn. please Sale mat here. Plannning Commission's denial of GPA 03-01/ ZC 03-O1/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/
CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01
Reasads) form : Plea- Note FayUra to rpuify t mason maye In d.alal of
vtlng ywwrpplsrl. th. rppcrl, md you rvl bolhnHmSM thegroondr stmed ham
BE SPECKG How dM the d8Cbibn maker Wn What about the decision is inconsistent with stab rn -1 fam. plans, or pol' 7 The project meets% applicable Carlsbad Codes, and all finding of facts as stated by the staf
Three of the memebers of the Planning Commisssion have referred to the project as ideal,
and felt Carlsbad needed more projects like this. The projects dedicates 75% of the propert)
to open space and provides a necessary link to Carlsbad's Veteran's Memorial Park.
The opposition by the dissenting members appears to be related to a concern that the future
on the property would appear massive and therefore the project should be revised to
minimize pad sizes. We meeet all requirements of the Hillside Development Ordinance.
The staff finsings of fact and recoimmendation for approval concur with our findings. -.*7a
~ (760)-480-6062
PHONE No.
18 1 1 Rock Springs Rd
NAME (pkese print) 11-17-03 San Marcos, CA. 92069
DATE city, State. Zlp Code
ADDfUiSS Sm?t Name I Number
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(760) 602-2401
~
~ I
NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY
CASH REGISTER
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: May 1,2003
DESCRIPTION: Appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to reconcile the zoning map to the General Plan map, and to deny a Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Coastal Development Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the subdivision of 21.9 acres of land into five residential lots, one open space
lot and one private street.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located north of Faraday Avenue at the southern terminus of Twain Avenue in Local Facilities Management Zone
8.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: 21 2-01 0-03
APPLICANT:
Pergola, Inc.
c/o Robert Wilson
21 21 Palomar Airport Rd, Ste 206
Carlsbad, CA 92009
A public hearing on the above appeal of the Planning Commission decision will be held by the Carlsbad City Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, on February 3, 2004 at 6:OO p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project appeal. The project will be
described and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on or after January 30, 2004.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Christer Westman at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Friday 8:OO a.m. to 5:OO p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008,
(760) 602-4614.
...
..,
...
...
...
...
APPEALS
If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Code,
Local Coastal Program Amendment, Carlsbad Tract, Planned Unit Development, and/or Hillside Development Plan 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’s Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008
prior to or at the public hearing.
1. Coastal Commission Appealable Project: 0 This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (IO) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, California
921 08-4402.
CASE FILE: GPA 03-01/ZC 03-01/LCPA 03-01/CT 02-06/PUD 02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02- 01
CASE NAME: KlRGlS TENTATIVE MAP
PUBLISH: January 23, 2004
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
KIRGIS TENTATIVE MAP
GPA 03-01 /ZC 03-01 /LCPA 03-01 /
CT 02-06/PUD 02-02/CDP 02-05/HDP 02-01
March 23,2004
Brian C. Regan
18 1 1 Rock Springs Road
San Marcos, CA 92069
Re: Appeal of the Kirgis Tentative Map, CT 02-06
Dear Mr. Regan:
The Carlsbad City Council granted your appeal at the March 2,2004, Council Meeting.
Since your appeal was granted, your appeal fee of $660.00 will be refunded to you.
Please find enclosed a copy of your original receipt, a copy of Resolution No. 2004-067
granting the appeal, and a copy of the request for refund, which has been sent to our
Finance Department for processing.
If you have any questions, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (760) 434-2808.
Sincerely,
/ci ,-
Marcia Long
Senior Office Specialist
Enclosures (3)
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive 0 Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 - (760) 434-2808 @
CITY OF CARLSBAD
REQUEST FOR REFUND
Date 0 Disapprove City Manager Signature 0 Approve
4-2 - 09'
@
Name of Applicant: * %*"t Qh
y:?/ + $.A,,,, e$&f&,,y- v&" Date
y
Signature of Applicant: - '+ &?
ity Manager's Action:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(760) 602-2401
I
I I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
!
@ Printed on recycled paper.
NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY
CASH REGISTER