Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-11-16; City Council; ; Consider an appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve four single-family residences located at 3745 Adams St, Meeting Date: Nov. 16, 2021 To: Mayor and City Council From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager Staff Contact: Jessica Evans, Associate Planner jessica.evans@carlsbadca.gov, 760-602-4631 Subject: Consider an appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve four single-family residences located at 3745 Adams St. District: 1 Recommended Action Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a coastal development permit and tentative parcel map to subdivide a 0.97-acre vacant lot into four parcels and construct a two-story single-family 3,182 square foot residence on each parcel located at 3745 Adams St. Executive Summary The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Sept. 1, 2021, to consider a proposal to subdivide a 0.97-acre vacant lot into four parcels to construct four single-family residences at 3745 Adams Street. The Planning Commission voted to approve the project. A community member has appealed the decision. The appellant expressed concern about impacts associated with an increase in building pad height, which has been determined to be necessary to accommodate required stormwater and sewer improvements. Appeals of Planning Commission decisions are to be considered by the City Council under Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.54.150. Discussion Background and project description The applicant proposes to subdivide a vacant, 0.97 acre lot into four parcels to build four single- family residences. The property, at 3745 Adams St., has the R-4 Residential General Plan designation, is covered by the Local Coastal Program and in the R-1 One-Family Residential Zone. The project required a coastal development permit and minor tentative parcel map. Topographically, the portion of the property that fronts Adam Street is roughly 10 feet higher than the rear western portion of the property. The subdivision will result in two lots fronting Adams Street and two lots in the rear of the site, which are to be accessed by a shared driveway. The proposed two-story homes will be on individual lots. Each includes a 499-square-foot, one-bedroom junior accessory dwelling unit that is attached to the dwelling and one detached 512-square-foot, one-bedroom, accessory Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 1 of 109 dwelling unit in the rear yard. Because of state laws enacted to streamline and guarantee the construction and use of accessory dwelling units, the junior and detached accessory dwelling units are not a part of the project request for the four new single-family residences, and are to be acted upon by the City Planner through a separate minor coastal development permit. The homes will have an overall building height of 27 feet and 1.5 inches, as measured from the newly established building pad grade, which is approximately 0.7 to 5.5 feet higher than the existing grade. Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.04.065 allows for building height to be measured from an approved finished grade that is higher than the existing grade with an approved discretionary permit and when consideration is given to the natural topography of the site, compatibility with the existing grade of adjacent and surrounding properties and the need to comply with required access, utility and drainage standards. Planning Commission hearing At the Planning Commission hearing on the project, five members of the public asked to have their comments read into the record. The comments raised concerns that the accessory dwelling units would create traffic impacts from additional trips by their occupants. They also contended that the elevated building pad would result in compatibility issues with the surrounding homes because the building height was being measured from the new finished grade pad height, as opposed to the natural existing grade. The commission received additional comments in general opposition to the project that were not read into the record. Public comments received on the project prior to the Planning Commission hearing and the comments that were read into the record are attached to the Planning Commission staff report (Exhibit 3). The applicant and staff responded to the issues raised before the commission, including the building height issue, which is further discussed below. After questions and discussion, the Planning Commission voted to approve the project (5-1-0, Commissioners Lafferty no, Commissioner Stine abstain). A full disclosure of the Planning Commission’s actions, and a complete description and staff analysis of the proposed project is included in the attached minutes (Exhibit 4) and Planning Commission staff report. Issues cited in appeal A community member filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the project Sept. 10, 2021, raising concerns about building height and the information provided to the commission (Exhibit 5). The appellant’s position and staff’s response are summarized below. Building height • Appellant’s position The building heights exceed the height limitations of the underlying zone, R-1 One- Family Residential. Buildings that tall will have adverse impacts and will be in conflict with the Carlsbad Municipal Code. • Staff’s response The project site slopes down and westerly from Adams Street, a slope differential of roughly 10 feet. The applicant proposes to fill the site with soil to increase the building pad height, which will result in finished pad heights of roughly 1 foot higher than natural grade for the proposed homes at the front of the property and 5.5 feet higher than natural grade for the homes in the rear of the property. There are two reasons why the Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 2 of 109 pad heights are needing to be increased: Sewage disposal and compliance with stormwater quality regulations. o Sewer disposal Given the current slope of the property, the building pads at the rear of the property need to be elevated approximately 3 feet for the sewage system to optimally deliver sewage to the public sewer line in Adams Street as a gravity flow system, the standard and preferred method to remove sewage from a property. Alternatively, in lieu of elevating the building pads, the sewage could be disposed through the use of mechanical pumps. Staff recommend against this method of waste disposal because there are challenges in ensuring that the pumps are properly maintained and the potential for mechanical failure, which could cause sewage backflow and health and safety issues. o Stormwater quality regulations To comply with current stormwater quality regulations, the project has been conditioned to install a biofiltration basin with partial retention system that will treat and detain stormwater before the stormwater is discharged from the property. Given the property size, shape, and proposed development, these biobasins are required to be about 6.5 feet deep. A basin this size will be needed to detain and treat all of the anticipated stormwater from the four homes onsite, consistent with Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations. The best practice for stormwater drainage is to allow it to flow in the direction it has historically drained, which in this case is toward the west, onto Pio Pico Drive. To accommodate that design, the finished grade at the rear portion of the property needs to be elevated by 5.5 feet above the natural grade. As is the case with sewage disposal, the finished grade elevation could be lowered by 2.5 feet, to a 3-foot finished grade increase over the natural grade if the bottom of the biobasins are designed to be 3 feet below the natural grade. In this scenario, the stormwater would then need to be mechanically pumped from the biobasin to outlets along the rear of the property. Staff recommend against this method due to concerns similar those described above, which include possible pump maintenance issues and mechanical failures that could cause flooding on the site and onto adjacent properties, and potential soil erosion. The building pads on the neighboring properties were not required to be elevated in the same manner. At the time those properties were developed, they were subject to different stormwater quality regulations and were not required to have bioretention basins. If those adjacent properties were to be redeveloped now, bioretention basins would be required and their building pads would need to be elevated, as is the case with this project. Building height is defined in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.04.065 as the vertical distance measured from the existing grade or finished grade, whichever is lower. However, the code allows for discretionary projects such as this to have the building height measured from the newly established finished grade if consideration is given to the natural topography of the site, compatibility with the existing grade of adjacent and Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 3 of 109 surrounding properties and the need to comply with required access, utility and drainage standards. It was because of the natural topography of the site and the necessary utility and drainage requirements that staff recommended, and the Planning Commission agreed, that the building height should be measured from the finished grade established through the grading plan for the site. (Exhibit 7) In terms of impacts to the neighbors along the northern and western property lines, the R-1 zone allows for a maximum building height of 30 feet. The proposed building height for all four buildings is 27 feet and 1.5 inches. If the height is measured from the existing natural grade, and not from the new finished grade, then the tallest home along the western property line would measure 32.6 feet in height. The project’s design will help minimize the impacts to the appellant’s property with a larger-than-required setback and landscaping: o The appellant’s rear property abuts the northern property line of the subject site. Given the subject site’s orientation to Adams Street, the northern property line is considered the side yard for the development project and the minimum required side yard setback for the main building is 9 feet. The applicant, however, is providing a setback of 16 feet from the side property line. This will leave 83 feet between the rear edge of the appellant’s home and edge of the closest new residence. o The 2:1 slope on the north side of the project boundary will range from two to 10 feet wide and will be fully landscaped with trees and shrubs to buffer any visual impacts to the existing single-family residences to the north. In addition, the applicant provided a shade analysis (Exhibit 6) that demonstrated the project as designed would result in no shade impacts to the adjacent properties. Information provided to Planning Commission • Appellant’s position The facts and evidence presented to the Planning Commission – or omitted from the presentation and staff report – caused the commission to abuse its discretion or approve the project in error. • Staff’s response Planning commissioners received the project staff report and a full set of plans for the proposed project in advance of the hearing. The staff report provided a description of the project’s location, what is currently on the site and the surrounding land uses. The staff report also provided a summary of how the project complies with applicable city ordinances, policies and plans. Planning commissioners received a briefing on the project in the days before the hearing, after they had had the staff report and exhibits for several days. Public comments submitted to the city before the hearing were also distributed to the planning commissioners. During the hearing, staff shared a location map and aerial photo of the project site and nearby area. Staff also answered questions posed by the Planning Commissioners. The city does not have a requirement that the Planning Commissioners visit the site in-person, although many often choose to do so. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 4 of 109 Following debate and deliberation, the planning commissioners found that they had adequate information to make an informed decision on the project, as reflected in the commission’s vote to approve the project. Options Staff provide the following options for the City Council’s consideration 1. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to approve the project Pros • City would benefit from the addition of four residential units • Achieves residential development objectives of the city’s General Plan, Local Coastal Program and Zoning Ordinance • Avoids potential conflicts with the state Housing Accountability Act, which placed limits on cities’ ability to disapprove housing developments Cons • Approves a project with some neighborhood opposition 2. Remand the project back to the Planning Commission for additional review Pros • The Planning Commission could discuss and consider specific City Council concerns about design or analysis or deficiencies and/or propose the project be redesigned Cons • Delays approval of the project • The City Council must provide clear direction why the project is being remanded and what is expected from the Planning Commission 3 Grant the appeal and deny the project. The City Council would need to make findings for the denial and comply with the state Housing Accountability Act. Pros • A different project could be submitted that might addresses neighborhood concerns Cons • The site may not be redeveloped • City would not benefit from the addition of four residential units. The Planning Commission and by staff recommend Option 1, denying the appeal. Fiscal Analysis All required improvements needed to serve this project will be funded by the developer, so there is no cost to the city from this action. The appellant paid the appeal fee of $786; however, if the City Council approves the appeal and the project is denied or remanded back to Planning Commission for a redesign of the project, the fee will be refunded. Next Steps If the City Council denies the appeal, approving the project, staff will follow up with the applicant to ensure that all conditions of approval are satisfied and that all development permits comply with all applicable regulations. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 5 of 109 Environmental Evaluation The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the state Secretary for Natural Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents in accordance with Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects, Class 32 categorical exemption of the CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, the project is: • Consistent with the city’s General Plan as well as with the Zoning Ordinance • Within the city limits • Less than five acres in size • Surrounded by urban uses In addition: • There is no evidence that the site has value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species • Approval of the project will not result in significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality • The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services In making this determination, the City Planner found that the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project. A notice of exemption will be filed by the City Planner upon the project’s final approval. The four single-family residences are required to comply with the city’s Climate Action Plan and the recently adopted Climate Action Plan ordinances, including electric vehicle charging infrastructure, energy efficiency measures and solar photovoltaic systems and new residential standards for water heating. Public Notification and Outreach This item was noticed in keeping with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date. The project is also subject to City Council Policy No. 84 – Development Project Public Involvement Policy. The applicant posted the notice of project application sign at a conspicuous location on the site on Nov. 24, 2020. On Nov. 20, 2020, the applicant mailed the early public notice to property owners within 600 feet of the project site and to occupants within 100 feet of the project site. Although the early public notice and notice of project application sign described above satisfy the requirements of the City Council policy, the applicant also communicated with concerned neighbors while the application was being processed. Exhibits 1. City Council resolution 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7422 3. Planning Commission staff report dated Sept. 1, 2021 4. Planning Commission minutes dated Sept. 1, 2021 5. Appeal form dated Sept. 10, 2021 6. Shade analysis Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 6 of 109 7. Grading plans 8. Public comments received through Nov. 10 at 5 p.m. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 7 of 109 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-257 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 0.97-ACRE VACANT LOT INTO FOUR PARCELS TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY, 3,182- SQUARE-FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON EACH PARCEL LOCATED AT 3745 ADAMS STREET, WITHIN THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 CASE NAME: ADAMS STREET HOMES CASE NO.: CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004·(DEV2020-0126) EXHIBIT 1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on Sept. 1, 2021, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Coastal Development Permit No. 2020-0043 and Tentative Parcel Map No. MS 2020-0004, as referenced in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7422 approving the project; and WHEREAS, at said hearing the Planning Commission voted 5-1-0 to approve the project; and WHEREAS, on Sept. 10, 2021, the appellant timely filed an appeal with the city as provided pursuant to Chapter 21.54 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.04.065 allows for discretionary project~ approved with a finished grader higher in elevation than the existing grade to measure building height from the newly established finished grade when consideration is given to the natural topography of the site, compatibility.with the existing grade of adjacent and surrounding properties, and the need tc comply with required access, utility and drainage standards; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that they had adequate information and analysis tc make an informed decision to approve the project with the building height to be measured from the higher, newly established finished grade; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve said Coastal Development Permit anc Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, f any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to the appeal. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 8 of 109 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision is denied, that all matters not specified in the appeal have been supported by substantial evidence with findings and approved by the Planning Commission, and that the findings and conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7422 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council. 3. That this action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: "NOTICE" The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with. a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 9 of 109 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7422 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO SUBDIVIDE AN APPROXIMATELY .97- ACRE LOT INTO FOUR PARCELS TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY, 3,182- SQUARE-FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON EACH PARCEL LOCATED AT 3745 ADAMS STREET, WITHIN THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1. CASE NAME: ADAMS STREET HOMES CASE NO.: CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) WHEREAS, Dennis Gimian, "Developer," has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Ricky and Chico Trust, Goldenwest Capital, LLC, "Owner," described as ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACT NO. 236 OF THUM LANDS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 1681, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO, DECEMBER 19, 2015, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET, A DISTANCE THEREON NORTH 28°39' WEST 734.81 FEET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTER LINE OF TAMARACK AVENUE, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ALSO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT NO. 236 CONVEYED BY THE SOUTH COAST LAND COMPANY TO SALVADOR AND YSIDRA TREJO BY DEED DATED JANUARY 19, 1931, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 1870, PAGE 77 OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND SO CONVEYED TO TREJO SOUTH 61°21' WEST A DISTANCE OF 195.03 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT NO. 236 CONVEYED BY SOUTH COAST LAND COMPANY TO DEAN F. PALMER BY DEED DATED M-AY 05, 1927 AND RECORDED IN BOOK 1335, PAGE 384 OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE PALMER PORTION NORTH 61 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE PALMER PORTION NORTH 61°21' EAST A DISTANCE OF 446.86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET; THENCE ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET SOUTH 28°39' EAST A DISTANCE OF 195.03 FEET TO THE POINT OF THE BEGINNING. ("the Property"); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit(s) "A" -"EE" dated September 1, 2021, on file in EXHIBIT 2 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 11 of 109 the Planning Division, CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 -ADAMS STREET HOMES, as provided by Chapters 21.10, 21.201, 21.203, 21.85, 21.90, and 20.24 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on September 1, 2021, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel 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 APPROVES CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004-ADAMS STREET HOMES, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: Coastal Development Permit (CDP 2020-0043) 1.That the proposed development is in conformance with the Mello II Segment of the Certified Local Coastal Program {LCP) and all applicable policies, in that the si_te is designated R-4 Residential (0-4 du/ac) for single-family residential development by the Mello II Segment of the LCP. The project consists of the construction of four single-family residences at a density of 4.12 du/acre on a 0.97-acre lot, which exceeds the maximum four dwelling units per acre but is permitted under General Plan Land Use Policy 2-Pl6 as discussed in finding 15.a below. The proposed two-story, single-family residences will not obstruct views of the coastline as seen from public lands or the public right-of-way, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. No agricultural uses currently exist on the site, nor are there any sensitive resources located on the property. In addition, the project is not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazards. Since the site does not have frontage along the coastline, no public opportunities for coastal shoreline access are available from the subject site. Furthermore, the residentially designated site is not suited for water-oriented recreation activities. 2.The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act in that the property is not located adjacent to the shoreline. Therefore, the four single-family residences will not interfere with the public's right to physical access to the ocean; furthermore, the residentially designated site is not suited for water-oriented recreation activities. PC RESO NO. 7422 -2-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 12 of 109 3.That the project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the four single-family residences will adhere to the city's Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, BMP Design Manual and Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to avoid increased urban runoff, pollutants, and soil erosion. No undevelopable steep slopes or native vegetation is located on the subject property and the previously graded site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods, or liquefaction. 4.The project is not located in the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone, according to Map X of the Land Use Plan, certified September 1990 and Agricultural Conversion Mitigation Fees are not required in accordance with the provisions of the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.202 of the Zoning Ordinance). 5.The project is not located between the sea and the first public road parallel to the sea and therefore, is not subject to the provisions of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance). Tentative Parcel Map (MS 2020-0004) 6.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 subdivision of the property into four parcels satisfies all the minimum requirements ofTitle 20 and has been designed to comply with other applicable regulations including the R-4 Residential General Plan Land Use designation and the One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone such as density, lot area, and lot width. 7.That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses in that the proposed subdivision of the 0.97-acre lot into four parcels will result in four new single-family residences and is surrounded by single-family residential development. The proposed subdivision meets all applicable standards of the One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone and the R- 4 Residential General Plan Land Use designation, such as land use, density, lot area, and lot width which is consistent with the surrounding properties. 8.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 all required development standards such as minimum lot size, minimum lot width, and other design criteria required by the One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone are incorporated into the four lot subdivision. 9.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 there are no easements of record or easements established by court judgment for access through or use of property within the property. PC RESO NO. 7422 -3-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 13 of 109 10.That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act). 11.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 subdivision of the property into four parcels meets the minimum lot size and lot width which allows for passive or natural solar heating and cooling opportunities and provides ample area to take advantage of coastal breezes. 12.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. 13.That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat, in that the project site has been previously developed and is surrounded by existing development. 14.