The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 00-21; Holly Springs; Tentative Map (CT)CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION APPDCATIONS APPLIED POR; (CHECK BCXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) • Administrative Permit • Planned Industrial Permit • Administrative Variance • Planning Commission Determination • Coastal Development Permit • Precise Development Plan • Conditional Use Permit • Redevelopment Permit • Condominium Permit • Site Development Plan • Environmental Impact Assessment • Special Use Permit • General Pian Amendment • Specific Plan Hillside Development Permit . • Tentative-Parcel Map Obtain from Engineering Department • Local Coastal Program Amendment • Tentative Tract Map • Master Plan • Variance • Minor Conditional Use Permit • Zone Change • Non-Residential Planned Development • List other applications not specified • Planned Development Permit 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) MAILING ADbRESS MAILING ADDRESS CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE CITY AND STATE 2IP TELEPHONE EMMl ADDRESS:Jeer^ ^/t^J, Co^ EMAIL ADDRESS;/V / ^A.*. 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER KND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOVjJL^DGE, 7 " /? / / 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM ^HE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE ' ' DATE SIGNATURE ^ DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Form 14 Rev. 01/07 4r 4f PAGEX OF^ I 1- 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT; STREET ADDRESS ON THE BETWEEN (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) SIDE AND OF (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS fi" 6o 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING 11-1.^ 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE, SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN i3.t-r>^ INAME OF STREET) 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION (2-l-o-yf?23) PROPOSED ZONING OS «A^S^2A) HABITAT IMPACTS OS IF YES, ASSIGN HMP # Y/N 25) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE. 26) PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO A NOTICE OF RESTRICTION FILED ON THE PROPERTY TITLE IF CONDITIONED FOR THE APPLICANT. CERTAIN APPROVALS (SUCH AS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) RUN WITH THE LAND AND BIND ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED RECEIVED MAY 2 9 ?007 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: Form 14 Rev. 01/07 PAGE 2 OF^ City of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, 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, title, 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 publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Part Title Title Address Address OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e. partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, 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 publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if Person LuCi/^ ^li^Peci^ Corp/Part A CACft^fWcA PAn.rjuaiiif//> Title Title_ Address 5'2g>o i/Ot^uj/ic'i' Address 1635 Faraday Avenue • Cartsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) e02-8559 * www.cl.carlsbad.ca.us ^ 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 Profit/Trust Non Profit/Trust 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? I I Yes ^ 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. Signature of owner/date Signature of applicant/date 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 H:AOMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/06 Page 2 of 2 Loduiig Design Group, Inc. May 29, 2007 RECEIVED MAY 2 9 2007 CITY OF CARLSBAD Barbara Kennedy PLANNING DEPT City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: CANTARINI RANCH (CT-00-18) AND HOLLY SPRINGS [CTOO-21] / TENTATIVE MAPS LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP L-1061) Dear Barbara: Enclosed are some signed land use review application forms and disclosure statements for Cantarini Ranch and Holly Springs Extension based on your memorandum dated May 16, 2007. In addition to the above application forms and disclosure statements we are also providing a more detailed explanation by David Bentley for why we are requesting a two year extension for this tentative map. In addition to David Bentley justifications, we are finalizing proposals for the final design and the Engineers are telling us that the scope of these projects will require at least 12+ months to record the maps and finalize design for College and the bridge at Agua Hedionda Creek. I am also attaching an updated title report for the project that reflects the recent boundary adjustments that were recorded as referenced in the Conditions of Approval and the original tentative map applications. The boundaries of the Cantarini Ranch tentative map now includes Bent-West for the 105 single family lots and Holly Springs LTD for the multi-family. There is no change for Holly Springs. 2234 Faradov Avenue • Carlsbad, California 92008 (760) 438-3182 • FAX (760) 438-0173 Lcicluiig Design Group, inc. We ask that you please look the attached over and if there are additional items that you need, please get in touch. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL/ssr, el Enclosures cc: Lucia Sippel with enclosures David Bentley with enclosures Jeremy Riddle with enclosures 2234 Faradai^ Avenue • Carlsbad, California 92008 (760) 438-3182 • FAX (760) 438-0173 CANTARINI RANCH DATE: May 25, 2007 TO: City of Carlsbad FROM: David M. Bentley, Member / Project Manager Bent-West, LLC / Cantarini Ranch RE: Justification for Extensions; Cantarini Ranch & Holly Springs Regulatory Delavs/lntemiptlons CEQA Lawsuit After more than 6 years in the staff review process, which included a re- circulated EiR, the Cantarini-Holly Springs projects were approved by Planning Commission and City Council in October and December 2004, respectively, tn January 2005, a CEQA challenge was filed by Preserve Calavera; the settlement was reported out by Council in September 2005. The maps were "tolled' to July 4, 2005. HMP. In addition to extraordinary delays caused during the original project review process (1998-2004) by the new and evolving HMP, in September 2005 the applicant was infomned by the USF&WS and CA DF&G that they did not concur with the City of Carisbad's HMP hardline equivalency determination/certified EIR. The project was delayed through September 2006 while the applicant resolved the HMP hardline issues. Resolution of the HMP issues required various project design modifications, including more open space exactions/dedications, larger wetland setbacks, lot reconfiguration arul elimination. USACE 404 & CDFAG1602. Although applications were filed in 2003, the wetland agency permit process (Army Corps, Fish & Game) was extremely slow. Although the substantive issues were agreed to long ago, the CDF&G permit (1602) is still "in process". RWQCB-401. As a result of new water quality regulations/BMPs, which were unknown/in process during the original project review and approval process, the projects had to be modified and retrofitted with vegetated swales to satisfy the new policies and standards. The substantial conformance exhibits for these project TMs were just completed (May 2007). Economic & Financial ExtraonHnary Off-Site Costs. Because the Cantarini Ranch & Holly Springs projects were held to an old Sunny Creek Plan (SP191) development yiekj (half-acre lots), which is about 1/3 of the Growth Management k>t yield, arKi t)ecause Zone 15 is providing a disproportionately higher share ofthe dty-wide HMP preserve area, the per-unit infrastructure burden for these projects is onerous. Accordingly, addittonal time is required to (1) fonmulate a feasible finance plan, and (2) coordinate addittonal concurrent development in Zone IS to timely share the large ofl'-site cost burden (College Blvd. Reach A, Sunny Creek Bridge, BJ Basin, RCOA rek)cation, Cannon 4A right-of-way/CUSD, etc.). Market Downturn. The severe downturn in the residential maritet, which began in mid 2005, substantially and negatively affected the value of reskiential land, thereby exacerisating the financial infeasibility problems associated with these lower density/lai^e lot projects. The Cantarini Ranch project's fonmer financial partner (a publicly traded homebuiteler) was replaced last month with a private investor/developer. The recapitalization will enable us to move the projects through the final map process more aggressively, but the broader maricet and economic concems will continue to have a sut>stantial effect on development timing. ® CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY PRELIMINARY REPORT Reference: HOLLY SPRINGS SEVENTH AMENDED Dated as of: April 25, 2007 Order No.: 13066302-U50 at 7:30 AM CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception in Schedule B or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of said Policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage of said Policy or Policies are set forth in the attached list. Copies of the Policy forms are available upon request. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to in Schedule B and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in the attached list of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects and encumbrances affecting title to the land. THIS REPORT (AND ANY SUPPLEMENTS OR AMENDMENTS HERETO) IS ISSUED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING THE ISSUANCE OF POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE AND NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED HEREBY. IF IT IS DESIRED THAT LIABILITY BE ASSUMED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE, A BINDER OR COMMITMENT SHOULD BE REQUESTED The form of policy of title insurance contemplated by this report is: CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY Visit Us On The Web: ChicagoTitle.com Title Department: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 2365 NORTHSIDE DR. #500 SAN DIEGO, CA. 92108 (619)239-6081 Fax: (619)521-3608 (§) TOM VOTEL / KEN CYR TITLE OFFICER PFP -08/05/99bk RECEIVED MAY 2 ^ 2007 LADWIG DESIGN GR SCHEDULE A Order No: 13066302 U50 Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS 1. The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is: A FEE AS TO PARCELS 1; AN EASEMENT MORE FULLY DESCRIBED BELOW AS TO PARCEL 2 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 3. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of Califomia, County of SAN DI EGO and is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED DESCRIPTION PREA -10/31/97blt Page 1 DESCRIPTION Order No. 13066302 PARCEL 1: PARCEL C OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED MARCH 27, 2007 AS FILE NO. 2007-0205874, OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS "D" AND "E" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 823, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ON NOVEMBER 16, 1896, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO, 1995-0100176 RECORDED MARCH 9, 1995 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS AND SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 7918 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ON OCTOBER 10, 1974 DISTANT NORTH 34"'43'32" EAST 664.30 FEET (NORTH 34''43'55" EAST 664.30 FEET RECORD PER DOCUMENT NO. 1995-0100176 AND RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 7918) FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, SAID DOCUMENT NO. 1995-0100176 AND RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 7918 ARE COLLECTIVELY HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS REFERENCE NO. 1; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN REFERENCE NO. 1, NORTH 15''54'53" WEST (NORTH 15°54'30" WEST RECORD PER REFERENCE NO, 1) 148.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN A GRANT DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED MAY 22, 2002 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2002-0432591 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 75°34'37" EAST 2270.27 FEET (NORTH 75°35'00" EAST 2270.27 FEET RECORD PER DOC. NO. 2002-0432591) TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D" AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DOC. NO. 2002-0432591; THENCE NORTH 12''57'25" WEST 576.81 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID REFERENCE NO. 1; THENCE FOLLOWING ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID REFERENCE NO. 1, NORTH 89''55'27" EAST 1965.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°04'18" EAST 1860.62 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89''26'55" WEST (NORTH 89°26'32" WEST RECORD PER REFERENCE NO. 1) 890.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID REFERENCE NO. 1 AND THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D" TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 330.00 FEET, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 25''27'56" EAST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°53'20" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 91,51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 80°25'24" WEST 96,37 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02°24'17" WEST 41.76 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF REFERENCE NO. 1; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, NORTH 89"26•55" WEST 1147.81 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, NORTH 82°38'27" WEST 233.40 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 330.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°48'28" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89''26'55" WEST 300.78 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 470.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°48'59" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 187.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 66°37'56" WEST 246,82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 630.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°18'48" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 322.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 15°47'25" WEST 320.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 84°25'10" WEST 394.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT TO USE THE EXISTING, UNIMPROVED ROAD WITHIN THAT PORTION OF LOT "E" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 823, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 16, 1896, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT POINT 1 OF LOT "D" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA PER SAID MAP NO. 823 AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY MAP NO. 7918, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY Page 2 DESCRIPTION Order No. 13066302 RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 10, 1974; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D", NORTH 89''26'32" WEST, 1,543.43 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT "E"; THENCE ALONG A PORTION OF THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT "E", NORTH 89°26'32" WEST 2,831.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 2, IN DEED TO WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, RECORDED MARCH 2, 1971 AS FILE NO, 38810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 OF LAND OF WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 34°43'55" EAST, 664.30 FEET (RECORD-NORTH 34°44'03" EAST 663.15 FEET) TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN AND NORTH 15°54'30" WEST (RECORD-NORTH 15°54'25" WEST) 148.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 NORTH 15°54'30" WEST 482.44 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OCEANSIDE-CARLSBAD UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, RECORDED NOVEMBER 27, 1970 AS FILE NO. 216959 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SCHOOL DISTRICT'S LAND AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 53°22'00" EAST (RECORD NORTH 53°22"17" EAST) 300.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SCHOOL DISTRICT'S LAND; SOUTH 27°10'12" EAST 610.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 75°35 00" WEST 400.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SCHEDULE B Page 1 Order No: 13066302 U50 Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in the policy form designated on the face page of this Report would be as follows: A 1. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, TO BE LEVIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008 THAT ARE A LIEN NOT YET DUE. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007. 1ST INSTALLMENT: $234.93 (PAID) 2ND INSTALLMENT: $234.93 (PAID) HOMEOWNERS EXEMPTION: NONE CODE AREA: 09013 ASSESSMENT NO: 168-050-06 PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007. 1ST INSTALLMENT: $2,543.53 (PAID) 2ND INSTALLMENT: $2,543.53 (PAID) HOMEOWNERS EXEMPTION: NONE CODE AREA: 09013 ASSESSMENT NO: 168-050-07 PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007. 1ST INSTALLMENT: $136.44 (PAID) 2ND INSTALLMENT: $136.44 (PAID) HOMEOWNERS EXEMPTION: NONE CODE AREA: 09013 ASSESSMENT NO: 168-050-49 PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007. 1ST INSTALLMENT: $10,217.53 (PAID) 2ND INSTALLMENT: $10,217.53 (PAID) HOMEOWNERS EXEMPTION: NONE CODE AREA: 09013 ASSESSMENT NO: 168-050-51 2. THE LIEN OF SUPPLEMENTAL OR ESCAPED ASSESSMENTS OF PROPERTY TAXES, IF ANY, MADE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 0.5, CHAPTER 3.5 OR PART 2, PREB -10/31/97bk SCHEDULE B Page 2 (continued) Order No: 13066302 U50 Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS CHAPTER 3, ARTICLES 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 75) OF THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE VESTEE NAMED IN SCHEDULE A; OR AS A RESULT OF CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP OR NEW CONSTRUCTION OCCURRING PRIOR TO DATE OF POLICY. A NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 3114.5 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE AND SECTION 53328.3 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE IMPOSING A CONTINUING LIEN. EXECUTED BY: THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AMOUNT: NO AMOUNT IS SHOWN IN SAID NOTICE DATED: MAY 17, 1991 PURPOSE: COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 RECORDED: MAY 20, 1991 AS FILE NO. 1991-0236959 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 4. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 4A. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PURPOSE: GAS PIPE LINE, INGRESS AND EGRESS RECORDED: MARCH 31, 1960 AS FILE NO. 65563 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AFFECTS: THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PURPOSE: INGRESS AND EGRESS RECORDED: JANUARY 4, 1963 AS FILE NO. 1851 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AFFECTS: THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. 7. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT PRELIMBC-9/23/93bk Page 3 Order No: 13066302 U50 SCHEDULE B (continued) Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PIPELINE OR PIPELINES JANUARY 1, 1963 AS FILE NO. 1852 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. AB 7A. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 8. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEVELOPER-OWNER AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD FOR THE PAYMENT OF A PUBLIC FACILITIES FEE FOR INSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1", DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1993 EXECUTED BY ALLAN 0. KELLY AND KATHERINE M. KELLY, CO-TRUSTEES, KELLY FAMILY TRUST NO. 1 DATED JULY 17, 1979 AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED NOVEMBER 3, 1993 AS FILE NO. 1993-0738090 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 9. RECORD OF SURVEY MAP NO. 7918, WHICH DISCLOSES VARIANCES FROM THE RECORD LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SAID LAND. REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS. 9A. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 10. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "ABSTRACT OF OPTION AGREEMENT", DATED AUGUST 31, 1999 EXECUTED BY OPTIONOR: HOLLYSPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND OPTIONEE: BENTLEY EQUITY, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1999 AS FILE NO. 1999-0804077, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AFEECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND. REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS. 10A. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. IOB. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. IOC. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. PRELIMBC-9/23/93bk SCHEDULE B 4 (continued) Order No: 13066302 U50 Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS 10D. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 10E. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. N 11.1NTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 11A. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. u 12. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT", DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2002 EXECUTED BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, HEREINAFTER CALLED STATE AND HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED MAY 22, 2002 AS FILE NO. 2002-0432592 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. w 13. A DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE AN INDEBTEDNESS IN THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT SHOWN BELOW AMOUNT: $1,000,000.00 DATED: JULY 26, 2005 TRUSTOR: HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TRUSTEE: TEMECULA VALLEY BANK BENEFICIARY: TEMECULA VALLEY BANK RECORDED: AUGUST 11, 2005 AS FILE NO. 2005-0686351, OFFICIAL RECORDS ORIGINAL LOAN NUMBER: 88001156 X 14. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AGREEMENT", DATED JANUARY 27, 2006 EXECUTED BY AND AMONG HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ET AL, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED APRIL 21, 2006 AS FILE NO. 2006-0279842, OFFICIAL RECORDS. AA 15. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT PRELIMBC-9/23/93bk Page 5 Order No: 13066302 U50 SCHEDULE B (continued) Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: END OF SCHEDULE B LO 1AMEND/JP 2AMEND/JP 3AMEND/JRS 4AMEND/JRS 5AMEND/JRS 6AMEND/JRS 7AMEND/JRS CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY MARCH 27, 2007 AS FILE NO. 2007-0205882, OFFICIAL RECORDS THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. PREUMBC-9/23/93bk Notice You may be entitled to receive a $20.00 discount on escrow services if you purchased, sold or refinanced residential property in Califomia between May 19, 1995 and November 1, 2002. If you had more than one qualifying transaction, you may be entitled to multiple discounts. If your previous transaction involved the same property that is the subject of your current transaction, you do not have to do anything; the Company will provide the discount, provided you are paying for escrow or title services in this transaction. If your previous transaction involved property different from the property that is subject of your current transaction, you must - prior to the close of the current transaction - inform the Company of the earlier transaction, provide the address of the property involved in the previous transaction, and the date or approximate date that the escrow closed to be eligible for the discount. Unless you inform the Company of the prior transaction on property that is not the subject of this transaction, the Company has no obligation to conduct an investigation to determine if you qualify for a discount. If you provide the Company information concerning a prior transaction, the Company is required to determine if you qualify for a discount which is subject to other terms and conditions. AGN -08/14/MAA CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement July 1,2001 We recognize and respect the privacy expectation of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"), and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: * From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; * From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; * From our internet web sites; * From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others; and * From consumer or other reporting agencies. Our Policies Regarding The Protection Of The Confidentiality And Security Of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We may also disclose your Personal Information: * to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; * to third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and * to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right To Access Your Personal Information And Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Change Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request correction, amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. All requests must be made in writing to the following address: Privacy Compliance Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Drive Jacksonville, FL 32204 Multiple Products or Services: if we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. PRWACYT-10/21/03 AA (§) CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY PRELIMINARY REPORT FIRST AMENDED Dated as of: May 30,2002 at 7:30 AM Reference: HOLLY SPRINGS Order No.: 13066302-U50 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception in Schedule B or not exduded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of said Policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage of said Policy or Policies are set forth in the attached list. Copies of the Policy forms are available upon request. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to in Schedule B and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in the attached list of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land. THIS REPORT (AND ANY SUPPLEMENTS OR AMENDMENTS HERETO) IS ISSUED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING THE ISSUANCE OF A POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE AND NO UABIUTY IS ASSUMED HEREBY. IF IT IS DESIRED THAT LIABILITY BE ASSUMED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A POUCY OF TITLE INSURANCE, A BINDER OR COMMITMENT SHOULD BE REQUESTED. The form of policy of title insurance contemplated by this report is: CAUFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POUCY Visit Us On The Web: westerndivision.ctt.com Title Department: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 925 "B" STREET SAN DIEGO. CA. 92101 (619)544-6233 fax: (619)544-6279 (§) RECEIVED TOM VOTEL / KEN CYR TITLE OFFICER JUN 2 \ 2002 LAOWIG DESIGN GR j\ PFP -08/05/99bk \ 0 A V SCHEDULE A Order No: 13 0663 02 USO Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS 1. The estate or mterest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is: A FEE AS TO PARCEL 1; AN EASEMENT MORE FULLY DESCRIBED BELOW AS TO PARCEL 2 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 3. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of California, County of SAN DIEGO and is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED DESCRIPTION PREA-10/31ygTbK Page 1 DESCRIFnON Order No. 13 0663 02 PARCEL 1: THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS "D" AND "E" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 823, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 16, 1896, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT POINT 1 OF SAID LOT "D" AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY MAP NO. 7913, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 10, 1974; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D", NORTH 89026'32" WEST, 1,543.43 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT "E"; THENCE ALONG A PORTION OF THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT "E", NORTH 89026'32" WEST 2,831.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 2, IN DEED TO WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, RECORDED MARCH 2, 1971 AS FILE NO. 38810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 OF LAND OF WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 34043'55" EAST, 664.30 FEET (RECORD - NORTH 34O44'03" EAST 663.15 FEET) TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN AND NORTH 15O54'30" WEST (RECORD - NORTH 15 0 54'25" WEST) 148.