Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-06-24; Design Review Board; MinutesMinutes of: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Time of Meeting: 6:00 P.M. Date of meeting: JUNE 24, 2002 Place of Meeting: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairperson Marquez called the Regular Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Chairperson Marquez asked Board Member Paulsen to lead in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL Vice Chairperson Marquez proceeded with the roll call of Board Members. Present: Board Members: Julie Baker Larry Paulsen Courtney Heineman Vice Chairperson: Sarah Marquez Absent Board Member: Tony Lawson Staff Present: Housing and Redevelopment Director: Debbie Fountain Management Analyst: Lori Rosenstein Assistant City Attorney: Jane Mobaldi Project Engineer: Glen Van Peski APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 29, 2002 Minutes: Larry Paulsen noted on page 8, about two-thirds of the way down that the paragraph ends in the word "swell" which should be "swale". ACTION: Motion by Board Member Paulsen, and duly seconded by Board Member Heineman to accept the Minutes of April 29, 2002 with the above noted correction. VOTE: 4-0-0 AYES: Marquez, Heineman, Paulsen and Baker NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Vice Chairperson Marquez reviewed the procedures that would be followed for this public hearing. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA There were no comments from the audience. NEW BUSINESS Vice Chairperson Marquez proceeded with Agenda Item No. 1, RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 - Request for a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Tract Map to allow the construction of a mixed-use sixty-five (65) unit condominium project and 8,662 sq. ft. of retail shops, on an accumulation of eight existing parcels located between Carlsbad DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24, 2002 PAGE 2 of 10 Boulevard and Washington Street, and Christiansen Way and Beech Avenue in Land Use District 1 of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Area. She stated that because of her conflict of interest with the item, she would pass the gavel to Courtney Heineman who would proceed with the meeting. Ms. Mobaldi pointed out that this item would take a unanimous vote of all three of the Board Members either in favor or against in order to take any action tonight. Board Member Heineman stated that the applicant should be informed of this before they proceed. He re-stated to the applicant that there are just three Design Review Board Members left to consider this item and that there must be a favorable vote from all three in order to have the item approved. He further stated that if the applicant wishes to wait for a full Board or at least four out of the five Board Members, that he has the right to ask for a continuance and proceed with the presentation at a later date. He asked the applicant how he would like the Board to proceed at this time. The applicant replied that he would like to proceed knowing that there are only three Board Members present. Board Member Heineman opened the public hearing and introduced Lori Rosenstein to present the staff report. Ms. Rosenstein reported the following to the remaining Board Members: The Anastasi Development Company is requesting a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Tentative Tract Map to allow the construction of a mixed-use development project consisting of sixty-five (65) condominium units and 8,662 square feet of retail space on Carlsbad Boulevard. The subject property is bordered by Carlsbad Blvd. to the west, Washington Street, to the east, Christiansen Way to the south, and Beech Ave. to the north. A majority of the 2.83 acre site is presently vacant with a few residential units in various stages of demolition located along Christiansen Way and Washington Street. Adjacent properties along Beech Avenue include two single-family residences and a triplex. On the adjacent corner of Carlsbad Boulevard and Christiansen Way are two existing retail shops (Salty Sister Surfwear and Carlsbad Paddle Sports Kayak Rentals). She pointed out that the subject property is bordered by a mixture of different uses and adjacent uses across the street which include the following: • Across Washington Street, to the east is the Carlsbad Village Transit Station. • Across Carlsbad Boulevard to the west are Magee Park, St. Michael's Church, a few office buildings, and Carlsbad by the Sea Lutheran Home. • On the north side of Beech Avenue is the Army & Navy Academy football field and the State Parks & Recreation Office. • On the south side of property across Christiansen Way are Carlsbad Mineral Springs and Spa, a single-family residence and a vacant lot. Ms. Rosenstein stated that the project is complicated in that there are ten different buildings proposed with three different project types. She proceeded to explain each different building type individually to give everyone an understanding about what is being proposed on site. She pointed out that Building 1 is located on the east side of the property, along the frontage of Washington Street, and is a three story structure with two levels of residential units over a fully enclosed parking garage. She stated that the two levels of residential units include eleven (11) affordable condominium flats located on the east side of the building and eight (8) townhome DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 3 of 10 market rate condominium units located on the west side of the building. She said the 11 affordable units include nine 2-bedroom units, one 3-bedroom unit, and one 4-bedroom unit. The unit sizes range from 871 sq. ft. to 1,768 sq. ft. in floor area. She stated that the fully enclosed parking garage consists of 45 enclosed parking spaces (2 per unit resident spaces, plus 7 guest spaces) on the first floor of the building. Ms. Rosenstein pointed out that the second product type is a townhome style and it includes Buildings 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 with buildings 5 and 6 fronting on Christiansen Way and the remainder of the buildings are located on the interior of the property. She stated that each of the townhouse units have their own separate two car garages. Buildings 2-5 include five (5) townhome units each and Buildings 6-9 have four (4) townhome units each. She further stated that each of the units have 3-bedrooms and measures 1,623 sq. ft. in floor area. Buildings 2-9 all appear as three story structures on the garage side of the buildings, but due to grade changes, as two story structures on the exterior (front) side of the property along Christiansen Way. Ms. Rosenstein pointed out that the third product type is Building 10, located along Carlsbad Boulevard, and includes 10 two-story townhome units over individually enclosed 2-car garages with 8,662 sq. ft. of retail shops immediately adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard. She stated that these 10 units each take access off Beech Avenue, which affords direct access to the units from the garages. Building 10 is three stories high. She stated that building 10 has the largest units and each of the 10 units has 3-bedrooms and measures 2,384 sq. ft. in floor area. She pointed out that required parking for the retail components of building 10 is located behind the building with vehicular access off Beech Avenue and additional public parking for the retail shops will be provided as parallel parking along Carlsbad Boulevard as part of the installation of public improvements. The applicant will be required to dedicate right-of-way to make way for curb, gutters, and sidewalks and this parking is over and above the required parking which is being provided on site. She further stated through an additional dedication of right-of-way on Christiansen Way the number of public parking spaces is being doubled by providing angled parking spaces versus the more traditional parallel parking spaces. She stated full curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements, street trees, and landscaping will be provided along Christiansen Way. Ms. Rosenstein noted that there are three vehicular entry points to the project on Washington Street, Christiansen Way which would provide access to Buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7, and Beech Avenue which would provide access to Building 10. Either Washington Street or Beech Avenue would provide vehicular access to the garages for Buildings 2, 3, 8 and 9. She pointed out that the recreational space is not a vehicular thoroughfare, but is set up at a higher elevation than the drive aisles. She added that guest parking for the townhouse units is proposed as parallel spaces along the private driveway off Washington Street. She pointed out that the property naturally slopes down from west to east and as a result, the ground floor and finish floor of the units within the east-west oriented buildings (Buildings 2-9) are stepped down to follow the topography of the site which is why they end up with a two-story element on Christiansen Way and on the drive aisle side it is actually three stories. Ms. Rosenstein further noted that the project also includes extensive landscaping within and around the project, decorative and retaining walls as required, three centralized outdoor active recreation areas, which include a spa, putting green, shuffle board and lawn bowling area. She stated that in Building 1 there is also indoor common recreational areas that include a gymnasium, card room and craft room. She pointed out that enhanced paving is proposed at all three vehicular entries off the public streets and at important visual locations internally along the drives. She said that there are four locations for enclosed trash bins which are distributed at convenient locations adjacent to the driveways throughout the site. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24, 2002 PAGE 4 of 10 Ms. Rosenstein continued stating that the architectural style proposed for the project is light- colored stucco finish with wood fascia and trim, accented with wood shutters and a cultured stone base. She pointed out the Carlsbad Boulevard elevation shows the storefronts on ground floor which include multi-pained windows and varying setbacks. She also pointed out the following: • The upper levels are further setback from the street with balconies facing the west. • Balconies include 5' high tempered glass to satisfy noise requirements. • Building height measures 37'-8" and includes a 5:12 roof pitch. • Architectural details include: concrete "S" roof tile, multi-paned windows, stucco and wood railing balconies, architectural trim around windows, fabric awnings, and decorative lighting. • Landscape plan includes: street trees along Carlsbad Boulevard, enhanced paving at shop entries, flowering vines on metal trellises at building columns, and potted plants at shop entries. Referring to the Washington Street elevation, Ms. Rosenstein stated the following information: • There is a ground floor entry off Washington Street with access to the elevator. • The upper levels are setback from the first floor with balconies facing the adjacent street. 1 Balconies include 5' high tempered glass to satisfy noise requirements. • Architectural details include: flat concrete roof tile, architectural trim around windows, exposed wood rafters and shudders. Ground floor parking structure is enhanced with 42" stone fagade along the base, decorative wood grid, and small windows for ventilation. • Landscape plan includes: trees and low-lying flowering shrubs, two multi-bench seating areas, and trellises with flowering vines along stone fagade columns. • The building height measures 35 feet. Referring to the Christiansen Way elevation, Ms. Rosenstein stated the following information: • The upper levels are setback from the lower levels with balconies facing the adjacent street. • Balconies include 5' high tempered glass to satisfy noise requirements. • Architectural details include: concrete "S" roof tile, architectural trim around windows, exposed wood rafters and shudders, round and arched windows, stucco corbels, wood trellises, decorative columns at upper balconies, and walk-up patios with stone facade. • Landscape plan includes: street trees, decorative paving along the sidewalk and at the vehicular entry, low-lying flowering shrubs, and stone fagade along the patio walls. • Building height measures 32'-4" as measured from Christiansen Way and 39'-10" as measured from the interior drive-aisle. Ms. Rosenstein stated the following information regarding the proposed density bonus and standards modifications: • The project meets all the development standards for Land Use District 1 as set forth in the Village Redevelopment Master Plan. • The project also meets the Planned Development standards for properties located in the coastal zone with the exception of three standards modifications, which the developer is requesting in addition to a 25% density bonus. • In order to allow for a density bonus, the Carlsbad Municipal Code states that the City shall grant a density bonus and at least one additional incentive to a developer who agrees to construct a minimum of twenty percent of the total units of the housing development as restricted and affordable to low-income households. In this case the qualifying owner could not make more than 80% of the San Diego Area median income as adjusted for family size. • The developer is requesting a 25% density bonus to increase the density from 19 dwelling units per acre (the GMCP) to 23 units per acre which is the top end of the density range. In addition, the developer is seeking standards modifications for 3 planned development DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 5 of 10 standards as the additional economic incentive. In exchange the developer is willing to provide 11 affordable housing units without the need for financial assistance. The 11 units are located on the east side of Building 1 and include nine 2-bedroom units, one 3- bedroom unit, and one 4-bedroom unit. o The standards modifications include: a reduction from the 40' setback from Carlsbad Blvd. (a major arterial); o The elimination of the requirement to provide storage space for recreational vehicles onsite; and o A reduction in the drive aisle widths from 30 feet to 24 feet. Ms. Rosenstein stated that Planning Department has conducted an environmental review of the project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. She pointed out that as a result of staff's review, a Negative Declaration was issued for the subject project by the Planning Director on June 5, 2002 and made available for public review. She stated that no comments were received on the environmental document and adoption of Design Review Board Resolution No. 285 will recommend approval of the Negative Declaration for this project to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. She further stated regarding the economic impact of the project that it is anticipated to have a positive financial impact on the City and the Redevelopment Agency in that: 1) the redevelopment of what was previously an under-utilized lot will result in increased property taxes and therefore increased tax increment to the Redevelopment Agency; 2) the retail uses will generate additional sales tax revenues to the City; and 3) the project may serve as a catalyst for other improvements in the area, either new development or rehabilitation of existing buildings, through the elimination of a blighting influence within the area. In conclusion, Ms. Rosenstein, stated that overall, the project meets the development standards and design guidelines for Land Use District 1 of the Village Redevelopment Area with the exception of the three planned development standards modifications. She said the project will have a positive fiscal impact on the redevelopment area and will assist in fulfilling the goals and objectives of the Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual by providing a highly desirable mixed-use, transit-oriented development in an appropriate location in the Village and therefore, staff is recommending approval of the project. Board Member Heineman asked the Board if they had any questions of staff. Board Member Baker asked staff if there were any regulations which would prevent the storage of items such as towels, bicycles, etc. on the balconies, particularly those along Carlsbad Boulevard. Ms. Rosenstein replied that the Homeowners Association could impose limitations on the storage of these types of items, but staff did not include any conditions to this effect in the resolutions for the project. She stated that staff has found it easier for the Homeowners Association to enforce these kind of restrictions than the City. Board Member Baker stated that in the one of the resolutions there was a condition restricting the rental of units for less than 28 days, even though the units being proposed are for-sale units. She asked how this condition is enforced given the project's proximity to the beach and is known as a vacation rental area. Ms. Rosenstein stated that the only way the City would know about it is through a complaint and then the City would initiate code enforcement action as a violation of the conditions of approval for the project. She stated that this is standard condition for condominium projects. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 6 of 10 Board Member Baker asked where the front doors of the units in Building 10 were located, how will the retail operations take deliveries, where are the storage spaces for these units, where are the closest trash receptacles for the retail uses, and do the retail uses have access in the back or is their only access through the front. Ms. Rosenstein pointed out on the site plan the location of the trash bin for Building 10, which is located in back on the building on the south side. She added that it is large enough to accommodate the retail-commercial uses as well as the residential uses. She further stated that the retail units' only access along Carlsbad Blvd. She pointed out that on the backside of Building 10 there are ten 2 car garages with a door that leads to stairs that go up into the units. She said that the backside of this building is only accessible to the residents whose front doors are not directly on the street but are behind. Board Member Paulsen asked what accommodations are there for a moving van to enter the interior of the property to deliver their loads. Mr. Glen Van Peski with Development Services, Engineering, replied that the project was reviewed for truck turning movements, similar to the normal type moving van that would be used to service these size units. While the truck turning radius on the property can be me, there would have to be some flexibility on the part of neighbors for the short period of time trucks are parked on the interior drive aisles. Board Member Paulsen asked about security gates for the project. Ms. Rosenstein stated that the parking garage to Building 1 will not be gated and will be accessible to anyone entering the site. She pointed out that the developer is not proposing gates at any other access points on the site, but the garages have the roll-up doors which will be closed a majority of time. She stated that the site is open with the intention that people can walk from Carlsbad Boulevard over to Washington Street whether it is along the frontage of Christiansen Way or meandering through the site where there are walkways and recreational facilities with outdoor seating areas. Board Member Paulsen asked if the parking on Christiansen Way was likely to be used by people using the Coaster Station and if it was going to be a problem to keep the spaces available for owners of the units. He asked if the sidewalk was wide enough to accommodate the overhang of the cars. Ms. Rosenstein replied that the required parking for the units is located on-site and the parking along Christiansen Way is public parking. She stated that ideally staff would want to discourage parking by Coaster Station patrons in this area as the City has already lost control of some of the public parking lots in the area when NCTD terminated the lease agreements. She pointed out that at a later date if the property owners in the area wanted to have time limits placed on Christiansen Way it would require Traffic Safety Commission approval. She added that three-hour time limits would restrict the Coaster Station patrons from parking there. She stated that there was an extra two feet next to the sidewalk for car overhang and it has decorative paving so it will stand out separately from the rest of the sidewalk. Board Member Paulsen stated that there was no mention of the heating and cooling of the buildings. He asked if the rooftops of the buildings would be shielded from public view. Ms. Rosenstein stated that there would be roof equipment on Building 10 and Building 1 and those are all shielded with screening designed as part of the roof. She added that all of the DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 7 of 10 buildings will have central air conditioning which is required in order to meet the noise standards due to the project's proximity to the Coaster Station and the railroad right-of-way. Board Member Paulsen asked about the provisions for the water metering; are they provided for the whole building or individual units and are there separate meters for the landscape areas? Mr. Van Peski replied that the units would be individually metered and each owner would be responsible for their own conservation efforts. He said there would be landscape area irrigation and the bill would go to the Homeowners Association. Board Member Heineman asked what school would serve children from this project? Ms. Rosenstein replied that the project is located within the Carlsbad Unified School District and the closest public school would be Jefferson Elementary. Board Member Heineman asked if there are doors on the street side of all the units as well as the doors through the garages in the back, particularly on Christiansen Way. He asked for staff to clarify the location of the front entrance on the north side of Buildings 9 and 2. Ms. Rosenstein replied that there is a walkway leading from the sidewalk to an outdoor patio area where the front door of the units on Christiansen Way is located. She mentioned that Buildings 9 and 2 have the same outdoor patio area facing the north side of the property. Board Member Baker asked where the driveway northeast of Building 2 leads to? Ms. Rosenstein replied that there is a 4,000 sq. ft. lot north of the subject property off Washington Street and the owners have asked the developer to provide them with an access easement through their site to help with the development of the adjacent property. She stated that staff conducted a preliminary review for development of the adjacent property and because of the size of their property; they were very limited in terms of vehicular access. She stated that she was not sure what the two parties have worked out privately, but what they see on the plans is a potential for an access easement to the adjacent property. Board Member Heineman asked the applicant to step forward. John Simons, Anastasi Development Company, 4743 Bryce Circle, Carlsbad. Mr. Simons thanked staff for their involvement in the design of this particular development. Ms. Rosenstein asked them to look at turning Buildings 2-9 to face the street which has enhanced their project tremendously. He stated that he sent a package describing the background of his company and their history of quality infill development to each of the Board members and he would answer any questions they had. Board Member Baker asked who will manage retail units, who is in charge of the rental agreement, and what kind of quality control exists over who would be the occupants of these units. She asked what sort of tenants they envision for the commercial rental spaces. Mr. Simons replied that their company has over 2,000 rental units and commercial spaces. His company would manage the retail space. He stated that the type of retail tenants would be beach-oriented type of retailers. He stated they are very happy to dedicate some frontage along Carlsbad Blvd. to allow 12 spaces on the street plus the parking in the rear of the building for retail uses. Board Member Paulsen asked if the buildings were going to be fully fire sprinkled. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 8 of 10 Mr. Simons answered in the affirmative. Board Member Paulsen asked if there would be any water risers that they could hook a hose onto if they had to fight a fire on the interior of the project. Randy Morris, architect for Anastasi Development Company, 4134 Pacific Coast Hwy, Torrance. He answered Board Member Paulsen's question affirmatively and further stated that generally that is a requirement of the fire code and they will have the special connectors at the base of the buildings that hook-up to a bumper truck and energize the fire sprinklers within the building. Board Member Heineman opened the public testimony. Mary Welch, 351 Beech Avenue, Carlsbad. She asked what Ms. Rosenstein meant by "blighted area" and for clarification on the future plans for development of the area. Sarah Marquez, 2968 Garfield Street, Carlsbad. She stated after spending so much time going over these plans, it is hard not to put in her two cents worth. She confirmed that the building plans were very nicely done. She pointed out Building 10 which fronts Carlsbad Boulevard that she would like to see if they could get the cultured stone applied to the abutments between the retail spaces and underneath the window areas as it would add to the continuity to that design and the richness of the building. She added that she would like to see a little more architectural articulation on Building 10 along Beech Avenue. She asked the City as to the feasibility of getting the subdivision boundaries along Christiansen Way increased to include the whole street so that they could see about getting the remainder of the utilities placed underground. She stated that she did not see in the near future that they would be redeveloping any historical buildings such as the Kay Christiansen Alt Carlsbad building. She pointed out that she did not note an electrical plan for the electrical system in Building 10 and would like clarification that the commercial signage would be done in accordance with the Village Design Plan. She also pointed out that perhaps there could be limited hours for the delivery of commercial items. More specifically, deliveries could be made in the early morning hours to keep parking along Carlsbad Boulevard open. She also pointed out that the commercial uses in this building should be restricted to tourist-serving commercial uses in accordance with the Village Master Plan. Board Member Heineman closed the public testimony. Ms. Rosenstein responding to Ms. Welch's concern about her use of the term "blighted area". She stated she was referring to the subject property and was not referring to the surrounding area. She added that the subject property is located in a highly visible area along a major retail corridor and has been vacant and underutilized for a very long time and has lacked public improvements. She stated that by redevelopment standards that is considered blighted property because it does not promote the redevelopment and economic revitalization of the area by its very existence. In answer to the question as to what is the intent of the future development in this area, she stated that the east side of Carlsbad Blvd. is located in District 1 of the redevelopment area. District 1 is the heart of the Village and is intended to be primarily retail-oriented especially along the major corridors like Carlsbad Blvd. She stated that staff looked for a compromise for what they thought would work on the remainder of the site since Land use District 1 allows a mixture of different uses. She stated that, in accordance with the Master Plan, the ground floor is intended to be visitor-serving commercial uses because the property is also located in the Coastal Zone, but District 1 also allows multi-family development as a provisional use in appropriate locations. Ms. Rosenstein stated, in answering Ms. Marquez's questions that the Board would have to discuss the addition of adding the cultured stone along the facade of Building 10. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24, 2002 PAGE 9 of 10 Board Member Heineman asked if they should ask the applicant about this? Ms. Rosenstein replied affirmatively. She continued that along with this they should discuss more architectural articulation on Beech Avenue. She stated all the signs, including those that are internally illuminated, will be required to meet the Village Sign Regulations. If the signs are internally illuminated they must be individual channel letters or otherwise they must be externally illuminated. She stated that according to the sign program that was submitted along with the project they are proposing a row of various different fonts of internally illuminated channel letters along Carlsbad Blvd. She added that there are no electrical plans as it currently stands because those typically come with full construction drawings for the project. Ms. Rosenstein stated that the Board could discuss limiting the hours of commercial deliveries, which may be hard to do. She stated that on previous projects they have limited the hours of trash pick up when it was thought it might have an impact on adjacent single-family residences. She stated that in accordance with the Village Master Plan, all of the retail uses will be required to be visitor-serving commercial uses as the City approves all the business licenses before the uses go in. She did not think it was necessary to add this as a condition as it is an existing standard in this area. She asked Mr. Van Peski to answer the question about the feasibility of getting the subdivision boundaries extended to address undergrounding of utilities. Mr. Van Peski stated that he was a little confused as to exactly which side of the street Ms. Marquez was talking about. He assumes she is talking about the southeast corner of Christiansen Way and Carlsbad Blvd., which is a part of this project. He stated that he knows the developer did make considerable efforts to acquire the adjacent property but was unable to do so. He stated that through the development of this site all overhead utilities within the subdivision boundaries will be underground, but the City is not able to require the developer to expand the boundaries so they can underground more electrical lines. He stated if it is the other side of Christiansen Way that Ms. Marquez is referring to then the City would typically wait for the redevelopment of that site for the undergrounding to occur. Board Member Heineman asked the applicant to address the architectural questions regarding the use of cultured stone on abutments between the storefronts. Randy Morris replied that they would be happy to do this as well as provide more articulation along Beech Ave. He stated that regarding the hours of delivery they may be able to have a delivery zone in the front where the 12 parallel parking spaces are so as to not to restrict hours of delivery. He stated there were no problems with commercial lighting standards and visitor-serving commercial uses were not an issue either. Board Member Paulsen asked what is currently intended for where Ms. Marquez suggested the addition of the upgraded surface. Randy Morris replied that it is proposed at stucco, but the columns on the base would turn into a cultured stone, similar to the Washington Street elevation, which would tie the entire architecture of the project together. Board Member Paulsen expressed concern that Board Member Lawson was not present to comment on the proposed landscape plan. Board Member Heineman assured him that it would not be a problem. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 10 of 10 DISCUSSION Board Member Heineman asked for a motion. ACTION: Motion by Board Member Baker, and duly seconded by Board Member Paulsen that the Design Review Board adopt Design Review Board Resolution No. 285 recommending approval of a Negative Declaration, adopt Design Review Board Resolution 286 recommending approval of RP 01-06, adopt Design Review Board Resolution No. 287 recommending approval of CDP 01-16, and adopt Design Review Board Resolution No. 288 recommending approval of CT 01 -10 to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 3-0-0 AYES: Heineman, Paulsen and Baker NOES: None ABSTAIN: Marquez Board Member Baker stated she finds this project intriguing with the mixed-use component so close to the train station. She stated that she personally does not think there needs to be cultured stone on the abutments, but it is a matter of taste. She pointed out that tourist-serving commercial uses would be a benefit to the people living in the area, but that Carlsbad residents would like to have stores for people who live in town as well. She pointed out that it might be difficult to tell UPS to come only at certain times and she has not seen where this has caused a problem in other areas. Board Member Paulsen stated that he sees the project as a positive thing for the District and for the Village and has no problem with voting for it. Board Member Heineman stated that he thinks this is a very attractive project, which could serve as an anchor for other redevelopment projects in the Village, and he is in favor of it. Board Member Heineman closed the public hearing. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Vice Chairperson Marquez shared that the election for Chair and Vice Chair would take place at the next Board Meeting when all members are present. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the Regular meeting of June 24,2002 was adjourned at 7:13 p.m. -Bespectfully submitted, Debbie Fountain Housing and Redevelopment Director JUDY KLINE Minutes Clerk MINUTES ARE ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE WRITTEN MINUTES ARE APPROVED. A REPORT TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ARpkATiON COMDlETE DATE STAff: LORi ROSENSTEiN 08/23/01 MikE CRiM ENViRONMENTAi RwiEW: C~EN VAN PEski NECjATiVE DEdARATiON JUNE 5, 2002 DATE: June 24,2002 ITEM NO. 1 SUBJECT: RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 - "VILLAGE BY THE SEA": Request for a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Tentative Tract Map to allow the construction of a mixed-use sixty-five (65) unit condominium project and 8,662 sq. ft. of retail shops, on an accumulation of eight existing parcels located between Carlsbad Blvd. and Washington St.; and Christiansen Way and Beech Ave., in Land Use District 1 of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Area. 1. RECOMMENDATION That the Design Review Board ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution No. 285 recommending APPROVAL' of a Negative Declaration, and ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution No. 286 recommending APPROVAL of RP 01-06, and ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution No. 287 recommending APPROVAL of CDP 01-16, and ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution No. 288 recommending APPROVAL of CT 01 -1 0 to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant, Anastasi Development Co. has requested a major redevelopment permit, coastal development permit and tentative tract map to allow the construction of a residential project (mixed use along the Carlsbad Blvd. frontage), consisting of sixty-five (65) condominium units and 8,662 sq. ft. of retail space. The subject property is bordered by Carlsbad Blvd. to the west, Washington St. to the east, Christiansen Way to the south, and Beech Ave. to the north. The 2.83 acre property is an accumulation of eight (8) existing lots, resulting in an irregular, semi-rectangular shape. A majority of the existing property is presently vacant with a few residential units located along Christiansen Way and Washington St. The existing structures on-site include two single-family residences, a duplex, and a four-unit apartment building. All of the existing buildings are in various stages of demolition. Existing adjacent lots along Beech Ave. to the north include two single-family residences and a triplex. On the adjacent corner of Carlsbad Boulevard and Christiansen Way are two existing retail shops (Salty Sister Surfwear and Carlsbad Paddle Sports Kayak Rentals). The subject property is bordered by a mixture of different uses. Across Washington St. to the east is the Carlsbad Village Transit Station. Across Carlsbad Blvd. to the west are Magee Park, ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 2 St. Michael’s Church, a few office buildings, and Carlsbad by the Sea Lutheran Home. On the north side of Beech Ave. is the Army & Navy Academy football field and the State Parks & Recreation Office. On the south side of property across Christiansen Way are Carlsbad Mineral Springs and Spa, a single-family residence, and a vacant lot. The proposed project involves four different types of buildings. Building 1 is located along the frontage of Washington St. and consists of two levels of residential units over a fully-enclosed parking garage (3 stories total). Building 1 will house eleven (1 1) affordable condominium flats, eight (8) townhome market rate condominium units, and one market rate flat. Four (4) buildings located in the central portion of the project (Buildings No. 2-5) house five (5) townhome units each, situated over individual tuck-under parking garages. Four (4) more buildings (Buildings No. 6-9) house four (4) townhome units each, also over individual tuck-under parking garages. Buildings 2-9 all appear as three story structures on the garage-entry side, but due to the proposed split grades, as two story structures on the exterior (front) side. The final building type (Building 10) consists of ten (IO) two-story townhome units over individual enclosed 2-car garages and a line of retail shops along Carlsbad Blvd. (3 stories total). The architectural style proposed for the project is light-colored stucco finish with wood facia and trim, accented with wood shutters and cultured stone base. Roof materials are flat concrete roof tile over numerous roof planes. Building 1 contains 45 enclosed parking spaces (2 per unit resident spaces, plus 7 guest spaces) on the first floor parking garage with 19 storage units (one for each unit within the building). Buildings 2, 3, 8 and 9 are located on the central portion of the property and possess an individual 2-car garage, plus storage, for each of the units in the building. Vehicular access to these units is via a private driveway with entrances off Washington St. and Beech Ave. Guest parking for these buildings is proposed as parallel spaces along the adjacent private driveway. Buildings 4-7 are also located in the central portion of the property and are separated from Buildings 2, 3, 8 and 9 by an access driveway and central, common recreation area. These units are also designed with individual 2-car private garages, plus storage area. Sufficient guest parking is provided on the private driveway to accommodate these units. Each unit in Buildings 2-9 includes a private patio (2nd story) and balcony (3rd story). Building 10 is proposed as mixed-use, located along the Carlsbad Blvd. frontage, and includes a private 2-car garage (accessed from the driveway at the rear of the building), plus storage, on the first floor for each of the ten units. The project is a mixed-use development. Retail shops totaling 8,662 sq. ft. in floor area are proposed on the front (Carlsbad Blvd. side) of the first floor of Building 10. Required parking for the retail component of Building 10 is located behind the building with vehicular access off Beech Ave. Additional public parking for the retail shops will be provided as parallel parking long Carlsbad Blvd. as part of the installation of public improvements. The property naturally slopes down from west to east. As a result, the ground floor and finish floor of the units within the east-west oriented buildings (Buildings 2-9) are stepped down to follow the topography of the site. The project also includes extensive landscaping within and around the project, and decorative walls and retaining walls as required. Three centralized outdoor active recreation areas, including spa, putting green and lawn bowling area are provided. Indoor common recreation is also proposed in Building 1 that includes a gymnasium, card room, and craft room. Enhanced paving is proposed at all four entries off the public streets and at important visual locations internally along the drives. Four locations for enclosed trash bins are distributed at convenient locations adjacent to the driveways throughout the site. The project contains a variety of units. Building 1 contains 2, 3, and 4-bedroom units ranging ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 3 from 871 sq. ft. to 1,768 sq. ft. in floor area. Buildings 2-9 contain 3-bedroom units measuring 1,623 sq. ft. each. Building 10 contains 3-bedroom units measuring 2,384 sq. ft. in floor area. Each unit within the project is equipped with a private deck. 111. VILLAGE MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN MANUAL LOCAL COASTAL PLAN AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY The proposed project site is located on the perimeter of Land Use District 1, adjacent to Land Use District 9. As set forth in the Village Master Plan and Design Manual, multi-family dwellings are a provisionally-permitted use within Land Use District 1 , Provisionally-permitted uses are defined as those uses which are allowed provided that they address certain identified considerations and location and development criteria, established in the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. In order for such uses to receive an approved Redevelopment Permit, the project must be determined to be consistent with identified findings. In addition, it is required by the Village Master Plan that the ground floor of mixed-use projects (proposed Building 10) must be devoted to commercial uses. The site is located within the Coastal Zone. Therefore, consistency with the Village Local Coastal Program is also applicable to this project. A coastal development permit is being processed concurrently with the redevelopment permit. IV. CONSISTENCY WITH VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA VISION, GOALS AND OB J ECTIVES The proposed project will satisfy the following objectives as outlined within the Village Master Plan and Design Manual: Goal 1 : Establish Carlsbad Villaqe as a Qualitv Shoppinq, Workinq and Livinq Environment. The subject property is situated between Carlsbad Blvd., Washington St., Christiansen Way and Beech Ave. on the edge of Land Use District 1. The western portion of the site is adjacent to highly-traveled Carlsbad Blvd. and the eastern section is across Washington St. from the Village Transit Station. The eastern section of the site is currently occupied by a four-unit apartment building, a duplex, and two single-family homes. The western section of the property is vacant. The proposed project will result in the development of an underutilized lot, including retail uses along the Carlsbad Blvd. corridor and multi-family residential ownership units on the balance of the site, within clear walking distance to the Village Transit Station. The attractive architectural design, extensive landscaping and site improvements will serve to enhance the site and the surrounding area. The multi-family residential aspect of the project also serves to increase the number, quality and diversity of housing units within the Village, particularly those in proximity to transit, shopping and employment facilities. The proposed condominium project will serve to increase the number, quality, diversity and affordability of housing options available to people seeking to reside in the downtown area. The proposed retail shops will serve residents, attract tourist-serving uses, and provide retail continuity along Carlsbad Blvd. Goal 2: Improve the Pedestrian and Vehicular Circulation in the Villaqe Area. The proposed project site is within convenient walking distance to the Transit Station, the beach and Village commercial uses. Therefore, it will encourage pedestrian activity by its residents and is transit- oriented. The project will provide for the replacement and extension of curb, gutter and sidewalk along large sections of all four of the public streets fronting the property. Along Christiansen Way, twenty (20) new diagonal public parking spaces (not counted as required ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06KDP 01-16KT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 4 project spaces) will be provided through the dedication and widening of this frontage to the project. Additionally, twelve (1 2) public parallel parking spaces will be provided along the Carlsbad Blvd. frontage (also not counted as project spaces). All of these improvements will serve to enhance the pedestrian and vehicular circulation adjacent to the project. Goal 3: Stimulate Propertv Improvements and New Development in the Villaqe. The Village Master Plan and Design Manual was developed in an effort to stimulate new development and/or improvements to existing buildings in the Village. The intent is that new development or rehabilitation of existing facilities will then stimulate other property improvements and in turn, additional new and modern development. Two of the objectives of this goal are to