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 subdivision of the property into four parcels and the construction of four single-family residences will adhere to the city's Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, BMP Design Manual and Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to avoid increased urban runoff, pollutants, and soil erosion. General 15.The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance with the Elements of the City's General Plan, based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated September 1, 2021 including, but not limited to the following: a.Land Use & Community Design -The project makes efficient use of limited land supply by subdividing a 0.97-acre lot into four parcels to construct one single-family residence on each lot for a total of four new single-family residences. The project meets all development standards, provides adequate parking, and the proposed design and materials ensure the development will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, the project provides a variety of housing types within the existing neighborhood by constructing four new single-family residences, which will allow for one attached junior accessory dwelling unit and one detached accessory dwelling unit on each parcel and will assist in meeting the diverse needs of the residents. The project has a density of 4.12 dwelling units per acre which is slightly above the R-4 Residential density of 0-4 dwelling units per acre and is allowed in accordance with General Plan Land Use Policy 2-P16. The project meets the findings required for General Plan Land Use Policy 2-PlG in that the project is consistent with the R-4 Residential land use designation and applicable goals and policies of the General Plan; and furthermore, there is sufficient infrastructure in place and utilities and improvements that will be provided as part of the development. In addition, the proposed density of 4.12 dwelling units per acre does not exceed the maximum of four dwelling units per acre by more than 25 percent. PC RESO NO. 7422 -4-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 14 of 109 b.Housing -The project site is vacant and therefore the project is conditioned to pay an in-lieu fee on a per unit basis for four units. c.Mobility -The proposed project has been designed to meet all circulation requirements, including vehicular access to and from Adams Street. In addition, the applicant will be required to pay any applicable traffic impact fees, prior to issuance of a building permit, that will go toward future road improvements. The proposed project will construct a sidewalk along the project frontage of Adams Street which will provide pedestrian access to and from the project. d.Noise-The project consists of four single-family residences; therefore, a noise study was not required since the project is not a multi-family project and is less than five units. However, the project has been conditioned to meet a 45 dB(a) CNEL interior noise level when openings to the exterior of the residence are open or closed. If openings are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, then mechanical ventilation shall be provided. e.Public Safety -The proposed structural improvements will be required to be designed in conformance with all seismic design stand�rds. The proposed project is consistent with all applicable fire safety requirements including fire sprinklers. Additionally, the proposed project is not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard and the site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods or liquefaction. 16.The Planning Commission hereby finds that all development in Carlsbad benefits from the Habitat Management Plan, which is a comprehensive conservation plan and implementation program that will facilitate the preservation of biological diversity and provide for effective protection of wildlife and plant species while continuing to allow compatible development in accordance with the Carlsbad's Growth Management Plan. Preservation of wildlife habitats and sensitive species is required by the Open Space and Conservation Element of the city's General Plan which provides for the realization of the social, economic, aesthetic and environmental benefits from the preservation of open space within an increasingly urban environment. Moreover, each development will contribute to the need for additional regional infrastructure that, in turn, will adversely impact species and habitats. The In-Lieu Mitigation Fee imposed on all new development within the city is essential to fund implementation of the city's Habitat Management Plan. Pursuant to the HMP, the project has been conditioned to pay habitat in-lieu fees for impacts to 0.83 acres of disturbed lands (Group F) and 0.15 acres of non-native grasslands (Group E). 17.The project is consistent with the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1 and all City public facility policies and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding sewer collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and other recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space, related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need. Specifically, a.The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the Carlsbad Unified School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities. PC RESO NO. 7422 -5-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 15 of 109 b. The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No. 17 and will be collected prior to the issuance of building permit. c.The local Facilities Management fee for Zone 1 is required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.050 and will be collected prior to issuance of building permit. 18.That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual and Water Efficient landscape Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 18.50). 19.The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332, In-Fill Development Project, of the state California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 20.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. Conditions: NOTE: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of grading permit, building permit, or recordation of the Final Parcel Map, whichever comes first. 1.If any of the following conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the 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; record a notice of violation on the property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the city's approval of this Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map. 2.Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map, documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development, different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 3.Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4.If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such PC RESO NO. 7422 -6-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 16 of 109 condition is determined to be invalid, this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. 5.Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees incurred by the city arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) city's approval and issuance of this Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map, (b) city's approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or nondiscretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the city's approval is not validated. 6.Prior to submittal of the building plans, improvement plans, grading plans, or final map, whichever occurs first, developer shall submit to the City Planner, a 24" x 36" copy of the Tentative Map/Site Plan, conceptual grading plan and preliminary utility plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision-making body. The copy shall be submitted to the City Planner, reviewed and, if found acceptable, signed by the city's project planner and project engineer. If no changes were required, the approved exhibits shall fulfill this condition. 7.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the Building Division from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to provide school facilities. 8.This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits. 9.This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within 24 months from the date of project approval. 10.Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map. 11.Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy #17, the· License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 1, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void. 12.Prior to the issuance of the grading permit or final parcel map approval, whichever comes first, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction executed by the owner of the real PC RESO NO. 7422 -7-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 17 of 109 property to be developed. Said notice is to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the City Planner, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map, by Resolution(s) No. 7422 on the property. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The City Planner 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. 13.Developer shall make a separate formal landscape construction drawing plan check submittal to the Planning Division and obtain City Planner approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the city's Landscape Manual. Developer shall construct and install all landscaping and irrigation as shown on the approved Final Plans. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. All irrigation systems shall be maintained to provide the optimum amount of water to the landscape for plant growth without causing soil erosion and runoff. 14.The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Division and accompanied by the project's building, improvement, and grading plans. 15.This project has been found to result in impacts to wildlife habitat or other lands, such as agricultural land, non-native grassland, and disturbed lands, which provide some benefits to wildlife, as documented in the city's Habitat Management Plan and the environmental analysis for this project. Developer is aware that the city has adopted an In-lieu Mitigation Fee consistent with Section E.6 of the Habitat Management Plan and City Council Resolution No. 2000-223 to fund mitigation for impacts to certain categories of vegetation and animal species. The Developer is further aware that the city has determined that all projects will be required to pay the fee in order to be found consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan. Developer or Developer's successor(s) in interest shall pay the fee prior to recordation of a final map, or issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first. The applicant shall pay habitat In-Lieu Mitigation Fees, consistent with the city's Habitat Management Plan for impacts to 0.83 acres of disturbed lands (Group F) and non-native grasslands {Group E). If the In-lieu Mitigation Fee for this project is not paid, this project will not be consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the General Plan and any and all approvals for this project shall become null and void. 16.Developer shall establish a homeowner's association and corresponding covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs). Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to final parcel map approval. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall provide the Planning Division with a recorded copy of the official CC&Rs that have been approved by the Department of Real Estate and the City Planner. A "hold" will be placed on the building permit (i.e. Certificate of Occupancy) to ensure that said CC&Rs are received prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. At a minimum, the CC&Rs shall contain the following provisions: a.General Enforcement by the City: The City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Declaration in favor of, or in which the City has an interest. PC RESO NO. 7422 -8-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 18 of 109 b.Notice and Amendment: A copy of any proposed amendment shall be provided to the City in advance. If the proposed amendment affects the City, City shall have the right to disapprove. A copy of the final approved amendment shall be transmitted to City within 30 days for the official record. c.Failure of Association to Maintain Common Area Lots and Easements: In the event that the Association fails to maintain the "Common Area Lots and/or the Association's Easements" as provided in Article---� Section _____ the city shall have the right, but not the duty, to perform the necessary maintenance. If the city elects to perform such maintenance, the city shall give written notice to the Association, with a copy thereof to the Owners in the Project, setting forth with particularity the maintenance which the city finds to be required and requesting the same be carried out by the Association within a period of thirty (30) days from the giving of such notice. In the event that the Association fails to carry out such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and/or Association's Easements within the period specified by the city's notice, the City shall be entitled to cause such work to be completed and shall be entitled to reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owners as provided herein. d.Special Assessments Levied by the City: In the event the City has performed the necessary maintenance to either Common Area Lots and/or Association's Easements, the city shall submit a written invoice to the Association for all costs incurred by the City to perform such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and or Association's Easements. The city shall provide a copy of such invoice to each Owner in the Project, together with a statement that if the Association fails to pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the city will pursue collection against the Owners in the Project pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Said invoice shall be due and payable by the Association within twenty {20) days of receipt by the Association. If the Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be subject to a late charge in an amount equal to six percent {6%) of the amount of the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection from the Association by means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available to the city, the city may levy a special assessment against the Owners of each Lot in the Project for an equal pro rata share of the invoice, plus the late charge. Such special assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon each Lot against which the special assessment is levied. Each Owner in the Project hereby vests the city with the right and power to levy such special assessment, to impose a lien upon their respective Lot and to bring all legal actions and/or to pursue lien foreclosure procedures against any Owner and his/her respective Lot for purposes of collecting such special assessment in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article ____ of this Declaration. e.Landscape Maintenance Responsibilities: The HOAs and individual lot or unit owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set forth in Exhibit ____ _ f.Balconies, trellis, and decks: The individual lot or unit owner allowances and prohibitions regarding balconies, trellis, and decks shall be as set forth in Exhibit ___ _ PC RESO NO. 7422 -9-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 19 of 109 17.Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner a recorded copy of the Condominium Plan filed with the Department of Real Estate which is in conformance with the city-approved documents and exhibits. 18.At issuance of building permits, or prior to the approval of a final map the Developer shall pay to the city an inclusionary housing in lieu fee as an individual fee on a per market rate dwelling unit basis in the amount in effect at the time, as established by City Council Resolution from time to time. 19.All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Directors of Community Development and Planning. 20.If satisfaction of the school facility requirement involves a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism which is inconsistent with City Council Policy No. 38, by allowing a pass-through of the taxes or fees to individual home buyers, then in addition to any other disclosure required by law or Council policy, the Developer shall disclose to future owners in the project, to the maximum extent possible, the existence of the tax or fee, and that the school district is the taxing agency responsible for the financing mechanism. The form of notice is subject to the approval of the City Planner and shall at least include a handout and a sign inside the sales facility, or inside each unit, stating the fact of a potential pass-through of fees or taxes exists and where complete information regarding those fees or taxes can be obtained. 21.Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map, or an alternative, suitable to the City Planner, in the sales office or inside each unit, at all times. All sales maps that are distributed or made available to the public shall include but not be limited to trails, future and existing schools, parks, and streets. 22.Prior to the recordation of the first final parcel 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 City Planner and the City Attorney. 23.Developer shall post a sign in the sales office, or inside each unit, in a prominent location that discloses which special districts and school district provide service to the project. Said sign shall remain posted until ALL of the units are sold. 24.Developer shall submit and obtain City Planner approval of an exterior lighting plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. 25.Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, field testing in accordance with Title 24 regulations are required to verify compliance with STC and IIC design standards such as meeting the 45 dB(a) CNEL interior noise level when openings to the exterior of the residences are open or closed. If openings are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, mechanical ventilation shall be provided. Mechanical ventilation for each unit shall be shown on the plans submitted for a building permit. A statement certifying that the required features have been PC RESO NO. 7422 -10-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 20 of 109 incorporated into the building plans, signed by an acoustical analyst/acoustician shall be located on the building plans. 26.Clearing and grading activities should be avoided during the bird nesting season (February 15 through September 15) to reduce indirect impacts to nesting birds that may be present within the construction footprint. If this cannot be avoided, the following measures shall be taken: Engineering: a.Nesting bird surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologist in appropriate habitat for nesting raptors and migratory birds and within a 500-foot survey buffer within three days of construction. b.If nests of federally or state-listed or special status birds of other migratory birds or raptors are located, a fence with a protective buffer of at least 500 feet from active nests of federally or state-listed species, and 300 feet from other bird species shall be placed. All construction activity shall be prohibited within this area. Reduced buffers can be requested from the City if the project biologist can demonstrate that nesting success will not be affected. Once the biologist has determined the nesting cycle has completed, work can commence. Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this proposed subdivision, must be met prior to approval of a final map, building permit or grading plan whichever occurs first. General 27.Prior to hauling dirt or co,nstruction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the city engineer for the proposed haul route. 28.This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the district engineer has determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of permit issuance and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. 29.Developer shall submit to the city engineer an acceptable instrument, via CC&Rs and/or other recorded document, addressing the maintenance, repair, and replacement of shared private improvements within this subdivision, including but not limited to private drive aisles, utilities, street trees, sidewalks, landscaping,, water quality treatment measures, low impact development features, storm drain facilities, etc. located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within this subdivision. 30.Developer shall include rain gutters on the building plans subject to the city engineer's review and approval. Developer shall install rain gutters in accordance with said plans. 31. Developer shall prepare, submit and process for city engineer approval a final map to subdivide this project. There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project. Developer shall pay the city standard map review plan check fees. PC RESO NO. 7422 -11-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 21 of 109 32.Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections and driveways in accordance with City Engineering Standards. The property owner shall maintain this condition. 33.Property owner shall maintain all landscaping (street trees, tree grates, shrubs, groundcover, etc.) and irrigation along the parkway frontage with Adams Street as shown on the Tentative Map. Fees/ Agreements 34.Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the city engineer for recordation, the city's standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless Agreement. 35. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the city engineer for recordation the city's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement. 36.Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the city engineer for recordation, the city's standard form Panhandle Lot Hold Harmless Agreement. 37.Developer shall cause property owner to submit an executed copy to the city engineer for recordation a city standard Permanent Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice Maintenance Agreement. Grading 38.Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall prepare and submit plans and technical studies/reports as required by city engineer, post security and pay all applicable grading plan review and permit fees per the city's latest fee schedule. 39.Prior to approval of the grading plans, the applicant shall submit a Construction Plan to the city engineer for review and approval. Said Plan may be required to include, but not be limited to, identifying the location of the construction trailer, material staging, material deliveries, bathroom facilities, parking of construction vehicles, employee parking, construction fencing and gates, obtaining any necessary permission for off-site encroachment, addressing pedestrian safety, and identifying time restrictions for various construction activities. All material staging, construction trailers, bathroom facilities, etc. shall be located outside the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the city engineer or Construction Management & Inspection engineering manager. Storm Water Quality 40.Developer shall comply with the city's Stormwater Regulations, latest version, and shall implement best management practices at all times. Best management practices include but are not limited to pollution control practices or devices, erosion control to prevent silt runoff during construction, general housekeeping practices, pollution prevention and educational practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices or devices to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater, receiving water or stormwater conveyance system to the PC RESO NO. 7422 -12-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 22 of 109 maximum extent practicable. Developer shall notify prospective owners and tenants of the above requirements. 41.Developer shall complete and submit to the city engineer a Determination of Project's SWPPP Tier Level and Construction Threat Level Form pursuant to City Engineering Standards. Developer shall also submit the appropriate Tier level Storm Water Compliance form and appropriate Tier level Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan {SWPPP) to the satisfaction of the city engineer. Developer shall pay all applicable SWPPP plan review and inspection fees per the city's latest fee schedule. 42.This project is subject to 'Priority Development Project' requirements. Developer shall prepare and process a Storm Water Quality Management Plan {SWQMP), subject to city engineer approval, to comply with the Carlsbad BMP Design Manual latest version. The final SWQMP required by this condition shall be reviewed and approved by the city engineer with final grading plans. Developer shall pay all applicable SWQMP plan review and inspection fees per the city's latest fee schedule. 43. Developer is responsible to ensure that all final design plans {grading plans, improvement plans, landscape plans, building plans, etc.) incorporate all source control, site design, pollutant control BMP and applicable hydromodification measures. Dedications/Improvements 44.Developer shall cause owner to submit to the city engineer for recordation a covenant of easement for private drainage, parking, reciprocal vehicular access, pedestrian access) purposes as shown on the tentative map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map. Developer shall pay processing fees per the city's latest fee schedule. 45.Developer shall design the private drainage systems, as shown on the tentative map to the satisfaction of the city engineer. All private drainage systems {12" diameter storm drain and larger) shall be inspected by the city. Developer shall pay the standard improvement plan check and inspection fees for private drainage systems. 46.Developer shall prepare and process public improvement plans and, prior to city engineer approval of said plans, shall execute a city standard subdivision Improvement Agreement to install and shall post security in accordance with C.M.C. Section 20.16.070 for public improvements shown on the tentative map. Said improvements shall be installed to city standards to the satisfaction of the city engineer. These improvements include, but are not limited to: 1.Half street improvements including, curb, gutter, sidewalk arid AC paving. 2.Full street width AC overlay. 3.Water meters. 4.Sewer Laterals. Developer shall pay the standard improvement plan check and inspection fees in accordance with the fee schedule. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 36 months of approval of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. PC RESO NO. 7422 -13-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 23 of 109 47.Developer shall design, and obtain approval from the city engineer, the structural section for the access aisles with a traffic index of 5.0 in accordance with city standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles with an ADT greater than 500. Prior to completion of grading, the final structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be submitted together with required R-value soil test information subject to the review and approval of the city engineer. 48.Developer is responsible to ensure all existing overhead utilities servicing the subject property are to be undergrounded to the satisfaction of the city engineer. No new or relocated utility poles are allowed. 49.Developer is responsible to ensure utility transformers or raised water backflow preventers that serve this development are located outside the right-of-way as shown on the Tentative Map and to the satisfaction of the city engineer. These facilities shall be constructed within the property. Non-Mapping Notes 50.Add the following notes to the final map as non-mapping data: A.Developer has executed a city standard subdivision Improvement Agreement and has posted security in accordance with C.M.C. Section 20.16.070 to install public improvements shown on the tentative map. These improvements include, but are not limited to: l.Half street improvements including, curb, gutter, sidewalk and AC paving. 