HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-14; City Council; 20358; LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 11
AB# 20,358
MTG. 9/14/2010
DEPT. CED
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3
PUD 05-12(6)
DEPT. DIRECTORIES
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council hold a public hearing and ADOPT Resolution No. 2010-222 APPROVING
Planned Development Permit Amendment No. PUD 05-12(6) for building floor plans, elevations and
plotting for the development of 67 single family detached homes within the Villages of La Costa Oaks
North Neighborhood 3.3 as recommended for approval by the Planning Commission.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
Project Application(s)Administrative Approvals Planning Commission City Council
PUD 05-12(6)RA
RA = Recommended Approval
* = Final City decision-making authority
/ = requires Coastal Commission approval
On July 7, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended approval (7-0-0) of a Planned
Development Permit Amendment application for the floor plans, plotting and architecture for 67
single family detached homes within the Villages of La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.3
located west of Rancho Santa Fe Road, south of Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia Street.
The lots for this neighborhood were created through Tentative Map CT 05-15 and Planned
Development Permit PUD 05-12, both of which were approved by the City Council on
September 26, 2006.
The project complies with all of the requirements of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan, the
Planned Development Ordinance, and City Council Policy 66 for Livable Neighborhoods. The
project is designed with three (3) floor plans (Plan 1, 2 and 3), one (1) variation to Floor Plan 1
(Plan 1X), and three (3) different architectural styles for each floor plan including: Spanish,
Tuscan and Santa Barbara. The total living area ranges in size from 3,162 to 3,688 square feet.
No public comment was received at the Planning Commission hearing. A full disclosure of the
Planning Commission's actions and a complete project description and staff analysis of the
proposed project are included in the attached minutes and Planning Commission staff report.
The Planning Commission and Staff are recommending approval of the proposed discretionary
action.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Shelley Glennon (760) 602-4625 shellev.glennon@carlsbadca.gov
FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY.
COUNCIL ACTION:APPROVED
DENIED D
CONTINUED D
WITHDRAWN D
AMENDED D
CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC D
CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN D
RETURNED TO STAFF D
OTHER - SEE MINUTES D
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT:
All public infrastructure required for this project will be funded and/or constructed by the
developer.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Staff has analyzed the project and concluded that no potentially significant impacts
would result with the implementation of the project that were not previously examined and
evaluated in the certified Final Program EIR for the Villages of La Costa Master Plan - EIR 98-
07. EIR 98-07 evaluates the potential environmental effects of the development and operation
of the "Villages of La Costa Master Plan" and associated actions inclusive of the proposed
project reviewed here.
The City Council certified EIR 98-07 on October 23, 2001. At that time, CEQA Findings of Fact,
a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
were approved. All mitigation, measures contained in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program for EIR 98-07 which are applicable to the proposed project have been
completed, incorporated into the project design or are required as conditions of approval for the
project. The EIR 98-07 "Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations" applies
to all subsequent projects covered by the Villages of La Costa Final Program EIR.
The proposed project would have no effects beyond those analyzed in the program EIR, as they
are a part of the program analyzed earlier. This project is within the scope of Final Program EIR
98-07 and no further CEQA compliance is required. EIR 98-07 is available for review at the
Planning Department.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 2010-222
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6711
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 7, 2010
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 7, 2010.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"NOTICE 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 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 is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost
or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is
extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either
personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written
request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk,
City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA. 92008."
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 14tb day of sppt-pmhpr 2010, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Member? Lewis, Kulcbin, Hall, Packard
and Blackburn
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ATTEST:
l/ORRA\NE M.<tfV0)6D, City Clerk (J
'(SEAL)
-2-
4
EXHIBIT 2
\
NOT TO SCALE
SITEMAP
La Costa Oaks North 3.3
PUD 05-12(8)
EXHIBIT 3
1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6711
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
4 AMENDMENT FOR BUILDING FLOOR PLANS,
ELEVATIONS AND PLOTTING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF 67 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES WITHIN THE
6 VILLAGES OF LA COSTA OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD
3.3 GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF RANCHO SANTA FE
7 ROAD, SOUTH OF MELROSE DRIVE AND NORTH OF
CADENCIA STREET IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
8 . ZONE 11.
9 CASE NAME: LA COSTA OAKS, NORTH 3.3
CASE NO.: PUD 05-12(6)
10
WHEREAS, LC Oaks 3-3, LLC, "Developer," has filed a verified application
12 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Real Estate Collateral Management
13 Company, "Owner," described as
14 Lots 1 through 18 inclusive, Lots 36 through 79 inclusive, and
Lots 116 through 120, of City of Carlsbad Tract No. 05-15, La
Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.3, in City of Carlsbad,
16 County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map
thereof No. 15596, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of
17 San Diego County, August 22,2007
18 ("the Property"); and
19 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Planned
20
Development Permit Amendment as shown on Exhibits "A" — "UUU" dated July 7, 2010, on
21
22 file in the Planning Department, LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3, as provided by Chapter
23 21.45/21.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
24 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on July 7, 2010, hold a duly noticed
25 public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
26
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
27
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
28
relating to the Planned Development Permit Amendment; and
1 WHEREAS, on September 26, 2006, the City Council approved PUD 05-12, as
2 described and conditioned in City Council Resolution No. 2006-287.
3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
4
r Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
6 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
7 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3, based on
the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
9
Findings:
10
1. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, and complies with all applicable
provisions of Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the Villages of La Costa
. Master Plan, in that the project is for the approval of architecture and plotting for 67
single-family detached units located on previously approved lots (CT 05-15) with a
13 minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet. In addition, the project achieves the General
Plan's Residential Objectives through providing a variety of safe and attractive
14 housing that preserves the neighborhood atmosphere and identity of existing
residential areas. The single-family residential development complies with all
development standards of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan as shown on
16 Attachments 6 through 9 (Tables 1 - 4).
2. The proposed project will not be detrimental to existing uses, or to uses specifically
permitted in the area in which the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely
18 impact the site, surroundings, or traffic, in that the project has been designated for
single-family residential development with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet.
The single-family residential neighborhoods to the north, south and east of the site
2Q are also similar in character and density. Lands to the west of the project site will
remain open-space as approved under the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. Traffic
21 has been previously analyzed for compliance through the approval of Tentative
Map No. CT 05-15 and Planned Development Permit No. PUD 05-12 (Planning
22 Commission Resolutions No. 6148 and 6149).
23 3. The project will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare, in that
24 the 67 single-family residential homes have been analyzed for consistency with all
applicable city codes, policies and regulations.
25
The project's design, including architecture and plotting:
26
a. Contributes to the community's overall aesthetic quality, in that the project consists
of a high quality residential design through the use of a variety of floor plans,
28 exterior building planes, roof planes and color schemes, as well as a variety of
PCRESONO. 6711 -2-
design elements distinctive to the 3 proposed architectural styles: Spanish,
2 Tuscan and Santa Barbara.
3 b. Includes the use of harmonious materials and colors, and the appropriate use of
landscaping, in that the project's distinctive architectural styles includes nine
4 different color schemes with a variety of design elements such as: accent colors,
,- window/door trims, roof tiling, decorative stucco, wood accents, stone veneer
and wainscoting. The proposed materials and colors contribute to the distinctive
6 architectural styles while the previously approved landscaping will highlight all
proposed architectural designs.
7
c. Achieves continuity among all elements of the project, in that the project's high
quality architectural design helps create interest and character to the entire
9 neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed homes have been carefully plotted to
avoid any identical homes (including floor plans, color scheme and architectural
10 styles) from occurring side-by-side, thereby avoiding a monotonous residential
street scene yet still providing a sense of continuity through design.
, ^ 5. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11 and all City public facility policies and
13 ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or
provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding: sewer collection
14 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.
16
6. That all necessary public facilities required by the Growth Management Ordinance will
17 be constructed or are guaranteed to be constructed concurrently with the need for them
created by this project and in compliance with adopted City standards, in that the project
is being proposed and will be implemented consistent with the requirements of the
in Villages of La Costa Master Plan arid Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan.
20 7. That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
21
8. The Planning Director has determined that:22 5
_, a. The project is a subsequent activity of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan, a
project for which a program EIR was prepared, and a notice for the activity has been
24 given, which includes statements that this activity is within the scope of the program
approved earlier, and that the program EIR adequately describes the activity for the
25 purposes of CEQA; [15168(c)(2) and (e)]; and/or
b. This project is consistent with the Master Plan cited above; and
c. The Villages of La Costa Master Plan EIR 98-07 was certified by the City Council
27 on October 23, 2001 in connection with the prior project or plan; and
d. The project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as significant in
28 the prior EIR; and
PCRESONO. 6711 -j-
e. None of the circumstances requiring a Subsequent EIR or a Supplemental EIR under
2 CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 exist; and
f. The City Council finds that all feasible mitigation measures or project alternatives
3 identified in the Villages of La Costa Master Plan EIR 98-07, which are
appropriate to this Subsequent Project, have been completed, incorporated into the
4 project design or are required as conditions of approval for this Subsequent Project.
9. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
6 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
7 degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
9
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of a
10 building permit.
1., If any of the following conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
j2 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
13 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
14 issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the
,, property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer
16 or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Planned Development Permit
Amendment.
17
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Planned Development Permit Amendment documents, as
19 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.
20 Any proposed development, different from this approval, shall require an amendment to
this approval.21
22 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.
23
4. If any conditions for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the
24 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
26 invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies
with all requirements of law.
27
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
PCRESONO. 6711 -4-
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
2 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
3 Development Permit Amendment, (b) City's approval or issuance of any permit or
action, whether discretionary or nondiscretionary, 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.
6
6. Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape and
7 Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan 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
9 condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
10 7. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the
landscape plancheck process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the
* * project's building, improvement, and grading plans.
12 8. Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24" x 36" mylar
13 copy of the Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision-making
body.
14
9. Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plancheck, a
reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24" x 36" blueline drawing
I g format.
17 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the San Dieguito Unified School District that this project has satisfied its
obligation to provide school facilities.
19 11. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
20 as part of the Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
21
~~ 12. The Developer shall comply with all the applicable conditions set forth by MP 98-
01(D) in Resolution No. 5837, CT 05-15 in Resolution No. 6148 and PUD 05-12 in
23 Resolution No. 6149, which are incorporated by reference herein.
24 13. The Developer shall implement and comply with all applicable mitigation measures
required by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program certified with the Final
25 Program EIR for the Villages of La Costa Master Plan - EIR 98-07, contained in
25 Planning Commission Resolution No. 5010, including but not limited to Mitigation
Measures regarding the adherence to the applicable foundation recommendations
27 contained in the geotechnical report and the fire protection plan for manufactured
slopes.
28
PCRESONO. 6711 -5-
14. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this
2 project within 36 months from the date of project approval.
3 15. Developer shall report, in writing, to the Planning Director within 30 days, any address
change from that which is shown on the permit application.