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED MAY 22, 2002 AS FILE NO. 2002-0432591 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA LAND NORTH 75°35'00" EAST 2270.27 FEET, THENCE NORTH 120 57'02 WEST 576.81 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE BOUNDARY OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO HUGH W. WARDEN ET AL, RECORDED NOVEMBER 30, 1961 AS FILE NO. 206962 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOXJNDARY OF SAID WARDEN LAND NORTH 89O55'50" EAST (RECORD NORTH 89052'25" EAST) 1,965.10 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D"; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 00°03'55" EAST, 1,860.62 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT TO USE THE EXISTING, UNIMPROVED ROAD WITHIN THAT PORTION OF LOT "E" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 823, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 16, 1896, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT POINT 1 OF LOT "D" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA PER SAID MAP NO. 823 AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY MAP NO. 7918, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 10, 1974; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "D", NORTH 89026'32" WEST, 1,543.43 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT "E"; THENCE ALONG A PORTION OF THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT "E", NORTH 89026'32" WEST 2,831.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 2, IN DEED TO WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, RECORDED MARCH 2, 1971 AS FILE NO. 38810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 OF LAND OF WESTERN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 34043'55" EAST, 664.30 FEET (RECORD-NORTH 34044'03" EAST 663.15 FEET) TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN AND NORTH 15O54'30" WEST (RECORD-NORTH 15054'25" WEST) 148.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 NORTH 15O54'30" WEST 482.44 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OCEANSIDE-CARLSBAD UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, RECORDED NOVEMBER 27, 1970 AS FILE NO. 216959 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SCHOOL DISTRICT'S LAND AS FOLLOWS: Page 2 DESCRIFnON Order No. 13 0663 02 NORTH 53022'00" EAST (RECORD NORTH 53022'17" EAST) 300.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SCHOOL DISTRICT'S LAND; SOUTH 27oi0'12" EAST 610.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 75O35'00" WEST 400.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SCHEDULE B Page 1 Order No: 13066302 U50 Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exdusions in the policy fonn designated on the face page of this Report would be as follows: A 1. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, TO BE LEVIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 THAT ARE A LIEN NOT YET DUE. s 2 . THE LIEN OF SUPPLEMENTAL OR ESCAPED ASSESSMENTS OF PROPERTY TAXES, IF ANY, MADE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 0.5, CHAPTER 3.5 OR PART 2, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLES 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 75) OF THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE VESTEE NAMED IN SCHEDULE A; OR AS A RESULT OF CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP OR NEW CONSTRUCTION OCCURRING PRIOR TO DATE OF POLICY. c 3. A NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 3114.5 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE AND SECTION 53328.3 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE IMPOSING A CONTINUING LIEN. EXECUTED BY: AMOUNT: DATED: PURPOSE: RECORDED: THE CITY OF CARLSBAD NO AMOUNT IS SHOWN IN SAID NOTICE MAY 17, 1991 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 MAY 20, 1991 AS FILE NO. 1991-0236959 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS NOVEMBER 20, 1928 IN BOOK 1550, PAGE 343 OF DEEDS THE WEST 12 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF LOT "D" OF SAID RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA DESCRIBED IN DEED RECOIiDED JULY 20, 1906, IN BOOK 393, PAGE 212 OF DEEDS 5. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GAS PIPE LINE, INGRESS AND EGRESS MARCH 31, 1960 AS FILE NO. 65563 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. 6. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS PBEB -10/31/97bk SCHEDULE B 2 (contmued) Order No: 130663 02 USO Your Ref: HOLLY SPRINGS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PURPOSE: INGRESS AND EGRESS RECORDED: JANUARY 4, 1963 AS FILE NO. 1851 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AFFECTS: THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEVELOPE-OWNER AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD FOR THE PAYMENT OF A PUBLIC FACILITIES FEE FOR INSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1", DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1993 EXECUTED BY ALLAN O. KELLY AND KATHERINE M. KELLY, CO-TRUSTEES, KELLY FAMILY TRUST NO.. 1 DATED JULY 17, 1979 AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED NOVEMBER 3, 1993 AS FILE NO. 1993-0738090 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORD OP SURVEY MAP NO. 7918, WHICH DISCLOSES VARIANCES FROM THE RECORD LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SAID LAND. REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS. 10. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "ABSTRACT OF OPTION AGREEMENT", DATED AUGUST 31, 1999 EXECUTED BY OPTIONOR: HOLLYSPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND OPTIONEE: BENTLEY EQUITY, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1999 AS FILE NO. 1999-0804077, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AFEECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND. REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS. 11. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 12. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT", DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2002 EXECUTED BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, HEREINAFTER CALLED STATE AND HOLLY SPRINGS, LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED MAY 22, 2002 AS FILE NO. 2002-0432592 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. END OF SCHEDULE B LO lAMEND/jP PREUMBC-9/23/93bk CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement July 1,2001 We recognize and respect the priyacy expectation of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non-public personal information ("Personal information"), and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: * From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; * From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; * From our internet web sites; * From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others; and * From consumer or other reporting agencies. Our Policies Regarding The Protection Of The Confidentiality And Security Of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We may also disclose your Personal Information: * to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; * to third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and * to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right To Access Your Personal Information And Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Change Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request conection, amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We resen/e the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. Ail requests must be made in writing to the following address: Privacy Compliance Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 4050 Calle Real, Suite 220 Santa Barbara, CA93110 Multiple Products or Services: If we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. PRIVACYT -06/29/01 bK CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPUED FOR: (CHECKBOXES) I I Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit I I Administrative Variance [ I Coastal Development Permit I I Conditional Use Permit I I Condominium Permit Environmental Impact Assessment General Plan Amendment Hillside Development Permit I I Local Coastal Plan Amendment I I Master Plan I I Non-Residential Planned Development i 1 Planned Development Permit (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) • • • • • • (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLYI • • Planned Industrial Permit Planning Commission Determination Precise Development Plan Redevelopment Permit Site Development Plan Special Use Permit Specific Plan Tentative PorccI Mop Obtain from Engineering Department Tentative Tract Map Variance Zone Change List other applications not specified cv~i<r 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) MAILING ADDRESS \X?'7 CfZ-u-z. MAILING ADDRESS CiTY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORR^ TO THE B6ST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SiGNATURE /sf^M^ j<^<Wy. 1^ IRKTVTO THE B6ST DATE SIGNATURE DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 3 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) (NAME OF STREET) AND (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS IS- 15) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE)?^ 22) EXISTING ZONING v«aF=" 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 1H7 0./nil tp-s 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. lAA/E CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE SIGNATURE Luc» A *^ I PP^-L- FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION 0^k >r ^(^7^0-00 -HD? ^^7 lo.oo TOTAL FEE REQUIRED RECEIVED NOV 2 2 2000 RECEIVED BY: ECEIVED DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. Form 16 PAGE 2 OF 3 City of ICarlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: BENTLEY DAVID Set Id: S000000514 Description CT000021 GPA00006 HDP00012 SDP00015 ZC000009 Total Amount 12,335.00 3,680.00 1,207.50 6, 7'509^£L/22/00 0002 01 2, 977.50 CGP' 26,970.00 Receipt Number: R0016716 Transaction Date: 11/22/2000 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1518 26,970.00 Transaction Amount: 26,970.00 laduiig Design Group, inc. L-1061 11/22/00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION HOLLY SPRINGS BACKGROUND Carlsbad is a City with a population of approximately 80,000 people. The City is located along the northem coast of San Diego County; 30 miles north of downtown San Diego. It is bordered to the north by the City of Oceanside, to the south by the City of Encinitas, on the east by the Cities of Vista and San Marcos, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. Carlsbad has a combination of industrial, commercial and residential development including a large regional shopping center, an auto retail center, a large industrial park area, the LEGOLAND Califomia Educational Park, and a regional airport. The City contains three lagoons, extensive agricultural areas and large tracts of undeveloped land, and significant natural open-space. The total area of the City of Carlsbad is approximately 40 square miles. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Holly Springs property hes in the northeast quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, north of Palomar Airport Road and east of El Camino Real within Local Facilities Management Zone 15. The current general plan designation for the property is residential low medium (RLM). A General Plan Amendment is proposed for a small portion of the property (9± acres), to RMH to accommodate affordable/multifamily housing. The zoning is limited control (LC). The proposed zoning is R-I, 703 PQlomar fiirport Road • Suit© 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22, 2000 Page 2 RD-M, and Open Space. Access to the property will be provided by College Blvd. College Blvd. and Cannon Road, all east of El Camino Real, are currently being study by the City and City Environmental Consultants for a proposed bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 for the constmction and development of these major arterial roadways. The property will be developed consistent with the recently amended Local Facilities Management for Zone 15. The project has been designed consistent with the proposed (HMP) regulations. Minor environmental impacts will be mitigated on-site. The project as proposed is compatible with the surroimding development and with the existing natural conditions. After significant negotiations with the City, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serve and State Fish and Game, a "hardline" designation has been achieved and recommended by staff for inclusion in the current draft ofthe Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. Significant acreage will be left in natural open space including the existing Holly Springs. Total open space including common open-space areas = 178.49 acres (78%) of228.31 total project acres. A fiirther breakdown of the above areas is as follows: Streets and lots 49.82 Acres - 22% Open space lots 49-50 & 52 58.69 Acres - 26% Open space Area A 99.34 Acres - 43% Open space Area B 20.46 Acres - 9% Total Ownership Area 228.31 Acres -100% 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22, 2000 Page 3 Areas A & B are to be retained by the owner to mitigate impacts firom the project (Streets and Lots) identified by the project Biologist (Recon). The remaining acreage (not including 5 acres set aside by easement for Sunny Creek in May 9,2000) to be reserved for disposal by owner for open space uses. The landscaping for the project will use a plant palette that is compatible and an extension of the existing native and plant palettes in the area. The project hes in and out of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan (SP-191). Project design criteria and setbacks will conform to SP-191 for the specific lots affected. The remainder lots outside of SP-191 will follow conventional R-1 setback - all lots are V2 acre or more. The multi-family site will contain 20 one-bedroom imits at 608 sq. ft.; 60 two-bedroom units at 878 sq. ft ; and 20 three-bedroom units at 1,027 sq. ft. Parking will be per City Code which equals 190 spaces required for the units along with 28 guest spaces for a total required parking of 218. Parking spaces will be full size per code. In addition, a 1,998 sq. ft. community facility will be included that contains restrooms, a community room with kitchen, laundry and other common space. The multi-family site will have a fiill entrance off of "C" Street just east of College Blvd. Parking is accessible to all vinits including 7 handicapped spaces. In addition, three trash receptacle areas are included The site is elevated above College Blvd. and a 4' minimum sound wall is required based on noise studies for the project. The project has five buildings that contain 20 imits each. The buildings are two story on each end and three stories in the center and contain 4 one-bedroom units, 4 three-bedroom units; and 12 two-bedroom units each. The buildings that have a down slope to the adjacent streets are setback according to the downhill architecture standards in the hillside ordinance. The site is not rectangular and along with a curvilinear access way, significant irregular 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22, 2000 Page 4 shaped open-space areas will provide for a very attractive multi-family site. In addition, a bus stop will be provided on College at the intersection of "C" Street. There will also be 47 one-half acre minimum single-family lots. Many lots will have long driveways to present a "rural" design. The development and phasing of the project will start in the southwesterly comer adjacent to "C" Street and College Blvd. and will work its way in a northeasterly direction. GRADING Grading will be adjusted in final design to balance around 320,000 CY/Ac with 49.82 acres being graded, the cubic yards per acre are 6423. GROWTH MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS The proj ect hes in areas RLM-2 and RLM 2-A of LFMP-15. Based on our Constraints Analysis, our growth management density is: Area RLM-2 - 64.24 net acres x 3.2 - 205.57 DU's AreaRLM-2A- 45.89 net acres x 2.88 = 132.16 DU's Total Dwelling Units Available 388* *Note: Units were not calculated in fiiture open space areas A & B that total 110.8 acres. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22,2000 Page 5 The project proposes 100 multifamily units and 47 single-family units for a total of 147 units. The 147 units represents 43% of the allowed density. PROPOSED CIRCULATION SYSTEM (Loop Road System) The main access to the property will be College Blvd. which is currently being analyzed by the City for Bridge and Thoroughfare District Unit No. 4. The local circulation will be provided by a loop road starting out at "C" Street at College Blvd. going easterly along the northerly edge of Cantarini into Holly Springs, through Holly Springs, into Cantarini to Mandana and back into Cantarini ("A" Street) to College Boulevard. This loop road has been designed to meet the City cul-de-sac pohcy and to provide access to adjacent properties Our traffic engineer, Willdan, has analyzed our loop road system and the balance of the entire project and the roads as being proposed meet or exceed City standards. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REOUESTED • Tentative Subdivision Map O'Day Consultants (George O'Day) has prepared the attached tentative subdivision map consistent with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad and the State Subdivision Map Act. O'Day, as part of their portion ofthe appUcation, will include a hydrology study and plans for the loop road. Reference is made to CT 00-18-Cantarini - that is currently being processed by the City 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad. California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22, 2000 Page 6 Hillside Development Permit This application will include a slope analysis, constraints map and profiles prepared by O'Day Consultants. • Site Development Plan/Affordable Housing A site development plan is included for the multi-family/affordable housing site. Included with the Site Development Plan application will be floor plans and elevations. The Holly Springs multifamily site will provide 46 affordable housing units for Holly Springs and Cantarini (CT 00-18). The calculation of our affordable requirement is as follows: Holly Springs 147 - 85% - 147 = 25.94 units Cantarini (CT 00-18) 113 - 85% -113= 19.94 units Combined Requirement 45.88 units A combination of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units will be provided (46) as affordable with the remaining units (54) to be leased at market rates. • Zone Change/General Plan Amendment A Zone Change and General Plan Amendment application is included to change the zoning from LC to R-1, RD-M, and Open Space. The GPA and RDM are for the 9-acre 100 unit multifamily/affordable housing site in Phase 1. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Proj ect Description - Holly Springs L-1061 November 22, 2000 Page 7 Environmental Review/HMP Included with the application is a environmental impact assessment. In addition, this property has participated in the preparation of the draft Habitat Management Plan and has obtained staff recommendations for "hardline" designation. The Holly Springs plan as submitted will require minor adjustments to the "Hardlines" shown in the draft HMP. A tabulation of changes is included. STUDIES/REPORTS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION Archeology, Biology and Impact Analysis - These reports have been prepared by Recon. Traffic Analysis - A complete analysis prepared by Willdan. • Soils and Geology - A complete report has been prepared by Geosoils. • Noise Analysis - A complete report and recommendations has been prepared by Pacific Noise Control • Project Hydrology Report - O'Day Consultants has prepared a report and is included with the apphcation. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs November 22, 2000 Page 8 L-1061 SUMMARY This apphcation has been prepared in conformance with all the regulations of the City of Carlsbad and all elements are included. No variances are requested and cooperation has been obtained from surrounding properties for the proposed development. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 City of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications ^hich will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Comminee. 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 defmed as "Any individual, fmn, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fratemal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or otiier political subdivision or any odier 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, title, 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 Publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) . Person DAU IC) )M . f^fgAJTUlEV Corp/Part Title Title Address "l^f^ )^ A-^g^^/^/U Address_ OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. • Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. U a publiclv- owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corpiorate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Pereon LuCiA ^ iPPitC CJ^^e*^ AJ S I pgr, CA . <^^C> Corp^a^l4g>LOY Cp/2.<nj6,^ L-rp Title Address ^A**^ 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 ® NON-PROrn4fcGANIZATION 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 Profit/Trust Title Non Profit/Trust. Title Address Address y Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions. Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. 1 certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of ovvner/dafe 00 Signature of applicant/date Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's a|ent if applicable/date U^t^UJ/q l^^^-St^AJ ^fi-Ouifi, 1 AJ c Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 # 41 Locluiig Design Group, Inc. November 22, 2000 RECEIVED Michael Holzmiller ^ NOV 2 2 2000 City of Carlsbad CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department PLANNING DEPT 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: HOLLY SPRINGS APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE MAP • HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT • ZONE CHANGE AND ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. JOB NO. L-1061) Dear Michael: The exhibits attached to this request are as follows: 1. Tentative Map (10 copies) 2. Landscape Concept Plan (10 copies) 3. Constraints Map including Slope Analysis and Slope Profiles (5 copies) 4. SVzxll Landscape Plan (1 copy) 5. 8'/2 X 11 Vicinity/Location Map (1 copy) 6. Environmental Impact Assessment Form with explanation 7. Disclosure Statements 8. Preliminary Title Report (3 copies) 9. Traffic Impact Analysis (2 copies) 10. Preliminary Soils and Geology Report (2 copies) with addendum letter (10/16/00) 11. Preliminary drainage report (1 copy each) 12. Photographs of the property and surrounding areas. (1 set) 13. Signed notice of time limits on discretionary applications - original 14. Environmental Noise Assessment (Pacific Noise Control) 2 copies 15. Paleontologist letter reference potential resources fi-om San Diego Natural History Museum 16. Project description (1 copy) 703 pQlomor Airport Rood • Suite 300 • CorlsbQcl, ColiforniQ 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Michael Holzmiller November 22, 2000 Page 2 17. Zone change exhibit at 1"=500' scale along with a color exhibit showing proposed open space (2 copies) 18. Biological Technical Report by Recon (3 copies). Including impact analysis 19. Archaeological Study (3 copies) by Recon. 20. Wetlands delineation report (3 copies) by Recon 21. 8'/2 x 11 Tentative Map (3 copies) 22. Original application forms for the project. 23. Completed Hazardous Waste Form 24. 10 sets of Multifamily Architecture including 1 @ 8-1/2 xl 1 25. School letter 26. Bentley Check in the amount of $26,968 • EIA (Assume No EIR) $ 1,030.00 • Fish & Game Fee NEG.DEC. (NI) • Hillside Development Permit $1610x75% $ 1,207.50 • Tentative Map ($9850 + $15 x 97) $ 11,303.00 • Zone change ($3970 x 75%) $ 2,977.50 • General Plan Amendment $ 3,680.00 • Site Development Plan (affordable housing) $ 6770.00 TOTAL $26,968.00 We ask that you please accept the above as our formal application for the Holly Springs property in Zone 15. We look forward to a formal written response in 30 days. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb.02 Attachments cc: Lucia Sippel with enclosures David Bentley with enclosures 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STAT^ENT Consultation Of Lists of Sites Related To Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Govemment Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of Califomia Govemment Code Section 65962.5,1 have consulted the Hazardous Wastes and Substances Sites List compiled by the Califomia Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): The development project and any altematives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Govemment Code. n The development project and any altematives proposed in this application ar§ contained on the hsts compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. , APPLICANT ^ ^ PROPERTY OWNER Name: ygPi^gft-r C- LA-J>U>^<:t Name: fUupy <^ AJ ^ UW Address-.IO^ PAU)t*i^ /^Ifi^/LT g^"^ Address: I^^7 J^e-l^ CtQcJ-Z. Phone Number: 16 0 - -1 //w Phone Number: ^(P^" ^^<=^''S^ 4-1 Address of Site: IS- g-C (^AK^ fKl o V^CAC^ Ai^CKiC Fur^/^£ Ca'^ceCE' Local Agency (City and Countv): C lAifi-^^gtAO, C^<^ ^f£.«:;Q Assessor's book, page, and parcel number: Xd)^^ O'^O - 0^, , K^/44-, Specify listrs): C Ut ^ T '^i IT/'hf' Regulatory Identification Number: Date of List:_Ai£f:^ii:i.^aA5i:: Applicant Signature/Date 7 Property Owner Signature/Date i Admin/Counter/HazWaste 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST CITY LIST 04/15/98 STREET NBR \ STREET NAME DTSC FACILITY INVENTORY OATA BASE HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST CITY ZIP CARLSBAD 920080000 CARLSBAD 92008 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO 93164 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO 92009 CARLSBAD 92008 CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD 92008 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAD 920080000 CARLSBAD 92008 CARLSBAO 920080000 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAO CARLSBAO 92008 CARLSBAD 920080000 CARLSBAD 92008 CARLSBAO 920080000 CARLSBAD 92008 PQM: CALEPA5 PAGE 37 ST NAME. ST NBR CO REG 37 WBC&O 9 0000B4N94 37 LTNKA 9UT1000 37 LTNKA 9UT2801 37 LTNKA 9UT2611 37 LTNKA 9UT2724 37 LTNKA 9UT242 37 LTNKA 9UT685 37 LTNKA 9UT1B13 37 LTNKA 9UT117 37 LTNKA 9UT2241 37 LTNKA gUT1503 37 LTNKA 9UT3452 37 LTNKA 9UT1950 37 LTNKA 9UT2041 37 LTNKA 9UT2227 37 LTNKA 9UT846 37 LTNKA 9UT394 37 LTNKA 9UT1953 37 LTNKA gUT1498 37 LTNKA 9UT1183 37 LTNKA 9UT3254 37 LTNKA 9UT1080 37 LTNKAV 9UT3043 37 LTNKA 9UT306S 5600 1044 1044 571 920 2100 2500 2545 2545 2590 7654 3701 405 2160 2210 2210 850 850 899 5335 5434 801 2615 2779 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAO VILLAGE CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD VILLAGE COSTA DEL MAR EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL HAYMAR OAK PALOMAR AIRPORT PALOMAR AIRPORT PALOMAR AIRPORT PALOMAR AIRPORT PALOMAR AIRPORT PALOMAR AIRPORT PASEO DEL NORTE PASEO DEL PINE STATE STATE NORTE UNISYS CARLSBAD CHEVRON SERVICE STATION CARLSBAD CHEVRON ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING C GASCO SERVICE STATION LA COSTA HOTEL ft.SPA CHEVRON SERVICE STATION H FIRESTONE J.C.PENNYS AUTO CENTER SHELL OIL SERVICE STATION WALTS ARCO SERVICE STATIO SOUTH COAST MATERIALS PUBLIC WORKS YARD PALOMAR AIRPORT MCCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL PEASOUP ANDERSON/UNION S/ CARLSBAD PROPERTIES. LTD" MOBIL OIL STATION WESELOH CHEVROLET NORTH COUNTY LINCOLN MERC CARLSBAO UNIFIED SCHOOL PAUL'S AUTOMOTIVE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT April, 1998 I Cj Q 3°- Rece±ved: 8/30/00 15:01; 7607Z3aee5 -> WILSON ENGINEERING; Page 2 fiUG.30.2000 3:00PM CflaUSBflP UNIF DIST ^ NO.847 P.2/3 :^|^BfiD UNIF DIST ^ 1 arSsbad Un^ffsd ScSioof Distnct 801 Pine Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 729-9291 • FAX (760) 729-9685 ...a world class district August 29» 2000 State of Califonua Department of Real Estate 107 South Broadway, Room 7111 LosAngeles,Ca. 90012 Re: Project Name: Holly Springs Property Developer; Ladwig Job No. L-1061) Location: East of College Boulevard near Cannon Road Project Size: 47 one-half acre minimum residential lots, 100 multi-&mily units (some designated affordable housing) Carlsbad Unified School District has reviewed the above project and its impact on school attendance areas in this District At this time, the schools of attendance for this project are: Hope Elementary School (K-6) 3010 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-6100 Valley Middle School (7-8) 1645 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad. CA 92008 (760) 602-6020 Carlsbad High School (9-12) 3557 Monroe Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760)434-1726 The Governing Board wishes to advise the Department of Real Estate and residents of Carlsbad that at present the Carlsbad Unified School District elementaxy schools are operating at full capacity. It is possible, therefore, that the students generated from this project may not attend the closest neighborhood school due to overcrowded conditions and, in f&ct, may attend school across town. You should also be aware that there are no school buses for regular student transportation fiom home to school. The Governing Board wishes to also infonn you that conditions imposed upon new development within the City of Carlsbad requires mitigation of school impacts. Sincerely, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services '^^^ ^ : =: De^lopcr LADWI6 DESIEN GR ^(jl I/'' PLEASE NOTE: Time limits on the processing of discretionary projects established by state law do not start until a project application is deemed complete by the City. The City has 30 calendar days from the date of application submittal to determine whether an application is complete or incomplete. Within 30 days of submittal of this application you will receive a letter stating whether this application is complete or incomplete. If it is incomplete, the letter will state what is needed to make this application complete. When the application is complete, the processing period will start upon the date of the completion letter. Applicant Signature Staff Signatured Date: ///4 VJiO^ To be stapled with receipt to application Copy for file ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART n (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/LFMP 15-C DATE: June 19. 