increase the intensity of development and to encourage mixed-use development projects in the Village. The proposed project will specifically accomplish both of these objectives. In addition, the proposed project increases the intensity of development on the site, resulting in a higher degree of compatibility with adjacent development. Staff projects that the development of the subject property will serve as a catalyst for future redevelopment of underdeveloped areas north and south of the site. Goal 4: Improve the Physical Appearance of the Villaqe Area. The project has a design that is visually appealing. Construction of the proposed project will reinforce the Village character with appropriate site planning and architectural design and materials that comply with City standards and requirements. In addition, the proposed project will establish commercial buildings along Carlsbad Blvd. whose scale and character are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. V. CONSISTENCY WITH VILLAGE LAND USE PLAN The site of the proposed project is located within Land Use District 1 of the Village Redevelopment Area. Multi-family residential projects are a provisional use within this district. Considerations that must be addressed to assess the appropriateness of this particular provisional use within District 1 are: 1) that the multi-family residential use is appropriate to the site and adjacent development, and 2) that the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate required on-site parking without adversely affecting the visual environment of the Village. Staff concludes that the proposed project complies with both of these considerations. First, the multi-family use is consistent with adjacent land uses which include single-family residential to the north and a professional care facility (Carlsbad by the Sea Lutheran Home) to the southwest. Additionally, the proximity of the site to mass transit and commercial services and the incorporation of a commercial component along the west facing frontage makes it ideal for encouraging pedestrian-oriented activities without upsetting retail continuity along Carlsbad Blvd. Finally, staff has determined that the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate required parking for both the residential and commercial components of the project. Location and Development Criteria that must be assessed for provisional multi-family projects within District 1 are that; 1) residential and parking uses should not displace desired retail uses or lessen active street frontage, 2) sites should accommodate parking requirements on-site or below grade, 3) residential units should not be placed in proximity to health hazards, 4) provision should be made to buffer train noise, and 5) multi-family housing located near the rail station should be constructed as part of a mixed-use development project. Staff concludes that the proposed project complies with all of these criteria. In addition, the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual stipulates that the ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 5 mixed-use aspect of the project (retail shops along Carlsbad Blvd. frontage) is a permitted use provided that the ground floor of all approved mixed-use projects be devoted to visitor serving commercial uses. Since retail shops are proposed exclusively along the Carlsbad Blvd. frontage, Staff concludes that the project complies with this requirement. VI. CONSISTENCY WITH VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The Village Master Plan and Design Manual provides for two types of standards with which every project must comply in order to receive permit approval. The first type is known as “Universal Standards”. Every project within the Village Redevelopment Area must comply with these Universal Standards, regardless of district location. The second type is known as “Individual Standards”. These standards are specific to the Land Use District in which the project is located. UNIVERSAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Universal Development Standards address 1 ) the issues of General & Redevelopment Plan Consistency, Residential Density, lnclusionary Housing; and 2) special instructions regarding the application of individual standards related to parking, building coverage, building height and setbacks. The following information is provided to indicate how the proposed project meets the “Universal Standards”. General and Redevelopment Plan: The General Plan includes the following goals for the Village: 1) a City which preserves, enhances and maintains the Village as a place for living, working, shopping, recreation, civic and cultural functions while retaining the village atmosphere and pedestrian scale; 2) a City which creates a distinct identity for the Village by encouraging activities that traditionally locate in a pedestrian-oriented downtown area, including offices, restaurants, and specialty shops; 3) a City which encourages new economic development in the Village and near transportation corridors to retain and increase resident-serving uses; and 4) a City that encourages a variety of complementary uses to Generate pedestrian activity and create a lively, interesting social environment and a profitable business setting. The General Plan objective is to implement the Redevelopment Plan through the comprehensive Village Master Plan and Design Manual. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives for the Village, as outlined within the General Plan, because it provides for multi-family residential use and retail use in an appropriate location within the Village. This in turn serves to enhance and maintain the area as a residential neighborhood and encourages greater residential support opportunities in the Village. By providing more residential opportunities, the project helps to create a lively, interesting social environment by encouraging and increasing the opportunity for 24-hour life in the Village, which provides the necessary customer base to attract complementary commercial uses. The project location serves to provide multi-family housing in close proximity to mass transit facilities and the project reinforces the pedestrian-orientation desired for the downtown area by providing much needed street improvements along its frontages on Washington St., Carlsbad Blvd., and Christiansen Way. Furthermore, the project will provide a strong street presence with extensive architectural relief, including outdoor decks looking out over the adjacent streets and fully enclosed and internal parking. Finally, the project assists in the effort to create a distinct identity for the Village as an area that contains a wide variety of uses by providing a residential product (multi-family for sale) that has been in demand by the market for some time. ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 6 In summary, Staff concludes that the proposed project supports the Village character for the area. The project is located in close proximity to mass transit, parks, the beach, retail, and commercial services. The project is consistent with the Village Master Plan and Design Manual and has also been determined to be consistent with the General Plan, as related to the Village Redevelopment Area. Residential Density: The Village Master Plan and Design Manual does not set forth specific densities in the land use districts which permit residential uses. Instead, an appropriate General Plan residential density is to be determined for each project based upon compatibility findings with the surrounding area. Maximum project density may not exceed the Growth Management Control Point (G MCP) for the applicable density designation unless a density increase or bonus is granted in accordance with Chapters 21 53 and 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Appropriate findings must also be made per Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to exceed the GMCP. After considering the goals and objectives of the Village Redevelopment Area, the vision for Land Use District 1 and surrounding land uses, staff is recommending a High Density Residential (RH) General Plan Designation for the subject property. Justification for the RH General Plan density designation is as follows: 1. The density is compatible with the surrounding area which contains a variety of uses including public uses such as the transit station, and private uses such as residential, retail, and commercial office. Residential uses in the area are a composite of single- family and multi-family residential, all of which is expected to eventually redevelop as multi-family due to the site's close proximity to the transit station, the beach and commercial uses. Application of the RH General Plan designation on the subject property allows for the construction of a project that will result in a significant number of units developed with convenient access to the transit station, and a project that is compatible with the mixture of surrounding uses in terms of size, scale, and overall density. 2. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the goals of the Village Redevelopment Master Plan by increasing the number, quality, diversity, and affordability of housing units within this area of the Village. The higher density designation makes the project financially feasible to construct for-sale multi-family units in today's economy. The Village Redevelopment Area has an abundance of residential rental units, but few condominiums have been developed in the area since prior to the inception of the redevelopment plan in 1981. 3. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the objectives of Land Use District 1 by increasing the number of residential units in close proximity to shops, restaurants, and mass transportation (Village Transit Station). Higher residential densities in close proximity to mixed-use areas with easy access to mass transportation promote greater job/housing balance and help solve regional issues such as reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. The RH designation allows for a density range of 15 to 23 dwelling units per acre with a Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) of 19 dwelling units per acre. The site area for the proposed project is 2.83 acres (123,275 square feet). The 2.83 acre site will accommodate 53 dwelling units per the GMCP. As will be discussed later in this report, the project applicant is requesting a density bonus to accommodate a total of 65 dwelling units, 11 of which (20% of 53 ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 7 units) are proposed to qualify as affordable to low income families. With 65 dwelling units proposed, the project results in a density of 22.9 dwelling units per acre, which is at the top end of the RH density range (1 5-23 dwelling units per acre). In accordance with the Growth Management Ordinance specific findings regarding the availability of public facilities must be made in order to approve a density above the GMCP. The proposed project complies with these findings because all necessary public improvements and facilities to accommodate the proposed development have been provided or are required as conditions of project approval. In addition, there have been sufficient developments approved in the northwest quadrant at densities below the control point to offset the units in the project above the control point so that approval will not result in exceeding the quadrant limit. Justification for meeting the findings of the Growth Management Ordinance to allow a density that exceeds the GMCP has been incorporated into the attached DRB Resolution No. 286. lnclusionary Housinq Requirements: All residential projects within the Village Redevelopment Area are subject to the City's lnclusionary Housing Ordinance, Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and those requirements imposed by Redevelopment Law. In accordance with Redevelopment Law, 15% of the private housing units constructed within a redevelopment area must be affordable to low and moderate income persons, of which not less than 40% (or 6% of the total newly constructed units in the redevelopment area) must be affordable to very low income households. Per City Ordinance, 15% of the total housing units constructed must be affordable to low income households. In order to allow for a density bonus, the Carlsbad Municipal Code states that the City shall grant a density bonus and at least one additional incentive, as set forth in Section 21.86.060(c), or in lieu incentives of equivalent financial value, as set forth in 21.86.060(c) to an applicant or developer of a housing development of at least five units, who agrees to construct the following: a. A minimum of twenty percent of the total units of the housing development as restricted and affordable to low-income households; or b. A minimum of ten percent of the total units of the housing development as restricted and affordable to very low income households; or c. A minimum of fifty percent of the total units of the housing development as restricted to qualified (senior) residents. The applicant has agreed to enter into an affordable housing agreement to deed restrict eleven (1 1) units within the project for purposes of providing housing which is affordable to low income households for a period of thirty (30) years. Thus, the proposed project is in compliance with item "a" above and qualifies for the density bonus and at least one additional incentive pursuant to 21.86.060. The additional incentive requested involves standards modifications as indicated below, per Section 21 53.1 20(c) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, for the project which allows for the less restrictive development standards to be processed for the production of affordable housing. It is important to note that the proposed major redevelopment permit shall also serve as the site development plan for the project. Attached DRB Resolution No. 286 includes a condition requiring the developer to enter in an affordable housing agreement prior to the approval of the Final Map for the project in accordance with the requirements for for-sale inclusionary units as outlined in Section 21.85.040(E) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. With the provision of eleven (1 1) affordable housing units and the execution of the required affordable housing agreement the project will satisfy its inclusionary housing requirement. ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 Planned Development: The Village Master Plan includes a specific requirement of residential units proposed for individual ownership which states that all such units shall comply with the development standards and design criteria set forth by Planned Development Ordinance, Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This requirement was added during the 1996 update to the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual with the intent to provide an additional layer of development standards to insure that any development standards unique to condominium projects were included in the Master Plan. A comprehensive amendment to Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Planned Development Ordinance) was recently approved by the City Council and became effective on January 18, 2002 for properties outside the Coastal Zone. Since the subject property is located within the Coastal Zone the project has been reviewed based on the development standards and design criteria of the previous Planned Development Ordinance. In addition to the development standards set forth in the Village Master Plan, the Planned Development Ordinance provides criteria for building setbacks, parking, recreational space, lighting, utilities, recreational vehicle storage, tenanuresident storage space, refuse areas, and antennas. Standards Modifications: The project was found to comply with each of the development standards and design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance with the exception of three requested standards modifications. The following are a description of the three standards modifications to the development standards requested (in lieu of City financial assistance) for the provision of eleven (1 1) affordable housing units: 1. Standard 21.45.090(b)(I). Arterial Setbacks: All units adjacent to a major arterial road shall maintain a minimum setback of forty feet. Carlsbad Boulevard is identified in the Circulation Element of the General Plan as a major arterial road. Justification for Standards Modification: As mentioned: the subject site is located within District 1 of the Village Redevelopment Area. The Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Guidelines Manual provides specific development standards for properties within the Redevelopment Area. It indicates that within District 1, setbacks shall be as follows: Front: 0 to 10 feet maximum Side: No setback requirement Rear: No setback requirement The purpose of these setbacks is to encourage buildings with a strong street presence in the most heavily pedestrian-oriented area of the Village. The proposed project design is in compliance with these Redevelopment Area-specif ic setback requirements. As such, the reduced standard will not have an adverse impact on surrounding properties. In addition, Staff believes that an increased setback along Carlsbad Boulevard would negatively affect the financial success of the retail uses proposed along the first floor street frontage of the proposed project. Furthermore, the reduced standard will assist in developing a project which meets the goals of the Village Redevelopment Area and is consistent with the objectives for the land use district in which the project is located, and the reduced standard will assist in creating a project design which is interesting and visually appealing and reinforces the Village Character of the area. ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 9 2. Standard 21.45.090(k). Recreational Vehicle Storaqe: The Planned Development Ordinance requires that all projects containing ten units or more provide space to store campers, trailers, boats, etc., at a ratio of 20 sq. ft. per unit. Justification for Standards Modification: The proposed project does not provide onsite RV storage inasmuch as this use is not identified as a preferred land use in the Redevelopment Area. In addition, since the proposed project is an urban, transit- oriented, mixed-use infill project, RV storage is considered to be an ineffective use of land and potentially an eyesore on small existing lots in the Redevelopment Area. Should an RV-owner purchase a unit within the proposed project, the owner would be responsible for storing the vehicle off-site in a commercial RV storage lot or garage business, typically located within an industrial or business park zone, and not within the urban core of the city. Staff concludes that the reduced standard will not have an adverse impact on surrounding properties and that this specific standards modification will assist in developing a project which meets the goals of the Village Redevelopment Area and is consistent with the objectives for the land use district in which the project is located. In addition, the proposed standards modification will assist in creating a project design which allows for greater interest, visual appeal and reinforces the Village Character of the area. 3. Standard 21.45.090(1). Private Street Widths: Private streets may be permitted within a planned unit development provided their width and geometric design are 30 foot private driveways in multi-family attached projects. Justification for Standards Modification: The proposed project is designed with minimum 24 foot wide driveway aisles. Due to the fact that the proposed project is an urban, infill, transit-oriented, mixed use project on existing lots, the minimum necessary, safe width of the drive aisle is proposed. The City Fire Department and Engineering Department have indicated the proposed width is acceptable. In addition, the newly- revised Planned Development standards modify the 30-foot minimum to 24-feet. The proposed project is consistent with the modified City standard for private driveway width. As such, the reduced standard will not have an adverse impact on surrounding properties, most of which have been designed in accordance with the same standard. Furthermore, the reduced standard will assist in developing a project which meets the goals of the Village Redevelopment Area, is consistent with the objectives for the land use district in which the project is located, and will assist in creating a project design which is interesting, visually appealing and reinforces the Village Character of the area. Staff has reviewed the requested standards modifications and justification and supports the request. Approval of the major redevelopment permit, which also serves as the site development plan for the affordable housing units, will approve the standards modifications as noted above. Compliance: In addition, the following is an analysis of how the project addresses the remainder of the development standards (for which the project is in full compliance) set forth in the Planned Development Ordinance: Recreational Space: Open space areas designated for recreational use shall be provided for all planned development projects at a ratio of two hundred square feet per unit. The open space areas shall provide for both common and private recreational facilities. The proposed project provides for both active and passive common recreational facilities which ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 10 include: spa, indoor gymnasium, indoor card room, indoor crafts room, shuffleboard court, lawn bowling court, a putting green, and passive bench areas. In addition, as required by the Planned Development Ordinance, the project provides for private recreational space in the form of private decks on individual condominium units and, in most cases, private patios. Each deck complies with the minimal dimension requirement of six feet. A total of 13,000 square feet of recreational space is required for the proposed project (200 square feet x 65 units). The total recreational space is a combination of common and private areas. The proposed project provides for a total of 17,267 square feet of recreational space (8,984 sq. ft. common and 8,283 sq. ft. private) and, therefore, exceeds the standard. Liuhtinq: Lighting adequate for pedestrian and vehicular safety and sufficient to minimize security problems shall be provided. As a standard condition of approval, the applicant shall be required to submit a lighting plan, subject to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to issuance of the building permit. This condition has been incorporated into attached DRB Resolution No. 286. Utilities: There shall be separate utility systems for each unit. This condition has been incorporated