4
- 16. If satisfaction of the school facility requirement involves a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District or other financing mechanism which is inconsistent with City Council
6 Policy No. 38, by allowing a pass-through of the taxes or fees to individual home buyers,
then in addition to any other disclosure required by law or Council policy, the Developer
7 shall disclose to future owners in the project, to the maximum extent possible, the
existence of the tax or fee, and that the school district is the taxing agency responsible for
the financing mechanism. The form of notice is subject to the approval of the Planning
Director and shall at least include a handout and a sign inside the sales facility stating the
fact of a potential pass-through of fees or taxes exists and where complete information
10 regarding those fees or taxes can be obtained.
17. Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map, or an alternative, suitable to
12 the Planning Director, in the sales office at all times. All sales maps that are distributed
or made available to the public shall include but not be limited to trails, future and
13 existing schools, parks and streets.
14 18. Developer shall post a sign in the sales office in a prominent location that discloses which
special districts and school district provide service to the project. Said sign shall remain
posted until ALL of the units are sold.
19. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing
17 water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that
adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the
time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and
facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy.
20. 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
21 5.09.030, and CFD #1 special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable
22 Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 11, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such
taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees are not paid, this
approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void.
24
21. Prior to the issuance of the building permits, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice
25 of Restriction executed by the owner of the real property to be developed. Said notice is
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
27 Carlsbad has issued a Planned Development Permit Amendment by Resolution No.
6711 on the property. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description,
28 location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as
PCRESONO. 6711 -6-
well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction.
2 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
3 or successor in interest.
4 Fire;
22. No combustible patio covers, decks or similar structures to homes shall occur within
6 the first 20 feet (Zone 1) of the 60-foot Fire Protection Zone unless fire rated or
heavy timber materials are utilized and approval of said materials shall be obtained
7 prior to installation from the Building Department and must be identified within the
CC&Rs.
o
9 23. Unless the Fire Protection Zone begins at the property line, trees and shrubs shall be
prohibited in the first 20 feet of the 60-foot zone and must be identified within the
10 CC&Rs.
1* 24. All submittals including architectural submittals shall reference that all lots are to
12 include the installation of Automatic Residential Fire Sprinklers. It is expected that
all submittals will reflect this requirement, so that this requirement is not lost
13 between submittals.
14 Engineering:
Fees/Agreements
16
25. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for
17 recordation the City's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement.
18 Grading
19 26. Developer shall apply for separate.grading permits for the precise grading associated with
20 the single family lot development, all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
21 27. Developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the City's current Standard Urban Storm Water
Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). Developer shall provide improvements constructed pursuant
23 to best management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best
Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level
24 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:
26 A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with established
27 disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste
products.
28
PCRESONO. 6711 -7-
B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze,
2 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
3 conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides,
insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State,
4 County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers.
C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
6 when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
7 28. 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
9 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
10 to the maximum extent practicable storm water pollutant runoff during construction of
the project.
,~ 29. 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)."
13 The SWMP shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Carlsbad Standard Urban
Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Order R9-2007-0001 issued by the San Diego
14 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
16 stage of the project. At a minimum, the SWMP shall:
17 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.
I n 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
20 extent practicable before discharging offsite;
d. Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine cleanup. Special
21 . considerations and effort shall be applied to (RESIDENT/EMPLOYEE) education on
the proper procedures for handling cleanup and disposal of pollutants.
e. Ensure long-term maintenance of all post-construction BMPs in perpetuity.
23 f. Identify how post-construction runoff rates and velocities from the site will not
exceed the pre-construction runoff rates and velocities to the maximum extent
24 practicable.
oc 30. Developer shall incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) standards into the design of
2/r this project per City Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP), latest
version, including applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Orders, all to the
27 satisfaction of the City Engineer.
28 ...
PCRESONO. 6711 -8-
31. Developer shall cause property owner to process, execute and submit an executed copy to
2 the City Engineer for recordation a City standard Permanent Stormwater Quality Best
Management Practice Maintenance Agreement for the perpetual maintenance of all
3 treatment control, applicable site design and source control, post-construction permanent
Best Management Practices prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit,
4 or the recordation of a final map, whichever occurs first for this Project.
Code Reminders:
6
32. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to
7 prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance
with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
9 33. Developer shall pay traffic impact and sewer impact fees based on Section 18.42 and
10 Section 13.10 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, respectively. The Average Daily
Trips (ADT) and floor area contained in the staff report and shown on the Site Plan are
* 1 for planning purposes only.
12 34. Developer shall pay a landscape plancheck and inspection fee as required by Section
13 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
14 35. 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.
!6 36. Premise identification (addresses) shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal
17 Code Section 18.04.320.
* ° 37. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance
jo with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning
Director to installation of such signs.
20
21 NOTICE
22 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
23 "fees/exactions."
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
25 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
26 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
27 annul their imposition.
28
PCRESONO. 6711 -9-
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
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor
zoning, grading, or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
planning,
with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this,
expired.
PASSED,
or as to which the statute of limitations has previously
APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
otherwise
planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on July 7, 2010, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
_^— =»^^^ , •• —
FARR^cH^DOUGLAS
Chairperson Douglas, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
L'Heureux, Montgomery, Nygaard and Schumacher
:
-^CN^"ysJet^
, ^fitirperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
dx.
DON NEU
Planning Director
PCRESONO. 6711 -10-15
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department EXHIBIT 4
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No.
P.C. AGENDA OF: July 7, 2010
Application complete date: March 15, 2010
Project Planner: Shelley Glennon
Project Engineer: Frank Jimeno
SUBJECT: PUD 05-12(8) - LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3 - Request for a determination
that the project is within the scope of the previously certified Villages of La Costa
Program EIR and that the Program EIR adequately describes the activity for the
purposes of CEQA; and a recommendation of approval of a Planned Development
Permit Amendment for building floor plans, elevations and plotting for the
development of 67 single-family detached homes within the Villages of La Costa
Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3, generally located west of Rancho Santa Fe Road,
south of Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia Street in Local Facilities
Management Zone 11.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 6711
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Planned Development Permit Amendment PUD 05-
12(B) based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II.INTRODUCTION
On October 23, 2001 the City Council certified the Final Program EIR, approved the Master
Plan, a Master Tentative Tract Map and related applications for the Villages of La Costa project.
The Villages of La Costa Master Plan establishes the permitted uses, development standards, and
design criteria for each neighborhood as well as the development review process to be utilized.
Master Tentative Tract Map CT 99-04 subdivided the area into open space areas and established
the neighborhood development area boundaries. A Tentative Map (CT 99-04) and final map
have been recorded for the Oaks; grading and improvement plans have been approved; and
construction is presently ongoing. The proposed project is also located within Local Facilities
Management Zone 11 in the southeast quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities
created by the project, and the project's compliance with the adopted performance standards
were analyzed and evaluated at the time of approval of CT 05-15 (La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.3 Subdivision).
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The proposed project includes approval of architecture and plotting for 67 single-family dwelling
units located in the Villages of La Costa Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3. The lots for these
neighborhoods were created through Tentative Map (CT 05-15) and Planned Development
Permit (PUD 05-12), approved by the City Council on September 26, 2006. A Planned
Development Permit was required for Neighborhood 3.3 because the minimum lot sizes are less
than 7,500 square feet. Architecture for the units was not proposed at that time and pursuant to
O II*
PUD 05-12(B) - LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3
JULY 7, 2010
PAGE 2
Section 5.2.8 of the Master Plan and PUD 05-12 Condition of Approval No. 7, could be
processed at a later date through a Major Planned Development Permit Amendment. This is the
second PUD Amendment to be processed for La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.3. The first
amendment was for the architecture and plotting of the southern portion of Neighborhood 3.3 -
Lots 19-35 and 80-115 (PUD 05-12(A)). This second PUD amendment application (PUD 05-
12(B)) is for the architecture and plotting of the northern portion of Neighborhood 3.3 - Lots 1-
18, 36-79 and 116-120. At over 50 units, this project also requires City Council approval
pursuant to the Planned Development Ordinance (Section 21.45.050(B)(1)).
The proposed two-story homes consist of four separate and distinct floor plans (Plan 1, IX, 2 and
3) with living areas ranging in approximate size from 3,118 square feet to 3,684 square feet.
Plan IX is a variation of the Plan 1 and incorporates a slightly larger building footprint. The
project incorporates three distinct architectural styles including: Spanish, Tuscan and Santa
Barbara, as well as nine different color schemes to provide street scene variation throughout the
project site. Each two-story home has either an attached three-car garage or two-car garage with
an additional tandem parking space. Additionally, each floor plan has an option to change the
third tandem parking space into livable area (see Attachment 10 for all the floor plans). The
project complies with City standards including the Villages of La Costa Master Plan and all
necessary findings can be made for the approval being requested. The following table provides a
summary of square footage and elevation styles:
TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF FLOOR PLANS
PLAN
NO.
1
IX
2
3
1ST
FLOOR
SQ. FT.
2,114
2,312
1,676
1,727
2ND
FLOOR
SQ. FT.
1,004
1,004
1,887
1,957
LIVING
AREA
SQ. FT.
3,118
3,316
3,563
3,684
GARAGE
SQ. FT.
595
3 car
595
3 car
703
3 car
735
3 car
TOTAL
BLDG.
SQ. FT.
3,713
3,911
4,266
4,419
ARCHITECTURAL
STYLES
Spanish,
Tuscan,
Santa Barbara
Spanish,
Tuscan,
Santa Barbara
Spanish,
Tuscan,
Santa Barbara
Spanish,
Tuscan,
Santa Barbara
IV. ANALYSIS
Villages of La Costa Master Plan (MP 98-01(G))
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project's
consistency with the standards contained within the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. The
Master Plan maps and text define the allowable type and intensity of land uses in each village
and provides detailed development and design standards, development phasing and timing, and
the method by which the Master Plan will be implemented. An overall goal of the Master Plan is
P
PUD 05-12(8) - LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3
JULY 7, 2010
PAGE 3
to create a balanced, open space oriented residential community. The development standards
contained in the Master Plan support this goal by describing the design elements that are shared
by all neighborhoods within the three Master Plan Villages. As previously discussed, the subject
neighborhood was divided into residential lots through CT 05-15 and PUD 05-12, and complies
with the Master Plan standards relating to the subdivision that was analyzed at that time. The
proposed project meets all applicable development standards of the Villages of La Costa Master
Plan. Please see Attachments 6 through 9 (Tables 1-4) for project compliance.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Staff has analyzed the project and has concluded that no potentially significant impacts
would result with the implementation of the project that were not previously examined and
evaluated in the certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Villages of La
Costa Master Plan (2000) MP 98-01 (EIR 98-07), dated July 16, 2001. EIR 98-07 evaluates the
potential environmental effects of the development and operation of the "Villages of La Costa
Master Plan (2000)" and associated actions inclusive of the proposed neighborhood project
reviewed herein.
The City Council certified EIR 98-07 on October 23, 2001. At that time CEQA Findings of Fact,
a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
were approved. All mitigation measures contained in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program from EIR 98-07 applicable to the proposed Villages of La Costa Oaks
Neighborhood 3.3 project have been completed, incorporated into the project design or are
required as conditions of approval for the project. The EIR 98-07 "Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the
Villages of La Costa Final Program EIR.