2002 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Holly Springs 2. APPLICANT: David M. Bentlev 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 7449 Magellan St. Carisbad. CA 92009 760-476-0335 DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: 11/22/00 4. 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed proiect is a subdivision of a 99 acre site to allow 43 single family-residential lots and approximately 60 acres of open space located in northeast Carlsbad in LFMP Zone 15. The proiect requires a zone change. General Plan amendment. LFMP amendment, and hillside development permit. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The simimary of envirormiental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ^ Land Use and Planning ^ Population and Housing Geological Problems El Water X Air Quality E Transportation/Circulation Q Public Services ^ Biological Resources ^ Utilities & Service Systems I I Energy & Mineral Resources ^ Aesthetics Hazards |2NJ Cultural Resources I I Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 03/28/96 DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. XI I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I I I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measiu-es based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A(n) EIR/Neg Dec is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I I I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR/MEIR 93-01/Neg Dec pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR/MEIR 93-01/Neg Dec, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. er Signature / Planner Signature ' Date\ Plaiming Director's SFignature/ Date Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source docmnent to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fi-om "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measiu-es, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated piu-suant to that earher EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental docmnent have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental doctiment is required (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or detennine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Infomiation Sources). I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? e) Dismpt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • S • m D D n m II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastmcture c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal resuh in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault mpture? b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amoimt of surface water in any water body? • • • • • • • • • X • • • • • • • • • X • • • X • • • • • • • • • • El • • • • • • • • • • • • X • • • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groimdwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Potentially Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact LJnless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • No Impact m • • • • m • • • s • El • • • • • s AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? X • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal resuh in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? • • • • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal resuh in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)?) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X • • • • • • El • El • • • • • X • • • VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? • • • Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient maimer? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State IX. HAZARDS. Would die proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? d) Exposure of people to existing soiu-ces of potential health hazards? e) Increase fu"e hazard in areas with flammable bmsh, grass, or trees? X. NOISE. Would die proposal resuh in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would die proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any ofthe following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other governmental services? Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • El • • • X • • • X • El • • • • • El • • • • X • • • • • X • • • X • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would die proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional water supplies? XIII. AESTHETICS. Would tiie proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstirated negative aesthetic effect? • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • X • • • X • • Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Infomiation Sources). c) Create light or glare? Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • •ED XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would die proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? XV. RECREATIONAL. Would tiie proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Cahfomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in coimection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have enviromnental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? • E • • • • • E • • • X • • • X • • • X • • X • • • X • X • • • X • • • • X • • XVn. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist Rev. 03/28/96 were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier docmnent piu^suant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measiu-es. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Site Location and Description The Holly Springs project is located in the northeast quadrant of the City of Carlsbad and is partially located within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191). The site is located southeast of the future intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road, and north of Agua Hedionda Creek. The 99-acre project site includes an exchange of land with the Cantarini Ranch Rancho property to the south. The property to the north primarily consists of tmdistm"bed coastal sage scrub habitat recently piu^chased by the State of Califomia. To the west lies the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park RV storage area and garden area, and the future multi-family site for both the Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch projects. The Cantarini Ranch project is located to the south and a residential neighborhood is located east of the site in Oceanside. The site is generally covered with imdisturbed, natural vegetation and granite boulders are present throughout the slopes of the hills. A portion of the southwest area of the property is currently used for agricultural purposes. Elevations of the site range from approximately 70 to 435 feet above mean sea level. Several hills are present on site; three peaks clustered on the west side of the site and one larger peak on the east side. There are a niunber of small drainages throughout the site including three natural springs and areas of ponded water, and an earthem dam. The site is located within the preserve planning area of the City's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The site includes a portion of Core 3 which connects to Link C. These areas form part of a wildlife corridor which connects with the Cantarini Ranch property to the south and the Kato and Mandana properties to the east. Project Description The majority of the project is located within the Simny Creek Specific Plan area which was developed for the purpose of establishing standards which would promote a nural estate type atmosphere and preserve the unique environmental resources of the area. The development proposal includes 43 single-family lots with a acre minimum lot size. A proposed 80-imit apartment project located west of the site will be used to meet the affordable housing requirements for the project. The affordable site was originally included with the Holly Springs project and therefore was included in the biological and geological analysis, as well as other reports. Approximately 58.8 acres of the 109.9 acres within the original project site (Holly Springs and multi-family site) are designated as "hardline" open space and together with the additional landscape and fire buffer areas comprise about 67 acres of open space. The project is dependent upon a loop road which traverses through the Cantarini Ranch project and connects to College Boulevard at two points. The project will also participate in the construction of certain water and sewer facilities as well as College Boulevard and Cannon Road, east of El Camino Real. These Citywide Improvements and Facilities were reviewed in EIR 98-02 prepared for the Calavera Hills Master Plan, Bridge and Thoroughfare District #4 (B&TD#4), and Detention Basins. The project includes a 3-way boundary adjustment that will facilitate 1) the exchange of Cantarini land west of College Blvd. for Rancho Carlsbad Partners land east of College Blvd., and 2) Cantarini land north of "C" Street for Holly Springs land south of "C" Sfreet and the 10 Rev. 03/28/96 multi-family site. The project will require a tentative map, and a hillside development permit to review the proposed grading. The project will also require an amendment to the General Plan, zoning, and Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan to reflect the new boimdaries of the proposed single-family residential and open space areas. LEAD AGENCY Pursuant to subsections 15050 and 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Carlsbad is the lead agency. The lead agency is defined as the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or disapproving a project. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS I. Land Use and Planning The application will require a Zone Change to change the existing LC zoning to R-1-0.5-Q for the single-family lots and to OS for the open space areas. The property ciurently has a General Plan designation of RLM (residential low-mediiun 3.2 du/ac) and OS (open space). A General Plan amendment is required to change the boimdaries of these designations to reflect the increased open space areas. The property is identified in the City's draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP) and contains areas designated as "Hardline Areas". Although the HMP has been adopted by the City of Carlsbad, it has not received final approval from USF&W or the Department of F&G. However, these agencies have indicated support of the HMP. The Holly Springs project deviates slightly from the draft "hardline" and the project must demonsfrate that the new hardline provides habitat of a quality that is "equal to or better" than the existing hardline. The project will not be incompatible with existing or proposed land uses in the vicinity nor will it disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The project site is generally undeveloped. Residential development proposals are ciurently under review for the property south of the subject site. The site has been used for agriculture as documented in a 1983 aerial photo. Approximately 9.9 acres of farmland will be impacted due to the proposed development. If the HMP is adopted, the project will be required to pay an agricultural mitigation fee to off-set the impacts. The property is listed as "X" - "Other Land" according to the San Diego County Important Farmlands Map, Califomia Department of Conservation, 1992. II. Popnlation and Housing The site is generally in a natural, undeveloped state with the exception of a small portion ofthe property used a farmland. The proposal will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections in that the Zone 15 LFMP estimated approximately 300 dwelling units for the project area based on a densities of 2.88 units per net developable acre for land located within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area and 3.2 units per net developable acre for the remainder ofthe site and 43 market-rate dwelling units are proposed. The multi-family housing site will be used to satisfy the 15% inclusionary (affordable) housing requirement for the Holly Springs project (7 units) as well as for the future Cantarini Ranch development. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 The project could induce growth since the project will bring roads and utilities into a relatively undeveloped area and will provide utilities and access to adjacent undeveloped properties. The project does not have the potential to displace housing. III. Geologic Problems Geotechnical reports have been prepared for the project by GeoSoils, Inc. The possibility of damage due to ground mpture is considered low since active fauUs are not known to cross the site. The potential for liquefaction is low, and the hazard from seiches and tsunamis is not present as the site is located away from the immediate coastal area. Preliminary investigations did not encounter any evidence of landslides. The geotechnical investigation states that seeps, springs, or other indications of high groundwater were not present during field investigations. However, the area is known to contain at least three springs and several areas of ponding as described in the Phase I Environmental Assessment Report. Additional analysis should be undertaken to determine if the spring/seepage activity on the site would have a significant impact on the proposed development. The report concludes that the proposed development appears to be feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that certain recommendations are incorporated into the design and constmction of the project. The major geotechnical areas of concem for the project site are earth materials characteristics and depth to competent bearing materials; expansion and corrosion potential of the site soils; potential for drill and shoot/blasting; regional seismic activity; and subsurface water and potential for perched groundwater. IV. Water The proposal will result in changes to absorption rates and drainage pattems due to the change of use from undeveloped natural areas and agriculture to residential development. The erosion potential would be reduced by the inclusion of necessary drainage and erosion confrols. The City of Carlsbad requires appropriate surface drainage features for cut and fill slopes and requires the slopes to be landscaped as soon as possible after grading to minimize potential erosion. No significant increase in erosion would be expected to occur with implementation of the City's Grading Ordinance and Landscape Manual requirements, as well as the recommendations provided in the geotechnical reports prepared for this project. The potential for water related hazards such as flooding would be confined to the area showTi as a 100-year flood plain where the College Boulevard extension crosses Agua Hedionda Creek. In addition, ground water is likely present in the cenfral south, cenfral and westem portions of the site due to natural seepage/spring activity in this area. The confrol of groundwater in a hillside development is essential to reduce the potential for undesirable surface flow, hydrostatic pressure and the adverse effects of ground water on slope stability. Since the project proposes to constmct sfreets and some housing in the vicinity of the wetiands areas, the presence of groundwater could have a significant effect on the project. The majority of the runoff from the site would be concentrated in the street, intercepted by curb inlets, and conveyed through the storm drainage system to the Cantarini Ranch storm drainage system which ultimately discharges into Agua Hedionda Creek either directly or through its existing drainage tributaries or water courses. Drainage on the northeastem portion of the site would be collected in a similar manner and conveyed into an existing drainage tributary on site which ties into the tributaries on the Cantarini Ranch project. The project will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and must demonstrate compliance with NPDES requirements and Best Management Practices. 12 Rev. 03/28/96 V. Air Quality Air quality impacts from the proposed project would include both short-term/temporary impacts during grading and/or constmction and long-term impacts. During grading operations, some temporary dust may be generated. This would be confined to areas proposed for grading and would not be of sufficient quantity to have any long-term or materially significant cumulative impacts. Uniform standard dust confrol suppression techniques will be utilized. The implementation of the project would also result in long-term impacts in the form of increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in the increase of emissions of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gasses, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air basin. Because the San Diego Air Basin is in a "non-attainment basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant, therefore, the "Initial Study" checkUst is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". Impacts must be evaluated and cumulative impacts will require a statement of overriding consideration. VI. Transportation/Circulation The proposed project would generate 516 average daily vehicle trips (ADT) and increase fraffic congestion on existing and planned roadways in the project vicinity. As a result of changes in intensity and location of proposed land uses, an analysis of the impact of the proposed development on the circulation system for the remaining properties in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area is needed. The proposed plans illustrate a circular loop road and connecting local streets which connect to College Boulevard. This section of College Boulevard is a continuation of "Reach A" of the proposed Bridge and Thoroughfare District # 4, which was reviewed under EIR 98-02. Regarding the emergency access or access to nearby uses, the project will be required to have access to El Camino Real through College Boulevard southbound and either to the existing terminus of College Boulevard northbound to Calavera Hills or to El Camino Real through College Boulevard northbound together with Cannon Road westbound. The current LFMP 15 requires the constmction of College Boulevard (ECR to Cannon Road) and Cannon Road (College Boulevard to ECR). In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in increased fraffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional confrol. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at build-out. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of fransportation such as frails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation 13 Rev. 03/28/96 strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-fraffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City sfreets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction ofthe City to control. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at build-out of the General Plan due to regional through-fraffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". The development of the proposed project would not create a large demand for new parking which would not be satisfied on-site, nor would it affect existing parking facilities. All development would be required to provide sufficient parking on site to satisfy all parking requirements. The project will be required to provide bus stops at appropriate locations. The project would not result in any rail, waterbome or air fraffic impacts. VII. Biological Resources A Biological Resources Report and Impact Analysis, and a Wetland Delineation Report was prepared for the project site by Recon. That report states that the site supports ten vegetation communities. These include freshwater marsh, cismontane alkali marsh, cismontane alkali marsh (seasonal), southem willow scmb, southem coast live oak woodland, mule fat scmb, Diegan coastal sage scmb, southem mixed chaparral, native grassland, and non-native grassland. These communities account for approximately 97.9 acres of the site. The rest of the site is disturbed, developed or under agriculture. The most significant resources are the wetland habitats, mule fat scmb, native grassland, and Diegan coastal sage scmb and impacts to these plant communities would be considered adverse and significant. The proposed project will impact sensitive plants including Califomia adolphia, Nuttal's scmb oak, and spiny msh. Impacts to non-native grasslands, southem mixed chaparral, and agricultural fields are considered to be significant. Impacts to the coastal Califomia gnatcatcher could occur during removal of Diegan coastal sage scmb and are considered adverse and significant. In addition, any impacts to nesting raptors or least Bell's vireo would be considered significant. The proposed project would have approximately 58.8 acres of open space. About 55 acres would be preserved in its natural state and with the remainder revegetated. A trail system may also be developed through the open space and associated impacts will need to be analyzed. Open space within the project would be provided in accordance with the Conservation Goals of the draft Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP) through modification of the draft "hardline' and meeting the "standards" guidelines for LFMP Zone 15. The Biological Resources Report assumed that all direct impacts would be fiilly mitigated through preservation within the HMP open space and through revegetation of non-native grasslands, manufactured slopes, and fire buffer easements. However, the City's HMP has not been approved. The project will require an EIR to analyze the significance/non-significance of all project impacts (with and without the HMP) including enhancement/revegetation of the wetlands areas, appropriate wetiand/riparian buffers, and management of the open space areas and frail systems. VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources Energy would be consumed at the project site in two phases. The first phase would be during constmction. The second phase would be after the project is completed and is being occupied. Energy consumed during constmction is considered to be short-term and therefore, is not a significant impact. Energy consumed after occupancy of the project would not have a significant impact since building constiuction must comply witii Title 24 of the Califomia Adminisfrative 14 Rev. 03/28/96 Code, which sets forth energy conservation requirements for new constmction. Measures relating to reducing the demand for automobile fiiel would be addressed under the sections dealing with air quality and traffic. Carlsbad has no non-renewable energy resources or no known mineral resources which would be of fiiture value to the region and residents of the state. No wasteful use of non-renewable resources is proposed. IX. Hazards No hazardous substances are proposed to be used for the residential development therefore, there is no risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances. The project circulation is dependent upon the two points of access from College Boulevard proposed by the Cantarini Ranch development and road improvements on College Boulevard (a portion of Reach A) from its current terminus north of El Camino Real (under constmction) to the northerly project entrance at "C" Sfreet. The remaining connections (Reach A, Reach B, Reach C, Reach 3, and Reach 4) are proposed as part of the Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II and B&TD#4 proposal. Since these improvements have not been installed, the Holly Springs project must analyze its potential project impacts with the existing and future emergency response plans ofthe City. The project does have the potential to negatively impact water quality as grease and oils from impervious surfaces, as well as fertilizers and pesticides used for project landscaping, could be carried off-site in drainage waters. There are no known existing sources of potential health hazards. However, trash, debris, and several abandoned/wreaked vehicles and abandoned/ stationary farm equipment were found on the site. The Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project recommended that a detailed agricultural chemical residue survey be conducted for the property. This report must be submitted to the County Health Department for review and approval prior to any discretionary approvals. The report also noted that it may be possible that buried/concealed/hidden tanks and agricultural by-products may have existed or exist which were not apparent at the time. All frash, debris, and materials containing petroleum residues will need to be disposed of off-site in accordance with current local, state and federal disposal regulations. With regard to fire hazards, the proposed project would be required to incorporate bmsh management/fuel modification zones between open space areas and adjacent residential stmctures to reduce the risk of exposure to wildfire. Sprinklers may also be required for homes that are outside of the Fire Departments 5-minute response time. X. Noise The project site is located in the Noise Impact Notification Area (NINA) identified in the McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). Much of the noise in this area occurs on an irregular basis, and although not considered a health or safety issue, may be a nuisance. To ensure that new residential discretionary projects notify new property owners of their proximity to the airport, the project shall be required to record a notice conceming aircraft environmental impacts, and clarifying that the property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar. XI. Public Services 15 Rev. 03/28/96 Fire protection services required as a result of the project will be provided under the City's Growth Management Program. The developer will be required to pay a public facility fee to mitigate any impacts on police protection created by the project. Likewise, the developer will be required to pay school impact fees to mitigate any impacts created by the project. Per the City's Growth Management Program, the project will not substantially impact maintenance of any public facilities or roads because any service required as a result of the project will be provided under the City's Growth Management Program. The project will be conditioned to comply with the Zone 15 LFMP to ensure the timely provision of public facilities required to meet the additional demands generated by the project. XII. Utilities and Service Systems The developer of the project will provide its share of improvements so that an adequate level of power, natural gas systems and supplies, and communication systems will be maintained. The developer will also contribute its share of improvements for local or regional water treatment or distribution facihties. Per the City's Growth Management Program, the project will not substantially impact sewers because the project will provide its share of improvements so that acceptable performance standards are maintained. However, the premise that the project will not substantially impact sewer is predicated on the constmction and operation of the South Agua Hedionda sewer line and pump station. Should these facilities not be operational, the building permits would be held up. The North Agua Hedionda line is close to capacity at the present time and might not be able to handle any additional load from this project. A revision to the current LFMP 15 is required to insure that adequate sewer facilities are provided. The developer of the project will provide its fair share of improvements to provide for adequate storm water drainage utilities. The project will not substantially impact local or regional water supplies because the project will provide its share of improvements so that acceptable performance standards are maintained. The project will be conditioned to meet all of the performance standards set forth for public utilities and facilities in the Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan. XIII. Aesthetics El Camino Real, which is designated as a Scenic Highway, is approximately 1/2 mile from the project site. The property consists primarily of undisturbed, natural vegetation and granite boulders throughout the hillsides and peaks. The site contains a ridge that is visible from El Camino Real and is a contributing element to the "back country vistas" seen along the roadway. The visual impacts associated with the grading for this project include cut and fill slopes, and alteration of the existing topography and features such as the peaks, ridgelines, and rock outcroppings. Over half of the site will remain in its natural condition with about 22.48 acres being graded. This proposal would require approximately 159,000 cubic yards of cut, 137,000 cubic yards of fill, and 22,000 cubic yards of export. The applicant has submitted a hillside exhibit which shows overall grading volumes of 7,100 cu. yd./acre. Retaining walls exceeding 6' in height are proposed adjacent to the loop road and will require evaluation and justification to allow a modification to the hillside design standards. At the time of plan review, no slopes exceeded a maximum allowable height of 40'. The proposed grading and constmction of homes could significantly impact the scenic quality of 16 Rev. 03/28/96 the El Camino Real corridor. An analysis of the potential visual impacts is also needed to insure that the project is consistent with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan intent of maintaining the "rural/estate character of the Sunny Creek area" and that the predominant features that contribute to the "back county vistas" are maintained. The analysis should include visual simulations that compare the existing terrain with the final appearance after grading and constmction of homes is completed. Development of the site would create new sources of light on the site from sfreetHghts and residential properties. However, lighting will be required to be directed downward so as not to affect any adjacent properties. XIV. Cultural Resources The subject site is located in an area identified by the General Plan as an area which could contain potentially significant fossil areas. In addition, the Geotechnical Report indicates that the property contains soils of the Santiago Formation. These soil types and deposits have a high potential for containing significant fossils. Destmction of fossils would represent an adverse impact on the region's paleontological resources unless mitigation measures are incorporated. Recon prepared a Cultural Resources Survey of the project site and no cultural resource sites were identified, nor were there previously recorded cultural resource sites identified through research of archives and documents. The project does not have the potential to affect historical resources since no historical site listings are located on-site or within a 1-mile radius of the subject property. No unique ethnic cultural resources were identified in the cultural resources investigation report and no existing religious or sacred uses were identified in the project area. XV. Recreational The project will increase the demand for additional recreational facilities and the project will be conditioned to pay the required Park in-Lieu Fees and Public Facility Fees for Park District 2 prior to approval of a final map/issuance of a building permit. The project will not adversely affect existing recreational opportunities. The project will be required to connect to the proposed Carlsbad Trail System near the southwest and southeast comers ofthe site which will connect to future links in the undeveloped areas. The project also may establish several trails throughout the open space areas in addition to maintaining a number of existing informal frails. XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, specifically with regard to impacts upon air quality and fraffic. Project impacts must be assessed with past, present, and future projects to determine if significant cumulative impacts would be created. Several potential environmental impacts identified in this initial study such as land use and planning, geologic problems, water, air quality, fransportation and circulation, biological resources, hazards, public services, visual aesthetics/grading, and paleontological resources could have potentially significant environmental impacts. Future analysis is required to determine if significant impacts in any of these areas would be created by the proposed project. 