HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-02-08; Housing Commission; Minutes--
Minutes of: HOUSING COMMISSION
Time of Meeting: 6:OO P.M.
Date of Meeting: February 8,1996 Place of Meeting: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Calverley called the Regular Meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The pledge of allegiance was led by Commissioner Scarpelli.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Calverley, Commissioners Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli, Schlehuber,
and Wellman
Staff Present: Evan Becker, Housing and Redevelopment Director
Reggie Harrison, Housing Program Manager
Debbie Fountain, Senior Management Analyst
Leilani Hines, Management Analyst
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA:
There were no comments from the audience.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Chairman Calverley requested that approval of the minutes be moved to the last item.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF - Request for
recommendation of approval of a 16-unit affordable apartment project to satisfy the affordable
housing obligation of the project known as Ocean Bluff.
Evan Becker, Housing & Redevelopment Director, reviewed the background of the request and stated that
on December 20, 1995, the applicant, Ocean Bluff Partnership, received a recommendation for approval
from the Planning Commission for a Tentative Tract Map, Local Coastal Plan Amendment, Zone Change,
Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development Permit to subdivide a 31.2 acre parcel into 92 standard
single family lots, one open space lot, and one multiple family lot with 16 affordable housing units. The
proposed affordable apartments include ten (1 0) one-bedroom, four (4) two-bedroom, and two (2) three-
bedroom units. Rents would be affordable to households earning between 50% and 80% of the Area
Median Income. Rents will range from $456 to $591 for a three-bedroom unit. As proposed, the project will
meet the developer’s obligation under the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Mr. Becker discussed the affordable rent structure and other assumptions regarding construction, financing,
and operating costs. The cost of the affordable housing will be approximately $86,00O/unit and the
developer’s proforma estimates a subsidy gap of approximately $55,00O/unit. He stated that no financial
assistance is being requested at this time, but a request could come at a later date. Prior to final map
approval, the developer will be required to enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement according to the
City’s lnclusionary Housing Ordinance. This agreement will establish the exact timing of project
- 1.
HOUSING COMMISSION February 8,1996 Page 2
development and other specifics about the project which are legally recorded against the property. Staff
recommends approval.
After a question and answer period with staff, Chairman Calverley invited the applicant to speak.
Jack Henthorn , representing the Ocean Bluff Partnership, addressed the Commission and described
various affordable housing issues and funding for the project. Several funding options are being
considered, including tax credits and mortgage revenue bonds. Mr. Henthorn stated that it could be a
combination of different types of funding. Management of the affordable housing would probably be done
by an outside entity similar to the MAAC Project.
One Commissioner was concerned about the segregation of the affordable housing units. She would prefer
to see the affordable housing integrated throughout the project.
Chairman Calverley opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Calverley
declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Scarpelli, and duly seconded, to adopt Housing Commission
Resolution No. 96-001, recommending approval of 16 affordable apartment units (SDP
93-07) within the Ocean Bluff project in order to satisfy an affordable housing
obligation under the City's lnclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Calverley, Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli, Schlehuber, Wellman
VOTE: 8-0
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
2. CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST - Request for recommendation of
approval for Emerald Ridge West to build second dwelling units and purchase an Affordable
Housing Credit in the Villa Loma project, to satisfy the affordable housing obligation of the project
known as Emerald Ridge West.
Debbie Fountain, Senior Management Analyst, reviewed the background of the request and stated that on
January 17, 1996, the applicant, MSP California, received a recommendation for approval from the
Planning Commission for a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development Permit
to subdivide the subject property into 61 single family lots and one (1) open space lot, to create a 27.4 acre
remainder parcel, and to provide nine (9) future second dwelling units. The affordable housing project is
proposed to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement of the Emerald Ridge West project.
Ms. Fountain stated that the developer's 15% inclusionary requirement is 10.764 dwelling units which,
according to the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance, must include one (1) three-bedroom unit. The proposed
affordable project includes nine (9) second dwelling units and the proposal to purchase one (1) housing
credit in an offsite affordable housing project to meet the requirement to provide one three-bedroom unit.
The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary housing dwelling unit would be satisfied through the payment
of a fee equal to the fraction times the average subsidy needed to make a newly constructed typical
housing unit affordable to a lower-income household. The nine (9) second dwelling units will be affordable
to households earning 80% of the Area Median Income. No financial assistance is being requested at this
time, but this does not rule out a request at a later date. An Affordable Housing Agreement will be required.
Evan Becker, Housing 8, Redevelopment Director, led a discussion regarding second dwelling units. He
discussed the proposed zone code amendment which the Planning Commission had denied at their
February 7, 1996 meeting. That zone code amendment would have required either the main unit or the
HOUSING COMMISSION February 8,1996 Page 3
second dwelling unit to be owner-occupied. He discussed some of the reasons why the Planning
Commission had denied the amendment.
Chairman Calverley invited the applicant to speak.
Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group, 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300, representing MSP California,
addressed the Commission and stated that the applicant has taken much care to integrate the second
dwelling units throughout the project. Mr. Ladwig feels that both products can co-exist in this project without
impacting
designed to have access to the main unit. Each unit having a second dwelling unit would have a double
garage and a single garage, with the single garage being dedicated to the affordable unit. A homeowner’s
association would be responsible for slope maintenance only.
one another. In many cases, the second dwelling unit sits over the garage but it could be
Commissioners queried Mr. Ladwig about various issues, Le. how to ensure that the unit will remain
affordable for 55 years and owner responsibilities regarding the third garage. Mr. Becker stated that second
dwelling units are permitted by state law but the law does not require that they be monitored.
Chairman Calverley opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Calverley
declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Sato, and duly seconded, to adopt Housing Commission
Resolution No. 96-002, recommending approval of nine (9) second dwelling units and
the purchase of one (1) credit for a three-bedroom unit offsite (SDP 96-06) within the
Emerald Ridge West project in order to satisfy an affordable housing obligation under
the City’s lnclusionary Housing Project.
Calverley, Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli, Schlehuber, Wellman
VOTE: 8-0
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
3. 1996-97 HOME PROGRAM - Request for approval of a recommendation of projects and funding
allocations for the City of Carlsbad’s 1996-97 HOME Investment Partnership Program.
Leilani Hines, Management Analyst, reviewed the background of the request and stated that on June 20,
1995, the City Council approved Carlsbad’s participation with the cities of Encinitas, Santee, and Vista and
the County of San Diego to form a consortium for the purpose of increasing the local supply of decent
affordable housing to low and very low income persons. As a participant in the HOME Investment
Partnership Consortium, the City will receive federal HOME funds to provide affordable housing
opportunities for lower income households in the approximate amount of $1 76,700.
Ms. Hines reviewed several of the affordable housing ideas currently under consideration for Carlsbad using
HOME funds. She stated that $17,670 (10%) of the proceeds will be used to cover administrative costs
incurred by the City for overall management, monitoring, and evaluation of the HOME program. She
advised the Commission that the HOME program has no impact on the General Fund.
Chairman Calverley opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Calverley declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
- ..
.' HOUSING COMMISSION February 8,1996 Page 4
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Scarpelli, and duly seconded, to accept the public comments
regarding the City of Carlsbad's housing and community development needs and
proposals submitted for funding under the HOME Investment Partnership Program and
adopt Housing Commission Resolution No. 96-003, recommending to the City Council
the projects and funding allocations for the City of Carlsbad's 1996-97 HOME
Investment Partnership Program.
Calverley, Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli, Schlehuber, Wellman
VOTE: 8-0
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS:
4. STATUS REPORT ON SECTION 8 FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM
Reggie Harrison, Housing Program Manager, reviewed the Section 8 Family Self-Sufficiency Program
(FSS) and stated that it is a mandate of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is
designed to enable a minimum of thirty (30) unemployed, underemployed, or undereducated Section 8
Housing Participants to achieve economic independence from welfare and rental assistance. Participants
receive assistance in removing bamers that prevent them from engaging in job-training programs,
educational programs, and/or employment opportunities. Lifeline Community Services was awarded the
contract to administer the FSS Program for the City of Carlsbad effective January 3, 1995.
5. UPDATED STATUS REPORT ON VARIOUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS AND
PROGRAMS
Evan Becker, Housing & Redevelopment Director, reviewed the status report on various affordable housing
projects and programs currently under review or in process. He noted that second dwelling units are
gaining interest by developers.
6. HOUSING COMMISSION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Evan Becker, Housing & Redevelopment Director, led a discussion on the Housing Commission policies
and procedures. Two Commissioners were concerned that Housing Commission Minutes were being
fowarded to the City Council prior to being approved by the Commission. Mr. Becker explained that when
a scheduled Housing Commission meeting is canceled, it is sometimes necessary to include copies of the
Draft Minutes in an agenda packet. Otherwise, a project could be severely delayed until Minutes could be
approved. Chairman Calverley and Commissioner Wellman would like to see draft minutes within two
weeks of a meeting.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Wellman, and duly seconded, that staff provide the
Chairman with a draft copy of the Minutes within two weeks of each meeting so that
she can suggest revisions before the final Minutes are presented to the Commission.
Calverley, Escobedo, Rose, Sato, Schlehuber, Wellman
VOTE: 6-2
AYES:
NOES: Noble, Scarpelli
ABSTAIN: None
- ,. .-
I I' *' HOUSING COMMISSION February 8,1996 Page 5
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Noble requested a correction to the Minutes of October 12, 1996 on page 4, paragraph one.
The first sentence should correctly read, 'Chairman Avis reported that Commissioner Noble had been
reappointed as the Planning Commission representative to serve on the Housing Commission for another
two year term.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Noble, and duly seconded, to approve the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of October 12,1996, as corrected.
Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli, Schlehuber
VOTE: 6-0-2
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Calverley, Wellman
It was noted that Page #5 of the Minutes of November 9,1996 should be renumbered as Page #4.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Sat0 and duly seconded, to approve the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of November 9, 1996, as submitted.
VOTE: 4-0-4
AYES: Escobedo, Rose, Sato, Schlehuber
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Calverley, Noble, Scarpelli, Wellman
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
7. CHAIRPERSON REPORT - Presentation of Service Appreciation Plaque to Doug Avis.
Chairman Calverley presented a service appreciation plaque to Doug Avis who had served as Chairman of
the Housing Commission for the year 1995.
8. DIRECTOR REPORT
There were no director reports.
9. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING
The next scheduled meeting of the Housing Commission is March 14, 1996.
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the Regular meeting of February 8, 1996 was adjourned at 8:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EVANBECKER
Housing and Redevelopment Director
BETTY BUCKNER
Minutes Clerk
TUB CITT OF CABISW UWSUG & ~DKVBUW~~ DIRAETMSNT A REPORT TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION
ItemNo. 1
Staff: Evan E. Becker &
Housing & Redevelopment Director
DATE: FEBRUARY 8,1%
SUBJECT: OCEAN BLUFF AFFORDABLE HOUSING - LCPA 9549/ZC 93-04/CT 93-
09/SDP 9347/HDP 93-09 - Request for recommendation of approval of a 16-unit
affordable apartment project satisfying the affordable housing obligation of the
project known as Ocean Bluff.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Housing Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 96-001, recommending APPROVAL
of 16 affordable apartment units (SDP 93-07) within the Ocean Bluff project in order to satisfy
an affordable housing obligation under the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
11. BACKGROUNJ3
On December 20, 1995, the applicant, Ocean Bluff Partnership, received a recommendation for
approval from the Planning Commission for a Tentative Tract Map, Local Coastal Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Hillside Development Permit to
subdivide a 31.2 acre parcel into 92 standard single-family lots, one open space lot and one
multiple-family lot with 16 affordable apartment units. The affordable project, as shown in the
Site Development Plan included in the Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 3), is
proposed to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement of the Ocean Bluff project.
The developer’s 15% inclusionary requirement is 16.24 dwelling units, which according to the
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, must include two (2), three-bedroom units. The fractional unit
may be satisfied by payment of the appropriate fractional amount of the In-lieu Fee established
by the Inclusionary Ordinance.
The proposed affordable apartments include ten (10) one-bedroom, four (4) two-bedroom, and
,as required, two (2) three-bedroom units. Rents would be affordable to households earning
between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income. As proposed, the project will meet the
developer’s obligation under the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
OCEAN BLUFF
PAGE 2
LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09
JJI. APPLICANT/DEVELOPMENT TEAM INFORMATION
The development team for the proposed project is as follows:
Applicant: Ocean Bluff Partnership
(Also see disclosure statement included in Exhibit 3)
Developer: Ocean Bluff Partnership
Landscape Architect: ADL Planning Associates
Engineering : Hunsaker and Associates
Project Consultant/
Manager: Jack Henthorn and Associates
IV. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is generally located at the northwest comer of the future Poinsettia Lane and
Blackrail Court in the Zone 20 Specific Plan area and Local Facilities Management Zone. The
affordable project is located in the southwestern comer of the site in proximity to Poinsettia
Lane, a major circulation arterial. The project will create access to Poinsettia Lane as an off-site
improvement. The site is surrounded by rural residential and agricultural uses.
The affordable apartments will consist of ten (10) one-bedroom units of approximately 660
square feet; four (4) two-bedroom units of approximately 885 square feet; and two (2) three-
bedroom units of approximately 1050 square feet. The units are located in two, two-story multi-
family structures.
The affordable project includes a recreation area of 3200 square feet of multi-purpose play area.
The project is in close proximity to major employment opportunities in the Palomar
industrial/office corridor. The Aviara Oaks Elementary School is approximately one mile from
the site and the planned Aviara Park is within approximately 1/2 mile. Commercial services are
located approximately one mile from the site at Alga Road and El Camino Real.
OCEAN BLUFF
PAGE 3
LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09
1
2
3
TOTAL
V. PROJECTAFFORDABIJXN
10 $456 I 50% AMI*
4 $527 < 50% AMI
2 $59 1 < 50% AMI
16
The applicant has presented a financial proforma which indicates the following rent and
affordability levels:
As the above table indicates, the proforma rent levels are significantly below the inclusionary
low-income requirement which is based on 80% of median income.
VI. FINANCIAL
The applicant has prepared a summarized development cost proforma which uses the above
affordable rent structure and other assumptions regarding construction, financing and operating
costs in order to estimate the financing "gap", i.e. that amount of subsidy necessary to make the
project feasible with affordable rents. While they are pcelhhary, the applicant's estimates and
assumptions appear reasonable. At a total project cost of approximately $86,00O/unit, the
proforma estimates a subsidy requirement of approximately $55,0oO/unit. These results are
reasonably consistent with the City's experience with actual projects and its study of protypical
affordable projects.
The financial information presented at this time only indicates that the applicant has a reasonable
understanding of what will be required to develop the project. The applicant has identified no
specific financing sources or commitments and no developer of the affordable housing project
has been identified; therefore, it is not possible to make any assessment of project feasibility.
OCEAN BLUFF
PAGE 4
LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09
No financial assistance is being requested at this time, but this does not rule out a request at a
later date. The applicant has requested, and the Planning Commission is recommending, an
overall density increase of 11.8% in order to accommodate the 16 affordable units. This
incentive for affordable housing is consistent with the City's General Plan. The applicant's
proforma of the proposed affordable project adequately demonstrates the need for this incentive
for economic reasons.
VZI. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT
Prior to final map approval, the developer will be required to enter into an Affordable Housing
Agreement according to the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. This agreement will establish the exact timing of project development and other specifics about the project which are
legally recorded against the property.
Vm. HOUSING ELEMENT CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the Housing Element,
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and the Zone 20 Specific Plan affordable housing requirements.
The rental apartments, affordable at 50% of Area Median Income, would rank "High Priority"
according to the City's Consolidated Plan which is required by the Department of Housing and
Urban Development. Construction of these units with rental restrictions would count toward the
City's Housing Element production goals.
E. SUMMARY
It is the role of the Housing Commission to make recommendations to the City Council based
on several considerations with respect to proposed affordable housing projects-- these are:
0 The proposal's effectiveness in serving the City's housing me& and priorites as
expressed in the Housing Element and HUD Consolidated Plan.
0 The proposal's consistency with the City's a#'ordable housing policies and ordinances,
as expressed in the Housing Element, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Density Bonus
Ordinance, etc.
0 The proposal's development and operating feasibility, emphasizing the development team,
financing sources and the role of the City (if any) in providing financial assistance or
incentives.
OCEAN BLUFF
LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09
PAGE 5
As proposed, the project would address established City affordable housing needs in a manner
that is consistent with applicable City policies and ordinances. Subject to the condition contained
in the recommended approvals from the Planning Commission that requires the developer to
enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City prior to final map approval, staff
recommends that the Housing Commission recommend this project to City Council.
This recommendation concerns only the applicant’s proposal to provide an affordable housing
project on site. The Planning Commission recommendation also includes conditions that permit
the option of satisfying the affordable housing obligation off-site. Pursuing an off-site option
would require the developer to process a request for approval through staff, the Housing
Commission and City Council as the final decision maker.
EXHIBITS:
1.
2. Housing Commission Review Application
3.
Housing Commission Resolution No. 96-001
Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 20, 1995 w/attachments
EB/ar
1/25/96
’-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-001
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
DEVELOPMENT OF 16 APARTMENT UNITS
AFFORDABLE TO LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
WITHIN THE OCEAN BLUFF PROJECT AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE FUTURE
POINSETTIA LANE AND BLACKRAIL COURT IN
THE ZONE 20 SPECIFIC PLAN.
APPLICANT: OCEAN BLUFF PARTNERSHIP
CASE NO.: AHP 96-01 (CT #93-09 And SDP #93-07)
WHEREAS, an Affordable Housing Project (AHP) Application (No.
96-01) has been submitted to the City of Carlsbad’s Housing Commission for review
and consideration;
WHEREAS, said Housing Commission did, on the 8th date of
February, 1996, hold a public meeting to consider said application; and
WHEREAS, at said public meeting, upon hearing and considering all
testimony, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Housing
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct.
2. That based on the information provided within the application and
testimony presented during the public meeting of the Housing
Commission on February 8, 1996, the Commission recommends
APPROVAL of Affordable Housing Project (AHP) No. 96-01
containing 16 apartment units to be affordable to low income (50%-
80% of county median) households subject to the findings and
conditions outlined herein. .... .... ....
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
HC Resolution No. 96-001
Page 2
3. That the Commission's recommendation for approval of said affordable
housing project does not include support for any financial assistance for
the project.
FINDINGS:
1. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of
Carlsbad's Housing Element and Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the Density Bonus Ordinance
and the affordable housing requirements of the approved Zone 20 Specific
Plan.
2. The project will provide a total of 16 apartment units (1, 2 and 3 bedroom)
affordable for rent to households at 50% to 80% of the county median which
meets a "high priority" affordable housing need as outlined within the City of
Carlsbad's approved 1995-2000 Consolidated Plan. The project, therefore, has
the ability to effectively serve the City's housing needs and priorities as
expressed in the Housing Element and the Consolidated Plan.
CONDITIONS:
1.
2.
3.
..... ..... .....
Recommendation of approval is granted for AHP No. 96-01, as shown on Site
Development Plan 93-07, incorporated by reference and on file in the Housing
and Redevelopment Department. Development shall occur substantially as
shown unless otherwise noted in the conditions of project approval by the City
Council.
Recommendation of approval is granted for AHP No. 96-01 subject to the
condition that the applicant submit an acceptable schedule for construction of
the required ratio of income restricted units for inclusion in the final
Affordable Housing Agreement to be approved prior to Final Map. The
schedule shall indicate acceptable construction phasing for the affordable units
in relation to the construction of the market rate units.
The applicant shall maintain rents at the allowable affordable rate (based on
household size) for low income households with incomes equal to 50% to 80%
of the county median upon lease up of units and continuing for the full period
of affordability .
*- ..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
HC Resolution No. 96-001
Page 3
4. The affordable housing units must be restricted for "the useful life of the
project" which means a minimum of 55 years.
5. Upon final approval of said affordable housing project and prior to final map
approval, the applicant shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with
the City of Carlsbad. The agreement shall be binding to all future owners and
successors in interest. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall include all
terms and conditions of said project approval and outline the incentives
(financial or other), if any, to be provided by the City of Carlsbad.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Housing Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 8th day of
February, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Calverley, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli & Wellman.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Housing
ATTEST:
f
EVAN BECKJZR, Housing and Redevelopment Director
TACI’ HENTHORN & ASSOCIA -3 EXHIBIT 2
.I 5431 Avenida Encinas Suite G
Carlsbad, California 92008
Fax (619) 438-0981
(619) 438-4090
REC E D VE Q
March 3, 1995
Housing & Redevelopment Director
City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt St.
Carlsbad, CA 92008 .. .
MAR 0 7 1995
. ..
Re: Ocean Bluff CT-93-09/SDP 93-07 Request for Density Bonus under SDP requirements of 21.53.120 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The above referenced application for City of Carlsbad Housing Commission Review is submitted to satisfy
Ocean Bluffs obligation to comply with the City of Carlsbad General Plan Housing Element and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) for affordable housing within the project. The Ocean Bluff‘ project, CT 93-09/SDP 93-07/ZC 93-04/HDP 93-09, consists of 92 single family homes
and 16 affordable units, located approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of Alga Rd. and
Poinsettia Lane on a 30.2 acre parcel..
Ocean Bluff‘ is requesting a 12.5% density bonus (12 units). A total of 16 units will be designated as
lower-income affordable “Rental” to be located in the southwest corner of the project.
The proposed affordable housing units provide a mix of one, two, and three bedroom units ranging in size
from 660 Sq.Ft. to 1050 Sq. Ft. Preliminary plans show a distribution of 10 lBR, 4 2 Br, and 2 3BR
units. The affordable units are intended to be available to all household types.
The Ocean Bluff‘ project meets the housing needs and priorities of the City Of Carlsbad General Plan
Housing Element, CHAS, Growth Management Zone 20, Specific Plan -SP 203 objectives and is
consistent with the City of Carlsbad Inclusionary Housing Ordinance for the following reasons:
Compliance with City of Carlsbad Housing Element Goals:
Goal #2 Quantity and Diversity of Housing Stock. Ocean Bluff provides a total of 108 dwelling
units of which 92 are single family detached and 16 are apartments for lower income families.
Goal #3 Provide new affordable housing opportunities in the City to meet the needs of future
lower income households: Ocean Bluff complies with policy 3.2 by providing the required
number of 3 bedroom units. The project will assist the City in reaching it’s target of lower
income units by providing 16 a€fordable units.
Compliance with City of Carlsbad CHAS Section 11: Five Year Strategy: Ocean BluE is consistent with Programs 1 and 2 of the five year
strategy plan by:
Providing new affordable housing opportunities through a private/public sector
partnership efforts.
The appropriate number of 3 bedroom affordable housing units are being
provided.
The project will comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirements.
Compliance with Growth Management Zone Specific Plan (SP-203) Ord #NS-257
Ocean Bluff provides on site lower-income aEordable units in conjunction with the 92 market
rate units. The Ocean Bluff project is coordinated with surrounding properties by providing major Circulation Element Roadways (Alga Rd. and Poinsettia Lane) as well as circulation and
pedestrian access to Public Facilities.
&an Bluff affordable housing product is consistent with the anticipated clustered multi- la
I-
.
family attached and stacked flat unit types indentified in the Specific Plan.
Compliance with Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 21.85 010 CMC
Ocean Bluff provides 15% of the total units for affordable (lower income) residential units.
The project also complies with the Inclusionary requirements as contained in Zone 20
Specific Plan & General Plan Housing Element.
In summary, we believe the Ocean Bluff project complies with or exceeds applicable City of Carlsbad
General Plan Housing Policies, Growth Management Zone 20 Development policies and the purpose &
Intent of the City of Carlsbad Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. The project will contribute towards the
City’s long and short term goals as described in the CHAS. n
ean Bluff Developer Representative
cc. Bob Wineteer
Anne Hysong
-- - CTTY Of CARLSBAD
HOUSIXG ~33l311SSIOS RE\'IE\\' APPLICA? a3N
.L
, APPLICAsTTIDE~ZLOPhLhT TEA!! l3TOR~lATION
:ame of Applicant: Ocean Bluff Partnership
IailingAddrcss: 4180 La Jolla Village Dr'. Suite 300 La Jolla, CA 92037
dentify Development Team (ie., des eloper, builder, architect, etc.): leveloper-Ocean Eluff Partnership
b r chi t ec t -N/A
'lanning/Management-Jack Henthorn & Associates
1. GEhTR4.L PROJECT bTOR\I 4TlOS
+oj& Name: Ocean Bluff
Describe General Location of Project:
Jorth side of the extension of Poinsettia Lane, East of College Blvd/
llga Rd, Located in Zone 20. - .. -
Project Address: &/A
Site Parcel No(s).: 5-o,o-
Total Yumber of AfTordabIe Units Required (if applicable): 16
Total Kmber of Affordable Units Proposed: 16
Tvpe of Units (ie., garden aparlmenu, detached, ctc.):
6 unit garden apartment project.
Size (in square feet) of each Unit:
1 BR-660 Sq. Ft. 2 BR-885 Sq. Ft. 3 BR-1050 Sq. Ft.
Bedroom Size Distribulion of Units:
0-1BR 4 -2BR, 2-3BR
Dcscribe any special features'amenities to bc intludcd within project:
Recreation area of 3200 square feet consisting of multi purpose play arez
Pqc I- .I? I93
.-
I. TER\IS OF AFFORDAB~LI~' -9 AFFORDABLE L3-s (ATTACH ADT-IOSAL INFORjlATION 1F
hTCESSARY) -.r
'argeted Income Lc\,els (as 5% of area rncdian):50-80% of county median income
'arget Population (ie., familics, srniom etd: Fami 1 i es
lonthlg Red -(b bdr. size) or Sales Price of Unifs: -Br =$4 56
-Br=$527 -Br =$59 1
.
- ~
'em of AfTordabilit! (ie., 30 jrs, life of project, etc.): To be determined by Housing Asreement .
'rejected Schedule for Construction of Affordable Housing t'nits:
ithin 5 years of recordation of final map.
f the affordable units are bcing conflructed to satisf! the Cit! of Carlsbad's Inclusionac Housing requirement, how
vill they be phased uith rfspcct to construction of the market rate units? Plcase Elplain Project Phasing:
Affordable units will be contained in two buildings. Building 21 contai ;en (10) units and will satisfy the firsL 66 market rate units. Building
#2 will be constructed prior or concurrent xith the 67th market rate unit 01: within five (5) years of recordation of the final map.
. .- .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. ,
..
Lv. m.iw~~ nioRmrlos os A~FOFWBLE HOUSJX PROJECT .
Please attach a copy of development and operating financial proformas shouing source and mes of fun& to
accomplish the affordable units proposed in this application. In the profomas, plcase idcntifj your subsid! sources
and appropriate justifications for use of these sources.
Describe the local financial assistance or incenthes, if any, including specific terms daired for the anordable housing
project which you are, or will be, requesting from the Citj of Carlsbad:
Applicant, through the site development plan process, is requesting
a density bonus of 12 units.
Identify an! other project conditions nhich may be rrle\ant to project feasibilitj:
Project has a large commitment for offsite improvements (Alga Rd, Poinsettia Lane, etc.) which requires the maximum number of market rate units.
Housing Commission Revicw App11;amn
Page 2 12/89>
: REQUIRED ATTACH-blEhTS TO if@PLICATION -
he follouing items must be atlachcd to this application:
Site Developmenr Plan for Affordahle Housing Units;
Narrative dcicribing how the projccl mceis the Housing Seeds and Priorities a expressed within the City of
Carlsbad's Hqusing Element and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Slratepy;
NmaGve on the project's consisrency with the City of Carlsbad's Affordahle Housing Policies as. expressed in the
Housing Element, Inclusionaq Housing Ordinance, General Plan md other relaled documents;
Development and Operaring Financial Proformas indicating sources and wes of funds for the project, including
justification and identificarion of subsidy sources;
I Complete description of financid assistance or incentives including specific !ems that are, or u,ill be requested from
the City of Carlsbad for the project, if applicable; and,
1
'I. APPLlCATlOS SIGSATLRES
troperty Onner Kame, Address and Telephone No.: Ocean Bluff Partnership
Completed Disclosure Starement of Ounership Interes~s uibin he project. J
4180 La Jolla Viilage Dr. Ste. 300 (619)452-1511 La Jolla, CA 92037
, the undersigned, do hereby rerlif! that I am the legal oHner of the subject propert! and fhai the abo\e information
s true and correct to the best of m! knowledge.
.- .. .. . ,. ... .. .. ..
*' . ,
Signature ._ . Date -
~
I, the undersigned applicant, do hereby certif? that I am the representative of the legal owner of the subject propefl!
md that the ab information is t correct to the best of rn! hoHledge. P
c- Date jO?/f!y 4 pplicant
Signature:
rm BOX BEYOW is FOR CITY VSE O~IY
Date Application Received:
Application Received By:
Staff Recommendation:
Date of Housing Commjssion Review:
Action on Application by Housing Commission:
Other Comments: ..
Housing Commission Rr!icw Application
Page 3
..
OCEANBLUFF
DENSITY INCREASE
3/1/95
PRO FORMA
REVENUE ANALYSIS
1 BEDROOM
2 BEDROOM
3 BEDROOM
95% OCCUPANCY
OPERATING COSTS @ 30%
NET OPERATING INCOME
DEBT SERVICE INCOME (1.2)
INCOME SUPPORTED DEBT
LAND DEVELOPMENT COSTS
IMPROVED SITE COST
LAND CARRY 18M0
LAND DEVELOPMENT COST
UNIT CONSTRUCTION COSTS
UNIT SIZE
SQUARE FEET (project)
STRUCTURE COST $35.00
ON SITE INDIRECTS .lo% STRUCT.
OVERHEAD .04
MARKETING .02
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
LOAN FEES .02
CONST FINANCING
SUBTOTAL FINANCING
PROJECT COST
GAP
DEV CONTRIB LAND
REQUIRED GAP FUNDING
RENT UNITS REVENUE
$456 10 $4,560
$527 4 $2,108
$59 1 2 $1,182
$7,850
$7,458
($2,237)
$5,220
$4,350
$495,468
$758,000
$85,000
$843,000
1 BR 2 BR 3BR
7250 3400 2200
$253,750 $1 19,000 $77,000
$540,205
$9,909
$27,010
$36,920
$1,383,205
$887,737
$525,000
$362,737
12850
$449,750
$44,975
$30,320
$15,160
$540,205
$36,920
$1,383,205
$887,737
Jack Henthorn Associates
EXHIBIT 3 - c -
P.C. AGENDA OF: December 20,1995
SUBJECT Lc PA 95-09LZC 93-041CT 9349lSDP 934‘7/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF -
Request for a Local Coastal Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract
Map, Site Development Plan and Hillside Development Permit to rezone
from L-C to R-1 a vacant, 31.2 acre site and subdivide 92 single family lots
and one multiple family lot with 16 affordable apartment units on property
generally located at the northwest corner of future Poinsettia Lane and
Blackrail Court in the Zone 20 Specific Plan area and Local Facilities
Management Zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3867,3868,
SDP 93-07, and HDP 93-09 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein.
3869, 3870, 3871 RECOMMENDING APPRO Vu of LCPA 95-09, ZC 93-04, CT 93-09,
11. INTRODUCTION
The applicant is requesting approval of various permits to subdivide and grade the 31.2 acre
hillside parcel into 92 standard single family lots, one open space lot, and one multiple famdy lot with 16 affordable apartment units to satisfy the project’s inclusionary housing
requirement. As designed and conditioned, the project is in compliance with the General
Plan, Zone 20 Specific Plan, Mello II LCP, the Subdivision Ordinance, and the relevant
Zoning Chapters of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
111. PROmDESCRIPTI ON-AM) BACKGROUND
The Ocean BJuffprojed is located within the boundaries of Area C of the Zone 20 Specific
Plan and the Mello II segment of Carlsbad’s Local coastal Program (LCP). The site is
designated FUM by the General Plan allowing law-medium residential de&ty (0-4 dwelling
uniwacre) and is zoned GC allowing agricultural uses. The project consists of 16 firdable
units and 92 single family lots resulting in a proposed project density of 3.6 dwelling units per acre which exceeds the RLM growth control point of 3.2 dwelling units per acre;
therefore, the project requires approval of a site development plan for a 11.8% density
inmase. The PrOPoged subdivision of the Ocean Bluff parcel into residential lots rquircs
approval of a Local ChstaI~Plan Amendment and Zone Change to the R-1 single family
zone.
LCPA %-09/ZC 934KI' 93496DP 9W/HDP 9509 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER^, ms GE 2
Tbe site amsisb of approximately 31 am of vacant, previously cultivated land which is
surrounded by mal residential and agricultural properties. Although the parcel rises in
elevation approximately 100 feet from west to east and contains a north-south trending ridge
in the eastern third of the property, the majority of the parcel is relatively flat with slopes
less than 15%. A 3 acre, steep sided ravine located at the northwestern corner consists of +E% slopes containing southern mixed chaparral. The ravine, identified as Ojxn Space
bt "A" on Exhibit "A", will be dedicated as permanent open space and maintained by the
Homeawneis Assodation. The site conditions demid abe require compliance with the
Hillside Development Ordinance development guidelines regulating grading and
architecture, however, architectural elevations arc not included as part of the project at this
time. The proposed grading design preserves ocean and backcountry views and coILsists of
balanced grading to create terraced hillside lots which generally follow the existing
topography, i.e., rising in elevation from west to east to the ridge line.
The proposed single family lots are a minimum of 7,500 square feet in area and the multiple
family lot containing a proposed 16 unit affordable apartment project is 34,410 square feet.
The affordable project is located in the southwestern corner of the site in proximity to
Poinsettia Lane, a major circulation arterial. As shown on Exhibits "A-F, since the project
does not front on an existing public street, access to the parcel will be provided by of&ite
improvements which include Street "A" from the project's southwestern boundary to future
Poinsettia he, Poinsettia Lane between its current easterly terminus and Street "A", and
Blackrail Court from its northerly terminus to the northeast comer of the project. The
project's proposed circulation design will also provide public street access to all adjoining
properties.
The provision of the necessary of%itc improvements, i.e. Poinsettia Lane and Street "A"wiU
result in impacts to approximately 4 acres of coastal sage habitat and one pair of California
gnatcatchers. The proposed 4 acre coastal sage habitat take area is located within Preserve
Planning Area 4 of Carlsbad's draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP) containing
approximately 84 acres of coastal sage scrub and 38 acres of chaparral habitat within its core
area.
Tbe Ocean Bldprojec! is subject to the following land use plans, policies, programs, and
zoning regdatkxm
A Generalplan
B. Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
C. MelloIILncalcoastalPmgnm (1) LCP Amendment (2) LCP Re~ations
D. Inclusionary Housing (Caapters 21.85 and 2153 of the Zoning ordinance)
E. Hitlside Development ordinance (Chapter 21.95 of the Zoning Ordinance)
c LCPA M-WZC 9349BDP 9347/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995
?AGE 3
E Gmwtb Management Ordinance (Caaptcr 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance)
G. SabdWion Ordinance (T& 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal We)
H. Draft Habitat Management Plan
Iv. ALYSIS
The recommendation of approval br this project was developed by anwg the project’s
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis
section discusses compliance with each of these regulationslpolicies utilizing both text and
tables.
The Ocean Bluff project is consistent with the applicable policies and programs of
the General Plan. Particularly relevant to the proposed single family and integrated
affordable multi-family project abutting a major circulation arterial roadway which
the project will be conditioned to construct arc the Land Use, Circulation, Noise,
Housing, and Open Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan.
Elemcot
Land Use RLM (0-4 Dwelling UniWAcre)
GCP (3.2 Dwelling UniWAcre)* Urban, low medium density
residential devlcloQmcnt in which a
variety of housing types may be
allowed within the density range.
Improvtmcntr
Rqect is singk family and
multipk family at a density of 3.6
dwelling uniwacre.
YCS
Encourage the provision of low
income dwelling units to meet the
objectives of the Housing Element.
Roject indudcJ a 16 unit
affordabk apartment project
YCS
LCPA 95-09/Zc 93-09/SDP 9347/HDP 9349 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20.1995 8
hmue that au hilbidt dcvelopmcnt is designed to prescnn the visual
quality of the preexisting
topography.
Permit tbe approval of discretionary
actions md the development of land ody after adequate provision
has been made for publlc Wtics
and scrvicts in accordance with
Growth Management public facility performance standards.
~
Ensure that master planned and
specific planned a~lmunitics and
range of housing for all ccoMwLfc
income raages. A minimum of
fifteen percent of all units approved for residential specific plans shad
be afhrdabk to lower income housebolda
Recognize pad impkment the
policies of the Californir coastal
Act and tbe carwad Local copstrrl program.
all quali&d SubdiVisiOaJ PI"& 8
~ ~~-
Tbt project is mnciitioncd to
mnstru~tallallpublicfrcilitks
neccssq to scm the subdivision
and citywidc and quadrant wide
public facilities are adequate in
Zone 20 to sadsfjf the additional
demand; therefore the project is consistent witb tbe Zone 20 LaA Facilities Management Plan.
~ ~~ Roject includes a 16 unit
affordable apartment project to
satisfy its lS% Inclwionnry
housing requirement.
bject is consistent witb the Mello I1 LCP segment in that
plant communitks (dual criterion)
arc prescmd except for the Poinsettia Lane major circulation
arterial mdway which is
exempted from the "dual
criterion" restriction by tbe Mello I1 LCP.
The propoQed slignmcnt of Poimcttk Lrne rod SWt 'A"
25%+ sropts posstssing chaparral
will disturb appximately 4 acres of aMstal sage scrpb habitrt and
8siagkWofCIUfwnk.
gnatcatd~~rs, bowever, mitigation
at a 21 repkmcnt mtb in the
bank is a condition of app& carbb8dHighLadrmitigation
YCS
YCS
YeS
YCS
YCS
L LCPA 95-09/Zc 9- 9349jSDP 9347/HDP 9349 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER #), 19% !
Circulation
Nok
uircLwlllatloo,GoJ,-J=ti-9 Propocld UIcr dor CompllUIcl
Mlafmi;peim~&omncw The majority of the pmject site is YeS
wprocznnr ImprwsllWlltr
development on hillsides relatively flat, however, slopes
exceeding 3% will not be disturbed and proposed grading
will fouow the natural land contour.
Project is conditioned to require an hevocabk offer of dedication for trail segment along Poinsettia
Lane.
Obtain an irrcwmbk o&r to dedicate a permanent easement for trailways where trails arc required
System.
Require new development to Project is conditioned to compkte Yes
construct all roadways necessary to sem the proposed development prior to or amrrent with nee&
60 dBA CNEL is thc exterior noise kvcl and 45 dBA CNEL is tbe interior noise kvel to which alI residential units should be mitigated
Yes
as part of the Carlsbad Trail
all street improvements prior to
occupancy of any unit.
Project provides mitigation to
abutting Poinstttia Lane and
YeS reduce noise kvels to 60 dBA within the usabk yard area of lots
project is conditioned to require compliance with the 45 dBA interior noise stnndrud.
Project density exceeds the Gruwth Management Growth Control Point, however, a density increase is being processed and required findings have been made (see the
following discussion under Affordable Housing and Inclusionaq Housing).
B. Zone 20 Spednc Plan (SP 203)
The Zone 20 Specific Pian requires project compliance with all applicable land usc
plans, policies and ordinancts, except as modified by the Specific Plan. "be
fom di8mmxl ddk the proposed project's conformance with the relevant
Speci&pI.p ngulatiqpswhich include Affordable Housing, Land Use (General Plan, Zoning, DeveloQment Standards, and the Mello 11 LCP), and Open Space
pres+mtiar,
Affordable Ho-
..
The Zone 20 Specific Plan reqaires consistencywith the city's Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance requiring that 15% of the total number of proposed units are made affordable to low income bousehokk When feasiik ad compatiile with
surrounding land uses, the a&rdabk units are rquiredto be built onsite, unkssan
offjite cobtn'bution of units h approved by the City Cbuncil upon a showing by the
developer that an oite amtriiution is not appropriate for the particular
LCPA 95-09/Zc 93-09BDP 9347mP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995 5
devclapmt. To enable the higbcr densitia neceSSary for affordable projects, the
Sped& Plan permits modification or waiver of development standards including increases in density to be accommodated through the Site Development Plan process.
The project's 15% inclusionary requirement is 16.24 dwelling units. The proposcd
project includes a request for approval of a site development plan for a 16 unit
affordable apartment project located on Lot 93 in the southwest corner of the site
to satisj. this requirement. The overall project density permitted is 96.6 dwelling
units, however, a total of 108 dwelling units (92 sin@ hdy and 16 multi-fardy
dwellings) are requested. The project therefore requires a density increase above the
density allowed using the Growth Control Point (3.2 du/acre) for the overall site to
enable the provision of 16 onsite affordabk housing units. In accordance with the
Zone 20 Specific Plan, the average density proposed for botb the affordable and
single family lots is 3.6 dwelling units per acre which would exceed the growth control
point but is within the RLM General Plan range of 0 - 4 dwelling units per acre.
The density hcrease is the only incentive requested by the applicant under the
provisions of Chapter 21.53.120 for affordable projects requesting approval of a site
development plan. The necessary findings that 1) no adverse impacts to the
surrounding area will result from the project; 2) the project will be compatible with
surrounding land uses; 3) the lot and traffic circulation are adequate to serve the
project; and 4) the neceSSary design features are provided, can be made and are
provided in the following discussion. A project proforma providing justification for
the density increase has been reviewed and verified by the Housing and
Redevelopment Director and the proposed density increases will require Housing Commission and City Council approval.
The project is located in the southwestern corner of the site in proximity to future
Poinsettia Lane, a major circulation arterial. As shown on Exhibit "H", the affordable
project consists of two relatively small multi-family structures, one containing 10 units
and the other containing 6 units (2 three bedroom units), which are compatible in
Scale with future single family dwellings. The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires
affordable projects to be consistent with RD-M standards and the proposed setbacks
and awerage are consistent witb these standards (see Land Use discussion). In
additia, the project will provide #w) square kt per unit of private and common
recrmma area. In accordance witb the Parking ordinance standard for multi-family
the site ir pravided from non-loaded Street "A" thereby reducing traffic flow through
the single brdy subdivision.
The project site is currently not served by a public road and surrounding uses are
limited to agricultural and residential dwellings. The 16 unit apartment project Win
not be detrimental to surrounding residential uses since all public bciIities, including
the construction of Poinsettia Lane and Blackrsil necessq to sem the
project will be co1Istr\lctcd to the site. A 25' separation between the nearest
residential units and agricultural fiehis, and intervening6'watlswill mitigate potential
confiicts between residentid and agricultural uss.
Units, wr-bour (34) parting spaccj a pdd onsite, and ~~WSS and e- to
LCPA M-o9/Zc 9344KI' 934PeDP 93-07/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995 PAGE 7
The pooared density increase is in accurdance with General Plan Housing Policy 3.8
reg- excus dwening unit allocstion, since it is requested to accommodate the
development of affordable housing, and the findings requircd to exceed the Growth
Control Point can be made, in accordance with Chapter 21.90.045 of the Zmiug
Ordinance. The proposed 11.4 dwelling unit increase would be available to be
withdrawn fiom the City's excess dwelling unit "bank" without exceeding the Citywide
or southwest quadrant dwelling unit and population buildout caps. The applicant will
be conditioned to provide all neccauy public facilities to se~e the additioual units
and the project is consistent with the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan
ensuring the adequacy of public facilities.
Land Use
The project is located within Area C of the Specific Plan. Properties within this area
are designated for Residential Low-Medium (RLM) density development by the
General Plan. Planning Area C is currently zoned LC and according to the Zone
20 Specific Plan, the appropriate zoning Tor these properties is the R-1 Zone. Therefore, zone changes must be processed prior to or concurrent with development
proposals. The R-1 zone allows for single family detached homes and associated structures, however, the Specific Plan also alluws multi-family affordable housing
structures developed in accordance with the RD-M development standards to be
located in the R-1 zone subject to site development plan approval. Accordingly, this
project includes an application for a Zone cbauge from the L-C Zone to the R-1
Zone. This zone change is consistent with both the RLM General Plan designation
and the Zone 20 Specific Plan development provisions fbr Area C.
_.
The Zone 20 Specific Plan Area C development regulations include architectural
design criteria and require consistency with the Landscape and Scenic Comdor
Guidelines. Since architecture for the single family units is not proposed by the
applicanf the project has been conditioned to require Planning Commission approval
of architectural elevations through an amendment to the Hillside Development
Pedt (HDP). "he HDP amendment sbd be required to demonstrate consistency with both the City's Hillside Ordinance architectural guidelines and the Zone 20
SpecitiC plrn Uchitcctwal design criteria As shown on Exhibits "J - L", the
co- Imd#.ape design is consistent with the Zone 20 Specific Plan, Scenic
Corridor Guideliaes, &d the City's Landscape Design Manual.
As shown on the f;dlowing tabk, the project meetsor exceedsthe R-1 (single famiiy) zone standards as modified by the Spec& Plan, aud the RD-M zbue (multi-family)
development standards as required by the Zone 20 Specific Plan.
- -
LCPA 95-09/Zc 93496DP 9347/HDP 9349 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995 B
RD-M -
Residential
Zone
Density Multiple
92 Siagk Family Lots, 1 Open Space Lot, and 1
Mdti-Famiiy Int
use: Single/?vlultiple Dwellings 16 multi-family affordable apartment
Units
Lot Arcs Minimum 7,500 sq.& 34,410 square feet
7310 - 12,910 I feet (single family)
Lot Area: Minimum 7300 square
- ~~ ~~ ~
Building Height 35'
Setbacks Front-2U'
Side - 5' (Interior)
10' (Street Side) Rem - 10'
I Lot Width: 60'
~-~
29'
Front - 28' Side - 12' Side - 22' Rem - 19'
1 Coverage: 5096 123.6% I Lot Width: 6(y 1119'
Open Space Prcservatiop
The project is consistent with the Open Space provisions of the Zone 20 Specific Plan in that Para1 "A" steep slopes possessing chaparral habitat will be preserved in
open space, slopes exceeding 4096 will not be developed, mitigation measures that
establish a physical barrier between residential and agricultural uses are imposed by
condition, and a 50' landscaped setback along the northern side of the portion of Poinsettia Lane that the project is conditioned to construct will be preserved as permanent apen space.
Seetbedtcusaon under item C below.
C1. Mdlo 11 llwl C0Ut.l Program Amendment
The project k Socatedwithin and subject to the Mello II heal corstal Program segment and is designated for residential low-medium density (RLM) land use and
Limited contrd (tC) zoning. Although the Mello II Land Use PIaa k amsistent
with the subject parcel's RLM General Plan designation, the implementing zone (G C) specified by the Mello II LCPis notoonsistentwiththepropasedzone change to
LCPA 95-09/Zc 9349/SDP 9347/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1993 GE 9
R-1. Sbm the Cdifbrnia Coastal Act specifies that all rezOnings related to land use regulatiom or administration within the coastal zone, which occur after the
of a local government's local coastal program, require a LCP amendment
in order to be effective, the project includes a Local coastal Program Amendment
to change the implementing zone from LC to R-1 for the Ocean Bluff parcel.
C2. Development Regulations
The project is consistent with Mello II LCP policies addressing steep slopes (25%+)
possessing chaparral plant communities since the proposed grading avoids the only
onsite area with slopes in excess of 15%. This area (Parcel A) does contain
chaparral plant communities and will be preserved in open space by easement. Some
coastal sage scrub on steep slopes will be disturbed by the ofkite Poinsettia Lane
extension, however, Mello II exempts City Circulation Element roadways from this
policy. The project will be conditioned to provide adequate drainage, siltation and
erosion control facilities as pat of the approved grading permit, and the grading
operation will be limited to the summer construction season, April 1 to October 1.