The proposed project would have no effects beyond those analyzed in the program EIR, as they
are a part of the program analyzed earlier. This project is within the scope of Final Program EIR
98-07 and no further CEQA compliance is required. EIR 98-07 is available for review at the
Planning Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6711
2. Location Map
3. Background Data Sheet
4. Local Facilities Impact Assessment
5. Disclosure Statement
6. Table 1 - Residential Architectural Criteria Compliance
7. Table 2 - Front Yard Setbacks
8. Table 3 - Individual Lot Data
9. Table 4 - Building Elevation Design Elements
10. Reduced Exhibits
11. Full Size Exhibits "A" - "UUU" dated July 7, 2010
NOT TO SCALE
SITEMAP
La Costa Oaks North 3.3
PUD05-12(B)
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: PUD Q5-12(B)
CASE NAME: LA COSTA OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3
APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Planned Development Permit Amendment for building floor
plans, elevations and plotting for the development of 67 single-family detached homes within the
Villages of La Costa Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3, generally located west of Rancho Santa Fe
Road, south of Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia Street in Local Facilities Management Zone
1L
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1 through 18 inclusive. Lots 36 through 79 inclusive, and
Lots 116 through 120, of City of Carlsbad Tract No. 05-15. La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood
3.3. in City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. State of California, according to Map thereof No.
15596, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County. August 22. 2007.
APN: 223-840-01-00 through 223-840-23-00: 223-841-18-00 through 223-841-24-00 and 223-
842-01 through 223-842-37-00 Acres: 18 Acres Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 67
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Existing Land Use Designation: RLM
Proposed Land Use Designation: N/A
Density Allowed: 4 du / acre Density Proposed: 2.5 du / ac
Existing Zone: P-C Proposed Zone: N/A
Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use:
General Plan Current Land Use
Site P-C RLM Vacant graded lots
North P-C OS/RLM Open Space / Vacant
lots
South P-C RLM Vacant graded lots
East P-C RLM Vacant graded lots
West P-C OS Open Space
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
Coastal Zone: | | Yes [X] No Local Coastal Program Segment: N/A
Within Appeal Jurisdiction: I I Yes 1X1 No Coastal Development Permit: I I Yes IXI No
Local Coastal Program Amendment: I I Yes [Xl No
Existing LCP Land Use Designation: N/A Proposed LCP Land Use Designation: N/A
Existing LCP Zone: N/A Proposed LCP Zone: N/A
Revised 01/06 2-0
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: San Dieguito Unified Water District: Vallecitos Sewer District: Vallecitos
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 67
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Categorical Exemption, N/A
I I Negative Declaration, issued N/A
I I Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated N/A
[X] Other, Prior Compliance with EIR 98-07
Revised 01/06 2-1
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.3
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 1 1 GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: P-C
DEVELOPER'S NAME: LC Oaks 3-3, LLC
ADDRESS: 4747 Morena Boulevard, Suite 100, San Dieeo, CA 921 17
PHONE NO.: (858) 490-2300 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 223-840-01-00 through 223-840-
23-00: 223-841-18-00 through 223-841-24-00 and 223-842-01 through 223-842-37-00
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC.. SO. FT., DU): 18 acres/3.6
building coverage / 67 dwelling units
acres of
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 2012
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
City Administrative Facilities:
Library:
Demand in Square Footage = 232.94 sq. ft.
Demand in Square Footage = 124.23 sq. ft.
67EDU
.47 Acres
160.1
Basin D
F.
G.
H.
I.
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage =
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin =
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = Station No. 6
Open Space: Acreage Provided =
Schools (San Dieguito Union High/Elementary):
Encinitas Union Elementary School District:
670 ADT
17.5 gross acres
28 Students
J.
K.
L.
Sewer:
Water:
Demands in EDU
Identify Sub Basin
Demand in GPD =
Middle School: 22 Students
High School: 22 Students
67 EDU
N/A
14,740 GPD
The gross overall neighborhood density is 2.5 du/ac (per CT 5-15), which is 0.7 du/ac
below the 3.2 du/ac Growth Management Control Point of the RLM Land Use
Designation.
Citv of Carlsbad
Planning Department
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require
discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint''venture, association, $gcjal club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver^ syndicate, in this andean other county, city and county, city
municipality, district or other political subdivision or assy other group or combination acting as a unit" t*» ? *'••*, "\ v *,. , ,4 <Agent* may siga.tfaJj dopnnent; fiowever, the legal same and entjty'qf the appllean^and property owner must be
provided below.' ! -* > **
1.APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the
names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
INDIVIDUALS OWN MOKE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the
names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.)
Person Corp/Part IQJalts 3,3, Ljj?
Title Title
Address.Address 4747 frfarena Blvd. Ste 100
San Dieno.CA 92117
2.OWNER (Not the owner's agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, "LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership
interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e.
partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a
corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES,
PLEAS E INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-
owned fcorooratipn. include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
Corp/Part
Title
peal Estate Collateral Management
Company
Address 1903 Wrloht Place. Suils 180
Carlsbad. CA 92008
1635 Faraday Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760} 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.cl.oarteDad.ca.U8
3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organisation or a trust, list the
names and addresses of AN% person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit
organization or as a trustee or beneficiary of (be.
Non Profit/Trust Non Profit/Trust
Title.Thle.
Address.Address.
4. Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months?
QYes No If yes, please indicate pcrson(s):,
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
rmation is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature of applicant/date
/gent lor RECM; Fred M.Arbuckie
F -esldent of Morrow Development
F tint or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Signature of owner/applicant*s agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent
H*OMIN\COUNTER\DISCIOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1 - RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Front Yard
Setback
(4.6.2.B.2.a)
15' minimum, 20' neighborhood average
(See VLCMP for instructions about
calculating averages).
All proposed porte cochere or arbor
structures are allowed within the front
yard setback to accommodate applicable
alternate garage configurations.
The cover cannot exceed 200 square feet
in size and must have a 5' minimum
setback from property line.
Please refer to Attachment 7 -
Table 2 "Front Yard Setbacks" for
the 15' minimum setback
compliance. Neighborhood
Average Front Yard Setback =
21.63'.
The proposed porte cochere on
Plan 2A is in compliance.
All units comply with the front
yard setback requirements.
Rear Yard Setback
(4.6.2.B.2.6 &
7.7.3.3.i)
15' minimum setback.
Minimum rear yard area is 15' by 15.'
All units comply with 15'
minimum rear yard setback.
All lots provide the required 15' x
15' usable rear yard area.
Side Yards
(4.6.2.B.2.C)
Combined 25% of the minimum standard
lot size width for lots less than 60' wide.
• Minimum combined side yard
setback: 12.5.'
• Minimum of 5' per side.
• Maximum setback does not need
exceed 20' in aggregate.
• Lots at the end of cul-de-sacs may
reduce each side yard to 5'.
At least 50% of the units in each
neighborhood shall have one side
elevation where there are sufficient offsets
or cutouts so the side yard setback
averages a minimum of 7'.
Please refer to Attachment 8 -
Table 3 "Individual Lot Data" for
side yard setbacks. All lots
comply.
Plan types 2 and 3 incorporate side
yard offsets. These plan types are
plotted on 45 lots or 67.1% of the
^
plotted on 45 lots or
unit mix.
Street Side Setback
(4.6.2.B.2.d)
10' minimum.All units comply with the
minimum 10' street side setback.
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1; RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Slope Edge
Building Setback
(4.3.4)
All main and accessory buildings that are
developed on hilltops and/or pads created
on downhill perimeter slopes of greater
than 15' in height shall be setback so that
the building does not intrude into a .7'
horizontal to 1' vertical imaginary
diagonal plane that is measured from the
edge of slope to the building.
For all buildings, which are subject to this
slope edge building setback standard, a
profile of the diagonal plane shall be
submitted with all other development
application requirements.
All proposed units will meet the
required slope edge setbacks by
maintaining the minimum rear
yard setback. Please refer to the
Slope Edge Building Setback
Exhibit "C-D" of the enclosed
site plans for further details.
Lot Width
(4.6.2.B.1 &
7.7.3.3.g)
Minimum lot width shall be 50.'All lots were previously approved
by CT 05-15 and have a
minimum width of 50'
Building Coverage
(4.6.3.B.2)
2-story units: 40% of net pad area.
Includes:
. Garages and the perimeter area of a
basement.
Excludes:
« Exterior structures: covered porches;
. Overhanging balconies that project <
8' from the building (or similar
structure);
. Porte Cochere's not > 22' length and
8'width;
• Roof eaves not extending 30" from
the face of any building;
• Awnings;
Open parking areas;
• Structures under 30" in height; and
. Masonry walls < 6' in height (wing-
walls, planter walls, grade separation
retaining walls).
All plan types are two-story
structures and do not exceed the
maximum 40% of net pad area as
required.
Please refer to Attachment 8 -
Table 3 "Individual Lot Date" for
building coverage.
All lots comply.
Building Height
(4.6.3.B.1 &
7.7.3.3.J)
Maximum of 30' and 2 stories.Planl= 28'-2" max and 2 stories
PlanlX=28'-2" max and 2 stories
Plan2= 27'-10" max and 2 stories
Plan3 = 26'-8" max and 2 stories
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Front Building
Planes
(4.6.3.B.4.6&
4.6.3.B.4.f)
50% of units in the neighborhood must
have 18 inch offset planes with a
minimum of 10' between front and rear
planes.
Each plane is 30 SF minimum.
3 separate building planes for lots with
45' of frontage or less.
4 separate building planes for lots with a
frontage greater than 45'.
33% of the above 50% required, may
reduce the limit from 4 separate planes to
2 if a fully landscaped front courtyard is
substituted.
Please refer to the architectural
plans for the building plane
exhibits.
Plan*
1
IX
2
3
SC
4
4
4
5
IT
5
5
5
6
SB
5
5
5
5
All units comply.
Rear Building
Planes
(4.6.3.B.4.g)
50% of units in the neighborhood must
have 18 inch offset planes with a
minimum of 3' between face of the
forward-most plane and rear planes.
Each plane is 30 SF minimum.
3 separate building planes for lots with
45' of frontage or less.
4 separate building planes for lots with a
frontage greater than 45'.
Please refer to the architectural
plans for the building plane
exhibits.
Plan*
1
IX
2
3
SC
4
4
4
4
IT
4
4
4
4
SB
4
4
4
4
All units comply
Front Building
Elevations
(4.6.3.B.6)
Front building facades shall incorporate a
minimum of 4 varieties of design
elements to create character and interest to
the home. These elements vary depending
on the architectural style used.
Please refer to Attachment 9 -
Table 4 "Building Elevation
Design Elements" and the
architectural plans that detail the
various design elements
incorporated for each front
elevation type. All plan types and
elevation styles comply.