17 Rev. 03/28/96 Therefore, an EIR is required. EARLIER ANALYSES USED The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, 92008, (760) 602-4600. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 2. San Diego County Important Farmlands Map, dated 1992, Califomia Department of Conservation. 3. Limited Geotechnical Evaluation. Holly Springs Proiect. GeoSoils, Inc., dated October 11,2000. 4. Geotechnical Update Review. Holly Springs Proiect. Citv of Carlsbad. San Diego Countv. Califomia. GeoSoils, Inc., letter dated October 29,2001. 5. Preliminary Drainage Study for Holly Springs. O'Day Consultants, Inc., dated November 5,2001 6. Preliminary Storm Water pollution Prevention Plan for Holly Springs CT 00-21. O'Day Consultants, Inc., dated November, 2001. 7. Holly Springs Propertv Traffic Analysis. Willdan, dated November 13,2000. 8. Revised Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report - Parcel D. HoUv Springs Property. GeoSoils, Inc., dated November 26, 2001. 9. Holly Springs Environmental Noise Assessment. Pacific Noise Confrol, dated November 2,2000. 10. Biological Resources Report and Impact Analysis for the Holly Springs Proiect. Carlsbad. Califomia. Recon, dated December 13,2001. 11. Wetland Delineation report for the Holly Springs Project. Recon, dated October 8, 1999. 12. Cultural Resource Phase I Survey of the Holly Springs Property Parcel D. Recon, dated August 25,1999. 13. Paleontological Resources. Holly Springs. Natural History Museum, letter dated November 2,2000. 18 Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) C ASE NO: CTOQ-'Z^I DATE RECEIVED: (To be completed by staff) BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: 2. APPLICANT: \)f\\}[Q &EloTU^^ 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: A^/?-^gCO/4vU Sf~. 4. PROIECT DESCRIPTION: '/u >4<^i^g, <tAjQ^|£. f^A-'^lO^ LDT% C^l) k \oo vkO(^Ti FA*^ior 0^ tT^ g^r cP- i^oTo^e. c-ouc(^^ SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that would be potentially affected by this project. This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Planning Q Transportation/Circulation Q Public Services I I Population and Housing Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Geological Problems Q Energy & Mineral Resources Q Aesthetics I I Water Q Hazards Q Cultural Resources I I Air Quality Q Noise Q Recreation [ I Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attaciied) I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? ( ) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infi-astructure)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would tiie proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: Fault mpture? ( ) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) Subsidence of the land? ( ) Expansive soils? ( ) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) IV. WATER. Would die proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface ranoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • Less Than Significan t Impact • • • • No Impact • • • m • • • K • • • X • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • • • • (3 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attaciied) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact Potentialh' Less Than Significant Sienifican No Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated t Impact • • • (Kl • • • 0 • • • m • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • m • • • 0 V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation'' ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would tiie proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? ( ) • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • m • • • • • • m • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • 0 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents rnay be referred to and attaciied) VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would tiie proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wastefiil and inefficient manner? ( ) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) IX. HAZARDS. Would tiie proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing soufces of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brash, grass, or trees? ( ) X. NOISE. Would the proposal resuh in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) c) Schools? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • 0 • • • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • H • • • 0 • • • • • • m • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • 0 • • • m • • • m • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attaclied) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) e) Other governmental services? ( ) XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would die proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) b) Communications systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact c) Affect historical resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultaral values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) XV.RECREATIONAL. Would tiie proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • • • • • • m • • • m • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • m • • • m • • • m • • • s • • • • • • • • • m • • • 0 • • • X • • • m • • • Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attaclied) XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildUfe species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts tiiat are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of otiier current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact • 0 • 0 • K XVTI. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and .state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were wdthin the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 Iciduiig Design Group, Inc. November 6,2000 L-1061 EXPLANATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 1 FOR HOLLY SPRINGS I. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) The application will require a general plan amendment from RLM to RH for the multifamily/affordable housing site and a zone change from LC to R-1 and RD-M. b) There are no conflicts with existing environmental plans. c) No land use changes are proposed. d) A small farming area will be converted to multifamily development. e) No change will occur. n. POPULATION AND HOUSING a) The proposed population proj ection is below what has been identified in the Growth Management Plan for Zone 15. b) The project will bring roads and utilities into a relatively undeveloped area and will provide utilities and access to adjacent undeveloped properties that could induce growth. c) No housing exists on the property, m. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS a) Evidence of faulting was not encountered during the soils engineer's field investigation. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault located approximately 7 miles west of the site. b) GeoSoils, Inc. has stated that the possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low since active faults are not known to cross the site. c) Lurching due to shaking due to distance seismic events is not considered a significant hazard although it is a possibility throughout the southem Califomia region. d) Hazards from seiches and tsunamis are not present as the site is located away from the immediate coastal area and there are no large standing bodies of water in or near the site (see GeoSoils, Inc. report). e) The GeoSoils' report indicated from their preliminary subsurface investigation and site reconnaissance that there is no indication of landslides or other slope instability conditions on site. 703 pQlomar Airport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Explanation - Environmental Impacts Page 2 f) The project will be graded under the supervision of the soils engineer. In addition, the civil engineer will design the grading to provide for erosion confrol. g) Some settlement in relative deep fills will occur during and within months of the completion of the grading and some monitoring of settlement may be required. h) There are some expansive soils on site and the soils engineer has provided recommendations on removals and recompactions. i) Groundwater is not anticipated to exist within 25' of the surface of the site, except for possibly canyon areas. IV. WATER a) Absorption rates and drainage pattems will change from the development of the project. b) The project is not in a flood plain and no water hazards are anticipated. c) There will be no direct discharge into any surface waters. d) No changes are anticipated. e) No changes are anticipated. f) No changes are anticipated. g) Additional runoff will be generated as a result of the development. Detention basins are being proposed so the developed discharge does not exceed the undeveloped discharge rates. h) No impacts are anticipated. i) No change is anticipated. V. AIR QUALITY a) No violation is proposed. b) None are proposed. c) No changes are anticipated. d) There will be short-term odors from heavy equipment during the grading operation and installation of improvements. VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION a) Currently there are no residents on the property and the anticipated project will add an additional 47 single-family and 100 multifamily units so there will be increased traffic trips. A fraffic impact analysis has been prepared to address and mitigate any potential fraffic congestion. b) The project will be designed to meet City safety standards. c) The project will enhance emergency access to adjacent and nearby uses. d) The City standard parking requirements will be met. e) Pedestrians and bicyclists access will be improved. f) Bus stops will be provided on College Blvd. as part of the project. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Explanation - Environmental Impacts Page 3 g) The project is outside ofthe impact areas of Palomar Airport, vn. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) The project has received a "hardline" designation in the draft Carlsbad HMP. There will be impacts to Coastal Sage Scrab which will be mitigated on-site as part ofthe implementation of the project. b) No significant trees exist on site. Recon, our biological consultant, has prepared an impact analysis to address project impacts. c) Coastal Sage Scrub will be impacted. These impacts will be mitigated on-site. d) A minor drainage area will be crossed with a public road. e) The project does comply with the Carlsbad Draft HMP and is providing a wildlife corridor per the Citywide plan. vm. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES a) No conflict is known. b) No wasteful use of non-renewable resources is being proposed. c) No minerals are known to exist on site. IX. HAZARDS a) No hazardous substances are proposed to be used. b) The additional new circulation roads and local roads in the area will aide in emergency response times and any evacuation plans. c) No health hazard potential is being proposed. d) No existing sources of potential health hazards are known to exist. e) The project will provide the required City of Carlsbad fire buffer zones where the project is adjacent to open space areas and flammable bmsh areas. X. NOISE a) Noise levels will increase with the extension of College Blvd. A noise analysis has been performed and a sound wall is required along the multifamily area backing up to College Blvd. b) Severe noise levels are not present at the site. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Explanation - Environmental Impacts Page 4 XI. PUBLIC SERVICES a) With the extension of public roads and maintenance and an adequate fire buffer around the development, fire protection will be enhanced. b) Police protection will be aided by the extension of public streets and lighting into the area. c) The Carlsbad Unified School District has indicated that schools are at or near capacity and that students from the Holly Springs project may be required to attend schools that are not near the site. d) Upon completion of the public road system and acceptance by the City, the maintenance of public facilities will be provided by the City of Carlsbad. e) Other govemmental services provided by agencies outside of the City will be available to the residents. Xn. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS a) Power and natural gas systems will be extended to the property. b) Underground telephone and cable communications systems will be provided as part ofthe development. c) Water treatment and distribution systems are provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. d) Sanitary sewer systems will be installed as part of the project and be maintained by the City of Carlsbad. e) The proj ect will provide an underground storm water system including detention and NPDES requirements for pollution control. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by Waste Management. g) Carlsbad Municipal Water District will acquire water from the Metropolitan Water District and the San Diego Water Authority. Xm. AESTHETICS a) The nearest scenic highway is El Camino Real which is about 1 mile to the southwest of the project. b) The project provides attractive landscaping and maintenance of open space and will not have a negative aesthetic effect. c) Safety lighting will be provided and no glare is anticipated. XW. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) A paleontologist will be onsite, if needed, during the grading operation to monitor any effect on resources if existing. b) Recon performed a field survey and records check and no resources were found on site. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Explanation - Environmental Impacts Page 5 c) Recon did an extensive records search and there are no historical site listings within the subject property. d) No unique ethnic cultural values have been identified. e) No existing religious or sacred uses have been identified within the potential impact area. XV. RECREATIONAL a) Additional demands will be created for neighborhood parks and the proj ect will pay the required park fee at building pennit issuance. b) There currently are no existing recreational opportunities onsite. The project will provide some trails to enhance recreational needs. XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) A portion ofthe project is being developed on already impacted agricultural lands. Habitat corridors are being provided as part of the project's compliance with the draft HMP and the wildlife goals for fish and wildlife species self-sustaining levels. No artifacts of Califomia history have been identified on the site. b) No additional comments. c) No environmental effects will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECT NAME: Holly Springs Date: 052004 Project number: Planning CT 00-21 Project conditions: (Note: The following identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) \/ FIRE Department conditions that the following lots shall be required to be constructed to 1-hour fire exterior walls and features rated in conformance with the that abut the Fire Protection Zones. Contact the Carlsbad Fire Department for approved materials and methods. Strict adherence to the adopted Landscape Manual for the 60 - foot clearance from combustible vegetation is required. No combustible or wood fencing within 100 - feet of undisturbed natural vegetation The lots are identified as: Lot 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,11,12,13,14,15, 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 34, 35,36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45 and 46 y All subsequent submittals shall indicate that these lots are conditioned by adding the suffix "FR" to the lot designator and shall be noted by lot number on the title sheet of the working drawings. only lot pads are submitted at this time and placement of the prospective / \ dwellings is indeterminate, the following conditions apply: *Fire sprinklers are required under the following conditions: In accordance with Chapter 9 of the California Fire Code, the centermost portion of the rear first floor of any residence, measured in an approved manner from the / nearest public street exceeding one-hundred and fifty (150) - feet shall be protected I with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in conformance with NFPA V. Standard 13D. Additionally, FIRE shall ask that the following item be included in the final development agreement and CCR's; The maintenance of common areas and fuel modification shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. Strict adherence to the adopted City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual for the 60 foot clearance from combustible vegetation is required. There shall be no combustible or wood fencing within 100 feet of native undisturbed vegetation (F.3-6). No patio covers, decks or similar structures to homes occur within the first twenty (20) - feet of the afore mentioned sixty (60) - foot fuel modification zone unless fire rated or heavy timber materials are utilized and approval of said materials shall be obtained prior to installation from the Building Department. Please note that in accordance with the City's adopted landscape manual, unless the 60- foot fuel modification zone begins at the property line. Section F.3-2 prohibits tree and shrubs in the first twenty (20)- feet of the sixty (60)- foot zone. Fire Protecfion Services PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECT NAME: Cantarini Ranch / Holly Springs Date: 021704 Project number: Planning CT 00-18 / CT 00-21 Proiect conditions; (Note: This commentary identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) • The latest Fencing Plan(s) continue to indicate what I assume to be combustible fencing that separates individual lots. Please review these plans and particular attention to those lots that abut open space areas or lots. Fire has commented throughout its review of these projects that combustible fencing shall not be allowed within 100 feet of the front edge of undisturbed natural vegetation. • As stated in original review '00, FIRE shall require that all developed lots be protected by an approved Automatic Fire Sprinkler system. • Additional conditions may be imposed pending FIRE's review ofthe requested response analysis that has yet to be presented. CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT PLANNING DEPT Fire Prevention Division TRACKING DESK REC'D: Land Use Review Report PROJECT NAME: Date: Project number: Staff Planner: Holly Springs 06/29/07 HDP 0012X1 B. Kennedy Engineer: Proiect conditions: (Note: The following identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire Department has reviewed this application and has no comments or conditions to submit. GR DATE: TO: CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO MAY 30. 2007 REVISED PLANS 1 Sl^»Mi^ M ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ATTN: TERIE ROWLEY • POLICE DEPARTMENT - ATTN: J. SASWAY IE FIRE DEPARTMENT - GREG RYAN i BUILDING DEPARTMENT - MIKE PETERSON RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE WATER/SEWER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - PELA SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT • SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT CALTRANS (send anything adjacent to 1-5) • PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): HDP0012X1 PROJECT TITLE: HOLLY SPRINGS APPLICANT: LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC PROPOSAL: EXTENSION REQUEST Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MICHELLE LENKOWSKI, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 06/19/2007. If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY, at 602-4626. THANK YOU COMMENTS: CX fey? 4-6 PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/07 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: •3 [ 6^ REVISED PLANS TO: <^ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT - ATTN: J. SASWAY FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - HEIDI HEISTERMAN ^WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT * CALTRANS (send anything adjacent to 1-5) * Always Send Exhibits FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO.Ct po-^l NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. PROJECTTITLE: VVQli^ ^^n/l^S APPLICANT: 'b^\> LArW^'j PROPOSAL: 3^ U-V SubcUvy;-s,i 6^, Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to \ , the Project Planner in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv f[23>^t>a- . (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it wiii be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact ^hck^haic^ ^/M^^ctyat 602- . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS:^7^Y^ (^^rHtpjlcty {]^.;t, y7^a^ A2/c^^iK^ /^^.^^^/^^^^/yk/^.^. PLANS ATTACHED FRM0020 10/01 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECT NAME: Holly Springs Date: 12/19/00 Project number: Planning CT 00-21 Project conditions: (Note: This commentary identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) Provide more that one entry to the development Provide a landscape plan for the wildland interface per the cities landscape guidelines Sprinklers are required in all units. Code reminders: (Note: This commentary is provided to assist the applicant, and identifies minimum code requirements that are fi-equently overlooked. # FILE COPY iO'P'Vl City of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION le^^c -^D CToo-ig) -^r drVh^r does October 2, 2007 Bentley Monarch Joint Venture 7449 Magellan St. Carlsbad, CA 92011 SUBJECT: CT 00-18x1/ SDP 01-10x1/ HDP 00-09x1/ SUP 00-09x1 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21x1/ HDP 00-12x1 - HOLLY SPRINGS At the Planning Commission meeting of September 19, 2007, your application was considered. The Commission voted 7-0 to APPROVE your request. The decision of the Planning Commission became final on September 29, 2007. 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 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attomey of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the Planning Director, Don Neu, Secretary of the Planning Commission, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (760) 602-4600. Sincerely, DON NEU Planning Director DN:BK:h cc: Data Entry Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6330, 6331, 6332, 6333, 6334, 6335. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us JPiN-51-2004 13:53 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD (7505438-0568 TO:60S8559 P.S Holly Springs, Ltd. P.O. Box 2484 Carlsbad, CA 92008 January 19, 2004 Barbara Kenedy City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ms. Kennedy, I have just finished reading your response to the comments received regarding Holly Springs/Cantaiini EIR, dated Jan. 15,2004. In the final sentence of item #1, you speak about "the USFW mitigation requirements" for Holly Springs. I believe this was settled at a meeting with Planning Dept. staff last Spring. The HMP for Carlsbad was years in the making. Land owners eventually worked out agreements delineating "hard lines" for their property. The space inside the hard lines was to be useable. It was balanced by the remainder on which the habitat was to be preserved. We met with Nancy Gilbert, Mr. Holzmiller and Mr. Wdeout and they approved our hard lines. We were allowed to use 109 acres of our 246 acres. It was agreed that we might sell 100 acres of pristine habitat including the creek, to the state. Nancy Gilbert agreed though she said it was really Carlsbads HMP and thus out of her jurisdiction. At that time , we did not need to own all the habitat to receive credit for it. No one questioned that there was sufficient habitat in 246 acres to allow us to build on 39.49 Acres. Otherwise, we would not have sold it to the Calif Dept. of Fish and Game- Wild Life Conservation Board! The HMP has taken years more for approval. New people work in the planning department and the various agencies. Nancy Gilbert is gone. The new people did not work through 10 years of struggle to solutions balanced between owners and planners. 