The project contains vacant non-prime agricultural land containing Class III soils and
is located in the coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site In). The Mello 11 LCP
requires mitigation when non-prime coastal agricultural land is converted to urban
uses. The project will therefore be conditioned to pay an "Agricultural Conversion
Mitigation Fee".
D. Inclusionuy Housing (Chap- 2185 and 2133 d the Zoning Ordinance)
As specified in the above discussion under B, Zone 20 Specific Plan - Affordable
Housing, the project is subject to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requiring that
a minimum of fifteen percent of all approved residential units in any specific plan be
restricted to and affordable by her income households. In accordance with the
ordinance, developers may apply for incentives, including requests for density
increases, to o&t the cust of affordable housing, however, they must submit
justikation for the requested incentive. Chapter 2153.120 of the Zoning Ordinance
rquiru the rpproval of a site development plan for multi-family affordable projects,
and hdings that the project is consistent with the underlying zoning ador Specific
plan ad in adonuance with General Plan policies and goals. (See the above
consi&cacydtcuatlon ' under k General Plan and B. Specific Plan - Affordable
Housing). "'his project complies with the Inclusionq Housing.provisions of the Municipal Code (Chapter 21.U) as demonstrated below
LCPA 95-09ZC 9- 93496DP 9307/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF
DECEMBER 20,1995 PAGE 10
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING
St.ndwd Reg- provided c-prb
Yes
Yes
16 Units + payment of the remaining .24 units
onsite on Lot 93.
16.24 Units
Onsite or within a
combined project
Inclusionary Requirements (UnitsFees)
Location of Units
I I I
Incentives Requested
1. Density Increase 115% Density
2. Standards Modificatiom Increase
3. Direct Financial
The applicant has requested the option to purchase credits in Villa Lama or
participate in an oaite combined affordable project, and tbe project has been
conditioned to require compliance with Council Policies 57 and 58 prior to City Council approval of an Affbrdable Housing Agreement to allow the offsite option.
Concurrent with implementation of this option, the applicant will be required to
process a tentative map revision to the Oaan Bluff project.
.
** A project profoxma demonstrating that the requested density increase is necessary
to achieve the affordable units was submitted to and reviewed by the Housing and
Redevelopment Director. Upon completion of his review, the Housing and
Redevelopment Director indicated that the proposed density increase is justified to
enable the provision of affordable units.
E. Hillside Development Ordinance
The proposed project grading is consistent with provisions ofthe Hillside Ordinance
requiriq thrt undevelopable portions of the project site are identified and avoided.
A stap mb located in the northwestern comer of the site contains the only 25%+. slop rad this area wi31 be preserved through an open space easement. The project
design miaimbs disturbana to billside lands through a tenaccd design which
follows the naturrl topopphy to the greatest extent posyik and retains view
opportunities abng the natural ridge line. Grading volumer (5,290 cy/-) are within the acceptable range and manufactured slopes are CoLltoUted Wor less than
30' in height in rnrdance with the ordinance. Since architectural extu'bits were not
submitted with the Hillside Development Permit application, the project will be
conditioned to require Planning Commission approval of a Hillside Development
Permit amendment prior to the issUana of building permits to ensure that
architecture is consistent with both the Hillside Development Architectural
Guidelines and the Specific Plan Architectural Standanls. (In order to facilitate the
I EPA %-09/ZC W M/SDP 93M/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF
DECEMBER 20,199s u
City Administration
Library
Waste Water Treatment
reVitlYi/lPPIOYlj proass, staff is recommending that the City council delegate its
au- rn the 6n.l decision maker to the Planning Commission).
--
3755 square feet YB
200.25 square Cet YeS
108 EDU Yes
The proposed project is a residential project located within Local Facilities
Management Zone 20 in the southwest quadrant. The project, including the
affordable housing units, is 11.4 dwelling units above the Grawth Management
dwelling unit allowance of 96.6 units, however, sufficient excess dwelling units exist
within the quadrant to avoid exceeding the Quadrant 3 or Citywide dwelling unit cap.
Even with this density increase, all public facilities necesscuy to scwe this project are
either already in place or will be provided through conditions of approval placed on
the project. The impacts on public facilities created by this project and compliance
with the adopted performance standards are summarized as follows:
Drainage
Circulation
Fire
Open Spa=
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE
Standard 1 bprdr I Cornpilance
NIA YCS
1,016 AM' YCS
Station No. 4 YeS
3.6 acres YCS
&hods
Water I 23.760 GPD I Yes
The Carisbad Municipal Code requires a subdivision map to be 6kd in accofdancc
with Title 20 for any subdivisioa project. Accordingly, a tentah map is being prd with standard single hmily lots and one multipk firmihr lot including all necesiuy public strats required to serve tbe pmjec~ As conditioned, the project
would provide all necessary improvements and all of the hiings rquircd by 'Iitle
20 can be made and are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3869,
dated December 20,1995.
LCPA 95-09/Zc 9344KI' 93-091SDP 93U7/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995
~
The ofMe Poinsettia Lgne and Street "A" alignments are consistent with the
approved Zone 20 Specific Plan biological mitigation and open space preservation
and the coastal sage scrub habitat loss is consistent with the HMP as follows:
1. The construction of Poinscttia Lane and Street "A" will not preclude
connectivity between Reserve Planning Areas (PPAs) since they are not
located within a PPA core area, and are not a part of a Linkage Planning
Area. If Lasible, the construction of a roadway advert under Poinsettia Lane
within the SDG&E easement, which is presented as open space, may facilitate
dispersal and movement of wildlift between core areas in PPAs 4 and 5.
2. Tbe habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the Carlsbad
HMP in that the area is not a part of a PPA core area or Wage Planning
Area.
3. Mitigation for the loss of the 4 acres of coastal sage scrub will be in the form
of the acquisition of habitat credits at a 21 ratio within PPA 2 (Carlsbad
Highlands Mitigation Bank) as discussed above. The loss of habitat on the
Ocean Bluff property will therefore not appreciably reduce the likelihood of
the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher,
4. The habitat loss is located in a disturbed and partially disturbed canyon area
which will be isolated by Poinsettia Lane, the Aviara development to the
south, and continued agricultural uscs to the east and west; thertbon, large
blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not occur.
5. The habitat area being impacted is somewhat isolated by surrounding
agricultural uses and development, and it is located within the alignment of
a major circulation element roadway providing primary access to the proposed
Ocean Bluff subdivision as well as other properties in the Zone 20 Specific
Plan ut..
The project site is Suated within the boundaries of the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203)
which men the 640 acre Zone 20 plaming area. The direct, inditect, and cumulative
environmentai impacts hm the future development of the Zoae 20 planning mas have
been discussed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR 90-03) for the specific plan.
Additional project kvel studies havc been mnducted including soib investigation, biological
analysis, noise report, tdic study, and a hydro- report. These studies provide more
focused and detailed project kvel adysis and indicate that additional environmental impacts beyond what was analyzed in FmaI EIR 90-03 wopld not result born implementation
of the project. This project qualib aa subsequent development to both the Zone 20 EIR
and the City's MEIR as identi6ied in Sedion 210833 of thc California Environmental
LCPA 95-09/ZC 9- 9349/SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF DECEMBER 20,1995
PAGE 13
Quality Ad; tbmfme, the Planning Dircctor issued a Notice of Prior Environmental
Compliance om Sptcmber 21,1995. Tbe recommended and applicable mitigation measurts
of Final EIR 90.03 are included as conditions of approval €Or this project. conditionir
include specific mitigation for impacts to coastal sage scrub habitat identified by the Zone
20 EIR along the Poinsettia Lane madway through the purchase of credits at a 2:l
replacement ratio in the Carlsbad Highlands in accordance with the recommendation of the
US. Fish and Wildlife SeMce. With regard to air quality and circulation impacts, the City's MEIR found that the cumulative impacts of the implementation of projects consistent with
the General Plan are significant and adverse due to regional factors, therefore, the City
Council adopted a statement of overriding consideration. The project is consistent with the
General Plan and as to these efkcts, no additional environmental document is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. a.
9.
10.
11.
12,
13.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3867
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3868 Planning Commission Resolution No. 3869
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3870
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3871
Location Map
Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance dated September 27,1995
Environmental Impact Assessment Form, Part II, dated September 18,
Background Data Sheet
Local Facilities Impact Assessment
Disclosure Statement
Reduced Exhibita Exhibits "A - N" dated December 20,1995.
1
i
c
4
L
f
7
I
s
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
G COMMISSION gEsoLUTtON NO. 3862
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
RECOMMENDJNGAPPROVALOFANAMENDMENTTO
THE MEW II SEGMENT OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO BRING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING MAP INTO CONFORMANCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF FUTURE P0INSEXTX.A LANE AND BLACKRAIL COURT WITHIN THE ZONE 20
SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARJES . CASE NAME: OCEAN BLUFF CASE N 0 LCPA 95-09
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Lncal coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning land usc designations for properties in the coastal Zone be in
conformance;
WHEREAS, Ocean Bluff PIvQcrshlp has filed a verified application for
certain property described as:
Lot 3 in sectlorr 22, Townsbip 12 south, range 4 west, Sa
Bemadno base d meridian In the County d San Diego, State
d Cdifornia, acepdng therehn those portions thcred lying
north d tbe south bounduy line dRurcho Agua Hedionda, as said south line was established May 5,1913, by decree d the
Superior Court ofthe State of California, In and for San Diqp
County, in that certain action (No. 16830) entitled Kelly
Investment Company, a won, vs. Clucnce Dayton Hillman and Bessie Olive Hillman.
attadad ta pI.nnt4 Commission Resolution No. 3868 and incorporated herein, which has
been ifkd with the Planning Commission and;
I
I
I
I
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local coastal
Program Amendment as shown on the map dated Dcamber 20,1995, attacbd to and
incorporrrkd by nlcrcaa In the Draft City Cwadl ordinance, Exbibit "X", atbched to
Resolution No. 3868 as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of
Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 55 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of
..
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
tive Regulations; and the Calihma Carstat Commission Ad~mmtra
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of December, 1995
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the propoecd Local
Coastal Plan Amendment and;
...
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a sixweek public review period
for any amendment to the bcai Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission j
RECOMME NDS APPROVAI, of LCPA 95-09 as shown on Exhibit "X", dated
December 20,1995, attached hereto and made a part hereof based on the ,
follawing findings: i Findins I
i That the proposed amendment to the Mello II segment of the Cartsbad Local '
Coastal Program is required to bring the designations of the City's Zoning Map (as
amended) and Mello II implementing zone into conformance, 1.e. from LC to R-1.
1.
Con-
1. Approvrl of IkPA 95-09 is granted subject to the approval of U: 9344, CI' 93-09, SDP 9347, and HDP 93-09. LCPA 95-0) is subject to all conditions contained in
PId4 Commission Readutloa Nos 3868,38Q),387@, and 3871 dated Decunkr
20,1995.
....
....
....
PC RES0 NO. 3867 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at I regular meeting of the
of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 20th day of December, 1995, by .. n--
the following vote, to wit
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3867
KIM WELSHONS, chairperson
cARLsBADPLAN"GCOMMlss10N
-3-
I
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
26
G COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3868
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE
LOCATEDONTHENORTHWESTCORNEROFEUTURE POINSETTIA LANE AND BLACKRAIL COURT. CASE NAME: OCEAN BLUFF
CASE NO zc 93-04
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
FROM LC TO R-1 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
WHEREAS, Ocern Bluff has filed a verified application for certain property,
to wit:
Lot 3 in Section 22,Tmsbip It south, range 4 west, Sm Bemadino base d mddim In tbe County dSan Diego, State
d Calilonri., excepting tbenlcom those porttoas thcnd lying
nor& d the south boundmy line d Ranch Agua Hedionda, as
saId south llne was estiMisbed May S, 1913, by decree of the
Supexior Court d the State d Califda, In d for San Diego
County, in that certain action (NO. 16830) entitled Kelly
Invcstmcnt Compmy, 8 -0% vs. Ch"X Dayton
Hillman and Bessie Olive Hillmm,
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and rekrred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as
shown on the maps .ttrcbed to and ineorporrrkd by reference in the Draft City Council
Ordinance, Exhibit "x attached hcnb as provided by Chapter 2132 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of December, 1995,
6
hold I dr3y notiad public bearing as prcscn'bed by law to consider said request; and
wHEREAs,IrtsaidpublicheUing,uponheuingrrnd~nsidering~testimony
and arguments, if auy, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Comrmsslo ' nmnsideredall
factors relating to the Zone Change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
,
commisson as hlknm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A) Th.t the hregoing recitations are true and correct
B) That based on tbe evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
OMh@NDS APPROVAL of Zone Change, ZC 93-04, based 00 the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Ffndina
1. That the proposed Zone change from UmM Control (LC) to One Family
Residential (R-1) is consistent with tbe goah and policies of the General Plan Land
Use Elemeat (Policy C.1) in that It will dt in "tbe 8mngement dld uses Wch
pme community Identity and are orderly, functionally dlcient, hdthhl, and
aestbetidly pldng."
2. That the Zone Change will provide consistency between the General Plan and
Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad General Plan
Land Use Element, in that the pperYs underlyhg Low-Medium Residential
density (RLM) land use designatha allows single famlly residentid dcrrdopment
density does not exceed 4 dwelling units per acrs Condslart with this pdlcy, the
proposed pJ&% ovdl ddty is 34 dwdling dts per am 8nd slnglc family md
multi-family residential units are propo#d.
UCept tb.t 8 V8dw Of OVdl boustq tyPU m8y be dloacd 88 1- 88 tk OVdl
Conditions:
1. Approval of 2X 93-04 is granted subject to the approval of LCPA 95-09, CT 9349,
SDP 9347, d HDP 93-09. ZC 9344 is subject to aU canditions contained in Planning CommiJdoa Rcsoludon Nor 3867,3869,3870, and 3871 dated Deccmk 1
! 24 1995. I
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
PCRESONO.3868 -2-
c-
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED; AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
ma=h- n of the City of Carlsbad, Califbraia, beM on the 20th day of December,
1993, by the following vote, to wit
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director
PCRESONO.3868 -3-
I
I
I I
I
KIM WELSHONS, Chairperson CARISBAD PLA"G.COMMISSION
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZOMNG MAP TO GRANT
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF FUTURE POINSETTIA LANE & BLACKRAIL COURT, IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME. OCEAN BLUFF
CASE NO zc 93-04
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows:
SEcllON I: That Titie 21 of the Carbad Municipal Code is amended by
the amendment of the zoning map as shown on the map attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
A ZONE CHANGE, ZC 93-04, FROM GC TO R-1 ON
SECIlON I1 That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission
as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3868 constitutes the findings and
conditions of the City council.
SECTION III: The Council further iinds that this action is consistent with
the General Plan and the Housing Element of the General Plan in that it is consistent
with residential land use and affbrdable housing goals and objectives.
DATE: This ordinance shall be e&ctive thirty days after its
adopw rpd tbe 439 flerit shall cert@ to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it
to be pubtisbtd at krst once in the Carisbad Sun within fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRSI' READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad
City council hehi on the day of ,1996, and thereafter
...
...
...
.-
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council held
on the day of ,1996, by the following vote, to wit
AYE&
NOES
ABSENT:
ABsrm
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAIXI'Y
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
E- L-c m R-l
OCEANBLUFF
LCPA 95-09/ZC 93-04
.-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
WG COMMIS SION RESOLUTION NO. 3869
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO DEVELOP 92 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE MULTIPLE FAMILY LOT WITH 16
APARTMENTS UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FUTURE POINSETTIA LANE AND BLACKRAIL COURT WITHIN THE ZONE 20 SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES. CASE NAME OCEAN BLUFF CASE N 0 cr 93-09
WHEREAS, Bluff Putncrsbip has filed a verified application for
certain property to wit
Int 3 in Sectloo 22, Township 12 south, range 4 west, !hn
Bcrnadino base and meridian in the County d San Diego, State
d California, excepting therehorn those mas thereof iying
north of the south boundary line d Rancho Agua Hedionda, 1s
said south line was estabiished May 5,1913, by decree d the
Superior CourC d the State d California, in and for Sm Diego
County, in that cedaln action (No. 16830) entftled Kelly
Investment Company, 8 corpot.tfon, vs. thence Dayton
HIiiman and Bessie Olive Hillman.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Plsnning commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for approval of a
Tentative Subdivision Map for more than 50 parcels as Shawn on Exhibits "AN dated
Decanber 20,1995, on fik in the Planning Department and incorpotated by this reference
CTcntrbh+ Map for Ocera Bluff Ct 93-09") as provided in Section 20.12.080(2)(B) of the
Carlsbad Municipai code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on t& 20th day of Deamber,
1995, hold a duly noticed public he- as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and oonddering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all pexsons desiring to be heard, said Comrmsrn 'onconsideredall
factors relating to the Tentative Tract Map.
_.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
NOW, THEREFORE, BE I" HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
A) That the above recitations arc true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the commission
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
COMME NDS APPRO Vu of Carlsbad Tentative Tract, CT 9349, based
Findins
1.
2.
3.
4.
The Plandng Cornmissloo finds that all kasibk mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the MEIR 9341 and Zone 24 EIR !JO43 appropriate to this
Subsequent Project have been incorporated into this Subsequent Project.
The Planning Commission finds that:
a. the project is a subsequent development as described in CEQA Guidelines
15168(c)(2), (e), and 15183;
b. the project is consistent with the ceacrrl Plan and Zoac 20 Specific Plan;
c. there was an EIR catifled (EIR W) in connection with the Zone 20
SpcdfiC HM
d. the project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as
sipficant in the prior EIR;
e. none of the circumstances requiring Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 exist;
Tbt Pldng Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for approval
is in drmance with the Elements of the Gtfs Geed P~I, based on the followiq:
a. Land Use - The project is muistent with the City's General Plan since the propoad density of 3.6 rwSCre is within the density range of 0-4 ddam spedkd for the site as indicated on the Lmd Use Ekmcnt of the General Plan, and altlmgh tbe project aacb &e Growth Control Point d3f
fiudli4 unlwacrq 8 daldtyincnu+ is IldBgplocLUcd in rccordurawith Pdlq 3.7.i d the Hod- Raneat and ptmumt to chpta 2153.l20 Of tbe
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -2-
c
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
20
b.
C.
d.
e.
Circulation - The project will be coadltioacd to consbud trro Onsite Pdnscttta he and 8 portion d Bllckrall Court, which 1s COIIsfstent witb
both objective kl ~uiti4 an adequate drcuidoa lnlrrstnrcture
concurrent witb or prior to the uhlrl demand for such frciitticr and Pdicy
C.16 requiting that new devdopment coastnrct roadways needed to serve the
proposed devdopment @or to or cobcurrent witb the drculation Mcdl
crated by tbc devdopmeat.
NO^ - Tbc pr0)Cd IS Coaslsteat With PdIq CJ estrMishlw that 60 dBA
CNEL is the exterior ads+ Ievd 8nd 45 dBA CNEL is the interior noise levd
to wtricb dI reddentid units should be mitigated since the project will
pmvide noise walls l~assuy to mitigate noise to these exterior and interfor
levels dong lots abutting Poinsettia Lane.
Housing - The proposed 16 unit apartment bousing project I& In Lot 93
of this project and within the Zone 20 Specific Plan, whlch wlll k rllotdablc
to lower income bousdrdds, is consistent dtb Policy 3.6.a d the Housing
Element In tha! it reprcsentr 15% d the total units In the Ocera BIUn
project. The project is consistent with Program 3.6r of the Housing Element ,
of the General Plan and the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as the
Developer has been mnditioned to enter into an Affordable Housing
Agreement to provide and deed restrict 16.24 dwelling units as affordable to I
lower-income houscholda
Tbc provldon d onsite .nord.Me units results In 8 p&ct density of 3.6 : ckpdiing units pcr IQ, which exceeds tbe Growth Management Contrd Point
d 32 ddllng units pcr acm 8nd reqdres 8pprov.l d 8 11s density
Increase. The proposed density increase is therefore coasistent with Policy
3.7.b. enabling density inmasts ILIc( Program 3.73 diowfng dlscrdionaty
coadderation d ddty incnuer through the processing d 8 site '
devdopment plan in acadmce wltb d implemented by Chapter 2133.120
dtbczoninqOrdl- t
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pdldes CJ2, C23, CJS d C3& Native Mitat Impacts onsite luve been
reduced M~/M mltipted by the pnserp.ltl00 d only steep slopes possessing
native habitat located dte. AItbough the construction d otloite Pdnsctlir
~tothe~froor"A"S~toAl~R~uadtheconstru~ood"A"
Stmet ktcllrwn the prom's southwestun boundmy 8nd PohseUl8 Lane wlll
result in impacts to a singie pair d gnatcatchers and approximately 4 .ens
of Diegan coastal sage habitat, the impacts due to the roadway dlgnment UT
unavoidable and will be rnitigsted through the purchrrs~ d credits in the
C.rt&ad Highlands mitigation bank a! 821 do. Mdltlonally, an overstzed
Iwdw.y culvert is required to be lnst8iled under the Pdnsctti. Lane
extension within the SDGdrE easement (ow space) to mdntah and enhance
wildllfe connections to native habitat areas that would otherwise be
hpsmented.
Tbe Poinsettia LAIK and Street "A" alignments are consistent with the Z&e
20 biological mitigation MCI open space pnsen.tloa regulations, md the
coastal sage scrub habitat loss is consistent witb the HMP as follows
1.
2.
3.
4
"he constmctSon of Pdnsettla Lane and Street "A" will not preclude
COM~V~Q between Preserve planning b nu (PPAS) since they UT I
not located within 8 PPA core .~t4 and not 8 put dr Unkage ; Planning Ant If f'ble, the constructloo of the roadway culvert,
under Poinsettia Lane within the SDG&E easement, may facilitate
dispersal and movement d wildlife between core areas In PPA's 4 and
5.
1 ! I I
!
The h8bit.t loss will aot preclude or prevent tbe pnpurtioa dtbc
Unbgdl.I1D/4Ant
'
cad- in th8t the 8ra is not 8 put d8 PPA core 8rea of '
....
PC RES0 NO. 3869 4
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
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:
The project has been conditioned to ensure that the final map will not be approved
unless the City Council finds that sewer service is available to serve the project. In
addition, the project is conditioned such that a note shall be placed on the final map
that building permits may not be issued for the project unless the District E,ngin&r
determines that sewer seMce is availabk, and building cannot occur within the
project unless sewer service remains available, and the -ct Engineer is satisfied
that the requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been
met insofar as they apply to sewer servia for this project.
Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of approval.
All necessary public improvements have been provided or are required as conditions ! ! 1 of approval.
I
i I
I
The developer has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate f
condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment i
of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available '
concurrent with need as required by the General Plan.
'Ibe project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new
amdmcth ti& or development fetes, 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 codc. This will ensure continued
availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative im- created by the
project.
This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the LQUI Facilities Management Plan br Zone U.
That the project will provide dicknt additional public facilities for the density io
excess of the control point to ensure that the adequaq of the City's public facility
plana* notbe advemiyh~ in thatthe pm~ircoaditfoacdto provide rll
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
..
19.
20.
mat there have been sufficient developments approved in tbe quadrant at densities
below the control point to ofkt the units in the project abe tbe control point so
that approval will not result in exceeding the quadrant limit.
That 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 witb adopted City standards, in
that the project will not mude tbe provisloa dperform.na standard open space
at buildout d Zone 20 and the project is conditioned to provide for dl neceSSay
public f8diaCS pdOr fld m8p .pp#d.
The project is consistent with the gend provisions and provisions specific to Area
C of the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203) including the provision d M onsttc multi-
family .nimJaMe housing project.
Thc pmjec! is consistent witb dl land use polides d the Mdlo I1 Locrrl Coastal
Progrun.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the
public at large, for access through or use of property within-the proposed subdivision,
in that the project has been designed 8nd structural such &at tba-e are no conflicts
witb any cstablisbed crscmentr.
I That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land
i
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive I
or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that tbe 7,500+ I
square foot lot sizes allow for I vutety d buildlng placement .Ita118tives, IncludJng j
the adequate placement and scpurtlon d tbe boma, la combination with the I
propo+cd dCLy d Mun I! oor plans and tbe dominant western wind p.tteras/soiar
rrdtrtlolr pattenrs, will allow utlltution dnatuml heating 4 coding opportunltles.
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act). I
'2hrt the pI.nrriw Commission has considered, in connection with the housing
pFaposed by this subdivisioa, the housing needs of tbe region, and balanced those housing needs against the public service needs of the C3ty.d available fiscal and
environmental rtsouras;
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -6-
1
1
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
21.
22.
23.
24.
W the discharge ofwaste from tbe subdivision will not result in violation of
axHng California Regional Water Quality contrd Board requirements, in that the
&abage ~uirrments d Specific Plan 203, city OFdln~rar, 8nd Mdlo II have beeu
amddad and appropriate Warrgc fdlitles he ken Mgned uw1 scared. In ddldoo to City Englnarlng St.ndardr and compliance with the City% Master
Drainage PI4 Natloarl Pollution Dlscbulge Ellmlnrtion System (NPDES)
standards dl be Srtisild to prevent my dischaqe vldatlona
The Plauniug commission haa reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the
exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the
project, and the extent and the degree of the chon is in rough proportionality to
the impact caused by the project.
The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April, 1994 in that the project as conditioned the
applicant shall record a notice concerning aircraft noise. The project is compatible
with the projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the noisefland use
compatibility matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land usc is compatible with the
airport in that the project is located outside the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour
allowing residential development to occur.
That the Project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual, adopted by City j Council by incorporation by reference in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 14.28.020.
Planntnn Condttlons
1. I
The Plannfng Commission does hereby Fccommend approvd of the Tentative Tract
Map for the standard single famlly/multl-family lot subdivision entitled "Ocean
Bluff" subject to the conditions hdn set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to 1
make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the i
appmed Documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and conform :
to City Coundl's final action on the project. DeveIopment shall occur substantially
as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development subsbntialIy j dif6erent from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. I
2. Agprovrl of CI' 9349 is granted subject to the approval of LCPA M, U: 9344, SD? 9347, and HDP 93-09. CT 93-09 is subject to dl conditions contained in
Pladng Commission Rcsdutlon Noa 3867,34368,3870, and 3871 dated December 24 -0
3. The Developer shall pruvide the City with a repducaiik 24" I 36", mylar cupy of the
Tentative M8p as appFwed by the Pl8Ming comrmsaron . TheTcntrtivcMapshall
re&cttbe condi~ofrpprovaibythe<wy. Thc Mapccq~~shallbe submitted to the City Eqber and approvod prior to bdding, e final map, or
improvement plan submittal, whichever OCCPI?I first.
PCRESONO.3869 -7-
1
2
2
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Tlt htoper shdl include, as part of thc plans submitted for any permit plan
&ck, (L legiik version of the approving ~utiouholutions on a 24‘ x W Mucline drawing. Said bluehe drawing(s) shall ab0 include a copy of any qpkabk Coastal Development Permit and signed approved site pl~.
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless
the District Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of
application for such Sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. A note to this e&ct shall be pled on the find map.
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July 28, 1987 (amended August 5, 1993) and as amended from time to time, and any
development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth
management system or Facilities and Improvement Plan and to fulfill the subdivider‘s
agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated August 5,1993, a copy of which is on
file with the City Clerk and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not pad
this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this
project will be void.
Prior to approval of a final map or the issuance/approval of a building permit, which
ever OCCUIS first, the Developer shall submit evidence to the Planning Director that
impacts to school facilities have been mitigated in COnfOrmance with the City‘s
Growth Management Plan to the extent permitted by applicable state law. If the
mitigation invohres a financing scheme such as a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District which is inconsistent with the City’s Growth Management Plan including City Council Policy Statement No. 38, the Developer shall disclose to future owners in the
projecf to the maximum extent possible, the existence of the tax and that the school
district is the tdng agency responsible for the financing Mct
This Project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are
required as part of the Zone 20 Lmal Facilities Management Plan and any
amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
Lfrpy- * for consbucbion of any public improvements or facilities, or the
PIpScnt of any kes in lieu thereoc imposed by this approval or imposed by law on tbit resi&nthl&mmg project are chalkngcd this approval shall be suspended as povided in Government Code sectiOsl66020. If any such condition is determined tobe hdid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council detennines that tbe project without the condition complies with all requirements of law.
PCRESONO.3869 -8-
c
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Prior to the approval of the find map MCI subject to approval d LCPA 95-09, ZC
93-04, SDP 93-07, HDP 93-09, the Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of
Restriction to be med in the offia of the County Recorder, subject to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director, notimg all interested parties and succcs#)rs
in interest that thc city of mad has hued a tent8tive map (m 93-09) for 8 93
lot ddential subdivision on the real property owned by the developer. 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 Planning
Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which
modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the developer
or successor in interest.
The Developer shall provide a minimum of 25 percent of the lots with adequate
sideyard area for Recreational Vehicle storage pursuant to City Standards. The
CC&Rs shall prohibit the storage of recreational vehicles in the required front yard
setback.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conformance
with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the Citfs Landscape Manual.
The plans shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director
prior to the approval of the 6nal map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever
occurs first. The Developer shall construct ad install all landscaping as shown on
the approved plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition,
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
Building identihition and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing
buildings so as to be plainly visible from the stnet or access road; color of
identihition and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color.
'Ibs Developesshall provide bus stops to servia this development at locations and
with reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of tbe North County Transit District and the Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall at a minimum include a
bench, he from advertising, and a pole for the bus stop sign. The bench and pok
shall be desi@ to enhance or be ConsiSttnt with tbe basic architectural theme of
the Project
All sales mw that are distriiuted or made avrrilabk to the public &all include but not be limited totrail, future and existing schodr, parks, and strcets.
Prior to approval of the find map, the Developer shall receive apQroval of a Coastal that substantially
collfocmb to this appmvd. A signed copy of the coclstal Development Permit must
.. Development Permit issued by tbe calitorni. coartrl COmrmsMM
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
k! submitted to the Planning Director. If the approval is substantially different, an
rmtzldment to Tentative Tract Map CT 93-09 shall be required.
Prior to approval of tbe final map, the Developer shall be required: (1) to consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Sewice (USFWS) regarding the impact of
the project on the Coastal California Gnatcatcher, and; 2) obtain any permits
required by the USWFS.
The Developer, or their succesx)rs in interest, shall improve the project Site with the
Project as described in the Final EIR 90-03, except as modified by this resolution.
The Developer shall post aircraft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental
offices associated with the new development. The number and locations of said signs
shall be approved by the Planning Director (see Noise Form #3 on file in the
Planning Department).
Prior to the approval of the ha1 map for any phase of this Project, or where a map
is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to
provide and deed restrict 16 dwelling units on Lot 93 as affordable to lower-income
households for the useful life of the dwelling units and to pay to the City an amount
of mosey qual to 24 times the average subsidy needed to make affordable a lower-
income household, as appropriate, one newly constructed typical attached housing
unit in accordance with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be
submitted to the Planning Director not later than 30 days after the submittal of the
final map.
Upon showing by the developer that an onsite contribution is not appropriate for the
project, a second inclusionary housing option available to the developer shall be that
prior to final map approval, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City to purchase afl'ordable credits from Villa Loma or participate In an offsite
corn bind inclusionary project within the southwe? quadrant and as appropriate, in
accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, the Zone 20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58
dstal September 12, 1985. Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a sign$ Modable Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment
Mnctor.
The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners
and successors in interest.
Concurrent wlth any proposal to satiw the project's' lncluslonary housing
requirement in an offdte combined inclusionary pmject, the developer shall process
a tentative map revision to the Ocean Bluff project in which the total number of
onsite single family residential lots shall not exceed 96 in accordance with the
density permitted by the Growth Management Growth Control Point for the parcel.
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -10-
.
t
1
4
I
f
4
<
1t
11
1;
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
Environmental Conditions:
25.
26.
27.
28.
To offset the conversion d non-pdme 8gxicultural land to urbrn lurd uses per tbe
requirements of the Mello II Lacrrl C0rrSt.l pFocpun, prior to approval d the fld
map, the applicant shall provide payment d an agricultural mitigation fee, tbe
mount d which shall not be less thur $!J,OOO nor more than Sl0,OOO per nd
converted am The amount dtbe fa shall be determined by the City Council prior
to approval of the final map and shall be consistent with the provisions of
Carlsbad's KP.
Improvement plans shall be submitted to the Clty for review and approval showing
locations/slzfng d reclaimed water and/or uriun modi divdoa fdiitlcs, in
accordance with the Culsbrd Municipal Water District quirunents and phrsrng
schedule provided in the Zone 20 LFMP.
Tbe Homeowners Assodatloo shall oM.in and distribute to owners and tenants
annual information lrom CdtrurS d NCID rqpFding the 8vallabillty d public
transportation, ride sharing and tnnspodation pooling services in the am. This
Information shall .Is0 be prodded in the sales/r#ltrl dncea A condition stating
this shall also be placed In the CC&R's for the project.
Compliance witb APCD Ruler 51 (" "Nuisance" Rule), 52 (putlculate Matter), I
and 54 (Dust and Fumes) dthe Air Quality Chapter would eftectlvdy mitigate dust '
impacts generated during grading operations. A note &all be placed on the Brpdlng
wit stipulating t&t the following masuru shall be required to achieve
compliance with these rulu and reduce constructloa related air pollutants
L
.
Tbe wa!erlng d all sud.cer being lprdcd urd haul routes shall be required
during drJr weather coadltloan
PCRESONO.3869 -11-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
Pursuant to the Interim Take pmvisions d the 4d Rule fix the California
29.
30.
31.
32
Removal d native vegetation and dcrrdopment d Open Space Lot "A", including but '
not limited to I' walls, dcclrs, storage buildings, pods, spas, strlmays, and
landscaping, is spcdfldly prohibited, except upon writ!en order of the Culsbad
Planning Dlrectot, d (Cdifbdni. Coastal Commission if in Coastal Zone), based
upon I request from the Homeownem Assdatlon .ccompanIed by report fmm a
qualified ubortst/botaaist indicating the nad to remove specifled tnes and/or plants
because d disease w impending danger to adjacent habitable dwdling units. For
areas coataid4 native vcgd.tlon tbe nport required to reeoslpany the request
Fire Depvtmcnt for Rn prevention purposcr, or upoa wlittcn 8pprOv.l d the
sbll bc pnpulcd by 8 qdifled bid@*
A. umrdzed culvert is c#y)lllmeaded to be Installed underthe pdda Lane
extuuioa a! the SDGdiE easement to m.lnt.in d mhmce wildlife COMdctlotm
at the the madway 1mprovePIcnt phus am submitted do the Ctty Engineering
Department for review. Specific rnltigatjoo masura required to be imqnmted
into the design dthae culv&s, if neaerruy, SUI be basad on fbbm biological
studles, subjcd to revlemmd approd by the Phni4 MFsdor.
~k fculwit)or-- 111 011- euhvrt rt thl#kdb~ shrli be
r
1
:
I
4
C c
€
7
e
S
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
storage baildings, pods, spas, stairways, and landscaping, other than that approved
aa put of landscape plan as shown on Exhibit "IC.
Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall provide an imvocable offkr
of dedication to the City of Carisbad for a trail easement the trail shown on the
Tentative Map within Lot(s) 74 79, M, 81,- 83,84, and 86. I& prior to final map,
the City of Carisbad accepts dedication of the trail easement and assumes
responsibility for maintenance and liability tben the Developer shall be required to
construd tbe MI. If the City of Carlsbad docs not accept liability and maintenance
responsibility for the Citywide Trail System, prior to recordation of the final map, the
Developer will not be required to construct the trail(s).
Prior to the recordation of the first final tract map or the issuance of building
permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that
this property may be subject to noise impacts from the proposed Poinsettia he Transportation Conidor in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and f
City Attorney (see Noise Form #1 on file in the Planning Department). I I
Prior to the remrdation of the first final tract map or the issuance of building ,
permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that 1
this property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from
Palomar Airport in a bm meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the i
City Attorney (see Noise, Form #2 on 6ile in the Planning Department).
In accordance with the Occur BluN Acoustical Study pnpved by James C. Beny,
Acoustidm, prior to occupurq d my d the dwdling units, the developer shall
construct 8 continuous 6 foot hlgh dsc Her wall above a minimum 1 foot high
berm as shown on Exhibit "A", Section B-B. 'Ik design dthe wall shall be included j
on the landsape plans for the project and shall require tbe dew and approval of 1
the Planning Dindor.
PCRESONO.3869 -13-
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
40.
41.
42.
43.
4d
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
Prior to any grading of the Project site, a paleontologist shall be
retained to perform a walkover suwey of the site and to review the
grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fd
resouras. A copy of the paleontolo@'s report shall be pruvidcd to
the Planning Director prior to issuana of a grading permit;
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic
inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small
nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be
necessary to collect matrix samples hr laboratory processing through
fine mens. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the
Planning Director during the grading process;
The paleontologist shall be ailowed to divert or direct grading in the
area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if
necessary, salvage artifacts;
All fossils coilectcd shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution
with a rescarcb interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural
History Museum;
Any conflicts regarding the rok of the paleontologist and the grading
activities of the project shall be resohred by the Planning Director and
City Engineer.
I Mor to issuance d 8 building permit tbe pmject sbdl comply with the City d !
~
All gmdlng shrll comply with tbe reeomma~datioar d the Ninyo and Moor '
Gmhdmkd Invcsti@on, dated Febnm~y 6,1989, paformed for the project and m dlk la tk Plurntng Deputment.
Carisbad% standards for solid waste management. I I
PCRESONO.3869 -re
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
- - 20 c
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
....
If the developer chooses to construct out of phase, the new phasing must be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
The developer shall defend, indemnifv and hold harmless the City and its agents, offian, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an apprmal of the
City, the Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the
City within the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
The developer shall pay the current 14 drainage area fee or shall consb~ct
drainage systems in conformance with Master Drainage Plan and City of Carlsbad
Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The mer of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and
easements required by these conditions, shown in part on the tentative map and
listed 8a follm
a. The storm draln easement on Lot 33 sball be 20 fa wick as required by City
Standards.
b. All the internal stndr as shown on the tentative map.
c Tbe mons d Pdnsettfr Lane and Bl.drrril Court within the subdivision
bound8rier.
A60 loot wide atendon d Street "D" acrose Lab 22 and 21. 6
Tbe offer &all.be made by a certificate on the final map. All land so offered shall be granted to the City free and clear of all lieas and encumbrances and without cust to tbe City. Streets that arc already public are not required to be rededicated.
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -1s-
!
1
i
2
4
c
e
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
Tbc above disdown may be in the form d a cccordcd agreement, non-mapping
notes on the find map, deed nSMCtton0 or mother metbod satisfactory to the City
Englneer d Dlnctor of PIdng
The developer shall underground all existing overhead utilities onsite along the
subdivision boundary.
Direct access rights for all lots abutting PdnseUla he and Blackrail Court shall be !
waived on the final map. I
I
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the mer shall
give written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the j
site plan into the existing City of Carl&& Street Lighting and Landscaping District i
No. 1 on a form provided by the City.
The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutaht
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pexmit. The developer shall provide best
management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best
Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level
prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved
by the City Engineer
The temporuy bash shown on Lot 1 shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City ;
Engineer. Tbe basin shall remdn In use until the City Enginar determines it is no
longer needed or until Basin CF pes the Muter Drrlnage md Storm Water Quality i
Management Plan is construdcd. Thc devdoper shslll enter into 8 basin mdntenance I
agreement urd submit a maintenance bond satisfactory to tbe Clty Engineer prior
to the approval d grading building permit or find map Wtricbever occurs Srst for !
this proJect. Tbe basin shall be serviced by an all-weather rccesdmaintenance road.
plrrrt, spdkations, and supporting documents br all public improvements shall be
pcputd to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards, tb hlaper SUI install, or agree to install and sccwe with appropriate security as
pavided by law, impmcments shown on the tentative map and the following I
I
improvements: t
~tephucoac:
A Str#tr "G", "H", and tht porttoo d"F'within &e pIuse one bomdaq to
st.odud full rsldtb impmmeamts as sboum 011 tht tentdve map.
Tbcodte and eontlguow portfoo dBldaail Court MI have N1 haif B.
dnet lmprwcmeatr plus It fee! dp.rlne drrrinye f8cllitlcr and all ufilltles
PCRESONO.3869 -16-
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 Ssect"P"itollltbephaseaacbounduytostrat"D",strc+t"D"hmstreet "F to strat "B", street "B" frvm stmet "D" to stnd "A" and sb#t "A" within
Ibd eoatiguour to tbc subdividon boundary MI have hrll half street
improvements plus It fat of paviw drainage fadlitler including the brsln
on lot one and dl utilities normally required heath the paving.
D. Tbc qutred smer and water lines fmm Bllckroil Court within the
digruncat d strat "D" to stnet "B".
Ondte Phase Two=
E, Full improvements to sb.atr "D", "E", and "F including 28 feet of pavement
within the 30 foot Interim access to stnd "D" from Blackroil Court and
bonding for its uitlmate removal.
That portloo d Pdnsda Lurc within tbe subdlddon. F.
onsite ph.sc Thne:
G. Full Improvements to streets "B" and "C".
oflstte Phase one
H.
I
Blackrail Court hm Alp Road to the southerly project bunday shall have
hrll ball StntL impvancots plw 12 feet d paving includlng curb and gutter,
ddewdl, drrlnagc fadlides rad sbwt lights 011 one Si& within 1 midmum
42 foot nlde publicly dedlatcd easement in complluwx with the cuidesac
st.adud as ddermiaed by tbe City Engineer. Also included are dI utilities
normally required to be beneath thc paving. This project is not required to
underground the overbead utilities otldte.
L Street "A" &dl be aterrdcd to eolllldcf the southwestern won oftbc project
dte to Pdnsettta Law approxim.tdy 1209 fat of the Blackmil Court
intersdon. "Us atension offsite hm thc project shrll have t minimum 32
foot wkk paved stred nlthln a 42 foot wi& publicly dedlMt.A easement, all
tdlltler nomally required to be bcnerrtb the pIPposCd paving and drainage
hdliticr
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -17-
1
2
.:
4
f
e
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
A list of the above improvements shall be placed on an additional map sheet on tbe
6nal 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
secured improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
The devdopu rhrll pay fiw the WI impplpvements for Poinsettia Lane and Alga Rod
in .ccord.IIce with a Wure hrndfng mechanism, or pay feu paid, In conformma
with the updated ZOM 20 Local F.cilitfes Management plan lunding program. Tbc
developer may apply fix a reimbursement 8gmment.
Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the
date of City councit approval unkss a final map is recorded. An extension may be
requested by the developer. Said extension shall be approved or denied at the
discretion of the City Council. In approving an extension, the City Council may
impose new conditions and may revise existing conditions pursuant to Section
20.12.110(a)(2) Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction
site within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval hm the
City Engineer for tbe proposed haul route. The developer shail comply with all
conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the
hauling operation.
Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on
the tentative map, a grading permit for tbis project is required. The developer must '
submit and reaive'approvd lbr grading plans in accordance with City Codes and
Standards. Prior to issuance of a building permit br the project, a grading permit
shall be obtained and grading work shall be completed in substantial conformance 1
with the approve grading plans. The developer may apply fw and obtain I mass
grading permit wbcn submitting the first final map.
i
NOTE: pacling permit or building pennit, whicker occufs first, the developer shall submit
pod that a Ndia of Intention has been submitted to the State Water Resources
a8tdlBOud.
No grading for prbte improvements shall occur outside the Iimits of the project unless a grading or dope easement is obtained hm the owners of the afdectcd
propertier. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement either
the tentative map shall be amended or tbe plans shall be modidiod so grading for
pdvate improvcprcrrtr will not occu outside the project site in a manner which substantially cudorma to the apprwcd tentative map aa determined by the Civ EngineerdPlanningDdctor. .
Ifthc dirturbed area is fie acres or more, prior to the issuance of a I
I
PCRESONO.3869 - 1%
c
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
20
63.
64.
65.
Same improvements shown on the tentative map and/or required by these conditions
am bated oflbite on property which neither the City nor the mer has sufficient
title or interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of titk
or interest The applicant shall canform to Section 20.16.095 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Prior to issuane of a building permit for any buildable lot within the subdivision, the
property mer shall pay a one-time special development tax in accordance with City
Council Rdution No. 91-39.
Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be
provided or installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as
may be required by the City Engineer.
JWe Condttlonq
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
Prior to building occupancy, private roads and driveways which sewe as required
access for emergency senice vehicles shall be potsed as fire lanes in accordance with
the requirements of Section 17.04.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Rior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall obtain Fire Department
approval of a wildland fuel management plan. The plan shall clearly indicate
methods proposed to mitigate and manage fire risk associated with native vegetation
growing within 60 feet of structures. The plan shall reflect the standards presented
in the fire suppression element of the City of carfsbad Landscape Guidelines
Manual. Prior to occupancy of buildings, all wildland fuel mitigation activities must
be complete, and the condition of aU vegetation within 60 feet of structures found
to be in conformance with an approvcd wildland fuel management plan.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall evaluate building
plans for conformance with applicable fire and life safety requirement of the state
and local Fire codes.
Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval which depicts trntkrn of nquired, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydrants.
Tbir plan shod$ indude off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project.
pnuidc dditionrrl public fire hydrants at intervals of 500 feet along public streets
dm private driveways. Hydrants should be located at street intersections when posa’bk, but sbould be positioncd no closer than 100 feet from terminus of a street
or driveway.
The appiiant shall provide a street map which drms to the followins rquircmentx a 400 scale photcbreductioa mylar depicting prapoeed improvements
and at kast hwo existing intersectmu * or streets. The map shall also cleaxly depict
street ante- hydrant locations, aud street
PCRESONO.3869 -19-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
72
73.
74.
75.
Appliant shall submit a site plan &picting emergency access mutq driveways and
tdk circulation for Fii Department approval.
An all weather, unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicks shall
be provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fie
Chief, the access road bas become unserviaable due to inclement weather or other
reasons, he may, in the interest of public safkty, require that construction operations
cease until the condition is corrected.
All required water mains, fire hydrants, and appurtenances shall be operational
before combustible building materials are located on the construction site.
Prior to final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access shall be
equipped with a "Knox" key operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall
contact the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to
installation.
Water District Conditions:
76. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be
evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can
be met.
77. The developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and cbarges which will be '
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the budding permits. Tbe San 1
Diego County Water Authority capacity charge wilJ be collected at issuance of
application for meter installation.
78. Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following:
a. Meet with the City Fm Manhall and establish the fire protection
requirements. Also obtain G. P. M. demand for domestic and imgational
needs from appropriate parties.
b. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning
Depuhnent for procasing and appd.
prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement
plans, a meeting must be scheduled with the Disbict Engineer for review, comment and approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages (ie -
I c.
GPM - EDU).
79. Thit project is approved upon the expressed amdition that building permits will not
be issued for atvelopmcnt ofthe subject propeq unkss the water district serving the
developmentdetermincs that adquatcanterscrvia andscwerhcilitics arc available
at the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to
be availabk until time of accu~. This nott shall be placed on the fial map.
Pc RES0 NO. 3869 -20-
1
2
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
80. Itany of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
impkmented and maintained overltime, if any of such conditions Eail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right
to revoke or modi@ all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance
of all future building permits, deny, woke or further condition all certificatts 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 apprwal of this Resolution.
Code Reminden:
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not
limited to the following de requirements.
81. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
FeeS:
82. The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu Ees to the City, prior to the approval of the
final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
83. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by
Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Find Map Notes:
84. The Developer shall provide the foIlowing note on the final map of the subdivision
and final mylar of this development submitted to the City.