into attached DRB Resolution No. 286. Tenant Storaae Space: The Planned Development Ordinance requires separate storage space of at least four hundred eighty (480) cubic feet for each unit. If all the storage for each unit is provided in one area, this requirement may be reduced to three hundred ninety two (392) cubic feet per unit. This requirement is in addition to closets and other indoor storage areas that are normally part of a residential dwelling unit. The project has been designed with storage closets within the parking garages. In a majority of the units the storage space is located in one area of the garage and exceeds the 392 cubic feet per unit requirement. In Building 10 the storage is broken up into two areas; one within the garage and one is in a fully enclosed storage closet on the balcony. In the case of Building 10, the total storage area for each unit exceeds 480 cubic feet as required by the planned development standards. A full tabulation of the storage areas is included on the Architectural Site Plan. The total storage area required is 29,528 cu. ft. and 40,634 cu. ft. is provided. Therefore, sufficient storage area has been designed into the units. Furthermore, the units are easily accessible by the tenants and will assist in meeting their on-site storage needs. Refuse Areas: Four centralized refuse-pickup areas have been distributed in key The refuse areas are fully Coast Waste Management has reviewed locations along the private driveways internal to the project. enclosed with block walls, gates and landscaping. the plans and found them to be acceptable for refuse-pickup in the proposed locations. Antennas: Individual antennas shall not be permitted. The project shall have a master cable television hookup. This condition has been incorporated into attached DRB Resolution NO. 286. Parkinq: The parking requirements set forth in the Planned Development Ordinance are more restrictive than the Village Master Plan standards. Staff used the more restrictive standards against which to evaluate the project. Thus, the minimum parking requirement for the project is 2 full-sized covered spaces per unit and additional guest parking at a rate of .5 spaces per unit up to 10 and .25 spaces per unit in excess of 10. As a result, the parking requirement for the proposed 65-unit condominium project equates to 130 covered parking spaces and 19 guest parking spaces (1 49 spaces total). The applicant is proposing to provide 130 covered parking spaces and 19 outside guest parking spaces, which complies with the ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06KDP 01-16KT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 11 minimum requirement for the residential aspect of the project. Resident parking spaces will not be visible from the public street and guest parking spaces will be screened from public view. The proposed project satisfies the parking requirements of both the Planned Development Ordinance and the Village Master Plan. The retail uses total 8,662 sq. ft. of area within Building 1. At 300 sq. ft. per parking space, a total of 29 spaces are required for the retail uses and 29 spaces are provided on-site. Twelve (12) additional on-street public parallel spaces are provided along Carlsbad Blvd. and twenty (20) additional on-street parallel spaces area provided along Christiansen Way, although these spaces are not included in the parking tabulation for the project. Buildins Coverage, Height and Setbacks: These standards are established individually according to the applicable land use district within the Village Redevelopment Area. The Universal Standards section of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual provides information on variances and criteria to be used in setting the standards for individual projects when a range is set forth for the subject standard. The details of these development standards are described below. INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Universal Development Standards set forth specifically for proposed new development within Land Use District 1 are as follows: Buildinq Setbacks: The Village Master Plan and Design Manual establishes the front, rear and side yard setbacks for the property. In Land Use District 1, the front yard setback is 0- 10 feet and the side and rear yard setbacks have no minimum or maximum requirement. The setbacks proposed in the project design are as follows: FN setback at Carlsbad Blvd.: SN setback at Christiansen Way: FN setback at Washington St.: SN setback at Beech Ave.: 2' 10'- 8" 10' 10' It should be noted that the frontage along Carlsbad Blvd. is measured after the dedication of four (4) feet for widening of Carlsbad Blvd. and the provision of new curb, gutter and sidewalk along this roadway by the applicant. In addition, certain architectural features are allowed to encroach into the setbacks pursuant to Section 21.46.120 of the Zoning Ordinance. As a result, the proposed project is consistent with the setback requirements of the Village Design Manual and the Zoning Ordinance. Open Space: A minimum of 20% of the property must be maintained as open space. The open space must be devoted to landscaped pedestrian amenities in accordance with the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Open space may be dedicated to landscaped planters, open space pockets and/or connections, roof gardens, balconies, patios and/or outdoor eating areas. No parking spaces or drive aisles are permitted in the open space. The project, as proposed, provides for a total of 34,325 square feet of open space/landscape area, which represents 28% of the site; a figure that exceeds the 20% requirement. Buildinq Coveraqe: The range of building footprint coverage permitted for residential and mixed-use projects in Land Use District 1 is 60% to 80%. For the proposed project, the ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 03-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 12 building coverage is 42%. The bottom of the range is considered the desired standard. However, a decrease in the standard to below the minimum is permitted. Therefore, the building coverage is determined to be consistent with the desired standard. Building Heiqht: The standard height limit for Land Use District 1 is 35 feet with a minimum 512 roof pitch and 45 feet with a minimum 5:12 roof pitch for a project where a residence or commercial/office space is located over a parking structure. Each of the buildings of the proposed project include fully enclosed parking at the ground level. As stated previously, the property naturally slopes down from west to east. The topography also slopes down from south to north. The buildings have been designed to take advantage of the natural topography, which allows for the garage levels to be at a lower elevation (on the inside of the project) than the adjacent street elevations. City standards require building heights to be measured from the lower of existing or finished grade. Building 1 has a maximum height of 35 feet as viewed from Washington Street. Buildings 2-9 have a maximum height of 32’-4” as measured from Christiansen Way. However, the maximum height of Buildings 2-9 as measured from the internal drive aisles is 39’-lo”, which is allowable since each of the units in these buildings are built over an enclosed parking structure. The same 45-foot height limit applies to Building 10 where the residential units are located over enclosed parking. Building 10 has a maximum height of 37’”” as measured from Carlsbad Blvd. Each of the buildings have varying rooflines throughout the project with pitched roof features (512) at the front, rear and sides of the building. The building heights and roof pitches are determined to be consistent with the desired standards permitted by the Village Master Plan. VII. CONSISTENCY WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES All new projects within the Village Redevelopment Area must make a good faith effort to design a project that is consistent with a village scale and character. The Design Review Board and the Housing and Redevelopment Commission must be satisfied that the applicant has made an honest effort to conform to ten (1 0) basic design principles. These design principles are: 1. Development shall have an overall informal character. 2. Architectural design shall emphasize variety and diversity. 3. Development shall be small in scale. 4. Intensity of development shall be encouraged. 5. All development shall have a strong relationship to the street. 6. A strong emphasis shall be placed on the design of the ground floor facades. 7. Buildings shall be enriched with architectural features and details. 8. Landscaping shall be an important component of the architectural design. 9. Parking shall be visibly subordinated. 10. Signage shall be appropriate to a village character. The proposed project is consistent with the design principles outlined above. The project design provides for an overall informal character with a variety of unit types and sizes, yet maintains a tasteful and pleasing architectural style conducive to the Village character. The architectural design provides for variety and diversity through varying roof features, open decks, building articulation on all elevations, and varied building setbacks at all levels. The landscaping along all street frontages and the ability for each of the tenants to add flower boxes and landscaped planters on their individual balconies also adds to the variety and diversity of the design. The buildings have a very strong relationship to the street in that they are physically located in close proximity to the public sidewalk area and enhance the pedestrian-orientation by providing an ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06KDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 13 enhanced landscaping along all street frontages and incorporating decorative paving and street trees along Carlsbad Blvd. and Christiansen Way. The “Monterey - Mission” architecture of the buildings is aesthetically pleasing and consistent with the Village character desired for the area, including the design of the transit station. The buildings provide for a variety of architectural features and details including; stucco siding, concrete “S” tile and flat tile, a variety of sizes of round and arched windows, wrought iron fencing, painted wood trellises, corbels, French doors, and dormers. The parking is visually subordinate in that is located within fully enclosed parking structures or generally screened from public view. Architectural details in the form of stone veneer, wood trellises and decorative grids have been added to the enclosed parking structure on the ground floor of Building 1 to enhance the pedestrian-orientation along Washington Street. To further break-up the faGade of the first floors, extensive landscaping on all sides of the buildings is provided. A summary of the design features related to the project is provided as an exhibit to this report (Exhibit 6). VIII. CONSISTENCY WITH SIGN STANDARDS As indicated on the Sign Plan, the applicant is proposing two freestanding site identification signs; one to be located at the corner of Carlsbad Blvd. and Beech Ave., and one located at the corner of Washington St. and Christiansen Way. The entry signs meet the requirements of the Village Sign Guidelines and are consistent with the overall scale of the project. A condition has been added to Design Review Board Resolution No. 286 requiring that the signs be externally illuminated and consistent with the signs shown on the approved plans. In addition, a maximum of 280 sq. ft. of retail business identification signs are proposed for the retail shops located on the first floor of Building 10 at Carlsbad Blvd. These signs do not exceed the maximum requirement of 1 sq. ft. of signage per 1 lineal ft. of retail shop building frontage. IX. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS The proposed project requires a major redevelopment permit because it involves new construction of a building that has a building permit valuation greater than $150,000. This major redevelopment permit serves as the site development plan required by Chapter 21.53 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The project also requires the approval of a tentative tract map because it involves a subdivision of airspace (i.e.; separate ownership of each of the residential units). In addition, due to the fact that the subject site is located within the Coastal Zone, the project is required to process a coastal development permit. In accordance with redevelopment permit procedures, the three permits are being brought forward together for a recommendation by the Design Review Board and final approval by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. The Design Review Board is being asked to hold a public hearing on the permits requested, consider the public testimony and staff’s recommendation on the project, discuss the project and then take action to recommend approval or denial of the project with the requested standards modifications. X. TRAFFIC, CIRCULATION, SEWER, WATER, RECLAIMED WATER AND OTHER SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS The project, as conditioned, shall comply with the City’s requirements for the following: ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06KDP 01-16KT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 14 Traffic: The total projected average daily traffic (ADT) for the project is 840 ADT (65 units X 8 ADT/unit = 520 ADT, plus 40 X 9.25 = 320 ADT retail), based on the most recent SANDAG Trip Generation calculations. A traffic report was prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan on July 16, 2001. The report analyzed traffic impacts of the additional traffic generated by the project at several key intersections and street segments within the project area. The report concludes that the project will cause no change to current levels of service for the key intersections and street segments in the area. Levels of Service at signalized intersections remain at LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. Levels of Service at street segments will remain at LOS A during the peak hours. All frontage related roadway widening is conditioned to be designed and constructed concurrent with development of this project. In addition, the project’s sole driveway is located such that safe site distance for drivers is provided in accordance with intersection site distance standards established by the California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual. Sewer & Water: The Carlsbad Municipal Water District will provide water service to the site. Sewer use for the project is estimated to be 70 EDU’s. The proposed water usage for the project equates to 15,840 gallons per day (GPD) (220 gpd/EDU x 65 EDU’s, plus 1,540 retail GPD). Sewer facilities exist in Carlsbad Blvd. and Washington St. The project will connect to the 8-inch sewer lateral line in Washington St. Sufficient size exists in this line to serve the project. No major water issues are associated with this proposed project. Water mains are available for service connections in all public streets surrounding the property. The project will connect to existing water mains in Christiansen Avenue, Washington Street and Beech Avenue to create a looped public water system for the project. The project is within the 255 pressure zone. The applicant is proposing separate one-inch service lines with separate meters for each unit. In addition, a separate service line and meter will be provided for common landscaping as well as building sprinkler fire protection lines. Soils and Gradinu: There are no major grading issues associated with this project. Preliminary geo-technical investigations were performed by NorCal Engineering, dated August 14, 2000. Grading for the project will involve 11,800 cubic yards of cut and 500 cubic yards of fill with 11,500 cubic yards of material being exported. There is no proposed import of materials. A grading permit will be required for the proposed grading. Drainaue and Erosion Control: A preliminary hydrology study was performed by O’Day Consultants. There are no major drainage issues associated with this project. Most on site drainage will be collected by a series of inlets and pipes that will connect directly with the public storm drain inlets on Washington St. The project will construct sump pumps to remove storm water from a portion of the site and discharge it to Christiansen Way. The sumps have an emergency overflow to allow storm water to flow to the street by gravity before living areas are flooded, in case of a blockage or pump failure. Other portions of the site drain by surface flow to Beech Avenue and Washington Street. The project is required to detain runoff onsite to reduce post-development peak runoff to no more than pre-development levels. The project storm water runoff discharges into streets which flow to pipes draining ultimately into Buena Vista Lagoon. The project is conditioned to prepare a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) with an enhanced level of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Through the SWMP, permanent BMPs, possibly including structural, such as a “vortex” type or similar system will be required. The project will also be required to identify and implement source- control BMPs. Improvements: The project will widen Carlsbad Boulevard to provide additional parking in front of the proposed retail space. Christiansen Way will be widened and angled parking installed to ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 15 provide additional parking spaces downtown. Frontage improvements to Washington Street are already completed. The project includes new curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Beech Avenue frontage. All three frontage streets will receive standard street improvements per the adopted “City of Carlsbad Street and Sidewalk Policy Committee Report”. This Report determines which unimproved streets will receive standard improvements and which streets require a special or “alternative” design. Sidewalk, curb and gutter will be replaced on each of the street frontages except Christiansen Way. A widening of Christiansen Way, installation of new curb, gutter and sidewalk, and striping of on-street, diagonal parking is proposed on this street. Land Title: Project will dedicate additional right-of-way on Christiansen Way and Carlsbad Blvd. Ten (10) feet of public street and utility right-of-way dedication is required along the Christiansen Way frontage to bring the half street right-of-way width to 30 feet. Onsite sewer and water mains will be public and will require dedication of a general utility and access easement. XI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Department has conducted an environmental review of the project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. Earlier analysis of this proposed project has been completed through the General Plan Update (GPA94-01) and related Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01) that reviewed the potential impacts of build out of the City’s General Plan, including transportation and air quality impacts. CEQA Guidelines state an MElR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MElR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. However, although the MElR was certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MElR was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, with intersection failure at Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real, has been mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could have been known at the time the MElR was certified. Therefore, the MElR remains adequate to review later projects. As a result of staff’s review, a Negative Declaration was issued for the subject project by the Planning Director on June 5, 2002 and made available for public review. No comments were received on the environmental document. Adoption of Design Review Board Resolution No. 285 will recommend approval of the Negative Declaration for this project to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached as part of Exhibit 1. The potential for subjecting the future residents of the project to significant noise impacts from the railroad track and Carlsbad Blvd., was determined to result from development of the proposed project. As a result, a noise study was commissioned and prepared by Mestre Greve Associates. This study concluded that noise mitigation, specifically balcony enclosures is required in order to achieve a noise level of insignificance. These balcony enclosures have been included in the architectural design of the proposed project. ANASTASI VILLAGE BY THE SEA - RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10 JUNE 24,2002 PAGE 16 XII. ECONOMIC IMPACT The proposed project is anticipated to have a positive financial impact on the City and the Redevelopment Agency. First, the redevelopment of what was previously an under-utilized lot will result in increased property taxes. This increase in property tax will further result in increased tax increment to the Redevelopment Agency. Second, the project may serve as a catalyst for other improvements in the area, either new development or rehabilitation of existing buildings, through the elimination of a blighting influence within the area. In addition, retail uses are proposed, which generate sales and property tax revenues. Staff anticipates that this project will have a very strong influence on the future redevelopment of properties in the vicinity. XIII. CONCLUSION Staff is recommending approval of the project. The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the redevelopment area and will assist in fulfilling the goals and objectives of the Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual. EXHl BITS: A. Design Review Board Resolution No. 285, recommending approval of the Neg. Declaration. B. Design Review Board Resolution No. 286, recommending approval of RP 01-06. C. Design Review Board Resolution No. 287, recommending approval of CDP 01-16. D. Design Review Board Resolution No. 288, recommending approval of CT 01 -10. E. Location Map F. Staff Analysis of Project Consistency with Village Master Plan Design Guidelines. G. Exhibits “A-Y”, dated June 24, 2002, including reduced exhibits. Exhibit A Design Review Board Resolution No. 285 (Negative Declaration) J ,- 1 L 4 c r I 8 s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 213 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 285 A RESOLUTION OT THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER RP 01 -06, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER CDP 01-16, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NUMBER CT 01-10 FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF SIXTY-FIVE (65) CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 8,662 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SHOPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BLVD., WASHINGTON ST., CHRISTIANSEN WAY, AND BEECH AVE. IN LAND USE DISTRICT 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES ZONE 1. CASE NAME: WHEREAS, the Design Review Board did on the 24‘h day of June 2002, hold a VILLAGE BY THE SEA CASE NO.: RP 01 -O6/CDP 01 -1 6/CT 01 -1 0 duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Design Review Board considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design Review Board as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Design Review Board hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit “ND dated June 5, 2002, and “PII” dated May 7, 2002 attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findinqs: 1. The Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Negative Declaration for Village By The Sea (RP 01-06/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10) the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and b. the Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and 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 C. it reflects the independent judgment of the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad; and d. based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Design Review Board of the City of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 24'h day of June, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SARAH MARQUEZ, VICE CHAIRPERSON CARLSBAD DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ATTEST: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DRB RES0 NO. 285 -2- Ex h i bi t "N D" City of Carlsbad NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project AddredLocation: West side of Carlsbad Boulevard, between Christiansen Way and Beech Street, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California Project Description: Tentative Tract Map, Major Redevelopment Permit, and Coastal Development Permit to allow the subdivision and construction of a 65 dwelling unit multifamily condominium, with 11 units restricted for low-income households, along with 8,662 square foot retail commercial and associated parking and landscaping on a vacant, in-fill site within the City's Village Redevelopment Area. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Michael Grim in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4623. DATED: CASE NO: CASE NAME: PUBLISH DATE: JUNE 5,2002 RF' 01-06/CT 01-10/CDP 01-10 VILLAGES BY THE SEA JUNE 5,2002 , '; . -1- y 'c- !0.-4. '.,L . I c Ll!,<', I., x . ii: MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director @ 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad. CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us Exhibit “PII” ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: RP01-06/CDP01-10/CT01-10 DATE: May 7,2002 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Village by the Sea 2. APPLICANT: Anastasi Development Co, LLC 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 1200 Aviation Blvd., Redondo Beach, CA 90278 13 10) 798-9772 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: April 17,200 1 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tentative Tract Map. Maior Redevelopment Permit. and Coastal Development Permit to allow the subdivision and construction of a 65 dwelline unit multifamily condominium, with 11 units restricted for low-income households, alonv with 8,662 square foot retail commercial and associated parking and landscaping on a vacant. in-fill site within the City’s Village Redevelopment Area. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,’’ or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Land Use and Planning TransportatiodCirculation 0 Public Services Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources Utilities & Service Systems 0 Geological Problems 0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics 0 Water Air Quality Hazards Noise u Cultural Resources Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) IXI 0 0 0 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A(n) is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. 2 Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “NO Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A “No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fiom “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. 3 Rev. 03/28/96 0 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. 0 An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Ovemding Considerations” for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EX; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part 11 analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. 4 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated LessThan No Significant Impact Impact . I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) (#l:PgS 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) 0 0 0 0 0 om om 0 0 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 5.5-6) housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) 0 0 0 0 0 OIXI 111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) b) Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#1 :Pgs d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs g) Subsidence of the land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) h) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-1 - 5.1.15) 5.1-15) 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) 5.1-15) 0 0 0 0 0 om om om 0 0 ON 0 0 o 0 ON OIXI 0 0 I7 o 0 OIXI OH OH IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff! (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 52-11) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) 11) 0 0 OH 0 0 5 Rev. 03/23/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact No Impact d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-1 1) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2- i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (# 1 :Pgs body? (#l:PgS 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) (#l:PgS 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) 11) 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) 0 CI 0 0 0 IXI IXI IXI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IXI IXI IXI 0 V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) 1 - 5.3-12) - 5.3-12) 0 0 0 0 0 0 IXI IXI 0 0 0 0 0 IXI VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCTION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) (#l:PgS 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) (#l:PgS 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) (#l:PgS 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) (#1 :PgS 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) IXI 0 0 OH 0 0 0 0 OH 0 om 0 om 0 0 om VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 0 0 (#l:PgS 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) 0 UIXI 0 OIXI 6 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 17 c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration comdors? (#1 :Pgs 5.4-1 (#l:PgS 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) - 5.4-24) Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 0 IXI CI 0 VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13- c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of fbture value to the region and the residents ofthe State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & proposal? 0 0 o 0 0 0 (#l:PgS 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) 1 - 5.13-9) 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) a IXI 0 0 0 w IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) 5.10.1-5) hazards? (#l:PgS 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) 0 0 0 IXI w IXI IXI IXI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9- b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9- 0 0 o IXI 15) 1 - 5.9-15) 0 0 0 XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6) b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4) C) Schools? (#l:PgS 5.12.7.1 -5.12.7-5) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: 7 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation LessThan No Significant lrnpact Impact Incorporated 0 OBI a) Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7) e) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8) fJ Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3) g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) 5.12.3-7) cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OIXI OIXI UIXI OIXI XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs b) Have a demonstrated negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs c) Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5) 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5) 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5) 0 0 0 0 0 O XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: 0 0 0 0 OIXI a) Disturb paleontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- c) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8- Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) 1 0) 10) 1 - 5.8-10) e) UIXI 0 0 0 0 ON om 0 0 OIXI XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 - b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#1 :Pgs 5.12.8-7) 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7) 0 om ON 0 XVI. MANDATORY FINDMGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 0 0 ON 8 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially rotentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 OH 0 0 CIH XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. The following site-specific technical studies were used in the analysis and design of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department located at 2965 Roosevelt Street, Carlsbad, California, 92008. (760) 434-28 15. 1. Traffic Impact Analysis - Villages by the Sea - Carlsbad. California, dated July 16, 2001, Linscott, Law and Greenspan Engineers. 2. Noise Analysis for Village by the Sea - City of Carlsbad, dated May 11, 2001, Mestre Greve Associates. 3. Preliminarv Geotechnical Investigation - Proiect No. 871 0-00, dated August 14, 2000, NorCal Engineering, Soils and Geotechnical Consultants. 4. Preliminarv Drainage Study for Village by the Sea, dated April 9, 2001, O’Day Consultants, Inc. 5. Preliminary Story Water Pollution Prevention Plan for Village by the Sea, dated October, 2001, O’Day Consultants 9 Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The proposed project involves a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development Permit to allow the subdivision and construction of a 65-unit condominium development with 8,662 square feet of retail commercial space. The 2.83-acre project site is bounded by Carlsbad Boulevard to the west, Beech Street and single family residential to the north, Washington Street and the railroad station to the east, and Christiansen Way and retail commercial to the south. The site is designated Village (V) in the City’s General Plan and is zoned Village Redevelopment (VR). It is located within District 1 - Carlsbad Village Center - of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual. This district calls for a mix of shops, restaurants, entertainment uses, visitor accommodations, and commercial services in a pedestrian environment. Multi-family dwellings are allowed as a provisional use in District 1, with the Manual recognizing that multi-family residential uses are appropriate near the railroad station provided ground floor retail uses are not displaced. The allowed density in the Village General Plan designation is 15 to 23 dwelling units per developable acre, with a Growth Management Control Point of 19 dwelling per developable acre. The project site gently slopes to the east and is cleared of most vegetation, except for several tall trees. The site currently contains four single family and one multifamily buildings that are in disrepair and unoccupied. The trees and the structures would be removed from the site to accommodate the proposed development. A total of 11,800 cubic yards of cut and 500 cubic yards of fill is proposed, resulting in 11,500 cubic yards of export. Given the project location, the likely haul route would exit the site heading north on Carlsbad Boulevard, a major arterial, to the City boundary approximately one quarter mile away. There are no private residences fronting on this haul route and no adverse impacts are anticipated. Once occupied, the project would generate approximately 840 average daily traffic trips, which can be accommodated by Carlsbad Boulevard, the major arterial serving the development. The proposed project would consist of 10 multi-family buildings containing a total of 65 condominium dwelling units. The highest point of all the buildings, as measured from the lower of existing or finished grade, is 39’-10” with total lot coverage equating to approximately 42 percent of the site. Of the 65 units proposed, 11 would be deed restricted to be affordable to lower-income households; the total project density would be 23 dwelling units per acre. In addition to the added density, the project incorporates several development standards modifications for setbacks, recreational vehicle storage, and driveway width. These density bonus and development standards modifications are in lieu of requesting City financial participation in the project, as allowed by Chapter 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The project also includes 8,662 square feet of ground floor retail fronting on Carlsbad Boulevard. To accommodate the condominium units and retail space, a total 178 parking spaces are provided in private garages, a common parking garage and surface parking. The project would also modify the Carlsbad Boulevard frontage and improve the Christiansen Way frontage to allow for street parking. The Christiansen Way improvements would also involve a street dedication along a portion of the frontage to achieve 40 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of the street to provide for angled parking. Also included in the project would be common and private recreation areas, landscaping, and outdoor seating areas. The proposed Village by the Sea proposal is consistent with the City’s General Plan and applicable zoning regulations; it is also providing more affordable housing than is required by 10 Rev. 03/28/96 the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. The project site is void of any sensitive biological, archeological, and historical resources. All recommendations of the site specific studies mentioned above have been incorporated into the project design, thereby not creating any significant adverse environmental impacts with regard to traffic, geology, soils, or noise. The project site is currently served by all utilities and does not produce any adverse impacts with regard to facility systems or capacity. No existing housing or recreational opportunities exist on the site. All construction activities must conform to City Standards, thereby precluding adverse impacts due to off-site erosion, geologic instability, hazards, or traffic circulation. Given the above, the proposed Village by the Sea project would not produce any significant adverse environmental impacts. AIR QUALITY: In 1994 the City prepared and certified an EIR which analyzed the impacts which will result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concludes that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts in the form of increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan build-out, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master ElR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR This document is available at the Planning Department. CIRCULATION: In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional 11 Rev. 03/28/96 through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all fieeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at build-out. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at build-out of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning Department. A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City’s ,preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MER was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. EARLIER ANALYSES USED The following document was also used in the analysis of this project and is on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 163 5 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008, (760) 602-4600. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 12 Rev. 03/28/96 Exhibit B Design Review Board Resolution No. 286 (RP 01-06) 1 L L C - 5 E s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 286 A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER RP 01-06 FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF SIXTY-FIVE (65) CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 8,662 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SHOPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BLVD., WASHINGTON ST., CHRISTIANSEN WAY, AND BEECH AVE. IN LAND USE DISTRICT 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES ZONE 1. CASE NAME: VILLAGE BY THE SEA APN: CASE NO: RP 01 -06 203-172-06, 07, 08, 11, 12, 16, 21 & 23 WHEREAS, Anastasi Development Company, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, “Developer“, has filed a verified application with the Housing and Redevelopment Agency of the City of Carlsbad regarding property it owns, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers 203-172-06,07,08,11,12,16,21 & 23 and more thoroughly described in Attachment A, (“the property”); and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Major Redevelopment Permit, to allow a mixed-use sixty-five (65) unit condominium project and 8,662 sq. ft. of retail shops, as shown on Exhibits “A-Y”, dated June 24, 2002, on file in the Housing and Redevelopment Department, “Village By The Sea RP Ol-OG/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10”, as provided by Chapter 21.35.080 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Board did on the 24‘h day of June, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Board considered all factors relating to “Village by the Sea RP 01-06”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the Design Review Board as follows: A. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 1 f 1 < L L t r I I! s IC 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Design Review Board RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Village by the Sea RP 01-06, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: GENERAL PLAN AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDINGS: 1. The Design Review Board finds that the project, as conditioned herein and with the findings contained herein for establishment of the RH density designation for the project, is in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, the Carlsbad Village Area Redevelopment Plan, and the Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual based on the facts set forth in the staff reports dated June 24, 2002 including, but not limited to the following: a. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives for the Village, as outlined within the General Plan, because it provides for a multi- family residential use and retail use in an appropriate location within the Village. This in turn serves to enhance and maintain the area as a residential neighborhood and encourages greater residential support opportunities in the Village. By providing more residential opportunities, the project helps to create a lively, interesting social environment by encouraging more of a 24-hour life in the Village, which provides the necessary customer base to attract complementary commercial uses. The project design serves to reinforce the pedestrian-orientation desired for the downtown area by providing much needed street improvements along Carlsbad Boulevard, Washington Street, Christiansen Way and Beech Avenue. Furthermore, the proposed buildings have a strong street presence with extensive outdoor decks looking out over the adjacent streets and fully enclosed parking. b. The project is consistent with the Village Redevelopment Plan in that: 1) it establishes the Village as a quality shopping, working, and living environment by providing for a multi-family for-sale product which serves to increase the type of housing options available to people seeking to reside in the downtown area, 2) it improves the pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the Village Area by providing for additional enhanced sidewalks along all sides of the property, 3) it stimulates property improvements and new development in the Village through the development of a highly visible site which may serve as a catalyst for future redevelopment in the area, 4) it improves the physical appearance of the Village Area by replacing a currently underdeveloped site with an aesthetically pleasing set of buildings, landscaping, and other site improvements, and 5) the project provides additional retail space for the Village area. c. The project as designed is consistent with the land use plan, development standards for Land Use District 1, design guidelines, and other applicable regulations set forth in the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. d. The existing streets can accommodate the estimated ADTs and all required DRB RES0 NO. 286 -2- 1 1 t 1( 1: 1: 1: 1f 1: 1c 1; 1t IS 2c 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e. f. 9. h. public right-of-way has been or will be dedicated and has been or will be improved to serve the development. The pedestrian spaces and circulation have been designed in relationship to the land use and available parking. Pedestrian circulation is provided through pedestrian-oriented building design, landscaping, and hardscape. Public facilities have been or will be constructed to serve the proposed project. The project has been conditioned to develop and implement a program of “best management practices” for the elimination and reduction of pollutants which enter into and/or are transported within storm drainage facilities. The proposed project will not have an adverse impact on any open space within the surrounding area. The project is being developed on a series of eight vacant lots which have appropriate zoning for a mixed-use project consisting of multi-family residential and retail along Carlsbad Boulevard. The project is also consistent with the Open Space requirements for new development within the Village Redevelopment Area and the City’s Landscape Manual. The proposed project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City to ensure that the project meets appropriate fire protection and other safety standards. The proposed project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan, the City’s lnclusionary Housing Ordinance, and the Redevelopment Agency’s lnclusionary Housing Requirement, as the Developer has been conditioned to enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement to provide and deed restrict eleven (11) dwelling units as affordable to low income households. The proposed project meets all of the minimum development standards set forth in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.45.090 with the exception of the three standards modifications outlined in the report to the Design Review Board dated June 24, 2002 as permitted by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.53.120(c) in lieu of City financial assistance for the provision of eleven affordable housing units. In addition, the proposed project meets all of the design criteria set forth in Section 21.45.080 and has been designed in accordance with the concepts contained in the Design Guidelines Manual, in that the overall plan for the project is comprehensive and incorporates a series of buildings that take advantage of the unique topographical constraints and unusual lot lay-out of the site. The buildings, landscaping, and on-site amenities all conform to the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual which serves as the adopted land use plan for the area. The overall plan for the project provides for adequate usable open space, circulation, off-street parking, recreational facilities and other pertinent amenities. The parking is well integrated into the project and oriented to the topographic features of the site. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses and will not negatively impact circulation patterns in the area. Common areas and recreational facilities are located so that they are readily accessible to the occupants of the dwelling units. The overall architecture is compatible DRB RES0 NO. 286 -3- I 1 L 4 c r I E s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 with the surrounding area and consistent with the Village character as set forth in the Village Design Manual. 2. The Design Review Board hereby finds that the appropriate residential density for the project is RH (15-23 dwelling units per acre), which has a Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) of 19 dwelling units per acre. Justification for the RH General Plan density designation is as follows: a. The proposed project is located immediately across Washington Street from the Village Transit Station. In addition, the density is compatible with the surrounding area which contains a variety of uses such as residential, commercial office, retail, a residential care facility, and a private school with on-site residents. Residential uses in the area range from single family residential to multi-family residential. Application of the RH General Plan designation on the subject property allows for the construction of a project that is compatible with the mixture of surrounding uses in terms of size, scale, and overall density. b. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the goals of the Village Redevelopment Master Plan by increasing the number, quality, diversity, and affordability of housing units within the Village. The higher density designation makes it financially feasible to construct for-sale multi- family units in today’s economy. The Village Redevelopment Area has an abundance of residential rental units and it is the goal of the City to provide additional attached ownership units. c. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the objectives of Land Use District 1 by increasing the number of residential units in close proximity to shops, restaurants, and mass transportation (Village Transit Station). Higher residential densities in close proximity to mixed-use areas with easy access to mass transportation promote greater job/housing balance and help solve regional issues such as reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. 3. The project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual. GROWTH MANAGEMENT FINDINGS: 4. The project is consistent with the City-wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1, and all City public facility policies and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding: sewer collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and other recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space, related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need. Specifically, a. The project has been conditioned to ensure that building permits will not be issued for the project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains available and the District Engineer is DRB RES0 NO. 286 -4- ( I 1( 1. 1: 1: 1L 1: 1C 1; 1E 1s 2c 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project. b. All necessary public improvements have been provided or are required as conditions of approval. c. The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the Carlsbad Unified School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities. d. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and will be collected prior to the issuance of building permit. e. The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No. 17 and will be collected prior to the issuance of building permit. 5. The project will provide sufficient additional public facilities for the density in excess of the control point to ensure that the adequacy of the City’s public facility plans will not be adversely impacted, in that all necessary public improvements to accommodate the proposed development have been provided or are required as conditions of project approval. 6. There have been sufficient developments approved in the quadrant at densities below the control point to offset the units in the project above the control point so that approval will not result in exceeding the quadrant limit. 7. All necessary public facilities required by the Growth Management Ordinance will 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 all required public facilities necessary to accommodate the proposed development have been provided or are required as conditions of project approval. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits. General 1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City/Agency shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’dAgency’s approval of this Major Redevelopment Permit. 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Major Redevelopment Permit documents, as DRB RES0 NO. 286 -5- I r 1 L 4 - c c i E 5 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the Housing and Redevelopment Commission determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Carlsbad, its governing body members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the Agency arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) Agency’s approval and issuance of this Major Redevelopment Permit, (b) Agency’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the Agency’s approval is not validated. The Developer shall submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department a reproducible 24” x 36, mylar copy of the Major Redevelopment Permit reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the Director from the Carlsbad School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to provide school facilities. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits. This approval is granted subject to the approval of Coastal Development Permit No. CDP 01-16 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolution No. 287 for this other approval and incorporated by reference herein. This approval is granted subject to the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. CT 01-10 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolution No. 288 for this other approval and incorporated by reference herein. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and DRB RES0 NO. 286 -6- 1 1 t I t I 1( 11 1; 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map. Housing 12. Prior to the approval of the final map for this project, the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City/Agency to provide and deed restrict 11 dwelling units as affordable to low-income households for the useful life of the dwelling units, in accordance with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the Housing and Redevelopment Director no later than 60 days prior to the request to final the map. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors in interest. 13. The Developer shall construct the required inclusionary units concurrent with the project’s market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City/Agency and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate schedule for development. Landscape 14. The Developer shall submit and obtain Housing and Redevelopment Director approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. The Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 15. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the project’s building, improvement, and grading plans. Miscellaneous 1 6. The Developer shall establish a homeowner’s association and corresponding covenants, conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Director prior to final map approval. Prior to issuance of a building permit the Developer shall provide the Housing & Redevelopment Department with a recorded copy of the official CC&Rs that have been approved by the Department of Real Estate and the Housing and Redevelopment Director. At a minimum, the CC&Rs shall contain the following provisions: a. General Enforcement bv the Citv. The City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Declaration in favor of, or in which the City has an interest. b. Notice and Amendment. A copy of any proposed amendment shall be provided to the City in advance. If the proposed amendment affects the City, City shall have the right to disapprove. A copy of the final approved amendment shall be transmitted to City within 30 days for the official record. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -7- i 1 ! 1( 11 1; 1: 1L 12 1t 1; 1E IS 2c 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. This project is being approved as a condominium permit for residential homeownership purposes. If any of the units in the project are rented, the minimum time increment for such rental shall be not less than 26 days. The CC&Rs for the project shall include this requirement. The Condominium Plan submitted to the Department of Real Estate for approval shall define the “units” owned exactly as approved by the Major Redevelopment Permit. Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy #17, the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFD #1 special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 1, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such taxedfees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxedfees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Directors of Community Development and Housing and Redevelopment. Prior to occupancy of the first dwelling unit the Developer shall provide all required passive and active recreational areas per the approved plans, including landscaping and recreational facilities. Notice 22. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad’s Redevelopment Agency has issued a Negative Declaration, Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Tentative Tract Map by Housing and Redevelopment Commission Resolution(s) No. 285, 286, 287, and 288 on the property. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Housing and Redevelopment Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. Onsite Conditions - Specific 23. The Developer shall construct trash receptacle and recycling areas as shown on the site plan (Exhibit “B”) with gates pursuant to City Engineering Standards and Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.1 05. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors andor materials to the project to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -8- I ,- L c - 4 4 I 6 7 e s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 24. 25. 26. 27. No outdoor storage of material shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. When so required, the Developer shall submit and obtain approval of the Fire Chief and Housing and Redevelopment Director of an Outdoor Storage Plan, and thereafter comply with the approved plan. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. Developer shall construct, install and stripe not less than 130 resident parking spaces, 19 guest parking spaces, and 29 retail parking spaces, as shown on Exhibit “B”. The developer shall design and install noise barriers on the balconies of structures as recommended in the noise study prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, dated May 11,2001 , in order to satisfy noise level requirements. ENGINEERING CONDITIONS Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this proposed tentative map, must be met prior to approval of a final map, building or grading permit whichever occurs first. General 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ... Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the tentative map and a digital copy of said map using NAD 83’ reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. The reproducible shall be submitted to the City engineer, reviewed and, if acceptable, signed by the City’s project engineer and project planner prior to submittal of the building plans, final map, improvement or grading plans, whichever occurs first. The digital file copy shall be submitted in a format as approved by the City Engineer. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means, CC&Rs or/and other recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the subdivision. Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -9- 1 A 1 t 5 I( 11 1; 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FeedAqreements 6. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation the City's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement regarding drainage across the adjacent property. 7. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 , on a form provided by the City Engineer. Gradinq 0. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the start of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 9. Upon completion of grading, Developer shall file an "as-graded" geologic plan with the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. The plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist, and shall be submitted on a 24" x 36" mylar or similar drafting film format suitable for a permanent record . 10. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the Tentative Map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. Coastal Conditions 11. If a Grading Permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be completed by October 1 st. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1 st to October 1'' of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15'h upon written approval of the City Engineer, obtained in advance, and only if all erosion control measures are in place by October lst. Dedications/lmprovements 12. Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City andor other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements shown on the Tentative Map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map and/or separate recorded document. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that already public are not required to be rededicated. 13. Developer shall provide the design of all private streets and drainage systems to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the standard improvement plancheck and inspection fees. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -10- I 1 L 1 t c I t 5 1( 11 1; 12 14 15 It 17 ia 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements shown on the tentative map and the following improvements including, but not limited to paving, base, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer, water, fire hydrants and street lights to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A. Curb and gutter, sidewalk, paving, street lights, signing and striping on Carlsbad Boulevard. B. Curb and gutter, sidewalk, paving, street lights, signing and striping on Christiansen Way to provide angled parking with appropriate transitions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. C. Curb and gutter, sidewalk, paving, street lights, signing and striping on Beech Avenue. A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. Carlsbad Boulevard shall be dedicated by Owner along the project frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 54 feet and in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards. Christiansen Way shall be dedicated by Owner along the project frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 40 feet and in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall underground all existing overhead utilities along the subdivision boundary. The developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to and approved by the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from 10-year frequency storms of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed conditions, are equal to or less than the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing developed conditions. Both 6 hour and 24 hour storm durations shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit for City approval a “Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP)”. The SWMP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWMP shall address measures to reduce to the maximum extent possible storm water pollutant runoff at both construction and post-construction phases of the project. At a minimum, the Plan shall: 1) Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants. 2) Recommend source control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter said pollutants. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -1 1- 1 ,- L c - 4 4 - c 7 E S ia 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3) Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to resident education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants. Ensure long-term maintenance of all post construction BMPs in perpetuity. 4) Special Enqineering Conditions 20. The Average Daily Trips (ADT) and floor area contained in the staff report and shown on the tentative map are for planning purposes only. Developer shall pay traffic impact and sewer impact fees based on Section 18.42 and Section 13.10 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, respectively. MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT CONDITIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet with the Fire Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public right-of-way or within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad. At the discretion of the District Engineer, wider easements may be required for adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits. The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and facilities substantially as shown on the Tentative Map to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans. The existing sewer in Washington Street is lined, and a special design is required for the proposed project connection. The Developer shall provide separate potable water meters for each separately owned unit. Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever is first, the entire potable water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS The following conditions shall apply to the storage units contained in Building 1 as part of a common parking garage: 1. The walls separating the U-occupancies (storage closets) from the parking garage shall be masonry construction. All cells shall be fully grouted. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -12- 1 1 t I 5 1( 11 1; 1: 14 15 1f 15 la 19 2a 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Entry doors to the storage closets shall be metal frame, metal-door, listed 1% hour assemblies that have an integral window for viewing inside the storage closets. The entry doors to the closets shall be master keyed so that the HOA has access to these areas for routine inspections. There shall be no electrical outlets within the storage closets. There may be general lighting within the closet installed in conformance with the National Electric Code. Signage shall be installed at each closet door noting that storage of flammable liquids or gasses is prohibited. Fire extinguishers shall be installed at a minimum 100 feet travel distance throughout the parking garage and storage closet areas. Automatic fire protection in storage units shall be upgraded to quick response heads and the fire sprinkler head for each closet shall be separated from the storage closet with a chain link ceiling assembly which will prohibit storage above the ceiling level and allow full operation of the sprinkler head and access to the light fixture for maintenance. The storage closets shall be owned by and managed by the HOA. The HOA shall have the responsibility and duty to ensure that all closets uses are limited to storage of ordinary household goods, which are consistent with the operation of a dwelling unit. There shall be no storage of flammable liquids or gases of any type in any type of container. There shall be gravity ventilation to the exterior from each individual storage closet. STANDARD CODE REMINDERS: The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following code requirements. - Fees The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 1. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 2. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.1 6 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. General 3. 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. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -13- 1 A 1 1 5 1( 11 12 1: 14 15 1f 17 ia 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. 5. 6. 7. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Premise identification (addresses) shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.04.320. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with the approved plans and the sign criteria contained in the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual and shall require review and approval of the Housing and Redevelopment Director prior to installation of such signs. This approval shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this major redevelopment permit approval becomes final. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CDP 01-16 and CT 01-10 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolutions No. 287 and 288 for those other approvals incorporated by reference herein. DRB RES0 NO. 286 -14- I c L c - 4 C - f 7 a s 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 213 NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as “fees/exactions.” You have 90 days from the date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feesdexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 24’h day of June, 2002 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SARAH MARQUEZ, VICE CHAIRPERSON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ATTEST: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DRB RES0 NO. 286 -15- Attachment A LEGAL, DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK DISTANT THEREON 270.0 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO HILLAND J. KELLY AND FRANCES K. KELLY, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, RECORDED JUI,Y 12, 1949 IN BOOK 3253, PAGE 425 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LAND 120 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND AND ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ELEANOR MADDING, A SINGLE WOMAN, RECORDED JANUARY 28, 1949 IN BOOK 3093, PAGE 161 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, 170 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET 80 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A L'ME THAT BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER THEREOF AND RUNS SOUTHWESTERLY IN A STRAIGHT LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID STRAIGHT LINE 170 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO W.N. KELLY, A SINGLE MAN, RECORDED APRIL 5, 1949 IN BOOK 3161, PAGE 463 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND 80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 150 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNT': 07 SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL, 2, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 3: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE NORTHWESTERLY 50 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. PARCEL 4: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 40 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 160 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 4, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. I PARCEL 5: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 60.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 120.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 5, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 6: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 65.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 225.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 6, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 7: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CIYT OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55O23’25” EAST 115.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTl”G NORTH 55”23’25” EAST 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25” EAST 120.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 55’23’25” EAST 135.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25’’ EAST 80.26; THENCE SOUTH 55’26’58” WEST 150.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34’33’25 WEST 200.10 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, I 894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’23’25’’ EAST 20.00 FEET; ALONG BEACH AVENUE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 55‘23’25’’ EAST, 95.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’38’25” EAST, 200.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55’26’58” EAST, 100 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PORTION OF SAID BLOCK 5 CONVEYED BY C.B. BREWRMAN TO HELEN R. KNOWLES BY DEED DATED FEBRUARY 17, 1899 AND RECORDED, IN BOOK 276, PAGE 200 OF DEEDS THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO KNOWLES FOR A DISTANCE OF 200 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENE NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGELS TO SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LlNE I00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 1 IS FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5 WHICH IS 100 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 20 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF PARCEL NUMBER 2 OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD LOT SPLIT MAP NO. 71, RECORDED FEBRUARY 20, 1969 AS FILE NO. 3364 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 34’33’00” WEST, 200.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION NORTHWESTERLY 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS C5DAR STREET ADJOINING SAID LOT 5 ON THE SOUTHEAST AS VACATED AND ABANDONED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS7 A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RECORDED OCTOBER 1,1986 AS FILE NO. 86-438978 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’24’44” EAST, 1 15.43 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 5, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE CONTIUING NORTH 55’24’44’’ EAST, 99.60 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY TO A POINT WHICH IS 225.75 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY FROM TEE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTIi 34’35’38’’ EAST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55’24’44’’ WEST, 99.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34O37’20” WEST, 10.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8A: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THERETO, . OVER, UNDER ALONG AND ACROSS THE SOUTHWESTERLY 5 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: BEGIIWING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF BLOCK 5, OF CARLSBAD IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894, DISTANT THEREON 140 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 60 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO CHARLES R. EYMANN, ET UX, RECORDED AUGUST 13, 1963 AS FILE NO. 14221 1 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMANN’S LAND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LAND; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMANN’S LAND AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 65 FEET TO A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND 5 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF EYMANN’S LAND; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 5 FEET OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID EASEMENT IS APPURTENANT ONLY TO THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEEDS BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORDED JUNE 12, 1980 AS FILE NO. 80-187294 AND APRIL 21, 1989 AS FILENO. 89-210431, Exhibit C Design Review Board Resolution No. 287 (CDP 01-16) 1 2 1 4 5 6 7 a 9 io 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 287 A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP 01-16 FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF SIXTY-FIVE (65) CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 8,662 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SHOPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BLVD., WASHINGTON ST., CHRISTIANSEN WAY, AND BEECH AVE. IN LAND USE DISTRICT 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES ZONE 1. CASE NAME: VILLAGE BY THE SEA APN: CASE NO.: 203-172-06, 07, 08, 1 1 , 12, 16, 21 & 23 CDP 01 -1 6 WHEREAS, Anastasi Development Company, LLC, “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Carlsbad regarding property it owns and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers 203-172-06, 07, 08, 11, 12,16, 21 & 23, and more thoroughly described in Attachment A, (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A-Y” dated June 24, 2002, on file in the Housing and Redevelopment Department, “Village By The Sea RP Ol-OG/CDP 01-16/CT 01-10’’ as provided by Chapter 21.81.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Board did, on the 24’h day of June 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Board considered all factors relating to the CDP. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) B) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Board RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Village By The Sea CDP 01-16 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: 1 2 2 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 Findings: 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Carlsbad Village Area Redevelopment Plan and the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual, which serve as the Certified Local Coastal Program for the City of Carlsbad Segment of the California Coastal Zone and all applicable policies in that the development does not obstruct views or otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone, and no agricultural activities, sensitive resources, geological instability exist on the site. 2. The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act in that the development will not alter physical or visual access to the shore. 3. The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that no steep slopes exist within the proposed construction area, all grading will conform to the City’s erosion control standards, and the site is not prone to landslides or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods, or liquefaction. Conditions: Note: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City/Agency shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s/Agency’s approval of this Coastal Development Permit. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. The Developer shall submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department a reproducible 24‘’ x 36”’ mylar copy of the Coastal Development Permit reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. This approval is granted subject to the approval of RP 01-06 and CT 01-10 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolutions No. 286 and 288 for those other approvals and incorporated by reference herein. The applicant shall apply for and be issued building permits for this project within twenty- four (4) months of approval or this coastal development permit will expire unless extended per Section 21.81.1 60 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. DRB RES0 NO. 287 -2- 1 I ( I( 11 1: 1: 14 1: 1t li 1E 1s 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall apply for and obtain a grading permit issued by the City Engineer. 7. If a Grading Permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be completed by October 1 st. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1 st to October 1'' of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November l!ith upon written approval of the City Engineer, obtained in advance, and only if all erosion control measures are in place by October 1 st. NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feedexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expi red. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 24'h day of June, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SARAH MARQUEZ, VICE CHAIRPERSON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ATTEST: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DRB RES0 NO. 287 -3- Attachment A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK DISTANT THEREON 270.0 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO HILLAND J. KELLY AND FRANCES K. KELLY, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, RECORDED JULY 12, 1949 IN BOOK 3253, PAGE 425 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LAND I20 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND AND ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ELEANOR MADDING, A SINGLE WOMAN, RECORDED JANUARY 28, 1949 IN BOOK 3093, PAGE 161 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, 170 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET 80 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LME THAT BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER THEREOF AND RUNS SOUTHWESTERLY IN A STRAIGHT LME TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID STRAIGHT LINE 170 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED M THE DEED TO W.N. KELLY, A SINGLE MAN, RECORDED APRIL 5, 1949 IN BOOK 3161, PAGE 463 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND 80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 150 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNT: 07 SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 2, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 3: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE NORTHWESTERLY 50 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FLED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. PARCEL 4: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 40 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 160 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 4, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 5: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 60.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 120.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF C”SEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 5, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 6: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 65.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 225.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 6, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 7: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CIYT OF CARLSBAD, COU” OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’23’25’’ EAST 115.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 55’23’25’’ EAST 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25’’ EAST 120.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 55’23’25” EAST 135.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25” EAST 80.26; THENCE SOUTH 55O26’58” WEST 150.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34’33’25 WEST 200.10 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1 894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55O23’25” EAST 20.00 FEET; ALONG BEACH AVENUE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 55’23’25” EAST, 95.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’38’25’’ EAST, 200.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55’26’58’’ EAST, 100 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PORTION OF SAID BLOCK 5 CONVEYED BY C.B. BRENNERl” TO HELEN R. KNOWLES BY DEED DATED FEBRUARY 17, 1899 AND RECORDED, IN BOOK 276, PAGE 200 OF DEEDS THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO KNOWLES FOR A DISTANCE OF 200 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENE NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGELS TO SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE I00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 115 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5 WHICH IS 100 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 20 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF PARCEL NUMBER 2 OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD LOT SPLIT MAP NO. 71, RECORDED FEBRUARY 20, 1969 AS FLE NO. 3364 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 34’33’00” WEST, 200.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION NORTHWESTERLY 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDAR STREET ADJOINING SAID LOT 5 ON THE SOUTHEAST AS VACATED AND ABANDONED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RECORDED OCTOBER 1,1986 AS FILE NO. 86-438978 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’24’44” EAST, I 15.43 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 5, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE CONTIUING NORTH 55’24’44” EAST, 99.60 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY TO A POINT WHICH IS 225.75 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY FROM TEE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTIi 34’35’38” EAST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55’24’44’’ WEST, 99.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34’37’20’’ WEST, 10.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8A: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THERETO, OVER, UNDER ALONG AND ACROSS THE SOUTHWESTERLY 5 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF BLOCK 5, OF CARLSBAD IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894, DISTANT THEREON 140 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 60 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO CHARLES R. EYMANN, ET UX, RECORDED AUGUST 13, 1963 AS FILE NO. 14221 1 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMAN”S LAND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LAND; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMAN”S LAND AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF PARALLEL WITH TI-IE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 65 FEET TO A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND 5 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF EYMANN’S LAND; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 5 FEET OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID EASEMENT IS APPURTENANT ONLY TO THE LAND DESCRIBED M DEEDS BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORDED JUNE 12, I980 AS FILE NO. 80- 187294 AND APRIL 2 1 , 1989 AS FILE NO. 89-2 1043 1, Exhibit D Design Review Board Resolution No (CT 01-10) 288 1 I ! 1( 11 1: 12 14 12 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 288 A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 01-10 TO SUBDIVIDE 2.83 ACRES INTO SIXTY-FIVE (65) CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 8,662 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SHOPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BLVD., WASHINGTON ST., CHRISTIANSEN WAY, AND BEECH AVE. IN LAND USE DISTRICT 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES ZONE 1. CASE NAME: VILLAGE BY THE SEA CASE NO.: CT 01-10 WHEREAS, Anastasi Development Company, LLC, “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the Housing and Redevelopment Agency of the City of Carlsbad regarding property it owns, known as Assessor Parcel Numbers 203-172-06, 07, 08, 11, 12, 16,21 & 23 and more thoroughly described in Attachment A (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative Tract Map as shown on Exhibit(s) “C-F” dated June 24, 2002, on file in the Housing and Redevelopment Department as “Village By The Sea RP Ol-OG/CDP Ol-l6/CT O1-lOyy, as provided by Chapter 20.1 2.01 5 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Board did, on the 24th day of June, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments] if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Board considered all factors relating to the Tentative Tract Map. NOW, THEREFORE] BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) B) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Design Review Board RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Village By The Sea CT 01-10, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdivision as conditioned] is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan, the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Village Redevelopment Plan and the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems. 2. That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since surrounding properties are located within Land Use District 1 of the Village Redevelopment Area and the intent of the Village Master Plan is to provide for a gradual transition in this district to a mix of higher quality commercial and residential uses. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate residential development at the density proposed, in that the development is consistent with the RH density designation which has been assigned to the property based on the following findings: a. The density is compatible with the surrounding area which contains a variety of uses such as residential, commercial office, retail, a residential care facility, and a private school with on-site residents. Residential uses in the area range from single family residential to multi-family residential. The RH General Plan density designation allows for the construction of a project that is compatible with the mixture of surrounding uses in terms of size, scale, and overall density cale. b. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the goals of the Village Redevelopment Master Plan by increasing the number, quality, diversity, and affordability of housing units within the Village. c. The RH General Plan density designation serves to satisfy the objectives of Land Use District 1 by increasing the number of residential units in close proximity to shops, restaurants, and mass transportation (Village Transit Station). 4. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, in that the property has frontage on Carlsbad Boulevard, Washington Street, Beech Avenue and Christiansen Way and there are no easements granting access through the property to others. 5. That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act). 6. That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. 7. That the Design Review Board has considered, in connection with the housing proposed by this subdivision, the housing needs of the region, and balanced those housing needs against the public service needs of the City and available fiscal and environmental resources. DRB RES0 NO. 288 -2- , L I t c I E s 1C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad. Based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Design Review Board finds that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. That the discharge of waste from the subdivision will not result in violation of existing California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that the project is conditioned to comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Design Review Board finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, the Village Redevelopment Plan and Village Master Plan and Design Guidelines based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated June 24, 2002 including, but not limited to the following: the project will provide for a permitted mixed-use development (multi-family residential and retail commercial) in an appropriate location within Land Use District 1 of the Village Redevelopment Area. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the applicable local facilities management plan, and all City public facility policies and ordinances since: a. The project has been conditioned to ensure that building permits will not be issued for the project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains available, and the District Engineer is satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project. b. Statutory School fees will be paid or otherwise satisfied to ensure the \ availability of school facilities in the Carlsbad Unified School District. C. Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of approval. d. All necessary public improvements have been provided or are required as conditions of approval. e. The developer has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the General Plan. The project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan prepared pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project. DRB RES0 NO. 288 -3 - 1 L c - 4 : d 6 7 a 9 io 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 13. This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1. CONDITIONS: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to approval of a final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the Redevelopment AgencyKity shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of this Tentative Tract Map. 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Tentative Tract Map documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 3. The Developer shall submit to the Agency a reproducible 24” x 36, mylar copy of the (Tentative Map/Site Plan) reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. 4. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map. Final Map Notes 5. Developer shall show on Final Map the net developable acres for each parcel. 6. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-mapping data: A. All improvements are privately owned and are to be privately maintained with the exception of the following: 1. Sewer mains 2. Water mains and fire hydrants B. Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are available. C. Geotechnical Caution: 1. The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad from DRB RES0 NO. 288 -4- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground water seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur on, or adjacent to, this subdivision due to its construction, operation or maintenance. D. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as sight distance corridors. Standard Code Reminders 7. 8. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... This approval shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this tentative map approval becomes final unless extended per Section 20.12.1 00 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This approval is granted subject to the approval of RP 01-06 and CDP 01-16 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolutions No. 286 and 287 for those other approvals and incorporated by reference herein. DRB RES0 NO. 288 -5- 1 1 1 ! 1( 11 1; 1: 14 1: 1C 17 ia 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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 “feedexactions.” You have 90 days from [insert date of approval] to protest imposition of these feedexactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feedexactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expi red. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 24‘h day of June, 2002 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAl N: SARAH MARQUEZ, VICE CHAIRPERSON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ATTEST: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DRB RES0 NO. 288 -6- Attachment A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREM IS SITUATED M THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL I : THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGMING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK DISTANT THEREON 270.0 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO HlLLAND J. KELLY AND FRANCES K. KELLY, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, RECORDED JULY 12, 1949 IN BOOK 3253, PAGE 425 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LAND 120 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGMNING; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND AND ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ELEANOR MADDING, A SINGLE WOMAN, RECORDED JANUARY 28, 1949 IN BOOK 3093, PAGE 161 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, 170 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET 80 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE THAT BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER THEREOF AND RUNS SOUTHWESTERLY IN A STRAIGHT LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, DISTANT THEREON 200.0 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID STRAIGHT LINE 170 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO W.N. KELLY, A SINGLE MAN, RECORDED APRIL 5, 1949 IN BOOK 3161, PAGE 463 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND 80 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 150 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNT\: 07 SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 2, WCH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 3: THE NORTHEASTERLY 60 FEET OF THE NORTHWESTERLY 50 FEET OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. PARCEL 4: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 40 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 160 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED lN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF C”SEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 4, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 5: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 60.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 120.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISMSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 5, WHICH WILL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 6: THE SOUTHWESTERLY 65.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEASTERLY 225.00 FEET OF SOUTHEASTERLY 200.00 FEET OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 6, WHICH WZLL REVERT UPON VACATION BY OPERATION OF LAW. PARCEL 7: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 2 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CIYT OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55°23’25yy EAST 115.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 55’23’25” EAST 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25” EAST 120.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 55O23’25” EAST 135.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 34’33’25” EAST 80.26; THENCE SOUTH 55’26’58’’ WEST 150.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34’33’25 WEST 200.10 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: ALL THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 5 OF CARLSBAD, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15,1894, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’23’25” EAST 20.00 FEET; ALONG BEACH AVENUE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 55’23’25” EAST, 95.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34’38’25” EAST, 200.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55’26’58” EAST, 100 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE, NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PORTION OF SAID BLOCK 5 CONVEYED BY C.B. BRENNERMAN TO HELEN R. KNOWLES BY DEED DATED FEBRUARY 17, 1899 AND RECORDED, IN BOOK 276, PAGE 200 OF DEEDS THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO KNOWLES FOR A DISTANCE OF 200 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENE NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGELS TO SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE I00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 1 15 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5 WHICH IS 100 FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 100 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 20 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF PARCEL NUMBER 2 OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD LOT SPLIT MAP NO. 71, RECORDED FEBRUARY 20, 1969 AS FILE NO. 3364 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 34’33’00” WEST, 200.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION NORTHWESTERLY 10 FEET OF CHRISTIANSEN WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS CEDAR STREET ADJOINING SAID LOT 5 ON THE SOUTHEAST AS VACATED AND ABANDONED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RECORDED OCTOBER 1,1986 AS FILENO. 86-438978 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTH 55’24’44” EAST, 115.43 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 5, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE CONTIUING NORTH 55’24’44’’ EAST, 99.60 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY TO A POINT WHICH IS 225.75 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY FROM T€iE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE SOUTE 34O35’38” EAST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55’24’44’’ WEST, 99.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34’37’20” WEST, 10.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGWING. PARCEL SA: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THERETO, OVER, UNDER ALONG AND ACROSS THE SOUTHWESTERLY 5 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF BLOCK 5, OF CARLSBAD XN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO AMENDED MAP THEREOF NO. 775, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 15, 1894, DISTANT THEREON 140 FEET NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 60 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO CHARLES R. EYMANN, ET UX, RECORDED AUGUST 13, 1963 AS FILE NO. 142211 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMANN’S LAND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LAND; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID EYMANN’S LAND AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 65 FEET TO A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND 5 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF EYMANN’S LAND; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 120 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE 5 FEET OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID EASEMENT IS APPURTENANT ONLY TO THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEEDS BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORDED JUNE 12,1980 AS FILE NO. 80-187294 AND APRIL 21,1989 AS FILE NO. 89-210431, Exhibit E Location Map SI VILLAGE BY THE SEA RP 01 -O6/CT 01 =l O/CDP 01 -1 6 Exhibit F Village Master Plan Design Guidelines VILLAGE MASTER PLAN DESIGN GUlDlErlNES CHECKLIST Provide variety of setbacks along any single commercial block front. I Provide benches and low walls along public pedestrian frontages. Maintain retail continuity along pedestrian-oriented frontages. 1 Avoid drive-through service uses. Encourage off-street courtyards accessible from major pedestrian walkways. Emphasize an abundance of landscaping planted to create an informal character. I Treat structures as individual buildings set within a landscaped green space, except for buildings fronting on: Carlsbad Village Drive, State Street, Grand Avenue, Carlsbad Boulevard and Roosevelt Street. Provide landscaping within surface parking lots I Provide access to parking areas from alleys wherever possible. Locate parking at the rear of lots. Devote all parking lot areas not specifically required for parking spaces or circulation to landscaping. Avoid parking in front setback areas. ~~~ Project: Village By The Sea A variety of setbacks are proposed along Christiansen Way, Washington St., Beech Ave., and Carlsbad Blvd. The adjacent residential and commercial properties also provide for varying setbacks along all streets. Benches are provided along Washington St. and low walls are provided in selective areas along the other street frontages. Retail shops are proposed along Carlsbad Blvd., which serves to maintain the retail continuity along this pedestrian-oriented frontage. Not applicable. The project minimizes the loss of privacy for the adjacent residential use to the south by providing driveways rather than units adjacent to these residences. The trash enclosures are also located away from the adjacent residential uses. Not applicable. Landscaped areas along all sides of the buildings except along Carlsbad Blvd., will provide for an informal charactedsetting. Landscaping will be provided along all sides of the buildings except along Carlsbad Blvd, which will have street trees and potted plants conducive to a retail area. Surface parking is provided for retail customers and tenant guests and is surrounded by landscape strips. The property does not abut an alley. Homeowner parking is located within a fully enclosed parking structure and separate garages. Parking for guests and retail customers is distributed on surface parking in locations throughout the site and fully screened by low walls and landscaping. All areas not required for parking spaces and driveway aisles have been landscaped. No Darkincl is Drovided in the front setback area. Design Guidelines - Village by the Sea Page 2 Avoid curb cuts along major pedestrian areas. 11 Avoid parking in block corner locations. Provide setbacks and landscaping between any parking lot and adjacent sidewalks, alleys or other pavec pedestrian areas. Avoid buildings which devote significant portions of theii ground floor space to parking uses. Place parking for commercial or larger residential projects below grade wherever feasible. Enhance parking lot surfaces. Provide for variety and diversity. Each building should express its uniqueness of structure, location or tenant and should be designed especially for their sites and not mere copies of generic building types. Step taller buildings back at upper levels. Break large buildings into smaller units. II Maintain a relatively consistent building height along block faces. Utilize simple building forms. Trendy and "look at me" design solutions are strongly discouraged. No curb cuts are proposed along Carlsbad Blvd Single curb cuts are provided on Washington St. Christiansen Way, and Beech Ave. ~ All parking is screened or hidden from public view and no open parking is provided in block cornel locations. Parking for the proposed project is completel) screened from public view by being integrated intc internal portions of the property. Retail customei and guest parking spaces are located off the drive aisles at the Beech Ave. and Washington St. entrances and are screened by landscaping withir a setback area. Although all of the parking for Building 1 (along Washington St) is located at ground level within a fully enclosed parking structure, architectural details such as ornamental wrought iron, stone veneer, and clay tile screens have been added tc enhance the pedestrian-orientation along Washington St. Furthermore, extensive landscaping is provided along the Washington St. frontage. These types of fully enclosed parking structures are an important design concept in the Village. The majority of the parking for the project is located partially below grade and is not visible from the exterior of the site. Enhanced paving is provided all entry drives to the project. The buildings have been designed specifically for the unique layout of the property and topography. The buildings provide for articulation on all sides, varying setbacks, and other architectural features which provide for a unique character. Architectural features and relief appears to step the upper level of the buildings back. The buildings on-site have been broken up to avoid large massing of buildings. The height of the buildings is relatively consistent although the site has some topography variety. The buildings have been designed with simple lines and forms but allows for representation of the traditional Village character desired for the area. The buildings are not trendy in design. Design Guidelines - Village by the Sea Page 3 Emphasize the use of gable roofs with slopes of 5:12 or I greater. I Encourage the use of dormers in gable roofs. Emphasize wood and composition shingle roofs, with the exception that in the Land Use District 5 clay tile roofs are acceptable. w Avoid flat roofs Screen mechanical equipment from public view. 1 Avoid mansard roof forms. Emphasize an informal architectural character. Building facades should be visually friendly. Design visual interest into all sides of buildings. Provide facade projections and recesses. I Give special attention to upper levels of commercial structures. Provide special treatment to entries for upper level uses. I Utilize applied surface ornamentation and other detail elements for visual interest and scale. Gable-type roofs and roof elements wit!‘ consistent pitches have been provided within thc project. Dormers have been incorporated into the gable roofs. The project provides S-concrete and flat concrete tile roof styles which are consistent with the architectural design intended for the project a: well as other projects in the area. The project avoids visible flat roofs. The screening of mechanical equipment will be a requirement of the project. The project avoids mansard roofs. By providing for quality building materials, attractive facades and significant landscaping, the project is very visually appealing. Visual interest is added to the building through architectural features. The design of the building incorporates design elements into all building facades, thereby enhancing the visual interest. The project makes good use vertical features, wood accents and trim, varying rooflines, balconies, patios and landscaping. The proposed project provides for windows in various styles that are appropriate to both the residential and commercial components of the project and consistent with the Village character. The building design provides for recesses and projections which will create shadows and contrast. The commercial aspect of the proposed project is on the first floor only. The upper levels of this building will be accessed through internal stairways. Therefore, no special treatment of upper level use entries is necessary. Stone veneer, wood siding, and wood trellises have been incorporated at the first floor level. The upper levels utilize French doors, steel and wood railings, stucco windowsills, corbels under the balconies, wood trellises, shudders, and fabric awnings. Design Guidelines - Village by the Sea Page 4 Respect the materials and character Of adjacent development. Emphasize the use of the following wall materials: wood siding; wood shingles; wood board and batten siding; and stucco. Avoid the use of the simulated materials; indoor/outdoor carpeting; distressed wood of any type Avoid tinted or reflective window glass. Utilize wood, dark anodized aluminum or vinyl coated metal door and window frames. n I The materials and colors proposed for the building will not conflict with adjacent developments. The exterior walls utilize a textured stucco finish of neutral color and exposed wood fascias, beam rafter tails, and exposed wood trellises. None of these materials are proposed. The windows are clear glass. Vinyl coated windows and doors are proposed. -~ Avoid metal awnings and canopies. Utilize light and neutral base colors. Fabric awnings are proposed. The project utilizes a light and neutral color scheme. Limit the materials and color palette on any single I building (3 or less colors) The project incorporates 3 main colors. 11 Encourage large window openings for restaurants. I Not applicable. Provide significant storefront glazing. Avoid large blank walls. II ~- I Retail storefront glazing is extensive. Large blank walls are not proposed. Encourage the use of fabric awnings over storefront windows and entries. Emphasize display windows with special lighting. 11 Encourage the use of dutch doors. Fabric awnings are proposed. Special lighting is proposed in retail display windows. Project design does not lend itself to the use of dutch doors. 1 Utilize small paned windows Small paned windows are utilized. 11 Develop a total design concept. Provide frequent entries. Limit the extent of entry openings. Avoid exterior pull down shutters and sliding or fixed security grilles over windows along street frontages. Emphasize storefront entries. Design of residential and commercial components of the mixed-use project are harmonious. Frequent entries are proposed. The extent of entry openings is limited. These features are not proposed. Storefront entries are emphasized. Integrate fences and walls into the building design. I-- Fences and walls are integrated into the overall project design. 11 Encourage front entry gardens I Landscaping is proposed along street frontages to Design Guidelines - Village by the Sea Page 5 Emphasize an abundance of landscaping. Limit access drives to garages or surface parking areas. contribute to the overall visual quality of the neighborhood. Ample room is available on the balconies for residents to incorporate flower boxes and landscape planters on the upper levels. architectural details to enhance the Village character. An abundance of landscaping is provided in highly visible portions of the project. Only four access drives are proposed for the project. Surface parking areas are strictly limited. Locate residential units near front property lines and Residential units along Christiansen Way have orient entries to the street. been oriented with extensive patios and front entries facing the street. Provide front entry porches. The residential units along Christiansen Way include extensive front patio areas adjacent to the street. Encourage detached garages which are subordinate in n visual importance to the house itself. Provide windows looking out to the street. I Not applicable. Windows and balconies look out onto all adjacent streets. Visually separate multi-family developments into smaller components. Utilize simple color schemes. A neutral base color (stucco) with a darker color trim (wood fascias, rafter tails, trellises) is utilized. The proposed project includes several separate building components. Provide decorative details to enrich facades. Decorative design elements such as stone veneer, wood trellises, and decorative light fixtures have been incorporated at the first floor level. The upper levels utilize French doors, stucco windowsills, corbels under the balconies, wood trellises, and exposed rafter tails. ~~ ____~~ ~~ Low stucco walls with stone veneer to match the facade of the building are incorporated along the frontage of the project to breakup the ground floor and screen guest parking. Exhibit G Reduced Plans Exhibits “A-Y” @j i B 9 1 4 Y Y - c h 8 LE, 1I"I I ! 1 I ji R'' ................... ...................... ..................... ..................... ...................... ..................... ...................... a P B P 4 I- cn - 1 a m i : d -4 .i r I 1 4 4 I- - I I I lki 31 t I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I +E :E I I I I I I I I I I I I I $E I I I I I I LE i -l r I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I [ i B - I l-r I B I I I x I- - zj i j i ! I 1 I i i i i .Z-,l -- I-- ..- ---r 1 anuenv peg -7kk "01 - 41