1 expect govemment employees to keep the promises made just as 1 have kept my promises. We do not owe any more mitigation fees or land. That was settled years ago. This issue has become a matter of principle. Those who work for govemment cannot simply enforce their opinions because they represent the power of govemment. Thank you for your time. JfiN-21-2004 13:53 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD C750D438-0558 TO:6028559 P.3 Yours truly, Lucia Sippel Holly Springs Cc: Ladwg Design Benteq Dept. of Fish & Wildlife JPlN-21-2004 13:54 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD C7605438-055S TO:6028559 P.4 A History of the Problem In 19911 agreed to co-operate in saving habitat during an HMP planning meeting held in the meeting room at Calavera Park. At that time, speakers in NCCP meetings at Cjfflsbad City Hall publicly asked land owners to co-operate in conserving habitat for the public good. It has gone down hill fi^om there! Did you know that my family contributed 195 acres of wetland in the Agua Hedionda flood plain to the state of Califomia? That was a vested gift before Hillraan Properties purchased the property. Perhaps an extreme example would help. Let's take education; neither you Barbara nor Jeremy nor Ann still have valid high school diplomas. The requirements have changed and you will need to take some additional classes if you want your diploma. You need not do so of course, but the city and state hst high school diplomas as necessary to your job applications. You will have 90 days in which to meet the requirements. Results will be sent to the university task force for comments followed by a 30 day public response of concems. Rule 33.a ofthe city and state agencies require that you go on unpaid leave of absence until the resuhs have been approved. Similarities: - It has taken 12 years of work to reach what was to have been permitted use of property. After 12 years of meetings, thousands of dollars spent gathering information, agency approvals given, the rules are changed . ( no diploma) Objections: 1 pa-sonaily know land owners who did not co-operate. They stripped all habitat off their property and sprayed it with Roundup so they have no habitat. They are rewarded for that.They are not caught by this latest mle because they removed all the habitat a few years ago. We who followed the law, did not scrape off every tree and bush are caught - i.e. demands for more mitigation. We set out to estabhsh an area with few houses through which native creatures could fiher. There was to be little grading, a narrow road that followed the ups and downs of the topography - impacting little on the land. It was to serve as buffer between higher density human occupation and the open space. It was sited on the south-facing hillside away Srom the Encinas creek to avoid impacting the open brush land to the north and the Encinas creek as much as possible. It was a use that justified my grandfathers struggles to keep land. Tt paid for 109 years of property taxes. It was to pay for family retirements and medical expenses and insurance and fanning activity in our old age. JflN-21-2004 13:54 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD (7505438-0668 TO:5028559 P.5 It has turned into urban rural, thousands of yards of grading changing the shape of the land; concrete roads and side walks, quantities of trees and fences and signage all for the desires of humans - not rural in nature. I am left with the realization that none of you know what rural is. Observation: Our land is not (yet) in the hands of Pardee or Laimar nor McMillan. We are merely citizens of long standing who happen still to own land. We agreed in 1991 to co- operate in saving habitat. Because we asked that we be paid for some of what was excess habitat land we are being punished. Did you know that an appraisal established the value of habitat at $22,500. per acre? Or that development land across the street brings $300,000.+ an acre? What do you think? Have we given up anything in order to co-operate and save habitat? We think it is unfair and unjust to demand more mitigation land. The lesson to be learned is, scrape off the brush! JflN-21-2004 09:02 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD C750)438-0668 TO:6028559 P.2 Barbara Kennedy January 20,2004 Carlsbad Planner RE: Holly Springs Project Barbara: Holly Springs is at a crossroad - either redesign, give in to new demands, or withdraw the project. Our rationale is that once again previous commitments, mles and expectations are being changed. In other words, the "No New Surprises" concept once again is the issue. Fish and Wild Life apparently had decided that previous commitments and consent by a former representative, Nancy Gilbert, won't be adhered to. Holly Springs is nearing the final planning stages, and F&WL is requesting we do something extra. On principle, we can't accept these demands and quietly give in when we feel it is imjust and unfair. Our position is as follows: Rule #1 If one plays by the rules, one will be or should be rewarded. An analogy: Is it feir to assume that in an athletic contest that during the final quarter, the rules will remain consistent? OR is it OK for a replacement official to enter the game and change the rules. Our position is that we played by the mles and didn't remove habitat. We have observed other property owners in Carlsbad destroy habitat. We set aside added acres in case we had to mitigate. Now F&WL states we have to mitigate outside our property. We can't use the land we set aside. It seems other owners destroyed their habitat. Therefore no mitigation was required on their part. During that past decade our femily representative has attended over one hundred HMP planning meetings with all agencies required. Hardlines have been developed with consent of City of Carlsbad officials and F&WL and other agencies. Nancy Gilbert represented F&WL at that time. During this period we also negotiated a sale of other habitat land to the State with agreement of aforementioned officials. Now new F&WL staff have come up with a surprise that not only do we have to give up 2/3 ofthe land in order to use 1/3, but we have to acquire added acres of grassland OUTSIDE our property. A 3:1 mitigation is being required. The matter of principle is the issue. It's not only the added expense we object to, but the willingness of F&WL not to honor earher commitments. No one wants to operate in a sphere of uncertain rules. Like most property owners, we would like to use and develop our property. The family has been the custodians of it since the 1880's, We have paid the taxes and cleaned up trash when dumped; in general we have taken good care of the property. If habitat is so important for the general public, then the public should acquire with compensation that needed land and not squeeze it out of the pockets of the owners. JeN-21-2004 09:03 FROM:HOLLY SPRINGS LTD C7605438-0668 TO:6028559 P.3 Our original intent and desire was to develop some large rural lots with minimal grading, creating some 40 + or - lots on 109 acres of land. This was not to be high density. City standards wouldn't allow this concept so we adjusted to the standards. In summary, when we have tried to play by the rules and then see governmental agencies not adhering to previous commitments, we become incensed. It may be best if we withdraw the project which will result in less traffic now, but fewer homes. College Boulevard won't be completed We may need to fence the property and return to cattle grazing in order to pay taxes. Maybe we should wait 5-10 years and then tiy again or sell to a developer who would likely put more houses than we wish or had planned for, We hope in future athletic events, the participants won't have to worry about rule changes. Thank you for time and consideration. Sincerely, Marvin Sippel Copies: Lee Ann Carranza David Bentley Bob Ladwig Loduiig Design Group, Inc. November 21, 2003 RECEIVED Barbara Kennedy NOV 2 1 2003 City of Carlsbad Q,yy Qp CARLSBAD Plannmg Department PLANNING DEPT 1635 Faraday Avenue rLANlNIIMU Utr I. Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: RESUBMITTAL FOR CANTARINI RANCH (CTOO-18) AND HOLLY SPRINGS (CTOO-21) (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP JOB NO. L-l048) Dear Barbara: Enclosed are six sets each of the tentative maps for Cantarini and Holly Springs. There are some other exhibits that I will refer to later on in this letter. Also as I mentioned on the phone, the lot numbers have changed on Cantarini to reflect all the open space lots that have been added in response to your earlier comments. 1 will go through your letter of July 31, 2003, item by item, and provide the appropriate response. GENERAL 1 A. Medians have been incorporated into A and C Streets. Rather than adding decorative walls we widened the right-of-way. IB. We have added extra open space lots where it did not reduce the lot area below the minimum lot size. IC. Numerous open space lots have been added as suggested. This will accommodate expanded landscape area level with the parkway. 2. Many of the open space lots occur where the lot is below the street and backs up to A Street or other streets. We agree with you that this concept will help add more landscaping and provide for rural character. 3A. We have identified on the front sheet a note relative the hillside and hill top architecture. The lots that are subject to that have an asterix next to the lot number. 3B. The building area extending into the fire buffers have been corrected. 703 Palomar nirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 fPiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21, 2003 Page 2 3C. Setbacks on panhandle lots have been identified. 3D. Through lots setbacks have been adjusted. 4. We discussed this on November 20*. As indicated we weren't sure how to respond to measuring the trees to be retained or removed. As I recall you were still thinking about it. My suggestion would be to possibly locate the live oak trees in the vicinity of lots 88 through 91. I don't recall any other major trees within the ownership. 5. The College Bridge and BJ Basin have been added to the plans and will be highlighted on the landscape plan. 6. On Sheet 2 of the tentative map the "no parking signs to be posted areas" are shown on the small key map. 7. We would like to use the Mission Bell light to try to enhance the rural character of the project. 8. Bus stops have been shown as required by NCTD. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN 1. The DG Trail has been shown on Holly Springs on the Cantarini plans. 2. The DG Trail has been shown on the east side of L Street. 3. DG Trail has been shown on the east side of J Street. 4. Trail has been shown between Lots 16 and 37 (Old Lots 8 and 29). 5. Landscape plan will show the trail within the multi-family. 6. These are now lots 29 through 33. Lots 29 and 30 have an additional lO-foot wide lot, Lot 55. 7. We are not showing a future trail in the state lands as recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I believe their statement was they didn't want any trail segments leading to State properties. 8. The lot configuration changes and the additional street to the VIXA property have been added. 703 Palomar nirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FRX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21, 2003 Page 3 9. Tony will be showing in more detail the trails on his landscape plan which will be submitted to you next week. I believe this is a weak area and we probably need to sit down after you have had a chance to look at things and discuss this some more. CANTARINI RANCH TENTATIVE MAP 2/Sheet #2. Items A through F have all been added. These items have all been added. Sheet #3/Item #A This has been modified. 3B. 3C. Sheet #4 Sheet #5 We have added the DG Trail on College. This has been updated. We have added the bridge plans to Sheet #4. We have not added the cobble design as requested. We need to talk about this further. Items A and B have been corrected. Item 6/Sheet 5,11, & 12 This is an area where we added an open space lot to address the setback concem. Item 7A/Sheet 6 Wall heights have been identified. 7B. 7C. The contour line has been corrected. Sidewalk has been added. 8/Sheets 5-8 Item 9 - Sheet 7 The slope along College has been labeled with the ratio which varies We deleted the reference to BJ apartments and added BJ Basin. Item 10/Sheet 9A. A SDP is going to be included. IOB. IOC 11/Sheet 11 The steps will be added from the apartments down toward the bus stop on College. The trail has not been shown north ofthe apartments to the open space. We have added top of wall and bottom of wall elevations. 703 Palomar nirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FnX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21, 2003 Page 4 IIB IID 12A 12B. 13A 13B. 13C. 14/Sheet 14/A 15/Sheet 16/A 15B. 16/Sheet 17/A 17/Sheet 18/A 19/Sheets 11, 19 & 20 Panhandle Lot 44 (formerly 73 has been reduced to 20 feet. This is a shared driveway with Lot 43). Parking spaces have been deleted adjacent to the pond along with the pond being deleted. Lot 86 (formerly Lot 78 has been redesigned and the panhandle Lot 84, formerly 76, has been deleted. The slopes adjacent to the riparian area have been modified. Lot 72 (formerly Lot 62) has been amended. It is now a panhandle lot. The small wall has been deleted with the change in the grading. We have added the trail between the two cul-de-sacs and the cross-section now shows on Sheet 10. These lots have been adjusted to meet the criteria specified. Lot 105 (formerly Lot 96) has been redesigned to meet panhandle standards. Lots 109 and 110 (formerly Lots 101 and 102) now the shows a 35-foot front yard setback. We have also adjusted the width of Lot 110 (formerly 102) to provide more building width. L Street has been redesigned. M Street has been extended to the subdivision boundary. O'Day has attached an exhibit to show the impacts if the retaining walls were reduced to a 6-foot maximum. We have not done a redesign to totally avoid the wetland impacts. HOLLY SPRINGS TENTATIVE MAP 1/General/A IB. We have added extra lots adjacent to the north edge of P Street to provide the additional open space areas. Lots have been redesigned so they don't encroach into the open space. 703 Palomar nirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FRX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21, 2003 Page 5 IC. Buildable area lines do not encroach into the fire buffers now. ID. This trail item, we need to discuss further. IE. 60-foot conservation easement has been designated also as fire buffer/conservation easement. 2/Sheet 1 We have changed the zoning as indicated. 2B. We now have six phases with the last phase being Lots 42 through 46. C. Indicated the proposed density. D. We've indicated the allowed density. 3/Sheet 2/Item A The cross-sections have been amended. 4/Sheet 3/A These hard line arrows have been corrected. 5/Sheet 4/A Setback has been corrected. B. Setbacks are shown at 35 feet. C. Setbacks have been added. 6/Sheet 6/A The 3 5-foot front yard setback to Lot 8 has been added. B. 50-foot side yard setback on Lot 9 has been added. C. The line separating RLM 2 and 2A has been dashed. 7/Sheet8 The phase designation has been deleted. 7B. The word possible has been deleted. 8. Sheets 9 and 10 have been deleted and a new Sheet 8 has been added to show the note for the farmed area which is now Lot 49. We also show a Sheet 9 and 10 that shows the complete boundaries ofthe open space Lots 40, Sheet 10 shows 42. We think it's a good idea to show on one sheet the larger lots. 9/Sheet 11A The last sheet in the set is now the phasing plan that we discussed earlier. 703 Palomar nirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FnX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21,2003 Page 6 10. We have constructed a note for the farmed area that shows on Sheet 8. Please review that for any changes that you may want to indicate. We've made the farming area a separate lot which is an easy way to keep track of the area that needs to be re- vegetated prior to the development of Lots 43 through 46. LANDSCAPE PLANS Tony Lawson has indicated that he will be submitting the Landscape Plans prior to Thanksgiving. APARTMENT PROJECT 1. O'Day is completing a separate site development plan exhibit for the apartment site. We have clarified the density and how we arrived at the units per acre. 2A. The landscape and architectural plans are a separate set of plans. 2B. We have followed the application checklist on the site development plan. 2C. The landscape plan will show the frash enclosures along with the urban treatment areas shown on the tentative map/site development plan. 2D. The community building floor plan has been revised. 3. Landscape Plan/Site Plan - All of these items are addressed on both the site development plan by O'Day and the landscape plans by ADL Planning. 3. Engineers Plan - These four items will show on the site development plan. 4A. Architectural Plan - The plans are 24" x 36". 4B. The maximum building height has been corrected. The architect has looked at the roof design. 4C. The community building height has been shown along with the materials for the pointed feature on the peak of the roof 4D. A summary of the 1, 2, & 3 bedroom units has been included. 4E. The patio areas on the architectural plans have been identified. 703 Palomar nirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FnX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy November 21, 2003 Page 7 4F. The mechanical equipment location has been shown. 4G. Color boards are attached to the resubmittal. 4H. David Bentley will coordinate with the Housing and Redevelopment to draft affordable housing agreement. August 12, 2003 - Memo from Jeremy Riddle (Second review of Cantarini property). O'Day Consultants have gone through the 87 items in the check list and responded accordingly. In summary we are including: 1. 6 sets (folded) of the revised tentative maps 2. 6 copies of a list showing old an new lot numbers for Cantarini. 3. 6 copies of 6' retaining wall heights (Sheets 1-3 of 3) 4. Previous check prints for both projects 5. 5 sets of Cantarini color boards for the multifamily 6. 5 sets of revised architectural plans 7. 6 sets of grant deed (Cantarini to Bentley-Monarch - 10/29/03) 8. 1 set of plan and profile sheets for offsite roads (A, K, I, & M Streets) Next week the landscape plans for Cantarini and Holly Springs will be delivered. Also, O'Day and ADL will complete the SDP/Landscape plans for the multifamily area and it should be in your hands the week of December 1 or sooner. We look forward to your response. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:ndg cc: David Bentley Lucia Sippel 703 Palomar nirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FnX (760) 438-0173 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department July 31,2003 Robert C. Ladwig Ladwig Design Group 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: CT 00-18 - Cantarini Ranch and CT 00-21- Holly Springs Dear Mr. Ladwig: The Planning Department has completed the review of the tentative maps and site development plan for the affordable housing project for the above referenced project. The Engineering Department will also complete their review in the next several days and send their comments/redlines to you under separate cover. The following Planning Department comments need to be addressed prior to resubmittal of the plans. GENERAL 1. In order to incorporate the "Livable Streets" concepts into the plan to the greatest extent possible, several modifications should be made: A. Incorporate a median at the primary entrances to the project at "A" Sfreet and "C" Street. Decorative retaining walls may be incorporated into the slopes/entry features to facilitate widening of the roadway to accommodate the medians. B. In instances where the CalTrans sight distance area occurs on certain lots (ie Lot 46 and 82) the property line should moved outside of the sight distance line and the landscaping within the sight distance area should be incorporated into the streetscape. The sight distance area could either be an open space lot or an expanded right-of-way. C. Widen the parkways, create an open space lot behind the sidewalk, or show an open space easement area on lots which slope down from the street to allow for adequate planting between the back of sidewalk and fence/property line. The expanded landscape area should be level with the adjacent parkway. (Cantarini Lots 70-75, 82-84, 21, 22, 65, 46, 36-38). (see comment #2 below). 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 2 2. Lots which were level or down slope from Street "A," with side or rear yards adjacent to the street, were to be designed with a wider right-of-way or an open space area behind the back of sidewalk so that there would be room for trees and landscaping between the back of sidewalk and fence. We had discussed showing an open space lot in these areas that would become part of the HOA maintained streetscape. Although an open space lot would reduce individual lot areas, it would provide a buffer between the street and the side/rear of the lot so that the lot no longer would qualify as having "sfreet frontage", nor would there be a need to relinquish access to the adjoining street. An intervening open space lot between the street and the lot would also reduce the setback requirement for the affected lots since they would no longer have street frontage. My suggestion is to increase the landscape area along the street using the difference between the setback requirement for a street side setback and an interior side setback. This would also solve fiiture fencing problems for the development since it would allow a 6-foot high fence at the property line. The additional landscape along the street could become a real asset to the project and would add to the openness and rural character of the development. I would like to discuss this concept with you in more detail and also discuss several other areas where this concept could be used in the Cantarini Ranch and Holly Springs projects. 3. On both TMs, the proposed building setbacks have some errors. A. All homes developed on lots with downhill perimeter slopes greater than 15' high will be subject to the Hillside regulations requiring a .7:1 setback (slope setback: structure height) from top of slope for structures. Some of the setbacks are incorrectly shown encroaching into or going up to the edge of the slope. B. The Holly Springs TM shows the buildable area as extending into the fire buffer areas and slopes in a number of instances. C. The location of the front setback must be clearly designated on all panhandle lots. The front setbacks for these lots must also be shown on the final map. D. The width of the setback adjacent to the "through street" should be 50 feet for rear yards fronting the street, similar to the setback requirement for the "Through Street Side". There are several lots which need to show this setback requirement. 4. Indicate the diameter and species of trees to be retained and trees to be removed. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 3 5. The design of the bridge, Basin BJ, and all landscape and other proposed improvements need to be shown along the length of College Boulevard. Additionally, you will need to provide more detailed information for the transitional improvements which will need to take place in the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park. For example, new fencing and landscaping will be required and the intemal roads to their tennis courts and possibly other areas will need to be adjusted. 6. On street parking is permitted only on one side of a street per the Specific Plan unless a variance from this standard is permitted (pg 5/6). Most streets will be permitted to have parking on both sides. However, there are a number of instances where parking is not desired along the street (for example, adjacent to the open space areas). The areas for "No Parking" will be marked on the Engineering Comment redlines. 7. Include a detail for the "rural character" street lights as required by the Specific Plan. Street lights along College Boulevard should be the City's standard street light. The "rural character" sfreet lights must use the City standard for lighting (lOOW High Pressure Sodium Vapor Lamp). They will need to be privately maintained unless it is a City approved light standard. The Mission Bell street light is a standard light that can be maintained by the City and that could be an option, but you may have something else in mind. Whatever is chosen will most likely be the standard for the rest ofthe Specific Plan. 8. Show the location ofthe bus stops as required by NCTD. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN (dated 1/16/03) needs to be revised as follows: 1. A DG trail should be shown on the south side of Holly Springs Road starting at the intersection of "C" Street and along the open space area to Lot 39. The sidewalk would then begin at Lot 39. A sidewalk will also be required with development of the Phase II Lots. 2. A DG trail should be shown on the east side of "L" Street. 3. A DG trail should be shown on the east side of "J" Street, north of Lot 92 to "M" Street. 4. Show a trail in the 20' utility easement between Cantarini Lots 8 and 29. 5. Add a community trail with a connection to the bus stop through the multi-family site. 6. Lots 21-25 on "O" Street only need a 10' wide parkway. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 4 7. Show a future public trail in the State lands to connect the trail segments in the Holly Springs open space (northeast of the apartments). 8. Update the plan to include recent modifications to the lot configurations and the addition ofthe street to the VIXA property. 9. You will need to work with Liz Ketabian on the design ofthe multi-use trails to incorporate any recommended mitigation measures associated with equestrian use of the trails. CANTARINI RANCH TM 1. Sheet 1: Please make minor corrections to the cover sheet: A. Cable Television - Adelphia. B. ADT should be 1,260 for SFD and 640 for MF. C. Under density, show allowable density, show density for the SF area and density for the MF site. D. Proposed Zoning - R-1-0.5-Q, RD-M-Q, and OS. E. Add OS to existing General Plan (RLM and OS). F. Ad RMH to proposed General Plan (RLM, RMH and OS). 2. Sheet 2: A. Show a typical lot drainage detail for the lots with shared driveways. B. Add a road to VIXA. C. Show "M" street through to the subdivision boundary. 3. Sheet 3: A. All sidewalks should be non-contiguous and should incorporate a parkway design. Sidewalks may meander within the 10' or 13' parkways; however, you will need to coordinate the location of the utilities in relationship to the sidewalk. B. A meandering concrete sidewalk, instead of a DG trail, should be provided along College Boulevard. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31, 2003 Page 5 C. Please include details for all streets and trails per the Pedestrian and Circulation Plan (with revisions as noted above). 4. Sheet 4: A. Please show a concept for the bridge design. Maybe something with a cobble design on the sides would tie in with the rural character. 5. Sheet 5: A. The sound wall is shown as 7' around Lot 86, however the Acoustical Analysis indicates that only a 6" wall is required in this location. Similarly, a 6' noise wall is shown on a berm near the north end of the project. Please refer to the Acoustical Analysis and revise the plans to show the height ofthe noise walls as recommended in the noise mitigation measures. B. The maximvun length for a panhandle serving one lot is 150'. Please keep this in mind when redesigning Lot 68 as proposed in conjunction with the future Lubliner subdivision. 6. Sheets 5,11, and 12: A. Lots 70 - 77 and Lot 18 and 19 should have a 50 setback adjacent to the "through street" ("C" Street). 7. Sheet 6: A. Please label the heights of the sound wall on Sheet 6. B. Please check the contour line labeled "130" on the slope of Lot 1. I think it should be "110." C. The sidewalk is missing along Street "F." 8. Sheets 5-8: A. The slope along College Boulevard is shown as "2:1" and "Varies". What does it vary to? Contour grading is required along this slope. 9. Sheet 7: A. Delete references to "BJ Apartments" and instead, refer to this area as "BJ Basin" (typical). CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31, 2003 Page 6 10. Sheet 9: A. The site plan for the apartments should be deleted from the TM set and instead, included with the Site Development Plan drawings for the apartments. B. Show a trail connection, such as railroad tie steps from the apartments to the bus stop location on College Boulevard. C. Show the trail connection north of the apartments, through the open space as discussed with Liz Ketabian. 11. Sheet 11: A. Provide TW/BW elevations at several locations along the proposed retaining walls. B. The panhandle potion of Lot 73 should be reduced to 20.' Is it a shared driveway with Lot 72? Please clarify. C. Show a 30' front setback for Lot 75. D. Delete the parking spaces near the pond (typical for all affected sheets). 12. Sheet 12: A. Lot 78 needs a minimum lot frontage of 33.' I think this will be resolved when you add the new street to VIXA and delete the panhandle at Lot 76. B. Show contour grading on the slopes adjacent to the riparian mitigation area so that they have a more natural appearance. 13. Sheet 13: A. Lot 62 either needs to have a 20' wide panhandle or 33' minimum frontage on the end of the cul-de-sac. B. Please try to modify the grading plan to eliminate the small retaining wall adjacent to the 30'easement. C. Show a trail in the utility easement. Include a detail for this trail as well as the frail in the 20' utility easement between Lot 7/8 and 29. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 7 14. Sheet 14: Show a minimum width of 80 feet at the setback line for Lots 37 and 38. Lot 36 should either be designed with a 20-foot wide panhandle or it must meet the 80' min. lot width at the setback line. 15. Sheet 16: A. Redesign Lot 96 utilizing a standard 20' wide panhandle. The panhandle as currently shown could be wide enough to support an accessory structure and that potential needs to be eliminated. Show the net developable area for Lot 96 on the table (sheet 2). B. Show a 35' front setback for Lots 101 and 102. As discussed previously, the configuration of Lot 102 may present some difficulties for fiiture development. 16. Sheet 17: A. Can "L" Street be reduced in length so that the slopes can be reduced? The slopes in the area will be quite visible and should be contour graded. It was also previously suggested that you explore relocating the cul-de-sac street to the east of Lots 88 and 89 so that all of the lots in this area would have street frontage and the panhandle lots would be eliminated. Please address this comment. 17. Sheet 18: A. Show "M" Street continuing through to the subdivision boundary. 18. Sheets 11, 19 and 20: A. Justification must be provided to allow a Hillside Standards modification for the over-height retaining walls in Cantarini Lot "E" and Holly Springs Lot 41. Please show how these areas would be developed with adherence to the hillside guidelines. Two scenarios should be evaluated: 1) show grading impacts to the wetland areas if the retaining walls are reduced in height to 6' max; and 2) avoid wetland impacts and show what the result would be if the roads and lots were reconfigured. HOLLY SPRINGS TM 1. General: CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31, 2003 Page 8 A. The lots with side yards adjacent to the "through" street should incorporate a widened landscape area so that adequate planting can be provided behind the back of sidewalk. As a suggestion, if a 30' wide open space lot could be provided along the street then the lots would no longer have a "street frontage and a 20' side setback would be required. The combined 30' open space and 20' sideyard would still comply with the original setback requirement of a 50' sideyard, but would enhance the street scene and could be designed to incorporate that rural quality that we been looking for. B. The lots should be designed so that they do not encroach into the open space area. I thought the concept was for the lot line to follow the edge of the fire buffer. C. The "buildable area" lines should not encroach into the fire buffer areas or slopes. D. Delete the arrows to existing trails. Delete the trail realignment and show trails as discussed with Liz Ketabian. Keep the "screened back" word "trail." E. Label the 60' conservation easement as Fire Buffer/Conservation Easement. 2. Sheet 1: A. The proposed zoning should be R-1-0.5-Q. B. Change Phase VII to Phase II. C. Indicate the proposed density of the subdivision (excluding remainder parcel "A"). D. Show the allowable density based on the constraints analysis. 3. Sheet 2: A. The details need to reflect the parkway sidewalk design and various trail designs as previously discussed. 4. Sheet 3: A. The existing and proposed hardline arrows (near Lots 36 and 37) point to the wrong hardline areas. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 9 5. Sheet 4: A. Lot 32 should have a 70' front setback. B. Lots 18-22 should have a 35' front setback. C. The setback for panhandle lots must be designated on the TM and Final Map. D. Dimension the width of the panhandles (15'min.) for Lots 20 and 21. The one on Lot 20 looks a little too narrow (also sheet 5). 6. Sheet 6: A. Show a panhandle for Lot 8. Indicate the 35' front setback. B. A 50' side setback is required adjacent to the street side setback of Lot 9. C. Show a dashed line for the line dividing RLM-2 and RLM-2 A (on Lot 4 and portion of Lot 9). Or, is there a reason why you think you need to show the dividing line? If not, just delete it. 7. Sheet 8. A. The Phase VII Lots should be designated as Phase II. B. Delete the word "possible" from Future Mitigation Area. 8. Sheets 9 and 10 do not need to be included in the TM set. It looks like these are habitat maps and these should be included with the HDP plans. 9. Sheet 11: A. The Phasing Plan should clarify that it is a construction-phasing plan, not a map-phasing plan. I would prefer not to include this with the TM sets. 10. With regard to the Phase II Lots, we will want to obtain a temporary/revocable easement over the lots and the temporary agricultural area. This could allow temporary open space preservation over the Phase II Lots and temporary agricultural uses in the Open Space area. The future mitigation area should be included as part of the Phase II Subdivision. Let's discuss this in more detail. LANDSCAPE PLANS 1. The landscape plan will need to be revised to address the comments regarding additional landscaping along a number of the lots, particularly on the side or rear CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 10 yards of the through lots. Also, the details of the pond area need to be revised. Show the current lot configurations and the new street to VIXA property. 2. Please include a fencing plan for the project. Show the location of the fencing on the lots with side or rear yards adjoining a street to insure that an adequate area for planting is provided between the back of sidewalk and the fence, include fencing for residential lots with side or rear yards adjacent to open space, and show fencing between the pond and adjoining trail (re-sawn posts w^lack vinyl chain link). A comment was received to place a split-rail fence along the multi- use trails to keep equestrians out of the wetlands area. We can discuss this in more detail. 3. A Landscape and Trails Maintenance Plan will be required to distinguish between areas of HOA maintained and owner maintained lands, and lands which will be conserved and managed through an endowment to a non-profit conservation organization. The location, identification, and management responsibilities for the trails should also be included on this plan. 4. Add street trees on both sides of all streets. Trees should be planted in informal groupings rather than at a standard spacing for a more rural/estate appearance. There may be areas where an on-center spacing would be more appropriate and we can discuss this, but in areas where the sidewalk is meandering, an informal grouping would be preferred. 5. Please coordinate with the project engineers to ensure that the components ofthe proposed storm water pollution plan are integrated into the landscape concept plan. 6. Specify the type of planting palette proposed for the crib walls adjacent to the wetlands areas. 7. Include details of the entry monument signs for the project. APARTMENT PROJECT 1. The multi-family site has been discussed as containing 7.2 acres. The LFMP shows 6.99 ac. of net developable area. The TM shows 6.37 acres (277,669 sf) and lot "G" which is 0.86 ac. for a total of 7.23 acres. The density for Lot 106 needs to be calculated based on net developable acreage. How are you calculating the 6.99 ac of net developable acreage? I am planning to use the RMH General Plan designation for this site. It will not be a problem to go above the Growth Control Point of 11.5 du/ac for the RMH designation as long as the project is within the range of 8-15 du/ac. 2. General: CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31, 2003 Page 11 A. Include the site plan (currentiy prepared by O'Day), the landscape plan and architectural plans for the apartment project as a separate set of plans, stapled together. B. Go through the application checklist and provide all applicable information for the apartment project on the cover sheet. C. The site plan and landscape plan need to be coordinated so that features such as trash enclosures and urban pollution freatment areas are shown in the same locations. D. The site plan does not appear to accurately reflect the community building floor plans. Landscape Plan/Site Plan: A. Provide dimensions on the site plan (parking spaces, drive aisles, distance from property lines to buildings and parking areas, separation between structures, etc.). B. A minimum distance of 10' must be provided between the property line on "C" Street and the drive aisle. C. The landscape plan should utilize berms or dense planting to screen views towards the parking lots. D. Show any proposed retaining walls on the landscape plans. E. Use decorative paving at the primary project entrance. F. Delete about 5 parking spaces at the primary project entrance and use an enhanced landscaped area as a focal point. G. Add landscaped islands between parking spaces at intervals of every 10 parking spaces. A minimum of one tree shall be provided for every 4 parking spaces. H. Include calculations for area of landscaping for recreation uses and the percentage of landscaping in the parking areas. I. Relocate the "overlook" area to connect with the proposed trail location. The trellis structure needs to be constructed of non-combustible materials. CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31, 2003 Page 12 J. Provide a trail connection (railroad ties?) from the southwest comer of the apartment project to the bus stop on College Boulevard. K. The low retaining walls along the parking areas should either be continued along the length of the slope or should be eliminated by reworking the grades for the site. L. Provide a children's wading pool in conjunction with the swimming pool area. M. Show trees located within the parkway on "C" Street. N. Trash receptacles need to be designed to City standards. Please indicate some type of trellis stmcture over the trash enclosures to screen views down into the enclosure. O. The sidewalk should be expanded to accommodate a 2' car overhang when it is located adjacent to parking spaces. P. Show a pedestrian connection to the sidewalk on "C" Street. Q. Add bike racks and bike storage lockers for the residents. R. Show the location of the fire buffers around the site. 3. Engineer's Plan: A. Show the net developable acreage and calculate the density ofthe project based on net developable acres. B. Include grading quantities under general notes. C. Show the percentage of lot coverage. D. Zoning should be RD-M-Q. 4. Architectural plans: A. The plans need to be prepared on 24' x 36" sheets. B. The maximum building height is 35.' Can a hip roof be designed for the 3-story portion of the building to reduce the building height? C. Please show the height of the community building measured to the top of the roof. Indicate what the materials are for the pointed feature on the peak of the roof # • CT 00-18 - CANTARINI RANCH AND CT 00-21 - HOLLY SPRINGS July 31,2003 Page 13 D. Include a summary of the number of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units and indicate the number of affordable units proposed in each category. E. Please dimension and give the square footage of the private patio areas. F. Indicate the location of any mechanical equipment and show the method of screening. G. Provide a color and materials board for the apartment project. H. You will need to coordinate with Housing and Redevelopment regarding the terms of the draft affordable housing agreement regarding timing for the constmction of the affordable units. Please include 5 sets of plans with your resubmittal. Please call me at 760-602-4626 if you have any questions or need to set an appointment to discuss any of these items in more detail. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP Associate Planner BK:bd C: Gary Barberio, Team Leader Jeremy Riddle, Project Engineer File Copy Loduiig Design Group, Inc. May 2, 2002 Barbara Kennedy ^f/|y Q ^ , City of Carlsbad Q..J. " ^ mi 1635 Faraday Avenue ' ^ OF CAR/.SDA n Carlsbad, CA 92008 '^'-^NNINQ DBPT RE: HOLLY SPRINGS (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. JOB NO. L-1061) Dear Barbara: On January 9,2001, you submitted a letter to me reference Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch. On January 3, 2002, we resubmitted the Holly Springs property based on your letter to me dated December 22, 2000. Since that time we have discussed the project very briefly, but we have gone through and made a significant number of changes to address your original concems. The following are comments based on your January 9,2001 letter to me. Please note that I will only address your letter as it relates to Holly Springs, not to Cantarini. Item No. 1, Page 1: The apartment site has now been removed from Holly Springs and added to Cantarini. In addition, we have reduced the size of the apartment site from 100 down to 80 units and have pulled off the grading from the seasonal cismontane alkaline marsh. Item No. 4, Page 2: We have made adjustments to the development and also recalculated the hardline areas. You will notice that on Sheet 2 of the tentative map, the current hardline area was 57.76 and now the proposed hardline area is 58.80 for an increase in 1.04 acres. 703 pQlomor nirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy May 2, 2002 Page 2 Item No. 6, Page 2: Attached to this letter is a draft worksheet I have prepared that reconfigures the 4 fiiture lots adjacent to the farm area. In addition, the area ofthe proposed hardline that is currently farmed is about 2.7 acres and the new development, within the future lot area, is 2.8 acres. This includes the lots themselves and the 60-foot buffer along the easterly edge. Also, you will notice that I have amended the lot configuration to better line up with the open space corridor between Lots 9 and 10 and further to the north. Please look this draft reconfiguration over and if it is acceptable to you, I would like to add it to the tentative map. These fiiture lots obviously would not be built until such time as the farming activity has ceased and the area identified for future habitat has been revegetated. Your letter also says we need to discuss this with you at future meetings with the wildlife agencies. Item No. 2, Page 2: Per your suggestion, we have made significant changes to the grading for Lots 1 through 9. The upper lots generally have driveway access graded and the balance of the lots have been left natural. Now, I think this will have a large impact on the appearance of this project from surrounding areas. In addition to the fiiture lot exhibit, I have also enclosed a new project description and 3 copies of the latest version of the tentative map and constraints map. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:mo Enclosures cc: Lucia Sippel, Holly Springs, Ltd. (w/enclosures) David Bentley, Bentley-Monarch, LLC (w/enclosures) 703 Polomor fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Loduiig Design Group, inc. L-1061 5/02/02 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (REVISED) HOLLY SPRINGS BACKGROUND Carlsbad is a City with a population of approximately 85,000 people. The City is located along the northem coast of San Diego County; 30 miles north of downtown San Diego. It is bordered to the north by the City of Oceanside, to the south by the City of Encinitas, on the east by the Cities of Vista and San Marcos, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. Carlsbad has a combination of industrial, commercial and residential development including a large regional shopping center, an auto retail center, a large industrial park area, the LEGOLAND Califomia Educational Park, and a regional airport. The City contains three lagoons, extensive agricultural areas and large tracts of undeveloped land, and significant natural open-space. The total area of the City of Carlsbad is approximately 40 square miles. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Holly Springs property lies in the northeast quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, north of Palomar Airport Road and east of El Camino Real within Local Facilities Management Zone 15. The current (and proposed) general plan designation for the property is residential low medium (RLM) and Open Space. The zoning is limited confrol (LC). The proposed zoning is R-1, and Open Space. Access to the property will be provided by College Blvd. College Blvd. and Cannon Road, all east of El Camino Real, have recently been included in the certified EIR for "Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase 2, Bridge and thoroughfare District #4 and detention basin" - EIR #98-02, SCH No. 99111082. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2, 2002 Page 2 The property will be developed consistent with Local Facilities Management for Zone 15. The project has been designed consistent with the proposed (HMP) regulations. Minor environmental impacts will be mitigated onsite. The project as proposed is compatible with the surrounding development and with the existing natural conditions. After significant negotiations with the City, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State Fish and Game, a "hardline" designation has been achieved and included in the current draft of the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. Significant acreage will be left in natural open space including the existing Holly Springs property. Total open space including common open space areas = 178.86 acres, or 82% of 218.73 total project acres. A further breakdown of the above areas is as follows: Residential lots (39) 30.76 Acres -14.06% Future lot area (4 lots) 3.26 Acres -1.49% Streets 5.85 Acres -2.67% Open space lots 40, 41 & 42* 59.52 Acres -27.21% Open space Area A** 98.88 Acres -45.21% Open space Area B*** 20.46 Acres -9.36% Total Ownership Area 218.73 Acres-100.00% *When the future lot area is developed, either the currently farmed area will be re-vegetated or an acceptable offsite mitigation will be implemented. **Area A is a pending sale to the State of Califomia for open space. ***Area B is to be reserved for disposal by owner for open space uses. A 20-foot access easement is being reserved across Lot 27 from "N" Street to the south edge of Parcel B and across the north 20 feet of Lot 28 for access to Lot 42. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad. California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2,2002 Page 3 The landscaping for the project will use a plant palette that is compatible and an extension ofthe existing native and plant palettes in the area. The project lies in and out of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan (SP-191). Project design criteria and setbacks for the entire subdivision will conform to SP-191. All lots are acre or more. The multi-family site has been removed from this application and added to the adjacent Cantarini project. There will be 39 one-half acre minimum single-family lots (not including the 4 future lots in the farm area). Many lots will have long driveways to present a "rural" design with minimal grading where possible. Fire buffers are provided as required by the City. The development and phasing of the project will start in the southwesterly comer adjacent to "C" Street and will work its way in a northeasterly direction. GRADING Grading will be adjusted in final design to balance around 159,000 CY/Ac with 22.48 acres being graded, the cubic yards per acre are 7073. This grading amount assumes the loop road within Holly Springs has been graded with the Cantarani project and that total is not included. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2, 2002 Page 4 GROWTH MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS The proj ect lies in areas RLM-2 and RLM 2-A of LFMP-15. Based on our Consfraints Analysis, our growth management density is: Area RLM-2 - 48.04 net acres x 3.2 = 153.73 DU's Area RLM-2A - 45.09 net acres x 2.88 = 129.86 DU's Total Dwelling Units Available 283.59 DU's* (43 ultimate units proposed - 240.59 not used) *Note: Units were not calculated in future open space areas A & B that total 119.34 acres. The project proposes 39 single-family units. The 39 units represents 14% of the allowed density, not including the growth management units in proposed open space parcels A & B (119.34 Acres). PROPOSED CIRCULATION SYSTEM (Loop Road Svstem) The main access to the property will be College Boulevard and was analyzed by the City for Bridge and Thoroughfare District Unit No. 4. The local circulation will be provided by a loop road starting out at "C" Street at College Boulevard going easterly along the northerly edge of Cantarini into Holly Springs, through Holly Springs, into Cantarini via "A" Street and back to College Boulevard. This loop road has been designed to meet the City cul-de-sac policy and to provide access to adjacent properties Our fraffic engineer, Willdan, has analyzed our loop road system and the balance ofthe entire project and the roads as being proposed meet or exceed City standards. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2, 2002 Page 5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REOUESTED • Tentative Subdivision Map O'Day Consultants (George O'Day) has prepared the tentative subdivision map consistent with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad and the State Subdivision Map Act. O'Day, as part of their portion of the application, included a hydrology study and plans for the loop road. Reference is made to CT 00-18-Cantarini - that is currently being processed by the City. • Hillside Development Permit This application includes a slope analysis, consfraints map and profiles prepared by O'Day Consultants. • Site Development Plan/Affordable Housing A site development plan (SDPO1 -10) is included with the adj acent Cantarani application for the multi-family/affordable housing site. Included with the Site Development Plan application are floor plans and elevations. The Holly Springs affordable housing requirement is as follows: Holly Springs 39 - 85% - 39 = 6.88 units A combination of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units will be provided in the Holly Springs and Cantarani affordable complex (SDP 01-10). 703 Palomar fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2, 2002 Page 6 • Zone Change/General Plan Amendment Zone Change and General Plan Amendment applications are included to change the zoning from LC to R-1, and Open Space. • Environmental Review/HMP Included with the application is an environmental impact assessment. In addition, this property has participated in the preparation of the draft Habitat Management Plan and has obtained staff recommendations for "hardline" designation. The Holly Springs plan as submitted will require minor adjustments to the "hardlines" shown in the draft HMP. The overall "hardline" area has been enlarged. The original "hardline" area was 57.76 acres and our proposal has increased the area by 1.04 acres to 58.80 acres. STUDIES/REPORTS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION • Archeology, Biology and Impact Analysis - These reports have been prepared by Recon. • Traffic Analysis - A complete analysis has been prepared by Willdan. • Soils and Geology - A complete report has been prepared by GeoSoils, Inc. • Noise Analysis - A complete report and recommendations has been prepared by Pacific Noise Control. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Project Description - Holly Springs May 2, 2002 Page 7 • Project Hydrology Report - O'Day Consultants has prepared a report that is included with the application. SUMMARY This application has been revised and presented in conformance with all the regulations of the City of Carlsbad and all elements are included. No variances are requested and cooperation has been obtained from surrounding properties for the proposed development. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Loduiig Design Group, inc. January 4, 2002 George O'Day ! < \a i O'Day Consultants \\\ n»HH««'^^* ^ 5900 Pasteur Court \ K 3sW* " Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: HOLLY SPRINGS (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. JOB NO. L-1061) Dear George: Barbara Kennedy at the City has questioned the acreages for Holly Springs and indicates some inconsistency between several documents. In reviewing the constraints map, you show 108.47 acres and on the tentative map, you show 96.22 acres. To fiirther complicate things, Recon shows 109.9 acres for the Holly Springs ownership which is sometimes called Parcel D. Attached to this letter is a copy of the boundary adjustment that Buccola Engineering did for the Cantarini project. What we need to do is be sure that the acreages are consistent between the two proj ects in all the various documents. The dividing line between Cantarini and Holly Springs should be the north line of "C" Street, as shown on the Buccola boundary adjustment. Please note that there is a small blip in the boundary line near the northeast comer of Cantarini that projects up along the north line of "M" Street into the Holly Springs property. Recon has used 109.9 acres (Parcel D), which comes from the attached plat that I did for breaking Holly Springs up into various parcels some time ago. After we have adjusted the acreages to agree with each other, we need to provide data to Recon so that they can make adjustments to their report and their impact analysis. 703 pQlomor fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CallFornlQ 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-01 73 George O'Day January 4, 2002 Page 2 Please go through the areas on the constraints map and on the tentative map and advise me which area is the correct one following the boundary between the two projects as I described above. If you would like to get together for any reason to clarify any of this or answer any questions, please give me a call. We also need to make a slight adjustment to the grading and fire buffer within Lots 33, 34, and 35 (see attached sketch). The purpose of this small adjustment is to not have any clearing within two small wetlands areas. Please make the area changes and the grading/buffer changes in Lots 33,34, and 35 and send the data to Wendy Loeffler at Recon and to me. We do not need to resubmit now to the City, but I need to give Barbara Kennedy a letter reference what the changes are. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C.Xadwig, President RCL:mo Enclosures cc: Barbara Kennedy, City of Carlsbad (w/enclosures) Phil Buccola, Buccola Engineering (w/enclosures) Wendy Loeffler, Recon (w/enclosures) Lucia Sippel, Holly Springs, Ltd. (w/enclosures) David Bentiey, Bentley-Monarch, LLC (w/enclosures) 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 XHIBIT A-9/26/1 HOLLY SPRINGS CARLSBAD CA. N i LAND GRANTED TO C.U.S.D. PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AUGUST 26, 1998 PER DOCUMENT #1998-0543228 0' 5 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO "TERRACES" PER DEED RECORDED MAY 9. 2000 PER DOC. # 2000-0239594 NOT A PART, CMWD TANK SITE PER DEED RECORDED JAN. 4, 1963 FILE NO. 1851 OF O.R. AP# 168-050-08 (80' RADIUS) ® 800' N77-03'22"E S12*56'38"E S7r03'22"W N12'56'38"W 466.69' 466.69' 466.69' 466.69' NOTE: BOUNDARY AND PARCEL COMPUTED FROM RECORD OF SURVEY #7918 HOLLY SPRINGS LTD C/O LUCIA SIPPa P.O. BOX 2484 CARLSBAD CA. 92018 (760) 438-0668 1 of 2 Lodiuig Design Group, inc 703 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD #300 « FAX (760) 438-0173 9/27/01 JOB L-1061 CS3\\FS\LDG\L-1061\PLAT\PARCELMAPSEPT01.DWG 01-04-02 11:11:28 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PORTIONS OF LOTS "B", "0" AND "E" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 823 FILED NOV. 16, 1896. SHEET 4 OF 9 SHEETS ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY GF CARLSBAD No.. APN 209--070--01 K 02 APN 209--050--50 APN 158--050--26, 44 K 45 APN 168--050--05 K 07 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY: Pm)^P D.' BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 APPROVED BY: ASST. CITY ENGINEER REG. NO. DATE SE CORNER LOT."D 'MAP NO. 823. " 03 ••ID A= 15°58'23' R=330.00^ L=92.00 B0''25'32"W- 96.75 02°24'08" 42.00 SEE SHEET 9 FOR EASEMENT LEGEND COR. COMMON B. D S E, MAP a 1 m -cn UJ N N 84°25•35"W 394.25 C/L COLLEGE BLVD. 102' WIDE. PER PM 17985 S DOC. 1998-0055998- POR. LOT "B", MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED PCL. 1 IN DOC. NO. 2000-0699587 S SHOWN AS REMAINDER PCL. ON PM 17985. 89°26'32" 300.75 A=22°48'12' R=470.00 L=187.06 66°38'20"W 247.52 A=29°18'12' R=630.00- L=322.21 15°47'35"W 320.22' SHEET ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY OF CAELSBAD No._ APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY: PHILZP D. BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 APPROVED BY; APN 209-070-01 S 02 APN 209-060-60 APN 168-05n-?R 44 S 45 ASST. CITY ENGINEER APN 168-050-06 S 07 REG. NO. DATE Is Co Q. <- EXISTING LOT LINES PER DOC. NOS. 89-561719, 95-0100176. 