2.Full street width AC overlay. 3.Water meters. 4.Sewer Laterals. B.Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are available. C.Geotechnical Caution: 1.Slopes steeper than two parts horizontal to one part vertical exist within the boundaries of this subdivision. 2.The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad from any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground water seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur on, or adjacent to, this subdivision due to its construction, operation or maintenance. D.No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor as defined by City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards or line-of-sight per Caltrans standards. E.The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad from any action that may PC RESO NO. 7422 -14-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 24 of 109 Utilities arise through any diversion of waters, the alteration of the normal flow of surface waters or drainage, or the concentration of surface waters or drainage from the drainage system or other improvements identified in the city approved development plans; or by the design, construction or maintenance of the drainage system or other improvements identified in the city approved development plans. F.There are no public park or recreational facilities to be located in whole or in part within this subdivision. The subdivider is therefore obligated to pay park-in-lieu fees in accordance with section 20.44.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and has either paid all of said park in-lieu fees or agreed to pay all of said park-in-lieu fees in accordance with section 20.16.070 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 50.Developer shall meet with the fire marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. 51.Developer shall install potable water and/or recycled water services and meters at locations approved by the district engineer. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 52.The developer shall agree to install sewer laterals and clean-outs at locations approved by the city engineer. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on public improvement plans. Code Reminders The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 53.Developer shall pay planned local area drainage fees in accordance with Section 15.08.020 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the city engineer. 54.Developer shall pay traffic impact and sewer impact fees based on Section 18.42 and Section 13.10 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, respectively. The Average Daily Trips (ADT) and floor area contained in the staff report and shown on the tentative map are for planning purposes only. 55.Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees in accordance with Section 20.44 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the city engineer. 56.This tentative map shall expire two years from the date on which the planning commission voted to approve this application. 57.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Developer shall pay a Public Facility fee as required by Council Policy No. 17. 58.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Developer shall pay the local Facilities Management fee for Zone 1 as required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.050. PC RESO NO. 7422 -15-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 25 of 109 59.Developer shall pay a landscape inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 60.Developer acknowledges that the project is required to comply with the city's greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction ordinances and requirements. GHG reduction requirements are in accordance with, but are not limited to, Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapters 18.21, 18.30, and 18.51 in addition to the California Green Building Standards Code (CCR, Title 24, Part 11-CALGreen), as amended from time to time. GHG reduction requirements may be different than what is proposed on the project plans or in the Climate Action Plan Checklist originally submitted with this project. Developer acknowledges that new GHG reduction requirements related to energy efficiency, photovoltaic, electric vehicle charging, water heating and traffic demand management requirements as set forth in the ordinances and codes may impact, but are not limited to, site design and local building code requirements. If incorporating GHG reduction requirements results in substantial modifications to the project, then prior to issuance of development (grading, building, etc.) permits, Developer may be required to submit and receive approval of a Consistency Determination or Amendment for this project through the Planning Division. Compliance with the applicable GHG reduction requirements must be demonstrate.d on or with the construction plans prior to issuance of the applicable development permits. 61.Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. 62.Premise identification (addresses) shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.060. Prior to submittal for a building permit, Developer shall submit a request for addressing to the Building Division. NOTICE TO APPLICANT An appeal of this decision to the City Council must be filed with the City Clerk at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92008, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the Planning Commission's decision. Pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.54, section 21.54.150, the appeal must be in writing and state the reason(s) for the appeal. The City Council must make a determination on the appeal prior to any judicial review. NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from date of approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a) and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading, or other PC RESO NO. 7422 -16-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 26 of 109 similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on September 1, 2021, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Kamenjarin, Luna, Meenes, Merz, and Sabellico NOES: Commissioner Lafferty ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner Stine ROY MEENES, Chair CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: DON NEU City Planner PC RESO NO. 7422 -17-Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 27 of 109 Item No. Application complete date: July 8, 2021 P.C. AGENDA OF: September 1, 2021 Project Planner: Jessica Evans Project Engineer: Tim Carroll SUBJECT: CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map to allow for the subdivision of an approximately .97-acre lot into four parcels to construct a two-story, 3,182 square-foot single-family residence on each parcel. The project is located at 3745 Adams Street, within the Mello II Segment of the city’s Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is not located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332, “In-Fill Development Projects,” of the state CEQA Guidelines. I.RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7422 APPROVING Coastal Development Permit CDP 2020-0043 and Tentative Parcel Map MS 2020-0004 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The subject .97-acre lot is located at 3745 Adams Street within the Mello II segment of the Local Coastal Program and is currently vacant. The development of the project requires the approval of a coastal development permit for the subdivision of land and the construction of the single-family residences. The tentative parcel map is required to subdivide the .97-acre lot and is considered minor because it involves the subdivision of land into four parcels. The junior accessory dwelling units (JADU) and the accessory dwelling units (ADU) will be administratively reviewed and acted upon by the City Planner through a separate minor coastal development permit subsequent to the planning commission’s action on the current applications. The project proposes to subdivide the .97-acre lot into four parcels, where two of the four parcels are in a panhandle configuration. The project includes the construction of one single-family residence with one attached JADU and one detached ADU on each parcel. Each two-story, single-family residence is approximately 3,182 square feet and has four bedrooms with an attached two-car garage. A one bedroom, 499-square-foot JADU is attached to each single-family residence and is located on the second floor; and a single-story, one bedroom, 512-square-foot detached ADU is located in the backyard of each parcel. The architect describes the design as “coastal contemporary,” and the materials include white stucco, siding, wood columns and knee braces as accent features, metal railings, and black-trimmed, recessed windows. 1 EXHIBIT 3 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 28 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 2 The roof design consists of dark gray shingles with 6:12 and 9:12-pitches. Photovoltaic solar panels are proposed on the roof of each single-family residence and provisions for electric vehicle charging are included in the garage. Access to each parcel is taken from Adams Street and the project includes a shared driveway for the two panhandle lots. Topographically, the existing lot has an elevation approximately 91 feet above mean sea level (MSL) along the front property line and slopes down toward the rear of the lot to 81 feet above MSL. A grading permit will be required for this project and estimated grading quantities include 45 cubic yards of cut and 6,300 cubic yards of fill. Since the rear side of the subject property is currently located approximately nine to 10 feet below the grade of Adams Street, approximately five and a half to six and a half feet of fill will be required to raise the pad elevation to install utilities and drainage facilities. In addition, required frontage improvements will result in the removal of nine existing palm trees along Adams Street. The palm trees are counted in the city’s street tree inventory; however, the Parks and Recreation Department has reviewed the proposal and conceptually approved the removal of the nine palm trees. The applicant will be required to obtain a tree removal permit from the Parks and Recreation Department after grading plans are approved and will be required to replace the trees at a 2:1 ratio, resulting in 18 new trees to be planted in the right-of-way surrounding the project site. Table “A” below includes the General Plan designations, zoning and current land uses of the project site and surrounding properties. TABLE A – GENERAL PLAN, ZONING AND EXISTING LAND USE Location General Plan Designation Zoning Current Land Use Site R-4 (Residential, 0-4 du/ac) R-1 (One-Family Residential) Vacant Lot North R-4 R-1 Single-Family Homes South R-4 R-1 Single-Family Home/Church East R-4 R-1 Single-Family Homes West VC (Visitor Commercial) C-T (Commercial Tourist) Church The project meets the City’s standards for subdivisions, and as designed and conditioned, is in compliance with the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and relevant zoning regulations of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC). III. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. R-4 Residential General Plan Land Use Designation; B. One-family Residential (R-1) Zone (CMC Chapter 21.10); C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Mello II Segment of the LCP (CMC Chapter 21.201) and the Coastal Resources Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203); D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20); E. City Council Policy Nos. 44 (Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines) F. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85); and G. Growth Management (CMC Chapter 21.90). The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project’s consistency with the applicable city regulations and policies. The project’s compliance with each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 29 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 3 A. R-4 Residential General Plan Land Use Designation The General Plan Land Use designation for the property is R-4, Residential. The R-4 designation allows development of single-family residences at a density of 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The 0.97- acre parcel would permit a maximum of 3.88 dwelling units. The proposed project density is 4.12 du/ac which exceeds the maximum density of four dwelling units per acre by 0.24 of a unit. Land Use Element Policy 2-P.16 of the General Plan allows for residential development above the allowed maximum density on properties with an R-4 land use designation such as this when the implementing zone (R-1) would permit a slightly higher density yield provided four specific findings can be made which is described in detail below. Lastly, the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan as outlined in Table “B” below: TABLE B – GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? Land Use Goal 2-G.3 Promote infill development that makes efficient use of limited land supply, while ensuring compatibility and integration with existing uses. Ensure that infill properties develop with uses and development intensities supporting a cohesive development pattern. Goal 2-G.4 Provide balanced neighborhoods with a variety of housing types and density ranges to meet the diverse demographic, economic and social needs of residents, while ensuring a cohesive urban form with careful regard for compatibility. Policy 2-P.7 Do not permit residential development below the minimum of the density range except in certain circumstances. Policy 2-P16 Allow residential development above the allowed maximum density on properties with a R-4 land use designation when the implementing The proposed project makes efficient use of limited land supply by subdividing a 0.97-acre lot into four parcels to construct one single-family residence on each lot. The project meets all development standards, provides adequate parking, and the proposed design and materials ensure the development will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The project provides a variety of housing types within the existing neighborhood by constructing four new single-family residences, which will allow for one attached JADU and one detached ADU on each newly subdivided lot and will assist in meeting the diverse needs of residents. The project has a density of 4.12 du/ac which slightly exceeds the R-4 Residential density of 0-4 du/ac but is not below the density range required for this land use designation. The project is located on a .97-acre lot with a proposed density of 4.12 du/ac where a maximum of 4 du/ac is allowed. The implementing zone (R-1) allows for a slightly higher dwelling unit yield than the allowed maximum Yes Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 30 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 4 Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? zone would permit a slightly higher dwelling unit yield than the allowed maximum density, subject to the following findings: a. The project is consistent with the intended uses of the applicable land use designation and other applicable goals and policies of this General Plan. b. There is sufficient infrastructure to support the project. c. The proposed density does not exceed the allowed maximum density by more than 25 percent. d. The project qualifies for and will receive an allocation of “excess” dwelling units, pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43. density. The project meets all required implementing R-1 zoning standards such as lot size, lot width, and setbacks. The project is consistent with the R-4 Residential land use designation and other applicable goals and policies of the General Plan as described in this table. The site has sufficient infrastructure in place and utilities and improvements will be provided as part of the development. The proposed density is 4.12 du/ac and does not exceed the maximum of 4 du/ac by more than 25 percent. Pursuant to SB 330, Government Code Section 66300 (b)(1)(D) and City Council action (Resolution No. 2021- 074), the city cannot use the city’s EDUB under the Growth Management Program (City Council Policy 43) to regulate the number of units built in the city and to limit or prohibit residential development. Therefore, this finding is not applicable. One dwelling unit will be withdrawn from the EDUB for residential unit tracking purposes. Housing Program 3.1 For all ownership and qualifying rental projects of fewer than seven units, payment of a fee in lieu of inclusionary units is permitted. The project is conditioned to pay an in-lieu fee on a per unit basis for four units. Mobility Policy 3-P.5 Require developers to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with the Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development. The proposed project has been designed to meet all circulation requirements, including vehicular access points to and from Adams Street. In addition, the applicant will be required to pay any applicable traffic impact fees, prior to issuance of a building permit, that will go toward future road improvements. Yes Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 31 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 5 Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? Noise Goal 5-G.2 Ensure that new development is compatible with the noise environment, by continuing to use potential noise exposure as a criterion in land use planning. A noise study is required when a project proposes five or more dwelling units. Since this project involves four single-family dwelling units, the project was not required to submit a noise study. However, to ensure that city standards for interior noise levels of residential units are met, the project has been conditioned to meet a 45 dB(A) CNEL interior noise level when openings to the exterior of the residence are closed. If openings are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, then mechanical ventilation shall be provided. In addition, because the project is located near an existing transportation corridor, the project is conditioned to require the applicant to record a notice that the property may be subject to impacts from the existing transportation corridor as required by the city’s Noise Guidelines Manual. Yes Public Safety Goal 6-G.1 Minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from fire, flood, hazardous material release, or seismic disasters. Policy 6-P.6 Enforce the requirements of Titles 18, 20, and 21 pertaining to drainage and flood control when reviewing applications for building permits and subdivisions. Policy 6-P.34 Enforce the Uniform Building and Fire codes, adopted by the city, to provide fire protection standards for all existing and proposed structures. The proposed structural improvements will be required to be designed in conformance with all seismic design standards. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with all the applicable fire safety requirements including fire sprinklers. Additionally, the proposed project is not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard and the site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods or liquefaction. Yes Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 32 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 6 B. One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone (CMC Chapter 21.10) The project is required to comply with all applicable regulations and development standards of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) including the One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone. The proposed project meets or exceeds all applicable requirements of the R-1 Zone as shown in Table “C” below. TABLE C – R-1 ZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS STANDARD REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROPOSED Minimum Lot Area Standard Lot: 7,500 sq. ft. Panhandle Lot: 10,000 sq. ft. Standard Lot: 8,568 sq. ft. Panhandle Lot: 12, 576 sq. ft. Lot Width 60 ft. 82 ft. Front Yard Setback 20 ft. 20 ft. Side Yard Setback Minimum 10% of lot width, or 10 ft., whichever is less 10 ft. Rear Yard Setback Twice side yard setback, or 20 ft. 42 ft. 6 in. Maximum Building Height Maximum 30 ft. if a minimum roof pitch of 3:12 is provided, or maximum 24 ft. if less than a 3:12 roof pitch is provided. Height: 27 ft. 1 ½ in. Pitch: 6:12 Lot Coverage 40% 31% Parking Single-Family Residence: two-car garage with a minimum interior dimension of 20 ft. by 20 ft. Panhandle Lot: three, open, non- tandem parking spaces The project satisfies this requirement by providing an enclosed, two-car garage with the minimum dimension of 20 ft. by 20 ft. In addition, adequate back-up and maneuvering space are provided. Three, open non-tandem parking spaces that meet minimum parking dimensions, back-up and maneuvering space. C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (CMC Chapter 21.201) and Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203) The project site is located within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program. The site is not located within the California Coastal Commission’s appeal jurisdiction but is located within and subject to the Coastal Resources Protection Overlay Zone. The project’s compliance with each of these programs and ordinances is discussed below: 1. Mello II Segment of the Certified Local Coastal Program and all applicable policies. The Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use designation for the property is Residential, R-4. The R-4 LCP Land Use designation allows for residential development at a density range of 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). As discussed in Section “A” above, the proposal to build four single-family homes is consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Mello II Segment of the LCP. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 33 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 7 The project proposes the subdivision of the .97-acre lot into four parcels to construct four 3,182-square- foot, 27 feet tall, two-story single-family residences with an attached, enclosed, two-car attached garage on each parcel. The new homes are proposed in an area designated for single-family residential development. The proposed two-story residences are compatible with the surrounding development of one and two-story single-family residential structures. Additionally, the two-story residences will not obstruct views of the coastline as seen from public lands or public right-of-way, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. Furthermore, no agricultural uses exist on the site, nor are there any known sensitive resources located on the site. The proposed single-family residences are not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard. Given that the site does not have any frontage along the coastline, no public opportunities for coastal shoreline access or water-oriented recreational activities are available. 2. Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the project will adhere to the city’s Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, BMP Design Manual and Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to avoid increased urban run-off, pollutants and soil erosion. No undevelopable steep slopes or native vegetation is located on the subject property and the site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods, or liquefaction. D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20) The Land Development Engineering Division has reviewed the proposed Tentative Parcel Map and has found that the subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20) for Minor Subdivisions. The subdivision is considered minor because it involves the division of land into four or fewer lots (four lots proposed). The project has been conditioned to install all infrastructure-related improvements concurrent with the development. E. City Council Policy No. 44 (Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines) The project is subject to City Council Policy No. 44 – Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines. A justification of how the proposed project complies with the intent and purpose of the City Council Policy No. 44 is provided in Table “D” below. TABLE D – CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 44 INTENT AND PURPOSE COMPLIANCE Goal Justification Visually interesting The proposed project provides covered first level porches for all units and substantial wall projections on the second floor for all units along the front façade. All four buildings have a variety of materials consisting of varied colors of stucco, board and batten siding, varied roof pitches, recessed windows, and a variety in window sizes. Sufficient building articulation to reduce bulk and mass The second story wall planes provide articulation and various rooflines that help reduce the bulk and mass of the project. In scale to their lot size The project is permitted to have a lot coverage up to 40%. This project proposes a lot coverage of about 31% and 21% for the two panhandle lots. In addition, the residences are two-stories and Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 34 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 8 within the height limit and either meet or exceed required setbacks. The project is in scale with the size of the lot. Strongly contribute to the creation of livable neighborhoods The project allows for four single-family dwellings as the zoning is R- 1 and General Plan Land Use is R-4 Residential. The project site is surrounded by single-family residences. By developing four single- family residences that are in scale and similar to the existing neighborhood, the project will contribute to the ongoing character of the existing single-family, livable neighborhood. Please refer to Attachment No. 4 for a detailed analysis of project compliance with this policy. F. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85) For any residential development of less than seven units, the inclusionary housing requirements may be satisfied through the payment of an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee. The proposal to construct four new single-family residential dwelling unit has been conditioned to pay the applicable housing in-lieu fee prior to the issuance of a building permit. F. Growth Management (CMC Chapter 21.90) The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the northwest quadrant of the city. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in Table “E” below. TABLE E – GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE City Administration 14.15sq. ft. Yes Library 7.55 sq. ft. Yes Wastewater Treatment 4 EDU Yes Parks .03 acre Yes Drainage 1.60 CFS/Basin B Yes Circulation 40 ADT Yes Fire Fire Station No. 1 Yes Open Space N/A N/A Schools Carlsbad (E=.7376/M=.4224/HS =.5764) Yes Sewer Collection System 4 EDU Yes Water 1,000 GPD Yes The Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) for the property under the R-4 General Plan Land Use designation is 3.2 du/ac. The GMCP is a tool utilized by the city to track anticipated growth within the city and plan for future facility needs. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 330, Government Code Section 66300 (b)(1)(D), and City Council action (Resolution No. 2021-074) the GMCP cannot act as a residential housing cap. At the GMCP, three dwelling units would be permitted on this 0.97-net-developable-acre property (3.1 dwelling units rounded down to three dwelling units). With four units proposed, one dwelling unit will be withdrawn from the EDUB for residential unit tracking purposes. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 35 of 109 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES September 1, 2021 Page 9 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) Class 32 Categorical Exemption of the State CEQA Guidelines. The project is consistent with the general plan as well as with the zoning ordinance, the project site is within the city limits, is less than five acres in size, and is surrounded by urban uses; there is no evidence that the site has value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species; approval of the project will not result in significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. In making this determination, the City Planner has found that the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the state CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project, including “historical resources.” The project site is currently vacant and does not include any structures that are included in the local register of historical resources. A Notice of Exemption will be filed by the City Planner upon final project approval. The four single-family residences are required to comply with the city’s Climate Action Plan and the recently adopted Climate Action Plan Ordinances, including electric vehicle charging infrastructure (Ordinance No. CS-349), energy efficiency measures and solar photovoltaic systems (Ordinance No. CS- 347) and new residential standards for water heating (Ordinance No. CS-348). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7422 2. Location Map 3. Disclosure Form 4. City Council Policy No. 44 Compliance Table 5. Reduced Exhibits 6. Full Size Exhibit(s) “A” – “EE” dated September 1, 2021 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 36 of 109 ADAMS STPIO P ICO DR MAGNO LI A A V HARDING ST TAMAR A C K A V PALM A V I- 5 TAMARACKNBONRAMP JEF FERSON S T ADAIR W Y YVE TTE W Y HIGH LAND DRPOLL Y LNGRECOURT W Y MARGARETWYLARKSPUR LNMAGNO LI A A V CDP 2020-0043 / MS 2020-0004 Adams Street Homes SITE MAP J SITE E L C AMINO R E ALLA COSTA AVCARLSBAD B L MELROSE DR !"^$ ATTACHMENT 2 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 37 of 109 ATTACHMENT 3DocuSign Envelope ID: 288730E5-58BC-42D0-A932-F9E1B4EB75E6 ( City of Carlsbad DISCLOSURE STATEMENT P-1(A) Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership. include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person N/A: Corp/Part__....,_;i,;_/A __________ _ Title.____________ Title _____________ _ Address ----------Address ------------ 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) P-1(A) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e., partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or.partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Dennis Gimian Title Managing Member PO Box 10537 Address Ne,~po, t Beac:h, eA 92658 Corp/Part. ___________ _ Title _____________ _ Address ------------- Page 1 of 2 Revised 07/10 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 38 of 109 DocuSign Envelope ID: 288730E5-58BC-42D0-A932-F9E 1 B4EB75E6 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non- profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non ProfiVTrust________ Non ProfiVTrust _________ _ Title ___________ _ Title _____________ _ Address Address ---------------------- 4. Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? D Yes [8;'{No If yes, please indicate person(s): __________ _ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. ~"''""""" .,, o=!o::itWv 9/3/2020 ~ 9-28-20 Signature of owner/date Signature of applicant/date Dennis Gimian Kirk Moeller Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent P-1(A) Page 2 of 2 Revised 07/10 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 39 of 109 ADAMS STREET HOMES CITY COUNCIL POLICY 44 – NEIGHBORHOOD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Guideline Compliance Comments Floor Plans and Elevations 1 All residential projects shall be required to have a minimum number of different floor plans, different front and corresponding matching rear elevations with different color schemes as identified below: 2-4 dwelling units shall provide 1 floor plan and 2 different elevations. 5-12 dwelling units shall provide 2 different floor plans and 2 different elevations. 13-20 dwelling units shall provide 2 different floor plans and 3 different elevations. 21+ dwelling units shall provide 3 different floor plans and 3 different elevations. The project consists of four dwelling units and provides for one floor plan that is reversed and two different elevations. 2 Every house should have a coherent architectural style. All elevations of a house, including front, side and rear, should have the same design integrity of forms, details and materials. The elevations of the project have consistent design on all elevations with similar coastal contemporary craftsman design integrity. 3 In addition to the previous requirements, design details should reinforce and enhance the architectural form and style of every house and differ from other elevations of the same floor plan. A minimum of 4 complimentary design details, including but not limited to those listed below, shall be incorporated into each of the front, rear and street side building façade(s) of the house. Design Details Each single-family dwelling has been designed to incorporate the following: 1) Knee braces 2)Accent materials (siding) 3) Decorative eaves/fascia 4) Columns 5) Window trims Balconies Decorative eaves and fascia Exposed roof rafter tails Arched elements Towers Knee braces Dormers Columns Exterior wood elements Accent materials (i.e.; brick, stone, shingles, wood or siding) 4 Floor plans in a project shall exhibit a variety of roof ridges and roof heights within a neighborhood. The project provides for a variety of roof ridges and roof pitches that create variation in the height of the units and within the neighborhood. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 40 of 109 CITY COUNCIL POLICY 44 – NEIGHBORHOOD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Guideline Compliance Comments Single Story Requirements 9 A maximum of 20% of the total number of homes are exempt from the requirement to have a single-story building edge. The remaining total number of homes shall comply with one of the following guidelines: The home shall have a single-story building edge with a depth of not less than 8 feet and shall run the length of the building along one side except for tower elements. The roof covering the single-story element shall incorporate a separate roof plane and shall be substantially lower than the roof for the two-story element. Porches and porte-cochere elements shall qualify as a single-story edge. Houses with courtyards that are a minimum of 15 feet wide located along the side of the house and setback a minimum of 15 feet from the property line are not required to have a single-story building edge. The home shall have a single story-building edge with a depth of not less than 5 feet and shall run the length of the building along one side. The roof of the single-story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the two-story element of the building. The home shall have a single-story building edge with a depth of not less than 3 feet for 40% of the perimeter of the building. Each home is designed with a porch which qualifies as a single-story edge with a separate roof plane that is substantially lower than the roof for the second story. Multiple Building Planes 10 For at least 66% of the homes in a project, there shall be at least 3 separate building planes on street side elevations of lots with 45 feet of street frontage or less and 4 separate building planes on street side elevations of lots with a street frontage greater than 45 feet. Balconies and covered porches qualify as a building plane. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to, building walls, windows, porches and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 10 feet. A plane must be a minimum of 30 sq. ft. to receive credit under this section. Each dwelling unit provides four separate building planes on the street side elevations. The offset in planes are approximately 24 inches, and the minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation exceeds 10 feet. 11 Rear elevations shall adhere to the same criteria outlined in Number 10 above for front elevations except that the minimum depth between front and back planes on the rear elevation shall be 4 feet. Rear balconies qualify as a building plane. Each dwelling unit has four separate building planes in the rear and exceeds the 4 ft. minimum. In addition, each unit includes a rear balcony. Windows/Doors 13 At least 66% of exterior openings (door/windows) on every home in the project shall be recessed or projected a minimum of 2 inches and shall be constructed with wood, vinyl or colored aluminum window frames (no mill finishes). All windows are proposed to be projected a minimum 2 in. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 41 of 109 14 Windows shall reinforce and enhance the architectural form and style of the house through, the use of signature windows and varied window shapes and sizes. Each dwelling unit includes windows with enhanced architectural style and form with large window trims that complement the overall design of the house, and all windows vary in shape and size. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 42 of 109 CITY COUNCIL POLICY 44 – NEIGHBORHOOD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES CONTINUED Architectural Guideline Compliance Comments Front Porches 15 Fifty percent (50%) of the homes shall be designed with a covered front porch, open courtyard, or balcony (each with a minimum depth of 6 feet and a minimum area of 60 square feet) located at the front of the dwelling. The minimum depth for a covered front porch shall be measured from the front façade of the home to the inside of any supporting porch posts. The front and sides of porches shall be open except for required and/or ornamental guardrails. A variety of roof elements shall be provided over porches. Porches may not be converted to living space. All four dwelling units include a covered front porch that meet the minimum depth and area. Front Entries 16 Seventy-five percent (75%) of the homes must have a front entry to the home that is clearly visible from the street. Walkways from the front door to the street are encouraged. The two street facing homes have a front entry that is visible from the street. Chimneys 17 Chimneys and chimney caps shall be in scale with the size of the home. No more than 2 chimneys shall be allowed for homes on lots in planned developments having an area less than 7,500 square feet. No chimneys are proposed. Garage Doors 18 Garage doors for 3 or 4 cars in a row that directly face the street must have a minimum of an 18” plane change between the garage doors after the 2 car garage door. The proposed garages are for two cars and not designed in a row. The garages are separate and meet this guideline. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 43 of 109 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A0.1 TITLESHEET A0.1MINOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION TO CREATE FOUR SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. EACH WILL HAVESIMILAR FLOOR PLANS WITH TWO MIRRORED WITH VARYING COLORS AND MATERIALS FOR THEEXTERIOR FACADES. EACH HOME CONSISTS OF AN ATTACHED JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ANDA DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. SITE IMPROVEMENTS CONSIST OF RECIPROCAL DRIVEWAYACCESS WITH ADEQUATE ON-SITE PARKING DEDICATED TO EACH RESIDENCE ON EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT.PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AND HARDSCAPE INCLUDES STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES. 3745 ADAMS STREET205-270-13-00 MAIN RESIDENCE: LOT AREA:EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOT (MINOR SUBDIVISION):42.290 S.F. / .97 AC RESIDENTIAL UNITS: TOTAL MAIN RESIDENCE FLOOR AREA:2,722 S.F. GARAGE:460 S.F.1,379 S.F. R-4GENERAL PLAN R-1ZONINGYESCOASTAL ZONE PROPOSED WATER USAGE RESIDENTIAL 250 GPD X 4 UNITS = 1,000 GPD RESIDENTIAL 10 TRIPS PER D.U. X 4 UNITS = 40 ADT PARKING REQUIRED ONE FAMIILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE:3 SP. PER UNIT RESIDENCE A: TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED: 12 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED PROPOSED SEWER USAGE RESIDENTIAL (EDU) = 220 GAL/DAY X 4 DU X (1 EDU PER/DU) = 880 GAL/DAY SINGLE FAMILY:4 UNITS OVERHANGING ELEMENTS AND EXTERIOR STAIRS:278 S.F. DWELLING UNIT DENSITY: ALLOWABLE DENSITY: BUILDING AREAS:RESIDENCES A, B, C & D (LOTS 1-4): NOTE: THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND DOES NOT CONTAINACCESSIBLE UNITS. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 3 SP. PROPOSED DENSITY: 3 SP. ADAMS STREET HOMES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 3745 ADAMS STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SHEET INDEXPROJECT DIRECTORYPROJECT INFORMATIONCODESVICINITY MAP SCOPE OF WORK UTILITY/ SERVICE PROVIDERS RICKY AND CHICO TRUST,GOLDENWEST CAPITAL LLCCONTACT: DENNIS GIMIANPO BOX 10537NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92658T: 714-612-1144dennisg2@cox.net 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE PLUMBING CALCULATIONS ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER:ADDRESS:STORIES:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM):30-0" DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS SITE PASCO LARET SUITER &ASSOCIATES (PLSA)CONTACT: TYLER LAWSON535 N HIGHWAY 101 STE ASOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075T: 858-259-8212tlawson@pslaengineering.com CIVIL: KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC.CONTACT: KIRK MOELLER2888 LOKER AVENUE EAST, STE 220CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92010T: 760-814-8128kirk@kmarchitectsinc.com ARCHITECT: PARKING ANALYSIS N DAEDALUS DESIGN GROUPCONTACT: JEFF SMITH2725 JEFFERSON ST, STE 15BCARLSBAD, CA 92010T: 760-720-4337jeff@ddgla.com LANDSCAPEARCHITECT: LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, IN THE COUNTY OFSAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACT NO. 236 OF THUM LANDS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SANDIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 1681, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTYRECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DECEMBER SEPTEMBER 19, 2015. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC SEWER DISTRICT:CARLSBAD WASTEWATER DIVISIONWATER DISTRICT:CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT ELECTRIC:SDGEGAS:SDGE SCHOOL DISTRICT:CARLSBAD UNIFIEDFIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT:CARLSBAD FIRE TELCO:AT&T BUILDING CODE ANALYSIS TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:V-BOCCUPANCY:R-3/ U (PRIVATE GARAGES)OCCUPANT LOAD:21DESCRIPTION OF USE:RESIDENTIALEXISTING USE:VACANTFULLY SPRINKLERED:NFPA 13R YESFIRE ALARM:NO STORIES:2 (4 ALLOWED)HEIGHT:30'-0" MAX. (40' ALLOWED) ARCHITECTURAL A0.1 COVER SHEETA1.1 SITE PLAN STANDPIPES:NO OWNER: A2.1A 1ST FLOOR PLAN RESIDENCES A & DA2.2A 2ND FLOOR PLAN RESIDENCES A & DA2.3A ROOF PLAN RESIDENCES A & DA3.1A BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE AA3.2A BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE AA3.3A ADU ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE A A2.1B 1ST FLOOR PLAN RESIDENCES B & CA2.2B 2ND FLOOR PLAN RESIDENCES B & CA2.3B ROOF PLAN RESIDENCES B & CA3.1B BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE BA3.2B BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE BA3.3B ADU ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE B RESIDENCE B:RESIDENCE C:3 SP. RESIDENCE D:3 SP. PRIVATE GARAGE: TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED: 20 SPACES (2 CAR GARAGE X 4 RESIDENCES) 8 SP.12 SP.DRIVEWAY SPACES: 2019 RESIDENTIAL CODE PROPOSED LOT 1:8,568 S.F. / .20 ACPROPOSED LOT 2:8,574 S.F. / .20 ACPROPOSED LOT 3:12,572 S.F. / .29 ACPROPOSED LOT 4:12,576 S.F. / .20 AC ADU:4 UNITSJUNIOR ADU:4 UNITS 4 D.U. / 0.97 D.U./AC = 4.12 D.U./AC0.97 AC X 3.2 D.U./AC = 3.1 UNITS (1 D.U. TO BE ALLOCATED FROM THE EDUB) ADU:512 S.F. 1ST FLOOR: MAIN RESIDENCE:JUNIOR ADU:499 S.F.1,343 S.F. COVERED PATIO:52 S.F. 2ND FLOOR: LOT COVERAGE:LOT 1 (RESIDENCE A):LOT 2 (RESIDENCE B):2,629 S.F. / 8,574 S.F. = 31%2,629 S.F. / 8,568 S.F. = 31% LOT 3 (RESIDENCE C):2,629 S.F. / 12,572 S.F. = 21%LOT 4 (RESIDENCE D):2,629 S.F. / 12,576 S.F. = 21% ALLOWABLE FLOOR:UNLIMITED RINCON HOMESCONTACT: KEVIN DUNN5315 AVENIDA ENCINAS, SUITE 200CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008T: 949-637-3254kdunn@rincongrp.com DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR: CIVIL 1 OF 5 TITLE SHEET LANDSCAPE L-1 TREE SURVEY PLANL-2 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLANL-3 LANDSCAPE LEGENDL-4 WATER CONSERVATION PLANL-5 WATER USE EXHIBITL-6 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY A3.1C BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE CA3.2C BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE CA3.3C ADU ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE C A3.1D BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE DA3.2D BUILDING ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE DA3.3D ADU ELEVATIONS RESIDENCE D 3 OF 5 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN4 OF 5 SECTIONS AND DETAILS5 OF 5 SECTIONS AND DETAILS 2 OF 5 PLANNING SITE PLAN ATTACHMENT 5 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 44 of 109 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS W 989796969 6 969695959595959494939393939392 9292 929292 92 929 291 91 9 1 91 91 91 9191919190 9 0 90 90 90 90909090 8989898989 89 89 89 8989 8888 888888 88 888888 88 8787 87 87 878787 87 878 7 87 8786 86 86 86 8686868 686 8686 86 85 85 85 85 85 85 8585858585 858 5 858484 84 84 8 4 84 84 8 4848484 84 84 83 8383 838383838383 82 82 8 2 82828 2 8 2 82 81818181818180 X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDENSE OVERGROWTHREQUIRES CLEARINGFOR A MOREACCURATE SURFACE DENSE OVERGROWTHREQUIRES CLEARINGFOR A MOREACCURATE SURFACE GS=80.8 GS=81.1 GS=81.0GS=79.1 GS=81.2 GS=79.1 GS=79.1 GS=81.3 GS=81.3 GS=82.8 GS=81.8 GS=82.7 GS=84.0 GS=84.7 GS=85.8 GS=90.5 GS=91.1 TW=85.53 TW=85.54 TW=85.59 TW=85.63 TW=85.68 TW=87.04 TW=86.99 TW=87.03 TW=88.37 TW=88.36 TW=89.70 TW=90.98 TW=91.68 TW=91.69 TW=90.43 TW=90.47 87.4 90.0 90.687.3 88.887.3 85.283.3 81.8 82.1 81.1 81.5 81.581.2 81.381.1 82.1 81.0 81.2 81.1 81.1 81.280.8 82.2 83.1 83.4 91.4 91.2 91.1 91.8 91.5 91.6 91.6 91.7 81.6 81.2 83.5 89.4 88.487.7 86.2 92.16 92.53 92.5592.20 92.23 92.61 92.6492.23 92.14 92.65 92.4492.15 91.85 91.59 92.10 TC=91.17 TC=92.21 TC=92.45 TC=92.74 FL=92.42 TC=92.60 FL=91.79 FL=92.01 FL=92.28 TC=92.89 FL=92.13 FL=90.69 SHIPPINGCONTAINER SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOESD SD SD SD SD SDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DSDSD SDSDSDS D S D SDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS S SSSSSSSSSSSSS S S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSS S S SSDSDSDSDS S S S W W W W S S S W W W W SD SD SDSDW W W W W W W W SD SD SD SD SD SD SD / / / / / //////////////////////////////////////////////XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXX84 85 86 87 83 88 899091 88 8990878684 8583 8281829291929291899088923 5 4 6 194.94'N 61°51'38" E 216.91' ( 61°23'37" E 216.88', R1) (N 61°21'15" E 216.87', R1)(194.95', R1)(N 28°38'05" W 292.28', R1)(194.80', R1)MAP 1681 ADAMS STREETN 61°51'44" E 216.98'N 28°07'09" W 292.48'194.93'N 28°07'09" W 702.55'N 28°08'21" W 292.41'(N 28°38'17" W 292.43', R1)91 92 RESIDENCE ATWO STORY2,722 SQ. FT. BIORETENTION TWOCARGARAGE499 SQ. FT.JADUABV.W/ DECK DRIVEWAY 20'-0"DRIVEWAY 10'-0"S.Y.S.B.10'-0"S.Y.S.B.20'-0"F.Y.S.B.30'-0"20'-0"R.Y.S.B.10'-0"S.Y.S.B.20'-0"R.Y.S.B. 30'-0" PARKING STAIR64'-8"11'-0"10'-0" 29'-6"34'-4"23'-2"16'-0"10'-0"2'-1"20'-0"24'-0"7'-6"11'-6" RETAINING WALL DRIVEWAY10'-0"S.Y.S.B.10'-0"S.Y.S.B.20'-0"F.Y.S.B. 20'-0"R.Y.S.B. PARKING 30'-10"10'-0"24'-0"RETAINING WALL 10'-0"S.Y.S.B.10'-0"S.Y.S.B.20'-0"R.Y.S.B. RESIDENCE DTWO STORY2,722 SQ. FT. TWOCARGARAGE499 SQ. FT.JADUABV.W/ DECK PARKING STAIR 16'-0"41'-2 1/2"16'-0"18'-0"6'-0"30'-10"LINE OF FIRE TURN AROUND 20'-0"F.Y.S.B.15'-0"LINE OF FIRE TURN AROUND512 SQ. FT.ADU 6'-0"32'-6"15'-9"32'-6"15'-9"55'-8"51'-6" 42'-6"64'-7"10'-0"6'-0"32'-6"15'-9"42'-6"17'-0"17'-1"10'-11"7'-5"11'-6"32'-6"15'-9"55'-8"TWOCARGARAGE 499 SQ. FT.JADUABV.W/ DECK STAIR 29'-6"34'-4"23'-2"RESIDENCE BTWO STORY2,722 SQ. FT. PARKING 10'-0"S.Y.S.B.RESIDENCE CTWO STORY2,722 SQ. FT. TWOCARGARAGE 499 SQ. FT.JADUABV.W/ DECK PARKING STAIR 16'-1"18'-0"6'-0"20'-0"F.Y.S.B.14'-11" PARKING 35'-6" 35'-6" PARKING D/W REF REF D/WW/D D/W REF 512 SQ. FT.ADU 512 SQ. FT.ADU 512 SQ. FT.ADU PARKING D/W REF REF D/WW/D SIDEWALKSIDEWALKREF D/WW/D D/W REF REF D/WW/D PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) 30'-0" CL CL CL CL CL8'-6"8'-6"20'-0" 8'-6"20'-0"8'-6"20'-0"8'-6"8'-6"20'-0" FRONT YARD SETBACK AREA:1,468 S.F.PAVED PARKING AREA: 438 S.F.30% MAX. OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS PAVEDPER CMC 21.44.060 1'-8" 1'-8" FRONT YARD SETBACK AREA:1,468 S.F.PAVED PARKING AREA: 438 S.F.30% MAX. OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS PAVEDPER CMC 21.44.060 BIORETENTION PORCH60 S.F. PORCH60 S.F. PORCH60 S.F. PORCH60 S.F. Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 APPROVED THIS IS THE APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP/SITEPLAN FOR PROJECT NO. PER CONDITION PLANNING DIVISION DATE ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE NO. OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A1.1 SITE PLAN A1.1SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" 5' 10'0 20'CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN N Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 45 of 109 D/W REF REF D/WKING SIZE BEDW/D PANTRY BEDROOM 1 CLOSET KITCHEN LIVING DINING STAIRS GARAGE STAIRS DECKABOVE JADUABOVE OPENTOABOVE12'-9"22'-0"6'-6"7'-0"3'-6"20'-0"20'-0" CLEANROOM BATH 1 CLOSET 11'-0"2'-10"11'-6" 17'-10" FIRST FLOOR1,379 SQ. FT. TOTAL HOME2,722 SQ. FT. KITCHEN LIVINGBEDROOM 1 CLOSET 15'-9"A.D.U.512 SQ. FT. BATH 1 UP 32'-6" 11'-6" @ RESIDENCE A10'-0" @ RESIDENCE D 11'-4"21'-2"45'-7" @ RESIDENCE A48'-7" @ RESIDENCE D3'-9"23'-2"11'-8"35'-6" EVSE READYPARKING STALL 6'-11" COVERED PORCH COLUMN (TYP.) FLOOR ABOVE 2'-11" 3'-0" COVERED PORCHSTRUCTURE ABOVE 1'-8"6'-3"6"6'-5"19'-8"16'-6" 4'-10"12'-6"4'-5"3'-3"3'-6"31'-7"17'-11"8'-0"3'-9"2'-3"8'-8"2'-3"9'-6"LEARNINGCENTER STORAGE 6'-0" UP 4'-11"4'-6"6'-8"2'-10"1'-0"3'-5"8'-4"13'-8"7"Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES A & D FIRST FLOOR PLAN N A2.1A RESIDENCESA & D FIRSTFLOOR PLAN A2.1A Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 46 of 109 KING SIZE BEDD W OPENCLOSETBEDROOM 3 MASTERBEDROOM HALLWAY STAIRS W/D REFCLOSETBEDROOM LIVING KITCHEN DECK GARAGEBELOWENTRYBELOWJADU499 SQ. FT. SECONDFLOOR1,343 SQ. FT. 2'-5"13'-2"11'-5"7'-2"3'-6"10'-11"2'-5"4'-5" BATH CLOSET BATH 2 MASTERBATH CLOSET2'-5"11'-0"14'-7"BEDROOM 211'-3"CLOSET STORAGE4'-7"13'-4"4'-11"4'-4"3'-9"LINEN 18'-9" DN.15'-9"32'-6" 11'-6" @ RESIDENCE A10'-0" @ RESIDENCE D 7'-6"25'-0"45'-7" @ RESIDENCE A48'-7" @ RESIDENCE D3'-9"12'-0"11'-8"35'-6"11'-2"9'-6"13'-2"17'-2"17'-11"8'-0"ADU BELOW 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0"14'-5"5'-5"3'-11"6'-7"3'-10"12'-2"3'-5"3'-3"2'-9"6'-6"3'-5"6'-5"3'-9"5'-7" 5'-8"5'-5"1'-3"11"2'-6"3'-0" LAUNDRY LEARNINGCENTER 1'-5"4'-2" DN. STAIRS 2'-6" Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES A & D SECOND FLOOR PLAN N A2.2A RESIDENCESA & D SECONDFLOOR PLAN A2.2A Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 47 of 109 9:129:12 6:126:12 9:129:129:129:129:129:121'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6" 2'-8" 1'-6" 1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6" 1'-6" RIDGE RIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGE LOW ROOF LOW ROOF 6:126:126:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:126:12RIDGE PV SOLAR ZONE 16'-9" FROM GABLE ENDPLANE TO ROOF LINE 6:126:129:129:12RIDGE 3'-0"3'-0"CRICKET 1'-6" 1'-6" Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES A & D ROOF PLAN N A2.3A RESIDENCESA & DROOF PLAN A2.3A Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 48 of 109 3 7 4 5 A BDCEF GHJK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1 1012 2 L D 34 57 ABD C EHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 L 4 3 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3A RESIDENCE AELEVATIONS A3.1A EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7615 SEA SERPENT KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 49 of 109 ADCE FHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L 3 4 57 A BD CEFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 345 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3A RESIDENCE AELEVATIONS A3.2A WEST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7615 SEA SERPENT KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' SOUTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 50 of 109 A D CG HK 9'-0"13'-8"612 1 34 6 A C D H K 9'-0"13'-8"6 12 34 6 ACDEHK 9'-0"13'-8"3471 612 A CD HK 9'-0"13'-8"1012 347 E Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3A RESIDENCE AADUELEVATIONS A3.3A EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7615 SEA SERPENT KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' WEST ELEVATION3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'SOUTH ELEVATION4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 51 of 109 3 7 4 5 A BDCEF GHJK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 LD 1 23457 ABD C EHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 LD 4 3 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3D RESIDENCE DELEVATIONS A3.1D EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C D E F KEYNOTES 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. G H MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE J K DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE DARK COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7615 SEA SERPENT LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7660 EARL GREY NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIM DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENT DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLES STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 52 of 109 ADCE FHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L 3 4 57 A BD CEFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 345 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3D RESIDENCE DELEVATIONS A3.2D WEST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C D E F KEYNOTES 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. G H MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE J K DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE DARK COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7615 SEA SERPENT LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7660 EARL GREY NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIM DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENT DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLES STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' SOUTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 53 of 109 A D CG HK 9'-0"13'-8"612 34 6 1 A C D H K 9'-0"13'-8"6 12 34 6 ACDEHK 9'-0"13'-8"3741 612 A CD HK 9'-0"13'-8"1012 E 347 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3D RESIDENCE DADUELEVATIONS A3.3D EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C D E F KEYNOTES 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. G H MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE J K DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW7069 IRON ORE LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7005 PURE WHITE DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE DARK COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7615 SEA SERPENT LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7005 PURE WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW7660 EARL GREY NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIM DECORATIVE PAINTED GARAGE DOOR - SW7615 SEA SERPENT DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLES STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' WEST ELEVATION3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'SOUTH ELEVATION4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 54 of 109 D/W REF REF D/W KING SIZE BEDW/D PANTRY BEDROOM 1 CLOSET KITCHEN LIVING DINING STAIRS GARAGE STAIRS DECKABOVE JADUABOVE OPENTOABOVE 12'-9"22'-0"6'-6"7'-0"3'-6"20'-0"20'-0" CLEANROOM BATH 1 CLOSET 11'-0"2'-10"11'-6" 17'-10" FIRST FLOOR1,379 SQ. FT. TOTAL HOME2,722 SQ. FT. KITCHEN LIVINGBEDROOM 1 CLOSET15'-9"4'-11"4'-6"6'-8"A.D.U.512 SQ. FT. BATH 1 UP 32'-6" 11'-6" @ RESIDENCE B10'-0" @ RESIDENCE C 11'-4"21'-2"45'-7" @ RESIDENCE B48'-7" @ RESIDENCE C3'-9"23'-2"11'-8"35'-6" EVSE READYPARKING STALL 6'-11" COVERED PORCH COLUMN (TYP.) FLOOR ABOVE 2'-11" 3'-0" COVERED PORCHSTRUCTURE ABOVE2'-10"1'-0"3'-5"8'-4"13'-8"1'-8"6'-3"6"6'-5"19'-8"16'-6" 4'-10" 12'-6"4'-5"3'-3"3'-6"31'-7"17'-11"8'-0"3'-9"2'-3"8'-8"2'-3"9'-6"LEARNINGCENTER STORAGE 6'-0" UP7"Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES B & C FIRST FLOOR PLAN N A2.1B RESIDENCESB & C FIRSTFLOOR PLAN A2.1B Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 55 of 109 KING SIZE BEDD W OPEN CLOSETBEDROOM 3 MASTERBEDROOM HALLWAY STAIRS W/D REFCLOSETBEDROOM LIVING KITCHEN DECK GARAGEBELOW ENTRYBELOWJADU499 SQ. FT. SECONDFLOOR1,343 SQ. FT. 2'-5"13'-2"11'-5"7'-2"3'-6"10'-11"2'-5" 4'-5" BATH CLOSET BATH 2MASTERBATH CLOSET2'-5"11'-0"14'-7"BEDROOM 2 11'-3"CLOSET STORAGE4'-7"13'-4"4'-11"4'-4"3'-9"LINEN 18'-9" DN.15'-9"32'-6" 11'-6" @ RESIDENCE B10'-0" @ RESIDENCE C 7'-6"25'-0"45'-7" @ RESIDENCE B48'-7" @ RESIDENCE C3'-9"12'-0"11'-8"35'-6"11'-2"9'-6"13'-2"17'-2"17'-11"8'-0"ADU BELOW 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0"14'-5"5'-5"3'-11"6'-7"3'-10"12'-2"3'-5"3'-3"2'-9"6'-6"3'-5"6'-5"3'-9"5'-7" 5'-8"5'-5"1'-3"11"2'-6"3'-0" LAUNDRY LEARNINGCENTER 1'-5"4'-2" DN. STAIRS 2'-6" Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES B & C SECOND FLOOR PLAN N A2.2B RESIDENCESB & C SECONDFLOOR PLAN A2.2B Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 56 of 109 9:129:12 6:126:12 9:129:129:129:129:129:121'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6" 2'-8" 1'-6" 1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6" 1'-6" RIDGE RIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGE LOW ROOF LOW ROOF6:126:126:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:12RIDGE PV SOLAR ZONE 16'-9" FROM GABLE ENDPLANE TO ROOF LINE6:126:129:129:12RIDGE3'-0"3'-0"CRICKET 1'-6" 1'-6" Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'RESIDENCES B & C ROOF PLAN N A2.3B RESIDENCESB & CROOF PLAN A2.3B Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 57 of 109 3 7 4 5 AEDCAB FGHJK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L D E 12 3 45 7 AE D CEBFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 D 3 45 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3B RESIDENCE BELEVATIONS A3.1B EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 58 of 109 A D CEFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L 3457 A ED CEHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 L 43 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3B RESIDENCE BELEVATIONS A3.2B WEST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' SOUTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 59 of 109 A D CGH K 9'-0"13'-8"5 12 3 4 6 1 AD CHK 9'-0"13'-8"612 3 4 6 7 ADCEHK 9'-0"13'-8"1012 3 47 A DCE HK 9'-0"13'-8"3 4 7 612 1 47 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3B RESIDENCE BADUELEVATIONS A3.3B EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE KEYNOTES NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORSG CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' WEST ELEVATION3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'SOUTH ELEVATION4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 60 of 109 3 7 4 5 ABDCE FGHJK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L 12 3 45 7 AB D CEFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 3 45 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3C RESIDENCE CELEVATIONS A3.1C EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE KEYNOTES G CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 61 of 109 A D CEFHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"1012 L D 3457 A BD CEHK 10'-0"9'-0"27'-1 1/2"612 L 43 6 7 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3C RESIDENCE CELEVATIONS A3.2C WEST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE KEYNOTES G CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' SOUTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 62 of 109 A D CGH K 9'-0"13'-8"6 12 3 4 6 1 AD CHK 9'-0"13'-8"612 3 4 6 7 ADCEHK 9'-0"13'-8"1012 3 47 A DCE HK 9'-0"13'-8"3 612 1 47 Date:9-28-20 Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Project: File: Revisions: 1 ADAMS RESIDENCES3745 ADAMS STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAADAMS STREET HOMES11-18-20 KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. 2888 LOKER AVE. EAST, STE 220 CARLSBAD, CA 92010 KIRK@KMARCHITECTSINC.COM 760-814-8128 CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 2 5-19-21 3 6-21-21 A3.1-3C RESIDENCE CADUELEVATIONS A3.3C EAST ELEVATION COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES 1.T.O.P. = TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. 2.F.F.E. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 3.ALL NOTES ARE TYPICAL. 4.ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS U.N.O. 5.ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6.ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY BUILDING PARAPET. 7.ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS PROVIDE WINDOW SURROUND TRIM THAT PROJECT 2" MIN. B A C DECORATIVE DARK COMPOSITE RAILING - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHT LIGHT COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE D E F LIGHT PAINT (ACCENT/ TRIM) - SW7009 PEARLY WHITE KEYNOTES G CLEAR RESIDENTIAL GLAZING WITH BLACK TRIMH MAIN BODY PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE ACCENT COLOR STUCCO PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULE A B PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING PER COLOR/ MATERIAL SCHEDULEE DECORATIVE DARK GARAGE DOOR - SW6993 BLACK OF NIGHTJ DARK GRAY COMPOSITE SHINGLESK PAINTED DECORATIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING - SW9149 INKY BLUE NATURAL WOOD TONE FRONT DOORS DARK PAINT (FASCIA) - SW7069 IRON ORE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SW7069 IRON OREL MEDIUM COLOR SAND FINISH STUCCO 20/30 - SW7660 EARL GREY 1 COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND 2 BUILDING ADDRESS LOCATION PER CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS DECORATIVE BLACK EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE LOCATION. 3 DECORATIVE EAVES AND FACIA 4 KNEE BRACES 5 WOOD COLUMNS 6 DECORATIVE WOOD ELEMENT (GABLE END VENT) 7 ACCENT MATERIALS (SEE COLOR/ MATERIAL HATCH LEGEND) 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'NORTH ELEVATION2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' WEST ELEVATION3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8'SOUTH ELEVATION4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2' 4'0 8' Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 63 of 109 From:Steve Linke To:Planning Cc:Jessica Evans Subject:9/1/2021 Planning Commission hearing Item 1: Adams Street Homes Date:Friday, August 27, 2021 3:38:18 PM Please distribute this to the Planning Commission and read it into the record at the meeting: The proposed development appears to include four 3,182 square-foot single-family home dwelling units, plus four 499 square-foot junior accessory dwelling units, plus four 512 square-foot accessory dwelling units. However, the Circulation impact related to General Plan compliance (Table E) only describes 40 average daily trips (or ADT), which only addresses the four single-family home dwelling units based on the standard SANDAG trip generation rate of 10 ADT per single-family detached residence. The other eight proposed dwelling units will have circulation and parking impacts independent of the single-family dwelling units, based on the fact that additional vehicles will be used by the additional residents. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate to include all of these additional dwelling units in the ADT calculation, for example at SANDAG’s trip generation rate of 6 ADT per apartment. That would result in a total trip generation of 88 ADT for the overall development. I would like to get answers to the following two questions: 1. Why are only the single-family dwelling units being used to calculate ADT for the overall development? 2. Will the traffic impact fee collected for this development reflect only the 40 ADT from the single- family dwelling units, or will it reflect an increased number for all of the dwelling units? Disclaimer: I am a member of the Traffic and Mobility Commission, but, because staff has chosen not to include our commission in the review of traffic impacts for development projects, I am commenting as an individual. Best regards, Steve Linke Carlsbad, CA CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 64 of 109 / / , August 31, 2021 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ms. Bui and Planning Commissioners, I live immediately north of the proposed development at 37 45 Adams Street and am writing to request you deny Coastal Development Permit CDP 2020-0043 as it is not compatible with the existing adjacent properties and the proposed plan does not take into consideration the natural topography of the site. The project is proposing a 2-3 foot high retaining wall along the property line between my house and the development, creating a building pad that is up to 8 feet higher than the existing grade of the site. As shown on section A-A on sheet 4 of the grading plan, and as noted on the landscape plans (6-foot max height wall/fence), the wall will have a·property line fence that is 3- 4 feet high above the wall. This means that anybody walking along the property or looking north from the 2nd story of the proposed building, will have a free unobstructed view into my backyard and into the bedrooms along the south side of my house. The developer should be required to lower the proposed building pads, and heights of the proposed buildings, making the development more consistent with the surrounding properties. Federal law requires vehicle headlights to be between 2 and 4-1/2 feet above the ground elevation. With only a 3 to 4 foot high property line fence, headlights from vehicles pulling into the most northerly parking spot will shine directly into the rooms on the south side of the my house. In _addition, if the Planning Commissioin allows the roof elevation of the building proposed to the south of my house to be 5 feet higher that is allowed by the underlying zone, it will drasfically reduce the amount of sunlight reaching my property. (existing elevatoin 84, proposed pad elevation 90.7, proposed top of roof elevation 118.9). Our property will be shaded by the proposed development tremendously and, as calculated below, premitting the roof elevation to be 5 feet above what is allowed by code will increase the time my home is in the shadow of the proposed structure by an 34 additional minutes. I have lived, raised my family, and periodically operated a successful home day-care center from my home on Adams for almost 27 years. The proposed development will infringe on my family's privacy and create a situation where the proposed building heights exceed those allowed in the R1 zone. Please do not approve the requested permit.· T~ ~ Cindy Esth 3725 Adams St. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 65 of 109 PS: It is also fairly dark on that portion of Adams Street and the neighbors have asked for an additional streetlight several times in the past. The existing lights are not standard city lights, they are attached to wooden poles and some are paid for by residents as part of the dusk-to- dawn lighting program. Whenever a development for the subject property is approved, please ensure they install a standard city streetlight as required by the municipal code. Solar Shade Calculator exhixit: Print Cflittact H~lp &Al)l Nore for Moun1PfonelslSateJllles Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 66 of 109 From:Dani Minkoff To:Planning Subject:Case Name: CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) - ADAMS STREET HOMES Date:Tuesday, August 31, 2021 7:18:40 AM To Whom It May Concern: We've been neighbors to 3745 Adams Street for nearly 6 years. We've seen and heard about the commotion between the lenders and prior residents. We are happy to see new developmenttake place where older, decaying homes were long overdue for a facelift. What we are not happy about is the number of ADUs proposed to be erected for each new property. We moved to Olde Carlsbad because it had and still has a great combination of bigcommunity-feel without being overcrowded. Taking ~1 acre and splitting it into 4 parcels magnifies the number of people that used to inhabit the property by a minimum of 4x. Addingin 2 additional ADUs per new site compounds that number to ~16x. There is already enough traffic on Adams Street due to the number of families attending St. Patrick's Catholic Churchand St. Patrick's Catholic School. With that background, here are our questions: 1. Why do you feel the need to allow for so much housing? What benefit do the 2 ADUsper property serve to the community? 2. How do you plan to address traffic control, with and without the ADUs? 3. Can we leverage the construction opportunity to provide a reasonable level of safety for our community? Currently, there are no speed bumps, no stop signs, no school zonespeed signs, and no designated crosswalks for pedestrians. Cordially, -- Dani Minkoff, CPA, MBA 3730 Adams StreetCarlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 522-4451dminkoff22@gmail.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 67 of 109 From:Don Neu To:Ronald Kemp Cc:Melissa Flores Subject:FW: FW: 9/1/2021 Planning Commission hearing Item 1: Adams Street Homes Date:Monday, August 30, 2021 7:42:26 AM For your information. From: Kevin Sabellico <kevin@kevinsabellico.org> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 5:12 PM To: Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com> Cc: Don Neu <Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov>; Jessica Evans <Jessica.Evans@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Re: FW: 9/1/2021 Planning Commission hearing Item 1: Adams Street Homes Steve, Gov. Code § 65852.2, subd. (f)(3) reads as follows: "A local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not impose any impact fee upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet. Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit." I hope this answers your question. Kind regards, Kevin On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 4:56 PM Planning <Planning@carlsbadca.gov> wrote: From: Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 3:38 PM To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Cc: Jessica Evans <Jessica.Evans@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: 9/1/2021 Planning Commission hearing Item 1: Adams Street Homes Please distribute this to the Planning Commission and read it into the record at the meeting: The proposed development appears to include four 3,182 square-foot single-family home dwelling units, plus four 499 square-foot junior accessory dwelling units, plus four 512 square-foot accessory dwelling units. However, the Circulation impact related to General Plan compliance (Table E) only describes 40 average daily trips (or ADT), which only addresses the four single- family home dwelling units based on the standard SANDAG trip generation rate of 10 ADT per single-family detached residence. The other eight proposed dwelling units will have circulation and parking impacts independent of Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 68 of 109 the single-family dwelling units, based on the fact that additional vehicles will be used by the additional residents. Therefore, it would seem more appropriate to include all of these additional dwelling units in the ADT calculation, for example at SANDAG’s trip generation rate of 6 ADT per apartment. That would result in a total trip generation of 88 ADT for the overall development. I would like to get answers to the following two questions: 1. Why are only the single-family dwelling units being used to calculate ADT for the overall development? 2. Will the traffic impact fee collected for this development reflect only the 40 ADT from the single-family dwelling units, or will it reflect an increased number for all of the dwelling units? Disclaimer: I am a member of the Traffic and Mobility Commission, but, because staff has chosen not to include our commission in the review of traffic impacts for development projects, I am commenting as an individual. Best regards, Steve Linke Carlsbad, CA CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. -- Kevin Sabellico He, Him, His (760) 814 - 7260 @KevinSabellico CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 69 of 109 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 70 of 109 From:Mark Kuhn To:Planning Subject:CDP2020-0043 Date:Friday, August 27, 2021 1:33:32 PM As the Pastor for New Song Carlsbad at 3780 Pio Pico, I have concerns about development project CDP2020-0043. I'm not an engineer, however in my opinion the design for the drainage runoff is inadequate and if developed as proposed will create a situation that will cause erosion and flooding and compromise the integrity of the wall along my easterly property line. I would like to object to this current design and ask for a redesign that does not impact our property. Please advise what can be done about this and that you are in receipt of this email. Blessings!Mark R. Kuhn Executive Pastor New Song Community Church Tel: 760-822-8906 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 71 of 109 August 31, 2021 Dear Planning Commissioners, I am writing to request that the Planning Commission deny the Coastal Development Permit application (CDP 2020-0043) or add a condition to the resolution limiting the height of the proposed buildings to thirty feet above existing grades which would normally be required for any non-discretionary building permit. The staff report states " ... five and a half to six and a half feet of fill will be required to raise the pad elevation to install utilities and drainage facilities." This statement is untrue and misleading. The site could easily be redesigned in a manner where the need for fill is limited and the project is more consistent and compatible with adjacent properties. The developer has stated the elevated pads are needed in order to adequately dispose of sewage and to comply with stormwater regulations; I disagree. The utility and drainage constraints are a result ofthe proposed design which creates horizon/ocean views and maximizes the size of the flat yards and number of structures proposed . Sewage The elevation of the existing sewer main in Adams Street is at an elevation of approximately 77.3 feet, approximately 14 feet below the grade of the road. As noted in my email correspondence to the developer, this depth would allow for a gravity sewer system to adequately serve homes on pads that were much closer to existing elevations. If this depth wasn't sufficient, the developer should request a variance from city's building official, allowing sewer laterals to have a slope of 1% as permitted by the Uniform Plumbing Code. The developer asked if the city would permit individual sewer pumps as part of the project's preliminary review application, indicating they were not opposed to installing pumps if needed. When it was approved, the Planning Commission Staff Report for the Tamarack Five Subdivision stated "The project also requires private sewer pumps in lieu of a gravity sewer ..... Gravity sewers would have necessitated raising the southern pad elevation 6' above existing grade which would have negatively impacted adjacent properties." As designed, this project will have negative impacts to adjacent property owners and should not be approved. If after redesigning the project it is determined individual sewer pumps are necessary for some of the buildings, the developer would be permitted install pumps. As with the Tamarack Five Subdivision, pumps are commonly used when sewage cannot be discharged via a gravity system. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 72 of 109 Stormwater In lieu of installing a gravity outlet pipe from the biofiltration basin, the developer could install an individual pump to discharge runoff. Package pump stations are an efficient and economic way of installing drainage systems where drainage by gravity is not possible. As an alternative to significantly altering the existing grades of the property, stormwater systems sufficient to support development of this parcel can be accomplished by redesigning the project. For example, smaller individual basins within HOA maintained areas could be created and strategically dispersed throughout the project. This might result in the loss of one of the ADU's or some of the propose flat yard areas. However, consider that the project as proposed exceeds the allowable density of the General Plan Land Use designation and, as designed, is not compatible and does not integrate with existing uses. Another solution for discharging stormwater could be securing an easement from an adjacent or downstream property owner. In speaking with neighbors north and west of the project, the developer made no attempt to look at this alternative design solution. There is no need to create large elevated flat building pads to mitigate stormwater runoff or to comply with stormwater regulations. Drainage: The Preliminary Hydrology Study overestimates the pre-development runoff, resulting in an undersized detention basin for the proposed development. Rather than calculate the pre- development time of concentration, the engineer chose to use a "minimum time per SDDHM". The study also used the wrong acreage for the pre-development calculations. Had the engineer used the appropriate acreage and calculated the time of concentration the resulting pre-development U100 would have been shown as .81 CFS, not 1.60 CFS. Because the pre-development runoff quantity was overestimated, the final design will need to account for additional retention and mitigation. In addition, the study states " ... once drainage passes through the adjacent wall {along the westerly property line} via weepholes or local low spots, it continues .... " The weepholes in the existing wall are not adequate to convey runoff coming from the proposed development. They are a common feature in wall construction included to relieve backpressure on the wall, they are not intended to convey runoff. The "local low spot" is the northwest corner of the property. Runoff will pond between the existing wall and the proposed wall causing it to be discharged in a concentrated fashion at the northwest corner of the property. This will result in post-development flows that are inconsistent with pre-development. Additionally, localized flooding, erosion, and deterioration of existing infrastructure will occur. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 73 of 109 In December 2020 and January 2021 I requested the developer redesign the project and lower the proposed building pads. The responses I received included "The existing topography doesn't allow an appropriate flat pad for our homes including the detached part of the homes." and "If we don't put the retaining walls in we would need to install a 2 to 1 slope and lose too much yard and frankly the site becomes undevelopable from our perspective". The responses clearly demonstrate that it is entirely possible to develop the property in a manner more compatible with the surrounding and adjacent properties, however, they weren't willing to consider any redesign. The project has been designed to maximize profit. Further, they didn't take me up on my offer to meet with them, their design team and/or engineer to discuss my concerns or thoughts on how the property could be developed with lower pad elevations. I've included a portion our email correspondence as an attachment. The proposed development does not take into consideration the natural topography of the site and it is not compatible with with the existing grade of adjacent and surrounding properties. Please deny the application for Coastal Development Permit No. CDP 2020-0043 as currently designed thereby denying the request to construct homes that exceed the zoning height restrictions. Thank you for your consideration, John Maashoff, P.E. 1075 Magnolia Ave. Attachments Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 74 of 109 Tom St.Clair <tstclair@rincongrp.com> To:corozam Wed, Jan 6 at 12:29 PM Appreciate your feedback. If we don't put the retaining walls in we would need to install a 2 to 1 slope and lose too much yard and frankly the site becomes undevelopable from our perspective. On a positive note, (if you live close by) we build a great product and strongly feel this will make the entire surrounding area better and boost home values in the area. Thanks, Tom St.Clair, Principal Rincon Homes m: 714.724.5647 rincon-homes.com On Jan 5, 2021, at 9:45 AM, coroza m <cOroza@yahoo.com> wrote: Tom, Thanks for the prompt response, I appreciate it. I am opposed to the development as currently designed. In reviewing the plans it appears to me the following elevations exist: Elevations of the existing topography on lots 3 and 4 is generally 81 -85 feet Existing pad areas of lots 3 and 4 is generally 82-83 feet The elevation of the existing sewer in Adams is 77.30 feet The sewer lateral from the ADU's on lots 3&4 (furthest point away from connection) is approximately 225 lineal feet away from connection point. This means the elevation of the sewer (@2%) will be at an elevation of 81.8 feet. Assuming a foot of cover on the lateral and adding another 6 inches to traverse the ADU 's the pad elevations could be at an elevation of 82.3 feet. I respectfully request you redesign the site such that the pads of lots 3 and 4 are lowered 5 feet, eliminating the need for importing so much soil and construction of a 6 foot retaining wall along the westerly property line. In addition, although of lesser concern for me, is the site drainage. I haven't yet reviewed the drainage study but the storm drain system appears to drastically alter pre-development site conditions. I'm happy to meet with you, your team and/or engineer to discuss further. Thank you for considering my request. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 75 of 109 ~L- On Thursday, December 10, 2020, 09:21 :29 AM PST, Tom St.Clair <tstclair@rincongrp.com> wrote: The existing topography doesn't allow an appropriate flat pad for our homes including the detached part of the homes. Regardless, we still would need to raise at least a couple feet for sewer drainage for appropriate fall. By the way, what was your name? Thanks for your question. Best, Tom On Thu , Dec 10, 2020 at 8:56 AM coroza m <cOroza@yahoo.com> wrote: Yes, thanks for responding . I'm an adjacent owner and have concerns about the amount of fill being brought in to the property and the proposed pad heights for the lots. In reviewing the plans the proposed residences could gravity sewer to the main in Adams from the existing site elevations, I wondered why the project is proposing to raise the existing grade of the property as much as is shown on the plans? Thanks in advance. On Monday, December 7, 2020, 05:00:25 PM PST, Tom St.Clair <tstclair@rincongrp.com> wrote: Hello, I understand you have some questions regarding 37 45 Adams? Best, Tom St.Clair, Principal Rincon Homes m: 714.724.5647 rincon-homes.com Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 76 of 109 The City of Carlsbad's Municipal Code (Code) section 21.10.050 limits the height of any building, with a minimum roof pitch of 3:12, to thirty feet. 21.10.050 Buildin g height. In the R-1 zone no building shall exceed a height of thirty feet and two stories if a minimum roof pitch of 3:12 is provided or twenty-four feet and two stories if less than a 3:12 roof pitch is provided for lots under twenty thousand square feet. Single-family residences on lots with a lot area of twenty thousand square feet or greater and within a R-1 zone and specifying a -20 or greater area zoning symbol shall not exceed thirty-five feet and three stories with a minimum roof pitch of 3:12 provided. {Ord. NS-718 § 7, 2004} The Code elaborates on the requirement by stating: "When non discretionary permits allow retaining walls, fill or other grading, which create a finished grade higher in elevation than the grade that existed prior to the retaining wall, fill, or grading, then building height shall be measured from existing grade. {Ord. CS-045 § Ill, 2009; Ord. NS-675 § 1, 2003; Ord. NS-204 § 2, 1992; Ord. NS-180 § 3, 1991; Ord. 9667, 1983; Ord. 9498 § 1, 1978; Ord. 9141 § 1; Ord. 9060 § 212}" The Code defines how a buildings height is to be measured from existing grade, or proposed finished grade, whichever is lower: 21.04.065 Building height. "Building height" is limited to the vertical distance measured from "existing grade" (defined: Section 21.04.160) or "finished grade" (defined: Section 21.04.161), whichever is lower, at all points along the "building coverage" (defined: 21.04.061) up to a warped plane located at a height, above all points along the "building coverage, 11 that is equal to the height limit of the underlying zone. All portions of the building shall be located at or below the building height limit, except as provided below. The Code allows for a building height to exceed the requirements listed above only if a discretionary permit is approved showing finished grades higher than existing grades. The Code requires that prior to approving a discretionary permit with finished grades higher than existing grades, the approvers shall consider the existing topography and compatibility with surrounding properties as noted below: 21.04.065 Building height 2. If a discretionary permit for a development or alteration of an existing development is approved, and such approval includes a grading plan that shows a finished grade higher in Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 77 of 109 elevation than the existing grade, then building height may be measured from the approved finished grade. In approving a finished grade through a discretionary permit that is higher in elevation than the existing grade, consideration shall be given to the natural topography of the site, compatibility with the existing grade of adjacent and surrounding properties, and the need to comply with required access, utility and drainage standards. The proposed project should not be approved as designed. The development as designed does not take into account existing topography and is not compatible with adjacent and surrounding properties. • The development as proposed is importing over 6,000 cubic yards of soil and creating pad elevations that are 5.6 to 8.7 higher than the existing grades on the property • The proposed pad elevations will be 3.5 to 6 feet higher than the adjacent properties to the north and south. • This project is proposing perimeter retaining walls of up to 4 feet in height to support the proposed pad elevations. As proposed the project retaining walls and 2:1 manufactured are 4 to 7 feet above existing grade. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 78 of 109 If the discretionary CDP permit is approved it will result in homes that are several feet higher than would otherwise be permitted in the Rl zone. This will result in privacy issues as well as reduce the amount of sunlight reaching my property. The proposed structure on a pad elevated 6' above the existing grade will result in a reduction of 28 minutes of direct sunlight at the southerly portion of my home. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 79 of 109 e-w HAHM./ D 0.:i1:. lnn-ca1t-1v,1 ,., / /,,,•'· /\ ,,, ... ~ ' Master Bedroom will be in the shadow of the proposed structure an additional 28 minutes if allowed to build on a Pad with an elevation of 87.5 ~rlnt ro,1t11a Ht-Ip It. API Horr. tor Mn<H1f Pt..m<:1!ol!,n\\•llit~ aZ: ·a·· ,:.<ad D t'a1·.11111-C.ubb.~I 111111111 Nov. 16, 2021Item #11 Page 80 of 109 From:Steve Linke To:Planning Subject:9/1/2021 Planning Commission hearing Item 1: Adams Street Homes (revised) Date:Friday, August 27, 2021 7:14:49 PM Commissioner Sabellico alerted me to a California regulation that answered the questions in my previous communication. Please retract that communication and distribute the following revised version to the Planning Commission and read it into the record at the meeting:   I normally only comment on larger proposed developments that have bigger impacts on traffic. However, the increasing frequency of conversions of single-family homes to multi-family dwellings and the proliferation of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are of concern. The current project proposes four single-family homes, each with both a detached ADU and an attached junior ADU, for a total of twelve dwelling units.   I am not opposed to these types of projects, but I feel they need to mitigate their traffic and parking impacts to the extent possible. Treated individually, they would not have a large impact, but there will be cumulative impacts as more and more of them are completed. Carlsbad’s traffic impact fee program will be undergoing review to potentially add projects intended to reduce vehicle usage (and vehicle miles traveled) to mitigate these types of impacts.   Although the future residents of the eight ADUs likely will use additional vehicles independent of those in the four main dwelling units, State regulations (65852.2(f)(3)(A)) prevent traffic impact fees from being charged for ADUs less than 750 square feet in area. However, a related State regulation (65852.2(a)(1)(A)) allows cities to designate areas where ADUs may be permitted based on the “adequacy of…traffic flow and public safety.”   I encourage the Planning Commission and City Council to explore the ability by ordinance to restrict ADUs in areas where they will add traffic to extremely congested street facilities, such as those that are failing the Growth Management Program vehicle performance standard, and to carefully consider lot divisions.   Disclaimer: I am a member of the Traffic and Mobility Commission, but, because staff has chosen not to include our commission in the review of traffic impacts for development projects, I am commenting as an individual. Best regards, Steve Linke CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 81 of 109 August 27, 2021 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Proposed subdivision at 37 45 Adams Street To whom it may concern: I am the property owner of 3764 Adams Street and would like to voice my opposition to the project as proposed. The project as proposed artificially elevates the building pads by importing soil and creating building pads that are well above the existing and adjacent grades. Every residential building's finished floor elevation, for properties accessing Adams Street from the west between Tamarack and Palm Ave, is lower than Adams Street. Photographs of each of these properties is included as an attachment for reference. The proposed project should be held to the same standard and the project should not be allowed to exceed the building height restrictions of the municipal code based solely on a discretionary action. The development as proposed is not compatible with the adjacent and surrounding properties and should not be approved as designed . Thank you for your consideration, Tony White C: Planning Commissioners Page 1 of 4 ECF D AUG 2 7 2021 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANN!NG DIVISION Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 82 of 109 3659-3667 Adams -First floor of buildings ~g feet below Adams Street 3647-3651 Adams -First floor of buildings ~6 feet below Adams Street Page 2 of 4 RECEf ED AUG 2 7 2021 CITY OF CARLSBAD P!_A~N 1NG D!V!S'GN Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 83 of 109 3043 Adams Street -Building ~5 feet below Adams Street 3725 Adams Street -Building ~4 _5 feet below Adams Street Page 3 of 4 AUG 2 7 20?1 CITY OF CARL~BAO P~A!\!~!!\!G !J!V1S!G'\l Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 84 of 109 3781 Adams Street -Building ~s feet below Adams Street Page 4 of 4 RFCF'J !ED AUG 2 7 2071 CITY OF CARLSBAD P'._P, '\!1\.1 I l\!G !J!\/!S1C . I Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 85 of 109 From:coroza m To:Planning; Jessica Evans Subject:Sept 1 PC meeting - CDP 2020-0043 Date:Wednesday, September 1, 2021 8:44:13 AM Attachments:PC letter.pdf Jessica,  Could you please request the first 3 pages of the attached are read into the record at this evenings PCmeeting.  If there is a time constraint, you can skip the sections under the Drainage section.  Thanks in advance. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 86 of 109 City Council Chamber 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Sept. 1, 2021 CALL TO ORDER: 3 p.m. ROLL CALL: Kamenjarin, Lafferty, Luna, Meenes, Merz, Sabellico, and Stine APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion by Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner Kamenjarin, to approve the July 7, 2021 minutes as amended. Motion carried 7/0. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA: None PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: Chair Meenes directed everyone’s attention to the slide on the screen to review the procedures the commission would be following for that evening’s public hearing. Commissioner Stine requested Item 3 be discussed first as he will need to recuse himself from Item 1 and Item 2. Motion by Commissioner Luna, seconded by Chair Meenes, to move the agenda order with Item number 3 going first, subsequently followed by Items 1 & 2. Motion carried, 7/0. 3.Planning Commission Meeting Time – Amend Planning Commission Procedures City Planner Neu introduced agenda item 3. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Stine asked for clarification as to why the city council adopted a 3 p.m. meeting time when virtual meetings became necessary again. City Planner Neu responded that work-from-home measures indicated to the city council that the public can still participate in virtual meetings held at 3 p.m. Additionally, the city council considered the length of time needed to properly discuss all scheduled items and decided an earlier start time was beneficial. Commissioner Stine asked if the public has provided feedback regarding a 3 p.m. start time for Planning Commission meetings. City Planner Neu stated there has not been any public comments submitted regarding a 3 p.m. start time. Commissioner Lafferty asked if public participation has increased due to virtual meetings. Exhibit 4 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 87 of 109 Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 1, 2021 Page 2 City Planner Neu stated that while data isn’t available to show whether public participation increased with virtual meetings, the public has been required to prepare and submit comments ahead of meeting start times which has resulted in a noticeable increase of public comments during the hearing. Chair Meenes, and Commissioner Sabellico commented that the Planning Commission should remain in line with City Council meeting hours. Commissioner Kamenjarin commented that a 3 p.m. start time has been beneficial and stated his support for a 3 p.m. start time. ACTION: Motion by Chair Meenes, seconded by Commissioner Sabellico, to adopt staff recommendation of retaining a 6 p.m. in-person start time, and continuing a 3 p.m. start time for virtual meetings. Motion carried, 5/2 (Commissioners Luna and Kamenjarin no). 1. CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) – ADAMS STREET HOMES - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map to allow for the subdivision of an approximately .97-acre lot into four parcels to construct a two-story, 3,182 square-foot single-family residence on each parcel. The project is located at 3745 Adams Street, within the Mello II Segment of the city’s Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is not located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332, “In-Fill Development Projects,” of the state CEQA Guidelines. City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Associate Planner Evans would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). DISCLOSURES: Commissioner Sabellico stated he visited the site and had a discussion with resident Steve Linke regarding ADU law in response to the public comment he submitted. Commissioners Merz, Luna, and Chair Meenes disclosed visiting the site. Commissioner Kamenjarin disclosed being familiar with the site. Commissioner Lafferty disclosed familiarity with the site and having received correspondence from a resident, John Maashoff stating opposition to the proposed development. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Sabellico asked why adjacent properties aren’t required to have elevated building pads if they are required for utility purposes. Engineering Manager Geldert clarified that elevated building pads are not a requirement and are proposed for this project for drainage and sewage flow. He explained that the drains that don’t have pumps are meant to flow with gravity. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 88 of 109 Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 1, 2021 Page 3 Commissioner Lafferty asked for further information regarding the 9 trees being removed at the front of the property. Associate Planner Evans responded that the 9 existing palm trees on Adams St. will need to be removed for widening the street and providing related improvements. She noted that Parks and Recreation has the trees listed as inventory only for maintenance rather than heritage or historic purposes. Additionally, the developer will need to apply for a removal permit from the Parks and Recreation department and replace the trees at a 2:1 ratio on the project site. Commissioner Merz asked for a summary of the response sent to John Maashoff who submitted a comment letter regarding the project. Applicant Tom St.Clair, Principal at Rincon Homes stated strong disagreement regarding the drainage calculations in Mr. Maashoff’s letter. He explained that the plan is consistent with the hydrology design manual in The City of Carlsbad design standards and has been approved by staff. He noted the BMP is designed to retain and drain water at the same rate which water is presently drained on the site, and so drainage quality will not be worse because of development. He added that they have worked with staff to design the site as low as possible to allow water to flow without pumping water and have done everything possible to appease neighbors. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Chair Meenes asked if there were any members of the public who wished to speak on the project, he opened public testimony at 4:05 p.m. Resident, Steve Linke commented that the current project needs to mitigate traffic and parking impacts to the extent possible. He noted that Carlsbad’s traffic impact fee program will undergo review to potentially add projects intended to reduce vehicle usage and vehicle miles traveled in order to mitigate parking impacts. State regulations 65852.2F3A prevent traffic impact fees from being charged for ADU’s less than 750 square feet in the area. However, state regulation 65852.2A1A allows cities to designate areas where ADU’s may be permitted based on the adequacy of traffic flow and public safety. He encourages the Planning Commission and the City Council to explore the ability to restrict ADU’s in areas where added traffic will further congest street facilities. Resident Tony White stated opposition to the project as it artificially elevates building pads well above the existing and adjacent grades by importing soil. He noted that every residential building accessing Adams St. from the west between Tamarack and Palm Ave. is lower and the proposed project should be held to the same standard. Additionally, the project should not be allowed to exceed the building height restrictions of the municipal code based solely on a discretionary action. Resident Cindy Estes requested denial of the proposed project as it is incompatible with existing adjacent properties and does not take into consideration the natural site topography. She stated that the retaining wall will have a property line fence allowing an unobstructed view into her backyard and the southern bedrooms in her home. As a result, the developer should be required to lower the proposed building pads to make the project more consistent with surrounding properties. Additionally, the proposed development will exceed building heights allowed in the R-1 zone. Residents Geoff Merzanis and Gina Severino requested denial of Agenda Item 1. They commented that the proposed elevated building pads are not compatible with the existing buildings within the neighborhood and will infringe on the privacy of adjacent properties. Approval of the project will create a situation where future occupants of the proposed project would have direct views into their backyard and bedrooms. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 89 of 109 Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 1, 2021 Page 4 Resident John Maashoff submitted comments asking the Planning Commission to deny Agenda Item 1. Or, apply a condition to the resolution to limit the height of the proposed buildings to 30 feet above existing grade. He stated that the site can easily be redesigned to be more consistent with adjacent properties. Additionally, utility and drainage constraints stated within the staff report are misleading. The developer should request a variance from the city to allow sewer laterals to have a one percent slope as permitted in the plumbing code. The staff report also states the project would require private sewer pumps in lieu of a gravity sewer. As gravity sewers will negatively impact adjacent properties, the project should be redesigned and the developer permitted to install pumps. Additionally, the project as proposed exceeds the allowable density of the general planed land use designation. Chair Meenes asked of there were any additional members of the public who would like to speak on the project. Seeing none, he closed public testimony 4:16 p.m. Applicant Tom St. Clair responded to public comments stating that sewer pumps are not recommended by city staff and building pad elevations are proposed as low as possible. He added that windows have been minimized on the North and South side of the buildings in order to maintain the privacy of existing neighbors. Parking has been made available for any ADU tenants should property owners choose to rent the spaces. Engineering Manager Geldert confirmed that the city does discourage the use of sewer pumps when possible. Pumps require a lot of maintenance, are more likely to break and will create great disturbance to property owners if broken. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Sabellico commented that based on the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the building pad elevations are understandable based on staff’s confirmation that sewer pumps are discouraged. Commissioner Lafferty stated concern for negative impacts on street traffic, minimal windows affecting natural heating and cooling opportunities, and potential destruction of natural habitats. She also asked if the property can include one central space designated for storing trash cans on site. City Planner Neu responded that a shared trash enclosure area isn’t required by the city however, the developer could voluntary agree to make such changes. He noted that some logistical issues will need to be assessed such as how to include space for trash trucks to access the property. He explained that the development site’s designation, according to the Habitat Management Plan, provides for the payment of an in-lieu fee to fund acquisition of additional habitat. The site is identified as habitat for the purpose of being subject to the habitat mitigation fee, not for identifying a CEQA impact. Regarding concerns surrounding noise, he stated the project is required to meet an interior noise level of forty-five decibels. Natural heating and cooling opportunities will not be affected by minimizing windows on the North and South facing walls of the proposed homes. Commissioners Merz, and Sabellico stated that the applicant has satisfied the concerns addressed by surrounding neighbors. They are satisfied with the project and the additional housing being added to Carlsbad. Commissioner Kamenjarin stated concerns over the proposed building heights and drainage. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 90 of 109 Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 1, 2021 Page 5 Commissioner Luna stated the project meets the standards and while she sympathizes with neighbors’ concerns, the developers have adequately made effort to satisfy such concerns. She stated support for the project. Chair Meenes stated support for the ADU’s included in the proposed project as they help alleviate Carlsbad’s housing needs. The drainage, building pad elevation, and traffic issues have been satisfied and explained by staff. He stated support for the project. Commissioner Lafferty stated concern that the applicant has not been amenable to concerns and requests made in the meeting discussion ACTION: Motion by Chair Meenes, seconded by Commissioner Luna, to adopt Resolution No. 7422. Motion carried, 5/1/1 (Commissioner Stine, recused and Commissioner Lafferty, no) . 2. PUD 2021-0001/SDP 2021-0002/CDP 2021-0003/MS 2021-0001 (DEV2020-0212) – GARFIELD HOMES – Request for approval of a Planned Development Permit, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit and Minor Subdivision to demolish an existing duplex and construct a three-unit, residential air-space condominium project on a 0.14-acre infill site located at 4008 Garfield Street, within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that this project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 “In-Fill Development Projects” of the State CEQA Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant impact on the environment. City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Senior Planner Harker would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). DISCLOSURES: Commissioners Lafferty, Merz, Kamenjarin, Sabellico, Luna and Chair Meenes have visited the site. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioner Lafferty asked why the site was not developed as a multi-family town home. Applicant Tom St. Claire, Principal at Rincon Homes responded that a buyer was already available for this property and the single-family home is proposed for that purpose. Additionally, the grade change of the site created an opportunity for the duplex unit. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Chair Meenes asked if there were any members of the public who wished to speak on the project. Seeing none, he opened and closed public testimony at 4:23 p.m. ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Luna, seconded by Chair Merz, to adopt Resolution No. 7421. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Commissioner Stine recused). Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 91 of 109 Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 1, 2021 Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS: Commissioner Luna suggested a commission workshop be added to next meeting agenda. CITY PLANNER REPORTS: City Planner Neu gave a brief update on the status of the Housing Element. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS: Assistant City Attorney Kemp commented that SB 9 and SB 10 have passed the legislature and are pending signature from the governor. SB 9 takes single family residential zoning and allows lots to be split for 2 units. Additionally, on-site parking requirements are reduced as a result of SB 9. SB 10 allows for high density projects, on sites identified by local governments, to forgo CEQA review. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Meenes adjourned the duly noticed meeting at 5:51 p.m. Corina Flores Corina Flores - Minutes Clerk Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 92 of 109 APPEAL FORM P�27 Date of Decision you are appealing: Sept 1, 2021 -Planning Commission Subject of the Appeal: Deu1e!orpmentc §eifu1ices Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760)602-4610 RECEIVED SEP l·O 2021 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BE SPECIFIC Examples: if the action is a City Planner's Decision, please say so. If a project has multiple applications, (such as a Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development, Minor Conditional Use Permit, etc) please list all of them. If you only want to appeal a part of the whole action, please state that here. Please see fee schedule for the current fee. CDP 2020-0043 / MS 2020-0004 (DEV 2020-0126) Adams Street Homes Reason(s) for the Appeal: PLEASE NOTE: The appeal shall specifically state the reason(s) for the appeal. Failure to specify a reason may result in denial of the appeal, and you will be limited to the grounds stated here when presenting your appeal. BE SPECIFIC How did the decision-maker err? What about the decision is inconsistent with local laws, plans, . or policy? Please see Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.54.140{b) for additional information (attached). Please attach additional sheets or exhibits if necessary. The facts and evidence presented to, and/or omitted from, the Planning Commission caused the commission to error or abuse their discretion whereby they approved building heights that exceed the height limitations of the underlying zone. The Planning Commission discretionarily approved the project with finished grades that are significantly higher than existing grades. If constructed as approved the project will have adverse impacts and will be in conflict with objective standards found in the Carlsbad Municipal Code. NAME (Print):. John Maashoff -------------------------------- MA I LING ADDRESS: PO Box 846 CITY, STATE, ZIP: Cardiff, CA 92007 TELEPHONE: 858-735-0022 EMAIL ADDRESS: cOroza@yahoo.com SIGNATURE: DATE: 09/10/2021 P-27 Page 1 of 1 Rev. 05/12 EXHIBIT 5 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 93 of 109 [ -?i 649019 CUSTOMER'S ORDER NO. I DEPARTMENT IDATEr-/ // cl 2 I "'I NAME �d," (t �S_jLD)/ ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP \. SOLD BY r QUANTITY 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 RECEIVED Bf... A-5805 T-46320/46350 Pu &x '€lf lY//1 Cl! I Cl::;,'--0-., "-\. , ]I CASH I :c.o.o. I CHARGE I ON. ACCT I MDSE. RETD. I PAID OUT ) ,.. DESCRIPTION PRICE AMOUNT �_d---L,. J /_.,.._ _ _JL£) ✓, St •!7 le_"�� v_.