"Chapter. 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes a Growth Management contrd Poiat for each General Plan land use designation. Development cannot
emecd the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapters 21.90 and Chapter
2153 allowing density increrscr upoe City Council qpd. The laad usc designation for this development is RLM. The Growth Control Point for this designation is 32 dwebg units per nonmnstmincd acre.
Parab 1 - 93 and Lot "A" an shown 00 ExhlMt "A" were used to calculate the
intensity of development under tbe General Plan and Chapter 21.90. Subsequent
redevelopment or resubdivision of any one of tbtse parcels must also include parcels under the General Plan and Chapter 21.90 oftbe Cadsbad Municipal Code.'
85. The following notc shall be placedanthc Firul Map: "Prior toirrsuance of I building permit hr auy buildabk lot within the subdidon, tbe I)evcbper shall pay a one-
PC RES0 NO. 3869 -21-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
time rpedal &welopent tax in accordance with the City council Resolution No. 91-
ST
86. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of
the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinanas in e&ct at time of
building pcrmit issuance, except as otherwise speddy provided herein.
87. 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 pmided in Building Department Policy No. 86.6, to the
satisfaction of the Directors of Planning and Building.
88. The Developer shall submit a street name list consistent with the City's street name
policy subject to the Planning Director's appraval prior to final map approval.
89. The developer shall exercise special care during the constnction phase of this project
to prevent ofbite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in
accotdance with the Carbad Municipal Code.
90. All landscape and irrigation plus shall be prepared to conform with the Landscape
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the
Planning Department
signs:
91.
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
Any sip proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in
conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval
of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs.
PCRESONO.3869 -22-
I
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED,. AND ADOPTED at I regular meeting of the
of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 20th day of, 1995, by .. manai---
the foIbwiug vote, to wit:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
mm
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PCRESONO.3869
KIM WEISHONS, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
-23-
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
20
C COMMISSION RESOLWITON NO. 38 74
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF C'ARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 93-07 ON FUTURE LOT 93 OF PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF FUTURE POINSElTIA LANE AND BLACKRAIL COURT WITHINTHE ZONE 20 SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES.
CASENAME: OCEAN BLUFF
CASE NO SDP 93-07
WHEREAS, Ocean Bluf? Partnc#ship has filed a verified application for
certain property described as future lot 93 of;
Ld 3 in Section 22, Township 12 south, range 4 WtQf, Sur
Bernadine base and meridian in the County d Sur Diegq State
d California, excepting tbenhom those portions thcreof lying
north d the south boundary llne d Rancho Agua Hedionda, as
said south line was cstrrblisbed May 5, 1913, by decree d tbc
Superior Court of the State d Califdr, in and fw Slur Diego
County, in that cerWn actioa (No. 16830) entitled Kelly
Investment Company, a corporation, YS. Clarence Dayton
Hillman and hie Olive Hillman.
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site
Development Plan approval 8s sbown on Exhibit %-I", dated December 20,1995 on file in
the Planning Dcputmcnt urd incorporated by this deremce ("SDP 93-07") as provided by
Chapter 2153 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and .
WHEREAS, pursuant to tbe provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commimion did, cni the 20th day of Dcccmbcr, 1995, consider said request;
a WHEREAS, at said public bearing, upon hcuing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons dashing to be heard, said Chnmidon considered all
factors relating to SDP 93.97.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commhion of the City of Carlsbad as folknus
A) Tbatthebrcgoingrccitationsaretruead~~
*-
roadway. Tbe pmject's ldoa is tberdon oriented so that lprutment Mc
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
c 28 - -
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
UPROW Site Development Plan, SDP 9347, based on the following
findings and subject to the following conditions:
1. All findings contained in Planning 'Cornmidon Resolution No. 3869 for (X 93-09
are incorporrted henin by rderenct.
2. That the requested use is: a) properly related to the site, surroundings and
environmental settings, b) is consistent with the various elements and objectives of
the General Plan; c) will not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitkd in the area in which the proposed usc is to be located; and d) will not
adversely impact the site, surroundings or traffic circulation, in that;
aa
bl.
b2.
i The 16 unit .putmat bouslng project located within thc Zoac 20 Specific '
PI4 whlcb will be .Ilord.ble to lower Income households, Is condotent with
PoUq 3.6.a d the Housing Elemat In that It ~epnrents 15% d the total '
Units In the Ocean Bluff pr0)Cd. Ibt prp)a!t, which requires 811.8% ddty
tnatrsc above the gmwth coatrd point, is dso consistent with Housing '
Pdlq 33 In that the alldon d"acesa units" to Wng development for
larr l&c bouseboldr Is givea tbe higiled priodty.
PC RES0 NO. 3870 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.
4.
5.
....
....
w8
c
d.
Tbc pIoposcd density lnenuc d 11.4 dwelling dtr above the Growth Mmmgunent Cootrol Pdnt for tbe purport d pmldlng 16 dknhbie
rsquirement is consistent witb Pdicy 38 allowing QCCOI dwelling units to be
diocrted with the top priority being busing development for low and very
low income households.
rputmalt unlts dte to Srtlsfy the ProJeCfs lndustoMIy wn(
Tbt pmJect is comprtlMe witb surrounding vacant d agdcultud
development in that It will not impact agrlculturrl uses due to sepamtioa
from these uses by rod rIgMs4way d buffers in the form of29 d
sepdon and/or 6 wdla "be overall pmject, including the 16 unit
apartment project, is within the low-medium General Plan residential density range whicb will be consistent with future development of surrounding
properties also designated fbr low-medium residential density. Compatibility
is also achieved since both the proJect and surrounding properties will be
developed with standard single family or clustered multi-family units.
Tbe project site is cumntly not med by I public mad and surrounding uses
are limited to rgrfculturrl and residential dwellings. "he 16 unit rpvtment
proJect will not be detrimental to surrounding residential uses since rU public
fdiitles Including the construdloo d Pdnsettir Lane d Blackdl Court
neewary to serve the pJed will be coRdsudcd dch will provide access and utilitles to the dte, and 29 sepamtioa bctwan uses d intenenlng 4
walls 411 miagate potcotlal dlcts bchrccn residential and agricultural
use&
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
two-stay 16 unit apartment Project in tbe R-1 zoac, since coverage of the .76 acre
site is 23.646, (well below the 60% maximum covemge allowed by the Speciflc Plan),
and front, side, and rear sctbtciw exceed the midmum reqdnd
That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will
be provided and maintained, slnce the 16 unit .putmat proJect will exd the minirun required SetbaCb and 36.7% dthe site coasistr dlandscapl coveragc kddttioarlly, a midmum d 200 sqwn feet per unit d private and common
rwedod open space md34 pvldng spaces to srtratbe Parking otdlnance
fix multl-famlly dwellings will be provided.
PC RESO NO. 3870 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The Planning Commission does hereby mommend APPROVAL of the Stte Development Plan for the aflordable .putmat project entitled "Ocean Bluff,
subject to the conditions herein set forth. StaB is authorized and directed to make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the Site
Dcvdopment Plan Documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and
conform to City Council's final action on the project. Development shall occur
substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development
substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this
approval.
Approval of SDP 93-07 is granted subject to City Council approval of LCPA SS-OS, 2X 9344, 93-09, and HDP 93-09 urd the Housing Commissloa's ncommendation
of approval for the requested density tncruse incentive. SDP 93-07 is subject to all
conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3867,3868,3869, and
3871 dated December 20,1995.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24" x 36", mylar cow of the
Site Plan as approved by the hal decision making body. The Site Plan shall reflect
the conditions of approval by the City. The Plan copy shall be submitted to the City
Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or improvement plan
submittal, whichever occurs first.
The Developer shall construct the required inclusionary units ancumnt with the
project's market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City
and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate
schedule br development.
'Ibc projcd shall complywltb the Zoac to Specific Plan Architectural Standards for
m.t#ldr and colors.
Fln corditlopr
7. All buildings having an aggregate floor area in excess of 1QooO square feet must be
protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems. Planr and specifications must be
approved by the fin department and a permit obtained prior to installation.
8. Proposed multi-family residential buildinp must be prosected by 6re alarm systems. Plans and specifications must be approved and a permit obtained prior to installation.
9. A monument sign shall be installed at the entrance to the may indicating the
PCRESONO.3870 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
....
ddnsrcr of the buildings on site.
pdor to issuance of building permits, the Fire Departmen. shall evaluate building
pltnr for conformance with applicable fire and life safety requirements of the state
and local Fire codes.
Provide additional public fire hydrants at intervals of 300 feet along public streets
and private driveways. Hydrants should be located at street intersections when
possible, but should be @timed no closer than 100 feet from terminus of a street
or driveway.
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.
Water Conditions:
PCRESONO.3870
The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be
evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can
be met.
The developer shall be responsible for all kes, deposits and charges which Win be
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permits. The San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of
application for meter installation.
Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following:
a. Meet with the City Fi Marshall and establish the fire protection
requirements. Also obtain G. P. M. demand for domestic and inigational
needs from appropriate parties.
b. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning
Department for processing and approval.
c. Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement
plans, C meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for’review, annmcnt and approval of the preliminary system layouts and wag& (ie - GPM - EDU).
Thiir project is approved upon the expressed condition thatbuilding permits will not
be issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the
development determines that adequate water senrice and Sewer facilities are
available at the time of application for such water service and mer permits will
mtinue to be availabk until time of occupanq. Thir note shall be placed on the
6nd map.
-5-
4 4
I *
1
I .
t - I
E
E
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
PASSED, APPROVED; AND ADOPTED rt 8 regular meeting of tbe
ma=4 - n of the City of carlsbad, California, held on the toth day of
Deccmbef, 1995, by the following vote, to wit
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
KIM WELSHONS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ._
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3870 -6-
1
:
c i
4
c
€
i
E
s
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
G COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3871
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMlT AND EXCLUSIONS FROM
THEAPPLICATIONOFTHEMLLSIDEORDINANCEON I 1 PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORT"CORNER0FFUTUREPOINSE"ITIALANE
I AND BLACKRAlL COURT WlTHIN THE ZONE 20
SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES. I 1 CASE NAME: OCEAN BLUFF
i CASE NO HDP 93-09
I WHEREAS, Ocean Bluff Partnership has filed a verified application for
I
I
I
i certain property to wit
I
-I .< Lot 3 in Won 22, Townsblp 12 south, range 4 west, San
Bemadin0 base and meridian in the County d SUI Diego,
lying north d the soutb bounduy line of Rancho Agiu
State dCdlfbmi4 excepting thedbm those portions thend i I Hdiondq as !hid south line was estabiisbed May 5,1913, by
decree d the Superior Court in the State d C.lifomIa, in and
for Sur Diego County, in that ccct./I1 don (No. 16830)
entitled Kelly Investment Company, I corporrtfoa, vs. Clu#rce Dayton Hillman and We Olive Hillman.
I
I
which has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission;
and
WHEREAS, said verified application coqititutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit as sl~m on Exhibits "A-G, M and N", dated December 20,1995 on
file in thr PIutntq Dcpvtment and irrcorporrtcd by this rdcnncc ("HDP 93109"), as
provided by Ch@er 2195 of the CirJSbad Municipal code; and
WHEREAS,thePl~g~~didontheZOtbdayofDeccmber, 1995,
consider said req\test; and
WHEREAS, atsaidhearing, upon hemhgandumsjderipb all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persoar desiring to be heard, said comanisron amsidered all facton
relating to the Hillside Development Pennit; 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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
commbdon as fouaws:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the commisson
COMMENDS APPROV& of Hillside Development Permit, HDP 93-09,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Flndinnu:
1. That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints map
(Exhibits "G" and "M" dated December 20,1995) which show existing and proposed
conditions and slope percentages;
2. That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%, have been properly identified on the constraints map (ExhiMtr "C" and "M" dated December 20,1995);
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpoa, and
requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that onsite pjed pang,
which is terrrced bm west to as&, follows existing topography up to a ridge line
which is dried to the greatest dent posdblc Grading volumes of 5,290 cy/acre
am within the acceptable range, and manufactured cut and fill slopes will nd exceed
30 f& in height md will be visually satawl with landscaping. Compliance with 1
Hillside Architecturrl guidelines will be accomplished through the processing of an I amendment to this Hillside Devdopmcnt Permit.
That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the undevelopable 1
portions of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 2153.230 of the Carlsbad 1
Municipal Code, in that the wdte grading will avoid disturbance to hillside slopes I
exceeding 2.5%. Grading necessuy for tbe extension d Poinscttla Lane, a ma@r ' circulation dement roadway, wlll end into 2S%+ slopes, however, grading
uecesmy for circulation dement roadways is hereby excluded hrn the provisions
d the Hillside DcPdopment Ordlnrncc by tbe Planning Comrnlsdoa pursuant to
Sdoa 2195.090 d the CMC.
I I I 4.
5. TBat the project design and lot configuration disturbance of hillside lands, in that ailti- dopes exdim 25% .I) avddcd ULd propcw+d Qding will dm
to tbe aiding id eoLlfout.
.. c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
26
27
20
family Lots 1-92, CO~O~~~ Will bc ensud throw the rtvim and
of architecture as an amendment to this Hillside Development Permit.
Con-
1.
2.
3.
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Hillside
Development Permit for the residential subdivision project entitled "Ocean Bluff",
subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make
or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the Hillside
Development Permit Documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and
conform to City Council's final action on the project. Development shall occur
substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this
approval.
Approval of HDP 93-09 is granted subject to the approval of LCPA 95-09, ZC 9344,
CT 93-, and SDP 93-07. HDP 93-09 is subject to all conditions contained in
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3867,3868,3869, and 3870 dated December
20, 1995.
Prior to the issuance of buildlng permits on lots 1-92 for single family residential
structures, an amendment to this Hillside Development Permit shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission to ensure that architecture is
consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards.
PC RES0 NO. 3871 -3-
c
-
1
i
<
4
C
e
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
plannirn- ' n of the City of Carisbad, California, held on the 20th day of December,
1995, by the following vote, to wit
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
mm
KIM WELSHONS, Chairperson
cARLsBADPIAN"GCOMMISS10N
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3871 4
OCEANBLUFF
LCPA 9509/ZC 93-04/CT 93-09/
SDP 93-07/HDP 93-09
Y
ACT ASStSMEN" FORM-PART
Cm, BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: LCPA 95-09/ZC 93 44lCT 93-091s DP 9347/HD P 93-09
DATE: Sptembe r 18. 1995
BACKGROUND
1. CASENAME: OCEANBLUFF
2. APPLICANT: OCEAN BLUFF PARTNERSHIP
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 4180 La Job Village Drive, Suite 30, San
Diego, CA 92037
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITI'ED: August 6,1993
5. PROJECI' DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a zone change fiom L-C to the R-1 single family zone
in which minimum 7,500 square foot lots are pcxmitted, the subdivision of 92 single family lots, and one
multifamily lot on a 31.2 acre parcel located in Planning Area C of the Zone 20 Specific Plan area.
Consistent with the underlying RLM General Plan designation, the total number of units is 108 (92 single
family and 16 multifamily units) on 30.2 developable acrcs resulting in an overall project density of 3.6
dwelling units per am which is consistent with the underlying RLM General Plan designation. The 16
unit apartment project will fulfill the projects inclusionary housing requirement.
offsite improvements necessary to ~er~e the project include Street "A" from the southwest comer of the
project south to the intersection of future Poinsettia Lane extension, Poinsettia Lane between the existing
easterly temzinuS to Street A, and Blackrail Road from its existing northem terminus to the northeast
comer of the project. Onsite grading involves 320,000 cubic yards of balanced cut and fd and results in
a terraced hillside design in accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance.
1
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRI OR ENMRONME NTAL COMPL IANCE
Please Take Notice:
The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the project described
below have already ban considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental
documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a notice of
determination will be filed.
Project Title: LCPA 95-09/ZC 9344/CI' 9349/SDP 9347/HDP 9349 - Ocesn Bluff
Project Location: South of Palomar Airpott Road between El Camin0 Real and Paseo del
None directly north of the terminus of Blackrail Court in LFM Zone 20 and the Zone 20 Specific
Plan area.
Project Description: The project cmsb of a Local coastal Program Amendment and zone
change from L-C to the R-1 single My tone in which mjnimum 7300 square foot lots are
permitted, the subdivision of 92 single family lots, and om multifamily lot on a 31.2 acre parcel
located in Planning Area C of the Zona 20 Specific Plan area. Consistent with the underlying
RLM General Plan designation, the td number of Units is 108 (92 sf lots and 16 apartment
units) on 30.2 developable acres resulting in an overall project density of 3.6 dwelling units per
acre. The 16 unit apartment project fuElls the project's inclusiomry housing requirement.
The project also includes offsite itnpvcments necessary to seme the project including Street "A"
extension, Poinsettia Lane between the existing easterly tuminus to Street "A", and Blackrail
Court from its existing northerly terminus to the northeast comer of the project. Onsite grading
involves 320,000 cubic yards of halanced cut and fill and results in a terraced hillside design in
accordance with the Hillside Development Ordinance.
from the southwest comer of the project south to the intm of future poinsettia Lane
Justification far this detemunatl 'on is on file in the Planning Department, community
Development, mS Ia pplrmu Drive, carlsbad, California 92009. Camments from the public
of date of pu-
DATED: SEPI'EMBER 21, 1995
CASE NO
are invited. PISrslr admit amperits in writing to the planning
J.HO ILLER
LCPA 95-09/Zc 93-#/CT 93491 SDP 9Un/HDP 93-09
APPLICANT: WEAN BLUFF PART"W
PUBLISH DATE: SEPTEMBER 27,1995
MJ?kAH:kc 9
2075 La8 Palrnas Drive - Cartsbad. California 92009-1576 (619) 438-1 161 @
DETERMINATION.
on the basis of this initirtmm
1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLAUTION 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. U
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one 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, if the
effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/MITIGATE NEGATNE DECLARATION is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. .u
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, then WILL
NOT be a signifcant effect in this case because all potentially si@icant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation mcasures that are imposed upon the proposed
project. Therefore, a Notice of Rior Compliance has been prepared.
9472-2-
Planner Signature Date
/
3 Rev. 1m
.
summary of en- ktas checked below would be patdally afhctcd by this project, involving at least
ofl~ impact that is a - Significant Impact", or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation
~corp~r~d" as inciicatatb tbe ciwcldist on the following pages.
- X LandUseandPlanning - X Transportation/Circulation - Public Services
- Population and Housing ;zL Biological Resources - Utilities and Service Systems
- Geological Problems - Energy and Mineral Resources Aesthetics
- Water
- X AirQuality
- Hazards - Cultural Resources
- X Noise - Recreation
- Mandatory Findings of Sigm.t5cance
2
I" -
STATE CEQA G- clbaper 3, Article 5, Scctii 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
hpitct Assessnent ta if a pjcct may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental
Impact Assessment appera in bre following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human fit- tbat might be impaaed by the proposed project and provides the City with information
to use as the basis for deciding whcther to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration,
or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Dcclaratiolt
A brief explanation is rquircd 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 so^ 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 sigmfkant, and the impact does not excecd adopted general standards and policies.
"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Si&icant Impact"
The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explh 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 sigmfknt.
Based on an "EM-Part IT", if a proposed project could have a potentially sigrufcant effect on the
environment, but potentially si@icant 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, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior
Compliance).
A Negative Dechratian may be pnparad if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any
If there are ollt Q m01b potentiallr significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are
of its aspects my ame a sigdicant effect on the environment.
U
mitigation mmmw to clearly reduce impacts to less than sipficant, and those mitigation measures are
agreed to by the devchpcr prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Sisnificant
Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be
prepared.
When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepan an EIR
if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR plrsuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, ar a "Statemnt of Ovuriding cansiderations" has been made pursuant to that
earlier EIR
4 Rev. m
e ~EIRzpplfbepeprndifmultlan y significant -* ar~d including but not limited to the
(1) taepotmtiauy sieaificam effect has nu baen ciisasd or mitigated in an Earlia following
EXR pmsaaat to arpl.rht. and the developer does not agree to mitigatim xncasum that Fbduoe the impact to lumh (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" fbr the significant impad has not been dprsplnt to an der EIR; (3) propostd mitigation measurts do not reduce the irnpaa
to less than a; (4) through the ELA-part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of
significance fix a paentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measurc in
reducing a potentially sipfhnt effect to below a level of signrficance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation rncasures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL E VALUATIW . particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined sigdkant.
5
k5U- (=I suppatrrll we -1:
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
Conflict with general plan designation
or zoning? (Sources #l & #2)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans
or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? (Source #2)
Be incompatible with existing land usc in the
vicinity? (Sources #1 & #2)
Affect agricultural resources or operations
(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts
from incompatible land uses)? (Source #2)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement
of an established community (including a low-
income or minority communiv)? (Source #2)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (Sources #l & #2)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects
in an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? (Source #2)
c) Displace Wirtisq hrosing, especially affordable
housing? (Somw #2)
x -
6
bwund-hdarubw;
m. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the
proposai dt in or expose people to potential
impacts involving:
Fault rupute? (Sources #2 & 3)
Seismic ground shaking? (Sources #2 & 3)
Seismic ground failure, including
liquefaction? (Sources #2 & 3) X -
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (Sources in &
3) - X
Landslides or mudflows? (Sources #2 & 3) - X -
Erosion, changes in topography or
unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading, or fa? (Sources #2 & 3)
Subsidence of the land? (Source #3) - X
X
X
-
-
-
Expansive soils? (Source #3) -
Unique geologic or physical featuns? (Source #3) -
IV. WATER. Wouldtbpraposalresultin:
a) Changes in aborptioa rates, &&age patterns, or the rate ad of smface nmfF (Sources
#l 4% &a) - -
b) Exposure of people or popercy to water related
hazards such as flooding? (Source #4) - -
7
Discharge into surfice waters or other
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)? (Source #1)
.
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (Source #l)
Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements? (Source #l)
Change 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? (Source #l, #3)
Altered direction or rate of flow of
groundwater? (Source #l, #3)
hpacts to groundwater quality? (Source #l, #3)
Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for
public water supplies? (Source #l, #3)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standad or contribute to
an existing a projected air quality violation?
(sources #l am> x -
b) Expose sendthe llaaptors to pollutants? (Source #l - - - x dk 2)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperatUte,
or cause any change in climate? (sourceS #1& #2) - - - -
,-
X
d) Create objectionable odors? (Sources #l & #2) x
8 Rev. mtm
ISUU (and suppartml btf-slmam):
VI. TRANSPORTA'I'XONQRCULATION.
Would the propod result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (Sources
X nl &a) - -
Hazards to safety from design features
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (Source
#2) - -
Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses? (Source Sn)
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or
off-site? (Source #2)
Hazards or barriers for pedcsuians or
bicyclists? (Source a)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? (Source e)
Rail, waterborne or air Mic
impacts? (Source #2)
VU. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
would the poposal nsvh in impacts to:
a) Endangered, or rare species or their
habitats (inchJcII W Mt limited to plants, fish,
insects, a ladbws? (samces m & m) - x
b) Locally designated species (e+ heritage
trees)? (source w2 & ns)
9
C) Locally designated natural cammunities
(e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source #2 &
#5) - - x -
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and
vernal pool)? (Source #2)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration
corridors? (Source #2 & #5)
Vm. ENERGY AND MlNERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a) Contlict with adopted energy consemation plans? (Source #l, Section 5.12.1)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (Source #l)
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that wodd be of future value
to the region and the residents of the State? (Source -
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substanas (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticide& chemical3 ar Iadhtion? (source X1) -
b) Possible intcrBsawx with an&ncrgency response plan Q enrqawy evacuation plan?
(source #1) -. X -
c) Thecrcationofanyhealthhazardar
potential health hazard? (source #l) X -
d) Expommofpeupletoexistingsources of potential health hazards? (saurce m)
10
e) Incrcaseihhrrrrdmanaswithflammable
brush, grass, of trees? (source n2)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (Source #2 & W) -
b) Exposure of people to severe noise
levels? (Source #)
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? (Sources #l &a) - -
b) Police protection? (Sources #l & #2) - -
c) Schools? (Sources #l & n2) - -
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? (sources #l & rn)
e) Other governmentai services? (Sources tl & n2) - -
XII. UTILITES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need fix new systems or
utilities:
suppli~, of SUM aimations to the following
a) Power ot dp? (Scmrce #I) x-
x-
11
Y
c) Local or regiaml water treatment or distribution facilities? (Sources #l & a)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (Sources #l & a) -
e) Stom water drainage? (Sources & W) -
f) Solid waste disposal? (Sources #l & #2) -
g) Local or regional water supplies? (Sources #I & in) -
Xm. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? (Sources W1 & #2) x
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic
effect? (Source in)
c) Create light or glare? (Source #2)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paleontological tesources? (Source K?)
Disturb archatological tesources? (Source #2)
Affect historical resources? (Source #!2)
Have the POtmeiJ to cause a &ysical change
which wd rdbct unique ethnic cuitural
values? (Samercn)
Restrict existing religious or sacred usts
within the potential impact area? (Source #2)
12
Y
a) lncrease the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities? (Source w - -
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (Source - -
XVT. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wild life species, cause a
fEh 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 rart or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory? - -
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 cumnt projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)
c) hsthcp~baveen- effects which
will cause sabcmdtl adverse effects on human
beings, eithr tiimtiy a &y?
13
hk -may be used wherc, pursuant to the ti-, program EJR, or othcr CEQA
declaratiar scctioa 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identrfy the following
onattachdshars:
r o ILYIIC effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they arc available for review.
Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist wen
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refmed from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
8
14 Rev. 1/3ops
A. Earlier and its applicability to project
The project is part of the Zone 20 Specific Plan approved by the City Council in 1994. CEQA compliance for the specific plan was achieved through the certification of the Zone 20 Program EIR
which identified, analyzed, and recornmended mitigation to reduce potentially significant impacts to
insignificant levels. The Zone 20 Rogram EIR (PEIR) analyzed potential impacts to agriculture, air
quality, biology, circulation, land use, noise, pesticide residue, paleontology, public facilities fhncing,
sotls/geology, and visual aesthetics that could result from the development of the Specific Plan area.
The PEIR is intended to be used in the review of subsequent projects within Zone 20. The project
incorporates the required Zone 20 PEIR mitigation measures, and through the aid of the required
additional biological, soilqlgeological, noise, slope, viewshed, and cultural resource analyses, a
determination has been made that no additional significant impacts beyond those identified and
mitigated by the PER will result from chis project. The following discussion of environmental
evaluation briefly explains the basis for this determination along with identifying the source documents
which verify the PElR impact identification, analysis, and mitigation requirements.
B. EnvironmentalAnalysis
The subdivision site consists of approximately 31 acres of vacant land previously used for agxicultural
use and surrounded by rural residential and agricultural properties. Elevations across the site range
from a high of approximately 380 feet (MSL) on a gently inclined, north-south trending ridge near the
middle of the property to a low of about 280 feet(MSL) in a wide, steepsided ravine providing natural
drainage in the northwestern portion of the site. The site drains predominantly to the east and west.
On-site vegetation consists of scattered clusters of trees, shrubs, and grass. The majority of the site
has been cultivated in the past. The sides of the northwestern ravine are severely eroded, however,
there is some vegetation present in most areas and includes southern mixed chapanal, a small pocket
of chamise chaparral, and disturbed habitat with scattered southern maritime chapanal. No plant or
wildlife species listed as ran, endangered, or threatened by the state of federal governments were
observed on the property.
Offsite impvunents ncesary for the project include the extension of Poinsettia he, Street A from
the south- axner of the site to Poinsettia Lane, and Black~ail Road from its existing northerly
terminus to tb poject's nmheastcrn boundary. The extension of Poinsettia Lane from its existing
eastemtammw to Stnet A and Street A will: 1) disturb areas currently being utilized for agricultural
purposes w&h m satsitive or endangered plant species, 2) impact the edge of a canyon containing
southern mixed cbopenal disturbed cuastal sage brush, and a single pair of California gnatcatchers;
and 3) disturb a small patch of disturbed coastal sage scrub adjacent to the existing agricultural road
along the southwestem comer of the project site.
Emsting improvements to the overall site include f- dirt mads, water lines, and overhead poweriines.
15 Rev. mm
la. The projset rittaaexaad the density range of 04 dwelling units perm allowed by the underlying
Rcsiddd taw Medium (RLM) density land use designation. The project density including
affordable pnitr is 3.6 dwelling units per am, which is consistent with the RLM designation but
exceeds the Gmwth Management growth control point (gcp) of 3.2 dwelling units per am. The
Growth Management gcp is imposed to ensure that the number of dwelling units in each quadmt of
the City at buildout docs not exceed the dwelling unit caps specified by ordinance. As a result, the
project requires a density increase above the gcp which will require the removal of 12 units from the
quadrant's excess units. There currently exists sufficient excess units in the southwest quadrant to
accommodate the request for the density increase above the gcp.
The Zone 20 Specific Plan requires a change in zoning from L-C to R-1 in the project planning area
and the Zone 20 Program EIR (PEIR) analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the required
changes in zoning from L-C to R-1. "he PEIR identitled no sigdbnt impact since the underlying
RLM (Residential Low Medium density) General Plan designation permits up to four dwelling units
per acre, and zoning to single family lots on minimum 7,500 square foot lots is consistent with the
low to medium density land use designation.
lb. The project is also subject to the Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP) requiring approval by the
California Coastal Commission. The project is consistent with the LCP "PA" land use designation
allowing low-medium residential density development which is consistent with all Mello 11 land use
policies. However, a Local coastal Rogram Amendment is required to change the zoning from LC
to R-1, and LCPA 95-09 is being processed with the project for this purpose.
lc,d. As detailed by the PEIR, Zone 20 is comprised of agricultural uses which are typically incompatible
with residential uses due to physical and operational characteristics such as tilling and
pesticide/herbicide spraying. The Ocean Bluff project will not impact or be impacted directly by
agricultural uses since the project will not abut any property under cultivation. PER mitigation
required to reduce these impacts including notification to all future residential land owners that this
area is subject to dust, pesticide, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations will be a
condition of map approval and the provision of temporary road co~ections to maintain continued
access to adjacent agricultutal properties will be a condition of map approval.
2a. Local popuhon projections are besad upon the residcntial.density permitted in each land use
desi- In accQdeslce with the discussion under la. above determining that the project is consistent witb the P0pert)'s underlying RLM land use designation, the additional population resulting
from thu PIPjset will nd cumulatively ex& local population projections.
2b. As specihl by tb Zane 20 PEIR, the development of projects including transportation routes, public
services, and land uscs within the Zone 20 planning area is not growth.inducing since the area has
been previously planned and designated for residential development by the City's &mal Plan, Growth
Management Program, and Zone 20 LFMP. Although the Pojnscttia Lane extension will provide
access to undevelopsd parcels within Zone 20, it is a planned --west circulation arterial and
development already exists to the cast, west, north, and south of Zone 20 properties; thenfore,
urbanizatian of the area is inevitable.
16 Rev. y3opj
-.
3b,e. consistentwiththeP€IRfixEnviranmcaral Area I, an additional gedechnical investigation has banpqad ikxtbepject by Niiyoand Moore. The conclusion of this repart is that "based upn
our gcacdmid it is our opinion that site developnent is feasible from a geotechnical
-praridsd the following rtcOmmcndatioIlS are incorporated into the design and construction of the sum pw There appear to be no sigruficant geotechnical constraints on the site that
cannat be mitigated by proper planning, design, and sound construction practices". Compliance with
the recommendatians of the Ninyo and Moore Geotechnid Investigation for this project will avoid
si@icant unstable earth conditions and or increased exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards. These recommendations will be inwrporated as project conditions in accordance with Zone
20 PER
4a. According to the project's pteliminary Hydrology Study prepared by Hunsaker 8c Associates, in which
the potential for changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff
are analyzed, a temporary detention basin for the westerly drainage hasin will attenuate post
development runoff to predevelopment levels and "the increase in the runoff ..... from development
is compensated for by the increased times of concentratio n... fhm the proposed grading which creates
longer flow paths and flatter grades." The !kal hydrology study will examine the flows in more detail
and size the detention basin which is proposed along the western project boundary.
The Zone 20 mitigation required to avoid adverse impacts to the quantity or quality of surface water
consists of compliance with the adopted LFMP performance standards. Individual projects must show
compliance with drainage and water distribution design and performance standards in accardance with
the adopted LFMP and City standards as well as conform to the NPDES permit requirements pursuant
to Regional Water Quality control Board No. 9042 adopted by City Council Resolution No. 90-235.
The project will be conditioned to comply with these stamhis.
5. The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994
General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power CoflswnPtioIL 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 COIIsidered cumulatively sigxuficant:
therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have
cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen ac minimhe tbe impect on air quality associated with Genual Plan buildout, a variety of
mitigatim nmsues are xqxmmdd in the Final Master EIR These include: 1) provisions for
roadway rrd Weaxman * ~vements prim to or concunent with development; 2) measures to
reduce vsbieb trips thraugh the implementation of Congestion and Transportaton Demand
Manag- 3) provisiam to encourage alternative modes of traqxxm *on including mass transit
services; 4) caditions to pnnnote energy efficient building and site d&sn; and 5) participation in
regional growth management strategies when adopted. 7%~ applicabk and appadpriate General Plan
air quality mitigation mc~tsurcs have either ban inaxpmted into tk design of the project or arc
included as conditions of project apprrwat
Operation-related emissians are coasidend cumulatively significant because the project is located
Significam Impact". This project is cumiamt with the General Plan, therefore, the pnparation of
within a "non-aminma basin", thaefore, the "Initial stody" clwcldist is marked mentially
an EIR iS aot rapired because the certificatianof Fiaal Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution
Na %246, indrytA a "Statement Of ovciriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "statemsrlo6Ovaxid@ corrsideratians" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General
Plan's Fiarlm EIR, including this project, thenfore, no further environmental review of air
quality impb is rqmd This document is available at the Planning De-.
6a. The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994
General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to
accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 -1 intersections will be severely impacted
by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include
all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the
implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's
adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Fi Master EIR. These include measures to
ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alternative
modes of transportation such as bails, 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 fiiling Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates
impacts that arc 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 collsidcred cumulatively significant because of the failure of
intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial
Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Sigmfkant Impact". This project is consistent with the General
Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is nat 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 Ovemding Considerations" applies to all
subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's h4aster ElR, including this project, therefore, no
further environmental review of circulation impacts is required.
6b. The Poinsettia Lane extension and the onsite circulation are designed in accordance with the General Plan Circulation element and City standards thereby avoiding hazards to safety from design features.
Additidy, tanpomy mad conntm 'om to maintain continued acceso to adjacent agricultural
pr0pext.b tLt CQQld be impacted by future Poinsettia Lane improvements will be provided.
7a. The Bm Sa#ic~ (3.4) of the Zone 20 Specific Plan PEIR provides basetine data at a gross scale due to the krgs size ofthe specitic plan area. Given the large number of property owners and their
differing development hosizoas and the inevitable change in biological conditioq over the long-term
buildout of the specific plan area, it is not possible to mitigate biological impacts fiom the buildout
of the entire specific plan under one comphem 've open space easemmt that crosses Iwoperty lines
or a habitat revegaation/enhancemcn! plan sponsorsd solely by the propetty owners. The impluxmtaticm of the biological don of the ElR is'bescd on future site specific biological survey
studicy that focps an the impeas created by individual subsqent development projects These
additional biological ddiu an requited to collsider the baseline data and biological open space
Mons of tbt PEIR and provide detailed and culf~lt resource surveys plotted at the
* -. -_
tentative mrp scale for each popertr. Th! range of the fixture mitigation options may include
pnsarstion of mve babitat onsite in conjunction with cdmcemcn~vcgetation plans, payment
off-inb8-m 'an plan, or the purchase and pmtecth of similar habitat offsite.
TomeetthmElIlnquirtmmts, a biological rc~~urce~ field survey was prepad for the project by
Anita h4. Haywmh, Biological consultant, dated March 1995. This subsequent biological study
provides more focused, current, and detailed project level analysis of site specific biological impacts
and provides more refined project level mitigation measures as required by the Zone 20 PEIR. The
property was surveyed for the bunowing owl and the bird was not observed on the site. No brown-
headed cowbirds were observed on the property or in the vicinity. The biological report indicates that
implementation of the project would not result in the disturbance of biological resources onsite,
however, construction of offsite Poinscuia Lane to the west from "A" Street to Alga Road and the
construction of "A" Street between the project's southwestern boundary and Poinsettia Lane will result
in impacts to a single pair of gnatcatchers and approximately 4 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub
habitat. The 3.7 acres of Diegan sage ScNb habitat located along the proposed Poinsettia Lane
alignment consists of California sagebrush, flat-top buckwheat, yerba santa, lad sumac, wart-
stemmed ceanothus, California encelia, black sage, and weedy species such as tree tobacco, and shows
signs of past and continuing dismbance. The habitat quality in the impactad area varies and has been
disturbed by human activities associated with encampments and illegal dumping. Although the habitat
area does offer cover and foraging areas for wildlife found in the area, the PEIR mitigation mapping
indicates that this area wdl be isolated by Poinsettia Lane to the north, the Aviara development to the
south and continued agricultural uses to the east and west. Coastal sage scrub habitat areas directly
impacted by the Poinsettia Lane alignment requiring mitigation an approximately 3 acres in size,
however, indirect impacts to the remaining .7 acns should also be mitigated. The total area of
disturbance for the poinsettia Lane extension requiring mitigation is therefore 3.7 acres and the
mitigation rtcommenddd by Biological cansultant Hayworth is the preservation of 3.7 acres of coastal
sage habitat within the high quality, gnatcatcher inhabited cuastal sage area found in the Carlsbad
Highlands mitigation bank ana Another 1.1 acres located at the southwestem comer of the
Oceanbluff parcel is identified as containing dhrbcd coastal sage scrub. Dishlrbance to .28 acres
of the 1.1 acrc am of coastal sage scrub will dt from necessary offsite grading to construct Street
"A" from the southwestem corner of the Oceanbluff site to the proposed Poinsettia Lane extension.
The proposed mitigation for this .28 acre area of disturbance to ccmstal sage scrub is preservation of
an additional .28 acre area in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank area for a total of 3.98 acres.
The Poinsettia Lane extension is within Reserve Planning Area 4, as defined by the Ciws draft
Habitat Managarmit Plan dated July, 1994, in which 84 acres of d sage scrub and 38 acres of
chapafiplhtik,are i&ntifiedwithinthe core area. Althoughdist\lrbance to approximately 4 acrcas
of mad mp seznb and puthem mixed chaparral habitat will rcsult fiom construction of Poinsettia
and stre~&~A~, it will aat preclude connca 'vity between PPA's nor preclude the pnservation of 50%
of the habitl in ppA4. Manover, this project provides mitigation m the form of offsite mitigation
because it will prwenre one acre of these habitat in PPA.2 fix every acre of the same habitat affected
by the proposed project. Additionally, the Zone 20 PEIR mitigation meas& 3.4.3.10 which is incorpratcd as a project umdition requires that an ovcrsi2td roadway culvert be installed under the Poinseaia Lane extensioslatthe sDG&E asanent t0ma;ntnindarhanCewildlife txmmctl 'om in
native habitat amas that Wd othuwnse be~byimaaopahleLogdwaycrossings. The
feasibility of lxxummq ' an oversized culvert at this hation shall be evald at the time roadway
improvemmtplans arc submitted to the city mgilwmg depment fot revitw. Specific mitigation
xxwasmsnquindtobe~ into the designofthis culva,ifmcesary, shall be based on
a biological pdd fa this prppose which will be sub* to review and approval by the -- 7c. 'RE ia cansistent with Mello II LCP policies regarding the ckurbmx of 25% slopes
possess* ad species and/or coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities (dual
criteria). Onsite, the only area possessing 25% slopes with this type of habitat will bc preserved in
open space. ntc poinsettia Lane alignment offsite will encroach into an area meeting this dual criteria, however, the dual criteria policy does not apply to the construction of roads on the City's
Circulation Element
8.a~. Tht project's compliance with Building Codes, Title 20, and chapter 17 of the Municipal Code in
accordance with the MEIR mitigation measures to reduce impacts (Electricity and Natural Gas Section
5.12.1 of the MEJR) associated with the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful manner wiil
ensure the implementation of energy conservation mcasurcs
The MER has identified mineral resources within the City of Carlsbad boundaries, and no mined
resources are located within the project area
9ad. The single family residential project is not a use typically associated with risks such as accidental
explosion or release of hazardous substances thereby creating a potential health hazard. Although
agricultural operations will continue on parcels in the vicinity of the Oceanbluff subdivision,
compliance with the Zone 20 PEIR measures and Zone 20 Specific Plan development ngulat~ons to
buffer residential development hm agricultural optrarions will avoid health hazards nsulting fiom
pesticide residue. Specifically, the project is conditioned to require prior to final map apval a
detailed soils testing and analysis report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer for City and
county approval, a minimum 25' Mer shall be provided between the project boundaries and open
field cultivation, temporary road connections required to maintain continued access to adjacent
agricultural properties that could be impacted by the Poinsettia Lane extension improvements will be
provided, a Notice of Restriction nosifyvlg all owners, users, and tenants of this project that the area
is subject to dust, pesticides, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations shall be
recorded prior to finat map approval, and drainage will be disposed of through stormdrains in
accordance with City standards and compliance with NPDES standards is required for the project.
9e. The project's compliance as conditiontd with the City's Landscape Design Manual - Fin Protection
policies will avoid increasing fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, trees, and grass.
1Wb. The ZrJllb 20 PEIR noise mitigation included a rquimnent that all projects within 500 feet of the
existing RdwmUia Lane pppm a noise study in accordance with the Ged Plan Noise Element.
The Noh ILI#t prepma fa the Ocean Bluff project revealed that noise levels exceeding 60 dBA
CNEL wopcd patentiaUr impea Loe 78 - 87 and Lats 91-91 which an adjacent to the roadway
without acccpcBbfe mitigation. Berms and 6' noise walls have been incarporated into the project within
the 50' landscaped setbackfram poinsettia Lane approximately Wfrrrm the right of way line to reduce
the noise exterior levels of these lots to 60 dBA CNEL or below within the usable yard anas as
required by the Zone 20 PEIR and the City's Generai Plan Noise Element.
11-12.
to
Inatxmhce with the citfsMEn& theprojcct~be Cmdaent with and willbeamdifioned
comply with the City's adaped bwth Management performarrce stdads for public facilities and services to ensure that adequate public facilities an provided prior to or concurrent with developent.
The pject is withinand subjact to the zone 20 specific plan requiring it to be in accocd811Cc with tbs 8ppcYvdzme 20 Local Facilitie3 Management Plan thereby cxmxriq that perfomance standards
fix pubiie- win be met through build- of the ZOIEt.
13. The & pel[R visuat aesthetic mitigation relevant to the Ocean Bluff project includes the
following pda to tentative map approval:
a.
b.
additional visual analysis within any sisnificant viewsheds and the addition of any recommended
mitigation measures as conditions of project approVa;
structures and roofs shall be earth tone in color and prior to issuance of building pennits the
applicant is required to submit for Planning Director approval a color board depicting the
proposed earth tOM,
manufkcturcd slopes and roadway cuts shall be landform-graded, contoured, and heavily screened
by landscaping in conformance with Zone 20 Specific Plan, and
general visual design guidelines shall be taken into collsideration during initial site planning and
design phases prior to approval of a tentative map or implementing permit for any development
within the Specific Plan area
C.
d.
The Ocean Bluff project includes a hillside development permit application (HDP 93-09) which
requires compliance with hillside architectural and grading standards. The Ocean Bluff project is in
compliance with hillside grading standards and PElR mitigation requiring landform grading and
contouring, and landscaping to screen cut and fill slopes. The project is located within the Palomar
Airport Road and Falomar Airport viewsheds identitied by the Zane 20 PEIR. Additid visual
analysis performed by the applicant has identified that units along the northeastern and northern
elevations will be visible from these viewsheds, however, as spe&ed in the Zone 20 PEIR, any visual
impact along the Palomar Airport Road viewshed will be brief and possibly less than SigJllficant due
to traveling speeds and topography. The hillside development permit will therefore be conditioned
to require compliance with the general visual design guidelines specified by the PEIR with special
emphasis on providing a combination of one and two story homes, a variety of roof heights and roof
massing, a variety of eatth tone roof and wall materials and colors, and enhanced fenesmtion. Since
the project is a standard subdivision with no prom architecture at this time, a condition will be
added to the hillside development permit (HDP 9349) requiring that an amendment be processed prior
to the issuance of building permits to ensure that the proposed architecture is consistent with the
general visual design guidelines as well as the Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards.
14. The Projccr cmtams * nb sites listed as Level 3 or 4 by the Zone 20 PER, therefore no additional
environmeEa dew of cultural resources is required.
the demand for community parks, however, the project will be conditioned
and Zone 20 LFMP which quires
15. Theprojectwillizllcnass
to require camp- with the Gfowth Management chtwmce
that parks in accordanCe with the growth management standud & prodied to serve new development.
21
Y
2. TilmAua- Impt Report for Zone 20 Specific Plan" and Planning commission
Reduth3425 for XR 203 dated June 16,1993.
3. "Geotecbnierl bv&@m" dated February 6,1989, per€o& by Ninyo & Moore, Geotechnical and
Environmental sci~consuttants
4. "Re- Hydrology Study for Ocean Bluff, City of CarIsbad" dated September 3, 1993 prepared
by Hunsaker & Associates San Diego, Inc.
5. "Biological Field Survey Update, Oceanbluff ct 9349" dated March 1995 performed by
Anita M. Hayworth, Biological consultant,
6. Jack Henthom's letter dated May 3, 1995, "Archaeological Site CB-1SDi-12026- Oceanbluff CT 93-
09".
7. "Report on an Acoustical Study - Ocean Bluff - On the extension of Poinsettia Lane at Black Rail
Road, City of CarIsbad" dated August 6,1993, and Addendum received May 12,1995, performed by
James C. Berry, Acoustician.
22
CASE NO:
CASE NAME:
APPUCANP
.-
BACKGROUND DATA SHEF- -
LCPA 9509hC 93-W CT 93.09/SDP 9347/HDP 93-09
Ocean Bluff
em Bluff Partnershi0
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Aeauest for a Local Coastal Plan Amendment. Zone
Chanae, Tentative Tract Map. Site Development Plan and Hillside DevelODment Permit
to Rezone from L-C to R-1 vacant, 31.2 acre site and subdivide 92 sinale familv lots and
one multide familv lot with 16 affordable apartment units on pro~ertv a enerallv located
at the northwest comer of future Poinsettia Lane and Blackrail Court in the Zone 20
Specific Plan area and Local Facilities Manaaement Zone.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3 in Section 22, Township 12 south. ranae 4 west. San
Bernadino base and meridian in the Countv of San Dieao. State of California. exceoting
therefrom those Dortions thereof lvina north of the south boundaw line of Rancho Aaua
Hedionda. as said south line was established Mav 5, 1913, bv decree of the SuDerior
Court of the State of California. in and for San Oieao Countv. in that certain action (No.
16830) entitled Kellv Investment Companv. a cornoration. vs. Clarence Davton Hillman
and Bessie Olive Hillman.