2000-0699587 S 2001-0167132 O.R. AND PARCEL MAP NO. 17985 TO BE REMOVED. PARCEL A SEE SHEET C/L COLLEGE BLVD. 102' WIDE. PER PM 17985 S DOC. 1998-0055998 AS POR. LOT "B". MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED PCL. 1 IN DOC. NO. 2000-0699587 S SHOWN AS REMAINDER PCL. ON PM 17985. LINE DATA 0 BEARING DISTANCE N 13°34'49"E 949.70 eg) N 00°15'08"E 324.35 N 86°31'49"E 25.78 N 00°2G'49"E 413.71 N 01°16'11"W 52.56 N 01° 25'11" W 57.66 0 N 00°05'49"E 54.69 N 69°54'49"E 31.21 N 00°15'0a"E 181.10 SCALE: SEE SHEET 9 FOR EASEMENT LEGEND SHEET 6 OF 9 SHEETS ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY CARLSBAD No.. APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3551 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; 7'A PHILIP D. BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 APPROVED BY: APN 209-070-01 S 02 APN 209-060-60 APN 168-050-?fi 44 S 45 ASST. CITY ENGINEER APN 168-050-06 S 07 REG. NO. DATE APN 168-050-46 OWNER: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DOC. 1998-0543227 S 1998-0543228 39 SEE SHEET 9 FOR EASEMENT LEGEND PARCEL D SEE SHEET 8 PARCEL 4 -z., , PM 17985 POR LOT "D" MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED IN DOC. 95-0100176 COMMON TO LOTS MAP NO. 823 1543.43 PARCEL B \ SEE SHEET 6 \ C/L COLLEGE BLVD 102' WIDE. PER PM 17985 S DOC. 1998-0055998 POR. LOT "B", MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED AS PCL. 1 IN DOC NOS. 89-561719 S 2001-0167132 0 •EXISTING LOT LINES PER DOC. NOS. 89-561719 95-0100176, 2000-0699587 S 2001-0167132 0 AND PARCEL MAP NO. 17985 TO BE REMOVED. SEE SHEET B". MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED AS DOC. NO. 2000-0699587 S'SHOWN AS REMAINDER PCL. ON PM 17385. SHEET 7 'OF 9 ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY OF CARLSBAD No._ APPLICANT: . BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; PHli^POTBUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 APPROVED BY; APN 209-070-01 S 02 APN 209-060-B0 ASST. CITY ENGINEER APN 168-05n-?fi 44 R 45 APN 168-050-06 S 07 REG. NO. DATE SEE SHEET 9 FOR EASEMENT LEGEND LOT "•' LOT "E" PARCEL C SEE SHEET 7 POR. LOT "D" S "E". MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED IN DOC. 1995-0100176 O.R. AND SHOWN ON ROS 7918 COR. COMMON TO LOTS B, D S E MAP NO. 823 a < m cn _j cc < CJ U- o >• h- 1-1 o N 89°55'50"E 1965.10 (I> PARCEL D 74.441 ACRES +/- POR LOT "D", MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED IN DOC. 95-0100176 N 02°24'0a"E 42.00 N 80''25'32"W 96.75 A= 15°58'23" R=330.00 L=92.00 889.40 469.43 LOT "B" N 89°26'32"W 5157.39 »V POR. LOT "B". MAP NO. 823 DESCRIBED AS PCL. 1 IN DOC. f^l NOS. 89-561719 S 2001-0167132 O.R. PARCEL A SEE SHEET 6 Ul Q M cn z < Ul a o u. o >-t- Id CD m P .^/ 1074.00 ^^^J^y^ SE CORNER LOT "D" MAP NO. 823 / EXISTING LOT LINE PER DOC. NOS. 89-561719. 95-0100176 S 2001-0167132 TO BE REMOVED. SHEET 6 OF 9 SHEETS ^'KjXr^jmJ^'^ ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY OF CARLSBAD No APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; APPROVED BY; APN 209-070-01 K 02 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; APPROVED BY; APN 209-060-60 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; APPROVED BY; APN 168-05n-?6. 44 S 45 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PREPARED BY; APPROVED BY; APN 468-050-06 R 07 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PWVCV? D. BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 ASST. CITY ENGINEER APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PWVCV? D. BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 ASST. CITY ENGINEER APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE DR. SUITE 231 TUSCON. AZ 85718 PWVCV? D. BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 REG. NO. DATE EASEMENT LEGEND .ITY EASE PAGE 343 O.R [GHTS OF WAY I OFFICIAL RECORDS IS NOT PLOTTABLE. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT I BOOK 4252. PAGE 595 O.R rT\ PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SDGSE RECORDED NOVEMBER 28 ^ BOOK 1550 ^ GRANT OF RIGHTS OF WAY RECORDED JULY 29. 1936 IN BOOK 541, 1928 IN PAGE 244 OF 0 RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SDGSE RECORDED OCTOBER 3, 1951 IN r7\ RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SDGSE RECORDED JANUARY 21, ^ DOC. NO. 12781 O.R. 1960 AS 0 GAS PIPELINE EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SDGSE RECORDED MARCH 31, 1960 AS FILE © 0 (D ® NO. 65563 O.R. DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT • RECORDED JANUARY 4. 1963 AS FILE NO. 1851 O.R. IS NOT PLOTTABLE." RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECORDED JANUARY 4, 1963 AS FILE NO. 1852 O.R. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SDGSE RECORDED OCTOBER 7. 1971 AS FILE NO. 231011 O.R. IS NOT PLOTTABLE. PUBLIC STREET AND UTILITY EASEMENT (COLLEGE BLVD.) IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD RECORDED FEBRUARY 4, 1998 AS FILE NO. 1998-0055998 O.R. (T^ CONSERVATION EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK LLC, A <^ CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. RECORDED MAY 9. 2000 AS FILE NO 2000-239594 O.R. (0) AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF BANNING T. CANTARINI. TRUSTEE. AND DOLORES P. CANTARINI. TRUSTEE. DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN DOC. 89-561719 REG. OCTOBER 17. 1989 AND PARCEL 2 IN DOC. 2001-0157132 O.R. AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES IN FAVOR QF BANNING T. CANTARINI, TRUSTEE, AND DOLORES P. CANTARINI. TRUSTEE. DESCRIBED IN DOC. 1995-0398033 REC. SEPTEMBER 7. 1995 AND DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 4 IN DOC. 2001-0167132 REC. MARCH 22. 2001. AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS. EGRESS AND ROAD PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF BANNING T. CANTARINI. TRUSTEE. AND DOLORES P. CANTARINI, TRUSTEE, DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 3 IN DOC. 89-561719 REC. OCTOBER 17, 1989 AND PARCEL 3 IN DOC. 2001-0167132 O.R. AN EASEMENT FOR CABLE TELEVISION FACILITIES IN FAVOR OF DANIELS CABLEVISION. INC. REC. DECEMBER 12, 1997 AS FILE NO. 1997-0631753 IS NOT PLOTTABLE. SHEET 9 OF 9 SHEETS ADJUSTMENT PLAT - CITY OF CARLSBAD No.. APN 209--070--01 R 02 APN 209--050--60 APN 168--050--26, 44 S 45. APN 168--050--06 K 07 APPLICANT: BENTLEY-MONARCH LLC 3561 E. SUNRISE OR. SUITE 231 TUSCON, AZ 85718 PREPARED BY: — PHIJ>IP D.-BUCCOLA R.C.E. 27732 EXPIRES: 3-31-02 APPROVED BY; ASST. CITY ENGINEER REG. NO. DATE loduiig Design Group, inc. January 3, 2002 Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: HOLLY SPRINGS (CT 00-21) RESUBMITTAL (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. JOB NO. L-1061) Dear Barbara: The following is our resubmittal of the Holly Springs property. This resubmittal is based on a letter to me dated December 22, 2000, and also a letter to me dated January 9, 2001. I will go through each letter, item by item, with the following responses. Letter dated December 22,2000 Planning 1. I have talked to Don Rideout reference the LFMP amendment and that will be submitted with the Cantarini application which will include all of Zone 15. 2. ADL Planning & Associates has identified on the landscape plan a note that all the landscape areas shown on the concept plan will be maintained by the HOA. 3. I am submitting three copies of a revised Phase I Envirormiental Site Assessment report. 4. I am attaching a copy of the signed paleontologist's report as requested. 5. The limits of grading has been amended to pull away from the wetlands and seepage areas. In addition, I am attaching three copies of an updated report from GeoSoils, Inc. 6. Comment noted reference conducting a survey during the spring season. 7. I am submitting two 1 "=100' scale color exhibits prepared by Recon identifying the biology and wetland resources. 703 pQlomar fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy A* January 3,2002 iO( m^^'f^^ I am submitting one copy each of the drainage study and also the SWPPP study prepared by O'Day Consultants. 9. O'Day has included grading quantities on the tentative map. Now that the affordable housing site has become part of the Cantarini application, separate grading quantities will be addressed on that plan. 10. New areas are provided as requested with the application. 11. I am attaching three copies ofthe new biological report including an impact analysis (Recon). (123 Recon has been asked to address the trail question identified in your City letter. 13. As mentioned earlier, the affordable housing site is now part of Cantarini. We will be asking for the RH land use designation based on the growth management developable acreage for the net site. The following are responses to the issues of concem: Planning 1. O'Day has provided a color graphic of the comparison of the hardlines both existing and proposed. 2. We have made significant changes to the configuration ofthe lots to minimize the number of lots that have direct access off of the loop road. 3. As you can see, the pads are now step pads per your suggestion and we have minimized the amount of grading and preserved views where possible. 4. As pointed out in your comments, a portion of our project is within SP 191 and a portion is outside of it. Our design criteria is based on the assumption that the entire project would be subject to SP 191 requirements. 5. Comment noted reference concurrent processing with Cantarini. 6. This comment relates to the proposed affordable housing. This project will satisfy its affordable housing requirements in conjunction with the Cantarini project on the affordable housing site that has now been attached to the Cantarini application. 703 Palomar fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, CaliFornia 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy January 3, 2002 Page 3 7. These comments pertain to the affordable housing project. We are combining these comments with the comments received from you relating to the Cantarini portion of the application. We anticipate to resubmit the Cantarini apphcation early next year. 8. It is the intent ofthe owner to continue to farm the area currently being farmed. We are also showing four future lots that would be developed in exchange for revegetating the farmed area after the farming has been stopped. This would be a separate application at a future date, and as mentioned, it is our intent to at some point to stop the fanning, and revegetate the farmed area in exchange for developing the four adjacent lots. Fire 1. The apartment site as part of the Cantarini application has been amended to provide two points of access. 2. The landscape plan will identify the wildlife interface as required by the landscape guidelines. 3. We acknowledge that all units will be required to be sprinklered. Letter dated January 9,2001 reference Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch The following are our responses to the numbered items: 1. The apartment site has been downsized to stay off the Cismontane Alkali Marsh area. 2. This comment pertains to Cantarini Ranch. 3. This comment also pertains to Cantarini Ranch. 4. We have made the adjustments to the hardlines to reflect your concems. 5. We have made adjustments so that there are no hardline areas within any private lots. 6. Comment noted reference discussions and fiiture meetings with wildlife agencies. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy January 3, 2002 Page 4 In addition to the above, you had comments related to contour grading and other items relating to both Cantarini and Holly Springs. The following are additional responses to items at the bottom of Page 2 ofthe January 9, 2001 letter. 1. This response is for Cantarini Ranch. 2. The grading for Holly Springs has been significantly amended since the original submittal. Please refer to the new plan. 3. We have used step pads and natural pads to minimize the grading impacts, as suggested, to provide a natural appearance and to blend with existing landforms. 4. You are suggesting that a view analysis be prepared. This has not been done to date and we may want to include it with a view analysis for Cantarini. You have suggested that we may want to process both Cantarini and Holly Springs together and do a single EIR for both projects. We would like to discuss that further with you and the owners at your earliest convenience. Because of the current timing of the two proj ects, I personally see some benefit to processing them as separate tentative maps under one environmental review process. This decision does need to be made by my clients and, as I mentioned, we would like to discuss this further with you in the very near future. In response to your letter to me dated December 21, 2001, O'Day has amended Lots 36 through 39 and they all now meet the V2 acre minimum. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:mo Enclosures cc: Lucia Sippel, Holly Springs, Ltd. (w/enclosures) David Bentley, Bentley-Monarch, LLC (w/enclosures) 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent February 1, 2002 Mr. Robert C. Ladwig Ladwig Design Group 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - Holly Springs Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Hillside Development Permit, and Site Development Plan, application no. CT 00-21 /GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15, as to its completeness for processing. As stated in previous correspondence, due to the fact that legislative actions are being processed concurrently with quasi-judicial actions the Planning Department has determined that the CT, SDP, and HDP must remain incomplete until the legislative actions are approved by the City Council. However, this will not delay the review and processing of your application. Comments relating to your latest submittal dated January 3, 2002 are attached. Please contact your staff planner, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:BKxs c: Don Neu, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer '-PTle Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - Holly Springs Planning: 1. The project will need to be included as part of the Zone 15 LFMP Amendment to be submitted with the Cantarini Ranch application. Please contact Don Rideout to coordinate these efforts. 2. During my recent conversation with Bob Ladwig, he indicated that Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch would like to move forward with preparation of a joint EIR. The City supports this decision. At this point, in order to move forward with preparation of the EIR, you will need to submit a letter together with the Cantarini Ranch applicants stating that you wish to proceed with preparation of the EIR. The letter and EIR deposit will need to be submitted prior to beginning work on the EIR. 3. The processing of a joint EIR for Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch will not preclude processing these projects as two separate tentative maps. However, if the projects are submitted as separate maps, they will each need to be designed to stand on their own. For example, the construction of the College Boulevard extension must be shown with each set of plans. Also, mitigation measures for impacts analyzed in the Cantarini Ranch proposal (such as Holly Springs Road) would need to be mitigated by the first project to submit for permits. Although it is anticipated that Cantarini Ranch will be the first project to begin construction, there is no way to guarantee that this will happen or to condition the project in such a manner. 4. Submit a colored constraints map, prepared at 1" = 200' and an overlay of the lots so that the constraints map can be analyzed in relationship to the lot layout. Please also submit a minimum of three slope profiles per section 21.95.1 IOB of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC). 5. Please include grading volume calculations with your next submittal per section 21.95.1 20D of the CMC. Grading volumes should only include your project and not the affordable housing site. 6. The project will require further analysis to determine if the area shown as the "buildable" pad is accurate as it relates to the development standards of the Hillside Development Ordinance. Please provide a slope analysis for the lots showing that the area indicated as "buildable" does not include any natural or manufactured slopes with a gradient of 40% or greater and having an elevation difference of greater than 1 5 feet. No development is permitted over slopes meeting this criteria and in addition, a slope edge building setback will be required for these lots per the Hillside Ordinance. Development is permitted to encroach up to 6 vertical feet into the base of a rear yard slope. 7. In order to approve the retaining walls adjacent to the wetland areas, the proposal will need to be reviewed in accordance with the Modification to the Design and Development Standards (Section 21.95.140 of the CMC). Please submit a grading plan showing how the site would be developed with a strict adherence to the 6' maximum wall height. The plan should show Holly Springs Road realigned to the north, as opposed to keeping the road ih place and expanding the impacts into the wetlands area. Both written and graphic justification shall be submitted in order to determine that the proposed modification will result in a superior project with less adverse environmental impacts. Engineering: Engineering comments will be sent under separate cover. Fire: 1. Provide a complete site plan showing all hydrant locations. 2. Provide landscape plans showing the details in the fire suppression zones. Please contact Colleen Balch at 602-4662 for any questions relating to the fire department comments. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. With regard to the HMP, the project boundaries have been significantly reduced so that Parcel "A" and Parcel "B" are now shown outside of the project boundary. The original project boundary (shown on the draft HMP hardline map) included about 230 acres, whereas now the project consists of about 96 acres. This will now require a revision to the draft HMP hardline which will need to be agreed to by the City and the wildlife agencies. In addition, the mitigation requirements for the Holly Springs impacts will also need to be reconsidered since the draft HMP hardline no longer represents the area shown on your proposal. The statement made in Table 9 under HMP mitigation "Additional mitigation acreage would not be required by the City of Carlsbad since the project has been included in the draft HMP as a proposed hardline preserve area" may be incorrect since the total area shown as preserved under the draft HMP is no longer included in the scope of your project. It is possible that the mitigation requirements will need to be a combination of those proposed under the HMP and those required under CEQA. At this time it is not known if the project impacts will need to be mitigated on-site or off-site on the Holly Springs property to the north. The hardline boundary issue is a critical issue that could greatly affect the design of the project. A meeting with the City and appropriate agencies will be needed to resolve this issue. 2. The lots shown as "future" must either be eliminated from the map or numbered and shown as Phase 2 of the tentative subdivision map. Mitigation for development of the lots needs to be included as part of the proposal. If approved, the Phase 2 lots would be conditioned to mitigate their impacts prior to final map approval for Phase 2. From a design standpoint, staff is concerned particularly about the most northerly "future" lot since it decreases the connectivity of the open space to the north with the open space located within the center of the project. Therefore, staff suggests omitting the northerly Phase 2 lot. There is also the possibility that if it is determined that the project requires mitigation for native grasslands at a 3:1 ratio. then staff may recommend deleting all of the lots and using this area for the required mitigation. 3. A residential use associated with the temporary farming can not be approved for property designated as open space. The interim use of the agricultural lands needs to be discussed in more detail. Some issues of concern are 1) the impacts associated with potential pesticide usage on the new residential lots, 2) access to the agricultural land, and 3) delineating the interface of the agricultural land with the preserved open space. 4. The street sections need to be shown with a landscaped parkway between the curb and sidewalk. In order to maintain a rural quality, the project should be designed so that landscaping can be provided between a meandering sidewalk and the property line as well as in the parkway between the curb and sidewalk. The project should avoid being designed with fences adjacent to the sidewalk with no landscape buffer between. There could be an opportunity to design the project with a wider landscaped open space buffer along the "through" street so that the rural quality can be assured through maintenance of a common area. This could also potentially reduce the setback requirements for the homes on the "through" street since they would not be adjacent to the street, but adjacent to a common open space lot. I would like to discuss this concept with you in more detail. 8. Please meet with me to discuss the lot area summary and open space equivalency numbers. Acreages in all documents need to be consistent with one another. 9. Why don't the lot lines adjacent to open space lot 42 follow the proposed hardline, similar to the other lot designs? Similarly, the rear lot lines of lots 27 and 28 should follow the hardline so that the proposed trail is located outside of the private lot area. 10. Connections to the trail should be provided through some of the cul-de-sacs in accordance with the Council's livable streets policies. It looks like the property lines on Lot 5 could easily be adjusted to provide a connection to the trail at the end of "A" Street. Please look at providing a minimum 20' wide trail connection at the ends of "B" and "N" Streets also. 11. The proposed grading/land form alterations for lots 4-9 will be evaluated in more detail in the visual simulation to be prepared for the EIR. If \ am reading this correctly, it looks like between 10 and 20 feet of the top of the hill will be leveled for the pads. Can you design the pads so that the natural landform can be retained to the greatest extent possible? 12. I have some questions about how some of the lots will sewer. For example. Lots 26, 27, and 28 show a small level pad area that daylights into the natural slope. This is great because it will help to maintain the original character of the area if the homes can be build so that they step down the natural slope. What we need to insure is that the depth of the sewer is adequate so that the lower level of these homes will not need to be pumped. Engineering Department will address this in more detail. 13. There are a number of errors/clarifications which need to be corrected on the plans as follows: a. Front and rear setbacks need to be designated for the panhandle lots. b. No development is permitted within the 60' conservation easement. By showing the setbacks in the conservation easement, it appears as though development would be permitted in this zone. Please clarify on the plans. c. Setbacks for lots greater than 1 acre are different than those for lots less than 1 acre. Please modify as required. d. Show the percentage of slope for the driveways. e. Sheet 3 - The existing and proposed hardline is mis-labeled (near the center of the sheet). f. Sheet 3 - Per our discussion, revise the grading near lots 30 and 34 to avoid wetlands impacts. g. Sheet 4 - Show the access point for Lot 22. h. Sheet 4 - The 35' front setback is shown correctly, but mis-labeled as 20' on lots 18, 19, & 22. i. Sheet 4 - Please redesign Lot 14 as a panhandle lot. j. Sheet 4 - Show the front setback as 70' for Lot 32. k. Sheet 4/5 - How is shared access for lots 20 and 21 accomplished? It looks like the slope in the panhandle will preclude joint access. 1. Sheet 5 - it looks like the pad elevations for Lots 27 and 28 are shown on the natural slope instead of the graded pad area. m. Sheet 6 - Show the panhandle as part of lot 8. n. Sheet 6 - Will Lots 8 and 9 have a shared driveway? Do Lots 6 and 7 have a shared driveway? Where is the access point for Lot 4? o. Sheet 6 - Lot 9 needs a 50' side setback on the through street. p. Sheet 6 - Use the same symbol for the conservation easement as shown on the other sheets. q. Sheet 6 - Please show the front setback for lots 6 and 8. We can discuss where to show the side and rear setback although it probably won't affect the plotting of the home site since it looks like the side and rear setback will occur in the 60' conservation easement area for the most part. These are examples of lots that need additional slope analysis to determine if an additional slope edge building setback is required. r. Sheet 6 - The matchline on the right side should reference sheet 4. s. Sheet 7 - Show the proposed access point for the farming operation. City of Carlsbad Planning Department December 21,2001 Mr. Robert 0. Ladwig Ladwig Design Group 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - Holly Springs Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Hillside Development Permit, and Site Development Plan, application no. CT 00-21 /GPA 00-06/ZC 00- 09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15, as to its completeness for processing. Due to the fact that legislative actions are being processed concurrently with quasi-judicial actions the Planning Department has determined that the CT, SDP, and HDP must remain incomplete until the legislative actions are approved by the City Council. Please contact your staff planner, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, \ /; MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER ( Planning Director MJH:BK:jt c: Don Neu, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - Holly Springs Planning: 1. The subdivision needs to be designed at least to minimum standards for lot areas. Please redesign the plans so that lots 36 and 37 contain at least VT. acre per the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. 2. All items included in your resubmittal of December 19, 2001 are being returned to you and may be resubmitted with the revised plans. Please set up an appointment to review your resubmittal to insure that all items listed on the December 22, 2000 letter have been submitted or have been addressed. Also, please include a composite drawing of the subdivision plotted at 1" = 100'. loduiig Design Group, Inc. December 19, 2001 DEC 1 9 2001 CITY OF CARLSBAD Barbara Kennedy PLANNING DEPT. City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: HOLLY SPRINGS (CT 00-21) RESUBMITTAL (LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. JOB NO. L-1061) Dear Barbara: The following is our resubmittal ofthe Holly Springs property. This resubmittal is based on a letter to me dated December 22, 2000, and also a letter to me dated January 9, 2001. I will go through each letter, item by item, with the following responses. Letter dated December 22, 2000 Planning 1. I have talked to Don Rideout reference the LFMP amendment and that will be submitted with the Cantarini application which will include all of Zone 15. 2. ADL Planning & Associates has identified on the landscape plan a note that all the landscape areas shown on the concept plan will be maintained by the HOA. 3. I am submitting three copies of a revised Phase I Envirormiental Site Assessment report. 4. I am attaching a copy of the signed paleontologist's report as requested. 5. The limits of grading has been amended to pull away from the wetlands and seepage areas. In addition, I am attaching three copies of an updated report firom GeoSoils, Inc. 6. Comment noted reference conducting a survey during the spring season. 7. I am not submitting a 1'-100' scale color exhibit prepared by REcon identifying the biologic wetland resources. The exhibit will follow. 703 Palomar l=lirport Road • Suit© 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 fPiX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy December 19, 2001 Page 2 8. I am submitting one copy each ofthe drainage study and also the SWPPP study prepared by O'Day Consultants. 9. O'Day has included grading quantities on the tentative map. Now that the affordable housing site has become part of the Cantarini application, separate grading quantities will be addressed on that plan. 10. New areas are provided as requested with the application. 11. I am attaching three copies of the new biological report including an impact analysis (Recon). 12. Recon has been asked to address the trail question identified in your City letter. 13. As mentioned earlier, the affordable housing site is now part of Cantarini. We will be asking for the RH land use designation based on the growth management developable acreage for the net site. The following are responses to the issues of concem: Planning 1. O'Day has provided a color graphic ofthe comparison of the hardlines both existing and proposed. 2. We have made significant changes to the configuration ofthe lot to minimize the number of lots that have direct access off of the loop road. 3. As you can see, the pads are now step pads per your suggestion and we have minimized the amount of grading and preserved views where possible. 