µ.. :::; J -;?lp I\ C/ I Joi :;2/ ,-, fl /.o_,r, f7 c· I? /h� Gm O � (\ (,I '')t)/ -=)d ID -'1 >!I� ✓;. /YJ/1 11 c. , A .,, KEEP THIS SLIP FOR REFERENCE 01-11 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 94 of 109 18"TD XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX88 8786868585858484848484838383 82 82 8282 8181818180 XXXDENSE OVERGROWTH REQUIRES CLEARING FOR A MORE ACCURATE SURFACE GS=80.8 GS=80.7 GS=81.1GS=79.7 GS=81.0GS=79.1 TW=85.53 TW=85.54 TW=85.59 83.3 81.8 82.1 81.1 81.5 81.581.2 81.381.1 82.1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXSDSDSDSDSDSSSSSDSD87 8684 85 83 8281EXISTING ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE EXISTING BLDGFOOTPRINT 3725 ADAMS STREET APPROX. LOT LINE EXISTING FENCETO REMAIN 16'~ 67'~ 5.3'1075 MAGNOLIA AVENUE PROP. SFR FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 PROP. ADU FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 APPROX. LOT LINE (81.9 FG)(82.8 FG) (82.6 FG) (~82.5 FF) EXISTING ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE APPROX. LIMITS EXISTING TREE / CANOPY AT 1075 MAGNOLIA AVENUE 83.3 FG 2:1 MAX PROPOSED PCC BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75; TYPE B DASHED LINE REPRESENTSAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE PL 88.2 FF 87.5 PAD 6.3' 16.3' 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE XFENCE PER SEPARATELANDSCAPE PLAN (82.5 FG) DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 1075MAGNOLIA AVENUE ~ 67' JUNE SOLAR ANGLE 80.8° DECEMBER SOLAR ANGLE 33.8° RIDGE APEX115.3 LINE OF SIGHT 34.6'27'-8"DASHED LINE REPRESENTSAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OFEXISTING GRADE PL ~83.0 FF~82.3 PAD 10.0'~ 67' LINE OF SIGHT JUNE SOLAR ANGLE 80.8° DECEMBER SOLAR ANGLE 33.8° RIDGE APEX 112.3 33.1' (82.5 FG)XEXISTING 6' FENCE 30'J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3339 3745 ADAMS STREET\CIVIL\DRAWING\EXHIBITS\3339-CV-EXBT-SECTIONS-SHADE.DWG PLSA 3339-01 SECTION VIEW - ALLOWABLE CONDITION PER ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE NOT TO SCALE SECTION VIEW - PROPOSED CONDITION NOT TO SCALEPLAN VIEW - 3745 ADAMS STREET + 1075 MAGNOLIA AVENUE SCALE: 1" = 10' HORIZONTAL EXHIBIT 6 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 95 of 109 N 61°47'58" E 216.98'ADAMS STREET 20' FYSB 20' RYSB 10'SYSB 20' FYSB 20'RYSB 20' RYSB 20' RYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 20' FYSB 20'FYSB 10'SYSB 30' 30' 60' N 61°51'12" E 216.89'N 28°07'09" W 194.93'N 28°08'50" W 194.96' LOT 4 GROSS = 12,576 SF LOT 2 GROSS = 8,576 SF LOT 1 GROSS = 8,568 SF LOT 3 GROSS = 12,572 SF 82' ±82' ±110' ± 110' ±82' ±110' ± 110' ±82' ±107' ±97' ±107' ±97' ±217' ± LOT 4 MAP 5478 LOT 7 MAP 5478 LOT 3 MAP 5478 APN: 205-270-43-00 APN: 205-270-27-00APN: 205-270-24-00APN: 205-270-23-00 APN: 205-270-12-00 15' ±15' ± 15' 30' 69' 4 4 16' 16' 4 30'31 15' 15' 15'1 1 56 2 2 6 5' 5' 13' 15'MAGNO LI A A V E.ADAMS ST . TAMAR A C K A V E.PIO P ICO DR . INTERSTATE 5 SITE 20 40 60 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 20' 020 LEGEND GENERAL NOTES SHEET INDEX REFERENCED DRAWINGS OWNER INFORMATION SUBDIVIDER INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION SITE ADDRESS TOPOGRAPHY BENCHMARK SITE ACREAGE EARTHWORK / PROJECT GRADING ACCESS ENGINEER OF WORK PREPARED BYPLAN VIEW - SITE LAYOUT SCALE: 1" = 20' HORIZONTAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS MS 2020-0004 / CDP 2020-0043 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP ADAMS STREET HOMES - 3745 ADAMS STREET MS 2020-0004 CDP 2020-0043 CAMERON ST. CLAIR FOR: RINCON HOMES INC. 5315 AVENIDA ENCINAS, SUITE 200 CARLSBAD, CA 92008PH: (888) 357-3553 3745 ADAMS STREET APN: 205-270-13-00 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TOPOGRAPHY OBTAINED BY FIELD SURVEY ON APRIL 27, 2020PREPARED BY: PASCO, LARET, SUITER & ASSOCIATES TYLER LAWSON, PE #80356 DATE ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACT 236 OF THUM LANDS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 1681, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTYRECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DECEMBER 9, 1915 MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER AS DOCUMENT NO. 2018-0397070. EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE / RIGHT-OF-WAY CENTERLINE OF ROAD EXISTING EASEMENTS PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJACENT LOT LINE GROSS:42,290 SF (0.971 AC) NET DEVELOPABLE:42,290 SF (0.971 AC) EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA:0 SF (0.000 AC)PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA (ONSITE): 20,050 SF (0.460 AC)PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA (ROW):1,214 SF (0.028 AC) PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA (TOTAL):21,264 SF (0.488 AC) DISTURBED AREA:42,290 SF (0.971 AC) CUT: 45 CY MAX CUT HEIGHT: 4.0 FTFILL: 6,300 CY MAX FILL HEIGHT: 10.0 FTIMPORT: 6,255 CYREMEDIAL: 630 CY VOLUME OF CUT (PER PRELIM GRADING PLAN): 45 CY VOLUME OF OTHER EXCAVATIONS: N/A TOTAL GRADED AREA: 42,290 SF (0.97 AC) 45 CY / 0.97 AC = 46 CY / ACRE *PROJECT DOES NOT PROPOSE TO GRADE, ERECT, OR CONSTRUCT INTO OR ON TOP OF A NATURAL ORMANUFACTURED SLOPE WHICH HAS A GRADIENT OF FIFTEEN PERCENT OR MORE, THEREFORE HILLSIDEDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PURSUANT TO C.M.C. 21.95.140(D)(2) DO NOT APPLY TO THIS PROJECT THESE QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FINAL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND DETAILING ADAMS STREET, A PUBLIC ROAD PREPARED BY:PASCO, LARET, SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 PH: (858) 259-8212 LAND USE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NUMBER OF LOTS 4 LOTS SEWER DISTRICT CITY OF CARLSBAD WASTEWATER DIVISION WATER DISTRICT CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT SCHOOL DISTRICT CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ELECTRIC SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC TELEPHONE AT&T CATV TIME WARNER CABLE DRAINAGE BASIN / HYDROLOGIC AREA AGUA HEDIONDA / LOS MONOS FIRE CITY OF CARLSBAD AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC GENERATED 40 TRIPS (4 UNITS * 10 ADT / DU RESIDENTIAL) PROPOSED DENSITY 4.0 DU / AC (RESIDENTIAL) PROPOSED # OF UNITS 4.0 UNITS SEWER GENERATION FIGURE 1 EDU / DU TOTAL SEWER GENERATION 4 EDU POTABLE WATER FIGURE 250 GPD / DU (RESIDENTIAL - MIXED USE) TOTAL POTABLE WATER (250 GPU / DU X 4 DU) = 1,000 GPU EXISTING ZONING ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) PROPOSED ZONING ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION R-4, RESIDENTIAL 0-4 DU/AC PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION R-4, RESIDENTIAL 0-4 DU/AC PRE-DEVELOPMENT PEAK DISCHARGE (Q100)1.60 CFS (TOTAL FOR SITE) POST-DEVELOPMENT PEAK DISCHARGE (Q100)3.71 CFS (TOTAL FOR SITE - UNMITIGATED PRE-DETENTION) 0.63 CFS (TOTAL - MITIGATED) 2-1/2 INCH BRASS DISK MARKED "CLSB-122" IN THE TOP OF NORTH CURB ON CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE, 0.1 MILES WEST OF HIGHLAND DR., AND WEST OF RAILROAD TRACKS AND 111 FEET WEST OF THE EAST EXIT TO CITY LIBRARY, PER ROS 17271 ELEVATION = 127.190 DATUM = NGVD 29 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TITLE SHEET 1 PLANNING SITE PLAN 2 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 3 SECTIONS AND DETAILS 4-5 CR 25954CR 26540 MAP 04438 MAP 05478 GROSS ACREAGE = 42,290 SF / 0.971 ACRES LESS BEACHES = 0 SF / 0 ACRES LESS PERMANENT BODIES OF WATER = 0 SF / 0 ACRES LESS FLOODWAYS = 0 SF / 0 ACRESLESS SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS = 0 SF / 0 ACRESLESS SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND HABITATS = 0 SF / 0 ACRESLESS LAND SUBJECT TO MAJOR POWER TRANSMISSION EASEMENTS = 0 SF / 0 ACRES LESS RAILROAD TRACK BEDS = 0 SF / 0 ACRES NET ACRES = 42,290 SF / 0.971 ACRES SLOPES AREA (SF / ACRES)DENSITY (DU)*DWELLING UNITS 0% - 25%42,290 SF / 0.971 ACRES 0-4 0.0 - 3.88 25% - 40%0 SF / 0 ACRES 0-4 040% +0 SF / 0 ACRES 0-4 0 *PER THE LAND USE ELEMENT - R-4: 0-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE TOTAL = 0.0 - 3.88 APPROVED THIS IS THE APPROVED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP / SITE PLAN FOR PROJECT NO ________________ PER CONDITION NO. ____________________ PLANNING DIVISION DATE ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE MAP 13868PM 00268 ROS 13434 THE RICKY & CHICO TRUST GOLDENWEST CAPITAL, LLC TRUSTEEP.O. BOX 10537NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 PROPOSED EASEMENTS / DEDICATIONS PROPOSED PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR STORM WATER TREATMENT FACILITY PURPOSES FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOTS 1-4 PROPOSED PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR CROSS-LOT DRAINAGE PURPOSES FORTHE BENEFIT OF LOT 2 PROPOSED PRIVATE RECIPROCAL ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOTS 3-4 PROPOSED PUBLIC EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS PURPOSES TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD PROPOSED PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR STORM WATER TREATMENT FACILITY PURPOSES FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOTS 1 PROPOSED PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT 1 VICINITY MAP SCALE: NTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TITLE SHEET FOR: ADAMS STREET HOMES3745 ADAMS STREET J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3339 3745 ADAMS STREET\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\3339-CV-TPM-01-TITLE.DWG 1 2 3 4 1 5 PLSA 3339-01 5 / 18 / 2021 5 6 Exhibit 7Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 96 of 109 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 97 of 109 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 24"TP 18"TC 18"TD 18"TD 18"TD 12"TD 12"TD XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS W 92 9292 929292 92 929291 91 91 91 91 91 91919191 90 9090 90 90 90909090 89898 9 8989 89 89 898989 8888 8888 88 88 888888 88 8787 87 87 878787 87 878 7 87 878686 86 86 8 6 86868 686 8686 86 85 85 85 85 85 85 8585858585 8585 858484 84 84 8 4 84 84 8 484848484 84 83 8383 8383 8383838383 82 82 82 828282 82 82 8181818181818 1 8080 X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDENSE OVERGROWTH REQUIRES CLEARING FOR A MORE ACCURATE SURFACE DENSE OVERGROWTH REQUIRES CLEARING FOR A MORE ACCURATE SURFACE SHIPPING CONTAINER SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGSD SD SD SD SD SDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSD SDSDSDS D S D SDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS S SSSSSSSSSSSSS S S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS S S S S S S SSDSDSDSDS S S S W W W W S S S W W W W SD SD SDSDW W W W W W W W SD SD SD SD SD SD SD / / / / / //////////////////////////////////////////////XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXGF = 91.7GF = 90.7GF = 87.5GF = 87.5PROP. ADU FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 N 61°47'58" E 216.98' N 61°51'12" E 216.89'N 28°07'09" W 194.93'N 28°08'50" W194.96'APN: 205-270-13-00 PROP. ADU FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 PROP. ADU FF = 92.4 PAD = 91.7 PROP. SFR FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 PROP. SFR FF = 92.4 PAD = 91.7 PROP. SFR FF = 88.2 PAD = 87.5 PROP. SFR FF = 91.4 PAD = 90.7 PROP. ADU FF = 91.4 PAD = 90.7 5' 20' TO TC 10' 18' 5' 16' 10.0' 10.0' 8.5' 8.5' 10'SYSB 20'FYSB 10'SYSB 10'SYSB 20' RYSB 2.0% 2.0% 9.7% 9.7% 6.0%1.0% 2.0% 10.0% 2.0% 2.0% 9.7% 9.7% 4.0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0% 9.7% 9.7% 4.0% 6.0%2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 11.0% 10.0% 6.0% 6.0% BMP 1 ~ 85.5 AREA = 700 SF 2.0% 2.0% 4.0% 1.0% 1.0% 4.0% 2.0%6.0% 6.0%ADAMS STREETAPN: 205-270-43-00 2:1 FILL SLOPE 2:1 FILL SLOPE 2:1 FILLSLOPE8.0% 10.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%2.0% 92.37 FS 92.45 FS 92.15 FS 92.1 FS 91.0 FS 91.3 FS (92.53 FS) (92.6 FS) (92.65 HP/ FS) (92.1 FS) (91.2 TC) (90.7 FL) EX. SEWER MH (92.5 RIM) (77.5 IE) 92.7 FS 92.75 FS 92.3 FS / HP 93.0 FS 93.1 FS 91.65 TG 89.7 IE 91.6 FS 91.9 FS PL (85.6 TW) (80.95 TW@FG) (79.1 BW@FG) (85.7 TW)(81.35 TW@FG)(80.0 BW@FG) (80.65 FG/ LP) 92.55 FS 92.5 FS 89.8 FS 89.8 FS 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE 87.5 TOPOF SLOPE 88.2 FS87.1 TG86.1 IE (89.7 FG)90.7 TW (87.7 BW@FG)88.7 TW (86.0 BW@FG)(84.1 FG)(82.7 FG) (81.1 FG) (85.65 TW)(81.33 TW@FG) (79.1 BW@FG) (85.7 TW) (82.75 TW@FG) (80.8 BW@FG) (82.73 FG)(84.0 FG)90.0 TW (86.0 BW@FG)(84.75 TW@FG) (83.85 BW@FG) 88.3 FG 89.9 FG 89.9 FS 88.2 FS 87.8 FS 88.0 FS 87.7 FS 87.5 FL/HP 91.7 TOP OF SLOPE 91.7 TOP OF SLOPE 90.7 TOPOF SLOPE R = 28' R = 28' EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING 1 1/2" H.P. GAS MAIN EXISTING 8" VCP SEWER PER DWG 140-10A EXISTING 8" CICLWATER MAIN PER DWG 140-10 (81.1 TW@FG) (79.7 BW@FG) 90.6 FS 87.5 TW 87.5 BW84.0 TW 81.5 BW 84.0 TW 82.0 BW 87.5 TW 87.5 BW 88.0 TW(85.0 BW) EXISTING DWY TO REMAIN 84.0 TW(81.5 BW@FG) LIMIT OF ROOF OVERHANG (TYP.) 84.0 TW (81.5 BW@FG) 84.0 TW(81.5 BW@FG) (85.5 TW) (80.7 TW@FG) (80.7 BW@FG) 84.0 TW 81.5 BW@FG (91.0 TW)91.0 BW 90.7 TW87.5 BW (90.51 FG) (91.0 TW)(88.9 TW@FG)(86.1 BW@FG) 89.0 TW(85.0 BW) 91.7 TW(88.9 BW@FG) (92.7 TW) (90.5 TW@FG) (87.3 BW@FG) 91.7 TW87.5 BW~85.0 TF LIMIT OF ROOF OVERHANG(TYP.) LIMIT OF ROOFOVERHANG(TYP.) EMERGENCYVEHICLE TURNAROUND 87.7 TC 87.2 FL 90.6 TG88.1 IE 85.5 IE 90.0 TG 86.7 IE 90.6 TG 87.8 IE 90.4 TG 87.4 IE 91.4 FS 90.7 TW90.7 BW 90.7 HP 83.5 FL 87.4 HP 87.5 FG 87.4 HP 87.5 FG 87.7 TC 87.2 FL 87.1 TG86.1 IE 88.0 FS1.0%87.5 FG 91.1 TG 88.55 IE2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%1.0%4.0% 4.0% 90.7 TW 88.0 BW LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 88.2 FS 87.7 FS 87.5 FG 87.1 FL 86.8 TG 86.1 IE1.0%1.0%87.5 FG 87.5 FG 87.1 FL 1.0% 87.5 FG 86.9 TG 86.3 IE 3.0% 88.1 FS 88.0 FS 87.3 TG 85.9 IE 87.3 HP 86.9 TG86.1 IE87.5 FG 3.3%87.5 FG 87.3 TG85.7 IE 87.0 TG 85.6 IE 87.5 FG 87.9 TC87.4 FL 87.5 FG 87.9 FS 87.8 FS 87.6 FS 2.3% 87.8 TG86.5 IE 5'90.4 TG86.9 IE 90.1 TG88.0 IE 90.0 TG 89.2 IE 90.7 FG 90.2 FL 90.7 TOP OF SLOPE 90.7 FG 90.4 FL 90.7 FG 90.7 FG 91.0 FS 90.7 FG 90.7 FG90.6 HP 90.4 TG 87.5 IE 10'SYSB90.6 HP 90.7 HP 91.3 FS 91.2 FS 90.7 FG 90.4 TG87.7 IE 90.6 TG88.0 IE 90.7 FS 91.1 FS 1.0% 90.8 FS 91.8 FS 4.5' 91.5 FS 5.5' 4.5' 91.0 TG 88.4 IE 91.2 TG 88.3 IE 91.7 TW87.5 BW 91.7 HP 91.3 TG87.9 IE 91.7 FG 91.7 FG 91.4 FL 91.4 TG88.1 IE 91.4 TG 89.2 IE 91.4 TG88.75 IE 91.7 FG 91.7 FG91.6 HP 81.5 IE (81.2 FG) 84.5 TG; 82.0 IEUNMITIGATEDQ100 = 2.85CFS; MITIGATED Q100 = 0.62CFS 91.7 HP 91.7 HP 91.4 TG89.6 IE 91.7 FG 92.3 FS 91.7 FG 92.2 FS 20' FYSB 91.4 TG 89.3 IE 91.6 TG 88.0 IE 92.0 FS 91.7 FS 91.6 FS 92.9 FS 93.0 FS92.6 FS 91.6 FS 92.7 FS 91.6 TG90.0 IE91.8 FS 4.5' 5' 91.4 FS 91.8 FS 91.7 FG 91.7 FG1.0%1.0%1.0 % 88.2 FS 87.9 FS 86.8 TG 86.1 IE 87.5 FG 87.5 FG 87.0 FL 87.5 FG 1.0%1.0% 88.3 TC87.8 FS 87.3 TG86.4 IE 88.1 TC 87.6 FS 2. 3% 87.5 FG 88.1 FS 88.0 FS 87.5 FG 87.5 FG @ TOP OF SLOPE 87.3 TG 86.25 IE 87.7 FS 87.0 TG86.2 IE 87.6 HP 87.5 FS 87.9 TC87.4 FL 84 85 86 87 83 8889909188 89 90 87 8684 85 83 82818292PROPOSED 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE@1.0% MIN (TYP.) PROPOSED 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE @1.0% MIN (TYP.) 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 81.5 IE 87.0 TG82.5 IE 4 13 85.5 IE 85.5 IE 3 3 3 5 PROPOSED 4" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE @ 9'O.C. (TYP.) TO OUTLETTHROUGH WALL; 81.7 IE PROPOSED 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE @1.0% MIN (TYP.) PROPOSED 6" PVCSTORM DRAIN PIPE@1.0% MIN (TYP.) PROPOSED 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE@1.0% MIN (TYP.) PROPOSED 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE @1.0% MIN (TYP.) 4 4 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 8 9 6 6 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10'SYSBPROPOSED TREE WELL PER DETAILS SHEET 5 PROPOSED TREE WELL PER DETAILS SHEET 5 BEGIN PROPOSED PCCCURB & GUTTER PERSDRSD G-02. MATCH TOEXISTING ASPHALT; TC=93.0; (FL=92.5) 20' FYSB 10'SYSB 20'RYSB 20' RYSB 10'SYSB 20' FYSB 10'SYSB 20' RYSB 90.5 TW 90.0 BW 91.7 TW91.7 BW 88.5 TW(84.5 BW) 24' 20' 24'PROPOSED 24' PCC DRIVEWAY PER SDRSD G-14A PROPOSED 20'PCC DRIVEWAY PER SDRSD G-14A PROPOSED 24' PCC DRIVEWAY PER SDRSD G-14A PROPOSED 4" PVC SEWER LATERAL PER CITY OF CARLSBAD S-7;(77.30 IE) PROPOSED 4" PVCSEWER LATERAL PERCITY OF CARLSBAD S-7;(77.25 IE) PROPOSED 4" PVC SEWER LATERAL PER CITY OF CARLSBAD S-7; (77.51 IE) PROPOSED 4" PVC SEWER LATERAL PER CITY OF CARLSBAD S-7; (76.95 IE) PROPOSED PCCCURB & GUTTERPER SDRSD G-02 PROPOSED PCC CURB & GUTTER PER SDRSD G-02 MATCH TO EXISTING 6" PCC CURB & GUTTER; (TC=91.3); (FL=90.8) 4.5' FULL-WIDTH 2" AC GRIND & OVERLAY FULL-WIDTH 2" AC GRIND & OVERLAY EXISTING WATER SERVICE & METER TO BE REMOVED& REPLACED 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 EXISTING WALL & FENCE TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED PCC CURB PER SDRSD G-01 PROPOSEDPCC CURB PERSDRSD G-01 87.9 TC 87.4 FL 87.7 RIM 81.1 IE 87.7 RIM 81.2 IE 12 12 EXISTING FENCE TO BE REMOVED CB BAAC DD 9192929189908892.71 RIM 78.1 IE 92.74 RIM78.2 IE 9292.1 TW 92.1 BW 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 3 AREA = 275 SF 4.0'9 9 BACKFLOW (TYP.) 3: 1 3:1 3:1 3:1 3 87.0 TG 83.0 IE5 6" X 24" RAISED PCC SILL TO CONVERT RUNOFF TO SHEET FLOW 6" X 24" RAISED PCC SILL TO CONVERT RUNOFF TO SHEET FLOW BMP 2 ~ 86.0 DEEPENED FOOTING (TYP.) DEEPENED FOOTING (TYP.) 88.2 FS 2.0% 2.0%88.2 FS 87.5 FG 11.5' 92.4 FS 91.7 FG 2.0% 2.0% 91.7 FG TURF TURF TURF 88.2 FS 87.5 FG2.0% 2.0% 9 9 88.2 FS 2.0% 2.0% 91.4 FS 91.4 FS FENCE PER SEPARATE LS PLAN (TYP.) FENCE PER SEPARATE LS PLAN (TYP.)3:1 2' 6' 3.3' 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT PROPOSEDSAWCUT LINE PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT PROPOSED SAWCUT LINE 13 13 UNMITIGATED Q100 = 0.89CFS; MITIGATEDQ100 = 0.01CFS 84.0 TG 81.7 IE 8 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 81.5 IE 3 81.5 IE 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 84.0 RIM 81.7 IE 8 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 87.5 FG 81.7 IE 81.7 IE 91 92 (82.6 FG) 87.1 RIM82.6 IE 84.0 RIM 81.7 IE 8(81.5 FG) 87.5 TOP OFSLOPE 87.5 FG 3.0' 2'87.5 FG87.5 FG (81.5 FG) (81.5 FG) (80.7 FG) (81.0 FG) (81.1 FG) (81.2 FG) APPROX. LOCATION ROOF DOWNSPOUT 87.5 FG 4.0' 4.0' 4.0' 8 90.7 TW(88.5 BW@FG)89.3 TW (87.0 BW@FG) 90.7 FG 91.4 FS 92.4 FS 91.7 FG 92.4 FS 91.7 HP 1.0% 90.7 FG 2.0%91.7 TOPOF SLOPE 11.5' 90.7 HP 87.5 TW 85.5 BW 87.5 TOPOF SLOPE 5.0%1.0% 88.2 FS 87.5 FG 88.2 FS EE 3.0' 6' 3.4' 4.0' 4.0' 87.8 TC87.3 FS 88.5 TC 88.0 FS PROPOSEDDEEPENED EDGE PROPOSED DEEPENED EDGE PROPOSED DEEPENED EDGE FENCE PER SEPARATE LSPLAN (TYP.) ADAMS STREET HOMES3745 ADAMS STREET PLSA 3339-01 10 20 30 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 10' 010 X X X W W W S S S G G G W W S S PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN FOR: J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3339 3745 ADAMS STREET\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\3339-CV-TPM-03-PGP.DWG LEGEND CONSTRUCTION NOTES S PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT LOT LINE CENTERLINE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT PROPOSED SETBACK PROPOSED EASEMENT PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED GRADING LIMIT PROPOSED FLOW LINE PROPOSED DRAINAGE ARROW PROPOSED 6" PVC DRAIN PIPE PROPOSED 8" PVC DRAIN PIPE PROPOSED RIP RAP PROPOSED BMP PROPOSED SAWCUT PROPOSED PCC CURB & CUTTER PROPOSED PCC CURB PROPOSED HARDSCAPE EXISTING RETAINING WALL PROPOSED MASONRY RETAININGWALL PER SDRSD (SEE NOTE SHT3) PROPOSED AC GRIND & OVERLAY PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT PROPOSED TRENCH RESURFACING PROPOSED FENCE EXISTING FENCE EXISTING WATER MAIN EXISTING SEWER MAIN EXISTING GAS MAIN PROPOSED 1" WATER SERVICEAND METER PER CMWD W-3A WITH 1" BACKFLOW PER CMWD W-20 PROPOSED 4" PVC SEWER LATERAL PROPOSED PCC DRIVEWAY PER SDRSD G-14B SD SD 3 5 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 5 10 11 12 13 14 15 PROPOSED MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-03 PROPOSED PCC BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75; TYPE B PROPOSED RIP RAP ENERGY DISSIPATER PER SDRSD D-40;ROCK CLASS = No. 2 BACKINGT=1.1 FT PROPOSED 8" PVC STORM DRAINPIPE PROPOSED 36" x 36" BROOKS BOX PROPOSED 12" x 12" BROOKS BOX PROPOSED 6" TRENCH DRAIN BY NDS OR APPROVED EQUAL PROPOSED 6" STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT WITH TRAFFIC-RATEDLID PROPOSED 6" AREA DRAIN BY NDS OR APPROVED EQUAL PRPOSED TRENCH RESURFACING W/ AC PAVMENT PER CITY OF CARLSBAD GS-25, GS-26, & GS-27 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVEDPER SEP. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT PROPOSED 4" SEWER CLEANOUTW/ 12" CAST IRON LID PER CITY OF CARLSBAD S-6 PROPOSED 8" SOLID-WALL PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE ALONG WESTERN RETAINING WALL; CONNECT 4-INCH PVC PIPE AT 9' O.C. TO PERFORATED PIPE TODISCHARGE THROUGH RETAININGWALL; 81.7 IE 8" SOLID-WALL PVC CALTRANS SIGHT DISTANCE / VIEW CORRIDOR PER CALTRANS HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL AND CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARDS MODIFIED CUT OFF WALL PER DETAIL SHEET 4 MS-2020-0004 CDP-2020-0043 9 WATER SERVICE NOTE: SERVICE LINE BETWEEN METER BOXLOCATION AND BACKFLOW PREVENTER TO BE SLEEVED IN SCH40 PVC AND EMBEDDED WITH 2" OF CONCRETE PER CMWD X X X DEEPENED FOOTING NOTE: BOTTOM OF FOOTING FOR RESIDENCES AND RETAINING WALLS ADJACENT TO BMP'S SHALL EXTEND MINIMUM 1-FT BENEATH FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION OF BMP PER GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER RECOMMENDATIONS ROOF DOWNSPOUT NOTE: ROOF DOWNSPOUT LOCATIONS ASSHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY; LOCATIONS TO BE VERIFIEDBY MEP ENGINEER DURING BUILDING PERMIT PHASE Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 98 of 109 88.2 FF87.5 PAD 83.3 FG PROPOSED PCC WALKWAY PROPOSEDPCC WALKWAY 3:1 3:12:1 MA X 84.0 FG 2:1 BMP BASIN 85.5 FG PROPOSED PCCBROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75; TYPE B EXISTING RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN PROPOSED PCC BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75; TYPE B DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF EXISTING GRADE PLPL PL 88.2 FF87.5 PAD 30.0' PROPOSED DRAINAGE EASEMENT 6.3' 16.3' 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE 5.8' 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE 16.4' PROPOSED BIOFILTRATION BASIN W/ PARTIAL RETENTION PER DETAIL THIS SHEET ~1' MAX ENGINEERED FILL MATERIAL BETWEEN BASIN BOTTOM AND NATIVE MATERIAL SELECTIVELY GRADED PER GEOTECH RECOMMENDATION TO PROVIDE RELIABLE INFILTRATION PROPERTIES LOT 4 LOT 3 6" PVC OUTLETPIPE FROMBMP 2; 82.7 IE 1:1 INFLUENCE LINE FROM BUILDINGFOUNDATIONXFENCE PER SEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLAN FENCE PER SEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLAN XPROPOSED DEEPENED EDGE (TYP.)XXFENCE PER SEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLANS FENCE PERSEPARATELANDSCAPE PLANS PROPOSED 4" PVC PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL; 79.8 IE PROPOSED MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-03**; 87.3 TF EXISTINGRETAINING WALLTO REMAIN PROPOSED MASONRY RETAININGWALL PER SDRSD C-03**; LOWERFOOTING TO ENSURE WALL DOES NOT SURCHARGE (1:1 INFLUENCE LINE) ADJACENT FOOTING; ~85.7 TF PROPOSED PCC PARKINGPROPOSEDPCC WALKWAY PROPOSED PCC DWY DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED 4" PVC PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL; 79.9 IE PL PL 90.7 TW (87.7 BW) 91.7 TW (88.9 BW)92.4 FF 91.7 PAD 2:1 91.4 FF 90.7 PAD PLPL 20.0' 5.0' 5.0' 14.9' 4.0' 10.0' 10.0' 14.9' 8.5' LOT 2 LOT 1 PLPANHANDLE LOT 4 15.0' 15.0' PANHANDLE LOT 3 0.3'XXFENCE PER SEPARATE LS PLAN (TYP.) 88.2 FF 87.5 PAD 91.4 FF 90.7 PAD PROPOSED 4" THICKPCC SIDEWALK PER SDRSD G-7 PROPOSED TREE WELL PER PLAN AND PER DETAIL SHEET 4 PROPOSED MASONRYRETAINING WALL PERSDRSD C-03**; 81.0 TF PROPOSED 6"TRENCH DRAIN;87.3 TG85.9 IE PROPOSED PCC DWY PL DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE 2:1 PL 2:1 TOP OF SLOPE; 90.7 FG84.0 TW(81.5 BW) PL 7.0' 9.7' 2.7' 38.9' 90.7 BOTTOM OF SLOPE ADAMS STREET LOT 2LOT 4 PROPOSED 8" HDPE SOLID-WALL PIPE RETAINING WALL BACKFILL & SUBDRAIN 2:1 87.5 FGXFENCE PERSEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLAN BMP BASIN 85.5 FG PROPOSED BIORETENTION BASIN PER DETAIL THIS SHEET EXISTING OFFSITE RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN PROPOSED MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-03**; 80.7 TF PROPOSED 4" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE TODISCHARGE THROUGH RETAINING WALL; CONNECT4" PVC PIPE @ 9' O.C. TO 8" SOLID-WALL PIPE RUNNING LENGTH OF PROPERTY LINE; 81.5 IE; UNMITIGATED Q = 2.85CFS; MITIGATED Q = 0.89CFS 84.0 TW (81.5 BW) PL PROPOSED 2' WIDE X 100' LONG RIP RAP PER SDRSD D-40 3:1 2.0' PROPOSED 90-FT LONG 8" SOLID-WALL HDPE PIPE TO EXTEND HORIZONTALLY FROM BOTH SIDES OF BROOKS BOX; 81.7 IE PROPOSED 12" X 12" BROOKS BOX 1.7' PROPOSED 8" PVC EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PIPE OUT OF CATCH BASIN EXISTING GRADE DRAINAGE TO PASS THROUGHEXISTING WEEP HOLES ORAROUND WALL AS IT DOES INTHE EXISTING CONDITION ~1'-1.5' MAX ENGINEERED FILL MATERIAL BETWEEN BASIN BOTTOM AND NATIVEMATERIAL SELECTIVELY GRADED PERGEOTECH RECOMMENDATION TO PROVIDERELIABLE INFILTRATION PROPERTIES PROPOSED 6" X 24" PCC SILL / SPLASH WALL 6" PVC OUTLET PIPE FROM PERMAVOIDMODULE SYSTEM TO CONNECT TO OUTLET STRUCTURE W/ ORIFICE PLATE 2:1 87.5 FGX FG = 85.5 3:13:1 36" X 36" BROOKSBOX; 87.0 TG 6" FREEBOARDAND CONVEYANCEABOVE RISER PLANT MIX PER LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PLAN 18" PONDING DEPTH87.5 TOP OF SLOPE 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE ORIFICE PLATE PER DETAIL THIS SHEET, DRILLED TO INSIDE OF BOX 2:1 2:124"XXXXFENCING PERLANDSCAPE PLANS PROPOSED DEEPENED EDGE AT WALKWAY 18" ENGINEERED SOIL LAYER; *SEE NOTE BELOW 18" LAYER PERMAVOID SYSTEM (PV150 MODULE W/ 95% VOID RATIO) OR APPROVED EQUAL 82.25 BOTTOM OF BASIN ELEVATION; PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TO WRAP PERMAVOID SYSTEM PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRICLAYER (MIRAFI 1100N OR EQUAL)BETWEEN PEA GRAVEL LAYER AND PERMAVOID SYSTEM IMPERMEABLE LINERALONG SIDES OFBMP ONLY 3" LAYER OF 3/8" PEA GRAVEL 8" PVC EMERGENCYOVERFLOW OUTLETDRAIN PIPE; 82.5 IE OUT0.5" HMP-SIZED LOW-FLOW ORIFICE, DRILLED INTO ORIFICE PLATE; 82.5 IE 6" PVC OUTLET PIPE FROMPERMAVOID MODULE SYSTEMTO CONNECT TO OUTLETSTRUCTURE W/ ORIFICE PLATE FENCING PERLANDSCAPE PLANS PROPOSED DEEPENED EDGE AT WALKWAY *BIOFILTRATION "ENGINEERED SOIL" LAYERSHALL