SC - Spanish Colonial SB - Santa Barbara IT - Italian Tuscan
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1; RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Side & Rear
Elevations
(4.6.3.B.7)
Minimum of 2 elements of enhanced
architectural detailing incorporating good
design is required for side & rear
elevations adjacent to public/private
roads.
Please refer to Attachment 9 -
Table 4 "Building Elevation
Design Elements" and the
architectural plans that detail the
various design elements
incorporated for each side and
rear elevation type. All plan
types and elevation styles
comply.
Elevations
Fronting
Circulation
Element Roads
(4.6.3.A.l.a)
Homes adjacent to circulation element
roads are required to receive special
attention to detailing on the elevation
fronting the roads. This will include
window detailing equal to or better than
that of the front elevation. The
introduction of additional wall planes and
balconies, where noise standards allow, is
encouraged.
Please refer to the enclosed
architectural plans that detail the
various design elements
incorporated for each of the
proposed elevations. All plan
types and elevation styles
comply.
Floor Plans
(4.6.3.B.5.C&
4.6.3.B.5.d)
Minimum of 3 per neighborhood.
Minimum of 3 front elevations shall be
provided for each floor plan.
The proposed project includes
four floor plans with three
distinctive elevation types for
each plan. Please refer to the
enclosed architectural plans.
Single-story units
(4.4&4.6.3.B.4.1)
For neighborhoods on ridgelines/hilltops
that are visible from a circulation element
roadway, at least 20% of the units shall be
single-story.
• Single-story shall be defined as a
plateline maximum of 15', (10'
preferred)
Not Applicable within this
Neighborhood.
Two Story Units
(4.6.3.B.4.n&
4.6.3.B.5.b)
Must include some single-story features.
The second-story must not exceed 80% of
the first-story square footage, including all
garage area.
Please refer to the enclosed
architectural plans that detail the
single story features provided.
All proposed plans comply.
Planl: 37.1%
Plan IX: 34.5%
Plan 2: 79.3%
Plan 3: 79.5%
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1; RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Where three two-
story units occur in
a row with less
than 15 ft between
homes-
(4.6.3.B.4.b)
One of the units must have a single-story
building edge at least 10' deep and shall
run the length of the building.
Single-story shall be defined as a plateline
maximum of 15'.
Plan types 1, Ix and 2 incorporate
a single story building edge that is
at least 10' wide and runs the
length of the building. These
plan types are plotted where there
are three (3) 2-story homes in a
row with less than 15' between
them.
Where three two-
story units occur in
a row with less
than 15 ft between
homes-
(4.6.3.B.4.C)
One of the units must have a single-story
building edge at least 5' deep and shall
run the length of the building.
Single-story shall be defined as a plateline
maximum of 15'.
Plan types 1, Ix, and 2
incorporate a single story building
edge that is at least 5' wide and
runs the length of the building.
These plan types are plotted
where there are three (3) 2-story
homes in a row with less than 15'
to 20' between them.
Single-Story
Elements
(4.6.3.B.4.d)
33% of units within a Neighborhood must
have a single-story element, with a
minimum depth of 3' which is 40% or
greater of the front elevation width.
Porches and porte cochere elements
qualify.
Plan types IX and 3 incorporate a
single story building element that
is greater than 40% of the front
elevation width and a minimum
of 3' deep.
Plan IX: 62%
Plan 3: 40.2%
Plan types IX and 3 are plotted
on 33 lots, or 49.2% of the unit
mix, meeting this requirement.
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Entries, Front
Porches,
Courtyards, &
Balconies
(4.6.3.B.9&
4.6.2.B.f)
25% of the units must have either a porch
at least 5' deep, across 33% of the width
of the dwelling, or a courtyard or balcony,
whichever is consistent with the
architectural style.
Courtyard walls with a maximum height
of 42 inches may encroach standard
distances into the required yard areas.
34.3% of the elevations
incorporate a courtyard with a
porte cochere entrance (All
elevation styles for Plan 2).
All courtyard walls comply and
do not encroach into the front
yard setback.
Octagonal or
Round Entry
Tower
(4.6.2.B.3.a)
May encroach into the required side yard
setbacks a maximum of 2'. The total
length of the encroachment may not
exceed 8' and shall be located within the
larger side yard. The roof eave may
encroach a maximum of an additional 12"
into the required setback.
A minimum 5' setback must be
maintained.
None are proposed within the side
yard setback.
Projections
(4.6.2.B.3)
Fireplace structures not wider than 8',
cornices, eaves, belt courses, sills,
buttresses, and other similar architectural
features projecting from the building may
intrude up to 2' into the required setbacks.
No projections extend into the
side, rear or front yard setback
more than 2' nor are wider than 8
feet.
Recreation Parking
(4.6.2.B.4.b)
Common recreation areas:
• Less than 8,000 SF - Do not require
off-street parking.
"Pocket Parks" - Not required to
provide parking.
• Within a 1/4 mile radius of the units
for which they are required to serve
shall include 1 space for every 20
units.
• More than a 1/4 mile radius from any
of the units for which it is required to
serve requires parking for those
additional units at a rate of 1 space
per 15 units.
(See VLCMP for alternative recreation
parking options)
The common recreation area for
the subject neighborhood is
located within Neighborhood 3.1.
Recreation parking will be
provided in Neighborhood 3.1.
30
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Resident Parking
(4.6.2.B.4.a)
Minimum 2-car garage with interior
measurements of 20' by 20'.
Two one-car garages each having interior
measurements of 12' in width by 20' in
length may be provided as an alternative.
All plan types meet the minimum
2-car garage with interior
measurements of 20' x 20.'
Plan 1 and Plan Ix have a two-car
garage with a one-car tandem
space. Plan 2 and 3 have a two-
car garage and 1 side loaded-
garage.
Roofs
(4.6.3.B.4.k &
4.6.3.B.8)
Varied building roof heights and roof
massing shall be incorporated into unit
designs for each master plan
neighborhood.
• Changes in roof direction shall be
provided to create diversity and
interest.
• Roof planes of units located at the
top of slopes should attempt to
parallel the slope.
• A variety of roof colors shall be
used within each neighborhood.
• Minimum roof pitch of 3:12.
A variety of roof forms and
massing are proposed with
changes in direction and pitches.
See elevations and roof plans for
compliance.
All roofs provide change in roof
direction, top of slopes
compliance, a variety of roofing
tiles and colors, and have a
minimum roof pitch of 3:12.
3
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Garage Criteria
(4.6.2.B.2.b,
4.6.3.B.4.H, &
4.6.3.B.13)
20' minimum setback from the property
line where garage doors face the street.
Side-loaded garages must maintain a 15'
setback from property line. They also
must be designed to appear as a livable
portion of the home.
For neighborhoods with a minimum lot
size of 5,000 sf or greater, an additional
25% of the units may have three-car in a
row garages facing the street provided
garages do not exceed more than 50% of
unit's frontage.
Projects with three-car garages shall be a
mix of two door garages, three door
garages, and offset two door garages (2
planes separated by at least 18 inches).
A variety of garage configurations should
be used within each neighborhood to
improve the street scene.
Roll-up garage doors are required.
Architectural projections may encroach
into the setback a maximum on 18" for
garages. However, the projection shall
not extend to the second story living
space.
All setbacks for garages that face
the street are no less than 20 ft.
All side-loaded garages comply
with the minimum 15' setback
from property line and are
designed to appear as a livable
portion of the home.
No floor plan provides three-car
in a row garages.
Plans 1 and Ix have a two-car
garage with 1 tandem car space
and Plans 2 and 3 have 2-car
garages with 1 side loaded
garage.
All garages are designed to fit
the proposed elevation.
All garage doors comply.
All homes comply.
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Colors
(4.6.3.B.12)
Colors should be consistent with the
architectural style selected. Warm, earth
tones are preferred; however other color
combinations are acceptable depending
upon architectural style.
Within each neighborhood, a minimum of
3 different exterior color schemes shall be
used for each floor plan within the same
architectural styles.
In all master plan neighborhoods, adjacent
units within the same architectural style
shall not utilize the same color scheme.
However, similar or same colors may
occur within different color schemes.
"Adjacent" includes units on either side of
the subject unit as well as those directly
across the street.
Each plan type plotted on the site
plan includes a color scheme
designation to match the proposed
architectural style.
There are a minimum of three
color schemes for each floor plan
within the same architectural
styles.
Please refer to the attached
plotting plan. All homes comply.
Accessory
Structures
(4.6.3.B.3)
Patio and accessory structures shall
comply with development standards set
forth in Section 21.10.050 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
All plan types comply.
Architectural
Styles Permitted
(4.6.3.C & 7.6)
Each Neighborhood shall contain one or
more of the following Architectural
Styles:
• Santa Barbara Mediterranean
• Craftsman Bungalow
Spanish Colonial
. Monterey Ranch
. Italian/Tuscan
• European Country
The architectural styles included
are as follows:
Spanish Colonial
Santa Barbara Mediterranean
Italian/Tuscan
ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE 1; RESIDENTIAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE (CONTINUED)
GUIDELINE
(VLCMP
REFERENCE)
STANDARD COMMENTS
Design Standards
(4.6.3.B.4.I &
4.6.3.B.5.e)
50% of exterior openings
(doors/windows) in the front of each unit
shall be recessed or projected a minimum
of 2 inches or shall be trimmed with wood
or raised stucco. Colored aluminum
window frames shall be used (no mill
finishes).
"Handcrafted" detailing, exposed rafter
tails, knee braces and columns shall be
used when appropriate to the proposed
architectural style.
The windows and doors on the
front elevations are recessed a
minimum of 2" and are trimmed
with either wood or raised stucco.
Please refer to the enclosed
elevations on the architectural
plans for compliance. All plans
comply.
Chimneys
(4.6.3.B.11)
The chimney and chimney cap shall be in
scale with the size of the structure.
2-chimney limit for dwelling units on lots
less than 7,500 SF.
Please refer to the enclosed
elevations on the architectural
plans for compliance. All
chimneys and their caps comply
with proper scale and proportion.
Each home has only one chimney.
Window Detailing
(4.6.3.B.10)
The design of the windows shall include
one or more of the following features:
• Deeply recessed windows
• Paned windows
• Decorative window ledges
• Accent and varied shape windows
• Window boxes and planters with
architecturally evident supports
Exterior wood trim surrounds
• Accent colors on shutters or other
elements
• Arched elements
• Shutters
• Raised stucco trim around windows
• Window lintels
Please refer to the enclosed
elevations on the architectural
plans for compliance. All plans
comply.