4. As pointed out in your comments, a portion of our project is within SP 191 and a portion is outside of it. Our design criteria is based on the assumption that the entire project would be subject to SP 191 requirements. 5. Comment noted reference concurrent processing with Cantarini. 6. This comment relates to the proposed affordable housing. This project will satisfy its affordable housing requirements in conjunction with the Cantarini project on the affordable housing site that has now been attached to the Cantarini application. 703 Palomar fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760)438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy December 19, 2001 Page 3 These comments pertain to the affordable housing project. We are combining these comments with the comments received firom you relating to the Cantarini portion of the application. We anticipate to resubmit the Cantarini application early next year. It is the intent of the owner to continue to farm the area currently being farmed. We are also showing four future lots that would be developed in exchange for revegetating the farmed area after the farming has been stopped. This would be a separate application at a future date, and as mentioned, it is our intent to at some point to stop the farming, and revegetate the farmed area in exchange for developing the four adjacent lots. Fire 1. The apartment site as part of the Cantarini application has been amended to provide two points of access. 2. The landscape plan will identify the wildlife interface as required by the landscape guidehnes. 3. We acknowledge that all units will be required to be sprinklered. Letter dated January 9,2001 reference Holly Springs and Cantarini Ranch The following are our responses to the numbered items: 1. The apartment site has been downsized to stay off the Cismontane Alkali Marsh area. 2. This comment pertains to Cantarini Ranch. 3. This comment also pertains to Cantarini Ranch. 4. We have made the adjustments to the hardlines to reflect your concems. 5. We have made adjustments so that there are no hardline areas within any private lots. 6. Comment noted reference discussions and future meetings with wildlife agencies. 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FAX (760) 438-0173 Barbara Kennedy December 19, 2001 Page 4 In addition to the above, you had comments related to contour grading and other items relating to both Cantarini and Holly Springs. The following are additional responses to items at the bottom of Page 2 ofthe January 9, 2001 letter. 1. This response is for Cantarini Ranch. 2. The grading for Holly Springs has been significantly amended since the original submittal. Please refer to the new plan. 3. We have used step pads and natural pads to minimize the grading impacts, as suggested, to provide a natural appearance and to blend with existing landforms. 4. You are suggesting that a view analysis be prepared. This has not been done to date and we may want to include it with a view analysis for Cantarini. You have suggested that we may want to process both Cantarini and Holly Springs together and do a single EIR for both proj ects. We would like to discuss that further with you and the owners at your earliest convenience. Because ofthe current timing ofthe two proj ects, I personally see some benefit to processing them as separate tentative maps under one environmental review process. This decision does need to be made by my cUents and, as I mentioned, we would like to discuss this further with you in the very near future. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. Robert C Ladwig, President RCL:mo Enclosures cc: Lucia Sippel, Holly Springs, Ltd. (w/enclosures) David Bentley, Bentley-Monarch, LLC (w/enclosures) 703 Palomar fiirport Road • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Holly Springs, Ltd. 1287 Vera Cruz * Oceanside, CA 92056 2P January 22, 2001 Barbara Kennedy Associate Planner City of Carisbad Dear Ms. Kennedy, i have received a copy of your letter dated January 9, 2001, in which you discuss a forthcoming "stakeholders" meeting to discuss proposed hardline modifications. 1 don't see a need fbr such a meeting. Since 1991,1 have attended regularly, meetings to prepare the Carlsbad HMP. In an early meeting, Dan Silver echoed by Don Rideout was asking that land owners co-operate with habitat preservation efforts. 1 verbally agreed that we would co-operate with the proviso that the core area they wanted had to be purchased. In 1999 with both city and agencies approving, we settled on hard lines around Holly Springs. Our map will be drawn to fall within those hard lines with minor modifications - trading a bit less here fbr more there but maintaining the original intent developed in 1995. T here should be no need fbr an EiR after 10 years of study and an agreement with both agencies and City. Why are you changing? And what happened to co-operation? Holly Springs wants rural, low density - preferably custom lots fbr which architects may design homes fitting the topography. Such small developments are nearly impossible due to infrastructure and fee costs imposed fbr current needs. ( It is no longer the Carlsbad of my youth.) It remains our goal to be as rural as possible with as little grading as possible and still succeed. Some of our concems are as follows: 1. It is appropriate that we meet our responsibilities fbr our share of aftbrdable housing, but we plan market rate apartments for a majority ofthe units as an investment for our old age. Other ownerships should meet their obligations when they submit their own tentative maps. 2. We prefer being treated as a separate apphcation from that of Cantanm. Infrastructure needs must be co-ordinated but our design is different and should be addressed on it's own merits and not tied to another project. 3. Grading IS a big issue. 'C street as the designated loop road, will need grad- ing, so "rural" cannot be attained through the typical narrow country road. More grading will be necessary to achieve 'C street constraints. We will maintain large lot size,and minimal change to topography where possible. We expect to use careful landscaping at entrances because we believe our area can and should be different from others as a marketing tool if nothing else. 4. Fanning as an interesting avocation will continue. We are long lived people and between ourselves and our children, we plan on retaining this as farming fbr 50 years. We hope you understand that we are not typical developers. With this property our responsibility fbr the land will be over. We would like to see it be a beautiftil project and one that we can be proud of in the fiiture. Sincerely. Lucia Sippel ^ W. Allan Kelly fidrieme, i^ande^rs Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department January 9, 2001 Mr. Robert Ladwig Ladwig Design Group, Inc. 703 Palomar Airport Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: HOLLY SPRINGS AND CANTARINI RANCH Dear Mr. Ladwig: As you know, we are in the process of setting up a "stakeholders" meeting to discuss the proposed hardline modifications for the Cantarini Ranch and Holly Springs projects. This meeting will include City staff, representatives from Fish & Game, Fish & Wildlife, and hopefully the Army Corps of Engineers, along with you and the project applicants. As a precursor to this meeting. City staff met to review your proposed hardline modifications. Michael Holzmiller, Gary Wayne, Don Rideout, Adrienne Landers and I were in attendance at the meeting held on January 4, 2001. The staff review of the proposed hardline revisions focused on three primary areas: a) Is the preservation equal or better than the current preservation area; b) Do the proposed modifications result in a net increase or decrease of overall habitat preservation; and c) Do the modifications result in a take of more habitat. Based on our collective review, the following areas of concem were identified: 1. The expansion of the apartment site on the west end results in additional impacts to seasonal Cismontane Alkali Marsh. The original hardline was based on development in an already disturbed area. Staff does not believe that there is a justification for expansion into the wetlands area. 2. The width of the undisturbed wetlands area which runs in a north-south direction, west of Cantarini lots 60 - 70 has been significantly reduced in width from a previous minimum of width of 220 feet to a proposed minimum width of 75 feet. I realize that you have stated that the Army Corps of Engineers is willing to accept less than a 100' wetlands buffer. However, the viability of the reduced width in this open space area is a concem and will need to be discussed at our future meeting with the other agencies. 3. In the areas of Cantarini Lots 35, 36 and 37, development is proposed on a knoll which contains Diegan coastal sage scmb. This area was identified as a preserve area on the Holly Springs HMP hardline map. Development of this knoll is not supported since it 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us AN^^ HOLLY SPRINGS ANDTANTARINI RANCH January 9, 2001 Page 2 increases the take of habitat, reduces the square footage of the adjacent "pocket" of open space, and eliminates a landform that could add to the mral character ofthe project. 4. Several other areas of development encroach rather significantly into the existing hardline preserve. For example, Cantarini lots 99, 100, and 107-111 encroach into agricultural and non-native grasslands currently designated as preserve areas. The expansion of the project in general has resulted in a decrease of open space of approximately 0.96 acres in Holly Springs and 6.89 acres in Cantarini Ranch. You have pointed out that there will be additional open space contained in the fire buffer/conservation easements (17.11 acres in Cantarini and 7.78 acres in Holly Springs). However, it was never intended for the fire buffer areas to be included as part of the gross acreage of hardline preserve. Therefore, the project is viewed as having a net loss of approximately 7.85 acres of hardline preservation area. 5. Please be aware that the project will need to be designed so that the boundaries of private lots do not encroach into the hardline preserve areas. 6. It was noted that the agricultural area in Holly Springs is now proposed as a hardline preservation area. The revegetation plans for this area will need to be discussed at our future meeting with the wildlife agencies. In addition to the hardline preserve issues, the projects must also be evaluated for their compliance with the Surmy Creek Specific Plan and the Hillside Development regulations. For example, in order to maintain a mral character, it is important to preserve natural landforms and features such as scenic rock outcroppings. Similarly, one of the purposes of the hillside ordinance is "to preserve and/or enhance the aesthetic qualities of natural hillsides and manufactured slopes by designing projects which relate to the slope of the land, minimizing the amount of project grading, and incorporating contour grading into manufactured slopes which are located in highly visible public locations". The revised Cantarini plan (12/20/00) is beginning to address these issues and the redesign of road "C" and "D" to provide views to the open space area is a positive feature for the project. However, in order to further comply with these goals and regulations, staff feels that the following specific areas should be modified: 1. The knoll and rock outcropping which occurs in the areas of Cantarini lots 107-111 is one of the most significant landforms and scenic features on the site. Staff believes that development of this feature would constitute a significant negative aesthetic impact. Lots in this area should be redesigned to preserve this feature. 2. Holly Springs lots 3,4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 should be designed so that the grading preserves the knolls. Use of stepped pads and/or single story homes is encouraged so that the views of the hilltops can be maintained, rather than leveling off the hilltops for development pads as proposed. 3. Both projects needs to be designed to minimize grading volumes to the greatest extent possible. Use of stepped pads and lower pad heights should be explored as an altemative. In addition to the requirement for contour grading of manufactured slopes, the transition AN^; HOLLY SPRINGS ANmJANTARINI RANCH January 9, 2001 Page 3 areas between new and existing slopes should be designed so that they have a natural appearance and blend in with the existing landforms. 4. In order to aid in the identification of significant on-site features (such as ridgelines and knolls) and off-site views towards the site, a view analysis should be prepared. A computer simulation showing the development proposal will also aid in evaluating the impacts to landforms. Finally, we discussed the level of environmental review that will be required for the Cantarini and Holly Springs projects. In view of the biological impacts to habitat areas and the fact that the City's HMP has not been adopted, the City will require preparation of an EIR for the projects. It may be pmdent to postpone preparation of the EIR until we meet with the other agencies and gain consensus on the new hardline boundaries and additional open space areas required by the City. I look forward to discussing/resolving the hardline issues at our next meeting. In the meantime, if you have any questions or wish to discuss this in more detail, please call me at 760-602-4626. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP ' Associate Planner Michael Holzmiller Gary Wayne Don Rideout Adrienne Landers File Copy Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department December 22, 2000 Mr. Robert C. Ladwig Ladwig Design Group 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - HOLLY SPRINGS Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Hillside Development Permit, and Site Development Plan, application no. CT 00-21 /GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15, as to its completeness for processing. Due to the fact that legislative actions are being processed concurrently with quasi-judicial actions the Planning Department has determined that the CT, SDP, and HDP must remain incomplete until the legislative actions are approved by the City Council. Please contact your staff planner, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincen ,MICHAEL J. HOI^MILLER Planning Director MJHiBKimh c: Adrienne Landers Frank Jimeno Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 -'FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CT 00-21/GPA 00-06/ZC 00-09/HDP 00-12/SDP 00-15 - HOLLY SPRINGS Planning: 1. An LFMP Amendment will be required for the project. Please contact Don Rideout to determine the scope of the amendment. 2. A maintenance responsibility exhibit is required as part of the landscape concept plan. 3. Please submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for the project. 4. Please submit a signed copy of the paleontologists report with your next submittal. In addition, the following items are needed to further analyze the project: 5. The geological report should identify and address soil conditions in the on-site wetlands and seepage areas. 6. The wetlands delineation survey should be conducted during the spring season. 7. Submit 1" = 100 scale colored plans of the maps included in the biological resources and wetland delineation reports. 8. Please submit an additional copy of the Preliminary Drainage Report. 9. Provide separate breakdowns of the grading volumes (cut/fill & import/export) and grading quantities (cu. yds./acre) for the affordable housing site and the single-family subdivision. 10. Please verify the calculations of net developable acreage shown on the constraints map. The net developable acreage is shown as being greater than the gross acreage. Also, the wetlands acreage is less than that shown in the Biological Resources Report and Wetland Delineation Report. Please provide consistency between documents. 11. Per our telephone conversation on 12/19/00, it is my understanding that you will be submitting a new Biological Resources Report. Please include a change to the heading on page 49 which incorrectly identifies the project as Cantarini Ranch. 12. The biological impact analysis should include a discussion of the proposed trail system to ensure that public access is consistent with the protection and enhancement of biological resources. Include design standards for the new trail system in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the draft HMP. 13. Please provide an analysis of the developable acreage for the apartment site. It appears that the proposed RMH Land Use Designation may not support the proposed density and it may be necessary to designate this parcel RH. Engineering: To be sent under separate cover. Fire: None Planning: ISSUES OF CONCERN 1. The development proposal encroaches into the draft HMP hardline areas with development impacts. The new hardline area will need to be approved by the wildlife agencies and the City prior to completion of the environmental review. If the revision is not supported, the project will need to be revised to comply with the existing hardline. 2. As suggested in the preliminary review comments, the subdivision should be designed to minimize the number of lots accessed directly off of Holly Springs Road since this roadway functions as a through street. In addition, the lots should be arranged so that public views into the open space areas can be maintained in order to give the perception of a more rural type of atmosphere. 3. In order to preserve and enhance the aesthetic qualities of the natural hillsides, the project should be designed so that on-site and off-site views of ridgelines, hilltops, and rock outcroppings are preserved to the greatest extent possible. Grading for the project should be designed to complement the existing topography and stepped pads should be used to minimize the amount of grading proposed. For example, homes should be nestled below ridgelines and hilltops, rather than on top of hills as proposed for lots 8 and 9, and grading should complement the landforms rather than scrape away half of a hillside as proposed for lot 5. 4. One of our future issues for discussion will be to determine what type of design elements will be required for the project. The portion of the project which lies within SP 191 will need to be designed to comply with the Specific Plan and the rural estate type design theme, similar to the Cantarini Ranch project. I envision setting up some type of design guidelines which will address (at a minimum) landscaping, signs, trails, walls, residential site design, size of homes in relationship to the pad size, and architecture. The portion of the project outside of SP 191 should have similar, if not identical, design guidelines. 5. The Holly Springs project will be processed concurrently with the Cantarini Ranch project since Cantarini Ranch proposes to utilize the affordable housing project to satisfy it's affordable housing obligation. 6. Staff envisions that the affordable housing project will be able to satisfy the affordable housing requirements of other projects within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. The development agreement will be structured so that as development occurs, other property owners may purchase credits and convert market rate units to affordable units. An estimate of the ultimate number of units to be developed in SP 191 should be submitted to ensure that an adequate number housing units are constructed within the apartment project. We realize that you are working with several other property owners in the area and if you could submit a map with an estimated number of units to be constructed in each ownership area, it would be helpful. 7. There are some concerns with the site design for the affordable housing project. The project should be designed to incorporate the following features: a. Provide two access points to the site. b. Consider developing the site as a split pad in order to reduce grading of the site. c. Consider providing parking areas around the perimeter of the site so that they can function as fire buffers and also to provide an additional separation from the roadway noise sources. d. Screen parking areas by using berms and landscaping. e. Add a "short-cut" pedestrian connection from the site to College Boulevard. f. The housing project should be scaled down so that it does not encroach into the wetlands areas. 8. Describe the proposal for the lands designated as agricultural which occur within the hardline area. Will farming continue on this property, and if so, for how long? How will the farm area be accessed? Do you plan to revegetate this area? Engineering: To be sent under separate cover. Fire: 1. Provide more than one entry to the apartment development. 2. Provide a landscape plan for the wildland interface per the cities landscape guidelines. 3. Sprinklers are required in all units. locliAg Design Grouf#lnc. December 19, 2000 ; " •' ' • I /- ^ Lucia Sippel ; ^5,,»,GDfff^^ 1287 Vera Cruz m^'. Occansido, CA 92056 \ RE: HABITAT MITIGATION RATIOS/HOLLY SPRINGS (LADWIG JOB NO. L-1061) Dear Lucia: After you and I discussed briefly Recon's biological resource report and impact analysis dated November 15, 2000,1 called and talked to Don Rideout about your concems. You were right to remind me that when the "Hardline" designation was placed on your property, we were led to believe that the project impacts would be handled within parcel "D" and that the remainder ofthe property could used at your discretion for other habitat uses. When I talked to Don this moming, I gave him a little background on the project and an overview of the Recon report and their suggested mitigation ratios and the potential impact of additional mitigation requirements outside of parcel "D" or the immediate subdivision boundaries. In addition, I asked Don if the City and the agencies ever used any ratios for occupied habitat of less than 2 tol. Don indicated that early on the agencies at one time used 1 Yi to 1 but with the adoption of the draft HMP, the ratios now are either 1 to 1 for non-occupied coastal sage scmb or 2 to 1 for occupied. In addition, I asked Don about whether a small number of birds on a given piece of property would give cause to use something less than the 2 to 1 ratio for occupied property. Don indicated that there have been other properties in Carlsbad where fraditionally there were no birds and then in recent surveys a number of Gnatcatchers have shown up. So the conclusion is that any birds on the property would constitute the general area as identified as occupied habitat. I fiirther mentioned to Don your concem for the potential of significant mitigation requirements outside of parcel "D" or the immediate subdivision limits. Don indicated very sfrongly that the City and Don himself do not want to cause you any problems and indicated that the mitigation ratios identified on Table 11 in the draft HMP apply to "standards" properties only and not to properties that have "Hardlines." He said the assumption with the "Hardline" properties is that a negotiation took place prior to the preparation ofthe plan and that the areas of development and preservation were outlined and again defined as "Hardlines." I am sure Wendy at Recon, like myself, was not aware that the mitigation ratios identified in the HMP only apply to "standards" areas. I also discussed with Don, Jim Whalen's negotiations with the State to consider acquiring a portion of your property for habitat. Don has a concem with this in that it is, he feels, premature to have those discussions at this time. His reasons for feeling it is premature is that there is a limited amount of money available to the State for habitat acquisition and even though Don would like to see money applied to your property, there are other properties in the immediate area that are threatened by development and that the City feels sfrongly should be acquired ahead of your property. One 703 pQlomar Airport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 Lucia Sippel December 19, 2000 Page 2 property he mentioned was the Sherman property up in zone 25 just south of Highway 78. Don did agree to advocate for your property being on the priority list for acquisition but felt that, as mentioned above, there are other properties that may be ahead of your property from a acquisition standpoint because of threatened development or other features. Going back to the mitigation ratios, Don felt that the City could be flexible on the mitigation ratios for your property primarily because of your agreement to set aside the area north of the proposed development area parcel "D" as property that would be in open space. As he indicated, all of this was considered at the time the "Hardlines" were approved and parcel "D" should be adequate to cover the mitigation ofthe impacts within parcel "D". I indicated to Don that as shown on Table 9 in the Recon report that the coastal sage scmb impacts within parcel "D" are 34.1 acres and the preserved area also within parcel "D" are 42.3 acres providing a mitigation ratio of 1.24 to 1. Because we are in the middle of the City review for your project including the biological report, I would suggest that we hold off on changing the report until after we are ready to make another resubmittal to the City. We should be getting written comments back firom the City in the next week or two. In addition, based on our last meeting we are looking at a re-alignment ofthe east-west street in your project to try to eliminate lots that front on that street. In addition, we are looking at a different configuration based on your input and Alan's input to try to raise some of the lots up and orient them different to take better advantage ofthe back country views in addition to the westerly views. On the subject of a clarification of the Nuttall's Scmb Oak, I talked to Wendy Loeffler and she said the symbol in the legend is wrong and will be corrected. The Nutall's scmb oak and Cahfomia adolphia symbol are reversed. I am sure you will have some questions about this memorandum and I ask that you please give me a call. Sincerely, LADWIG DESIGN GROUP, INC. M-— Robert C. Ladwig, President RCL:lb.05 cc: David Bentley Don Rideout Barbara Kennedy Wendy Loeffler Jim Whalen 703 Palomar fiirport Rood • Suite 300 • Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-3182 FfiX (760) 438-0173 # • Tue City of Carlsbad Planning Department ^ A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. Application complete date: July 2, 2007 P.C. AGENDA OF: September 19, 2007 Project Planner: Barbara Kennedy Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CT 00-18xl/SDP 01-lOxl/HDP 00-09xI/SUP 00-09x1 - CANTARINI RANCH and CT 00-21xl/HDP 00-12x1 - HOLLY SPRINGS - Request for approval of a retroactive two-year extension for: 1) a Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-18), Site Development Plan (SDP 01-10), Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-09), and Special Use Permit (SUP 00-09) for Cantarini Ranch; and, 2) a Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-21) and Hillside Development Pennit (HDP 00-12) for Holly Springs. The projects consist of a 105-lot single-family residential subdivision, associated open space lots, and an 80-imit mixed-rate apartment project for Cantarini Ranch and a 42-l6t single-family residential subdivision and associated open space lots for Holly Springs. The projects are generally located north of El Camino Real and east of the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road within Local Facilities Management Zone 15. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Plarming Commission Resolutions No. 6330, 6331, 6332, 6333, 6334 and 6335 APPROVING a retroactive two-year extension for: 1) a Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-18), Site Development Plan (SDP 01-10), Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-09), and Special Use Permit (SUP 00-09) for Cantarini Ranch; and, 2) a Tentative- Tract Map (CT 00-21) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-12) for Holly Springs based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant. Bent-West, LLC, has requested a retroactive two-year extension for: 1) a Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-18), Site Development Plan (SDP 01-10), Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-09) and Special Use Permit (SUP 00-09) for Cantarini Ranch; and, 2) a Tentative Tract Map (CT 00-21) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 00-12) for Holly Springs. The projects consist of a 105-lot single-family residential subdivision, associated open space lots, and an 80-unit mixed-rate apartment project for Cantarini Ranch and a 42-lot single- family residential subdivision and associated open space lots for Holly Springs on approximately 276.58 acres generally located north of El Camino Real and east of the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. The proposed two-year extension will allow the property owners to preserve existing property entitlements, while processing grading and improvement plans and final map approval.