BE MINIMUM 18" DEEP PER COUNTYOF SAN DIEGO LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENTHANDBOOK: APPENDIX G - BIORETENTION SOIL MEDIA (BSM) EXAMPLE SPECIFICATION FG = 86.0 3:13:1 18" ENGINEERED SOILLAYER; *SEE NOTE BELOW 18" LAYER PERMAVOID SYSTEM (PV150 MODULE W/ 95% VOID RATIO) OR APPROVED EQUAL82.75 BOTTOM OF BASIN ELEVATION; PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TO WRAP PERMAVOID SYSTEM 36" X 36" BROOKS BOX; 87.0 TG 6" FREEBOARD AND CONVEYANCE ABOVE RISER PLANT MIX PER LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PLAN 1.0% - 2.0%1.0% - 2.0% 12" PONDING DEPTHFG = 87.5 PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC LAYER (MIRAFI 1100N OR EQUAL) BETWEEN PEA GRAVEL LAYER AND PERMAVOID SYSTEM FG = 87.5 IMPERMEABLE LINER ALONG SIDES OF BMP ONLY 3" LAYER OF 3/8" PEAGRAVEL 2:1 2:1 0.4" HMP-SIZEDLOW-FLOW ORIFICE, DRILLEDINTO ORIFICE PLATE; 83.0 IE ORIFICE PLATEPER DETAIL THISSHEET, DRILLEDTO INSIDE OF BOX 6" PVC EMERGENCY OVERFLOW OUTLET DRAIN PIPE; 83.0 IE OUT6" PVC OUTLET PIPE FROM PERMAVOID MODULE SYSTEM TO CONNECT TO OUTLETSTRUCTURE W/ ORIFICE PLATE24"*BIOFILTRATION "ENGINEERED SOIL" LAYER SHALL BE MINIMUM 18" DEEP PER COUNTYOF SAN DIEGO LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENTHANDBOOK: APPENDIX G - BIORETENTION SOIL MEDIA (BSM) EXAMPLE SPECIFICATION INFLOW PIPE FROMPERMAVOID SYSTEM (PER PLAN) LOW-FLOW ORIFICE (SIZE PER DETAILS THIS SHEET) ORIFICE PLATE: MIN SQUARE DIMENSIONS 1.0 FT GREATER THAN PIPE DIA. HOT DIP GALVANIZEDPLATE AFTER HOLES HAVE BEENDRILLED; CONNECT TO INSIDEWALL OF OUTLET STRUCTURE MIN. 6" (TYP.) NOTE: ORIFICE AND FLANGECONNECTION TO CONCRETE SHALL BE FILLED WITH 30 DUROMETER NEOPRENE RING12" MAX3/8" DIA. HOLE (TYP.)3"TYP.PL EXISTING RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN PROPOSED MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-03**; LOWER FOOTING TO ENSURE WALL DOES NOT SURCHARGE (1:1 INFLUENCE LINE) ADJACENT FOOTING; ~83.8 TF 89.4 TW (85.4 BW) 0.3'PROP. ADU 92.4 FF 91.7 PAD 2:1X 11.0' FENCE PER SEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLAN SECTION B-B NOT TO SCALE MS 2020-0004 CDP 2020-0043 SECTIONS AND DETAILS FOR: J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3339 3745 ADAMS STREET\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\3339-CV-TPM-04-05-SECTIONS.DWG SECTION A-A NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL DETAIL BMP 1 - BIOFILTRATION BASIN W/ PARTIAL RETENTION NOT TO SCALE ADAMS STREET HOMES3745 ADAMS STREETSECTION C-C NOT TO SCALE 4 5 PLSA 3339-01 SECTION D-D NOT TO SCALE **RETAINING WALL NOTE: BACKFILL FOR PROPOSED MASONRY RETAINING WALLS TO BE SELECTIVELY GRADED WITH NO MORE THAN 20% OF FINES PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE TO REDUCE EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE (EFP) TO 35 PCF PER GEOTECH RECOMMENDATION. **SEE RETAINING WALL NOTE THIS SHEET **SEE RETAINING WALL NOTE THIS SHEET TYPICAL DETAIL BMP 2 - BIOFILTRATION BASIN W/ PARTIAL RETENTION NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL DETAIL - FLOW CONTROL ORIFICE PLATE NOT TO SCALE SECTION E-E NOT TO SCALE Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 99 of 109 CL CONSTRUCT PCC SIDEWALKPER SDRSD G-7 CONSTRUCT 6" PCC CURB & GUTTER PER SDRSD G-2 EXISTING 6" PCC CURB & GUTTER TO REMAIN 2.0% 20.0' TO TC 4.5' 5.5' 30.0' 60.0'ROW 20.0' TO TC 30.0' PL 10.0' PKWY 10' PKWY SAWCUT EXISTINGPAVEMENT PERDETAIL THIS SHEET EXISTING 8" VCPSEWER MAIN PER140-10A REMAIN EXISTING 8" CICLWATER MAIN PER DWG 140-10 TO REMAIN EXISTING 1 1/2" H.P. GAS MAIN PER DWG118-5 TO REMAIN 2:1 MAX FULL WIDTH G&O ACIMPROVEMENTS TW PER PLAN = TOP OF WALL AT FINISHED SURFACE TF = TOP OF FOOTING CAP UNIT PER SDRSD BW PER PLAN = BOTTOM OF WALL AT FINISHED GRADE 0.5' MIN COVER OVER FOOTING PER SDRSD TYP.GUTTER LINESAWCUT LINE2.0' MIN 3.0' MIN 6" AB6" PCC CURB & GUTTER PER SDRSD G-2 COLD PLANE AND OVERLAY (2" MIN. DEPTH) TO PROVIDE SMOOTH TRANSITION STRUCTURAL SECTION 4" AC OVER 6" CLASS II AB OVER NATIVE SUBGRADECOMPACTED TO 95% REL. COMP. EXISTING AC PAVEMENT EXTEND BASE 6" BEHIND CURB PROPOSED 6" PVC PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT 4DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED PCC DWY THICKNESS AND BASE PER GEOTECH RECOMMENDATION PL PL PROPOSED 6" PVC PRIVATESEWER LATERAL FOR THEBENEFIT OF LOT 3 2.0%2.0% 2:1 MAX 2:1 MAX 20.0' 5.0' 5.0' 30.0' PVT ACCESS ESMT PL DWY FL 10' DIAMETER STREET TREE WITH 160 CF MIN STRUCTURAL SOIL (4.5' WIDE X 10' LONG X 4' DEEP)PCC CURB &GUTTER (SIZEPER PLAN) PCC CURB & GUTTER (SIZE PER PLAN) CONSTRUCT PCC SIDEWALK PER PLAN B B A A 18" WIDE CURB CUT CENTERED ON TREEWELL (SEE DETAIL B-B) 4.5' X 10' LIMIT OFSTRUCTUAL SOIL LA LIMITS OF 30 MIL PLASTIC IMPERMEABLE LINER AROUNDSTRUCTURAL SOIL 6" THICK, 18" DEEPENED EDGE SIDEWALK TREATMENT, SEESECTION B-B BELOW SPLASH PAD PER GS-5.06 LA 9" x 30" x 12" DEEP TYPE 1SPLASH PAD PER SDC DSGS-5.06 (NO. 2 COARSE AGGREGATE ROCK) R=6"(TYP.) 6" PCC C&G PER SDRSD G-02GUTTER LIP 2.5' 1.0' 1.0'A A B B 18" CURB CUT OPENING CENTERED AT TREE WELL LOCATION AS SHOWN ON SHEET 4 GUTTER LIP 4.5' GUTTER DEPRESSION6" PCC C&G PERSDRSD G-02 TOP OF 6" PCC C&G TOP OF 6" PCC C&G 4.5' FLOWLINE(PER PLAN) FLOWLINE (PER PLAN)1" GUTTER DEPRESSION @ TREE WELL1" VERTICAL GUTTERTRANSITION OVER 1'HORIZONTAL 1.5' CURB CUT OPENING 1.0' 1.0'7"1" 2.5' 6" PCC C&G PER SDRSD G-2 STREET FLOW COMPACTED SUBGRADE CURB CUT PERDETAIL THISSHEET 30 MIL PLASTICIMPERMEABLE LINERAND ROOT BARRIER 9" X 30" X 12" DEEP NO. 2 AGGREGATE ROCK SPLASH PAD 6" PCC C&G PER SDRSD G-2 STREET FLOW PCCSIDEWALK 6" X 18" DEEPENED EDGE COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTEDSUBGRADE 6" SANDFILTER LAYER 4.5' LIMITS OF STRUCTURAL SOIL ROOT BARRIERPER SDRSD L-6 30 MIL PLASTIC IMPERMEABLE LINER 48" DEEP STRUCTURAL SOIL DEEP ROOT TREE BUBBLER PER SDRSD DWG I-4 UNCOMPACTED SUBGRADE 3" MIN MULCH LAYER ROOT BALL 1" CURB CUT PER DETAIL B-B 30 MIL PLASTIC IMPERMEABLE LINER SPLASHPAD PER SDC GSDS GS-5.06 6" 4:1 6" SAND FILTER LAYER 10.0' LIMITS OF STRUCTURAL SOIL ROOT BARRIER PER SDRSD L-6 30 MIL PLASTIC IMPERMEABLE LINER 48" DEEP STRUCTURAL SOIL DEEP ROOT TREE BUBBLER PER SDRSD DWG I-4UNCOMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADEROOT BALL 30 MIL PLASTIC IMPERMEABLE LINER 3" MULCH ADJACENT LANDSCAPED PWKY ON JEFFERSON STREET COMPACTED SUBGRADE 4:1 3"4:1 ADJACENT LANDSCAPED PWKY ON JEFFERSON STREET ROOT BARRIERPER SDRSD L-6 STORM DRAIN PIPE (SIZE PER PLAN) PCC HEADWALL THICKNESS=8" DASHED LINE REPRESENTS EXISTING GRADE AT INVERT D DD 8"DDTYPICAL SECTION - ADAMS STREET NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL DETAIL - RETAINING WALL NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL DETAIL - SAWCUT AC PAVEMENT NOT TO SCALE MS 2020-0004 CDP 2020-0043SECTIONS AND DETAILS 3745 ADAMS STREET SECTIONS AND DETAILS FOR: J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3339 3745 ADAMS STREET\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\3339-CV-TPM-04-05-SECTIONS.DWG ADAMS STREET HOMES3745 ADAMS STREETTYPICAL SECTION - PRIVATE ROAD NOT TO SCALE 5 5 PLSA 3339-01 PLAN VIEW - TREE WELL W/O GRATE MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-1.04a + GS-1.04b NOT TO SCALE SECTION A-A - TREE WELL W/O GRATE MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-1.04a + GS-1.04b NOT TO SCALE SECTION B-B - TREE WELL W/O GRATE MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-1.04a + GS-1.04b NOT TO SCALE PLAN VIEW - CURB CUT @ TREE WELL MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-5.01 NOT TO SCALE SECTION A-A - CURB CUT @ TREE WELL MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-5.01 NOT TO SCALE SECTION B-B - CURB CUT @ TREE WELL MODIFIED SDC GS DS GS-5.01 NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL DETAIL - MODIFIED CUTOFF WALL NOT TO SCALE Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 100 of 109 From:Eric Clark To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adams Street Homes Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 10:07:30 AM Hi Jessica, I live in Carlsbad and have reviewed the details of the project and support this plan. I know you are reviewing it so I wanted to offer a locals view of the project. The widening of the street seems like a very positive development. We need more affordable housing with updated designs so this project fits with that need. Thanks! Eric Eric M. Clark Portfolio Manager Cell: 310.776.0501 Click to set up a quick call with Eric on the Brands Fund Dynamic Brands: HSUTX 4 Star Equity FundPSN Top Gun Awards for Dynamic & Core Brands SMA Investors Choice Awards for:Best Equity Fund – < $100M assets Best Equity Fund, Long-Term Performance – < $100M in assets @DynamicBrands on Twitter Global Brands: Why Invest? Brands Weekly Market Blog Dynamic Brands Current Portfolio Mega Brands Podcasts & Bloomberg Interviews CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Exhibit 8 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 101 of 109 From:Tanner Sloan To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adams Street Homes Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 11:01:12 AM Hello Jessica- I am writing to you to express my support for the Adams Street Homes project. Currently, Adams St narrows at this property and with no sidewalks is dangerous for children, this project will widen the street and add a sidewalk making it much safer. Additionally, the widening of the street will reduce traffic on an already congested street. Please consider my support for the project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best Regards, Tanner Sloan -- Tanner Sloan201.396.0085 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 102 of 109 From:Dennis Sakofsky To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adams Street Homes Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 11:53:40 AM Hi Ms. Evans, I am a Carlsbad resident. I own a home in Carlsbad and two in Oceanside. I am aware of the proposed Adams Street Homes project. I am in favor of the project and was disheartened tohear that it has been appealed to the City Council. I hope the Council will approve the project as it will add well considered and developed and greatly needed inventory to our city. Weneed more good housing and ADUs. Kind regards, Dennis Sakofsky Mortgage Loan OfficerC2 Financial Corporation (619) 313-1051Click Here to Applyhttps://www.dsakofskyc2mortgage.com/ https://reversemortgagecarlsbad.com/ NMLS #1711774 State Lic #01807911 Company NMLS #: 135622 Company DRE #: 1821025 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 103 of 109 From:Peter Curry/USA To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adams St Homes project Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 1:03:07 PM Hi Jessica, I am a Carlsbad resident and I wanted to reach out to you in support of the Adams St Homes project. It is my understanding that it was approved by the Planning Commission but has been appealed to City Council. In my review, it checks all of the boxes for what the City and smart growth advocates look for. As you are aware these include. - Currently, Adams St narrows at this property and with no sidewalks is dangerous for children, this project will widen the street and add a sidewalk making it much safer- The widening of the street will reduce traffic on an already congested street - The ADU's and main houses at much needed affordable housing - The homes are a great design and great layout - By elevating the pads of the site, the developer doesn't have to pump sewer or stormwaterwhich if a sewer or stormwater pump fails can be a major issue. These are all demonstrating a high quality and responsible development! If you have any questions, please feel free to call me! Regards, Peter Curry 760-310-0882 The information contained in this email (including any attachments) is confidential, may be subject to legal or other professional privilege and contain copyright material, and is intended for use by the named recipient(s) only. Access to or use of this email or its attachments by anyone else is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you may not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or its attachments (or any part thereof), nor take or omit to take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email and delete it, and all copies thereof, including all attachments, from your system. Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 104 of 109 Although we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, we accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or unapproved access. Please see our website to view our privacy notice / statement. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 105 of 109 From:Jeff To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adam street project Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 4:55:12 PM Hi Jessica, I’m a Carlsbad resident and I just wanted to shoot a quick email letting you know I approve the Adam’s street home project. Thanks, Jeff Gould CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 106 of 109 From:Jim Norum To:Jessica Evans Subject:Project Support - Adams Street Homes - Rincom Homes Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 7:52:02 PM Good evening, My name is Jim Norum and my wife and I reside at 4921 Avila Lane in Carlsbad. We bought our home in 2013 and two of our four children are presently enrolled at Kelly Elementary(watch out for the Norum twins in 2023). We love everything about Carlsbad, and have enjoyed all of the forward progress around town over the last 8 years from hotels to restaurantsto mid rise condos. I've previously gone on record in support of several of these projects, and I enthusiastically support Rincon's recent development proposal for Adams Street. The diversity of housingoptions afforded within such a small development footprint should serve as a template to be followed and encouraged, not appealed and debated. I sincerely wish that our Council'svaluable time could be invested in finding ways to solve our housing crisis, not exacerbate it with needless discussion, especially when it involves an experienced home builder that liveslocally and has delivered on so many attractive projects in Carlsbad. Thank you for all that you do for our City. We adore this place, so keep up the great work. Warm Regards, Jim Norum & Family CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 107 of 109 From:Annette Swanton To:Jessica Evans Subject:Adams Street Homes Date:Tuesday, November 9, 2021 9:16:33 AM Hello Jessica As a resident housing 3 generations under one roof, and as a realtor in the Village of Carlsbad, I support the Adams Street Homes project. There is a great need for multi generation homes, and, to make homes more affordable for all,a great need for ADU’s large enough to accommodate not just a single person or a couple but a young family. The Adam’s street homes would be a great addition to the neighborhood. 1. As you are aware, Carlsbad desperately needs more housing. This project provides athoughtful design of both single family homes for larger families and adequately sized ADU's for tenants. 2. Unusually this project gives a lot of extra parking for the ADU's which will allow tenantsto have their own parking rather than on the street. 3. The architectural style fits into the neighborhood very well. 4. For safety Adams avenue needs sidewalks and lighting especially near the church and school. This project looks like it will bring some good improvements for safety for bothpeople walking and traffic. The project makes a lot of sense and looks good to me. I think local families are likely new residents. The lots are large, the homes look nice and the project can be an example ofneighborhood renewal and thoughtful improvement. My hope is that the city will approve the project. Best, Annette Swanton Annette Swanton HomeSmart Realty West 300 Carlsbad Village Dr. Ste 217Carlsbad CA 92008 760-622-9046CABRE # 00930835 Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 108 of 109 Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Nov. 16, 2021 Item #11 Page 109 of 109 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hole a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 16 2021, to consider an appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve four single-family residences located at 374E: Adams Street, and more particularly described as: ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACT NO. 236 OF THUM LANDS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 1681, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO, DECEMBER 19, 2015, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET, A DISTANCE THEREON NO.,RTH 28°39' WEST 734.81 FEET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTER LINE OF TAMARACK AVENUE, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ALSO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT NO. 236 CONVEYED BY THE SOUTH COAST LAND COMPANY TO SALVADOR AND YSIDRA TREJO BY DEED DATED JANUARY 19, 1931, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 1870, PAGE 77 OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND SO CONVEYED TO TREJO SOUTH 61°21' WEST A DISTANCE OF 195.03 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT NO. 236 CONVEYED BY SOUTH COAST LAND COMPANY TO DEAN F. PALMER BY DEED DATED MAY 05, 1927 AND RECORDED IN BOOK 1335, PAGE 384 OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE PALMER PORTION NORTH 61 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE PALMER PORTION NORTH 61°21' EAST A DISTANCE OF 446.86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET; THENCE ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF ADAMS STREET SOUTH 28°39' EAST A DISTANCE OF 195.03 FEET TO THE POINT OF THE BEGINNING. Whereas, on Sept. 1, 2021 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5/1/1 to approve of a Coastal Development Permi and Tentative Parcel Map to allow for the subdivision of an approximately .97-acre lot into four parcels to construct a twa:- story, 3,182 square-foot single-family residence on each parcel. The project is located at 3745 Adams Street, within the Mello II Segment of the city's Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is not located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a cla53 of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Sectio, 15332, "In-Fill Development Projects," of the state CEQA Guidelines. Per California Executive Order N-29-20, and in the interest of public health and safety, we are temporarily taking actions t:::> prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by holding City Council and other public meetings online only. A,I public meetings will comply with public noticing requirements in the Brown Act and will be made accessible electronically t:::> all members of the public seeking to observe and address the City Council. Comments received by 2 p.m. the day of th? meeting will be shared with the City Council prior to the meeting. When e-mailing comments, please identify in the subject line the agenda item to which your comments relate. All comments received will be included as part of the official record_ Written comments will not be read out loud. If you wish to participate virtually, you may visi:: https://www.carlsbadca.gov/city-hall/meetings-agendas for meeting instructions. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after November 12, 2021. If you have any questions, please contact JessiG: Evans in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4631 or Jessica.Evans@carlsbadca.gov. If you challenge the Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map in court, you may be limited to raising only thoSc issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing_ CASE FILE: CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 (DEV2020-0126) CASE NAME: ADAMS STREET HOMES PUBLISH: November 6, 2021 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL .OCCUPANT 3781 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 1~CCUPANT 1065 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 1085 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3780 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ;>------·----·---··--------~ OCCUPANT 3710 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3758 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 >---- -18 PRINTED - ,---·-----· . focCUPANT '3 7 4 5 ADAMS ST 1CARLSBAD CA 92008 I I OCCUPANT 1075 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ;OCCUPANT 1 1095 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3801 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3720 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3790 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 1055 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 1075 MAGNOLIA AVE APT A ,CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3725 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3820 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3730 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 OCCUPANT 3802 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 Fair and impartial Hearing I • Comments had to be submitted in writing • No opportunity to speak to the commission • There was no notification that comment letters needed to be requested to be read into the record • Developer was provided copies of all comments prior to the meeting • Comments were not available to the public prior to the meeting . j I understand the hearing was conducted in accordance with the laws in place at the time but it sure didn't feel right.. ..... and I'd like to highlight procedural issues that I believe created unfairness in the process. • Comments had to be submitted in writing • No opportunity to call in or speak directly to the PC • Requests to meet with the PC prior to the meeting to discuss the project and community concerns were not granted. • There was no notification that if a comment was submitted the submitter had to request it specifically be read into the record. Comments/concerns from some neighbors were not read into the record and that left them feeling frustrated and feeling like their voices weren't heard. • Developer was provided copies of all comments received prior to the meeting • Those same comments were not available to the public prior to the meeting ... I couldn't read what my neighbors submitted until after the hearing was completed. Unlike Council where the Clerk posts additional correspondence received after an item is noticed, in this case Nothing was posted to the website or made readily available for the public to review. The process did not appear to me to be a fair process. 4 61661 28 development but only one resident was home. When I asked about his individual sewer pump system he indicated he had lived there since the project was constructed and for the first 16 years he never had to have the system maintained or repaired. Last year he had to replace one of the pumps and a float switch, but the system is built with redundancies (2 pumps, 3 floats), so the chance of a backup in the system is nearly eliminated. 29 Adams Street Homes Appeal CDP 2020-0043/MS 2020-0004 Jessica Evans, Associate Planner Community Development Nov. 16, 2021 {city of Carlsbad Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.54.150 outlines procedures for appeals of Planning Commission Decisions, and states: “Grounds for appeal shall be limited to the following: that there was an error or abuse of discretion on the part of the planning commission in that the decision was not supported by the facts presented to the planning commission prior to the decision being appealed; or that there was not a fair and impartial hearing.” ADAMS STREET HOMES CMC 21.54.150 ( City of Carlsbad The code section goes on to state that the City Council’s consideration is “de novo” or “like new,” but limits the consideration to “only the evidence presented to the planning commission for consideration in the determination or decision being appealed.” Therefore, no new information may be considered by the City Council that was not presented to the planning commission. The appeal is limited to the grounds stated in the appeal. The City Council may uphold, modify or overturn the planning commission’s decision. ADAMS STREET HOMES CMC 21.54.150 ( City of Carlsbad •Staff presentation •Council opportunity to ask questions of staff •Appellant presentation •Applicant presentation •Mayor opens public hearing •Council receives comments from speakers •Mayor closes public hearing •Council discussion •Council decision ADAMS STREET HOMES PROCEDURE ( City of Carlsbad CDP 2020-0043 / MS 2020-0004 0 100 200 •Subdivide 0.97-acre lot into 4 parcels •Construct 4 new single-family homes •One attached JADU & ADU per home under separate permit ADAMS STREET HOMES PROJECT REQUEST { City of Carlsbad I J1 I ► CJ ► ~ U) en ..:....i ;ti m ~ PROJECT HISTORY •Sept. 1: PC approved project •Sept 10: project appealed •Reasons for appeal: –Building height exceeds limits & adverse impacts –PC approved project in error ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad BUILDING HEIGHT •Measured from existing or finished grade, whichever is lower •Discretionary projects may measure from higher grade for utility reasons ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad BLDG. PAD HEIGHT INCREASE •Topography of existing site •Sewer disposal •Stormwater quality regulations ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad ADAMS STREET HOMES Insert a photo of the property ADAMS STREET HOMES Maximum storage of water Outflow to underground pipe Bioretention soil Retention basin Flow from property Impermeable liner Geotextile { City of Carlsbad COMPATIBILITY •Proposed 27 ft. high house in-lieu of 30 ft. max •2:1 slope with landscaping •Increased setbacks ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad ► CJ ► ~ U) en ..:....i ;ti m ~ ~ JW-1 BASIS OF PC DECISION •Staff report •Project exhibits •Briefing •Public comments •Presentation and questions answered by staff ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad STATE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT GC §65589.5(j)(1) states cities shall not disapprove a project or impose a condition requiring a lower density unless the city finds based on a preponderance of evidence that the project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety, or there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid such adverse impact. ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt the resolution denying the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission approval for the project as described in the staff report. ADAMS STREET HOMES { City of Carlsbad 33.1’Existing Grade 30 ft. house MEASURE AT EXIST. GRADE 10’ SETBACK -67' UNEOFSIGHT DECEMBER SOLAR ANGLE 33.8' EXISTING 6' =::J FENCE ff_ >< (825 FG) ---------1-----_f _-_ ----=-=---=--_----=/ ----\ ------~ - \_ DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROX/MA TE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE SECTION VIEW -ALLOWABLE CONDITION PER ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE RIDGE APEX 112.3 JUNE SOLAR ANGLE 80.8' -I I I _/_ -83.0FF -82.3PAD MEASURE AT NEW GRADE 34.6’ 27’ 1 ½” house Proposed Grade 16.3’ SETBACK EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 1075 MAGNOLIA AVENUE UNEOFS/GHT -6T _L __ ~ DAS/IEDUIE REPRESENTS APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE SECTION VIEW_ PROPOSED CONDITION 83.JFG (82.5FG) PROPOSEDPCC / BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75; TYPE B RIDGE APEX 115.3 I I FENCE PER SEPARATE LANDSCAPE PLA 87.5 TOP OF SLOPE 88.2 FF 87.5PAD ---- DASHED LINE REPRESENTS APPROX/MA TE LOCATION OF EXISTING GRADE