APN: 215-070-16 Acres 31.2 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 93 Lotdl08 DU's
(Assessor's Parcel Number)
Land Use Designation RLM
Density Allowed 0-4 Density Proposed 3.6
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Existing Zone L-c Proposed Zone R-1
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning
Requirements)
Zoninq Land Use
Site L-C Vacant/Agricultural
North R-1 Vacant
south L-c Horticulture
East L-C Vacant
west L-c Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District CUSO WaterDistrict CMWD Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 108 EDU
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated Auaust 5. 1993
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
- Negative Declaration, issued - Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Prior Comdiance. dated Seotember 27. 1995
c .P CITY OF CAIUSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACI' ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: LCPA 95-09/ZC 93.04/CT 9349/SDP 9347MDP 93-09 - OCEAN BLUFF
LOCAL FACILlTY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 20 GENERAL PLAN: RLM
ZONING: L-C
DEVELOPERS NAME: 1
ADDRESS: 4180 LA JOLLA TALLAGE DRIVE. SUITE 30. SAN DEGO 92037
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.: 2 15470- 16
(AC., SQ. FT., DU): 31.2 AC/108 DUs
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
E
G.
H.
r.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities:
Library:
Wastewater Treattnent Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage -
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Demand in Square Footage =
Demand in Square Footage =
Identw Drainage Basin =
(Idenufy master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs =
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire:
open SP-: Acreage Provided -
%moats:
@emands to be determined by staff)
Served by Fire Station No. =
Sewer: Demand in EDUS -
Identify Sub Basiu -
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: DemaadinGPD -
375.5 Sam Feet
200.25 Sauare Feet
108 EDU
0.75 Acres
NIA
NIA
1.016 ADT
3.6 Acres
CUSD
108 EDU
fl
The project is 11.4 units above the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
.. -_ 7
-st the names and addresses of all persons having a financial Interest In the application.
Par-
4370 I a I-VlllaPer.. #
La Jolla. Ca.. 92122
990
Owner
ist the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest In the property invoked.
Same
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation of partnership, list the names and addresses
of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the carporation of awning any partnership interest in the
partnership. Please see list (attachment #l)
If any person id-& pUnUUlt t0 (1) 01 (2) 8- l8 8
addreso8 of any parson servkrg u Oflbf of dkoc!or of the non-prollt wgur&aUm 01 as tnrsteo of MefidW Of
the trust
OrgMiUrtiOn 01 8 tnrSt, list the namOS and
isclosure Statement Page 2
Have you had more than $350 worth of business transacted with any member of City stae Boards,
Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes - NQ - If yes, please indicate person(s)
,=: Anam additional pages ds necessafy.)
Signature of Owner/date
?rint or type name of owner
Signature of applicantldate
Print or type name of applicant
.- .._ .. -- ..--....-
Javier Benito 2275 Via Lucia La Jolla, Ca., 92037
L.
Attachment #l
OCEANBLUFF PARTNERSHIP
Paul R. Hasley
c/o Illiff, Thorn 6 Company
2386 Faraday Avenue Suite 100 Carfsbad, Ca., 92008
Mary Beth Jernigan
P.O. Box 898
Ketchurn, ID., 83340
Fritz Leibhardt
7575 Cacrizo Drive
La Jolla, Ca., 92037
5.M. Schcr
P.O. Box 9565
Newport Beach, Ca., 92658
Wal tcr Wcgner
1304 Larch Avenue Moraga, Ca., 94556
Eugene L. Freeland P.O. Box 732
Rancho Santa Fa., Ca., 92067
J. Sterling Hutchison
Gray, Cary, Amcs 5 Frye
1700 First Interstate Plaza
401 "E" Street
San Diego, Ca., 92131-4219
Frederick Liebhardt 7224 Carrito Drive
La Jolla, Ca., 92037
John F. Linden
8 Quai D'Orleans
75004 Paris, France
Calvin F. Schmid
888 Armada Terrace
San Diego, Ca., 92106
Robert L. Winetcer 4370 La Jolla Village Dr. #990 San Diego, Ca., 92122
a !
I
1 II I i 1T
-1
I I I I
a1 , I I I I 1, I I
I m I I II
T- I 'I J
I 1 I I 1- I 1 I I
1 1 1 I L I I I I 1 I
?
I I I
I
C C
I 4
I r'e I I I li. I - . ..
IW li 1. I I E- / I ..
L, IW t." I I, I .I I I 1 1
c
#-
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
1
1
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
t
k-
I-
I.
........
..
-. ...
.....
......
....
__
...
._
-. r
I I '4 ai ir
/
I
a
8
10 E
. .-
I i
i
/
/- /
/ -- .
l-
A REPORT TO TEE HOUSING COMMISSION
ItemNo. 2
Staft Debbie Fountain
Sr. Management Analyst
DATE: FEBRUARY 8,1%
SUBJECT: EMERALD RIDGE WEST - CT 9543/SDP 9546lHDP 9546 - Request for
recommendation of approval of a 16-unit affordable apartment project satisfying
the affordable housing obligation of the project known as Ocean Bluff.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Housing Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 96-002, recommending APPROVAL
of 9 second dwelling units and the purchase of 1 credit for a three-bedroom unit offsite (SDP
95-06) within the Emerald Ridge West project in order to satisfy an affordable housing
obligation under the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
II. PROJECT BACKGROUW
On January 17, 1996, the applicant, MSP California, received a recommendation for approval
from the Planning Commission for a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan and Hillside
Development Permit to subdivide the subject property into 61 single-family lots and 1 open space
lot; to create a 27.4 acre remainder parcel; and, to provide 9 future second dwelling units. The
affordable housing project, as shown in the Site Development Plan included in the Planning
Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 3), is proposed to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement
of the Emerald Ridge West project.
The developer’s 15% inclusionary requirement is 10.764 dwelling units, which according to the
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, must include one three-bedroom unit.
The proposed affordable project includes nine (9) second dwelling units and the proposal to
purchase one (1) housing credit in an offsite affordable housing project to meet the requirement
to provide one three bedroom unit. The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary housing
dwelling unit would be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction times the
average subsidy needed to make a newly constructed typical housing unit affordable to a lower-
income household. The nine (9) second dwelling units will be affordable to households earning
80% of the Area Median Income. As proposed, the project will meet the developer’s obligation
under the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
The site development plan for the project indicates which lots will be designated and deed
restricted for second dwelling units. The project has been conditioned to require an Affordable
Housing Agreement which will provide the specific details regarding the phasing and
implementation of the affordable housing component of this project.
EMERALD RIDGE
PAGE 2
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
III. APPLICANTDEVELOPME" TEAM INFORMATION
The development team for the proposed project is as follows:
Applicant: MSP California, LLC (see disclosure statement included in
Exhibit 3)
Developer: MSP California, LE
Project Consultant/Manager : Ladwig Design Group, Inc.
Tv. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is generally located east of Paseo Del Norte, north of Camino de las Ondas, and
south of Palomar Airport Road, within Specific Plan 203 and Local Facilities Management Zone
20. The project includes improvements for 1) construction of local public streets, curbs,
gutters, sidewalks and drainage facilities necessary to service the new lots; 2) addition of a sewer
line that connects from the property, through the Mar Vista Site to the west, and then north to
an existing sewer line located along Encinas Creek and Palomar Airport Road; 3) and the
construction of a local public street named Calle Serena from Hidden Valley Road west to the
project site. The project will create 61 single family lots and provide for 9 second dwelling
Units.
As stated above, the affordable housing component of the project will consist of nine (9) one-
bedroom second dwelling units approximately 640 square feet in size. These units will have
exterior access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary home and utilize a portion
of a three car garage for parking.
V. PROJECTAFFORDABIIXIY
If the second dwelling units are rented, the rate shall be set according to the applicable rent for
a household with an income equal to 80% of the San Diego County Median. This rental rate will
be set at the time the second dwelling units are constructed and provided for rental purposes.
VI. FINANCIAL
The applicant is unable to provide information which can be analyzed by staff to determine the
feasibility of the proposed affordable housing project. Additionally, the developer has identified
no specific financing sources or commitments. Therefore, it is not possible to make any
assessment of project feasibility at this time.
No financial assistance is being requested at this time, but this does not rule out a request at a
later date.
EMERALD RIDGE
PAGE 3
CT 95-031SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
VII. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT
Prior to final map approval, the developer will be required to enter into an Affordable Housing
Agreement according to the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. This agreement will
establish the exact timing and other specifics about the project which are legally recorded against
the property.
Vm. HOUSING ELEMENT CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the Housing Element,
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and the Zone 20 Specific Plan affordable housing requirements.
The second dwelling units, affordable at 80% of Area Median Income, would rank “Medium
Priority” according to the City’s Consolidated Plan which is required by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development. Construction of these second dwelling units with deed
restrictions will count towards the City’s Housing Element production goals.
M. SUMMARY
It is the role of the Housing Commission to make recommendations to the City Council based
on several considerations with respect to proposed affordable housing projects-- these are:
0 The proposal’s effectiveness in serving the City’s housing needs and priorities as
expressed in the Housing Element and HUD Consolidated Plan.
0 The proposal’s consistency with the City’s flordable housing policies and ordinances,
as expressed in the Housing Element, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Density Bonus
Ordinance, etc.
0 The proposal’s &veibpmmentand operating fearibility, emphasizing the development team,
financing sources and the role of the City in providing financial assistance or incentives.
As proposed, the project would address established City affordable housing needs in a manner
that is consistent with applicable City policies and ordinances. Subject to the condition contained
in the recommended approvals from the Planning Commission that requires the developer to
enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City prior to final map approval, staff
recommends that the Housing Commission recommend approval of this project to the City
Council.
The Housing Commission’s recommendation concerns only the applicant’s proposal to provide
an affordable housing project on site. The Planning Commission recommendation also includes
conditions that permit the option of satisfying the affordable housing obligation off site.
Pursuing the off-site option would require the developer to process a request for approval
through staff, the Housing Commission and City Council as the final decision maker.
c
r
EMERALD RIDGE
PAGE 4
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
x. EXHIBITS
1.
2. Housing Commission Review Application
3.
Housing Commission Resolution No. 96-002
Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 17, 1996 with appropriate
attachments
'F
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
HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
DEVELOPMENT OF NINE (9) SECOND DWELLING
UNITS AFFORDABLE TO LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN THE EMERALD RIDGE
WEST PROJECT GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF
PASEO DEL NORTE, NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS AND SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT
ROAD.
APPLICANT: MSP CALIFORNIA, LLC
CASE NO. : AHP 96-02 (CT #95-03 And SDP #95-06)
WHEREAS, an Affordable Housing Project (AHP) Application (No.
96-02) has been submitted to the City of Carlsbad's Housing Commission for review
and consideration;
WHEREAS, said Housing Commission did, on the 8th date of
February, 1996, hold a public meeting to consider said application; and
WHEREAS, at said public meeting, upon hearing and considering all
testimony, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Housing
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct.
2. That based on the information provided within the application and
testimony presented during the public meeting of the Housing
Commission on February 8, 1996, the Commission recommends
APPROVAL of Affordable Housing Project (AHP) No. 96-02
containing 9 second dwelling units to be affordable to low income (80%
or below of county median) households subject to the findings and
conditions outlined herein. .... .....
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
HC Resolution No. 96-002
Page 2
3. That the Commission's recommendation for approval of said affordable
housing project does not include support for any financial assistance for
the project.
FINDINGS:
1. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of
Carlsbad's Housing Element and Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the Density Bonus Ordinance
and the affordable housing requirements of the approved Zone 20 Specific
Plan.
2. The project will provide a total of 9 second dwelling units (1 bedroom)
affordable for rent to households at 80% or below of the county median which
meets a "medium priority" affordable housing need as outlined within the City
of Carlsbad's approved 1995-2000 Consolidated Plan. The project, therefore,
has the ability to effectively serve the City's housing needs and priorities as
expressed in the Housing Element and the Consolidated Plan.
CONDITIONS:
1.
2.
3.
..... ..... .....
Recommendation of approval is granted for AHP No. 96-02, as shown on Site
Development Plan 95-06, incorporated by reference and on file in the Housing
and Redevelopment Department. Development shall occur substantially as
shown unless otherwise noted in the conditions of project approval by the City
Council.
Recommendation of approval is granted for AHP No. 96-02 subject to the
condition that the applicant submit an acceptable schedule for construction of
the required ratio of income restricted units for inclusion in the final
Affordable Housing Agreement to be approved prior to Final Map. The
schedule shall indicate acceptable construction phasing for the affordable units
in relation to the construction of the market rate units.
The applicant shall maintain rents at the allowable affordable rate (based on
household size) for low income households with incomes equal to 80% or
below of the county median upon lease up of units and continuing for the full
period of affordability.
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
2E
27
2€
HC Resolution No. 96-002
Page 3
4. The affordable housing units must be restricted for "the useful life of the
project" which means a minimum of 55 years.
5. Upon final approval of said affordable housing project and prior to final map
approval, the applicant shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with
the City of Carlsbad. The agreement shall be binding to all future owners and
successors in interest. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall include all
terms and conditions of said project approval and outline the incentives
(financial or other), if any, to be provided by the City of Carlsbad.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Housing Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 8th day of
February, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Calverley, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Scarpelli & Wellman.
ATTEST:
/
V
EVAN BECKER, Housing and Redevelopment Director
EXHl6lT 2
* ladwia Design Group, Inc.
January 23, 1996
Mr. Evan Becker
Housing and Redevelopment
City of Carlsbad
2965 Roosevelt, Suite B
Carlsbad, CA 92008
SUBJECT: EMERALD RIDGE WEST CT95-03 AND SDP 95-06
(LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. - JM L-1017)
Dear Evan:
Emerald Ridge West was approved by Planning Commission with a unanimous vote on January 17,
1996. This project contains 61 R1 7500 lots and is proposing to construct, as one option, nine
second dwelling units onsite and to purchase one credit for a three-bedroom unit offsite as allowed
for in the conditions of approval for this project. I have attached to this application, nine copies of
the reduced site plan and architecture for the second dwelling units along with nine copies of the full
scale architectural plans and site development plans. In addition, I have included nine copies of a
photo vicinity map for the project.
We ask that you please present this project to your Housing Commission at your next meeting, which
is February 8, 1996, and ask them to review the three major aspects of the project, which include the
project’s ability to serve the City’s housing needs, the project’s consistency with the City’s affordable
housing policies and the project’s feasibility.
Please look everything over and if you need additional copies or any items are not clear, please get
in touch.
Sincerely,
LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC.
Robe; C. Ladwig
RCL:klb. 102
Attachments
cc: Mr. Marc Palkowitsh, MSP California LLC
Mr. David Bentley, MSP California LLC
703 Palomar Rirport Road + Suits 300 + Carlsbad, California 92009 (619) 438-3182 FIX (619) 438-0173
- CITY OF' CARLSBAD
HOUS. 3 COMMISSION REVIEW APPLd-ATION
I 1. APPLICANTlDEVELOPMENT TEAM WM)RMATXON
Name of Applicant: Ladwig Design Group, Inc.
Mailing Address: 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300
Robert C. Ladwig
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Telephone No.: (619) 438-3182
Identify Development Team (ie., developer, builder, architect, etc.):
Developer
MSP California, LLC & David M. Bentley
Marc Palkowitsh MSP California, LLC
650 S. Cherry Street 3573 East Sunrise Drive Suite 435 Suite 221
Denver, CO 80222 Tucson, A2 85718
(303) 399-9804 (520) 299-2179
IT. GENERAL PROJECi' INFORMATION
Project Name: EMERALD RIDGE WEST (CT 95-03)
Describe General Location of Project:
South,lof Palomar Airport Road, West of Hidden Valley Road, just North of and
adjacent to Poinsettia Park. I I
i Project Address: I
Site Parcel No(s).: 21 2-040-32 & 36
11 Total Number of Affordable Units Required (if applicable): 10
11 Total Number of Affordable Units Proposed: 10
1 Type of Units (ie., garden apartments, detached, etc.):
9 - 2nd Dwelling Units and Purchase of 1 Credit Offsite.
Size (in square feet) of each Unit: 640' max for each 2nd dwelling unit.
Bedroom Size Distribution-of Units: 9 - 1 bedroom units onsite.
Describe any special featwedamenities to be included within project:
Adjacent to Poinsettia Park in Zone 20.A proposed City wide trail segment is within
the project and will provide for pedestrian access from the Park to Palomar Airport
Road and other further trail segments, if approved and accepted by the City Council.
All lots are 7500 square feet or more and many units will have ocean views.
Housing Commission Review Application
P3ge 1
Targeted Income Levels (as 96 of area median): Rental units @ 80% of County Median
- -
*~. TEKhlS OF AF'F'ORDAB-TY FOR AFFORDABLE UNTTS (ATTAC
NECESSARY) WDITIONAL INFORMATION IF
Target Population (ie., families, senion, etc): Single rentals
Monthly Rent (by bdr. size) or Sales Price of Units:
Within rental rate limits established by City affordable criteria.
Term of Aff'ordability (ie., 30 yrs, life of project, etc.): As required by City.
Projected Schedule for Construction of Affordable Housing Units:
Mid to late 1997
V the affordable units are being constructed to satisfy the City of Carlsbad's Inclusionary Housing requirement, how
will they be phased with respect to construction of the market rate units? Please Explainl'roject Phasing:
The proposed 2nd dwelling units will be built in conjunction with and proportion to
the market rate units.
V. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
'lease attach a copy of development and operating financial proformas showing sources and Uses of funds to
iccomplish the affordable units proposed in this application. In the proformas, please identify your subsidy sources
nd appropriate justifications for use of these sources.
Iescribe the local financial assistance or incentives, if any, including specific terms desired for the affordable housing
lroject which you are, or will be, requesting from the City of Carlsbad:
N/A
None
jentify any other project conditions which may be relevant to project feasibility:
Because the affordable/inclusionary housing character of the proposed product is
untested in a new subdivision setting, feasibility is not,yet proven.
Housing Commission Review Applicrnon
Page 2
ctlon on Appllwtltln by Haurlng CcmaMooa: .
her coamaou:
I
- EXHIBIT 3
-- RT TO TEE PLANNING CO MMISSION
P.C. AGENDA OF: JANUARY 17, 1996
Item NO.: @
Application complete date: September 19, 1995
Project Planner: Jeff Gibson
Project Engineer: Mike Shirey
SUBJECT: CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST - Request for
recommendation of approval for a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Map,
Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development Permit, to: (1) subdivide
the property into 61 single-family lots and 1 open space lot; (2) create a 27.4
acre remainder parcel; (3) provide 9 future second-dwelling units; and (4)
deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home as affordable to lower income households
or purchase one Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma; all on property
generally located east of Paseo del Norte, north of Camino de las Ondas, and
south of Palomar Airport Road, within Specific Plan 203 and Local Facilities
Management Zone 20.
1. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3879
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued by the
Planning Director, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3880,3881, and 3882
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of CT 95-03, SDP 95-06, and HDP 95-06, based on the
findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. INTRODUCIlON
The developer proposes to subdivide the 56.3 acre parcel into 61 single-family lots with a
27.4 acre remainder parcel, and provide 9 second dwelling units to satisfy inclusionary
housing requirements. Architectural elevations and floor plans are provided for the second
dwelling units and the project is consistent with all City codes, policies, and ordinances as
well as Specific Plan 203. To comply with all the requirements of the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance, including the three-bedroom requirement, the developer has been conditioned
to deed restrict one of the future three-bedroom homes as affordable to lower income
households, or purchase 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Lorna in compliance with City
Council Policy No. 57 and 58, and final approval by the City Council.
JII. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The 56.3 acre parcel is located within the Coastal Zone, Specific Plan 203, and has
Residential Medium (RM) and Open Space (OS) General Plan Land Use designations. The
CI' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 2
proposed project would include the following major features:
1. A residential subdivision into slxty-one (61) single-family lots with a 27.4 acre
remainder parcel, and one 8.3 acre open space lot, and;
2. The designation of 9 lots for future second-dwelling units and the deed restriction on
one three-bedroom home to satisfy the City's inclusionary housing requirements.
The second-dwelling units would have exterior access, be incorporated into the
second-story of the primary home, and utilize a portion of the three-car garage for
parking.
The zoning for the entire 56.3 acre MSP California LLC parcel was recently recommended
for a change from Residential Density Multiple with the Qualified Development Overlay
Zone (RDM-Q) to the One-Family Residential with the Qualified Development Overlay
Zone (R-1-7500-Q). The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the
zone change (ZC 94-04) on January 3,1996, as part the neighboring Mar Vista project to
the west. The City Council has not taken final action on ZC 94-04, therefore, the approval
of Emerald Ridge West/C" 95-03 would be conditionally recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission, subject to the final approval of ZC 94-04 by the City Council.
The major project improvements would include the following:
1. The construction of local public streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and drainage
facilities necessary to sewice the new lots;
2. A sewer line that connects from the property, through the Mar Vista site to the west
and, then north to an existing sewer line located along Encinas Creek and Palomar
Airport Road;
3. The construction of a local public street named Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road)
from Hidden Valley Road west to the project site.
Currently the western half of the property is being used for agricultural purposes. It is also
surrounded by open space to the east and north, Poinsettia Community Park to the south,
and similar residentially designated (RM) property (Mar Vista) to the west. The majority
of the site contains very gently sloping topography that rises from west to east. The eastern
half of the property consists of a finger canyon which continues north and connects with
Canyon de las Encinas. The flat buildable areas within the western half of the property are
rimmed by steep slopes along the east and north. Topographic elevations on the site range
from approximately 70 feet in the canyon floor to 190 feet above mean sea level on the
gently sloping mesa.
The following vegetation types are present on the property:
1. RuderaVagriculture on the gently sloping mesa;
-.. ..
CT 95-03/SDP %-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 3
2. Pampas grass, diegan coastal sage scrub, and southern mixed chaparral along the
steeper slopes surrounding the mesa to the north and east;
3. Riparian southern willow scrub, and baccharis/mule fat in the bottom of the eastern
finger canyon.
Vehicular access to the site would be provided by future Calle Serena (also referred to as
Cherry Blossom Road) which connects to Hidden Valley Road. Hidden Valley Road is east
of the property and intersects with Camino de las Ondas to the south and PaIomar Airport
Road to the north.
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640
acre Zone 20 Planning Area. Specific Plan 203 was approved by the Planning Commission
and City Council in 1993. The specific plan provides a framework for the development of
the vacant properties within Zone 20 to ensure the logical and efficient provision of public
facilities and community amenities for the future residents of the planning area.
The proposed project is subject to the following adopted land use plans and regulations:
A. General Plan with RM and OS Land Use Designations;
B. Specific Plan 203;
C. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance), including;
1. Chapter 21.10 One-family Residential Zone;
2. Chapter 21.06 Qualified Development Overlay Zone;
3. Chapter 21.85 Inclusionary Housing, and Chapter 21.53, Site Development
Plan required for affordable housing project;
4. Chapter 21.95 Hillside Development Regulations.
D. Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP);
E. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 20 (Subdivision Ordinance);
F. Habitat Management Plan: (in process);
G. Growth Management Ordinance, (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20);
H. Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) and the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
CT' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 4
w., ANALYSIS
Staff is recommending approval of this project for the reasons stated in the staff report.
Consequently, this analysis section was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with
the applicable plans, policies, regulations, and standards listed above and presented through
the use of the following tables and text.
A. CARLSBAD GENERAL PLAN
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The
table below indicates how the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan which
are particularly relevant to this proposal.
1. Proposed residential density of 3.01 dus/net acre is below the GP
designation of RM 4-8 dus/net acre and growth control point of 6
dudnet acre;
Provide a combination of second dwelling units, deed restriction of 1
three-bedroom home or the purchase of 1 Affordable Housing Credit
in Villa Lorna.
1. GP constrained lands are (steep slopes and riparian habitat)
protected in 8.3 acre open space lot; 2. City Wide Trail Link No. 29 to be aligned along the top of the
bluff and across the slope via an exiting dirt road to minimize
California gnatcatcher, and coastal sage scrub impacts in the
eastern finger canyon.
Required roadway and intersection improvements, including Hidden
Valley Road from Camino de las Ondas to Palomar Airport Road, are
shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval.
1. Exterior traffic noise levels do not exceed 60 d%A CNEib
2. Noise study required to evaluate interior noise levels as part of the
future Site Development Plan for the homes;
3. Residential land use is conditionally compatible with land uses
designated within the 60-65 dBA CNEL noise contours of the
airport land use plan (CLUP).
Proposed project is required to pay Park-in-lieu fees.
Proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and
fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions
pf approval.
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST JANUARY 17,1996
Site Design
B. SPECIFIC PLAN 203
The proposed project is consistent with the policies of Specific Plan 203. The table below
indicates how the project complies with the relevant requirements of the specific plan:
The layout of the subdivision does not impact steep slopes, the streets
are curnilinear, and there are adequate buffer areas between the
proposed dwelling units and the open space lot and Poinsettia Park.
Land Use
Compatibility
Lot Size (Min.)
Lot Width
Open space is provided along the eastern and northern slopes,
proposed low density residential is compatible with future residential
(RM) to the west, and there is a roadway (Cherry Blossom Rd.)
between the residential building pads and Poinsettia Community Park
to the south.
7,500 Square Feet 7,570-19,201 SF
60 Feet 60-100 Feet
Circulation
Landscaping
See General Plan Discussion under Circulation. In addition, Hidden
Valley Road would have pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes.
70% of the lots have three (3) street trees in the front yard, and 30%
of the lots have one (1) tree. All manufactured slopes have
landscaping to prevent erosion and to provide visual screening.
Building
Elevations
The building elevations of future single-family homes would be
reviewed by the Planning Commission under a Site Development
Plan.
Affordable
Housing
Designate 9 second dwelling units, deed restrict 1 three-bedroom
home or purchase 1 credit in Villa Loma per the offsite affordable
housing provisions of Section IV.C.3.ii of SP 203
C. ZONING ORDINANCE
1. One-Family Residential Zone (R-1-7500):
The developer is proposing to subdivide the property into single-family lots,
therefore, the following table summarizes the project’s compliance with the standards
of the R-1-7500 Zone:
Second Dwelling I 640 Square Feet I 640 Square Feet
Unit Size
- -
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 6
Setbacks:
Front - 20 Feet
Street Side - 10 Feet
Side - 10% of Lot Width
I Rear - 20% of Lot Width
Garage Size &
Lot Coverage
Two Car Garage - 20’X 20’ Two & Three-Car Garages
One Additional SDace I
I To Be Determined with Future I SDP
40 Percent
Building Height
Panhandle Lot:
Access Length -
Combined Access
Width -
Buildable Area -
30 Feet & Two-Story To be Determined with Future I SDP
150 Feet Max.
30 Feet Min.
8,000-10,000 SF
120 Feet
30 Feet
8,635-9,836 SF
To Be Determined with Future
SDP
The developer is also proposing Lots No. 28 and 29 as panhandle type lots. The two
lots are justified based on the irregular configuration of the buildable area of the
overall parcel. The buildable portion of the parcel is long and narrow and
constrained with steep slopes to the north and east, and a property boundary to the
west, resulting in developable land that cannot be served adequately with a public street. The panhandle lots are located along the perimeter of the site and between
two cul-de-sac bulbs and would not adversely effect public street access to
surrounding properties. The project has been appropriately conditioned to ensure
that the panhandle lots comply with the access, parking, setback, and drainage
provisions of the code.
2. Qualified Development Overlay Zone:
The property contains the Q-Overlay Zone. At this point in time the developer is
not planning to construct homes on the lots, therefore, the Q-Overlay Zone would
require that a Site Development Plan (SDP) be approved by the Planning
Commission prior to approval and issuance of building permits for the homes. The
SDP would show the floor plans, placement of the homes on the lots, building height,
and the architectural elevations of the homes.
CI' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 7
3. Chapter 21.85 Inclusionary Housing, and Chapter 21.53, Site Development
Plan:
The project would have 61 single-family lots and an inclusionary housing requirement
of 10.764 dwelling units which must be affordable to lower income households. In
addition, 10 percent of those units, or 1 dwelling unit, must be a three-bedroom unit.
The developer is proposing to satisfy the housing requirements by designating, onsite,
9 lots for future second-dwelling units. The second-dwelling units would have
exterior access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary home, and
utilize a portion of the three-car garage for parking. Since the project also requires
the provision of 1 three-bedroom unit which is infeasible to accomplish with second
dwelling units, staff has conditioned the project to deed restrict one of the future
three-bedroom homes as affordable to lower income households. In addition to this
condition, the developer has been provided an option of providing 9 second dwelling
units on-site and purchasing 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma. The offsite
purchase of 1 credit in Villa Loma is conditioned subject to compliance with City
Council Policy No. 57 and 58, Specific Plan 203, and the final approval of the City
Council as part of the project's Affordable Housing Agreement. The remaining .764
fraction of an inclusionary dwelling unit would be satisfied through the payment of
a fee equal to the fraction (.764) times the average subsidy needed to make
affordable to a lower-income household, one newly constructed typical housing unit.
If at a future date it is determined to be infeasible to provide any of the affordable
housing onsite, the developer has also requested a second option to satisfy the
affordable housing requirements by either purchasing 10 credits in Villa Loma or
participating in an offsite combined affordable project. In the event of this option,
the project has been conditioned to require future compliance with City Council
Policies 57 and 58, and Specific Plan 203 prior to City Council approval of an
Affordable Housing Agreement to allow the offsite option.
The Carlsbad Municipal Code requires a Site Development Plan for any affordable
housing project of any size. The Site Development Plan for this project indicates
which lots would be designated and deed restricted for second-dwelling units. The
plans also include prototypical preliminary floor plans and building elevations to
illustrate the parking arrangement and how the second-dwelling units integrate into
the primary homes. If, at a later date, the developer desires to build a different type
of primary home/second-dwelling unit or change the designated lots, a Site Development Plan Amendment must be approved by the Planning Director.
The project has been conditioned to require an Affordable Housing Agreement that
would be submitted for review and approval by the City prior to final map approval.
The Affordable Housing Agreement is a legally binding agreement between the
developer and the City which provides the specific details regarding the phasing and
implementation of the affordable housing requirements of this project.
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD FUDGE WEST JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 8
Slope Height
Grading Volume
4. Hillside Development Regulations:
30 Feet 14 Feet Max.
0-7,999 cubic yds/acre 6,493 cubic yds/acre
The project site contains slopes of 15% or greater and an elevation differential
greater than 15 feet, therefore, a Hillside Development Permit is required. The table
below indicates how the project complies with the requirements of the Hillside
Development Regulations:
Contour Grading Variety of Slope Direction
& Undulation
Manufactured Slopes
Follow the Edge of the
Bluff
Slope Setback
Landscaping Combination of Trees, I I Shrubs, & Ground Cover
Slope Screening
I Not Quantified - 15 Foot I 30-60Feet
Recommended
Roadways
I Roofline, Building Bulk & To Be Determined with I Future SDP
Arc hi tecture
Scale
Follow Contours Curvilinear Streets That
Follow the Bluff Top
The project is located in the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and
complies with the plan as follows:
1. The project is located within the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone
and would connect to the gravity sewer system that has been proposed and
designed to service the sewer basin in this area which includes a portion of
the Costa Do Sol project, Poinsettia Community Park, and the Mar Vista project. Sewer Alignment "A" is the environmentally preferred alignment and
would impact steep slopes with disturbed habitat.
Due to the topographic constraints in the area, the District Engineer and the
Coastal Commission staff have both recommended that Alternative "A" is the
least environmentally damaging alternative. On January 3, 1996, as part of
the Mar Vista project (CI' 94-11), the Planning Commission approved
Alternative "A" for the following reason:
CI' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 9
a. The Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone permits development
and grading on slopes over 25% in order to provide utilities to service
areas of the project site if there is a no less environmentally damaging
alternative. The feasibility of Sewer Alignment "B is questionable in
terms of tunneling under Encinas Creek to minimize riparian impacts
and the Coastal Commission supports Alignment "A".
Primary access to the site via Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road) would
impact .05 acres of steep slopes (25% slope or greater) that contain disturbed
Coastal Sage Scrub habitat. Because this access is also the least
environmentally damaging and provides primary access to flat developable
areas of the site, the slope encroachment is permitted per the requirements
of the Overlay Zone. The Planning Commission also reviewed and
recommended approval of this access, as part of the Mar Vista Project.
2. The project will be conditioned to provide adequate drainage, siltation, and
erosion control facilities as part of the approved grading permit. To avoid
potentially damaging runoff into Encinas Creek during the rainy season, the
grading operation would be limited to the summer construction season, April
1 to October 1.
3. The project contains vacant non-prime agricultural land containing Class I11
and IV soils and is located in the Coastal Agncultural Overlay Zone (Site 11).
The Mello I1 LCP requires mitigation when non-prime coastal agricultural
land is converted to urban land uses. The project has been conditioned to
comply with the LCP mitigation option provided when projects are located in
Site 11. This option requires the payment of an "Agricultural Conversion
Mitigation Fee" to the California Coastal Conservancy.
E. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
The proposed tentative map would comply with all the requirements of the City's
Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20. Currently there are no public roads or intersections to
serve the project site, therefore, the developer must extend public off-site street
improvements to connect to the existing circulation network. Primary access to the property
would be provided by future Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road) which connects to Hidden
Valley Road. In order to comply with the City's cul-de-sac policy, the developer is also
required to construct a second road connection for emergency access purposes to the
driveway of Poinsettia Community Park to the south (as shown on Exhibit "C', dated
January 17, 1996).
The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and fire hydrants, as
shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval. The local streets have
adequate public right-of-way and connect to Hidden Valley Road which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area would be
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 10
constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb, gutters, sidewalks, and
underground utilities. The proposed street system is adequate to handle the project’s
pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate emergency vehicles.
To mitigate drainage impacts from the project site, the developer is required to provide
adequate drainage, erosion control, and urban pollutant basins. The drainage requirements
of Specific Plan 203, City ordinances, and Mello I1 have been considered and appropriate
drainage facilities have been designed and secured. In addition to City Engineering
Standards and compliance with the City‘s Master Drainage Plan, National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards will be satisfied to prevent any discharge
violations. To comply with Water Quality standards, City grading and erosion control
requirements, and the requirements of the Mello I1 segment of the Local Coastal Program,
the developer is required to install permanent and or temporary desiltatiodretention basins
at the downstream end of all proposed storm drain pipes.
The subdivision 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. The project has been designed and structured such that there are
no conflicts with any established easements. In addition, the property is not subject to a
contract entered into pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
F. HABlTAT MANAGEMENT PLAN: (IN PROCESS)
Future Calle Serena (Chew Blossom Road), which would lead from Hidden Valley Road
to the project site, would impact approximately 0.05 acres of disturbed coastal sage scrub
habitat (CSS), and grading for the residential building pads would impact 0.07 acres of CSS.
The impacted CSS habitat area is small in size, linear in shape, partially disturbed and
located along the edge of larger habitat areas, thus the significance of the impact is reduced.
Because the CSS habitat is regarded as disturbed or located along the edges and the
remaining high quality CSS habitat in this area would be preserved, the project is
conditioned to mitigate the 0.12’acre CSS impact by acquiring, for preservation, comparable
quality habitat. The developer is proposing to mitigate this impact by purchasing, for
preservation, .19 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat within the high quality, coastal sage
scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank (subject to the approval of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish, and the City of
Carlsbad).
The construction of Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road) in this area is the least
environmentally damaging access alternative. It provides primary access to an otherwise
landlocked area that is surrounded by steep slopes and high quality CSS. The .07 acre
impact within the 60 foot buffer area is small and linear in size and shape and will not
adversely effect the larger habitat area to be preserved in permanent open space (Lot 62).
The project would result in the loss of 0.12 acres of disturbed CSS habitat, therefore, prior
to the issuance of a grading permit, the City will have to authorize this project to draw from
CT 95-03/SDP 9546/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 11
the City's 165.70 acre (5%) CSS interim take allowance. The take of 0.12 acres of CSS
habitat from the MSP California LLC property will not impair the ability of the City to
implement it's draft Habitat Management Plan (subregional NCCP). Interim CSS habitat
losses that are incurred before completion and approval of a subregional NCCP/Carlsbad
Habitat Management Plan (HMP), must be approved by the City Council (Habitat Loss
Permit) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. A procedure has been established
which allows the City to benefit from the 4(d) rule. This procedure includes: establishment
of the base number of acres of coastal sage scrub habitat in the subregion, calculation of the
5% for the interim habitat loss, and cumulative record keeping of all interim habitat losses.
Prior to the grading of the project site the Developer must receive City Council approval
of a Habitat Loss Permit, The City has calculated that 5% of the base acreage of coastal
sage scrub in Carlsbad is 165.70 acres. As of August, 1995, 19.38 acres have been taken.
The loss of coastal sage scrub due to this project (0.12 acres) would result in a cumulative
habitat loss of 19.5 acres for the HMP area once all the approved loses have been taken.
This loss does not exceed the 5% guideline of 165.70 acres.
The habitat loss has been reduced or mitigated by the design of the project, in that the Calle
Serena (Cherry Blossom Road) alignment is the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope
impact and adequate mitigation is proposed to offset habitat impacts from grading for
building pads along Lot 62. The project meets the intent of the City's draft HMP as follows:
1. The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning Areas;
2. The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat
values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage Planning Area
&PA);
3. The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the Carlsbad HMP in that the area is not a part of a Linkage Planning Area, makes no
contribution to the overall preserve system and will not significantly impact
the use of habitat patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding
PPAS.
4. Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of CSS will be in the form of the
acquisition of habitat credits as discussed above. The loss of habitat on the
MSP California LLC property will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of
the sunrival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
5. The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent to
Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore, large
blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not occur, and;
6. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS habitat
area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be more
CI' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996 PAGE 12
~~
LIBRARY
WASTE WATER TREATMENT
PARKS
DRAINAGE
important.
131.6 square feet Yes
71 EDUs Yes
.49 acres Yes
Basin No. 3 Yes
G. GROWI" MANAGEMENT
~~~~
CIRCULATION
FIRE
OPEN SPACE
SCHOOLS
SEWER COLLECIION SYSTEM
WATER
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20 in the
Southwest Quadrant of the City. The impacts created by this development on public
facilities and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summarized as
follows:
~ ~~~~~
670 ADT Yes
Station No. 4 Yes
3.48 acres YeS
CUSD Yes
71 EDUs Yes
15,620 GPD Yes
CITY ADMINISTRATION I 246.8 square feet I Yes II
The project is 68.26 dwelling units below the Growth Management Dwelling Unit allowance
of 139.26 dwelling units for the property as permitted by the Growth Management
Ordinance. Surplus dwelling units (68.26) that are not used by the developer are placed into
a City bank of excess dwelling units. The City can allocate these dwelling units to residential
projects that exceed the growth control point (Density Bonus) in order to provide affordable
housing.
H. E"MENTALREMEW
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan SP 203 which covers the
640 acre Zone 20 planning area. The certified Final Program EIR 90-03 for Specific Plan
203 addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with the future buildout of the
Zone 20 Specific Plan area and is on file in the Planning Department. Use of a Program
EIR enables the City to characterize the overall environmental impacts of the specific plan.
The Find Program EIR contains broad, general environmental analysis that serves as an
information base to be consuited when ultimately approving subsequent development
projects (i.e. tentative maps, site development plans, grading permits, etc ...) within the
CT 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 13
specific plan area. The City can avoid having to "reinvent the wheel" with each subsequent
development project by analyzing, in the program EIR, the regional influences, secondary
effects, cumulative impacts, and broad alternatives associated with buildout of the planning
area. The recommended and applicable mitigation measures of Final EIR 90-03 are
included as conditions of approval for this project. Per the requirements of Final EIR 90-
03, additional project specific environmental studies, including biological analysis, have been
prepared. These studies provide more focused and detailed project level analysis and
indicate that additional environmental impacts beyond what was analyzed in Final EIR 90-03
will result from implementation of the project.
In addition to the Final EIR for Specific Plan 203, more recently the City has certified a
Final Master Environmental Impact Report for an update of the 1994 General Plan. The Master EIR serves as the basis of environmental review and impact mitigation for project's
that are consistent with the plan, including projects within Specific Plan 203.
Per the recommendations of Final EIR 90-03, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued
for this project to evaluate the additional environmental impacts created by the two off-site
sewer lines, project grading, and the access road (Cheny Blossom Road) from Hidden
Valley Road. The Planning Director has determined that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment, however, there will not be a significant effect in this case since the mitigation measures and Mitigation and Reporting Program described in the attached
EM-Part I1 have been added to the project. This decision was based on findings of the
EM-Part 11, an evaluation of Final EIR 90-03 and Master EIR 94-01, an archaeological
report, a biological survey and impact study, a geotechnical report, soils report, pesticide
residue survey and report, acoustical study, traffic report, and field surveys by staff.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration was sent to the State Clearinghouse and the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service for public agency review and letters were received from the
California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the California Coastal Commission
(CCC). DFG concurs with the mitigation measures of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and agrees with staff that the project is consistent with the Natural Communities
Conservation Planning Program Guidelines (NCCP). The CCC recommends Sewer
Alignment "A" because it is the least environmentally damaging alternative. They have also
commented on the project's grading and the potential impact it may have on steep slopes.
In response to this comment, the project's grading for the trail, local internal streets, and
building pads has been designed to avoid all steep slopes and the proposed manufactured slopes have been contoured graded to follow the top of the bluff. In addition, future
buildings would be setback 60 feet from the steep slope and native habitat areas.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2.
3.
4.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3879 Planning Commission Resolution No. 3880
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3881
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3882
Cl" 95-03/SDP 9546/HDP 95-06 - EMERALD RIDGE WEST
JANUARY 17,1996
PAGE 14
5. LocationMap 6. Background Data Sheet 7.
8. Disclosure Form
9.
10.
11.
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Department of Fish and Game letter, dated November 17, 1995
California Coastal Commission letter, dated November 30, 1995
Full size Exhibits "A" - "M", dated January 17, 1996 JG:kr
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3879
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP,
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, TO: (1) SUBDIVIDE THE MSP
LOTS, ONE 8.3 ACRE OPEN SPACE LOT, AND A 27.4
ACRE REMAINDER PARCEL; AND (2) ALLOW 9
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF PASEO
DEL NORTE, NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS ONDAS,
AND SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN
SPECIFIC PLAN 203 AND LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CALIFORNIA LLC PROPERTY INTO 61 SINGLE-FAMILY
FUTURE SECOND-DWELLING UNITS; ALL ON
CASE NO: CI' 95-03/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for approval of the project
more fully described as a Tentative Map, Site Development Plan, and Hillside Development
Permit, to subdivide the MSP California LLC property into 61 single-family lots, one 83
acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder parcel, and allow 9 future seconddwelling units,
for certain property to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as "Description No.
1,103.91 Acres" on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19,1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels "A", "B", "C" and "D" of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Official Records.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law and provided in Chapter 19.04 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code, to consider said request, and
I i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning I
Commission as follows: I I
i A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 1
4 I I B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning 1
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Mitigated Negative '
Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated October 27, 1995, the "PII", I
dated October 3, 1995, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program on file in the Planning Department, attached hereto and made a
part hereof, based on the following findings:
~
I I I
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and ,
considered Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Emerald Ridge West project, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments thereon,
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, on file in the Planning I
Department, prior to recommending approval of the project. Based on the EM
Part-I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that there is no i
substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and !
hereby recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. I
i
2. The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration 1
for the Emerald Ridge West project and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting i
Program have 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.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Emerald Ridge West project reflects the independent judgment of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
Conditions:
1. Sewer/Stonndrain Alternative "A" - Implementation of Alternative "A" crosses
Encinas Creek. Prior to the issuance of a final map or grading permits, whichever
occurs first, the developer shall obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the
PC RES0 NO. 3879 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
4.
5.
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
California Fish and Game Department, if required for any proposed alterations to
existing natural watercourses, and shall comply with any and all permit
requirements associated therewith, pursuant to Section 1601/1603 of the Fish and
Game Code. The developer, in conjunction with the Department of the Army Corp
of Engineers shall determine whether a 404 permit shall be required for alterations
to wetland areas.
0.12 acres of coastal sage scrub (CSS) habitat will be directly impacted by this
project. The impacted CSS habitat is regarded as disturbed habitat (0.05 acres) and
medium to high quality habitat (0.07). Pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of
the 4d Rule for the California gnatcatcher, the project shall be required to mitigate
this loss of .12 acres of CSS by acquiring, for preservation, comparable quality
habitat at a 1:l ratio for the disturbed CSS and 2:l for the higher quality CSS. The
developer proposes to mitigate this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .19 acres
of CSS habitat within the high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad
Highlands mitigation bank. This proposal shall require the approval of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the California Department of Fish and Game,
and the City of Carlsbad. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project
applicant shall be required to consult with and obtain necessary “take” permits from
the USFWS, the California Department of Fish and Game for impacts created by the
loss of the .12 acres of CSS.
The CC&Rs for the project shall include a requirement, stating that flood lights
from the development shall not project/shine into the native habitat areas.
Heavy construction adjacent to coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitat areas along
the east and north side of the site during the California gnatcatcher breeding season
(March 1 to July 31) shall be prohibited.
Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is granted subject to the approval
of LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 95-03, SDP 95-06, and HDP 95-06. The Mitigated
Negative Declaration is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolution Nos. 3873,3874,3880,3881, and 3882.
PC RES0 NO. 3879 -3-
P
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
20
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of January,
1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3879
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
-4-
'
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARA TION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: San Diego County, City of Carlsbad, Accessors
Parcel Number 212-04032,35,36,38. East of
Paseo del Norte and south of Palomar Airport
Road.
PROJECT DESCRIPTlON: A tentative map for 61 singlefamily residential lots
ranging in size from 7,500 to 19,201 sq. ft., a 8.3 acre open space lot, and 10 second-
dwelling units. Project improvements include: (1) local public streets, curbs, gutters,
sidewalks and drainage facilities to serve the lots; (2) two alternative sewer and
stormdrain alignments (A and 6) that connect from the property to an existing easvwest
sewer line along Encinas Creek; (3) the construction of Hidden Valley Road from
Camino de las Ondas to Palomar Airport Road; (4) the alignment of a trail between the
northern segment of Hidden Valley Road and the residential lots, and; (5) the
construction of a local public street from Hidden Valley Road to the project site.
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 Mitigated 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 Migated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carisbad, California 92009. Comments
from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning
Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call
Jeff Gibson in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1 161,'actension 4455.
DATED: OCTOBER 27,1995
CASE NO: CT 95-03/HDP 9506/SDP 95-06 Planning Director
CASE NAME: EMERALO RIDGE WEST
PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 27,1995 JQkr
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. Callfornia 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 t 61 @
ONME "TAL IMPACT ASSESSME NTF'ORM-PART4
(?O BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CT 9543/HDP 9546/SDP 95.06
DATE: October 3. 1995 BACKGROUND
1. CASENAME: Emera Id Ridne West
2. APPLICANT: Lad win Desim G~uD. Inc.
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 703 Palomar Abort Road. Suite 300
Carlsbad CA 92009. (619) 438-3182
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: May 26.1995
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A tentative ~TE~D for 6 1 single-family residential lots ranning in size from
7.500 to 19.201 sa. ft.. a 8.3 acre own wce lot. and 10 seconddwellinn units. Proiect
hmovements include: (1) local Dubk streets. curbs. gutters. sidewalks and drainaze facilities to Sewe
the lots: (2) two alternative sewer and stormdrain aliments (A and B) that connect from the
prowrtv to an existinn eastf west sewer line along Encinas Creek (3) the construction of Hidden
Valley Road from Camino de las Ondas to Palomar Ahrt Road: (4) the alipnment of a trail between
the northern sement of Hidden Valley Road and the residential lots. and (5) the construction of a
local Dubk street from Hidden Valley Road to the m iect site,
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.