ATTACHMENT 7
Front Yard Setbacks
Lot#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
Floor Plan
1 R
3 R
2 R
3 R
1 R
1x
2
3
2
3
2
1X;
3
2
1x
2 R
3 R
1x R
1 R
2 R
3 R
2
1 R
2 R
3 R
1x R
2
3 R
2 R
1 R
3
3 R
2
1x
3
2 R
1x R
3 R
1
2
2 R
3
1
2 R
3
1 R
3
1x R
Individual Buildina Plane Setbacks in Feet
Plane #1 Plane #2 Plane #3 Plane #4 Plane #5 Plane #6
20.00 27.90 24.20
34.50 15.00
26.40 15.40 46.00
33.10 15.00
20.00 29.90 27.20
23.20 30.40 15.00
27.00 15.80 46.30
33.70 15.00
26.50 15.30 46.10
34.00 15.30
26.70 15.70 46.30
21.10 30.10 16.10
38.00 19.30
29.40 18.40 49.00
21.50 30.00 16.20
28.50 17.40 50.10
35.50 15.10
20.70 28.80 15.00
20.00 28.20 25.10
26.20 15.00 45.80
36.60 17.90
32.50 21.50 52.10
20.00 27.90 24.00
27.00 15.00 45.60
34.30 15.60
24.70 32.80 18.80
26.00 15.00 45.60
34.30 15.50
25.80 15.70 47.80
20.00 28.00 24.70
36.00 15.00
38.60 22.00
34.50 15.20 39.70
25.50 32.50 15.40
35.00 16.30
32.30 15.00 42.70
21.30 29.20 15.00
33.70 15.00
20.00 27.70 22.00
25.90 15.00 45.80
26.00 15.00 45.60
33.70 15.00
20.00 27.40 21.90
26.70 15.70 46.30
33.90 15.00
20.00 28.00 24.60
52.70 38.40
20.80 33.60 23.90
Weighted
Average
22.79
15.00
24.51
15.00
24.24
15.00
24.98
15.00
24.52
21.47
24.81
20.56
25.14
27.51
20.77
26.87
21.96
15.00
23.18
15.00
23.85
30.61
22.72
15.00
21.75
23.68
15.00
21.69
24.68
23.00
15.00
26.78
26.71
22.71
22.39
15.00
15.00
15.00
21.92
15.00
15.00
15.00
21.84
24.81
15.00
22.96
. 40.90
23.91
4/19/2010 2:37 PM
Neighborhood 3.3 North
Section B
Table 3
Page 3 of 5
3-S
ATTACHMENT 7
Front Yard Setbacks
Lot#
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
116
117
118
119
120
Floor Plan
2
1x R
3
3R
2
1
2
3
1 R
3
2
2.
1
3
3R
2 R
1x R
2 R
1x R
Individual Buildina Plane Setbacks in Feet
Plane #1 Plane #2 Plane #3 Plane #4 Plane #5 Plane #6
28.80 15.70 47.00
22.60 35.50 24.20
43.20 21.90
33.70 16.70
29.70 15.20 44.90
21.00 29.00 25.60
26.20 15.00 45.80
29.50 15.00
20.00 31.60 30.70
31.70 22.20
30.90 16.70 46.20
31.20 15.70 46.10
21.80 29.50 25.50
28.60 15.00
29.60 15.00
30.40 15.00 43.00
28.20 34.10 15.90
33.20 17.30 46.50
23.60 31.60 17.20
NEIGHBORHOOD AVERAGE:
Weighted
Average
25.76
25.16
28.56
22.08
25.58
23.96
15.00
15.00
25.83
24.14
26.93
26.59
24.37
15.00
15.00
15.00
24.41
28.17
22.37
21.63
4/19/2010 2:37 PM
Neighborhood 3.3 North
Section B
Table 3
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT 8
Individual Lot Data
. La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.3 North
Lot*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
116
117
118
119
120
Plan
1 R
3 R
2 R
3 R
1 R
1x
2
3
2
3
2
1x
3
2
1x
2 R
3 R
1x R
1 R
2 R
3 R
2
1 R
2 R
3 R
1x R
2
3 R
2 R
1 R
3
3 R
2
1x
3
2 R
1x R
3 R
1
2
2 R
3
1
2 R
3
1 R
3
1x R
2
1x R
3
3 R
2
1
2
3
1 R
3
2
2
1
3
3 R
2 R
1x R
2 R
1x R
Elevation
B
C
A
B
A
C
B
A
C
B
A
B
C
B
A
C
A
C
B
C
B
A
C
B
A
B
A
C
B
A
B
A
A
C
A
C
B
C
A
C
B
B
C
A
C
B
C
B
A
C
B
A
B
C
C
B
A
C
A
B
A
A
B
A
3
C
A
Color
4
7
2
5
1
9
6
3
8
6
1
5
9
4
2
9
1
7
5
8
6
1
7
5
2
6
1
8
6
3
4
1
2
7
3
9
4
7
2
8
6
4
9
3
8
4
9
6
1
8
4
2
5
8
7
5
2
9
2
4
3
1
5
3
6
7
3
Average Neighborhood Setback:
Setbacks (ftl
Average Side Yard
Front Rear Left Right Garage
22.79
15.00
24.51
15.00
24.24
15.00
24.98
15.00
24.52
21.47
24.81
20.56
25.14
27.51
20.77
26.87
21.96
15.00
23.18
15.00
23.85
30.61
22.72
15.00
21.75
23.68
15.00
21.69
24.68
23.00
15.00
26.78
26.71
22.71
22.39
15.00
15.00
15.00
21.92
15.00
15.00
15.00
21.84
24.81
15.00
22.96
40.90
23.91
25.76
25.16
28.56
22.08
25.58
23.96
15.00
15.00
25.83
24.14
26.93
26.59
24.37
15.00
15.00
15.00
24.41
28.17
22.37
21.63
15
15
15.4
15
17.6
62.1
73.4
69.1
63.1
58.1
54.5
54.1
57.9
57.5
44.3
37
30.6
18.6
15.5
15
56.6
53.2
60.2
73.5
73.8
92.6
22.7
28.3
40
100.3
26.2
31.9
15
36.2
20.5
16.3
61.4
24.2
19.8
15.6
16.2
17.1
16.6
15.6
15.7
15
17.6
28.2
15.1
52.9
75.9
43.8
16
19.4
15
19.6
15
15.6
40.2
46.2
34.8
25.1
57.7
66.4
45.6
25.6
22.4
7
5.3
5.3
5.5
5.7
10.8
10.8
10.8
10.8
9.8
7.5
8.4
7.7
7.2
6.7
13.4
6.7
7.9
9.3
42
5.3
5.5
5.3
5.5
5.5
5.5
7.4
5.8
9.7
5.6
8.3
15.8
8.5
8.4
7.2
5.3
5
15
11.8
8.6
6.8
10.2
9
9
9.4
22.4
5.3
17.8
21.9
5.6
5.5
5.3
22.4
11.2
10.8
7.8
19.2
7.3
10.1
11.2
10.2
7
8.7
7.2
6
5.8
6
24.7
10.8
10.8
10.6
10.4
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.5
7
5.3
5.8
8.4
5.4
9.9
8.4
6.5
17.8
21.4
7.5
11.5
9.2
9.2
9
16.9
8.2
8
8.1
7.8
7.8
51.8
5.7
16.4
11.4
10.5
20
5.3
5.5
5.9
5.5
5.8
5.5
5.3
5.3
15.5
7.3
11.1
7.4
7.6
7.8
7.2
21.4
5.9
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.4
5.5
5.3
5.7
5.4
7.5
7
7.2
7.7
20
34.5
26.4
33.1
20
23.2
27
33.7
26.5
34
26.7
21.1
38
29.4
21.5
28.5
35.5
20.7
20
26.2
36.6
32.5
20
27
34.3
24.7
26
34.3
25.6
20
36
38.6
34.5
25.5
35
32.3
21.3
47.9
20
25.9
26
33.7
20
26.7
33.9
20
52.7
20.8
28.8
22.6
43.2
33.7
29.7
21
26.2
29.5
20
31.7
30.9
31.2
21.8
28.6
29.6
30.4
28.2
33.2
23.6
Porch
Net Pad
Area (SF)
7,266
6,478
6,481
6,539
6,801
7,330
6,267
6,292
6,363
6,365
6,203
7,745
7,033
7,163
8,904
8,626
8,676
7,520
7,201
7,272
6,224
6,245
7,150
6,266
6,651
8,601
6,530
6,600
7,244
6,817
6,602
7,151
10,022
7,761
6,779
6,839
8,584
10,080
6,812
6,248
6,171
6,717
6,905
6,314
6,311
7,038
10,189
13,248
11,181
9,553
10,728
9,262
9,458
7.093
6,636
6,444
8,600
9,427
8,810
9j541
8,218
7,678
10,028
9,343
8,494
7,309
7,568
Building
Coverage1'
Sq. Footage % of Net Pad
2,709
2,462
2,379
2.462
2,709
2,907
2,379
2,462
2.379
2,462
2,379
2,907
2,462
2,379
2.907
2,379
2,462
2,907
2,709
2.379
2,462
, 2,379
2,709
2,379
2,462
2,907
2.379
2,462
2,379
2,709
2,462
2.462
2,379
2.907
2.462
2,379
2,907
2,462
2,709
2.379
2,379
2.462
2,709
2,379
2,462
2,709
2.462
2,907
2,379
2,907
2,462
2.462
2,379
2.709
2.379
2,462
2,709
2,462
2,379
2,379
2,709
2,462
2,462
2,379
2,907
2,379
2,907
37.3%
38.0%
36.7%
37.7%
39.8%
39.7%
38.0%
39.1%
37.4%
38.7%
38.4%
37.5%
35.0%
33.2%
32.6%
27.6%
28.4%
38.7%
37.6%
32.7%
39.6%
38.1%
37.9%
38.0%
37.0%
33.8%
36.4%
37.3%
32.8%
39.7%
37.3%
34.4%
23.7%
37.5%
36.3%
34.8%
33.9%
24.4%
39.8%
38.1%
38.6%
36.7%
39.2%
37.7%
39.0%
38.5%
24.2%
21.9%
21.3%
30.4%
22.9%
26.6%
25.2%
38.2%
35.8%
38.2%
31.5%
26.1%
27.0%
24.9%
33.0%
32.1%
24.6%
25.5%
34.2%
32.5%
38.4%
1/ "Building Coverage' = net pad area of a site occupied by the habitat* area of any building or structure as measured from the outside of its surrounding eternal walls or supporting members. Includes garages and
the perimeter area of a basement. Excludes exterior structures such as covered porches, permanent structural elements protruding from buildings such as overhanging balconies that project less than 8 ft. from the
building, and poite cocheres not exceeding a length of 22 feet and a width of 6 feet. Abo excluded are roof eaves extending less than 30 inches from the face of any building, awnings, open parking areas, structures
under 30 inches in height and masonry waBs not greater than 6 feel in height such as wing-walls, planter wafe or grade-separation retaining waits.
4/19/2010 2:37 PM
Neighborhood 3.3 North
Section B
Table 4
Page 5 of 5
La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.3 North
BUILDING ELEVATION DESIGN ELEMENTS
DESIGN ELEMENTS
a. Variety of Roof Planes
b. Deeply Recessed Windows and Doors
c. Paned Windows and Doors
d. Exposed Roof Beams or Rafter Tails
e. Decorative Window Ledges
( Accent Materials such as Stucco, Wood,
Sidina and Stone
g. Window and Door Lintels
h. Dormers
1. Accent and Varied Shape Windows
. Window Boxes and Planters with
Architecturally Evident Supports
k. Exterior Wood Elements
. Variations in Colors of Stucco and Other
Elements
Accent Colors on Doors, Shutters or Other
m' Elements
n. Stucco Wainscoting
o. Covered Balconies
p. Arched Elements
q. Shutters
Raised Stucco Trim around Windows and
Doors
PLAN ONE/ONE X
Spanish
Front ! Side Rear
i !
'i '
<\< <
'
1
'iI
'
^
^
V
v'
s s •/
S S V
I
0
' '
'
^
Tuscan
Front
'
Side Rear
S
/ v'
'
/
'
S
'
j
s
'
S S
^
V
^
^
^
^
^
^
\
0 j
/ ^ j ^
Santa Barbara
Front
'v'
'
/
^
^
^
Side
^
^
^
^
i
1
. 1
i
/ I
^
0
'
Rear
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
'
V
PLAN TWO
Spanish
Front
'
'
'
Side ! Rear
_lj ^^'
i
/ S \ S
-/ j S
'
s
'
'
s
'
V
^
v'
^
___
X
sisTs
s s s
Tuscan
Front
'
^
^
^
^
^L
'
'
Side
'
^
Rear
'^
1
^
^
^
_
j/ ! ^
^V
X
j
i
Santa Barbara
Front
^
^
'
^
Side Rear
^ ^
^
v^
^
'
^
! x
^ ^
V1 ^
T
v^
X
^.X i ./
PLAN THREE
Spanish
Front
^
^>
'
^
S
'
s
'
s
Side
v'
^
'
^
^
^
0
^
Rear
^
v'
'
^
^
^
v^
X
^
^
Tuscan
Front
v'
^
^
'
/•
^
Side
^
'
^
^
^
^
i
V
^
v'
/
^
^
^
0
^
Rear
'
^
^
^
^
X
^
v'
^
X
'
Santa Barbara
Front
v'
V
v'
Side
./
^
^
^ i
'
^
^
•
^ ^
Rear
•
'^
^
s
^
^ 1 / i ^
^
0
X
^
I I
o: OPTIONAL
: AT SELECTED LOTS
mz
(O
6/8/2010 Section A, Item #9
PUD 05-12 (B)
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND.i A rnsTALr\ U/LA3//1
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
-12 (B)
LEGEND
LA COSTA VICINITYMAP
.
!CTHCE ffiOW HA1&. STKR.
ABBREVIATIONS
RECLAIIfD *AT£R
PAP ELEVACROSS SO
IfT SO F
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
! NORTH
'/6-I20 OF nf CITY OF CA&SBAD TRACT
A COSTA - LA COSTA OWCS NORTH -
I Tlf CITY OF CMtLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ACCORDING TO HAP NO THEffCfI5S96 FILED IN rtf OFFICE OF nf COW STOKER OF SAN D
OtMTY ON AUGUST 22. 2007 AS FILE HO. X07-05S04X
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND DISTRICTS
YALLCCITOS WATER DISTRICT
CITY OF CARLSBAO
VALLEClTOS «IER DISTRICT
ENCINITAS UNION ELEU. SCHOOL DIST.
SAN DIECUI TO LHION HICH SCHOOL DtS'
COX. Tilt »A»CR
. CARLSBAO MUNICIPAL *ATER DIST
SCKWLS
SCHOOLSCABLE .KEQ-AllfD *ATEX
REFERENCE DRAWINGS
446-5
446-5A
446-1B
44E-SC
446-SE446-sr429-7
CJOSWG tOf •KMBCH
tasTiNG LOT HUUKK*ITH PAD ZLEVAnON AND
NT PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH BUILDER it«?ovoo/r$ NEIGHBORHOOD 3 3
DINC AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3 3
DINC AND EmSlON CONTROL PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
NT PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH BUILDER IHPROVEIfNTS NEIGHBORHOOD 3 3 NORTH
DINC *SO EKOSION CONTROL PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3 3 SOUTHNT PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NCKTH BUILDER itfRovEtftfrs NEIGHBORHOOD 3 3 SOUTHNT PLANS FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH DEVELOPER iifRovEuEnTs NEIGHBORHOOD 3 t. 3 3-3 :
FOR LA COSTA OAKS NORTH HE I J 3 CARLSBAD TCT OS-IS
EXISTING EASEUEHT UHE
CXISHHC maifBLL SLOPE (2:i UAX)
EXISTING * OF GHAOE
ft- eve UNLF.SS ontKmsE NOTED}
WATER HUH *TH n« HYDRANT
RECLAMED WATEK
STREET CENTERUHE ELEVATIONS
PROPOSED HtTAVUHG WALL
nnsrwc RETAINING WALL
BOUNDARY ANNOTATION CAILOUT
PLAN TYPE
ELEVA TION ANO COLOR SCHEME
BUILDING COVERAGE SUMMARY
PIAM
3
*OF
UNITS ««
32 3! «*
»Q. Ft.'
248J
TOTAL BUXJ.
COVERAGE-
S' IW
PARKING SUMMARY
SNGIE FAU1.V
VffinWPARKWG
TOT>LS
M,L STMDMtD SPAC
*PEB If. COSTA DfiKS V
PROVOED PARKIN
SiNGLE PAMIY
FULL-SQED 'HG»B«G&
TOTALS
sr
%
LAGEO
,
D^W
2 : IM
S SPACES : s
KW«S**HHGUNpr3] : " '"'
SLBTOTHL . 19 ?s
153
EV BLANMV STAIOAIW)S 4 « 2 C •* D
* SPACESJDU TOTAL SPACE3
MS
^CEPEHUMT
REPRESENTATIVES,
PROCESSED BY:
JACK HENTHORN & ASSOCIATES
GENERAL NOTES
I WTAL SITE AREA; APPROXIMATELY IB 0 ACRES
! EXISTING LAND USE. VACANT - ROUGH GRADED (PER DRAWING 446-X)
J PROPOSED LAND USE. SINGLE FAUILY RESIDENTIAL tfC OPEN SPACE
4 TOTAL W*«R OF DUELLING UNITS: 67
5 TOTAL HJ*S£P OT RESICCNTIAL LOTS 676 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL HUHGERS 221-840-01-23. 223-841-18-24 t 223-942-01-37
7 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAIC USE DESIGNATION
OLU (RESIDENTIAL LOf-tfDilM DENSITY 10-4 Ou/ocl)
a PROPOSE! GOffUL PLAN LAIC USE DESIGNATIONRLU (RESIDENTIAL LOn-lfDIlM DENSITY fO-4 Ou/oci)
9 EXISTING ZONING: PC10. MASTER PLAN UNDERLYING ZONING: R-l (SINGLE FA¥ILt DETACHED)!l GROSS OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY: 2 5 DU/AC (I2O OU'S/48.9 AC) PER Tu CT 05
12 LFHP ZONE: 20NE nIJ AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS: 670 (67 UNI TS * 10 TRIPS/DAY)
14 BUILDING COVERAGE: APPROXIMATELY J 9 ACRES15 PERCENTAGE LANDSCAPING: APPROXIMATELY 5J.W
GENERAL DESIGN NOTES-SITE PLAN
I ALL GRADING FOR PROPOSED AND Fl/OfiF STREETS SHALL CONFORM TO THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD DESIGN STANDARDS AND AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY ENGINEER
2 AU, EASCUEMTS SHALL BE PROVIDED. REMOVES OR RELOCATED AS REQUIRED
BY THE CITY ENGINEER. PUBLIC UTILITIES AH) THEIR APPROPRIATE DISTRICTS
3 ALL PROPOSED UTILITIES SHALL 8E INSTALLED LftDETORIXM).4 SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY:
SAH-LO AERIAL SURVEYS FLOtH OJ-JO-97
R J LUNG FLOfN 05-11-04
AND THE MUNSAKER t ASSOCIATES ROUGH GRADING PLAN (DRAWING NO 446-56)
5 CONTOURED INTERVALS l'/S' FEET6 UANLfACTuKED SLOPE RATIOS SHALL BE VARIABLE (2: I MAX).7 FINIStfD GRADES ARE PER ROUGH GRADING PLANS 44S-SB
S SOILS INFORMATION *AS OBTAINED FROU THE UPDATED CfOTECHNICAl INVESTIGATIONPREPARED BY: CEOCON INC. . DATED- Ofl-OJ-OT
9 GRADED StALES SHALL HAVE A HIHtltM OF IX FLOf LINE GRADE AND 'S 9-OKHOH GRADING PLAH OIK 446-58
10 ALL STREET DESIGNS. STREET LIGHT AND FIRE HYDRANTS TO CONFOHti
TO CITY OF CARLSBAD DESIGN STANDARDS AfO AS REOUlRED BY CITY ENGINEERVC PROVIDED AS SHOWY ON IHPROVEtfNT PLANS OK 446-SC t 429-7.J i LAtcscAFiNC AND TREE PIANTINC SHALL BE PCR THE CARLSBAD LAfOSCAff UANUAL
Aft) Tff VILLAGES OF LA COSTA VASTER PLAH. (SET. Tff MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAH
FO> Ttf OAKS NORTH) . AH) PER LANDSCAPE PLAN PREPARED BY GILLISPIE DESlCH12 CLL-CE-SAC CURB GRADES SHALL BE" A UINIUUH OF it
II Ttf SUBDIVIDEK/KVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL APPROVED STREE'
L IGHT STANDARDS AND FIXTURES IN Ttf TYPE AHS MMER APPROVED BY Ttf
CITY OF CARLSBAD THE PUBLIC HORKS CEPARnfNT - TRHTIC SECTION AND
PER Ttf CITY'S STREET LIGHT CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.
STREET LIGHTS AS SHOHN OH THIS IMP ARE TO BE USED AS A GUIDE ONLY.
STREET LIGHTS AS SHOK* ON THIS UAP AOE PER DK 429-7 AND 446-SC
M THIS PIC ASS(MES CERTAIN BACKB&C INFHASTmjCTUSl IS EXISTING OR
APPROVED AHD BONDED FOR TO T/C SATISFACTION OF Tff CITY ENGINEER
TtfY INCLUDE fttWCHO SANTA F£ ROAD. SAN EL I JO ROAD. AVffJIM SOLEDAD
ORDER TO tfTT 7W 5 '15 »CFfT ifCESSARY I
PER Itff/OVEUfNT AND GRADING
BUILDING
'POSITIVE DRAINAGE 0-
S AU_0»O! PER CEOCON.LETTER DATED FEB-OJ-tO.
ALL llfROVEIfNTS AH) GRADING ARE EXISTPLANS 446-5C AHD 446-5B RESPECTIVELY.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A PRECISE GRADING PERU!
PERMITS. THE EXISTING IHfROVEUENT DRAKINCS SHALL BE COHSTK
CHANGED TO SHO* THE RELOCATION OF ANY DRIVEWAYS SEKR AfCLATERALS HHICH IMY CONFLICT HIT,
RESIDENTIAL UNITS/DRIVEWAYSRESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED *ITHIN FIRE PROTECTION
ZONES FIRE RATED * IGNITION RESISTIVE GAZEBOS. DECKS AHD PATIOS Cf
FiHE SPRINKLERS »ILL BE HEOUIRED FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES BUION OR ffTER JANUARY I. 2011.