- Land Use and Planning - X Transportation/CircuIation - Public Services
- Population and Housing - X Biological Resources - Utilities and Service
- Geological PmbIans - Energy and Mineral Resources
Systems
;X, Aesthetics - X Water - Hazards X CdturalReso~
- Recreation
- X AirQuality X Noise
- X Mandatory Findings of
Significance
1 Rev. 3r2sps
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the I#d Agency).
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a signifkant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I frnd that although the proposed project could have a sipifkant 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I frnd that the proposed project MAY have a signXcant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have signifcant 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. An MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I frnd 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 EIR / MlTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice
of Prior Comuliance has been premed.
IOlUt. k- Planning Director Date I
2 Rev. 3m
STATE CEQA GUIDBLINES, chapret 3, Article 5, saction 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment to detmnim if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental
hpact 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 referend infodon 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 Signifcant Lmpact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact
is not adversely si@icant, and the impact does not ex& adopted general standards and policies.
"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Sigdhnt
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 signifhnt level.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant.
Based on an "EM-Part IT, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the
environment, but fl potentially sipfkant 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
requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required
by the prior en- document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental &cument is quired (Prior compliance).
mitigation measufcs that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circuastan CeS
When "Potentially Signiticant Imp9 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 Ci perceives no substantial evidence that the Project
or any of its aspects may cause a signifhnt effect on the environment.
3
If then gtc cmc amore jmtcndally significant efficts, the Ci may avoid prcpdng an EIR ifthere
are mitigation mcasucm to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation
measures are agmd to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate
"Potentially Si- Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated' may be checked and a Mitigated
Negative Declaratioa may be prepared.
0 An EIR mu@ 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 agra to
mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than sigxuficant; (2) a "Statement of Ovemding
Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier Em, (3) proposed
mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or, (4) through the EIA-Part
tI 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. 3m
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): ) - - - - X
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project? 0 - X -
X - c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the
vicinity? 0 -
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts fiom
incompatible land uses)? 0
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-inunne or
minority wrnmunity)? 0 X -
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? 0 X -
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? 0 X -
X - c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? 0
III. GEOLOGIC PROBXXMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to pore3ltial impacts involving:
- X
- X
X -
- X
a) Fault rupture? 0
b) Seismicgroundshaking?O
c) Seismic ground Mure, including Liquefaction? 0
d) Seiche, tsunaru *, or volcanic hazard? 0
5
e) Landslides or mudflows? 0
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fa? 0
g) Subsidence of the land? 0
h) Expansive soils? 0
i)
6
Unique geologic or physical features? 0
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff? 0
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? 0
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? 0 X -
Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body? 0
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements? 0
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception ob an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through SUM loss of groundwater recharge
capability? 0
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
0
Impacts to groundwater quality? 0
6
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
0 - - - - X
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? 0
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? 0 - -
d) Create objectionable odors? 0 - -
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCUL,ATION. Would the proposal
result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
0 - -
b) Ham& to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 0 - -
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses? 0 - -
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 0 - -
f) Conflicts with adaped policies supporting
alternative transpoptatr 'on (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle
racks)? 0 - -
g) Rail, waterbom or air traffic impacts? 0 - -
X -
X -
- X
X -
X -
- X
- X
X -
- X
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the prop4
result in impacts to:
7 Rev. 3/L8p3
a) Endangered, threatened or ran species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and buds? 0 x
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 0
c) Locally designated ~tural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? 0 X -
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
Pool)? 0 X -
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 0
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 0
b) Use non-renewable resourus in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? 0
c) Result in the loss of availability of a hown
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State? 0
E. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous subdances (including, but not limited
to: oil, pestichks, chemicals or radiation? 0
b) Possible intedferrm# with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuarion plan? 0
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? 0
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? 0
8
e) Increase fue hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? 0 -
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 -
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 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:
- X
X
X
-
-
a) Fire protection? 0
b) Police protection? 0
c) Schools? 0
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including mads? 0 X
X
-
- e) Other governmental services? 0
XII. UTILlTIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? 0 X -
- X b) Communicatia~~syIltemslO
c) Local or ngiaml water treatment or distribution
facilities? 0
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0
e) Storm water drainage? 0
f) Solid wastedisposai? 0
' g) Local or regional wata supplies? 0
9
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? 0
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0
c) Create light or glare? 0
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
I
Disturb paleontological resources? 0
Disturb archaeological resources? 0
Affect historical resources? 0
Have the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? 0
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within
the potential impact area? 0
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase- the demand for neighborhood or regional park or other recreational facilities? 0
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0
x
10 Rev. 3/23/95
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fsh or wild life 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 perids of
California history or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other cumnt projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
X -
x
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should idenq the following
on attached sheets:
Earlier analyses uscd. IdcntiQ earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. MBIR - 1994 update of the Carlsbad General Plan/Fii EIR 90-03 for Specific Plan 203, on
file in the Phdng Department at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad CA. 92009.
Impacts adequEdely addrewed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis. See following discussioh
Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measunx which were inc~qorated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specitic conditions for the
project. See following discusrioh
11 Rev. 3/23/95
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:
The project is located 900th of Mom Airport Road, east of Paseo Del Norte, adjacent to future Hidden Valley
Road, and north of Camin0 de las Ondas, in the City of Carlsbad. The western half of the property is utilized for
agriculture. The majority of the site wntains very gently sloping topography that rises from west to east. The
eastern half of the property consists of a finger canyon which continues north and connects with Canyon de las
Encinas. The flat developable areas of the property are rimmed by steep slopes along the east and north.
Topographic elevations on the site range from approximately 80 feet in the canyon floor to 180 feet above mean
sea level on the gently sloping mesa. The site is underlain by the Eocene age bedrock Santiago Formation (also
known as Delmar and Friars Formation), which is capped by Quaternary terrace deposits. These bedrock
formations are mantled by alluvium, topsoil, and artificial fill soils. Six vegetation types are present on the
property: (1) rudera.l/agriculture on the mesa; (2) pampas grass, diegan coastal sage scrub, and southern mixed
chaparral along the steeper slopes, and; (3) riparian southern willow scrub, and baccharislmule fat in the canyon.
Vehicular access to the site would be provided by a local street leading from a future non-loaded collector street
named Hidden Valley Road. Hidden Valley Road would travel east of the property and intersect with Camino de
las Ondas to the south and intersect with Palomar Airport Road to the north. The project would sewer north,
through the Mar Vista project (CT 94-11) and connect with the existing east/west sewer line in Canyon de las
Encinas (Alternative “A“ or “B”). Due to an elevation differential of 28 feet between the low end of the Mar Vista
project site at elevation 142 feet (La 19) and the high point on Emerald Ridge - West at elevation 180 feet, it is
not physically possible to sewer the project through the already approved sewer line in future Hidden Valley Road,
therefore, another sewer line that flows directly to the north of the site is required. The alignment of future Hidden
Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road to Camino de las Ondas has already been environmentally reviewed and
approved by two previous projects; the City‘s Poinsettia Community Park project - (CUP 92-05), and the Sambi
Vesting Tentative Map - (CT 92-02). The environmental documents for these projects are on file in the Planning
Department.
Subsequent to the submittal of this project to the City on May 26, 1995, the California Department of Fish and
Game, the California Coastal Commission, and the Army Corps of Engineers in a Section 7 Consultation with the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service have all issued permits or approvals for the construction of Hidden Valley
Road from Palomar Airport Road to the northern propeIty boundary of the City‘s Poinsettia Community Park.
Hidden Valley Road would provide primary access to the project from palomar Airport Road, and it‘s construction
would not sipifkantly impact the environment as conditioned and mitigated through City, State and Federal
permits.
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640 acre Zone 20 Planning
Area. The certified Fiarl Frogram EIR 90-03 for Specific Plan 203 addresses the potential environmental impacts
associated with the future buildout of the Zone 20 Specific Plan area and is on file in the Planning Department.
Use of a Program EIR enables the City to characterize the overall environmental impacts of the specific plan. The
Final Program EIR contains broad, general environmental analysis that serves as an informaton base! to be
consulted when ultimately approving subsequent development projects (i.e. tentative maps, site development plans,
grading permits, etc ...) within the specific plan area. The City can avoid having to ”reinvent the wheel” with each
subsequent development project by analyzing, in the program EIR, the regional influences, secondary effects,
cumulative impacts, and broad alternatives associated with buildout of the plannjng area. The applicable and
recommended mitigation me%sures of Fii EIR 90-03 will be included as conditions of approval for this project.
This subsequent expanded “Initial Study is intended to supplement the Final EIR and provide more focused and
12 Rev. 3/28/95
L
detailed project bel analysis of site specific environmentaI impacts and, ifappficable, provide more refined project
level mitigation xneasms as required by Final EIR 9043. Mitigation measures that are applicable to the project
and already included in Final EIR 90-03 will be added to the tentative map nsolution and new mitigation measures
not evaluated in Final EIR 903 will be included in this Mitigated Negative Declaration. For example, additional environmental impacts not addressed in Final EIR !N43 include riparian impacts created by the offsite sewer
alignment "B".
In addition to the Final EIR for Specific Plan 203, more recently the City has certified a Final Master
Environmental Impact Report for an update of the 1994 General Plan. The certified Master EIR is on file in the
Planning Department. The Master EIR serves as the bash of envirOnmental review and impact mitigation for
project's that are consistent with the plan, including projects within Specific Plan 203. Projects covered under the
Master EIR for the General Plan include implementation activities such as rezoning of properties, specific plans,
and the approval of development plans, including tentative maps, conditional use permits, and other land use
permits.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT:
To DomaDhv. Geotechnical. & G radin e *
Development of the site would include 129,205 cubic yards of grading to acmmmodate building pads, lots, utilities,
drainage structures, onsite local public roadways, and Hidden Valley Road. The proposed grading conforms to the
City's Hillside Development Ordinance and manufktumd slopes would be landform/contour graded, screened with
landscaping, and not exceed 30 feet in height, therefore the alteration of the topography would not be considered
a significant physical impact. The Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by GeoSoils, Inc., dated
September 6, 1994 states that, "Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering and geologic
analyses, it is our opinion that the project site is suited for development from a geotechnical engineering and
geologic standpoint". A grading permit is required for the project, therefore, the City's adopted &rading permit
standards, including required compliance with the geotechnicd study, would ensure that the project has proper erosion control measures including landscaping on manufactured slopes, adequate drainage facilities, and proper
soil compaction. These items are all required by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the grading
permit.
Water Oualitv;
Section 5.2 of Master EIR 9341 discussed water quality and sedimentation impacts to Encinas Creek Development
of the project would create impervious surfaces onsite which reduce absorption rates and increase swface runoff
and runoff velocities. In addition, drainage from the project's roofs, streets, driveways, slopes, and yards would
constitute a potentially significant impact to water quality due to potential pollutants in the %on-point source"
urban runoff. Buildout of the General Plan, including nsi&ntial development within Specific Plan 203, may
significantly impact hydrological resources, therefore, the appropriate, and recommended General Pian mitigation
measures will be added as a condition of this project - (Sccticm 5.2.5, hge 5.2-8, Master EIR 9341). Prior to
approval of a grading permit the applicant must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("DES) permit. The applicant would be required to provide the best management practices
to reduce Surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive biological areas. compliance with
this requirement would reduce any water quality impacts to below a level of significance. Grading Permit
standards and the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan require adequate drainage facilities to service the site.
Hydrology standanis of the Mello II Segment of the Local coastal Program require that post development surface
m-off, from a lO-year/6 hour storm event, must not carry any increased velocity at the property line. To meet
this standard, energy dissipation hcilities (i.e. riprap) would be provided along the drainage course, in addition
to a pexmanent regid besin praposed west of future Hidden Valley Road, adjacent to Encinas Creek at the 67
foot elevation.
Air Oualitv:
Final EIR 90-03 for the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203) discussed air quality impacts, however, this discussion
has now been supplemented by the Air Quality Section 5.3 of the Master EIR. The implementation of projects
that are consistent with the updated 1994 General Plan will result in 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 buildout 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 buildout, 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.
Section 3.3.2.2 of Final EIR 9043 and Section 5.3.3 of the Master EIR both indicate that construction activities
associated with implementation of the Specific Plan and General Plan will produce short tern air quality impacts
in the form of dust from grading and traffic on dirt roads, and emissions from construction equipment. To reduce
these short-term construction impacts to the lowest extent possible the project would be conditioned with mitigation
measures designed to reduce dust and construction emissions - (Final EIR 9043, Section 3.3.3, Page III-33; and
Master EIR 9341, Section 5.3.5, Page 5.3-11).
Short-term construction impacts for this project can be mitigated below a level of significance locally, but
operation-related emissions are still considered cumulatively signikant because the area is located within a "non- attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked " YES - significant". This project is not
required to prep an EIR because the recent certification of the Final Master EIR 93-01. by City Council
Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding considerations" for air quality impacts. This
"Statement Of Overrim consideration" applies to all projects covered by the Mastez EIR, including residential
projects in Specific Plan 203, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required.
Cultural & Paleontolonical Resxrceg
Section 3.60 of Fii EIR 90-03 identified an archaeological site within the project boundaries (CA-SDI-9607).
The project would impact CA-SDI-9607, therefan, a Historical/Archaeological Survey of the site was ppared
by Gallegos & Associates, dated September 1994. The report concluded that due to the limited number or axtifacts
and the disrurbed natun of the deposit, site CA-SDI-9607 is identified as not impomnt under CEQA and the City
of Carlsbad Guidelines, and no further study or mitigation is required.
Section 3.10 of Final EIR 90-03, identified the potential for the presence of significant paleontological tesou~ces
throughout the entire spaclfic p-g area, with a high potential for the discovery of fossils during future grading
and construction activitisr To reduce this potential im~ to below a level of significance the project would be
conditioned with miti- mc8su~es designed to protect paleontological resources - (Section 3.10.0, Page a-107,
Final EIR 9043).
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT:
Backmound;
The Biology Section (3.4) of Fi EIR 90-03 provides baseline data at a gross scale due to the large size of the
specific plan area. Given the large number of property owners and their Mering development horizons and the
inevitable change in biological conditions over the long-term buildout of the specific plan area, it is not possible
to mitigate biological impacts from the buildout of the entire specific plan under one comprehensive open space
easement that crosses property lines or a habitat revegetation/enhancement plan sponsored solely by the property
owners. The implementation of the biological section of the EIR is based on future site specific biological survey
studies that focus on the impacts created by individual subsequent development projects. These additional biological
studies are required to consider the baseline data and biological open space recommendations of Final EIR 90.03
and provide more detailed and current resource surveys plotted at the tentative map scale for each property. The
range of the future mitigation options may include preservation of sensitive habitat onsite in conjunction with
enhancement/revegetation plans, payment of fees into a regional consewation plan, or the purchase and protection
of similar habitat offsite.
Proiect Level Bioloeical Reports:
To meet these EIR requirements a biological resource field survey was prepared by RECON, dated January 1995
and updated June 20, 1995 (sewer and stormdrain impacts), and a Biological Survey Report, prepared by Brian
Mooney Associated, dated August 1995, which evaluated impacts created by the project. These subsequent
biological studies are intended to provide more focused, current, and detailed project level analysis of site specific
biological impacts and provide more refined project level mitigation measures as required by Final EJR 90.03.
The project site was surveyed for sensitive plant and animal species and no sensitive plant species were identified
onsite, and three (3) sensitive wildlife species (turkey vulture, northern harrier, and California gnatcatcher) were
observed onsite. The "threatened" wastal California gnatcatcher was ohsewed in the Diegan coastal sage scrub
along the east and north side of the site. The property was also surveyed for the burrowing owl and the bird was not observed on the sita
Offsite Roadway ImDaCts and A hernatives:
The RECON Biological Report indicates that implementation of the project's off-site sewer and stormdrain
alignment "B" would create additional significant impacts to riparian habitat not discussed in Fii EIR 90-03,
therefore, mitigation measutts designed to reduce biological impacts to below a level of significance will be
required as part of the project. Alignment "B" may have a potentially significant impact on sensitive biological
habitat which is under the jurisdiction of two (2) "Responsible" public rtsourct agencies, the California Coastal
Commission and the California Department of Fii and Game (CDFG). The construction of the project's sewer
may be considered an alteration to a streambed and require a permit fram the CDFG and the Army Corp of
Engineers. If feasible, the Alternative "B" sewer line should be tunneled under Encinas Qnek to avoid impacts
to the wetlands. To reduce riparian impacts to below a level of significance, and contingent on the approval of
15 Rev. 3/28/%
the appropriate rcsou~as agencies, any areas of riparian habitat disturbed by wns&uction of the sewer line shall
be replanted/enhanced with native riparian species at a 3:1 ratio so there is no "net loss" of habitat, and impacts
are temporary. 'IXe will be required to obtain all necessaty or applicable resources agency permits prior
to approval of a W map or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
Based on comments from the California Coastal Commission during the public review period for the Mar Vista
project's (located directly west) Mitigated Negative Declaration, the developer has proposed a more environmentally
sensitive sewer and stormdrain alignment "A. If the newly proposed and environmentally preferred alternative
sewer and stormdrain alignment "A" is implemented, then no native habitat would be impacted and habitat
mitigation is not required, per the analysis provided in the updated Biological Survey Report, prepad by RECON,
dated June 20, 1995. During the writing of this Initial Study the Carlshad Water District has decided to actively
pursue approval for Alternative "A", from the California Coastal Commission and the State Fish and Game
Department, in order to provide sewer for the City's Poinsettia Community Park as well as other properties that
must gravity sewer in this direction within the area Phase I of the park is estimated to be completed by the end
of the summer of 1996, therefore, the Water District anticipates having all environmental clearances and applicable
resource agency permits for the sewer line prior to the summer so that the sewer line construction can be
coordinated with the completion of the park.
The Mooney & Associates Biological Report, dated August 1995, indicates that the project's main access road
leading from future Hidden Valley Road to the project site would impact approhtely 0.05 acres of disturbed
coastal sage scrub habitat (CSS), and grading for the residential building pads would impact 0.07 acres of CSS.
The impacted CSS habitat area is small in size, linear in shape, partially disturbed and located along the edge of
larger habitat areas, thus the significance of the impact is reduced. To offset the loss of 0.12 acres of CSS the
project shall be conditioned to mitigate the 0.12 acre CSS impact by acquiring, for preservation, comparable quality
habitat. The developer is proposing to mitigate this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .19 acres of coastal
sage scrub habitat within the high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank
(subject to the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish).
City's Habitat Management Plan. NCCP. and 4d Rule Determination:
The construction of the local access road in this area is the least environmentally damaging access alternative, it
provides primary access to an otherwise landlocked area that is surrounded by steep slopes and high quality CSS,
and it would result in the loss of 0.05 acres of CSS habitat, The .07 acre impact within the 60 foot buffer area
is small and linear in size and shape and will not adversely effect the larger habitat area to be preserved in
permanent open space (Lot 62). %or to the issuance of a grading pexmit the City may have to authorize this
project to draw from the City's 167.5 acre (5%) CSS take allowance. The take of 0.12 acres of CSS habitat from
the Emerald Ridge-W- ppoperty site will not impair the ability of the City to implement it's draft Habitat
Management Plan (sutxeghal NCCP). Mor to completion of a subregional NCCP/Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), interim apptroval must be secured for losses of coastal sage scrub habitat. A procedure has been
established which allows the local jurisdiction to benefit hm the 4(d) rule. This procedure includes:
establishment of the base numbex of acres of cogstal sage scrub habitat in the subregion, calculate 5% for the
interim habitat loss, and keep a cumulative record of all interim habitat losses. The City of Carlsbad has calculated
that 5% of the base acreage of coastal sage scrub is 165.70 acres. As of March, 1995.3.96 acres have been taken.
The loss of coastal sage scrub due to the project (0.12 acres) would result in a cumulative habitat loss of 4.08 acres
for the HMP area once all the approved loses have been taken. This loss does not exceed the 5% guideline of
165.70 acres. The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning Areas. The habitat loss will not
preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA). The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the Carlsbad HMP in that
'
I
the area is not a put ofa Linkage Planning
4
Area, makw no cudbution to the overall preserve system and will
not significantly the w of habitat patches as archipelago or stepping stones to sunounding PPAs.
The habitat loss has ban reduced ar mitigated by the design of the project, in that this acccss alignment is the most
sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact. Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of CSS will be in the fonn
of the acquisition of habitat dts as discussed above. The loss of habitat on the Emerald Ridge-West property
will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher. The habitat loss is small
in size, located along the edge, and in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent to future Hidden Valley Road and
the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore, large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not occur.
The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS habitat area; it is not in the center where the
loss of habitat would be more important.
The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The development of the Emerald Ridge West property
is a legal development and all required permits will be obtained. Mitigation for impacts to the CSS habitat will
be accomplished in the form of purchase of equal or better habitat credits at an off-site location. This mitigation
area has been identified as the Carlsbad Highlands Mitigation Bank site which has previously been accepted by
the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Noise and Light ImDacts to Gnatcatchers:
Since coastal California gnatcatchers are known to occur in the area to the east and north of the property per the
biological surveys, there may be an indirect impact to the gnatcatcher from the project's lights. These impacts can
be avoided by directing construction and project lighting away from the native habitats. The development wlll be
conditioned to prohibit any flood lights from projecting into native habitat areas. In addition, possible construction
noise impacts to breeding gnatcatchers should be avoided, therefore, the project shall be conditioned to prohibit
heavy construction adjacent to CSS and chaparral habitat areas during the breeding season (March 1 to July 31).
Future Hidden Valley Road hmcts:
An offsite access requirement for this project includes the construction of future Hidden Valley Road from Camino
de las Ondas to Palomar Airport Road. The Initial Study and adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Sarnbi Project - (CT 92-02), identified significant biological impacts associated with the construction of the
northern segment of Hidden Valley Road from Poinsettia Community Park north to Palomar Airport Road. As
part of the Sambi project a prehhry biological mitigation program was also adopted to reduce significant
biological impacts associated with the midway. As of the date of preparation of this Initial Study all required
Local, State, and Fcdd permits have been obtained for the construction of Hidden Valley Road. Since CT 94-1 1
(Mar Vista) is dependeat an this offsite roadway for access, compliance with all approved biological mitigation
as part of all local aad 1#0urct agency permits will become a condition of approval for this project. If the
developer constructs ths dway as part of this project, then that developer must comply with the terms and
conditions of the applicable pumits,
17 Rev. 3m95
The relatively level porticm of the site are currently being utilized for agricultural purposes. The site's soil (Marina
Loamy Coarse Sand & chestemon Fie sandy Loam (CfB)) is not considered prime, Class I or 11,
agricultural soil. The site is located in the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone (Site n) of the Mello II Segment
of the Local Coastal Program. Section 3.0 of Final EIR 90-03 evaluated impacts created by the conversion of
agricultural land use to urban land use in the overlay zone. The EIR concluded that the cumulative loss of
agricultural land could be offset with the mitigation measures established and required by Mello II Segment of
the LCP, therefore, the appropriate condition will be added to the project - (Section 3.1.3, Page III-20, EIR 90-03).
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT:
Planned Land Use And Density:
The project would not alter the planned land use of the site and is consistent with the Residential Medium (RM)
land use designation and density established by the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan. The RM
designation allows up to 8 dwelling units per net acre with a Growth Control Point of 6 dwelling units per net acre.
The project's proposed density is 3.01 dwelling units per net acre.
Hazardous Substances:
The site has been farmed and cultivated for a number of years and there may be a potential for signi!icant impacts
to future residents from accumulations of hazardous chemicals in the soil. To evaluate this potential impact a
Prelrrmnary Pesticide Residue Survey was prepared by Geo Soils Jnc., dated July 1994. The survey report indicates
that very low levellminute concentrations of four pesticides (3); 4,4'-DDE, 4,4'-DDT, Aroclor- 1254 (PCBs), Dioxin
(HpCDD, HxCDD, and OCDD) were detected in soil samples taken from the site. The report concluded that the
pesticide levels in the random soil samples were sufficiently below regulatory levels to not wanant additional
testing or assessment, therefore, the potential hazard is considered less than significant, and no further analysis is
required. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, per Final EIR 90-03 Section 3.9.3 , the pesticide
swey report shall be reviewed and approved by the County Health Department.
Section 3.9.2.3 of Final EIR 90-03 analyzed land use incornpatibiliti& cad by the ongoing use of agricultural
chemicals and the future development of residential land uses. As phased development proceeds within the specific
plan area, interface conflicts associated with pesticide spraying, inigation runoff, and odor impacts may arise
between agricultural operations and residential uses To reduce such impacts to below a level of significance, the
appropriate EIR recommdd mitigation measures will be made a condition of the project - (Section 3.9.3, Page
III-103, Final EIR 903). Mitigation will include walls, drainage control, and a notification to all future residential
land owners that this area is subject to dust, pesticide, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations.
Lipht and Glare;
The property is surrounded by open space to the cast and north, a future public park with several lighted sports
fields to the south, and similar residentially zoned property to the west, therefore, the light generated from the
vehicles, street lights, and homes in this single-family pmjcct will not signScantly impact the surrounding land
Uses.
18 Rev. 3JL8/95
m
Circulation;
The project would incnsr# local tra!lic in the area, however, a Traffic Study prcpand far the project by WPA
TMic Engineering, ItkcI, dated November 23, 1994, and a Traffic Impact Analysis conducted as part of the Zone
20 Specific Plan indicates that compliance with the circulation requirements of the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 2031,
Final Program EIR 90-03, and the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 20 would mitigate any significant
local traffic impacts - (Section 3.5, Page III-58, Final EIR 90.03). Fii EIR 90-03 for the Zone 20 Specific Plan (SP 203) evaluated circulation impacts, however, this discussion has now been supplemented by the Ciation
Section 5.7 of Final Master EIR 93-01.
Public Facilities:
The project is located within the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan. Public facility impacts and financing
have been accounted for in this plan to accommodate the residential development. The residential land use would
be consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the project would not significantly impact public facilities and
planned land uses. In addition, a condition will be added to the project to require that the developer enter into an
agreement with the appropriate school district to ensure that there are adequate school facilities available to serve
the residential subdivision - (Section 3.11, Page Ill-112, Final EIR 90-03).
Noise:
Section 3.8 of Final EIR 90.03 evaluated potential noise impacts for fume projects located in Specific Plan 203
and recommended that noise studies be prepared for projects impacted by traffic and airport noise. A portion of
the site is located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL contour, therefore, noise from existing Palomar Airport Road,
heo Del Norte, and the airport would create a potential impact on the homes in this project. In the
Comprehensive McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Plan, residential development is considered conditionally
compatible within the 60 to 65 CNEL contour area. A Noise Technical Report was prepared for the project by
Pacific Noise Control, dated May 1995. Noise levels on the project site will not exceed the Noise Element's
exterior Mic noise standard of 60 CNEL. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan for siting of single-
family homes on the lots, additional interior noise analysis will be required for the project. If interior noise levels
in the homes exceed the interior noise standard of 45 CNEL, mitigation measures are required to reduce the noise
levels to the adopted standard. The project will be conditioned to comply with all the appropriate mitigation
recommendations of Section 3.8.3 of Final EIR 90.03 and the recommendations of the projed's noise report,
including but not limited to interim noise mitigation, if applicable, and legal notification of potential airport noise
impacts to future land owners.
Visual Aesthetics;
Section 3.13 of Final EIR 9043 analyzed potentially visual impacts created by development within Specific Plan
203, including this propaty. It was determined that visual impacts to the Palomar Airport Road Viewshed
(Vantage Point 7, Figure 3.164) could be potentially significant. To reduce these potential imp& to below a
level significance the EIR recommended mitigation measuns, including additional visual analysis - (Section 3.13.3,
Page m49, Final EIR 90-03).
The proposed project is a residential lot subdivision, and at this point in time, no residential structures are being
planned. Due to the visual Sensitivity of the site from hlomar Airport Road and it's location adjacent to a future
public park the propews mning contains the Qualified Development Overlay Zone. The Q-Overlay Zone
requirement for a Site Development Plan will ensure that future development is consistent with the overlay zone.
19 Rev. 3/28/%
This future SDP will evaluate visual impacts crea!cd by the building height, building facades, roof Lines, and colors
of homes along the nmhern and e8stcm edge of the mesa. The SDP will also evaluate the placement of homes
on the individual 1- in datimship to setbacks, and the visual street scene fiom internal public streets. As part
of the development of futpn homes on the site, the project will be conditioned to require additional visual analysis.
This analysis shall at a minimum, of computerenhanced photo modifications showing development
conditions proposed by the project.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNFICANCE;
As discussed in the Biological Section of this EM, the implementation of sewer alignment "B" will impact riparian
resources and the construction of a local public access road and grading of the site will impact .12 acres of coastal
sage scrub habitat. However, mitigation measures included as part of this EIA and the project will adequately
mitigate impacts to biological resources.
The implementation of projects that are consistent with the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased
traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to ammmdate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2
partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional
control. These generally include all Ereeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard.
Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the Citfs
adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation
measures have been recommended in the Final Master ElR. These include 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 incorpofated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Local traffk impacts for this project can be mitigated below a level of significance, but regional related impacts
are still considered cumulatively sisnificant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan
due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "YES - significant". This project
is not required to prepare an ElR 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 considtraton" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the Master EIR, including
residential projects in Specific Plan 203, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is
required.
As previously discussed within this document, this project will not create environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Alternatives;
Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the project will have a significant adverse impact on
the environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse impacts Public Resources Code Section
21002 forbids the approval of projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or mitigation
measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A "signifhnt effect" is delined as one which has a substantial
20 Rev. 3tZ8ps
adverse impact. Given the anached mitigation conditions, this project has "NO" sisnificant physical environmental
impacts, therefore, them is no substantial adverse impact and no justification for requiring a discussion of
alternatives, (an altedve would not lessen an impact if there is no substantial adverse impact).
Sources;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Brian Mooney Associates, Biological Survey and Report for Emerald Ridge - West, August 1995;
Final EIR 9043 - Zone 20 Specific Plan,
Gallegos & Associates, Historical/Archaeological Survey of the Kelly Property (Now referred to as Emerald
Ridge - West) and Test of Site CA-SDI-9607 (W-l15), September 1994;
GeoSoils, Inc., Preliminary Pesticide Residue Survey, Kelly Property, July 25, 1994;
GeoSoils, Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment, Kelly Property, September 6, 1994;
MER - 1994 Update Date of the Carlsbad General Plan;
Pacific Noise Control, Noise Assessment, dated May 24, 1995;
RECON Biological Surveys and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Surveys for the McReynolds hpaty, January
13, 1995;
RECON Updated Biological Surveys and Coastal California Gnatcatcher Surveys for the McReynolds Property,
June 20, 1995;
10. WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc., Traffic Study for the Kelly Property, November 23, 1994.
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES IIF APPLICABLE)
1. SewerlStormdram ' Alternative "B' - Implementation of Alternative 'B' as it crosses Encinas Creek,
would impact .02 acres of riparian vegetatioa Mitigation for this impact will require the replacement
of this riparian vegetation at a 3:l ratio so there is no 'net loss' of habitat, and if fmible, the sewer line
should be tunnekd urrder EDcinaJ Creek to avoid impacts to the streambed and Surrounaing wetlands,
All riparian rrnrrhpacted along the proposed sewer/stormdrain alignment shall be replanwenhaneed
Prior to the issumce of a hd map or grading permits, whichever occurs 6rst, the developer shall be
required to: coamlt wi&b the California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and
the U.S. Fish ad WWe SeRiCe regarding speciilc permits and mitigation for impacts to .02 acres of
riparian vegetation
OR
SewerlStormdrain Alternative 'A' - Implementation of Altemah 'AA' crosses Encinas Creek. Prior
to the issuance of a final map or grading permits, whichever occurs ilrst, the devebper shall obtain a
Streambed Alteration Agreement hm the CaMoornia F'ish and Game Department, ifrequired for any
proposed alterations to exhting natural watercoursq d shall comply with any and all permit
21 Rev. 3/38/95
quirementr asm&ted herewith, pursuant to Section 1601fl6Q3 of the F'ish and Game Code. The
developer, in eoajpndioa with the Department of the Army Corp of Engineen shall determine whether
a 404 permit sbrg k r#Iuired for alterations to wetlaad areas.
2. -12 acres of coastal sygc scrub (CSS) habitat wiU be dhctly impacted by this project. Tbe impacted
CSS habitat is mgarded as disturbed habitat (0.05 acres) and medium to high quality babitat (0.07).
Pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of tbe 4d Rule for the California gnatcatcher, the project shall
be required to mitigate this loss of .12 acres of CSS by acquiring, for preservation, comparable quty babitat at a 1:l ratio for tbe disturbed CSS and 2:l for the higher quality CSS. Tbe developer proposes
to mitigate this impact by purchasing, for preservation, .19 acres of CSS habitat within the high quality,
coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank This proposal shall require
the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the California Department of Fish and
Game. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to consult with
and obtain necessary "take" permits from the USFWS, the California Department of Fish and Game for
impacts to the loss of .12 acres of CSS.
3. The CC&Rs for the project shall include a requirement, stating that flood lights from the development
shall not projecvshine into the native habitat areas
4. Heavy construction adjacent to coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitat areas along the east and north
side of the site during the California gnatcatcher breeding season (March 1 to July 31) shall be
prohibited.
ATI'ACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IIF APPLICABLE)
See Attached Sheet
22 Rev. 3/Lsp5
THIS IS TO CEKKFY THAT I HAW REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURE8 TO THE PROJ".
23 Rev. WW
- -
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST Page 1 of 1
* M 0 a 0 a *
04
.I 3 ."
9 E .-.
.! li
&I a
I I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3880
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP
TO SUBDIVIDE A 56.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO SIXTY-ONE
SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF
7,500 SQUARE FEET, ONE 8.3 ACRE OPEN SPACE LOT,
A 27.4 ACRE REMAINDER PARCEL,, AND ALLOW NINE
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: CT' 95-03
SECOND-DWELLING UNITS, ALL ON PROPERTY
WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain
property to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as "Description No.
1,103.91 Acres" on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19,1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels "A", "B", "C" and 'ID" of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Offcial Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
.- WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative
Map to subdivide a 563 acre parcel into sixty-one single-family lots with a minimum lot
size of 7,5500 square feet, one 83 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder parcel, and
allow nine second-dwelling units as shown on Exhibits "A-M", dated January 17, 1996, on
file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference ("Tentative Map for
Emerald Ridge West" CT 95-03) as provided by Chapter 20.12 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code; and
?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Tentative Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Carlsbad Tract CT 95-03, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Emerald Ridge West project, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments thereon,
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, on file in the Planning
Department, prior to recommending approval of the project. Based on the EL4
Part-I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that there is no
substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and
hereby recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the Emerald Ridge West project and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California
Ewironmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection
Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Emerald Ridge West project reflects the independent judgment of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
4. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for CT 95-03
is in conformance with the Elements of the City's General Plan, based on the
following:
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dus/acre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dudacre
PCRESONO. 3880 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
b.
C.
d.
e.
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 duslacre.
Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
right-of-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffic noise from
Palomar Airport Road does not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is
required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL.
The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable housing units and has been conditioned to enter
into an Affordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second
dwelling units and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9
second dwelling units and purchase 1 Affordable Housing Credit from Villa
Loma subject to the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and
final approval by the City Council. The remaining .754 fraction of an
inclusionary dwelling unit will be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal
to the fraction (.764) times the average subsidy needed to make affordable to
a lower-income household, one newly constructed typical housing unit.
Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 83 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize
gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Cherry Blossom Road alignment is
the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as follows:
1) The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning
Areas (PPAs);
2) The habitat loss will not preclude co~ectivity between areas of high
habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
PCRESONO. 3880 -3-
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
3)
4)
5)
6) .
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of the acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat on the MSP California LLC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore,
large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and;
The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be
more important.
f. Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
g. Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street
lights, and fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
5. 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 the final map will not be
approved unless the City Council finds that sewer service is available to serve
the project. In addition, the project is conditioned such that a note shall be
placed on the final map that building permits may not be issued for the
project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer service is available,
and building cannot OCCUT 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. Prior to final map approval the developer is conditioned to enter into an
agreement with the appropriate school district to ensure that adequate school
facilities are available to serve the project.
c. Park-in-lieu fees are required.
PCRESONO. 3880 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
20
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
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.
This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part
of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 20.
The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April, 1994 in that the develowr is conditioned
to record a notice concerning aircraft noise and an avieation easement. The project
is compatible with the projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the
noise/land use compatibility matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible
with the airport, in that residential development is conditionally compatible within
the 60 to 65 CNEL and the project has been conditioned to mitigate interior noise
levels to 45 dBA CNEL.
That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual, adopted by City
Council Resolution No. 90-384.
That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdivision
as conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan,
any applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and
the State Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in
that the proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and fire
hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as conditions of approval. The
local streets have adequate public right-of-way and connect to Hidden Valley Road
which is a non-loaded collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets
within this area would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have
curb, gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project's pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate
emergency vehicles.
That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for residential development less than 4 to 8
dudacre in the General Plan, in that the proposed residential land use is buffered
from the park, compatible with the residentially designated property to the west; and
PCRESONO. 3880 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
consistent with the CLUP. Public street improvements would be provided to
accommodate traffic generated by the project. A local street would separate the
residential lots from the community park, and the residential land use is compatible
with the RM residential land use designation on the property located directly west.
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 residential development complies with all city policies
and standards, including zoning, without the need for variances from development
standards.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the
public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision,
in that the project has been designed and structured such that there are no conflicts
with any established easements.
That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act);
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive
or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that the 7,500+
square foot lot sizes allow for a variety of building placement alternatives, including
the adequate placement and separation of the homes, in combination with the
proposed variety of future floor plans and the dominant western wind patterns/solar
radiation patterns, will allow utilization of natural heating and cooling opportunities.
That the Planning Commission has considered, in connection with the housing
proposed by this subdivision, the housing needs of the region, and balanced those
housing needs against the public service needs of the City and available fiscal and
environmental resources;
That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat, in that all feasible mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and certified Final EIR
93103 which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project
and no significant impacts to fish, wildlife or their respective habitats will occur.
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
drainage requirements of Specific Plan 203, City ordinances, and Mello II have been
considered and appropriate drainage facilities have been designed and secured. In
addition to City Engineering Standards and compliance with the City's Master
Drainage Plan, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
standards will be satisfied to prevent any discharge violations.
PCRESONO. 3880 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
19.
20.
21.
22.
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the
exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the
project, and the extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to
the impact caused by the project.
That the property cannot be served adequately with a public street without panhandle
lots due to unfavorable conditions resulting from unusual topography, surrounding
land development, or lot configuration, in that steep slopes to the north and the east,
and a property line to the west both created an isolated area of buildable land that
is not feasible to access with a full width public street.
That subdivision with panhandle lots will not preclude or adversely affect the ability
to provide full public street access to other properties within the same block of the
subject property, in that the lots are located between two cul-de-sac bulbs and are
bordered by the western subdivision property line.
That the buildable portion of the panhandle lot consists of a minimum of 8,000 sq.
feet, which meets the requirements of Section 21.10.080(d)(l) of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code;
Planninn Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Tentative Map
forThe CT 95-03 project entitled "Emerald Ridge West". (Exhibit "A" - "M on file
in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, dated January 17,
1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to
make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the
exhibitdor documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and conform
to City Council's final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially
as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development substantially
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
2. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Maps and Exhibits:
3. The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24" x 36", mylar copy of the
Tentative Map as approved by the final decision making body. The Tentative Map
shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The Map copy shall be submitted
to the City Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or improvement plan submittal, whichever occurs first.
4. The Developer shall provide the Planning Director with a 500' scale mylar of the
subdivision prior to the recordation of the final map. Said map shall show all lots and streets within and adjacent to the Project.
PCRESONO. 3880 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan
check, a reduced, legible version of the approving resolutiodresolutions on a 24" x
36" blueline drawing. Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any
applicable Coastal Development Permit and signed approved site plan.
Facilities & Services:
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July
28, 1987 (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any
development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth
management system or Facilities and Improvement Plan and to fulfill the subdivider's
agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated May 26, 1995, a copy of which is on
file with the City Clerk and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not
paid, this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for
this project will be void.
The final map shall not be approved unless the City Council finds as of the time of
such approval that sewer service is available to serve the subdivision.
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless
the District Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of
application for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of
occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final map.
Prior to approval of a final map or the issuance/approval of a building permit, which
ever occurs first, the Developer shall submit evidence to the Planning Director that
impacts to school facilities have been mitigated in conformance with the City's
Growth Management Plan to the extent permitted by applicable state law. If the
mitigation involves a financing scheme such as a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District which is inconsistent with the City's Growth Management Plan including
City Council Policy Statement No. 38, the Developer shall disclose to future owners
in the project, to the maximum extent possible, the existence of the tax and that the
school district is the taxing agency responsible for the financing district.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are
required as part of the Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan and any
amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
General Conditions:
11. 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 residential housing project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as
provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined
to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the
project without the condition complies with all requirements of law.
PCRESONO. 3880 -8-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Approval of CT 95-03 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, SDP 95-06, and HDP 95-06. C" 95-03 is subject
to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874,
3879,3881, and 3882.
The Developer shall establish a homeowner's association and corresponding
covenants, conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Director prior to final map approval. The CC&Rs shall
include provisions specifying Homeowner's Association maintenance responsibility
for all natural open space (Lot 62), slope maintenance and landscape easements
(Lots 1-17, and 22-23), as shown on the approved Tentative Map and landscape plan
which is on file in the Planning Department, or as conditioned by this resolution.
Prior to approval of the final map the Developer shall establish slope maintenance
and landscape easements along the rear yard slopes facing Palomar Airport Road
and Hidden Valley Road, including Lots 1-17, and,23.
Prior to approval of the final map the developer shall dedicate Open Space Lot No.
62 to the Homeowner's Association and dedicate a perpetual open space easement
over Open Space Lot No. 62 to the City of Carlsbad.
Removal of native vegetation and development of Open Space Lot No. 62, including
but not limited to fences, walls, decks, storage buildings, pools, spas, stainvays, and
landscaping, other than that approved as part of the tentative map for the sewer line
and drainage facilities as shown on Exhibit T", is specifically prohibited, except
upon written order of the Carlsbad Fire Department for fire prevention purposes,
or upon written approval of the Planning Director, and (California Coastal
Commission if in Coastal Zone), based upon a request from the Homeowners
Association accompanied by a report from a qualified arbonstbotanist indicating the
need to remove specified trees and/or plants because of disease or impending danger
to adjacent habitable dwelling units. For areas containing native vegetation the
report required to accompany the request shall be prepared by a qualified biologist.
Prior to approval of a final map the Developer shall establish an open space
easement, as shown on the Tentative Map, and deed restriction along the rear of
Lots 1 thru 23 for purposes of native habitat protection and fire suppression as
shown on the tentative map. No development shall be permitted in this buffedopen
space easement, including; future regrading of the building pad and manufactured
slopes, the construction of habitable and non-habitable accessory structures, patio
covers, pool rooms, solanums, and second-story decks and balconies, wooden decks
and spas 42 inches above grade, and any other structures that require a building
permit. Screen wallslfences, landscaping in accordance with the approved fire
suppression plan for the project, hardscape features such as brick or cement
walkways and patios, pool equipment, and grade level pools and spas shall be
permitted. In addition, the CC&Rs for the project shall stipulate the above
mentioned restrictions.
PCRESONO. 3880 -9-
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
....
Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Carlsbad for a trail easement for trail(s) shown on the
tentative map within Open Space Lot No. 62. If the City of Carlsbad accepts
dedication of the trail easement the City shall assume responsibility for maintenance
and liability. If the City of Carlsbad does not accept liability and maintenance
responsibility for the Citywide Trail System, prior to recordation of the final map,
the Developer will not be required to construct the trail(s).
Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, the developer shall not@, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Attorney, all owners, users and tenants of this project that a community park site
is located adjacent to this project to the south.
The Developer shall provide a minimum of 25 percent of the lots with adequate
sideyard area for Recreational Vehicle storage pursuant to City Standards. The CC&Rs shall prohibit the storage of recreational vehicles in the required front yard
setback.
Prior to issuance of any building permits for the project the Developer shall receive
approval of a Site Development Plan (SDP) by the Planning Commission in
accordance with Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The single-family
homes within this tentative map shall be developed consistent with the project’s
approved SDP. Unless otherwise approved through the future Site Development Plan
process, the lots shall not be sold for the purpose of developing individual custom
homes on each separate lot.
The applicant shall submit a wall and fencing plan subject to Planning Director
approval prior to issuance of building.permits. Prior to occupancy of Lot Nos. 1
thru 12 the developer shall construct a 6 foot high solid screen wall/fence along the
top of the berm that separates the City Wide Trail from the residential building
pads.
The Developer shall provide bus stops to service this development at locations and
with reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and
the Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall at a minimum include a bench, free from advertising, and a pole for the bus stop sign. The bench and pole
shall be designed to enhance or be consistent with the basic architectural theme of
the project.
The Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map in the sales office
at all times, or suitable alternative to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
All sales maps that are distributed or made available to the public shall include but
not be limited to trails, future and existing schools, parks, and streets.
PCRESONO. 3880 -10-
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
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conformance
with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual.
The plans shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director
prior to the approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever
occurs first. The Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on
the approved plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition,
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompanied
by the project’s building, improvement, and. grading plans.
Prior to approval of the landscape and irrigation plans, the plans shall show all
manufactured off-site slopes created by this project, landscaped to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director, and shall include at a minimum, landscaping to control
erosion and to provide visual screening of the slopes.
All building pad and street areas that are graded and remain vacant or undeveloped
for a period of more than 6 months after the grading operation is completed shall
be seeded and adequately irrigated to reduce erosion and visual impacts. If grading
is phased, the six month time period shall start at the completion of each individual
grading phase, subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director.
All landscaping shall comply with the Landscape Requirements of Specific Plan 203.
Contingency Permits/Other Agencies:
31. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall receive approval of a Coastal
Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission that substantially
conforms to this approval. A signed copy of the Coastal Development Permit must
be submitted to the Planning Director. If the approval is substantially different, an
amendment to CT 95-03 shall be required.
32. Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall be required: (1) to consult
with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USWS) regarding the impact of
the project on the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat;
and, 2) obtain any permits required by the USWFS.
Environmental:
33. The Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of, all
mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR 90-03 that are found by this
resolution to be feasible.
34. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of the Final EIR and
Mitigated Negative Declaration’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
PCRESONO. 3880 -11-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
1
Paleontology:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
Prior to any grading of tAe project site, a paleontologist shall be
retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the
grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil
resources. A copy of the paleontologist’s report shall be provided to
the Planning Director prior to issuance of a grading permit;
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic
inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small
nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be
necessary to collect matrix samples for laboratory processing through
fine screens. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the
Planning Director during the grading process;
The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the
area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if
necessary, salvage artifacts;
All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution
with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural
History Museum;
Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading
activities of the project shall be resolved by the Planning Director and
City Engineer.
Prior to the recordation of the first final map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this
property may be subject to noise impacts from the proposed or existing
Transportation Corridor in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and
City Attorney.
Prior to the recordation of the first final map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this
property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from
McClellan-Palomar Airport in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director
and the City Attorney.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall record an Avigation
Easement for all lots located within the 60 to 65 CNEL contour, including Lots 13
thm 35 to the County of San Diego and file a copy of the recorded document with
the Planning Director.
The Developer shall post aircraft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental
offices associated with the new development. The number and locations of said signs
shall be approved by the Planning Director.
PCRESONO. 3880 -12-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
40.
41.
42.
Prior to issuance of a building permit the developer shall mitigate the interior noise
levels of the homes to 45 dBA CNEL, in accordance with the policies of the Noise
Element of the General Plan and the recommendation of the project's noise study
prepared by Pacific Noise Control, dated May 24, 1994, and on file in the Planning
Department. If openings to the exterior of the homes are required to be closed to
meet the interior noise standard then mechanical ventilation shall be provided.