OWNER
L ESTATE COLLATERAL UCUT CO .
APPLICANT
7 UOffNA BOLLEVARD
Jr- -
OF UORROH DEVELOPMENT
AS AGENT FOR REAL ESTATE
COLLATERAL MCUT CO
PREPARED BY:
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(8)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carlsbad, California
SHEET
1
OF
7
PUD 05-12 (B)
AHD SHALL BE PLACFD 9V ACCOKDANCt
AND AS APPLICABLE. LEUCADIA MSTiMl
AS SWDHW PC* OH- DiHC 446-5
atMOff ntou nupfwvfoe/s w»s
rf.C ffOCF. WCO»E»a> 5L*flSfSHlUL. TO /Nf MfUOMCM £XfNTfWACiwwit er WRCCITDMfOUCW *OJ»CEWf LAHOSCAPfD
48EAS PRIOR TO WAOHHC MfDRAINS.
PER SDfiSD 0-2?.
DRIVEWAY SHALL INCLUDE CROSS-FA
TO Sffl£ OF LOT MTU D-2? ORMN
•XtiOHfD PER CEOCON iHC SOUS l£Tl£R DATED FEB-03-10
SEf SHEEI ! (XHEML flESKW-S/E PLAN NO!E / /5.
SO)£W*LK UNDEDDfiAIN PER Rf&OHAi SFAHtMRD DKAmGS
mt_L BE PROVI1XO OH EifRY LOI PER DETAIL 0-2?.
SECTION B-B
TVPOi DRAINAGE SWALE DETAILS
SHIP CALJENTE (PUBLIC) CORTEFORTUNA (PUBLIC)
i-4- ^4- « (um.)HOT ftJ SC«f
-4' «:/»• M <UN.JHOT to swtE
„,\cr-rsy
SITJO CALIENTE (PUBLIC) COUNA CERRO (PUBLIC)
EXISTING " T O COfl-IZO J (" g
EXISTING STREET SECTIONS
PREPARED BY:
ATES
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(B)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carlsbad, California
SHEET
2
Xo
PUD 05-12 (B)
1 HI I l in \ ,— TOP DF SLOPE
\ / SETBACKV* LINE OF 90HT
in
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION W - TYPICAL
SCALE- 1" - 10'
NOTE; AS LONG AS A 16-8' MM DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP OT SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
...i
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION 'B' • TYPICAL
SCALE; T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 14.6' UN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE M£T
LOT" 53 SETBACK
TOP Of SLOPE -
SETBACK
LINE OT SCHT
I I
i
•
LOT 56 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION V • TYPICAL
SCALE: 1' - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A fl.r MM. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET
TOP Of SLOPE-
SEIBACKUNE OF SIGHT i •
,'Jfls
•
I
m m
LOT 57 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION "D" - TYPICAL
SCALE: T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONC AS A 14.fi* MN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP Of SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET
TOP Of SLOPE -
SETBACKUNE Of SIGHT 111 11 • =
II! «"«
LOT 58 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION *£' - TYPICAL
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 16.8' MIN DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET
SLOPE EDGE BUILDING SETBACK
LOT 59 SETBACKTOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION "F - TYPICAL
SCALE: 1" « 10'
MOTE: AS LONG AS A 16 8' Mm. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
">-
1
• i •
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION 'G' - TYPICAL
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 7.5' UjN. DISTANCE IS MAWTAWED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP Of SLOPE-
SETBACK
UNE OF SKHT III
Ill
•
t
LOT 61 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION 'H' • TYPICAL
SCALE: 1" « TO'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 16.0' MIN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP OF SLOPE -SETBACK
LINE Of SKHT
LOT 62 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION T - TYPICAL
SCALE: l" • 1O'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 14.0' MIN. DISTANCE rS MAIN TAWED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
rf""™-«.,,
I I ! i
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION -J • TYPICAL
SCALE: T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 9.7* MIN DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
SLOPE EDGE BUILDING SETBACK INDEX
ARCHITECTURAL PLANE DETAIL
SLOPE EDGE BUILDING SETBACK INDEX
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120)
PLANTYP
1A
1B
1C
1XA
1XB
1XC
2A
2B
2C
3A
38
3C
ELEVATION STYLESPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SCWE I" . JO1
MO&; fit BUUMCtuwts CMUD our
VMM no uss PREPARED BY:PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(B)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carfabad, California
SHEET
3
OF
7
X.
PUD 05-12(6)
TOP OF SLOPESET8ACK
LINE QT SIGHT
H-2Q.fj, „.*'•"
LOT 64 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION TO - TYPICAL
SCALE: T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 14.6' UN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
H-24.Q"> ..
TOP OF SLOPE-SETBACKLINE OT aotl
I I ' 1
LOT 66 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION V • TYPICAL
SCALE: f " 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 16.8' MIN. ft STANCE IS MAINTAINED,THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET
1 • *
• I *
i 1
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION "M1 • TYPICAL
SCALE: I" - 10'
NOTCx AS LONG AS A 10.3* MIN. DISTANCE IS MAIN TAWED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP OF SLOPE -
SETBACK
LINE OF SCHT
i i
^"^ laV-ACTUAL /
LOT 71 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION 'N' • TYPICAL
SCALE; 1* - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 7.4' MM. DISTANCE IS MAMTAMED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP OF 5LOPE-
SCTBACK
UNE OF 9GHT J, _ I U.
I I
LOT 72 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION "O1 - TYPICAL
SCALE: 1" - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 14.5' MIN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.1>C TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARC MET.
LOT 73 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION V • TYPICAL
SCALE: T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 16.6' MIN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.
THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP OF SLOPE
SETBACK
LINE OF SIGHT
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION *Q' • TYPICAL
SCALE: T - 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 9.7' WIN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAMED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
TOP OF SLOPESETBACKUNE OF SIGHT
LOT 75 SETBACK
TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK SECTION TV - TYPICAL
SCALE: \~ . 10'
NOTE: AS LONG AS A 14.fi' MIN. DISTANCE IS MAINTAINED.THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE VET.
SLOPE EDGE BUILDING SETBACK
SLOPE EDGE BUILDING SETBACK INDEX
ARCHITECTURAL PLANE DETA L
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18.36-79 & 116-120)
PLAN TYP
1A
1B
1C
1JW
1XB
UU
2A
2B
2C
3A
3B
3C
ELEVATION STYLE
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCANSANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCANSANTA BAR6AHA
If MO iff MO LESS
PREPARED BY:PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(B)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carlsbad, California
SHEET
4
OF
7
PUD 05-12 (
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120)
PLANTYP
1A
1B
1C
1XA
1XB
1XC
2A
2B
2C
3A
3B
3C
ELEVATION STYLE
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
SPANISHTUSCAN
SANTA BARBARASPANISH
TUSCAN
SANTA BARBARA
PREPARED BY:
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(B)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carlsbad, California
SHEET
5
OF
7
PUD 05-12(6)
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120)
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(B)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
Xr
PUD 05-12 (B)
PREPARED BY:
Mf ftmomrK fASfifa ms HO srfonc loautat SET «
xcows
Af«s; jo' *er CASfufHi txmiCD H3 muforos Ufittt orsnacT Pfit DOC KCus 13. xo«. •$ ru no. 2006-0104^70, or O.K. A PORTION or THS
OSfUfHT UCS IHJHft ffOfVSCD DCDICttn} SJWfFT. StttO CHJDrtt. ttC $ HOISTOUT* ffafOH. iff on of ovtts&P met no. 99-04-01. m? HO t$3it
A * f* f DOKxai m of on OF aaseno P& i
EXISTING EASEMENT EXHIBIT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMEND. 05-12(8)
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.3 NORTH
(LOTS 1-18, 36-79 & 116-120 OF C.T. 05-15)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
City Of Carlsbad, California
SHEET
7
OF
S1 PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
BRICK VENEER
SIDING DETAIL IN RECESS
frontELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
STONE VENEER
6X WOODOUTLOOKERS
frontELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRiM
2X FASCIA
STONE VENEER
RECESSED ARCHED WINDOWS
frontELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
SCALE- 1/4"- I1 0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarcmtecturalgroup,inc
planONE
04 . 05 « 2010
leftELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
rearELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A'
SCALE: 1/4"' V-0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
SPANISH
planONE
leftELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
rearELEVATION 'B1 TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B1
SCALE: 1/4"= V-0"
TUSCAN
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/R/ch planONE
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
leftELEVATION 'C santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C1 santaBARBARA
SCALE: 1/4"= 1 XT LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarcnitecturalgroupjnc
planONE
S1 PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
BRICK VENEER
SIDING DETAILiN RECESS
frontELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
STONE VENEER
6X WOOD OUTLOOKERS
frontELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
2X FASCIA
STONE VENEER
RECESSED ARCHED WINDOWS
frontELEVATION 'C1
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarcmtecturalgroupjnc
santaBARBARA
planONEx
05 «2010
leftELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
rearELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A1
SCALE: 1/4"= V-0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroup,inc
SPANISH
planONEx
leftELEVATION 'B1 TUSCAN
rearELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B1
SCALE: 1/-41 - V-CT
TUSCAN
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/Rich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
planONEx
04 • 05 .2010
leftELEVATION 'C santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C'
4' $'LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
santaBARBARA
planONEx
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
BRICK VENEER
AIDING DETAIL IN RECESS
frontELEVATION 'A1 SPANISH
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
STONC VENEER
6XWOODOUTLOOKERS
frontELEVATION 'B1 TUSCAN
S' PROFILE CONCRETt ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
2X FASCIA
[STONE VENEER
IRECESSED ARCHED WINDOWS
frontELEVATION 'C1
SCALE: 1/4"= l'-0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
santaBARBARA
planTWO
05 .2010
leftELEVATION 'A1 SPANISH
rearELEVATION 'A1 SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A'
4' 8'
SCALE: !/<"= V-0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/Rich
woodleyarchitecturalgroup,inc
SPANISH
planTWO
leftELEVATION 'A1 (with optional balcony)SPANISH
rearELEVATION 'A1 (with optional balcony)SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A' (with optional balcony)
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTHSCALE: \!f -TO"
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
SPANISH
planTWO
02 • 05 • 2010
leftELEVATlON 'B1 TUSCAN
rearELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B'
a 7 4'LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
TUSCAN
planTWO
04 « 05 • 2010
leftELEVATION 'B1 (with optional balcony)TUSCAN
rearELEVATION 'B' (with optional balcony)TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B' (with optional balcony)
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/R/ch
woodleyarchitecturalgroup,inc
TUSCAN
planTWO
04 • 05 • 2010
leftELEVATION 'C santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C1 santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C1 santaBARBARA
SCALE. 1/4' - 1 -0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich planTWO
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
leftELEVATION 'C' (with optional balcony)santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C' (with optional balcony)santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C' (with optional balcony)santaBARBARA
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
planTWO
04 • 05
V PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
8RICK VENEER
SHAPED STUCCO DETAILING
frontELEVATION 'A1 SPANISH
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
PANEL SHUTTERS
RAFTER TAILS
STONE VENEER
GX WOOD OUTLOOKERS
.,!».** «U£i.«Jf • "*»v»» '•» U< i«'i->. • ',. » (fii.^.i i'k .&.**,« .W 'if.
frontELEVATION 'B1 TUSCAN
S1 PROriLE CONCRETE ROOP TILE
STUCCO TRIM
2X FASCIA
STONE VENEER
RECESSED ARCHED WINDOWS
frontELEVATION 'C1 santaBARBARA
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
planTHREE
34 • 05 » 2010
S' PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
RAFTER TAILS
BRICK VENEER
SHAPED STUCCO DETAILING
frontELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
S1 PROFILE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
PANEL SHUTTERS
RAfTtR [AILS
STONE VENEER
6X WOODOUTLQOKERS
frontELEVATION 'TUSCAN
S' PROflLE CONCRETE ROOF TILE
STUCCO TRIM
2X FASCIA
STONE VENEER
RECtSSED ARCHED WINDOWS
frontELEVATION 'C1
SCALE' 1/4' - V 0"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/R/ch
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
santoBARBARA
planTHREE
w/ OPT. OFFICE
04 • 05 • 2010
icole: 1/4"5
leftELEVATION 'A'SPANISH
rearELEVATION 'A1 SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A1
SCALF: V4" = rff LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
SPANISH
planTHREE
04 • 05 • 2010
leftELEVATION 'A' (with optional balcony)SPANISH
l/f
rearELEVATION 'A' (with optional balcony)SPANISH
rightELEVATION 'A' (with optional balcony)
SCALE. I/* - I'CT LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
SPANISH
planTHREE
04 • 05 »2010
leftELEVATION 'B'TUSCAN
reorELEVATION 'B1 TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B'
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
TUSCAN
planTHREE
leftELEVATION 'B' (with optional balcony)TUSCAN
rearELEVATION 'B' (with optional balcony)TUSCAN
rightELEVATION 'B' (with optional balcony)
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
TUSCAN
planTHREE
leftELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C'santaBARBARA
0 •£_ 4'
SCALE: 1/4' - I'-O"LA COSTA 3.3 NORTH
Co/Rich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
planTHREE
leftELEVATION 'C1 (with optional balcony)santaBARBARA
rearELEVATION 'C' (with optional balcony)santaBARBARA
rightELEVATION 'C' (with optional balcony)
LA COSTA 3.3 NORTHSCALE; !/*"= t'-O"
ColRich
woodleyarchitecturalgroupjnc
santaBARBARA
pfriaMRBEE
EXHIBIT 5
Planning Commission Minutes July 7,2010 Page 4
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L'Heureux, and duly seconded, that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6710 recommending
approval of the Envision Carlsbad Phase 2 Draft Work Program.
VOTE: 7-0
AYES: Chairperson Douglas, Commissioner Baker, Commissioner Dominguez,
Commissioner L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Nygaard and
Commissioner Schumacher
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Douglas asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.
2. PUD 05-12(6) - LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3 - Request for a determination that the
project is within the scope of the previously certified Villages of La Costa Program EIR
and that the Program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA;
and a recommendation of approval of a Planned Development Permit Amendment for
building floor plans, elevations and plotting for the development of 67 single-family
detached homes within the Villages of La Costa Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3, generally
located west of Rancho Santa Fe Road, south of Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia
Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 11.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Assistant Planner Shelley Glennon would make the Staff
presentation.
Chairperson Douglas opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2.
Ms. Glennon gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Douglas asked if there were any questions of Staff. Seeing none, she asked if the applicant
would like to make a presentation.
Jack Henthorn, 1902 Wright Place, Suite 200, Carlsbad, representing Colrich Communities, gave a brief
presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Douglas asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Baker asked which neighborhoods in the Villages of La Costa Master Plan have single
story homes. Ms. Glennon stated there are single story homes as required by the Master Plan located
north of this proposal along Rancho Santa Fe Road; however there were no single story requirements for
this proposal.
Commissioner Dominguez complimented Mr. Henthorn on the rear elevations for this project.
Chairperson Douglas asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, she asked
if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, Chairperson
Douglas opened and closed public testimony.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery stated he liked the project.
Commissioner Schumacher concurred with Commissioner Montgomery.
Commissioner Nygaard stated this project will be a nice addition to the city.
7O
Planning Commission Minutes July 7,2010 Page 5
Commissioner L'Heureux stated he is in favor of the project and complimented the applicant on the
colored map depicting the placement of the various plans within the neighborhood.
Chairperson Douglas commented that this development will not look like a cookie-cutter development and
complimented the applicant on the project.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L'Heureux, and duly seconded, that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6711 recommending
approval of Planned Development Permit Amendment PUD 05-12(6) based on the
findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
VOTE: 7-0
AYES: Chairperson Douglas, Commissioner Baker, Commissioner Dominguez,
Commissioner L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Nygaard and
Commissioner Schumacher
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Douglas asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.
3. GPA 04-03/GPA 09-07/ZC 09-08/SDP 09-05/SUP 09-08/CUP 03-21(A)/CUP 09-07/CUP
10-05/V 10-01 - PALOMAR COMMONS - Request for the recommendation of adoption
of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
and a recommendation of approval of a General Plan Amendment to establish a new
General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (GC), a General Plan
Amendment and a Zone Change and approval of a Site Development Plan, Special Use
Permit, two Conditional Use Permits, one Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and 'a
Variance for the development of a 16.65 acre site with a 185,244 square foot commercial
center located at the southwest corner of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real in
Local Facilities Management Zone 5.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Senior Planner Van Lynch would make the Staff
presentation.
Chairperson Douglas opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3.
Mr. Lynch gave a detailed presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Douglas asked if there were any questions of Staff.
Commissioner Baker stated that some of the buildings do not seem to be related as they are currently
placed. She commented that it might be a more walkable project if the buildings were placed closer
together. Mr. Lynch stated much of the design for the project is dictated by the intensity of uses that is
allowed by the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Commissioner Baker stated that if the further you are
away from the airport the more intense the use can be, it would then make more sense to have the more
intense uses further from the airport. Mr. Lynch stated the applicant can address the issues regarding the
design of the project. Mr. Lynch stated the project did go through quite a few revisions during the review
of the Airport Plan. Commissioner Baker commented that she is concerned because of the shared uses
of the parking and the reduction of parking. Mr. Neu stated that when Staff reviews the distribution of
parking, Staff is looking at the distribution of parking relative to the uses of the buildings. Mr. Neu stated
that if all of the buildings end up on the southern side of the access road there is the potential for
pedestrians crossing the road from a sea of parking. The building placement along the road also helps
break up the parking lot. Mr. Neu further commented that at one point there were utility lines that affected
the site in terms of the placement of buildings.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200
Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 7, 2010, to
consider approval of a Planned Development Permit Amendment for building floor plans,
elevations and plotting for the development of 67 single-family detached homes within the
Villages of La Costa Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3, generally located west of Rancho Santa Fe
Road, south of Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia Street in Local Facilities Management
Zone 11 and more particularly described as:
Lots 1 through 18 inclusive, Lots 36 through 79 inclusive, and Lots 116
through 120, of City of Carlsbad Tract No. 05-15, La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.3, in City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
California, according to Map thereof No. 15596, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 22, 2007
Whereas, on July 7, 2010 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend
approval of a Planned Development Permit Amendment for building floor plans, elevations and
plotting for the development of 67 single-family detached homes within the Villages of La Costa
Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.3, generally located west of Rancho Santa Fe Road, south of
Melrose Drive and north of Cadencia Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 11.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after September 3, 2010. If you
have any questions, please contact Shelley Glennon in the Planning Department at (760) 602-
4625 or shelley.glennon@carlsbadca.gov.
If you challenge the Planned Development Permit Amendment 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, at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: PUD 05-12(B)
CASE NAME: LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.3
PUBLISH: August 28, 2010
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
NOT TO SCALE
SITE MAP
La Costa Oaks North 3.3
PUD 05-12(6)
AM3AV-OD-008-1
UlCO'AjaAB'MMM B| za;|nsuco
ap suas ®091S ®AM3AV »ueqe6 a|
ja|ad e sajpej sananbiig
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
6225 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92011
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DISTRICT
STE 250
255 PICO AVE
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DISTRICT
101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DISTRICT
701 ENCINITAS BLVD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DIST
TIM JOCHEN
1960 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT
1966OLIVENHAINRD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AV
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
CITY OF VISTA
600 EUCALYPTUS AVE
VISTA CA 92084
VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT
201 VALLECITOS DE ORO
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
4949VIEWRIDGEAV
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE 100
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STEB
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
10124 OLD GROVE RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92131
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
CARLSBAD CA 92011
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
ATTN TEDANASIS
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE
5934 PRIESTLEY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
STEVE MACIEJ - BIASD
STE 110
9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER
•09is®Afcl3AV
Yajrueaj |aaj Aseg
! iaau<; uoiurmsui aa<;
jaded
W I
®091S
Asea
AM3AV-O9-008H uojpn.ijsui.p
e|
CIC LA COSTA L P
5993 AVENIDA ENCINAS 101
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-4459
LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN
1903 WRIGHT PL 180
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-6584
REAL ESTATE COLLATERAL MANAGI
1903 WRIGHT PL 180
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-6584
LA COSTA OAKS ASSN
1903
jSBAD
IHT PL 180
, CA 92008-6584
REAL ESTATE COLL.L MANAGI
1903WRiGHT PL 180
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-6584
CLINE CRAIG & N
3388 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
JOSEPH G & KIM CAMARATTA
3384 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
EDWARD & SARA WEBER
3380 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
DAVIS
3376 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD', CA 92009
BONNIE E PEDERSEN TODD W & AUDRA HOKUNSON MICHAEL & RENEE TINKER
3368 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
3371 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
3375 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
LEWIS & KIMBERLY HALL
3379 CORTE PANORAMA
CARLSBAD, CA 92009
LC OAKS 3 3 LLC
4747 MORENA BLVD 100
SAN DIEGO, CA 92117-6584
*** 18 Printed ***
ROBERT S Sc SUSAN ANTHONY
PO BOX 236063
ENCINITAS, CA 92023
L C OAKS 3 3
4747XMORENA BLVD 100
DIEGO, CA 92117-3466
A notice has been mailed to
yll property owners/occupants
listed herein.
Dale: 3-3-JO
CENTER FOR NATURAL LANDS MANJ
215 W ASH ST
FALLBROOK, CA 92028-2904
LC OAKS 3 3 LLC
4747
DIEGO
[A BLVD 100
, CA 92117-3466
rTejn;eaj laaj Aseg joj jadej