To offset the conversion of non-prime agricultural land to urban land uses per the
requirements of the Mello II hl Coastal Program, the applicant shall provide
payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than
$5,000 nor more than $lO,OOO for each net converted acre of non-prime agricultural
land. The amount of the fee shall be determined by the City Council prior to
approval of the final map and shall be consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad's
LCP.
Compliance with APCD Rules 51 (The "Nuisance" Rule), 52 (Particulate Matter),
and 54 (Dust and Fumes) of the Air Quality Chapter would effectively mitigate dust
impacts generated during grading operations. A note shall be placed on the grading
permit stipulating that the following measures shall be required to achieve
compliance with these rules, and reduce construction-related air pollutants:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
g*
The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul mutes shall be
required during dry weather conditions.
All unpaved areas shall be revegetated according to approved
landscape plans as soon as possible after grading.
All construction-related traffic shall be restricted to routes that are
dust-controlled, and reduced speed limits shall be maintained for all
haul and construction vehicles.
All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high
winds.
All heavy-duty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be
operated according to manufacturers suggested operating instruction
(with the fuel-injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NO,
emissions, but which would not result in excessive visible smoke
emissions) in order to control pollutant emissions.
Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly scheduled
maintenancdtune-ups, and be turned off when not being utilized to
avoid excessive idling emissions.
The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall
adhere to APCD Rules 67.0 and 67.7, to effectively control other
construction-related emissions of air pollutants.
PCRESONO. 3880 -13-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
la. The Engineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all
grading operations of the project.
The Homeowners Association shall obtain and distribute to owners and tenants
annual information from Caltrans and North County Transit regarding the
availability of public transportation, ride-sharing, and transportation pooling
services in the area. This information shall also be provided in the sales office of
the project. A condition so stating this shall also be placed in the CC&Rs for the
project.
Prior to occupancy of individual units a solid wall or fence, and landscaped
windbreaks shall be installed along the perimeter of any future developable area that
abuts property under "open field" cultivation, in order to reduce public nuisance
effects of adjacent pesticide spraying and dust generation from faim vehicles and
operations.
Prior to approval of a final map or issuance of a building permit, which ever occurs
first, an infrastructure improvement plan shall be submitted to the Planning and
Engineering Departments for review and approval by the Planning Director and City
Engineer. This plan shall illustrate the temporary road connections required to
maintain continued access to adjacent agricultural properties that could be impacted
by future roadway improvements.
Drainage water from buildings, streets, parking lots, and landscaped areas within
the project shall be disposed of through stormdrains or othelwise in a manner that
will avoid any runoff onto agricultural areas whether planted or fallow. All runoff
agricultural and urban shall conform with the National Pollution Discharge and
Elimination System Permit requirements pursuant to San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board Order No. 90-42, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 90-
235.
Prior to issuance of a building permit the project shall comply with the City of
Carlsbad's standards for solid waste management.
Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
ht, the applicant shall notify, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Attorney, all owners, users and tenants of this project that this area is subject to
dust, pesticides, and odors associated with adjacent agricultural operations, and that
the owners, users, and tenants occupy this area at their on risk.
All grading shall comply with the recommendations incorporated by Geosoils, Inc in
the preliminary geotechnical assessment of the site! dated September 6,1994 and any
amendments or updates of the report, that is on file in the Planning Department.
Prior to approval of a final map, improvement plans shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department showing locations and sizing of reclaimed and or urban
runoff diversion facilities, in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
PCRESONO. 3880 -14-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
requirements and the phasing schedule provided in the Zone 20 LFMP. Reclaimed water facilities shall be constructed in all major roadways within the project.
51. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan for the project, as required by
Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, a visual analysis of the project shall
be conducted by the Developer. This analysis shall consist, at a minimum, of
computer-enhanced photo-modifications showing development conditions proposed
by the development of homes as viewed from Palomar Airport Road. The purpose!
of this analysis is to determine the specific visual impacts that the proposed project
could have on the Palomar Airport Road Viewshed. If the Planning Director determines, based on future visual analysis, that there is a potentially significant
visual impact created by the construction of homes, mitigation to reduce this impact
shall be consistent with Section 3.133 of Final EIR 90-03 and may include, but not
be limited to, the following measures: (1) reduced building height along the top of
the bluff; (2) varying rooflines and roof massing, (3) enhanced rear building
elevations that are visible from Palomar Airport Road; (4) increased landscape
screening; (5) earth tone roof and building wall material and colors; and (6)
increased building separation.
Housing:
52. Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map
is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to
provide and deed restrict 9 lots for second dwelling units (including: Lots 2, 7, 13,
19, 24, 31,36,42, 52) and one three-bedroom home as appropriate, in accordance
with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Director not later than thirty (30) after the final map submittal. The
recorded Mordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest; OR
Prior to approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is
not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to deed restrict 9 second
dwelling units (including: Lot 2,7,13,19,24,31,36,42, and 52) and the purchase
of 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma, as appropriate, in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Zone
20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58 dated September 12, 1985.
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a signed Affordable
Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The recorded
Afltordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors
in interest; OR
Upon showing by the developer that an onsite contribution is not appropriate for the
project, a second inclusionary housing option available to the developer shall be that prior to final map approval, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
PCRESONO. 3880 -15-
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
53.
54.
City to purchase affordable credits from Villa Loma or participate in an offsite
combined inclusionary project within the southwest quadrant and as appropriate, in
accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, the Zone 20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58
dated September 12, 1985. Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall
submit a signed Affordable Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment
Director. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future
owners and successors in interest.
Prior to City review and approval of the offsite option, the approval of a Specific
Plan amendment to SP 203 shall be required to designate the proposed offsite
combined inclusionary project as an approved location for the provision of affordable
units to satisfy the inclusionary requirements of Zone 20 properties.
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
and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate
schedule for development.
Endneering Conditions:
Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering conditions,
upon the approval of this proposed major subdivision, must be met prior to approval
of a final map.
55. The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intersections in
accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following statement in
the project's CC&b
"No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches
above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area
identified as a sight distance comdor in accordance with City Standard
Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B3. The underlying property owner
shall maintain this condition."
The above statement shall be placed on a non-mapping data sheet on the final map.
56. Drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct access road for maintenance purposes is not provided, shall be designed and incorporated into
the grading/improvement plans for the project. These end treatments shall be
designed so as to prevent vegetation growth bm obstructing the pipe outfall.
Designs could consist of a modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended
concrete spillway section with longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed riprap,
or other means deemed appropriate, as a method of preventing vegetation growth
directly in front of the pipe outlet, to the satisfaction of the Community Selvices
Director and the City Engineer.
PCRESONO. 3880 -16-
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
20
57.
58.
This project is approved specifically as 1 (single) unit for recordation.
The developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an approval of the
City, the Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the
City within the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
FeedAgreemen ts
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
A funding mechanism for the full improvements for Poinsettia Lane and Alga Road
must be approved or fees paid, in conformance with the updated Zone 20 Local
Facilities Management Plan funding program.
The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City
harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
The developer shall construct desiltatioddetentiodurban pollutant basin(s) of a type
and a size and at location(s) as shown on the Tentative Map and as approved by the
City Engineer. The applicant shall enter into a basin maintenance agreement and
submit a maintenance bond satisfactory to the City Engineer prior to the approval
of grading, building permit or final map whichever occurs first for this project. Each
basin shall be serviced by an all-weather access/maintenance road.
The owner shall give written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the
boundaries of the site plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and
Landscaping District No. 1 on a form provided by the City.
Grading:
64. The developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to
the State Water Resources Control Board.
65. No grading shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision unless a grading or slope
easement is obtained from the owners of the affected properties. If the applicant is
unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, no grading permit will be issued. In
that case the applicant must either amend the tentative map or modify the plans so
grading will not occur outside the project site in a manner which substantially
conforms to the approved tentative map as determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
66. 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. The developer must submit and receive approval for grading plans in accordance with City codes and
PCRESONO. 3880 -17-
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
20
67.
68.
69.
standards.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction ma :rials to or from the site, the developer shall
submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route.
The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer
may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project
to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in :
I
i Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be '
accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer.
nrnvirfed nr inctslld nrinr tn nr rnnriirrent with anv urarlino nt hiiilrfino nermit ac '
.- may be required by the City Engineer.
DedicatiodImprovements:
70.
71.
....
The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and
easements required by these conditions or shown on the tentative map. The offer
shall be made by a certificate on the final map for this project. All land so offered
shall be granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the City. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated. j
The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best 1
management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to
discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the
City Engineer. The plans shall include, but not be limited to the following, which :
1
shall be included in the project's CC&Rs: I
! ! a. The homeowner's association shall coordinate the use of the City's established
program to assist residents with the removal and proper disposal of toxic and
hazardous waste products. 1
b. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm
drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides,
fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical
treatments shall meet Federal, State, County, and City requirements as
prescribed in their respective containers.
c. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface
pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface
improvements.
PCRESONO. 3880 -18-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
72. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards,
the developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as
provided by law, improvements shown on the tentative map and the following
improvements:
a.
Note:
b-1.
b-2.
Hidden Valley Road full width improvements (68’ Right of way/48’ Curb to
curb width) from Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) to Palomar
Airport Road, including:
0 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement.
0 Concrete Curb and Gutter.
0
0
0
0
Concrete Sidewalk on one (1) side.
Street Light Standards on both sides.
Traffrc Signal at Palomar Airport Road and Hidden Valley Road.
RetrofiVOpen Existing Raised Median in Palomar Airport Road.
Hidden Valley Road secondary access width improvements (68’ Right of
way/28’ Berm to berm width) from Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom
Road) to Camino De Los Ondas, including:
0 Asp ha1 t/Concre te Pavement.
0 Asphalt/Concrete Berms.
The City will enter into an agreement with the developer to obtain
proportionate share reimbursement from benefitting property owners ‘to the
north of Camino de Las Ondas and to the south of the project, for the
Hidden Valley Road secondary access improvements.
Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) full width improvements (60’
Right of way/W Curb to curb width) from Hidden Valley Road to the
southwest comer of the property, including:
0 AsphaltlConcrete Pavement.
0 Concrete Curb and Gutter.
0 street Light standards.
0 Concrete Sidewalk on both sides.
On-Site/Off-Site Calle Serena Asphalt/Concrete Transition.
-OR-
Calle Serena (formerly Cherry Blossom Road) secondarg access width
improvements (72’ Right of way/52’ Curb to curb width) from Hidden Valley
Road to “A“ Street, including:
0 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement.
0 Concrete Curb and Gutter.
PCRESONO. 3880 -19-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
Note:
C.
d-1.
d-2.
ea
Concrete Sidewalk on both sides. Street Light Standards.
Roadway Improvement B-2 above will only be required if Poinsettia Park is
not constructed prior to building permits being issued for Emerald Ridge
West. If Poinsettia Park is constructed, prior to building permits being
issued for Emerald Ridge West, then this widened roadway section will not
be required (site specific secondary access will be gained through the park as
indicated on the tentative map.)
"A" Street full width improvements (60' Right of way/40' Curb to curb width)
from Calle Serena to the northern terminus, including:
e Asphalt/Concrete Pavement.
e Concrete Curb and Gutter.
e Street Light Standards. Concrete Sidewalk on both sides.
"A" Street off-site, site specific secondary access improvements (30'
Easementl28' Berm to berm width) from the westerly property line to the "A"
Street /Calle Serena (Mar Vista) intersection, including:
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement.
AsphaWConcrete Berms.
b On-Site/Off-Site "A" Street AsphaltlConcrete Transition.
Calle Serena (Mar Vista) off-site, site specific secondary access improvements
(30' Easementl28' Berm to berm width) from the "A" Street/Calle Serena (Mar
Vista) intersection to the westerly property line (located at the southwest
comer of the property), including:
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement.
b Asphalt/Concrete Berms.
On-Site/Off-Site Calle Serena AsphaltKoncrete Transition.
Sewer and Drainage Alternative "A" or as determined by the CMWD District
Engineer and City Engineer. Note: Prior to approval of the final map the
developer shall revise the map to eliminate Sewer/Stormdrain Alignment "B".
A list of the above improvements 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 secured improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
PCRESONO. 3880 -20-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Special Jhgheering Conditions:
73.
74.
75.
76.
Tentative map easement items number‘s 7 and 14 shall not be vacated. These
easements shall remain and this shall be indicated on the conforming tentative map.
Preliminary Title Report (PR) (PR dated 3/22/95) Item No. 6 shall be shown on the
conforming tentative map with the future disposition of the easement indicated.
An Adjustment Plat shall be processed for the 37 acre “triangular” area located at
the proposed detentioddesilting basin west of Hidden Valley Road.
The developer shall enter into an “Agreement for Reimbursement of Costs for the
Construction of Poinsettia Park Off-Site Sewer, CMWD Project No. 94-404” for a
proportional share of the total construction cost.
Water Conditions:
77. The entire potable water system., reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be
evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can
be met.
78. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application
for meter installation.
79. Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following:
a. Meet with the City Fire Marshall and establish the fire protection
requirements. Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs
from appropriate parties.
b. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning
Department for processing and approval.
Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement
plans, a meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review,
comment and approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages (ie -GPM
,
c.
- EDU).
80. This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not
be issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the
development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are available
at the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to
be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map.
PCRESONO. 3880 -21-
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
20
81.
82.
83.
84.
The Developer shall be required to participate in either: 1) the construction of a
gravity sewer pipeline in Hidden Valley Road extending from Palomar Airport Road
south to Cheny Blossom Road or 2) the construction of a gravity sewer pipeline in
Calle Serene (Sewer Alignment "A), which is a future street proposed for the Mar
Vista Tract CT 94-11.
The Developer shall construct a 12" potable water line (375' H.G.) in Hidden Valley
Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cherry Blossom Road. Also, a water analysis
shall be required to establish the size of water lines in Cherry Blossom Road, Streets
A, B and C. In any event, 8" diameter water lines will be minimum size installed.
The Developer shall construct. a 12" reclaimed water line (384' H.G.) in Hidden
Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cheny Blossom Road and shall install
reclaimed water lines deemed necessary after the colored use map is reviewed and
needs established.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted
to and approved by the Fire Department.
Fire Conditions:
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
....
Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted
to and approved by the Fire Department.
I Additional onsite public hydrants are required.
Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval, which depicts
location of required, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydrants. The I
plan should include off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project. I
Applicant shall submit a site plan to depicting emergency of access routes, driveways i
and traffic circulation for Fire Department approval.
An all-weather unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicles shall t
be provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fire
Chief, the access road has become unserviceable due to inclement weather or other
reasons he may, in the interest of public safety, require that construction operations
cease until the condition is corrected.
I
All required water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be operational before
combustible building materials are located on the construction site.
Prior to final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access shall be
equipped with "Knox", key operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall contact
the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to installation.
PCRESONO. 3880 -22-
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
20
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
Prior to building occupancy, private roads and driveways which serve as required
access for emergency service vehicles shall be posted as fire lanes in accordance with
the requirements of Section 17.04.020, Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Native vegetation which presents a fire hazard to structures shall be modified or
removed in accordance with the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual. Applicant shall
submit a Fires Suppression plan to the Fire Department for approval.
Plans and/or specifications for fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, automatic fire
sprinkler systems and other fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for approval prior to construction.
An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in buildings having an
aggregate floor area exceeding 10,OOO square feet.
The applicant shall provide a street map which conforms to the following
requirements: A 400 scale photo-reduction mylar, depicting proposed improvements
and at least two existing intersections or streets. The map shall also clearly depict
street centerlines, hydrant locations and street names.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right
to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance
of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of
occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and
prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages
for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in
interest by the City's approval of this Resolution.
PlanninP Code Reminders:
Fees:
98. 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.
The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by
Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
99.
Final Map Notes:
100. The Developer shall provide the following note on the final map of the subdivision
and final mylar of this development submitted to the City:
"Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes a Growth Management
Control Point for each General Plan land use designation. Development cannot
PCRESONO. 3880 -23-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
101.
102.
103.
exceed the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapter 21.90. The land use
designation for this development is RM. The Growth Control Point for this
designation is 6 dwelling units per nonconstrained acre.
Parcels 1 thru 62 were used to calculate the intensity of development under the
General Plan and Chapter 21.90. Subsequent redevelopment or resubdivision of any
one of these parcels must also include parcels 1 thru 62 under the General Plan and
Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code."
The following note shall be placed on the Final Map: "Prior to issuance of a building
permit for any buildable lot within the subdivision, the Developer shall pay a one-
time special development tax in accordance with the City Council Resolution No. 91-
39."
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 provide herein.
The Developer shall submit a street name list consistent with the City's street name
policy subject to the Planning Director's approval prior to final map approval.
Landscape:
104. All landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared to conform with the Landscape
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the
Planning Department.
Signs:
105. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in
conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval
of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs.
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
PCRESONO. 3880 -24-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carisbad, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PCRESONO. 3880
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
-25-
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
20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3881
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 9 SECOND DWELLING UNITS WITHIN A 61 LOT SINGLE-FAMILY
SUBDIVISION AND DEED RESTRICTION OF 1 THREE-
BEDROOM HOME OR THE OPTION TO PURCHASE 1
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDIT IN VILLA LOMA
SUBJECT TO CITY- COUNCIL APPROVAL, ALL TO
SATISFY THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 21.85 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUMCIPAL CODE, ALL ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINO DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: SDP 95-06
WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain
property to wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as "Description No.
1,103.91 Acres" on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19,1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Rancho Aqua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,
1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels "A", "B", "C" and "D" of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Official Records.
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site
Development Plan to subdivide a 563 acre parcel into 61 single-family lots with a minimum
lot size of 7,500 square feet, one 83 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder parcel, and
allow 9 seconddwelling units as shown on Exhibits "A-M", dated January 17,1996, on file
in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference ("Site Development Plan
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
20
for Emerald Ridge West" SDP 95-06) as provided by Chapter 2153 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Site Development Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of SDP 95-06, based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for SDP 95-
06 is in conformance with the Elements of the City's General Plan, based on the
following:
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dudacre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dudacre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 duslacre.
b. Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
rightsf-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project's pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
accommodate emergency vehicles.
c. Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffic noise from
Palomar Airport Road would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL
PC RES0 NO. 3881 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
d. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable units and has been conditioned to enter into an
Affordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second dwelling units
and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9 second dwelling
units and purchase 1 Mordable Housing Credit from Villa Loma subject to
the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and final approval by
the City Council. The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary dwelling
unit will be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction (.764)
times the average subsidy needed to make affordable to a lower-income
household, one newly constructed typical housing unit.
e. Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 83 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize
gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Calle Serena (Cherry Blossom Road)
alignment is the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as
follows:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
V.
The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning
Areas (PPAS);
The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high
habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat on the MSP California UC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore, large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and;
PC RES0 NO. 3881 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
vi. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be
more important.
f. Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
g. Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street
lights, and fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
use, in that the lots are a minimum of 60 feet wide and the seconddwelling units
would have exterior access, be incorporated into the second-story of the primary
home, and utilize a portion of the three-car garage for parking.
That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will
be provided and maintained in that the second dwelling unit would be integrated into
the primary dwelling units and meet all the development standards of the R-1-7500
Zone.
The second dwelling unit is located above a new three car garage and does not
exceed the 30 foot height limit.
The total floor area of the second dwelling unit does not exceed 640 square feet.
The second dwelling unit is architecturally compatible with the primary dwelling unit
and retains the appearance of a single family dwelling within the project.
Since the second dwelling unit complies with all of the applicable development
standards of the R-1 zone, has been designed to appear as a single family residence
when viewed from the street, and should generate very little additional traffic, it will
not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
The second dwelling unit has a separate entrance.
Plannirw co nditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Site Development
Pian for the SDP 95-06 project entitled "Emerald Ridge West". (Exhibit "A" - I'M"
on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, dated
January 17,1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and
directed to make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications
to the exhibitdor documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and
conform to City Council's final action on the project. Development shall occur
substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development
substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this
PC RES0 NO. 3881 -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
20
approval.
2. Approval of SDP 95-06 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 95-03, and HDP 95-06. SDP 95-06 is subject
to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874,
3879,3880, and 3882.
3. Prior to the approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map
is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the Developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to
provide and deed restrict 9 lots for second dwelling units (including: Lots 2, 7, 13,
19, 24, 31,36,42, 52) and one three-bedroom home as appropriate, in accordance
with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. The draft Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the
Planning Director not later than thirty (30) after the final map submittal. The
recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
successors in interest; OR
Prior to approval of the final map for any phase of this project, or where a map is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for any lots or units,
the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to deed restrict 9 second
dwelling units (including: Lot 2,7, 13, 19, 24, 31,36,42, and 52) and the purchase
of 1 Affordable Housing Credit in Villa Loma, as appropriate, in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Zone
20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58 dated September 12, 1985.
Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall submit a signed Affordable
Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The recorded
Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors
in interest; OR
Upon showing by the developer that an onsite contribution is not appropriate for the
project, a second inclusionary housing option available to the developer shall be that
prior to final map approval, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City to purchase affordable credits from Villa Loma or participate in an offsite
combined inclusionary project within the southwest quadrant and as appropriate, in
accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, the Zone 20 Specific Plan, and City Council Policies 57 and 58
dated September 12, 1985. Prior to City Council approval, the developer shall
submit a signed Atrordable Housing Agreement to the Housing and Redevelopment
Director. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future
owners and successors in interest.
4. Prior to City review and approval of the offsite option, the approval of a Specific
Plan amendment to SP 203 shall be required to designate the proposed offsite
combined inclusionary project as an approved location for the provision of affordable
units to satisfy the inclusionaxy requirements of Zone 20 properties.
....
PC RES0 NO. 3881 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
5. The Developer shall construct the required inclusionary units concurrent with the
project's market rate units, unIess both the finaI decision making authority of the City
and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an alternate
schedule for development.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLA"G COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3881 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
to wit:
1 1 1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3882
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO GRADE AM> SUBDIVIDE
A 56.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 61 ONE SINGLE-FAMILY
LOTS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE 7,500 SQUARE I
FEET, DEVELOP NINE SECOND DWELLING UNITS,
CREATE A 8.3 ACRE OPEN SPACE LOT AND LEAVE A
27.4 ACRE REMAINDER PARCEL, ALL ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAMINCX DE LAS
ONDAS, EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE, AND SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN
203, IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE
20.
CASE NAME: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO: HDP 95-06
I THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, I
I
I
I
I
, WHEREAS, MSP California LLC has filed a verified application for certain property
i I All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as "Description No.
1,103.91 Acres" on Record of Survey Map No. 5715, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, being a portion
of Lot G of Rancho Aqua Hedionda, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, I
1 1
i 1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsbad, all being in the
County of San Diego, State of California. Excepting therefrom that portion
lying within Parcels "A", "B", "C" and "D" of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23,1974 as File No. 74-230326
of Official Records.
1
I
with the City of Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit to subdivide a 563 acre parcel into 61 single-family lots with a
minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet, one 83 acre open space lot, a 27.4 acre remainder
parcel, and allow nine second-dwelling units as shown on Exhibits "A-M", dated January
17,1996, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference ("Hillside
Development Permit for Emerald Ridge West" HDP 95-06) as provided by Chapter 21.95 of
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of January, 1996,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Hillside Development Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission 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 Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Hillside Development Permit HDP 95-06,
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinm:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for HDP 95-
06 is in conformance with the Elements of the City‘s General Plan, based on the
following:
a. The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan since the proposed
density of 3.01 dudacre is less than the density range of 4 to 8 dudacre
specified for the site as indicated on the Land Use Element of the General
Plan, and is below the growth control point of 6 dus/acre.
b. Circulation - The local streets serving the project have 56 to 60 feet of public
rightsf-way, and connect to Hidden Valley Road which is a non-loaded
collector street. All the local, collector, and major streets within this area
would be constructed to full public street width standards, and have curb,
gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities. The proposed street system is
adequate to handle the project’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate emergency vehicles.
c. Noise - A noise study was completed for the project, and traffic noise from
Palomar Airport Road would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. The developer is
required to mitigate interior noise levels of the future homes to 45 dBA
CNEL.
....
PCRESONO. 3882 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
10
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
v
d. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan and
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance since the Developer is required to
provide 10.764 affordable units and has been conditioned to enter into an
Mordable Housing Agreement to either: (1) construct 9 second dwelling units
and deed restrict 1 three-bedroom home; or (2) construct 9 second dwelling
units and purchase 1 Mordable Housing Credit from Villa Lama subject to
the requirements of City Council Policy No. 57 and 58 and final City Council
approval. The remaining .764 fraction of an inclusionary dwelling unit will
be satisfied through the payment of a fee equal to the fraction (.764) times
the average subsidy needed to make affordable to a lower-income household,
one newly constructed typical housing unit.
e. Open Space and Conservation - The project is designed to avoid the steep
slopes surrounding the mesa and riparian drainage area in the eastern finger
canyon. This area will be placed under an 83 acre open space easement to
the Homeowners Association. This 83 acre open space lot would connect
with the open space to the north along Encinas Creek. City Wide Trail Link
No. 29 would be aligned to the east along the bluff and slope to minimize
gnatcatcher, coastal sage, and riparian impacts in the eastern finger canyon.
Native habitat impacts have been reduced or mitigated by the design of the
project, in that project grading and the Cherry Blossom Road alignment is
the most sensitive in terms of habitat and slope impact as follows:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
V.
PCRESONO. 3882
The 0.12 acre take area is located outside of any Preserve Planning
Areas (PPAs);
The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high
habitat values since this area is not included as a part of a Linkage
Planning Area (LPA);
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the area is not a part of
a Linkage Planning Area, makes no contribution to the overall
preserve system and will not significantly impact the use of habitat
patches as archipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs.
Mitigation for the loss of the 0.12 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
will be in the form of the acquisition of .19 acres of high quality CSS
habitat credits from the Carlsbad Highland Mitigation Bank. The loss
of habitat on the MSP California LLC property will not appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the sutviv81 and recovery of the gnatcatcher;
The habitat loss is located in a disturbed area that is directly adjacent
to Hidden Valley Road and the Poinsettia Community Park, therefore,
large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmentation will not
occur, and;
-3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
vi. The habitat area being impacted is at the periphery of a larger CSS
habitat area; it is not in the center where the loss of habitat would be
more important.
f. Parks and Recreation - The project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
g. Public Safety - The proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street 1
lights, and tire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
That hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraints map Exhibit
"J", dated January 17,1996, which show existing and proposed conditions and slope
percentages;
That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%, have been properly
identified on the constraints map Exhibit "J", dated January 17, 1996, and placed
into a 83 acre Open Space (Lot 62);
That the development proposal is consistent with the intent, purpose, and
requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, in that the grading avoids
steep slopes, manufactured slopes do not exceed 30 feet in height and follow the
natural contours, grading volumes do not exceed 7,900 cubic yards per graded acre,
the roadways are curvilinear and follow the natural contours, and the future homes
would be setback from the bluff top;
That the proposed development or grading will not occur in the undevelopable portions of the site pursuant to provisions of Section 21.53.230 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, in that steep slopes and riparian areas are preserved in open space;
That the project design substantially conforms to the intent of the concepts illustrated
in the Hillside Development Guidelines Manual, in that the roadways are
curvilinear, grading follows the natural contours, the future homes would be setback
from the bluff top, and all the manufactured slopes will be screened with
landscaping that includes a combination of ground cover, shrubs, and trees;
That the project design and lot configuration minimizes disturbance of hillside lands, in that project's grading and development does not encroached into steep slopes. 8
Planninn Conditions:
1. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Hillside
Development Permit for the HDP 95-06 project entitled "Emerald Ridge West". 1
(Exhibit "A" - "M" on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this '
reference, dated January 17, 1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff
is authorized and directed to make or require the Developer to make all corrections j
and modifications to the exhibitdor documents, as necessary to make them internally
consistent and conform to City Council's final action on the project. Development I 1 i PCRESONO. 3882 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
shall OCCUT substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed
development substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment
to this approval.
2. Approval of HDP 95-06 is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, LCPA 94-04, ZC 94-04, CT 95-03, and SDP 95-06. HDP 95-06 is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3873, 3874,
3879,3880, and 3881.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits on Lots 1- 61 for single family residential
structures, an amendment to this Hillside Development Permit shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission to ensure that architecture is
consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance architectural standards.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of January, 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
PCRESONO. 3882
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
EMERALD RIDGE - WEST
CT 95-O3/SDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
GROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO
CASE NAME:
CI' 9543BDP 95-06/HDP 95-06
APPLICANT: mcALn: om LLC
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 61 Sinele-Familv Lots. 9 Second Dwellinn Units. & one 8.3 acre Omq
LEGAL DESCRIPTION AU that certain ~art~l of land delineated and desimated - as "DesaiDtion No. 1.103.91 Acres" on Record of Survey mao No. 5715. filed in the Offioe of the Countv Recorder of San Dieno Countv. December 19,1960. beinn a uortion of Lot G of Rancho Arma Hedionda. accordinn to Ma0 thereof No. 823. filed in the office of the Countv Recorder of San Diem Countv. November 16.18%. a
portion of which lies within the Citv of Carlsbad. all being in the Countv of San Dieno. State of California. ExceDtinrz therefrom that Dortion hinn within Parcels "A" "B." "C." and "D" of Parcel No. 2993 in the City of Carlsbad. Countv of San Dieno. State of California. filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Dieeo Countv. Aurmst 23.1974 as File No. 76230326 of Official Records
APN 212-040-32 and 36 Acres 56.3 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 61 Lots and 71 Units
(Assessor's Parcel Number)
Land Use Designation Residential Medium G&
Density Allowed 6 dudacre Density Propotwd 3.01
Existing Zone R-1-7500-0 Prop<wedZone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements)
zoning
Site R-1-7500-Q
Land Use
Aericulture
PUBLIC FA-
North os
south pc
East R-1-IO-Q
West R-1-7500-Q
Vacant
Park
Residential
School District -bad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Unib (Sewer Capacity) 71 EDUs
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated Mav 26.1995
ENVIRONh4ENTA.L WACX ASSESS=
Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued October 27.1 995
- Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CROWI" MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO CI' 95-03BDP 95-06IHDP 95-06
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT Z0NE:Z GENERAL PLAN. ZONING. R-1-7500
DEVELOPERS NAME MSP CALIFORNIA LLC
ADDRESS: 650 S. CHERRY STREET' SUITE 435 DENVER COLORADO 80222
PHONE NO (303) 339-9804 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO 212-040-32 ad 36
QUAN'TTIY OF LAND USEDEVELOPMENT (AC., SO. F"., DU): 56.3/71 units
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: N/A
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K
L
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage =
Library: Demand in Square Footage =
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park Demand in Acreage =
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin =
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in AM's =
(Identify Trip Distn'bution on site plan)
Fii: Served by Fire Station No. =
Open Space: AC~C~C Provided -
Schools:
(Demands to be determined by staff)
sewer: Demand in EDUs -
Identify Sub Basin -
(Identify trunk line@) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD -
246.8 sa. ft.
131.6 sa. ft.
NIA
.49 acres
NIA
NIA
670 AD"
No. 4
3.48
CUSD
71
N/A
15.620
The project is 68.26 dwelling units below the Grawth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
t
D t SCLC SL' RE ST.4E.M ENT
I
I ,.. - . .- .. - Pease Prrnr) U
:re fcilowlng Information must bo disclosod: :..!:Y 2 6 :.?35
1. Aoolicrfl
kst the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in tho application.
HSP CALIFORNIA, L.L.C.
Marcus S. Palkowltsh
650 South Cherry Street, Suite 435
Denver. Colorado 80222
MSP CALIFORNIA. L.L.C.
David M. Bentlev
Tucson. Arizona 85718 !e 3 21
2. Ownor
Lst the names and addressos of dl porsons having any ownonhip intuW in tho proporty involved.
MSP CALIFORNIA. LJlyC. MSP CALIFORNIA. L.L.C.
Marcus S. Palkowitsh David M. Bentley
Denver. Colorado 80222 Tucson, Arizona 85718
650 'South Cherry Street. Suite 435 3573 East S-e. S- 1
1
3. If any person identinod punant to (1) or (2) above i8 a corporation or putnorship, list tho names acc
addressos of all individuals ownmg mor0 than 1096 of tho Marw in th. corporation or owning any partnersme ~nterost in tho putnorship.
!Over}
Page 2
5. Have you had mcre than S2S0 worth of business transacted with any member of City Staff. 3carz3
Commlssrons. Committees and Councii within tho past twelve mOnthS?
Yes - If yes, pleaso indicate person@)
(NOTE; Attach additional pages as fwCe?ssW.)
Marcus S. Palkowitsh Marcus S. P-nh
~nnt or rypo name d ownor Print or rypa named appbcax -
-. .
STATE OF CAUILOIN(A--THC (LUOUQS A-
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
4949 VIMIW m.
SAN MEGO, CA 92123
(619) 4674212
November 17, 1995
Mr. Jeff Gibson
Planning Department
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Cdsbad, CA 92009-1 576
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Emerald Ridge West Project,
City of Cadsbad, CT 95-03/HDP 95-06/SDP 95-06
Dear Mr. Gibson:
The Department of Fish and Game's (DFG) Natural Community Conservation Planning
(NCCP) staff has reviewed the mitigated negative declaration, and supporting environmental
documentation, for the Emerald Ridge West development project and offers the following
comments. The proposed 28.9 acres project is located in the City of Carlsbad, south of Palomar
Airport Road, east of Paseo Del Norte, north of Camino de las Ondas, and immediately west of
the proposed alignment of Hidden Valley Road. The development would consist of 61 single-
family residential lots, 10 second-dwelling units, and an 8.3 acre open space lot. An access road
off of Hidden Valley Road, and an off-site sewer line would also be constructed.
The property currently supports 6.44 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub (CSS), 0.05 acres
of disturbed CSS, 1.2 acres of southern mixed chaparral, 0.43 acres of riparian vegetation, 0.23
acres of unvegetated channel, and 20.55 acres of disturbed agricultural lands. The site is not
iocaed wltlhin the City ofCarlstad'3 proposed AW.t:t ?.bmgement Plzm presewe sed. No
sensitive plant species were identified on-site. The California gnatcatcher, a federally-threatened
species was obsand within the CSS habitat on the property, as well as in habitat just off-site.
The proposed development would impact 18.0 acres of agricultural lands, and 0.12 acres
of CSS habitat. The habitat where the California gnatcatcher was observed would not be directly
impacted. The project proponent proposes to mitigate impacts to CSS by on-site preservation of
4.82 acres of CSS and the purchase of 0.19 acres of credit within the Carlsbad Highlands
mitigation bank. On-site impacts to CSS and wetlands fiom the construction of Hidden Valley
Road will be mitigated by on-site habitat restoratiodcreation. An adjacent property owner
(Sambi) is responsible for filfilling this mitigation requirement.
The DFG concurs with the mitigation measures proposed by the project proponent, and
Mr. JeffGibson
November 17,1995
Page Two
also agrees that they are consistent with the NCCP Guidelines. If mitigation credits are not
purchased in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bank, then 0.19 acres of equal or higher quality
CSS habitat must be acquired by the property owner within the North County coastal region. The
DFG would need to review and concur with any alternate mitigation site if this project is to be
processed through the provisions of the NCCP program.
If you have any questions concerning these comments please contact David Lawhead at
(6 19) 467-42 1 1. Thank YOU.
I Sincerely,
William E. Tippets
NCCP Field Supervisor
cc: Department of Fish and Game
Mr. RonRempel
Sacramento
Ms. Patty Wolf
Long Beach
Mr. David Lawhead
San Diego
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Gail ICobetich
Ms. -Berryman
FILE: Chon
EMRLDRDG.DNL
LAWHEADlTPPETS
Pm WILSON. Gomnor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
UN MKio COAST
5111 CAMIN0 DCL RIO NCUW, Sum 100
SAN DIECO, CA 9Zla6172l
(619 521-8036
November 30,1995
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Attn: Jeff Gibson
Carlsbad, CA 92009- 1576
RE: Proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Emerald Ridge
West Project - SCH #95101062
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Commission staff has reviewed the above cited document and would like to provide the
following comments. To begin with, it is our understanding that the project involves a 61-
lot residential subdivision along with open space and 10 second dwelling units. The
project also proposes a number of on- and off-site road and utility improvements including
two alternative sewer alignments. Relative to procedures, the project site is located within
the Coastal Zone and is therefore subject to coastal development permit review. The
project site is located within the area governed by the City of Carlsbad certified Mello II
LCP segment. As such, the standard of review for the coastal development permit is the
Commissioncertified Mello II LCP segment.
Pertaining to potential concern raised by the above cited draft document, the document
derails two sewerhtom drain aiternauve alignments (A & B). Based on the information
provided, Alternative B would have sigdicant impacts on environmentally sensitive
habitat areas, while Alternative A does not have any direct native or sensitive habitat
impacts. As such, Alternative A is clearly the least environmentallydamaging alternative.
However, tb draft document does not spec@ which alignment is being proposed. As you
are aware, in March of this year, the Coastal Commission approved a permit for a
residential subdivision south of the subject site (ref. CDP #6-%-131/Toyohara). The
Commission’s approval also included the extcnsiort/impmvement of Hidden Valley Road
north from the project to Palomar Airport Road. In its approval, the Commission found
that while the road alignment would impact dual criteria slopes, such impacts could be accepted because the road alignment would also provide necessary sewer, water and
access to other developable arcas. In subsequent permit actions for other development in
this area, the Commission made additional findings that, because of potential impacts to
environmentally sensitive habitat arcas, any proposed sewer lines to serve development in
,
this area should be within Hidden Valley Road Due to topographic constraints that
would require the use of a pump facility, which can be costly to construct and maintain,
neither alternative is proposed within Hidden Valley Road. However, because Alternative
A does not involve any native habitat impacts, it should be the “preferred alternative”.
The draft document also states that approximately 129,205 cubic yards of grading is
necessary to accommodate building pads, lots, utilities, etc., and that the grading conforms
to the City’s Hillside Development Ordinance. However, the document does not indicate
whether a slope analysis has been completed and if there is any grading of dualcriteria
slopes. As such, this should be clarified. In addition, because portions of the site drain to
environmentally sensitive habitat areas, any grading that occurs during the winter rainy
season could lead to sedimentation impacts to such downstream resources. Therefore, the
document should make it clear that gradrng of the site would be prohibited during the
winter rainy season (October I to April l), consistent with LCP requirements.
Finally, on Page 15 of the draft document, the statement is made that “no sensitive plant
species were identified onsite...”. Although this statement is true, taken literally, it is
somewhat misleading. While it is true then arc no plant species onsite that have been
listed by any state or federal agencies, the site does contain several environmentally
sensitive habitat areas (Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, Mixed Chaparral and Riparian) that do
support several listed/protected wildlife species. Therefore, this should be clarified in the
document.
The above comments have been prepared by Commission staff based on the information
available at this time. Additional issues may result from further public review and input.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this draft document. If you have any
questions, please give me a call.
Q& Coastal Planner
TEE Cm 01 C- Bonwra 4 Bggwrmrlmr DIWAR~ENT
A REPORT TO TEE HOUSING COMMISSION
Item No. 3
I St&. Leilani Hines I Management Analyst
DATE: FEBRUARY 8,1996
SUBJECT: 1996-97 HOME PROGRAM - Request for approval of a recommendation of
projects and funding allocations for the City of Carlsbad's 1996-97 HOME
Investment Partnership Program.
I. RECOMMENDATION
ACCEPT public comments regarding the City of Carlsbad's housing and community
development needs and proposals submitted for funding under the HOME Investment Partnership
Program and ADOPT Housing Commission Resolution No. 96-003, recommending to the City
Council the projects and funding allocations for the City of Carlsbad's 1996-97 HOME
Investment Partnership Program.
II. BACKGROUND
On June 20, 1995, the City Council approved Carlsbad's participation with the cities of
Encintas, Santee, and Vista and the County of San Diego to form a consortium for the purpose
of increasing the local supply of decent affordable housing to low and very income persons. As
a participant in the San Diego Urban County HOME Investment Partnership Consortium, the
City will receive federal HOME funds to provide affordable housing opportunities for lower
income households. The total amount of HOME funding available for allocation to eligible
projects is anticipated to be approximately $176,700.
Attached for Housing Commission's information is the City's CDBG/HOME Investment
Partnership Program Funding Plan Strategy (Exhibit 2), as approved by City Council. This
Strategy outlines the eligible housing activities for the HOME program.
In response to the City's "Request for F'roposals", a total of two (2) proposals, with $185,070
in HOME funding requests, have been submitted to date for consideration by the Housing
Commission. A copy of each proposal is attached as Exhibit 3 for the Housing Commission to
review. Copies of the proposals are also available for review by the general public at the
Housing and Redevelopment Office (2965 Roosevelt Street).
1996-97 HOME PROGRAM
FEBRUARY 8, 1996
PAGE 2
Housing Activities
Administration
TOTAL
The chart below summarizes the CDBG/HOME funding available and the maximum amount
which can be allocated in each expenditure category:
167,400 159,030
{ 2 moDosals)
17,670
(1 moposal)
17,670
185,070 176,700.00
In identifying the needs of low and moderate income persons, a public hearing is held to obtain
the views of citizens on Carlsbad's housing and community development needs. During this
public hearing, the Housing Commission may also solicit comments on specific activities
proposed to meet the needs of low and moderate income persons.
As a participant in the San Diego Urban County HOME Investment Partnership Consortium, the
City will receive approximately $176,700 to increase affordable housing opportunities. In
response to the City's "Request for Proposals", the City has received a total of two proposals
for HOME funding.
The Community Resource Center is requesting $13,400 to provide a one time security deposit
to assist lower-income persons currently in "near homeless" living situations, such as living in
motels, shelters or transitional housing programs, to move into permanent housing. The City
of Carlsbad is requesting $154,000 to provide fmncial assistance for the rehabilitation of owner
occupied single family homes.
In selecting projects for HOME funding, priority should be given to projects which best meet
the identified needs of the low and moderate-income population within Carlsbad, as detailed
within the City's Consolidated Plan. Additionally, staff evaluated each eligible proposal
submitted based upon the following criteria, with a maximum score of 100 points: 1) organization's ability and capacity; 3) benefits and
beneficiaries; and 4) ready implementation of program/project. The chart provided as Exhibit
4 outlines each request for funding received by the City with an indication of staff's evaluation
score, the corresponding Consolidated Plan priority, and bding recommendation.
2) financial ability and stability;
c
1996-97 HOME PROGRAM
FEBRUARY 8, 1996
PAGE 3
Staff is recommending that the Community Resource Center receive its full request for $13,400
in HOME funding for a Security Deposit Assistance Program and the City receive $145,630 for
the Single Family Residential Rehabilitation Program. Additionally, the City may use a
maximum of ten percent (10%) of the available HOME funds, or $17,670, for administration
of the HOME Program. Staff is recommending that the City receive the $17,670 allowed for
the reasonable administrative costs of the HOME Program. Administrative activities include
overall program management, coordination, monitoring, and evaluation.
At this time, staff recommends that the Housing Commission accept public comments on the
needs of low and moderate income persons and the proposals submitted for funding under the
1996-97 CDBG program to meet those needs. Then, as a second action, the Housing
Commission is being requested to approve a recommendation of project funding allocations for
the City's 1996-97 HOME Program.
FISCAL IMPACE
As a participant in the San Diego Urban County HOME Investment Partnership Consortium, in
1996-97, the City will receive approximately $176,700 to increase affordable housing
opportunities in Carlsbad. The City may use a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the available
HOME funds, or $17,670, for administrative costs incurred by the City for the overall
management, monitoring, and evaluation of the HOME Program. The HOME Program has no
impact on the General Fund.
EXHIBITS:
1. Housing Commission Resolution No. 96-003
2. 1996-97 CDBG/HOME Consolidated Funding Plan Strategy
3. HOME Funding Project Proposals (2 Total)
4. Summary of staffs evaluation of proposals and funding allocation recommendations
* .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2a
HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-003
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING SPECIFIC
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.
PROJECTS FOR FUNDING UNDER THE 1996-1997 HOME
WHEREAS, the Housing Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held
a public hearing on February 8, 1996 to accept comments on the needs of low and
moderate income persons and the proposals submitted for funding consideration under the
1996- 1997 HOME Investment Partnership Program;
WHEREAS, the Housing Commission selected projects to be recommended for
HOME funding during a public hearing on February 8, 1996; and,
WHEREAS, the Housing Commission has taken all testimony into account.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED as follows:
1.
2.
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the projects selected at the Housing Commission meeting of February
8, 1996 are hereby recommended at the indicated funding levels for inclusion in
Carlsbad’s Consolidated Plan for the 1996-1997 HOME Investment Partnership
Program.
...
...
...
...
...
...
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
-. c i
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Housing Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 8th day of
February, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES: None.
Chairperson Calverley; Commissioners: Schlehuber, Escobedo, Noble, Rose, Sato, Scarpelli & Wellman.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
RLY, Chairperson
ATTEST:
EVAN E. BECKER
Housing and Redevelopment Director
HC RES0 NO. 96-003 -2-
EXHIBIT 2
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1996-97
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
FUNDING PLAN STRATEGY
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1996-97
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OBJEcnvEs
The City of Carlsbad Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds will be allocated to
organizations, agencies, City Departments, or persons to implement programs or develophprove
public facilities which meet the following community development objectives:
1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING:
0 Provide direct benefit to lower income persons through the provision or retention of affordable housing units in Carlsbad;
0 Provide shelter or services to homeless or near homeless persons/families which
result in an improved situation through employment, permanent housing, treatment
of mental, or substance abuse problems, etc.; and,
0 Provide direct assistance to lower income households to prevent or eliminate
residential Building or Municipal Code violations and/or improve the quality of
housing units in Carlsbad through residential (rental and/or owner occupied)
rehabilitation programs.
2. SOCIAL SERVICES (GENERAL):
0 Provide assistance to non-profit public service providers who meet the basic needs
of lower income Carlsbad residents. Basic needs are defined as those which provide
food, shelter, clothing and, in some cases, health care;
0 Provide assistance to non-profit public service providers who offer counseling and
self-improvement programs/activities for lower income Carlsbad residents; and,
0 Provide assistance to non-profit public service providers who offer recreational
and/or cultural programs/activities for lower income Carlsbad residents.
3. SOCIAL SERVICES CHILDREN & ADULTS);
0 Provide assistance to organizations which administer programs that directly benefit
lower income children living in Carlsbad. The programs must provide one or more
of the following activities: day care, after-school care, cultural enrichment,
recreation, health care/immunization or self-improvement. The City may also give
priority to single-parent assistance programs such as counseling services; and
0 Provide assistance to organizations which administer programs that directly benefit
low income adults living in Carlsbad. The programs must provide one or more of
the following activities for adults: employment services, job training, and educational
programs. Programs designed for elderly adults only must provide one or more of
the following activities: meals, homemaking or personal assistance services, financial
assistance services, counseling, transportation, or shared housing or other housing
related services.
I CITY OF CARLSBAD
1996-97 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
SUMMARY OF EUNDS AVAILABLE
Source of Funds Amount
New Entitlement Grant 647,000.00
Reallocation of Previous Funds 50,621.58
TOTAL 697,621.58
CompletecVCanceled Project Funds to be Reallocated
Activity - Year Status w
Boys & Girls Club (Renovation) 92-93 Completed 220.78
Boys & Girls Club (Renovation) 93-94 Forfeited 50,000.00
Join Hands Save a Life 94-95 Completed 400.80
TOTAL 50,621.58
Funds Available bv Activity Amount ($1
Public Service 97,050.00
Public Facilities 8~ Improvements, etc. 236,976.32
Program Administration 117,913.68
Section 108 Loan Payment 195,000.00
Reallocation due to completed or canceled 50,621.58
project and unprogrammed funds.'
TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS 697,621.58
1 May not be used for Program Administration or Public Sewice Activities
SAN DIEGO URBAN COUNTY
1996-97
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM STRATEGY
The City of Carlsbad, as a member of the San Diego Urban County HOME Consortium, will
allocate its HOME Investment Partnership funds to implement the following activities directly,
through local housing authorities, or for-profit or non-profit organizations:
e
e
e
' 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Housing AcquisitionRehabilitation e Rental Assistance
Housing Rehabilitation e Security Deposits
Housing Construction e Administration/Planning
Housinp AcauisitionlRehabilitation
HOME funds may be used for acquisition of existing housing units with or without
rehabilitation for lower-income persons and special needs groups.
Housing Rehabilitation
HOME funds may be used for housing rehabilitation costs incurred separately or in
connection with the acquisition of existing housing for lower-income persons and special
needs groups.
Housinp Construction
HOME funds may be used for all eligible costs of housing construction for lower-income
persons and special needs groups, when housing units are not available through acquisition
or rehabilitation.
HOME funds may be used for rental assistance for eligible lower-income persons and special
needs groups, and for related residential security deposit assistance programs.
Administration/PIanning
A portion of HOME funding may be used for eligible HOME administration and planning
costs, including direct administrative and overhead costs, public information, fair housing,
and program development costs.
NOFA Process
The City's portion of HOME funds will be awarded to eligible housing activities
implemented by the City or by for profit or non-profit organizations. All housing proposals
submitted as part of the CDBG/HOME Request for Proposals which were not recommended
for CDBG funding and proposals which are determined to be ineligible activities under the
CDBG Program will be considered for funding under the HOME Program.
City staff shall evaluate each proposal and present all eligible HOME funded housing
activities to the Housing Commission. Based upon the evaluation, staff will recommend a
housing activity(ies) to be considered by the Housing Commission for a HOME funding
recommendation to the City Council.
The Urban County HOME funding program will be implemented through twice yearly
Notices of Funding Availability (NOFA’S). For 1996-97, the County Fall NOFA will be
available from November 17 to 30, 1995 and the Spring NOFA will be available from April
19 to May 31, 1996.
.7. Leveragp
In so far as possible, HOME funds will be leveraged with other public and private funding
sources to enhance program productivity.
8.. Area of Activity
HOME funds may be used for housing activities implemented within the City of Carlsbad.
!
I S DIEGO COUNTY CONSORTIUn
1996-97
HOME PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
PRELIMINARY STRATEGY ALLOCATIONS
Participating Jurisdictions Amount ($1
Carlsbad 176,720.25
Encinitas 162,582.63
santee 14 1,376.20
Vista 226,201.92
Urban County 1,859,65 8.00
Program Administration 285,171 .OO
TOTAL
~
2,851,710.OO
EXHIBIT 3
HOR.IE FUNDING
PROJECT PROPOSALS
-
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTlHOME PROGRAM
FUNDING PROPOSAL APPLICATION
1996-97
The following information must be completed by each person/agency/organization interested in being
considered for CDBG funding. All information requested must be provided or the application will be
considered incomplete and will not be further evaluated for funding consideration. Please type or print
clearly. Attach additional sheets or information as necessary.
ADMINISTRATING AGENCY
Name of Agency:
Address:
City of Carlsbad. Housing & Redevelopment Department
2965 Roosevelt Street. Suite B
Carlsbad CA 92008
Federal Tax I.D. Number:
PROPOSED PROGRAM/PROJECT
Title of ProgrdProject: Single Familv Residential Rehabilitation Program
Location of ProgramlProject: Citv wide activitv
Administrative Office - See above
Contact Person: Leilani Hines Telephone No.: (619) 434-2818
Requested Funding Amount: $ 154.000
Description of ProgrdProject (Describe the work to be performed, including the activities to be
undertaken or the services to be provided, the goals and objectives of the program/project, etc.):
Rehabilitation of single family owner occupied homes through out the Citv of Carlsbad. Funds will be
used for loanskrant to aualifving; low income households and for the County of San Diego’s costs to
administer the Drogram. The Citv is reauesting additional CDBG funds so that this residential
rehabilitation urogram can continue without delay. Funding reauest will allow for the rehabilitation of
armroximatelv 10 single family homes. Currentlv. there are apuroximatelv 18 single familv home owners
and 7 mobilehome owners on the City’s interest list.
I. ORGANIZATIONAL ABILITYiCAPACITY
A.
B.
This agency is:
0 Non-profit
0 For-profit XBt Local public agency
0 State public agency
0 Other (Please specify.)
What is the purpose/mission of the agency?
The Housing; and Redeveloument Deuartment is dedicated to: 1) Enriching and
revitalizing the redevelopment area for the benefit and enioment of the entire
community: 2) Providing affordable housing citv wide for all economic segments of the
population: and 3) Providing a CDBG urotyam that meets the social service, housing
and community develoument needs of low income residents.
- -
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT/HOME PROGRAM
FUNDING PROPOSAL APPLICATION
1996-97
The following information must be completed by each person/agency/organization interested in being
considered for CDBG funding. All information requested must be provided or the application will be
considered incomplete and will not be hrther evaluated for funding consideration. Please type or print
clearly. Attach additional sheets or information as necessary.
ADMINISTRATING AGENCY
Name of Agency:
Address:
Citv of Carlsbad. Housing & RedeveloDment DeDartment
2965 Roosevelt Street. Suite B
Carlsbad CA 92008
Federal Tax I.D. Number:
PROPOSED PROGRAM/PROJECT
Title of ProgrardProject: Single Family Residential Rehabilitation Program
Location of ProgrdProject: Citv wide activity
Administrative Office - See above
Contact Person: Leilani Hines Telephone No.: (619) 434-2818
Requested Funding Amount: $ 154,000
Description of ProgramRroject (Describe the work to be performed, including the activities to be
undertaken or the services to be provided, the goals and objectives of the programlproject, etc.):
Rehabilitation of single family owner occupied homes through out the City of Carlsbad. Funds will be
used for loans/grant to qualifvina low income households and for the Countv of San DiePo’s costs to
administer the Drogram. The City is requesting additional CDBG funds so that this residential
rehabilitation program can continue without delay. Fundinp reauest will allow for the rehabilitation of
apDroximatelv 10 single family homes. Currently, there are aDmoximatelv 18 single familv home owners
and 7 mobilehome owners on the Citv’s interest list.
I. ORGANIZATIONAL ABILITY/CAPACITY
A. This agency is:
0 Non-profit
0 For-profit
0 Local public agency
0 State public agency
0 Other (Please specify.)
. B. What is the purpose/mission of the agency?
The Housing and Redevelopment Deuartment is dedicated to: 1) Enriching and
revitalizing the redevelopment area for the benefit and enioment of the entire
communiw: 2) Providing affordable housing city wide for all economic segments of the
poDulation: and 3) Providing a CDBG propm that meets the social service. housing
and community develoDment needs of low income residents. I
r_ City of Carlsbad
1995-96 CDBG/HOME h ,riding Application
Page 2
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
How long has this agency been in operation? Please include the date of incorporation?
Citv of Carlsbad incorporated in 1952.
How long has this agency been providing the proposed program/project?
Carlsbad’s residential rehabilitation program administered by the Countv has been in
operation since 1993. The County has been operating residential rehabilitation programs
for the unincomorated San Diego County area and on behalf of other jurisdictions since
1978. Prior to the Citv of Carlsbad becoming a CDBG Entitlement communitv, the
County of San DiePo did offer a residential rehabilitation program to Carlsbad residents
under the Urban Countv program.
Please describe the agency’s existing staff positions. (May substitute an organizational
chart.)
Please see attached.
Please describe the agency’s existing staff positions directly responsible for the proposed
progrdproject and their qualifications and experience in implementing such a
program/project. (Resumes may also be submitted.)
Please see attached.
Please indicate your agency’s level of experience with the CDBG program and/or other
State or Federal Funding Sources.
CDBG program:
0 No past experience.
0
0
[29
Some experience, 1 to 2 years of using CDBG funds.
Moderate experience, 3 to 5 years of using CDBG funds.
Considerable experience, more than 5 years of using CDBG funds.
Other State/Federal Funding Sources:
0 No past experience. 0 0 Some experience, 1 to 2 years of using other StatelFederal funding sources.
Moderate experience, 3 to 5 years of using other State/Federal funding sources.
Considerable experience, more than 5 years of using other StatelFederal funding
sources.
If you have received federal funds, including CDBG funds, in previous years, have
program violation findings ever been made against your agency/organization?
B No 0 Yes
If yes, please explain nature of finding(s) and how finding@) has been addressed by your
organization.
Not Amlicable
(WPUPPLICATION)
Mad. I/25/96
I City of Carlsbad
1995-96 CDBG/HOME Funding Application
Page 3
_-
11. FINANCIAL CAPACITY/STABILITY
A. Please attach the proposed budget for the prograndproject, itemizing revenues and
expenses, to this application. Indicate how the requested CDBG funds would relate to
the overall proposed budget.
B. Please submit a copy of the organization's financial statements for the last three years and
a copy of the most recent PA Audit Report.
C. Did you receive any of the following sources of funding from the City of Carlsbad last
year (July 1995 to June 1996) for the proposed program/project?
Sources of Funding - No - Yes
CDBG
Community Activities (General Fund monies)
w 0
El 0
1. If yes, please indicate status of previously awarded funds (fully expended, funds
remaining, prograndproject discontinued).
CDBG funds:
Community Activities: Not aDDliCable
D. Did you receive any federal funds, including CDBG funding from other cities, last year
(July 1995-June 1996)?
4 No 0 Yes (Please list funds below.)
Amount Received
$
$
$
$
Program Source
E. Will additional CDBG funds be required in future years for the project?
0 No a Yes
111. BENEFITS & BENEFICIARIES
A. How accessible or convenient is the proposed progrdproject to Carlsbad residents?
(Please be specific.)
Program offers funds to rehabilitate lower income owner-occuDied single family homes
and mobile homes located in Carlsbad onlv.
- City of Carlsbad
1995-96 CDBG/HOME b unding Application
Page 4
B. What is the approximate percentage of your clients that have annual family incomes in
each of the following ranges: (Percentages should add to 100%; Please see the 1994-95
Income Limits for the CDBG Program)
% of clients are at 30 percent or below of the area median income
% of clients are between 31 and 50 percent of the area median income
% of clients are between 51 and 80 percent of the area median income
% of clients are above 80 percent of the area median income
40
60
C. Please describe how low and moderate income persons will benefit from the proposed
progrdproject. Include the need or problem to be addressed in relation to local and
national objectives, CHAS or other community development priorities, as well as the
population to be served or the area to be benefitted.
The rehabilitation of residential units occupied bv lower-income households will assist
in the preservation and maintenance of the Citv’s affordable housing stock. Additionallv,
the rehabilitation of these homes will further protect the health and safety of the occupant
bv correcting deficiencies in the home.
D. Please indicate the number of households or individuals you serve each year and the
percentage that are Carlsbad residents.
- 5 Households or Persons of which 100 % are Carlsbad residents
E. Does your agency focus its activities on populations with special needs?
0 No @ Yes (Please specify)
Please specify which special needs populations. (Homeless individuals/families, Persons
with disabilities, Persons with substance abuse problems, Veterans, Farm workers & day
laborers, Elderly, Children, etc.)
Offers rehabilitation grant of $l.OOO for the elderly or disabled for
accessibilitv/ada~tilitv improvements.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTIVITY
A. Please attach a schedule for implementation of the proposed progrdproject to this
application. The agency must ensure the expenditure of all CDBG funds awarded within
the program year.
f
- City of Carlsbad
1995-96 CDBG/HOME fc barding Application
Page 5
I, the undersigned, do hereby attest that the above information is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
Management Analyst December 20. 1995
Title Date
Date Received: December 20, 1995
Date Reviewed: December 20. 1995
Staff Person Completing Review: Leilani Hines
National Objective: Low/mod Income Benefit
Local Objective:
Eligibility Determination:
Affordable Housing - Rehabilitation
24 CFR Part 570.202 (aMl)
24 CFR Part 570.208 (aM3)
(WP:UPPLICATION)
Revis&: 1ml%
CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM
1996-97
EXPENSES:
No. of Units Cost Der Unit Total Cost
Single Family Homes 6 $20,000.00 $120,000.00
Mobile Homes
Administration @I 22% $33,846.15
TOTAL 6 $20 ,OOo. 00 $153,846.15
Revenues:
HOME Funds $154,000
ADMINISTRATIVE CAPABILITY
Edward A. Baker
Director (Acting)
Alfred0 Ybarra
Housing Program
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
HOUSING REHABILITATION
Martha Meurer
Principal Rehabilitation Specialist
(Supervisor)
Bob Steckman
Housing Rehabilitation Specialist
(Inspector)
Margaret Wooley
Housing Rehabilitation Specialist I1
Sharon Ford
Housing Rehabilitation Specialist II
David Smith
Housing Rehabilitation Specialist II
Two years as Acting Director of the County of San
Diego’s Housing and Community Development
Department, which includes the Urban County’s
CDBG Program, the Housing Authority and the
Industrial Development Authority. Currently, the
Director’s responsibilities include 91 employees and an
annual budget of $82 million.
Ten years with the County of San Diego’s HCD
Department; Thirteen years of experience in various
housing programs including mobilehome assistance
programs, density bonus programs, rehabilitation, and
bond financing.
Fourteen years with the County of San Diego’s HCD
I11 Department; Experience in all phases of duties
associated with the rehabilitation programs;
Experience in the supervision of and responsibility for
subordinates in the division.
Six years with the County of San Diego’s HCD
I11 Department in the Rehabilitation Division; Twenty
three years of experience in construction, inspections,
and teaching construction applications.
Fifteen years with the County of San Diego’s HCD
Department; Eight years of experience with Housing
Rehabilitation Division; Experience in real estate and
construction industry.
Nine years of experience with the County of San
Diego’s Housing Rehabilitation Division; Experience
in construction and inspections of residential properties
for health and safety code violations, and general
remodeling and repair.
Five years of experience with the County of San
Diego’s HCD Department; Six years of experience in
housing, office, and industrial construction and
renovation; Eleven years experience in civil
engineering and earth work.
Sherri Hopkins
Housing Aide
Six years of experience with the County of San
Diego’s HCD Department with three years of
experience in residential rehabilitation; Experience as
an Account Clerk I11 at the County of Orange HCD.
- COMMUN-Y DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT OGRAM
PROGRAM/PROJECT EVALUATION
INSTRUCTIONS
Each eligible proposal/application for CDBG funds shall be reviewed and evaluated, for ranking purposes
based upon the attached criteria. The CDBG Funding Advisory Committee, as well as Housing and
Redevelopment Department staff, will evaluate each eligible proposal for funds and assign a score based
on a maximum 100 point scale.
To assist you in reviewing and evaluating each proposal based upon the established criteria, measurement
examples, where appropriate, have been provided. These are to be used as a guide only and is not
intended to cover every circumstance which may occur. Please use your best judgement in evaluating the
proposals with the criteria that has been provided. You will find a copy of each evaluation form placed
directly behind the application.
To facilitate the evaluation of eligible proposals based upon the attached criteria, applicants will be given
the opportunity to participate in a 10 minute interview with the CDBG Funding Advisory Committee and
staff during a public meeting. The public will be given the opportunity to comment on the eligible
proposals being considered for funding.
The interview will provide the Advisory Committee with an opportunity to obtain additional information
regarding the organization and the proposed activity that may not have been provided in or was unclear
within the application. It will be suggested that applicants provide any documents which may assist the
Advisory Committee and staff in evaluating the proposal p& to this interview.
Staff will average the evaluation scores given by each Advisory Committee member and staff, The
average score received will then be used to rank order each of the proposals within each of the following
three classifications for public service and public facility activities: 1) Housing; 2) General Social
services; and 3) Social Services for Children & Adults. This information will then be presented to the
Advisory Committee for further review and evaluation to determine the level of funding to be
recommended for each selected proposal.
- CITY OF CARLSBAD
COMMU~~A Y DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
PROGRAM/PROJECT EVALUATION
Name of Organization & Project:
Project Location: 9wr; RQQSFVFI T ST-, STF R CAU SBAD
CITY OF CARLSBAD/SF RESIDENTIAL REHAB
CITYWIDE PROGRAM
Service Providedmenefit to Carlsbad Residents:
Type of Activity:
Local Objective:
National Objective:
Amount of Funding Request: $ 154.000
I. ORGANIZATIONAL ABILITYKAPACITY (Max. of 15 ooinrs):
A. General Experience of Organization - How much general experience does the organization have
in providing services to low and moderate income persons? (i.e., length of time the organization has been
in operalion)
Measurement Examples:
No Experience New organization
1 to 3 years of experience Some Experience -
Moderate Experience - 4 to 9 years of experience
- -
-
Considerable Experience = 10 years or more of experience
0
No
1
Some 3 SCORE 2 0 Moderate Considerable
Experience Experience Experience Experience
COMMENTS:
B. Experience in Implementation of Program/Project - How much experience does the organization
have in providing the specific programlproject proposed for funding? (i.e., length of time the aciunl
program/proiect has been operated by the organization)
Measurement Examples: No Experience iT New progranJproject Some Experience -
Moderare Experience -
Considerable Experience = IO years or more of experience
0 to 3 years of experience
4 to 9 years of experience
- -
0
No
1
Some 4- SCORE 2
Moderate
Experience Experience Experience Experience
COMMENTS:
c CDBG Program
Evaluation Form
Page 2
C. Staffing for Program/Project - How qualified is the identified staff in performing the various
functions required to implement the proposed programlproject? (i.e., years ofstaff experience, education
and training)
0
Not
1
Fairly
2 3 SCORE 0 More than
Qualified Qualified Qualified Qualified
COMMENTS:
D. Experience with Federal or State Funding Sources - How much experience does the
organization have in administering CDBG and/or other State or Federal funds? fie., length
of time the organization/assigned staff has been administering such funds)
Measurement Examples: - No Experience - First time applying for FederaMtate Funk
Some Experience - I to 2 years of experience
Moderate Experience -
-
3 to 5 years of experience -
Considerable Experience = 5 years or more of experience
0
No
1
Some
3
SCORE 2 0 Moderate Considerable
Experience Experience Experience Experience
COMMENTS:
E. Performance record - What overall level of ability has the organization demonstrated for
providing services to the public, as well as adhering to local, State and/or Federal regulations
which may have applied to the various funding sources for their previous programs/projects?
(i.e., number of clients benefitting from program/project, any vioIations of the regulationr, ability to clear violation
fldings)
0
No
1
Some Adequate 0 3 2
Strong SCORE
Ability Ability Ability Ability
COMMENTS:
CDBG Program
Evaluation Form
Page 3
11. FINANCIA CAPACIT’ & STABILITY (Mar. of 20 points):
A. Leverage of Funds - What level of leveraging of CDBG funds with other funding sources
has been proposed for the proposed program/project or demonstrated in the current operating
budget for the program/project?
Measurement Examples:
No Leveraging
Some Leveraging
Moderate Leveraging
Considerable Leveraging
0 120
No or Little
Leveraging
= Proposed program/project will be funded enrirely with CDBG finds
from CDBGfinds.
31 to 65% of the revenues used for the proposed program/project will be
from CDBGfinds.
CDBG fud.
- - 65 to 95% of the revenues used for the proposed program/project will be
- -
- - 0 to 30% of the revenues used for the proposed progranJproject will be from
456 789 10 3 Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Leveraging Leveraging Leveraging
B. Financial Stability - Do the financial statements of the organization indicate a relatively stable
financial position? (i.e., diversifedfunding revenues and support, revenue exceeding expenses, fund balance)
Measurement Examples:
No Capacity One source offinding (CDBGJ and few, if any, assets. Revenue does not
cover expcmes. Fund balance is negative.
A few sources of funding and assets. Revenues equal expenses. No find
balance.
Moderate Capacity - Several sources of finding and assets. Revenues equal or slightly exceed
expenses. Some fund balance to carry over.
Considerable Capacity - A wide variety offinding sources and substantial assets. Revenues notably
exceed expenses with significant fund balance.
-
- Some Capacity -
-
-
0123 456 7@9 10 L No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Stability Stability Stability Stability
CDBG Program
Evaluation Form
Page 4
c
111. BENEFITS & BENEFICIARIES (Mar. of 60 points):
A. Access to Program/Service - Is the proposed program/project easily accessible or convenient
to Carlsbad residents?
Measurement Examples:
Not or Not Very Accessible = Service office located more than a mile outside 01 Carlsbad and office is
not located directly along any public transpottation routes.
directly along any public transportah*on routes.
Senice office located outside of Carlsbad butprovides transporlation to and
from service locarion aNor ofice is located directly along public
transportation routes.
Service ofice located within Carkbad or provides services directly to
client's residence.
Fairly Accessible - - Service ofice located within a mile of Carkbad and ofice is not located
Accessible =
Very Accessible =
024 579 10 12 14 15 13
Not or Not Fairly Very SCORE
Very Accessible Accessible Accessible Accessible
B. Benefit to Lower Income Persons - To what extent does the proposed program/project benefit low
income persons?
Measurement Examples:
Some Benefit
Considerable Bemfit
No or Little Benejt
Moderate Bene@
= Less than 30% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
61 to 80% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
=
-
30 to 60% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
More than 81 46 of clients are of low income (50% of MFl).
=
0 2 4 509 10 12 14 15 7
No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit
C. Benefit to Carlsbad Residents - To what extent does the proposed program/project benefit low
income Carlsbad residents?
Measurement Examph:
No or Little Bene@
Some Benefit
Moderate Benefir
Considerable Benefit
E Serves 1 to 15 Carlsbad residents annually. Facility located outside of
Carlsbad
Serves 16 to 50 Carlsbad resiaknts annually. Facility located just outside
of CarlsW
Serves 51 to 99 Carlsbad rednts annually. Facility located in Carkbad
but serves less than 50 reside-
Serves more than 100 Carlsbad residents annually aflor facility located in
Carlsbad and serves more than 51 reskiem.
P
=
=
024 579 a1214 15
No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit
I
i
CDBG Program
Evaluation Form
Page 5
L
D.
Iv.
A.
Needs of Low Income Residents - To what extent does the proposed program/project meet
the needs of low-income residents? (i.e., relation to Consolidated Plan priorities, special nee& population
served)
Measurement Eramples: Not A&quate =
Fairly Adequate -
Adequate -
More than A&qme -
024 57
Not Fairly
Adequate Adequate
-
Meets no prioritized need of the Consolidated Plan.
Meets a low priority need of the Consolidated Plan.
populations.
populations.
Serves no special nee&
Serves no special nee& .
._ Meets a medium priority need of the Consolidated Plan. Serves special
nee& populations.
Meets a high priority need of the Consolidated Plan.
9 10 12 14 15 13 More than SCORE
Adequate Adequate
COMMENTS: )/rm7lVk4 mz I4-WI-Y. e-sw-5 Eu=Iaz-LY
kblJ13>ltpppcsD.
IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECTPROGRAM (Max. of 5 points):
Implementation/Expenditure of Funds - To what degree has the organization demonstrated a
readiness to implement the proposed program/project and expend the CDBG funds within the
one year period? (i.e.. progra'am/project is in planning stage oniy, identification awor commitment of other
funding sources for completion of program/project, program/project already in operation or started)
Measurement Examples:
No or tittle
Some
Moderate
High
0
No or Little
Degree of
Readiness
- -
E
ProgranJproject in development stage only. No specijic site selected No construction or construction related plans completed
Program operating for less than one year. Specific site selected and ready to submit
purchase offer. Architectural, engineering plans and other plans being drafted
to open bid process. Site selected and oJer accepted or option to buy.
Program operating at least two years. Construction work ready to begin by July 1st.
Property to be in escrow by July 1st.
- - Program operating for at lem one year. Construction drawings completed and ready
L
A SCORE 1 2 3 4 0 Some Moderate High Degree
Degree of Degree of of Readiness
Readiness Readiness
COMMENTS:
TOTAL POINTS RECEIVED (Maximum of 100 Points Possible): 73
SCORE
REQUEST FOR FUNDS
1996-1 997 Entitlement Year
to
City of Carlsbad
Housing and Redevelopment Department
2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B
Carlsbad, CA 92008
December 28, 1995
from
Community Resource Center
650 Second Street
Encinitas, California 92024
- CITYOFCARISBAD -
CDBG PROGRAM CEECKLIST OF REQUIRED DOCUMENTS
The following information is required of all CDBG applicants. Private organizations receiving CDBG funds from previous years do not need to submit documents if they are on file at the
Housing and Redevelopment Department and these documents have not changed since initially
submitted.
Program Yeat: 1996 - 1997
Title of ~ogram/proj~t: Carlsbad Community Resource Center
Name of Agency:
Address:
Community Resource Center
3138 Roosevelt, Suite H
Carlsbad. CA 92008
0 3 d
El
Board of Directors' authorhtion to submit CDBG application
Board of Directon' designation of authorized offxiaI(s)
List of Board of Directors
State and Federal tax exemption determination letters
Funding proposal application. May include the following attachments:
d' Organizational chart d ' d % Most recent Independent Audit Report
0 Implementation schedule dh
Resumes of identified key personnel
Proposed budget, itemizing revenues and expenses Financial Statements for the last 2 years
!
bu,, , , r,unlry norninisrrarive Office Encinilas Social Services Carlrbad Soclal Services
650 Second Streel Resource - Enclnitas. California 92024 Encinilas, Car - \ia 92024 Carlsbad. California 92008
'elephone: (619) 753-1156 Telephone: (6 , 753-8300 Telephone: (61 9) 729-9300
Fax: (61 9) 753-0252
656 Second Streel 3138 Roosevell Streel. Sune H
Fax: (61 9) 753-0252 Fax: (619) 729-9399 Center
Board Officers and Directors
Addresses, Occupations & Telephones
- 1995/1996 -
BOARD OFFICERS
President
Gregory L. Murrell
655 Second Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
Vice President
Veronica J. Seay
982 Santa Florencia
Solana Beach, CA 92075
Treasurer
Becky Cofgan
136 Village Run East
Encinitas, CA 92024
Secretary
Ed Kaiser
135 Saxony Road
Encinitas, CA 92024
Attorney at Law
Mitchell & Murrell
61 9-753-6327
Executive Director
Coastal Community Foundation
61 9-755-0639
Owner
Sci-Tec h Communications
61 9-436-6325
V,P./Manager
San Dieguito National Bank
619-436-5226
Community Resource Center
Board Officers and Direc - fs, cont'd,
LIST OF DIECTOflS
David A. Billings
255 Sanford Street
Leucadia, CA 92024
Peter DeFrancesca
144 West "D" Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
Richard M. Freeman
Law Offices of Sheppard,
Mullin, Richter & Harnpton
501 West Broadway, Ste. 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
William H. Gish 111
1205 Santa Fe Drive
Encinitas, CA 92024
Deacon AI Graff
P.O. Box 674
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 .
Robert G. Halliday
4285 Ibis Street
San Diego, CA 92103
Mary Lapham
345 S. Nardo
Solana Beach, CA 92075
Walter Lehmann
1555 Summit
Cardiff, CA 92007
Dr. Marshall B. hubin
756 Grand Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Mary Helen Rubalcava
2360 Seasons Road
Oceanside, CA 92056
Evelyn Weidner
537 Ocean View Ave.
Encinitas, CA 92024
.-
General Counsel
So. California Soil & Testing, Inc.
61 9-280-4368
Partner
Grice, Lund & Tarkington CPA's
6 1 9-753- 1 1 57
Administrative Partner
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton
61 9-338-6609
Pres id ent
Gish's Pacific Flowers Inc.
61 9-436-9080
Deacon
Saint James Catholic Church
61 9-756-1 895
Owner
Halliday Construction
61 9-295-5700
Owner
San Dieguito Publishers
61 9-744-09 10
Management Consultant
61 9-942-0232
Owner
Marshall 6. Lubin, D.C.
61 9-434-4743
Outreach Worker
San Diego County Library
61 9-755-7859
Owner
Weidner's Begonia Gardens
619-436-2194 .
FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
Telephone: (800)852-57~ $kRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95867
COXMI" BGSODRCE CESJTJZR Attn.: Ronald W. Egger 275 Estrelita Dr. Vista, CA 92083
December 13, 1979
In reply refer to
344: TIC:vc:g
Charitable
' 0967931
Purpose
Form of Organization : Corporation
Accowiting Period Ending: September 3o
Organization Number
On the basis of the information submitted and provided your present operations
continue unchanged or conform to those proposed in your application, you are
exempt from state franchise or income tax under Section 23701d, Revenue and
Taxation Code.
m\i& be reported immediately to this office 60 that we may determine the effect on
your exempt status.
You are required to file Form 199 (Exempt Organization Annual Information Return)
or Form 199B (Exempt Organization Annual Information Statement) on or before the 15th
day of the 5th month (4 1/2 months) after the close of your accounting period,
annual instructfons ,with forms for requirements.
Any change in operation, character or purpose of the organization
Any, change of name or address also must be reported.
See
You are not required to file state franchise or income tax returns unless you have
income subject to the unrelated business income tax under Section 23731of the Code.
In this event, you are required to file Form 109 (Exempt Organization Business
Income Tax Return) by the 15th day of the 3rd month (2 1/2 months) after the close
of your annual accounting period.
. If the organization is incorporating, this approval will expire unless incorporation
is completed with the Secretary of State within 60 days,
Exemption from federal income or other taxes and other state taxes requires separate
appli tions.
*Thie exemption effective November 26, 1979. &k%rd=& aempt Oreanhation Section
CC: Registq of Charitable !bust&?
Internal Revenue Service
District Director
Community Resource Center
1042 A fat Street Encinitas, CA 92024
e. Dear Applicant:
*
Department of the Treasury '
~?~:m:80 '. &aqo
Fmpfoycr Identificrtfon Niimben
Accounllng Period Ending: September 30
Form990Required: (fJ Yes 0 No
95-3497 92 6
Pcrron lo Contack B. Brewer
Contact Tete hone Number:
(213) 6d-4553
Based on information supplied, and assuming your operations will be as stated
in your application for recognition of exemption, we have determined you are exempt from Federal. income,'tax under section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Codo. --
We have further determined that you are not a private foundation within the moaning of section 509(a) of the Code, because you are an organization described
in section 509(a)(2).-
"
IS your sources of support. or your purposos. character, or method of operation 3hange, please let us know so we can consider the effect of the change on your exempt status and foundation status. Also, you should inform us of all changos in your name or address.
Generally, you are no< liable for social security (FICA) taxes unless you file o waiver of exemption certificate as provided in tlie Federal Insurance Contributions Act. If you have paid FICA taxes without filing tho waiver, you should contnct us.
You are not liable for the tax imposed under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA).
Since you are not a private foundation, you are not subject to the exoiso taxes . under Chapter 42 of tlie Code. However, you are not automaticqlly exempt from other Faderal excise taxes. If you have any quostions about excise, employment, or other Federal taxes, please let us know.
Donors may deduot contributions to you as provided in section 170 of the Code. Bequests, legacies, devises, transfers, or girts to you or for your use 'are deductible for Federal estate and gift tax purposes if tlioy meet the applicable provisions of sections 2055, 2106, and 2522 of the Code.
The box checked in the heading of this letter shows whether you must file Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income tax. If Yes is checktd, you are required to file Form 990 only if your gross receipts each year are normally more than $10,000. If a return is required, it must be filed by the 15th day of
of the fifth month after the end of your annual accounting period. The law imposes
a penalty of SlO a day, up to a maximum of 85,000, ?hen a return is filod late, inless there is reasonable cause for the delay.
!
!
P.0: Box 2350, Lo$ Angelsr, Calif. 98053- fever) Letter 947(DO) (5-77)
CITY OF CARLSBAD COhfkW DEVELDPMEdW BLOCK GWN” PROGRAhl FUNDING PROPOSAL APPLICi- “LON
199697
The following information must be completed by each persodagency/organkation interested in being
considered for CDBG funding. All information requested must be provided or the application will be
considered incomplete and will not be hrtber evaluated for funding consideration, Please type or print
clearly. Attach additional sheeu or information as necessary.
c
ADMTNIWRA’IING AGENCY
Name of Agency: Address: 650 Second Street
Community Resource Center (CRC)
Encinitas, CA 92024
Federal Tax I.D. Numbet: 95-3497926
PRoGRMIIPRoJECT Carlsbad Community Resource Center Title of Program/Projea:
Location of Program/Project: 3138 Roosevelt, Suite H
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Contact Person:/s: Sally Risqs/Ann King Telephone No.: (661 9)753-1156
Requested Funding Amount: $ 13,400 .
Brief Description of ProgradProjeCt (Describe the work to be performed, hcludiig the activities to be
undertaken or the services to be provided, the goals and objectives of the progrdproject, ac.):
,The Carlsbad office of Community Resource Center (CRC) provides
services to individuals and families In need, helDinq them tQ become
more self-sufficient.
CRC offers bilingual emergency assistance; information and referral;
case manaaement: cow : Droblem solvlng: crisis intervention:
translation and forms assistance. CRC also staffs the Federal Commod-
~e.
One of the most important ways in which CRC serves the community is
in treatinq our clients with resDect and encouraqina them to formulate
and pursue their own realistic solut ions to the oroblm they exDerie nce.
Please refer to attached list of qoals and objectives.
Brief Description of Program
Goal
The Carlsbad Office of the Community Resource Center provides services to
individuals and families in need. The goal of the Carlsbad CRC is to improve the
quality of life for residents of Carlsbad by providing a multitude of services geared
toward the promotion of self-sufficiency
0 bjective To reduce and prevent homefessness in Carlsbad
Activies 1)
2)
To provide one time rental assistance to people in a
situational crisis (ie. family illness, violent crime)
To provide one time assistance for a security deposit to
enable people to upgrade from "near homeless" living
situations, such as motels, and to assist people graduating
from shelters and transitional housing programs
To develop and maintain a directory of low cost housing
referrals in the Carlsbad area
To provide case management services and other support in
order for clients to maintain stable housing once it has been
obtained
3)
4)
i
LILY OL Larlsbad
1996-97 CDBG Funding Apdication
Page 3
I, ORGANIZATIONAL ABIL.ITY/CAPACITY
A. This agency is: t9 Non-profit 0 For-profit 0 Lmal public agency 0 State public agency 0 Other (Please specify.)
B. What is the purposdmission of the agency? To help people help themselves and to foster a sense of community. The CRC assists people in crisis and helps
them make plans and effect chanqe in order to avoid a
future crisis.
C. How Ioag has this agency been in operation? Please include the date of incorporation?
Since November 26, 1979
D. How long bas rhii agency been providing the proposed progradproject? Since June of 1993 in Carlsbad; since November of 1979 in
Encinitas, where Carlsbad residents were served as well.
E. Please describe the agency's existing staff positions. (May substitute an organizational
Chart.) Organizational chart attached.
F. Please describe the agency's existing staff positions direaly responsible for the proposed progrdproject and their qualifications and experience in implementing such a
programlproject. (Resumes may also be submitted.)
Rems awed.
..
.. *
b . . .. _. .- "%'. . - .--. -. . . . .^ . - ." - . . . , .. .. ._ . .. '. .-- . . . ..
r I
I
ANN KING
235 Leucadia Blvd
Encinitas, Ca. 92024
(61 9) 436-7585(h), 753-1 156(~)
EDUCATION
Master of Social Work, in a program which emphasized systems theory
for both therapy and management. San Diego State University,
May 1987. GPA: 3.8
Bachelor of Science, Community Services Counseling major, psychology
and sociology minors. Wayne State College,Wayne, NE., April 1980.
GPA: 3.3
EXPERIENCE
Executive Director, Community Resource Center, Encinitas, Ca.
Responsible for the day to day administration of a nonprofit
organization in North Coastal County of San Diego. Programs include
emergency services, homeless services, food assistance, shelter,
transitional housing, 24 hr. domestic violence hotline, counseling, and
an emergency shelter for battered women and their children.
Community, staff, program and board development. Mar. 1995
Area Director, Episcopal Community Services, San Diego, Ca.
Responsible for the administration of a collection of programs designed
to work with people in transition, which primarily relates to
homelessness, mental illness, poverty, substance abuse, violence,
unemployment, refease from prison. Develop budgets, program
proposals, community resources. Hire, train and supervise program
managers. Oversee 19 contracts and relate to 26 various funding
sources. Programs include: Empfoyment Assistance for Downtown
Homeless; Downtown Work Center; SRO Transitional Housing;
Literacy; Dual Diagnosis Residence; Day Center for Homeless Mentally
111; NlMH Employment Project; Men's Transitional Housing; Women
and Children's Transitional Housing; Counseling; Ex-Offender
Residence; Emergency Assistance; Legal Aid; . Men's Domestic
Viotence Treatment: Crime Victim Hotline; Victim Recovery Centers.
1990-1 995
Manager of Emergency Services, Episcopal Community Services,
San Diego. Responsible for the management of 4 programs:
1. Emergency Assistance - Meeting crisis needs primarily of the
downtown homeIess and near-homeless. Includes Emergency Shelter
Program and the ECS portion of Interfaith Shelter Network's
Transitional Housing Program.
..
2. Julian's And- age - A small, long-term residentbur program for
homeless, abused women and children with comprehensive services.
3. Ex-Offender Re-Entry - A 60-Bed residential facility for parolees.
4. Counseling - Crisis intervention and brief therapy.
Responsible for contract compliance; hired, trained and supervised
paid, interning and volunteer staff. 1989-90
Director of Services, Battered Women's Services, YWCA, San Dfego.
Was responsible for general operation of BWS during prolonged
absence of Executive Director. Supervised program coordinators,
social work interns, administrative office staff. Managed media
requests, staff devefopment, community relations, contract compliance,
fund development. Member of YWCA management team. 1988-89
Coordinator of Speaker's Bureau/Counselor, Center for Women's Studies
and Services, San Diego;. Public speaking on prevention of violence
against women. Coordinated volunteers for community education
events. Trained and supervised interns, facilitated women's support
groups, provided long and short term counseling. Initially worked as
intern providing hotline and individual counseling for assault and other
concerns. 1985-88
Them pistlco un selo r, He artla n d Human Re l a tions Association, La Me sa.
Counseled individuals and families primarily in transitional situations.
Included voluntary and involuntary clients. Crisis intervention, long
and short term therapy. Completion of quarterly reports. 1987-88
Graduate Teaching Assistant, College of Health and Human Services,
San Diego State University. For "Cultural Pluralism", prepared and
delivered lectures, led discussions, graded papers. 1 986-87
Residendal Counselor, Covenant Children's Home, Princeton, ILL.
Development and implementation of treatment plans for emotionatly
disturbed youth. Guided residents toward eventual family
reunification, foster placement, or Independent living. 1 980-82
Special Assistant, Housing and Counseling Department, Wayne State
College, Wayne, NE. Paraprofessional counseIor and disciplinarian for residents in co-ed dormitory. Responsible in senior year for
independent assignments for the department, assisted undeclared
majors, co-facilitated leadership workshops for student groups,
coordinated activities relevant to the department. 1977-80
..
.- Sally Rtggs
444 Brrooke8 Ave. San Dlego, CA 92103
(619)2-
MISSION To utilize my skills and background in social sm'ces
management, pubnc health research and health promoth
EDUCATION: MPWMSW San Diego State Universfty
Concentration in Maternal Child Health
BA (English) University of Misskslppl Minor in Business Adminlstratbn
EXPERIENCE
(September 1994- Emergency Assistance Program
present) Epfscapal Cornmunfty Senrlces - San Dlego, CA
Manage emergency sendces program located in
downtown San Dlego. DutIes indude staff, vdunteer and
intern supervision and training, budgeting, fundmising,
research and grant writng.
(August 1993- P-
September 1994) Wellstart International - San Diego, CA
Assisted with research and development fn evaluation
department of an lntematlonal organization promoting
women and infant heatth worldwide.
(August 1992- - August 1994) Graduate School or Pubtlc HeaHh San Dfego State University
Oversaw all aspeds of graduate revel Intemshlp program,
lndudlng job training, community outreach, job placement
and publlc relations.
(August 1992- May 1993) Armed Sewices YMCA - San Dlego, CA Conducted hospital and home visits, case management
. and &is Intervention to milttary families.
-. EXPEfUENCE (cvntrnued) ... .
(Summer 1992
& 1993) San Dfego Medfcare Preventbe Health Profect
Admfnlstered written and oral questionnaires to geriatric population to measure heatth and wet) being.
(April 1990- h August 1992) Planned Parenthood - San Dlego, CA Provided HIV, Mrth confroI and pregnancy munsefing and education to high risk population.
HONORS: Chancellor's Honor Roll
Kappa Deb Honds Sodety
PROFESSlONAL
AFFILIATIONS Community Fd and Nutrition Core Advisory Board
Metropolitan Area Providers of Sodat SenAces (MAPS)
COMPUTER WordPerfect 5.1, Microsoft Word, Lotus 123
REFERENCES References Avar'lable Upon Request
- - Catherine Allison Sellers
2 120 Howard Avenue . San Diego, CA 92104
(6 19) 683-2632
Education Columbia College, New York, NY
B.A. in History, May, 1991, Dean’s List (GPA: 3.5)
Experience San Diego Youth and Community Services (SDYCS), San Diego, CA
Volunteer Coordinator Apprentice, January, 1995-Present.
Interviewed, screened, placed and trained volunteers in day treatment center for high-risk
adolescents. Responsible for volunteer recognition, retention and tracking, as well as
conducting and attending trainings and meetings. Trained agency staff, participated in
outreach and planned community development activities.
Social Advocates for Youth (SAY), San Diego, CA
Administrative Assistant, January, 1995-Present.
Collected and processed statistical information on clinical services for monthly and
quarterly reports, c.onducted, analyzed and presented research for grant applications,
reviewed casefiles and assured contract compliance, managed client database and assisted
in creation of new database. Supervised administrative work of clinical staff.
Women’s Resource Center, Oceanside, CA
Domestic Violence Hotline Volunteer, September, 1994-Present.
Episcopal Community Services, San Diego, CA
Victim Recovery Center Hotline Volunteer, September, 1994-Present,
FUXDECI, Community Development Organization, Managua, Nicaragua
Volunteer, December, 1993.
Assisted with interviews (in Spanish), edited grant proposals, revised publicity materials,
trained employees on computer software.
Peermusic, Music Publishing Firm, New York, NY
Legal Assistant, July, 1991-Apn1, 1993.
Wrote &id revised ContmtS, mriducted negotiations for music licerising managed &tiib&~t
for all legal department matters, corresponded with composers and attorneys,
- Skills Trainings: Community Mediation, Crisis Intervention, HWAIDS, Chemical Dependency
Typing: 80 \vpm.
Foreign Languages: Spanish, German.
Word Proce&hg: WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Wordstar.
Database Management: Paradox, QM, Sidekick, Artfile.
Desktop Publisbing: PageMaker, Persuasion.
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
JANET La PULLEN
1576 BUCKBOARD DRIVE
(619) 758-2328
OCEANSIDE, CA 92057
SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Implemented and administered fiscal policies of a major
5 year, 1.5 million dollar federal grant from the Department of Health and Human Services. policies also incorporated City, State, and County guidelines.
These fiscal
Developed and implemented contract proposals, sub- contractor agreements, and grant proposals.
Successfully completed favorable audits which were performed in accordance with GAAP and also in accordance with strict federal guidelines as outlined in Federal
OMB Circular A-133.
Developed an accounting department which included the establishment of a computerized accounting system from the start-up phase, as well as the development of internal controls which complied with strict federal guidelines.
Developed a computerized payroll system and also a computerized fixed asset system.
Developed and wrote an extensive accounting manual as well as a health and safety manual to meet the current
OSHA guidelines .
Designed and implemented an extensive expense program which allowed management to effectively analyze in detail expenses of over 50 cost centers.
PROFESSIONAL SKILLS
* Ability to delegate * Lotus 123 * Innovative and visionary * Wordperfect 5.1 * Positive attitude Quattro Pro 3.0 * Ability to develop. a team concept * DBase IV * Excellent written and oral * Print Shop cornmication skill * Acc Pac Accounting
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Financial Manager - Non Profit Organization 12/91-Present Oceanside, CA
Responsible for the overall fiscal and contract management of a federally funded non-profit agency.
Responsibilities included financial reporting; budget preparation, planning and forecasting; financial analysis; purchasing and inventory control; all payroll and payroll tax reporting; fiscal compliance and reporting to Federal, State, County and City funding
Directors in monthly meetings; participated in and represented the agency at various City, .County and community-wide management meetings .
. authorities; regular attendance at and reporting to the Board of
Accountant - J. Michael Management Oceanside, CA
7/90-12/91
Responsible for the overall fiscal management of approximately 12
Prepared all monthly financial reports which were presented to the Board of Directors on a monthly basis. Responsible for yearly budgets as well as 5 year forecasting for all associations. A160 responsible for accounts payable, payroll, and prepared all special reports as requested from Board members.
.homeowners associations.
Accounting Supervisor - Home Savings of America 3/89-4/9 0 Irwindale, CA
Responsible for the overall operations of the Credit Card Center's Accounting Department which included a staff of 8 clerks and
Responsible for the monthly financial reports; the budgeting and forecasting for the credit card center which included assets of
$500 million; all monthly and quarterly financial reports to regulatory agencies; analysis of departmental expenses and association loss repqrts; and special projects for management. Developed an automated accounts payable system from the existing manual system.
- accountants .
Janet Pullen Resum6 Page Two
Assistant to the Chief - Progressive Savings C Loan 12/86-12/88 Financial Officer Pasadena, CA
Direct assistant to the Chief Financial Officer in a medium sized
Savings and Loan.
Responsible for the cash control and investment of the Association's excess reserves, preparation of the tax returns for
the Association and its subsidiaries, special projects which
included extensive work on the year end proxy's, branch sale proposals, stock offerings, and development of loan packages to sell. Designed and implemented an extensive cost center program which, facilitated analysis,of variances in expenses of individual
branches and cost centers.
Accounting Manager - Republic Federal Savings L Loan 12/84-12/86 Pasadena, CA
Responsible for a staff of 10 clerks and accountants in the Accounting Department of a large Savings and Loan with assets of
approximately 1.5 billion.
Responsible for the restructuring and reorganization of the accounting department upon acquisition of Weyerhauser Corp.; supervised a staff of clerks and accountants in the areas of cash
management, financial reports, monthly and quarterly Federal Home
Loan reports, monthly tax estimates, accounts payable, fixed
assets, G/L reconciliations, monthly REO and Loan Loss reserve analysis, and year end audit schedules.
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Univereity of California at Los Angeles B.A. Economics, June 1980
REFERENCES
\ Will be furnished upon request
.
LlbJ Ul Lakouau
1996-97 CDBG Funding Ajplkatlon . Page 4
G. Please indicate your agency's level of experience with be CDBG program and/or other
State or Federal Funding Sources.
CDBG Dronrm:
0 No past experience. 0
0
B
Some 'experience, 1 to 2 years of using CDBG hnds.
Moderate experience, 3 to 5 years of using CDBG funds.
Considerable experience, more than 5 years of using CDBG funds.
Qther StatelFederal FundinP Sourceg 0 No past experience. 0 0
&I
Some experience, 1 to 2 years of using other Statflederal funding SOUIECS.
Moderate experience, 3 to 5 years of using other StatelFederal funding sou~ca.
ConsiderabIe experience, more than 5 years of using other StatelFederal funding
sources.
H. If you have received federal finds, including CDBG funds, in previous years, have
program violation findings ever been made against your agencylorganization?
a NO 0 Yes
If yes, please explain nature of finding@) and how finding(s) has been addressed by your
or anization. fie have carried in our audit for 2 years a "Dossible finding"
in regards to property acquisition with HUD funds. Also,
misa I loca t ion of -occurred in 1992 and has sin- resolved to HUD's satisfaction.
lT. FINANCIAL CAPACITYISTABILITY
A. Please attach the proposed budget for the progradproject, itemizing revenues and
expenses, to this application. Indicate how the requested CDBG funds would relate to
the overall proposed budget.
B. Please submit a copy of the organization's financial statements for the last three years and
a copy of the most recent PA Audit Report.
C. Did you receive any of the following sources of funding from the City of CarIsbad last
year (July 1994 to June 1995) for the proposed programlprojea?
Sources of Funding & xzs
CDBG Community Activities (General Fund monies) *
*We' are anxiously awaiting word on a possible request process.
Community AdminktrJti*e Office EnciniCac SOCiJl Services Carlsbad Sociel Services
650 Second Street 656 Second Street 3138 Roosevelt Sirest. %n,H Resource-- Eoanilas. Calflomre 92024 EnciJtas. C iia 92024 Cekbad. Caliiomia 92008
Telephone: (619) 752-1158 Teltyhne: (b. 4) 7534l300 Telephone: (619) 720-9300 Center Fax: (619) 753.0252 Fax, (619) 753.0252 Fax: (619) 729.9399
BUDGET
SECURITY DEPOSIT PROGRAM
Personnel 3,200'
Tax & Benefits 576
Assistance 9,600"
OfficeSupplies - 74
$1 3,400
'$3,200 represents 10 percent of the Social Services Manager's annual salary
** the program will aid 24 clients with $400 toward a security deposit to secure
housing ($400 x 24 clients = $9,600)
Communjv Adminlslrative MTt Encinitas Social Services Carlsbd Social Scrvicer
650 Second Stred Resource Encnitas, Calif0rr.a 92024 Encinitas, C 'nia 92024 Ca:l*d, Caliiornia 92008
Telephone: (619) 753-1156 Telephone: (big) 753-8300 Tekpmc: (619) 729-9300
656 Second hee! 3138 Roosevelt Street, Stifle H
Faw: (619) 753-0252 Fax: (619) 7539252 Fa: (619) 729-9399 Center
BUDGET
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Personnel 3,200"
Tax & Benefits 576
Assistance Lu!Q!2z
$8,576
* $3,200 represents 10 percent of the Social Service Manager's annual salary
** $4,800 reflects up to $400 in rental assistance per clieni to benefit a minimum
of 12 clients ($400 x 12 clients = $4,800)
TOTAL P.83
a
i i c
c c
2 8
d
F n
F s
U
NOVflN.XLS - DRAFT
Community RIpoUrCb Centsr Fi.d Strtamarrt.
A. of November 30.19% Nov NW
Y.T.D. Y.T.D.
V.n'MC8 Woa Aawl.
Nw. k4w NW.
Actudr variura
PUBLIC SUPPORTMENUE
Sib
Fundraising Events
0 6.648
22.780
6.648 9.218 17.178 7.960
(4.535) 0 22780 50.905 46,370
4.220
..
12,066 7.846 26.942 47.051 20.115
Othsrlncom. Thrift Store lneome HUD Grant
CTmt Feer CDBQ Oranis
other GranWChtrads
Lii GrMt Mi Income
Subtotal
40.917
6.116
300
6.900
2.667
16,796
0 73,696
32.900
3.684 170
6.306
1,735
17.44 1
32
62.268
421.821
56.630
2.712
24.435
21.869
104.263
100
631.830
397.41 I
42.855
2.721
18.380
18.505
69.154
881
649,913
(24.41 0)
(13.775) 15
(6.055)
(3.364) (35.109)
78 1
(8 1.9 171
TOTAL REVENUE 77,916 103.762 26.846 718,895 660,618 (68,377)
EXPENSES wi* 0 1.639 (I ,639) 2,126 4.017
(11.363) 12132 18.922
(1.891)
(6.790) 0 11.363
Diroct AJd
DiredAssii
HUD Prpsram Libn RoQram
50
3.988
5.656
30 690 798 6.031 32.81 1 15.806
(1245) 51.828 30.008
(W 17.005
21.819
oP-- SaiarieahRelatedCUSt
c)oarpMcy -kma
TOTAL EXPENSES
Net Incorn.
42.697
10.799
1.828
5.168
41.742
11.308
6.344
5.525
945 396.776 367.126
(509) 133.058 135,306 (4.51 6) 19.9Sl 27.343
(357) 83.034 78.117
29.650
(2.248)
(7.352) 5.317
70,176 82,799 66.402
7,740 20,963 13,223 (13.9Slj (1 6.926)
0 38,324 38.324
13,223 (622751 (66.260)
(2976)
0
(2.976)
3.484 3.484
4,268 17,479
I
COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER
FEI[N: 95-3497926
FINANCIAL REPORT AND FEDERAL AWARDS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
DECEMBER 31,1993
I & SCHMITT
ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION
COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER
FEIN: 95-3497926
FINANCIAL REPORT AND
FEDERAL AWARDS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
DECEMBER 31,1993
CONTENTS
Paqe
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL AWARDS
Balance sheet Statement of activity and changes in fund balances Statement of functional expenses Notes to financial statements .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Schedule of federal awards
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH
LAWS, REGULATIONS, CONTRACTS AND GRANTS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOYERNMEKT AUDITING STANDARDS
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL
STRUCTURE USED IN ADMINISTERING FEDERAL AWARDS
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ OPINION ON COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIF IC REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO MAJOR PROGRAMS
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1 and 2
3 4 5 6-9
10
11 - 13
14
15 - 17
18
19
\VEST TURNQUIST -I & SCHMITT
2550 FlJ?b Aveirire, Tenth Floor
(619) 234-6775
Fnr (619) 69GG581
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON THE BASIC Snn Dipgo. CA 92103-GG25 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL AWARDS
To the Board of Directors Community Resource Center Endnitas, California
We have audited the accompanying bal ance sheet of Community Resource Center as of December 31, 1993, and the related statements of activity and changes in fund balances, and functional expenses for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsi bil i ty of the Center's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial ,statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Community Resource Center as of December 31, 1993, and the results of its operations for the year then ended, in confomi ty with generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 11 to the financial statements, the Organization expended certain grant funds in a manner that may have been inconsistent with certain restrictive provisions of the related grants. The possible outcome of these matters, which is being reviewed by HUD officials, is uncertain at this time. Accordingly, no provision for any liability has been made in the financial statements for possible grantor claims for refunds of those grant monies.
JAMES H. WEST, CIA. WlLLLL\.I H. TURXQtiIST. CXA. CW I? SCHMlTT. CCA.
EDWW W MTROSSER. C.PA MARK E. SlcSL4HON. CPA.
Jlrtirbur of Tbr A iiwricui: Griurp oif C.R.4. firms. wilb oiflicrs ti: priiiclpiil cltii*s rr~~rliltc~i~le
A ffi'ilict~nl with the .4iiirriciii: Inslitutr i,/ C.P.4.s dirisiiiii o,/ firins
To the Board of Directors
I Community Resource Center Page 2
Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements of Community Resource Center taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of federal awards for the year ended December 31, 1993 is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. The information in that schedule has been subjected to the procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. for WEST, TURNQUIST & SCHMITT
San Diego, California April 13, 1994
-2-
h-QI CD * U 4: m
ON
0 -a. Ln H * ! H
"I HI
U c 3 3
s
0 3 n U-U c QIeVI U QI c, U
n m
b rn n z c r
F rn c,
0 z <
L a
..
q, -lo 3 000 0 QI
f- rn
a
H
c c, .r t
c
c m
u E m c
LL
0 +r
c
Y) W +., 0 z
W W #
- COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITY AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES Year Ended December 31, 1993 (With Comparative Totals for the Year Ended December 31, 1992)
Year Ended December 31, 1993 Year Ended Current Funds Property Total December 31 Unrestricted Restricted Fund A11 Funds 1992 (Note 7) public support and revenue: Public support: contributions and
fn-kind donations Grante and contracts special fund raising (net of direct costs of $19,114 in 1993 and $171517 in 1992)
Total public Support
donat ions
Revenue I Rental income Thrift stores Client fees Interest income
Total revenue
Total public sup- port and revenue
Expenses : Program servicest Thrift stores Direct support Hous ing
Total program services
Supporting services: Management and general '.Fundsa is ing
Total supporting
Total expenses
Exceaa (deficiency) of public support and revenue over expensee Transfer of current funds for: Interest expense Property and equipment acquisit ione Payment of debt Fund balances: Beginning of year
End of yeax
services
77,715 0 0 77,715 174.459
240,475 361,753 0 602,228 1,045,146
5,824 0 0 51824 7,725 412 8202 0 0 412 8 202 343 8 007 9,701 0 0 9,701 15,812 4 74 0 0 4 74 790
428,201 0 0 428,201 367.334
668 , 674 361.753 0 1,030,429 1,412,480
280, 937 0 8,284 289,221 298,119 212 8 827 68,174 15, 971 296,972 336,153 41,452 78,132 38,478 158,062 138,304
535,216 146,306 62,733 744,255 772.576
21,900 1038.166 60,936 5,363 25.746 12,548 81,266 0. 20,383 0
101,649 0 27,263 128.912 73,484
873,167 846,060 636,865 146,306 89.996
31,811 215, 447 (89,996) 157,262 566,420
(53, 959) 0 53,959 0 0
(8, 611) (187,736) 196,347 0 0 5,271 0 (5,271) 0 0
s 31,097 S 56,589 $ 786.180 S 873,866 ,$ 716 , 604
56,585 28.878 631,141 716,604 150.18Q
See Notes to Financial Statements.
-4-
c 0 m L m a E 0 V
c c, .r t
m 2
J; m
m .I 4
2 m
h u)
Q .I
9
Y) (0
0,
'D,
t4 s .. Q m
Q Q
u) W t
9
0 *
ob W
5
4 Q
ob ob 4
s
h W
m
ob 4
'p.
0 a '1 u
P
21
-2
*, 0 c
4 a V
L 0
m
L. c
9 *,
c
c e
a
c 9 *r 0 c
m- m (v- m 4
(v-*-m-s- 4- N- ui- m- I Url
-5-
COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1. Nature of Organization and Significant Accounting Policies
Nature of Organization:
Community Resource Center (Center) is a California not-for-profit corporation. It provides community support through counseling and direct aid to the needy, operating thrift stores, and low-income transitional housing.
Significant accounting policies:
The significant accounting policies followed are described below to enhance the usefulness of the financial statements to the reader.
Method of accounting:
The financial statements of the Center have been prepared on the accrual bas i s .
Fund account i ng :
To ensure observance of limitations and restrictions placed on the use of resources available to the Center, the financial statements are presented in accordance with the principles of fund account- ing. This is the procedure by which resources for various purposes are classified into funds established according to their nature and purposes,
The assets, liabilities and fund balances of the Center are reported in self-balancing fund groups, as follows:
Unrestricted funds for all resources over which the Board of Directors has discretionary control to use in carrying on the operations of the Center in accordance with its bylaws. Restricted funds which are expendable only for operating purposes specified by the donor or grantor. Property fund which is used to accumulate the net investment in fixed assets.
Property and equipment :
Property and equipment are stated at cost and depreciated on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets.
-6-
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1. Nature of Organization and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
Publ ic support:
Publ ic support re.ceived is considered available for unrestricted use unless specifically restricted by the donor and is recognized as revenue when received. Restricted support is recognized as revenue at the time expenses are incurred in compliance with the restrictions. As discussed in Note 8, significant support is received through a five-year grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) ,
Donated inventory:
Donated merchandise for the thrift stores is recorded as inventory at its estimated realizable value.
Investment in land is recorded at its fair market value at the date of donation.
Note 2. Inventory
Inventory consists of donated merchandise held for resale by the Center's thrift stores,
Note 3. Property and Equipment '
Property and equipment consists of: 1993
Land Bui 1 di ng Furniture and equipment Vehicles Leasehold improvements
$ 539,937 917.961 71 ; 033 7,110
1992
$ 539,937 638,455
54,078
7,110 4 I975 4: 975
1 . 244,555 1 . 541.016 Less accumulated depreciation * 115: 340
$1,425,675
- 791319
31,165,236
-7-
NOES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS -
Note 4.. Notes Payable
Notes payable are comprised of: 1993 1992 Note payable to bank, at 8.5% interest, payable in monthly installments of
$2,549 until July 1998, when a balloon payment of $311,554 is due, secured by real property $328,000 $235 , 000 Note payable to bank, at variable interest (currently 6.75%), payable in monthly installments of $2,026 until February 1999 when a balloon payment of approximately
$277,000 is due, secured by real property 300,827 305,112 Note payable to bank, at 6.00%, payable in monthly installments of $152, due March 1998, guaranteed by a member of the Board of Directors 6,864 0
Foundation, at 3%, due May 1995 10,000 0 0 967
)645a x541.02
Note payable, unsecured, San Diego Community
Note payable to bank, paid in full March 1993
Aggregate maturities over the next five years are as follows:
1995 $19,095; 1996 $9,775; 1997 $10,506; and 1998 $320,726.
1994 $8,462;
Note 5. Commitments
The Center rents office and store space under various lease agreements. Future minimum lease obligations of $16,446 are due as follows: 1994 $13,354; and
1995 $3,092.
The total rental expense for the year ended December 31, 1993 was $59,618.
Note 6. Income Tax Status
The Center is exempt from income taxes under §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and §23701d of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.
-a- t
- NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS -
Note 7. 1992 Financial Information
The 1992 amounts in the accompanying financial statements are incluGd( to provide a basis for comparison with 1993 and present summarized totals only. The 1992 amounts are not intended to present all information necessary for a fair presentation in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Note 8. Transitional Housing Program
On February 6, 1992, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded a five-year $1,118,751 grant to Community Resource Center for a Transitional Housing Program. This grant provided one-half the acquisition and approximately 50 percent of the rehabilitation costs of the property. It also covers 75 percent of tenant relocation costs and the first two years of operating costs, and 50 percent of the last three years of operating costs. The program provides case management and housing for homeless families and support services such as child care, employment assistance, food, and counseling as these families make the transition to stable living situations .
Note 9. Re1 ated-Party Transactions
The following are transactions with companies which employ members of the Board of Directors:
1993 1992
Legal expense Accounts payable Soi 1 s test i ng
$ 11,160 $ 2,383 10,906 0
500 0
Note 10. Subsequent Event
Subsequent to December 31, 1993, the Executive Director was asked to resign by the Board of Directors.
Note 11. Expenditures of HUD Grant Funds
HUD officials are currently looking into the value of property purchased during 1992 by the Center for $750,000. They believe this may have been an excessive amount. In addition, HUD officials are also looking into the manner in which certain administrative funds charged to the HUD grants have been expended. The ultimate resolution of these items cannot be determined at this time. No amounts have been accrued in the accompanying financial statements for any potential disallowance of such costs by HUD.
-9-
COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER -
SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL AWARDS For the Year Ended December 31, 1993
Federal Grantor/ Federal
Proqram Title Number Pass-Through Grantor/ CFDA
flAJOR PROGRAMS
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development : Supportive Housing Demonstration Program
NON-MAJOR PROGRAMS
Pass-through from City of Enci ni t as : Community Development Block Grant
Grant Federal Award ExDendi tures
14.235 $1,118,751 $ 212,270
14.2
Pass-through from City of Carlsbad: Community Devel opment Block Grant 14.218
TOTAL
8 52,3 7
9 000 9 000
$1,180,092 $ 262.097
- 10 -
i & SCHMITT
Snn Dfego, CA 32 103-GG25 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL (619) 234-6775
Fay (619) 69GG58i STRUCTURE BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
To the Board of Directors Community Resource Center Encinitas, California
We have audited the financial statements of Community Resource Center as of and for the year ended December 31, 1993, and have issued our report thereon dated Aprll 13, 1994.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of Community Resource Center for the year ended December 31, 1993, we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure.
The management of Community Resource Center is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absol Ute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate.
JAMES H. WEST C.PA. WILLIAM H. lURSQl!lST. C.E.4. CHARLES F! SCHMIT. C.P.A.
EDWARD W. UTXOSSER. C.PA LLMX E. .\lc>L+HO.V. C.F!A.
To the Board of Directors- Community Resource Center Page 2
For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures in the following categories:
b Accounting
0 Cash Receipts
0 Cash Disbursements
0 Payroll
0 Budget/Financial
0 Computer System
b Administrative and ComD1 iance/General
0 Civil Rights
0 Cash Management
0 Federal Financial Reports Allowable Costs/Cost Principles
0 Drug-Free Workpl ace Admi ni strati ve Requ i rement s
b Admini s trat ive and ComDl i ance/Proqram SDeci f ic
Types of Services Allowed Matching
0 Reporting Requirements
b Claims for Advances and Reimbursement
b Amounts Claimed or Used for Matchinq
For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures .and whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk.
Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above.
We noted other matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we have communicated to the management of Community Resource Center in a separate letter dated April 13, 1994.
- 12 -
Board of Directors c
Community Resource Cente, Page 3
This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management, and agencies providing federal assistance. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited.
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. FOR WEST, TURNQUIST & SCHMIll
San Di ego, Cal i forni a April 13, 1994
- 13 -
ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION
2550 Fi/b Acerrue, Tenlb F7oor
Dfego# cA92f03-6G*5
Fru (GI (619) 9) 234-6775 636658,
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH
LAWS, REGULATIONS, CONTRACTS, AND GRANTS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FlNANC IAL STATEMENTS PERFORMEO IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERAWEW AUDITING STANDARDS
Board of Directors Community Resource Center Enci ni tas, Cal i forni a
We have audited the financial statements of Community Resource Center as of and for the year ended December 31, 1993, and have issued our report thereon dated April 13, 1994.
We conducted our audit in accordance with enerally accepted auditing standards
States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
Com liance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to Community Resource E enter is the responsibility of Community Resource Center’s management. As part of obtainin reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material miss atement, we erformed tests of Community Resource Center’s compliance with certain provisions of aws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, the objective of our audit of the financial statements was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not express such an opi ni on.
The results of our audit procedures disclosed immaterial instances of noncompliance with the requirements of the HUD administrative contract as described below. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that Community Resource Center had not complied, in all material respects, with those provisions.
and Government Auditing Standards, issued by t il e Comptroller General of the United
Q ?
During our review of costs char es to the HUD administrative
administrative re uirements and these costs should have been allocated to The Community Resource Center has accumulated and reviewed a71 of the payroll charges made to the HUO administrative contract. These charges have been allocated to other contracts as appropriate.
This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, manag-ment, and agencies providing financial assistance. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited.
contract we noted that several payro 3 1 costs did not meet HUD’s
the other HUD con ‘I racts.
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. for WEST, TURNQUIST & SCHMIIT San Die 0, California April 13, 1994
JA\I€S H. UW, C.6A. WIUW H. TLXUQUlsr. CPA. CHARLES P. SCHWlT C.PA
u)U’ARD W. lUTROSSER. C.PA MARK € McWON. C.EA.
.tlrtitber of Tbe An#erlcun Crvup of C.R.4. Flrim. with oflces in principut cities Iriirkfiride
Aflilinfed uitb tbu Anrericun Irtrtitutr of C.R.4.s dirision nf firms
ACCOUNTANCY Comiu-noN
2550 Fftb Acenire. Tenth Floor INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON THE Snn Diego, CA 9210366.5 INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE USED (619) 234-6775 IN ADMINISTERING FEDERAL AWARDS Far (619) 696-6581
Board of Directors Community Resource Center Encinitas, California
We have audited the financial statements of Community Resource Center, as of and for the year ended December 31, 1993, and have issued our report thereon dated April
13, 1994.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Nonprof f t Inst f tut ions. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and about whether Community Resource Center complied with laws and regulations, noncompl lance with which would be material to a federal program.
In planning and performing our audit for the year ended December 31, -1993, we considered Community Resource Center’s internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the pur ose of expressin our opinion on Community Resource
accordance with OMB Circular A-133. This report addresses our consideration of internal control structure policies and procedures relevant to compliance with requirements applicable to the federal program. We have addressed pol icies and procedures relevant to our audit of the financial statements in a separate report dated April 13, 1994.
The management of Community Resource Center is responsible for establ ishin and maintaining an internal control structure. In . fulfilling this responsibi 4 ity, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or dis osition, that transactions are executed in accordance with management’s aut R orization and recorded properly. to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accountin rinciples, and that the federal award Because of inherent 1 imitations in any internal control structure, errors, irregularities, or instances of noncompliance may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, rojection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk e hat procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate.
Center’s financial statements an a to report on t \ e internal control structure in
program is managed in compliance with applica %Q e laws and regulations.
J.L.IES H. W-. CLA. WIUM H. n:wyutsr, C.P.A. CHARLES P. SCHMIlT C.P.A.
EDWARD W. WTROSSER. C.P.A. LURK E. SlcMAHcW. C.?”.
Board of Directors Community Resource Cente.” Page 2
For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures used in administering the federal program in the following categories:
b tlccountinq
0 Cash Receipts
0 Cash Disbursements
0 Payroll
a Cash Management
e Budget/Financial Computer
b bdministrative and ComD1 iance/General
0 Civil Rights
0 Cash Management
0 Federal Financial Reports
0
Drug-Free Workpl ace Administrative Requirements
A1 1 owabl e Costs/Cos t Pri nci pl es
b Administrative and ComDl iance/Proaram SDecific
0
Matching Reporting Requirements
Types of Services A1 1 owed
b C1 aims for Advances and Reimbursement
6 Amounts Claimed or Used for Matchinq
I
For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk.
During the year ended December 31, 1993, Community Resource Center expended 81% of its total federal awards under major programs.
We performed tests of controls, as required by OMB Circular A-133, to evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal control structure policies and procedures that we considered relevant to preventing or detecting material noncompl iance with specific requirements, general requirements, and requirements governing claims for advances and reimbursements and amounts claimed or used for matching that are applicable to each of the Organltation’s major programs, which are identi f i ed i n the accompanying schedule of federal awards. Our procedures were 1 ess in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on these internal control structure policies and procedures. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
- 16 -
Board of Directors Community Resource Center- Page 3
Our consideration of the internal control structure pol ides and procedures used in administering the federal award would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might constitute material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one of more of the internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that noncompliance with laws and regulations that would be material to a federal awards program may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned fdnctions. We noted no matters involving the internal control structure and its operating that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above.
However, we noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we have reported to the management of Community Resource Center in a separate letter dated April 13, 1994.
This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management, and agencies providing federal assistance. However, this report is also a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited.
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. for WEST, TURNQUIST & SCHMITJ
San Diego, California April 13, 1994
- 17 -
ACCOUNTAiiCY U)RPORATlON
'55' Wb A1~~~ Tenth floor
Snn Diego, CC 92I0.34625
(619) 2346775
Fax W9) 69GG581
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE
TO MAJOR PROGRAMS WITH SPEC IF IC REQUIREMENTS APPL I CABL E
Board of Directors Conuni ty Resource Center Encinitas, California
We have audited the financial statements of Community Resource Center as of and for the year ended December 31, 1993, and have issued our report thereon dated April 13, 1994.
We have a1 so audited Community Resource Center's compliance with the requirements governing types of services allowed or not allowed, matchin , and federal financial
December 31, 1993. The management of Community Resource Center is responsib e for the Center's compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance with those requirements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit of compliance with those requirements in accordance with enerall accepted auditing standards; Government Auditin Standards, issued by the &omptrol er General of the United States; and Office of anagement and Bud et (OMB) Circular A-133 Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other onprofit Institutions. those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the re uirements referred to above occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, ev 4 dence about Community Resource Center's compliance with those requirements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
The results of our audit procedures disclosed immaterial instances of noncompl i- ance with the requirements referred to above, which are described below. We considered these instances of noncompliance in forming our opinion on compliance, which is expressed in the following paragraph.
During our review of costs charges to the HUD administrative contract, we noted that several ayroll costs did not meet HUD's administrative require- ments and these cos P s should have been allocated to the other HUD contracts, The Community Resource Center has accumulated and reviewed all of the ayroll charges made to the HUO administrative contract. These charges have !,en allocated to other contracts as appropriate.
re orts and claims for reimbursement that are a plicable to i 9 s major federal program, whych is identified in the accompanying schedu f e of federal awards for the ear ended 4
3, Y A
i
I
In our opinion, Community Resource Center complied, in all material res ects, with ! the requirements governing types of services allowed or not allowed, an B reportin requirements that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ende December 31, 1993.
This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management, and agencies providin federal assistance. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distri % ution is not limited.
&LA-&&-
San Die 0, California April 13, 1994
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. for WEST, TURNQUIST & SCHMITT
!I
- -
/?iE&TIST
& SCHMITT
ACCOL‘hTANCY CORPORATlON
2550Fi/lhA~rritre, Tetit/>FIoor
Snn Diego. 01 9-7103-6625
(619) 2346775 Fer (619) 6966581
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Board of Directors Community Resource Center Enci ni tas, Cal i fornia
We have audited the financial statements of Community Resource Center as of and for the year ended December 31, 1993, and have issued our report thereon dated April 13, 1994.
We have applied procedures to test Community Resource Center’s com liance with the
accompanying schedule of federal awards for the year ended December 31, 1993. General requirements involve the following matters:
following requirements applicable to its federal programs, which are i t! entified in the
Pol it i cal Activity Davi s-Bacon Act Civil Rights Cash Management Federal Fi nanci a1 Reports Allowable Costs Cost Principles
Admi ni s trat i ve Requi rements Drug-Free Workp c ace
Our procedures were limited to the ap licable procedures described in the Office
Learnin and Other Nonprofit Institutions. Our procedures were substantially less in scope t an an audit, the objective of which is the ex ression of an opinion on Community Resource Center’s compliance with the requirements isted in the preceding paragraph. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
With respect to the items tested, the results of our procedures disclosed no material instances of noncompliance with the requirements listed in the second paragraph of this report. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that Community Resource Center has not complied, in all material respects, with those requirements.
This report is intended for the information of the audit committee, management,
of Management and Budget’s Compliance Supp P ement for Audits of Institutions of Higher
! f
agencies providing financial assistance. However, this report is a record and its distribution is not limited.
Edward W. Kitrosser, C.P.A. for WEST, TURNQUIST b SCHMITT
San Di ego, Gal i forni a April 13, 1994
JAMES H. WEST. C.P.4. U(lLLU\l H. TURNQUIST. C.PA CH.4RLES L SCH.\.IIlT, C.P.A.
EDWARD W. KITROS.+ER C.P.4. %LARK E. wc5l.uios. C.L.4.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGPdM -
PROGKAM/PROJECT EVALUATION
INSTRUCTIONS
Each eligible proposal/application for CDBG funds shall be reviewed and evaluated, for ranking purposes
based upon the attached criteria. The CDBG Funding Advisory Conmuttee, as well as Housing and
Redevelopment Department staff, will evaluate each eligible proposal for funds and assign a score based
on a maximum 100 point scale.
To assist you in reviewing and evaluating each proposal based upon the established criteria, measurement
examples, where appropriate, have been provided. These are to be used as a guide only and is not
intended to cover every circumstance which may occur. Please use your best judgement in evaluating the
proposals with the criteria that has been provided. You will frnd a copy of each evaluation form placed
directly behind the application.
To facilitate the evaluation of eligible proposals based upon the attached criteria, applicants will be given
the opportunity to participate in a 10 minute interview with the CDBG Funding Advisory Committee and
staff during a public meeting. The public will be given the opportunity to comment on the eligible
proposals being considered for funding.
The interview will provide the Advisory Committee with an opportunity to obtain additional information
regarding the organization and the proposed activity that may not have been provided in or was unclear
within the application. It will be suggested that applicants provide any documents which may assist the
Advisory Committee and staff in evaluating the proposal p& to this interview.
Staff will average the evaluation scores given by each Advisory Committee member and staff. The
average score received will then be used to rank order each of the proposals within each of the following
three classifications for public service and public facility activities: 1) Housing; 2) General Social
services; and 3) Social Services for Children & Adults. This information will then be presented to the
Advisory Committee for further review and evaluation to determine the level of funding to be
recommended for each selected proposal.
CDBG Program - Evaluation Form
Page 2
C.
D.
E.
Staffing for Program/Project - How qualified is the identified staff in performing the various
functions required to implement the proposed program/project? (i.e., years of staffexperience, ehcation
and training)
0
Not
1
Fairly
2 4 SCORE 0 More than
Qualified Qualified Qualified Qualified
COMMENTS:
Experience with Federal or State Funding Sources - How much experience does the
organization have in administering CDBG andlor other State or Federal funds? (i.e., length
of time the organization/assigned staff has been administering such funds)
Measurement Examples: - No Experience - First time applying for Federafltate Funds
Some Experience - 1 to 2 years of experience
Moderate Experience - 3 to 5 years of experience
- -
Considerable Experience = 5 years or more of experience
0 1 2
No Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Experience Experience Experience Experience
COMMENTS:
Performance record - What overall level of ability has the organization demonstrated for
providing services to the public, as well as adhering to local, State and/or Federal regulations
which may have applied to the various funding sowces for their previous programs/projects?
(i.e., number of clients benefim’ng fiom program/project, any violations of the regulations, ability to clear violation
findings)
5
SCORE 0 1 2 (9 No Some Adequate Strong
Ability Ability Ability Ability
COMMENTS:
CDBG Program
Evaluation Form
Page 3
n. FINANCIAL CAPACITY & STABILITY (Max. of 20 points):
A. Leverage of Funds - What level of leveraging of CDBG funds with other funding sources
has been proposed for the proposed program/project or demonstrated in the current operating
budget for the program/project?
Measurement Eramples:
Some Leveraging
- No Leveraging
Moderate Leveraging -
- Proposed ProgranJproject will be funded entirely with CDBG funds
31 to 65% of the revenues used for the proposed progranJproject will be
- - 65 to 95 % of the revenues used for the proposed program/project will be
from CDBGfitnds.
from CDBGfunds.
0 to 30% of the revenues used for the proposedprogram/project will be from
CDBG funds.
-
Considerable Leveraging =
0103 456 789 10 z
No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Leveraging Leveraging Leveraging Leveraging
COMMENTS: QJO @ ad& -)b.(2
#s---5F=F-7-hsci-m-m==Tl
lT/&T 6L -1s TPl-kfz )svT
B. Financial Stability - Do the frnancial statements of the organization indicate a relatively stable
financial position? (Le., diversifedfunding revenues and support, revenue exceeding expenses, fund balance)
Measurement Eramples:
One source offinding (CDBGJ and few, if any, asses. Revenue does not
cover expenses. Fund balance is negative.
Some Capacity = A few sources of funding and assets. Revenues equal expenses. No find
balance.
Moderate Capacity = Several sources of funding and assets. Revenues equal or slightly exceed
expenses. Some find balance to carry over.
Considerable Capacity = A wide variety offunding sources and substantial me& Revenues notnbly
exceed expenses with signifcant fund balance.
No Capacity -
0123 456 7@9 10 a No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Stability Stability Stability Stability
CDBG Program - Evaluation Form
Page 4
111. BENEFITS & BENEFICIARIES (Max. of 60 points):
A. Access to Program/Service - Is the proposed program/project easily accessible or convenient
to Carlsbad residents?
Measurement Examples: Not or Not Very Accessible =
Fairly Accessible . s
Accessible
Service ofice located more than a mile outside of Carlsbad and ofice is
not located directly dong any public transportation routes.
Service ofice located within a mile of Carlsbad and ofice is not located
directly along any public transportation routes.
from service location a@or offce is located directly along public
transportation routes.
client's residence.
- - Service ofice located outside of Carlsbad butprovides transportation to and
Service ofice located within Carlsbad or provides services direct4 to - - Very Accessible
15 SCORE
024 579 10 12 14
Not or Not Fairly very Very Accessible Accessible Accessible Accessible
B. Benefit to Lower Income Persons - To what extent does the proposed program/project benefit low
income persons?
Meawrement Examples:
Some Benefit
- - No or Little Benefit
Moderate Benefit
Considerable Benefit
024
No or Little Some Moderate Considerable
Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit
Less than 30% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
61 to 80% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
More than 81 % of clients are of low income (50% of MFI).
= 30 to 60% of clients are of low income (50% of MFI). - -
- -
I4
SCORE 579 10 12 14 (9
C. Benefit to Carlsbad Residents - To what extent does the proposed program/project benefit low
income Carlsbad residents?
Measurement Examples: No or Little Ben@ c Serves I to IS Carkbad residents annually. Facihy located outside of
Carlsbad
oj Carlsbad
Serves 51 to 99 Carfsbad residents annually. Fociliry hated in Carlsbad
but serves less than 50 residents.
Serves more than Io0 Carlsbad residents annually a@or facile located in
Carlsbad and serves more than SI residents.
- Some Benefit - Serves 16 to SO Carlsbad residents annually. Facility located jm outside
Moderate Benefit
Considerable Benefit
c
c
024 579 10 12 14 15 ' 15
No or Little Some Moderate Considerable SCORE
Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit
CDBG Program - Evaluation Form
Page 5
D. Needs of Low Income Residents - To what extent does the proposed program/project meet
the needs of low-income residents? (i.e., relation to Consolidated Plan priorities, special needs population
served)
Measurement Examples:
Not Adequate P Meets no prioritized need of the Consolidated Plan. Serves no specialneeds
populations.
populations.
neea3 populations.
Fairly Adequate -- Meets a low priority need of the Consolidated Plan. Serves no special needs
Adequate = Meets a medium priority need of the Consolidated Plan. Serves special
More than Adequaie - - Meets a high priority need of the Consolidated Plan.
15 SCORE
024 57 9 10 12 14
Not Fairly More than
Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECTlPROGRAM (Max. of 5 points):
A. Implementation/Expenditure of Funds - To what degree has the organization demonstrated a
readiness to implement the proposed program/project and expend the CDBG funds within the
one year period? (ie., prograwproject is in planning stage only, identification awor commitment of other
funding sources for completion of program/project, program/project already in operation or started)
Measurement Examples:
No or Little
Some
Moderate
High
0
No or Little
Degree of
Readiness
- - Program/project in development stage only. No specific site selected No constntcrion
or construcrion.related plans completed
Program operaring for less than one year. Speclfic sire selected and ready to submit
purchase offer. Architectural, engineering plans and other plans being drafted
Program operating for at least one year. Construction drawings completed and ready
to open bid process. Site selected and offer accepted or option to buy.
Program opernring at le& two years. Construction work ready to begin by July 1st.
Propelty to be in escrow by July 1st.
=
E
-
4 5 5
oderate High Degree SCORE
1
Some
Degree of Degree of of Readiness
Readmess Readiness
TOTAL POINTS RECEIVED (Maximum of IO0 Points Possible): 84 SCORE
- No. AGENCY/
PROJECT
I
'Community Resource
Center/Security Deposit Program
city of Carisbad/
Single Family Residential
/Rehabilitation Program
City of Carlsbad/
- 2.
REQUEST
AMOUNT RECOMMEND
($1 ($1
13,400 13,400
154,000 145,630
17,670 17,670 3.
TO1 - r -
- CITY OF CARLSBAD
Hob. :NVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROc AM
1996-1997
EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS & FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
NOTES:
1. The total number of points possible was 100.
Medium .11
EVALUATIOS
Qualified
Qualified
N/A
N/A
2. A proposal was evaluated based upon the following scoring criteria: 1) organization's ability/capacity; 2)
financial ability and stability; 3) benefits and beneficiaries; 4) ready implementation of the project/program; and
5) overall impression. Each proposal was given a ranking according to the following evaluation scores:
85 points + = Highly Qualified
70 to 84 points = Qualified
69 points or less = Minimally Qualified
i
.
%E CITY OF CARISBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPABTHENT
Item No. 4
Staff Reginald Harrison
Housing Program Manager
DATE: FEBRUARY 8,19%
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON FAMILY SELF- SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM
I. RECOMMENDATION
This report is provided for information only; no action is required.
II. BACKGROUND
On July 26, 1994, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission authorized the Housing
Authority to appropriate $30,000.00 from its operating reserves in order to implement the
Family Self-sufficiency (FSS) Program. The FSS Program is designed to enable unemployed,
underemployed or undereducated Section 8 Housing Participants to achieve economic
independence from welfare and rental assistance. Participants receive assistance in removing
barriers that prevent them from engaging in job-training programs, educational programs and/or
employment opportunities. Lifeline Community Services was awarded the contract to administer
the FSS Program for the City of Carlsbad effective January 3, 1995.
The FSS Program is a mandate of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
The Housing Authority has a responsibility to assist a minimum of thirty (30) FSS participants
to achieve attainable career goals, e.g. completing course work for a GED, vocational training,
entrepreneurial programs and increasing current job skills. Community-based organizations and
institutions are used as the primary source of training and education. Additional assistance is
given to participants to help with the removal of barriers that prevent the achievement of those
goals, e.g. lack of finances for tuition, books and fees, lack of affordable child care, lack of
affordable transportation and poor coping skills.
c
STATUS REPORT ON FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM
FEBRUARY 8, 1996
II. PARTICIPATION AND PROGRAMS
Currently there are 28 families participating in the FSS Program. The chart below dispdys 1
participation of those families in employment and/or educational programs:
11 PARTICIPANTS I 11 I
11 PARTICIPANTS I 1 I I
PARTICIPANIS 2
PARllClPANlS 5
PARTlClPANlS 1
PARIICIPANTS 1
PARIICIPANM 6
ie
EDUCATION
Success stories include:
0 One FSS participant has obtained an associates degree and is now working.
One participant who earned a bachelor’s degree prior to joining the program,
obtained her first career job as an FSS client.
Four FSS participants have increased their earned income since joining the
program.
Through fund raising activities and the donations of various banks and organizations, a loan
program has been established to help participants pay for books, tuition and fees. On September
19, 1995, the City Council donated four surplus microcomputers to the Housing Authority for
the benefit of the FSS program. Additionally, monthly workshops which provide the participants
with topical information are conducted and a quarterly newsletter which provides networking
opportunities is published.
TEE (3m! 01 Cnusw HOUSING RED~EUW"T ~ARTKKNT A REPORT TO TEE HOUSING COMMISSION
Item No. 5
Staff Debbie Fountain
Sr. Mngt. Analyst
DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 1996
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON VARIOUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS
AND PROGRAMS
I. RECOMMENDATION
This report is provided for information only; no action required.
JI. BACKGROUND
The attached report provides a status report on various affordable housing projects and
programs which are currently under review or in process. This report has been prepared to
keep the Housing Commission informed as to the affordable housing activities which are
ongoing within the City of Carlsbad.
III. EXHIBITS
1. Affordable Housing Projects and Programs Status Report
rn t
U
m
Q)
w
rl a u a Q) a -4 u
0 u
8
a m
rl k tu V
IYC 0
0 z
$ n u
m k a
I a
W m
m
W
6) M &
m at
W 6
U
3 n
0
0)- Q) 4 at4 a (0 som Y
br U -4 m I 0 A* a ala, 4k a -4 as aw kQ) Ok ccl wm mY -4 mu WI
I U I& 0 Q) Z ma I NO
U a k 4J -4 0 um a4 Q) I Y U-no k u m OW 0) alYk a W4nIYO
I
m Y
.
8
9) 9) Lc H
rl 9) k 8 1
n Y U m k a m I a
B m W
0 Y 0 0 '--I 51 pc
Lc
a u01 ma
-- - in
Q N -4 m X
dQ) 08 3k OH k a4 ao, cdk
.
1 Q) k 1 m
le -4 U k 0 w -4 1 Q U
le
Q) rl Q
LIU P1H
I;
maas 4JQ)Q)4J+, -4 u k -4 u El 1.4 m Q) Sa I I-n
0 k alw k
I
r 4J El m k a m I 0
5 P w
k Q)aJ 43 QO m4 I k 0- om WE I .- .4 mu 4 -4 -4 E 0) UOE sa 0 Elu eoEl
(Y u.4
I
m k Q) El 4J k m a
w w I 4 Ep
El m 8 u 0
m
Q) -4 4J k
Q)
k a
m -4 4J 4J Q)
.4 0 a
3
2
t
I coa
rl 4J U a, fo
ma -4 -4 U? Lco
W .A .. on
A4 mu UQ 4J au v) EQ
n 4 U m k a m 7 a
3 it",
4 &-- - b 0- ama u a k
wm ou -4 VIVI 47 -4 0 Ua I Q) drl FR 4m a Ok 40 W OW mm
4 U m k a m 0 I a W
W v)
I
P W
a
(Dk 3k om &El a0 a-4 am 7 a1 a,U a,a A -4
1 m -4 4J a a, a -4 m 8 a
l a 0
1 1 B
a a 0 U a, m
W
A REPORT TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION
Item No. 6
Staff Evan Becker
Director
DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 1996
SUBJECT: HOUSING COMMISSION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES - MINUTES
OF COMMISSION MEETINGS
I. RECOMMENDATION
This report is provided for discussion purposes only at this time. If the Housing Commission
would like to revise the Policies and Procedures to reflect a change in how the minutes are
taken and reported, it is recommended that the Housing Commission instruct staff to include
the proposed changes on a future agenda with the appropriate approving resolution.
11. BACKGROUND
At a previous meeting of the Housing Commission, it was requested that an item be placed
on a future agenda of the Commission to discuss the minutes - how they are taken and
reported back to the Commission.
Attached is a copy of the section from the Housing Commission's approved Policies and
Procedures Manual which indicates how the minutes are to be kept for the Housing
Commission. These are the same procedures used by other Commissions within the City,
including the Planning Commission.
The procedures indicate that the "Minutes Clerk shall be required to make a record only of
such business as was actually passed upon by a vote of the Commission and shall not be
required to make a verbatim transcript of the proceedings. 'I The procedures also indicate that
"a record shall be made of the names and addresses of persons addressing the Commission,
the title of the subject matter to which their remarks related and whether they spoke in
support of or in opposition to such matter." According to these procedures, the Minutes
Clerk should only record very basic information such as the action taken and very general
information on persons speaking to the Commission. These procedures do not require that
any discussion on a given item be recorded by the Minutes Clerk. However, to provide some
information on how the Commission reached its decision, it has been standard practice of the
Minutes Clerk to summarize discussion by the Commission members and the public, but not
HC Staff Report
Policies and Procedures
Page 2
record every comment made by an individual Commissioner or member of the public.
If a Commission Member would like to have an abstract or statement on any subject matter
entered into the minutes, the member may do so through the Chairperson and as long as
there is no objection from any member of the Commission. The Policies and Procedures set
forth the process for entering an individual Commissioner's statement into the minutes.
The Policies and Procedures allow the Minutes Clerk to tape record the Commission's
meetings. If tape recordings are made, they are retained until the written minutes are
approved by the Commission. They are then erased unless the City Attorney or a member of
the Housing Commission requests that they be retained at the time the minutes are approved.
III. SUMMARY
The approved "Policies and Procedures" represent the process to be used in the conduct of
business by the Housing Commission. If the Commission would like to revise these Policies
and Procedures, then a written proposal should be made and considered by the Commission.
A resolution approving any revisions is required in order for the Commission to take final
action on any changes to these Policies and Procedures. The proposed changes will also be
reviewed by the offices of the City Attorney and City Clerk prior to the Housing
Commission taking final action.
IV. EXHIBITS
1. Excerpt from Housing Commission Policies and Procedures Manual - Minutes.
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
J’Q ORDER PRESIDING OF dXHIBIT NO. 1 - 14- or in his/, - absence the Vice Chai: EXCERPT FROM HOUSING chair at the hour appointed for the me
commission to order. In the absence & PROCEDURES - MINUTE the Vice Chairperson, the City Hou Director shall call the Commission to order, whereuion a temporary presiding officer shall be elected by the Commission
Members present. Upon the arrival of the Chairperson or the Vice Chairperson, the temporary presiding officer shall relinquish the chair at the conclusion of the business then before the Commission. Whenever the term ‘Chairperson‘ is used in these rules, and the Chairperson is absent, it shall apply equally to the Vice Chairperson, and if he/she is also absent, to the presiding officer elected pursuant to this section.
COMMISSION POLICIES
15 ROLL CALQ. Before proceeding with the business of the Commission, the Minutes Clerk shall call the roll of the Commission Members and the names of those present shall be entered in the minutes.
16 READING OF THE MINUTES. Unless the reading of the minutes of a meeting is requested by a member of the Commission, the minutes may be approved without reading if each member of the Commission has previously been furnished with a copy thereof.
17 MINUTES. The minutes of the Commission shall be kept by the Minutes Clerk and shall be neatly typewritten and retained on file in the Housing and Redevelopment Department, with a record of each particular type of business transacted set off in paragraphs, with proper subheads; provided that the Minutes Clerk shall be required to make a record only of such business as was actually passed upon by a vote of the Commission and shall not be required to make a verbatim transcript of the proceedings, and provided, further, that a record shall be made of the names and addresses of persons addressing the Commission, the title of the subject matter to which their remarks related and whether they spoke in support of or in opposition to such matter.
A Commission Member may request, through the Chairperson, the privilege of having an abstract of hisjher statement on any subject under consideration by the Commission entered in the minutes. If there is no objection from any member of the Commission, such statement shall be entered in the minutes.
18 DISTRIBUTION OF MINUTES. A copy of the minutes of the meeting shall be furnished to each Commission Member prior
to the subsequent meeting. Copies shall also be provided to the City Manager, City Attorney, Housing and Redevelopment Director, Community Development Director, Planning Director and any other individual designated by the City Manager.
6
1
2
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 19 --e (a) Minutes Clerk may tape recort ..., using Commission meetin- as an aid in the
preparation of the minutes. If tape recordings are made, they
shall be retained by the Minutes Clerk until such time as the minutes have been approved by the Commission. Upon such approval of the written minutes by the Commission, the Minutes Clerk may reuse or erase such tape recordings unless specifically requested by the Commission or the City Attorney to retain such tapes at the time the minutes are approved.
(b) While the Minutes Clerk has the tape recordings in his/her possession, members of the public may hear tape recordings of the Commission meetings during office hours when it will not inconvenience the ordinary operation of the Information
Systems Department. Brief or shorthand notes may be made;
mechanical recordings may be made from said tapes; and in this connection, the Minutes Clerk is further authorized to allow the recording machine to be used by the public for listening purposes when such machine is not necessary for use by the Information Systems Department in the ordinary function of the
office. The provisions of this section shall be administered according to the provisions of Section 1.20.170 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
(c) If any person wishes a record of the Housing Commission meeting, or any portion thereof, a request therefore shall be filed with the Housing and Redevelopment Department twenty- four hours prior to the meeting. If such a request is received, the Minutes Clerk shall make arrangements to make and preserve such a record at the expense of the person making the request.
If any person desires to have a matter reported by a stenographer reporter, he/she may employ one directly at his/her expense.
20 PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chairperson of the Commission shall be the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the Housing Commission.
21 POWERS AND DUTIES OF PRESIDING OFFICER. The Presiding Officer may move, second, debate, and vote from the Chair. He/she shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Commission Member by reason of his/her acting as Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer, or such person, as he/she may designate may verbally restate each question immediately prior to calling for the vote. Following the vote the Presiding Officer shall announce whether the question carried or was defeated. The Presiding Officer shall be responsible for the maintenance of order and decorum at all
meetings. He/she shall decide all questions of order and procedure subject, however, to an appeal to the Commission in which case the matter shall be determined by majority vote of the Commission. The Presiding Officer shall sign all
7