Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CT 81-39; Rancho La Costa Inc.; Tentative Map (CT)
y^ STAFF REPORT - CONDO '5' - A request DATE: December 23, 1981 TO; Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT; CT 81-39/CP-185, SUP-5, V-327 for: 1) A Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit for a 78 unit time-share condominium project; 2) A Special Use Permit to develop in a floodplain, and; 3) A Variance to allow an increase in the height limit from 35 feet to 40 feet located on the south side of Costa Del Mar, east of El Camino Real in the R-P zone on 3.28 acres of property. PROJECT DESCRIPTION I. The applicant requests approval of three applications: 1) a 78 unit Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit for a time-share project, 2) a Special Use Permit to develop in a floodplain, and 3) a Variance to allow an increase in building height from 35' to 40' located as described above. The project would be developed as time-share condominiums and would be managed by the La Costa Hotel and Spa. The units would sell in time increments ranging from one week to four months. Units selling for four months would cater to people who wish to live in the area during the Del Mar racing season. The applicant must obtain a special use permit in order to allow development of a small portion of the project within the 100 year floodplain. To obtain these approvals, the City Engineer must find that mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project's design to ensure that flooding will not endanger the project. The project would be three stories in height and the one and two bedroom units would range in floor area from 1010 sq.ft. to 1745 square feet. The applicant's intent is to retain a high degree of security. To accomplish this, the project is designed for entry to the units through only one front entry and from the se- cured subterranean parking garage. The discussion section of the staff report is divided into three subsections for easier understanding: 1) The special use per- mit; 2) the tentative tract map and condominium permit, and 3) the variance request. II. ANALYSIS Major Planning Issues (SUP-5) 1. Will approval of a special use permit allow development which would be subject to flooding hazards? Discussion As mentioned, a portion of the site is within the 100 year flood- plain boundary, and as such, must receive approval of a special use permit prior to development. The special use permit may only be granted if the City Engineer finds that the project is designed to mitigate flooding hazards. The applicant has submitted detailed data showing how all flood- ing hazards would be mitigated. This data was reviewed by the Engineering Department and by the San Diego County Flood Control District. Both parties have found that, as designed, the project would be removed from the 100 year floodplain zone and will not be subject to flooding hazards nor will the construction of the project create other flooding problems to adjacent or downstream properties. A memo from both the Engineering Department and the Flood Control District confirming these findings are attached for the Commission's review. Because these findings have been made, staff is recommending approval of SUP-5. Major Planning Issues (CT 81-39/CP-185) 1. Does the project meet all development standards and design criteria of the Condominium Ordinance? 2. Can the design of the parking and storage areas be justified because of the time-share nature of the project? Discussion As designed, the project technically meets all development stand- ards of the Condominium Ordinance. The parking requirements is met by a subterranean garage housing 78 cars (1 space/unit) and an outdoor parking lot (100 spaces; 1 space/unit plus 22 visitor parking spaces) located west of the units (Exhibits "B" & "C"). The subterranean garage is protected by a security system allow- ing access to the residents. The open recreational requirements would be met by a combination of private patios and balconies for each unit and a common recre- ation area containing a sunning area and a large swimming pool. The storage requirement is satisfied by an underground storage area (within the subterranean garage) accessible to the units by the elevators. -2- Although the project technically meets the development standards of the ordinance, staff had concerns regarding the location and accessibility of the open parking lot and the underground storage space. The parking spaces are located in excess of 150 feet from the units, which is over the distance established by adminis- trative policy. In some cases, the required parking spaces are greater than 1000 feet (walking distance) from the units. Likewise, the storage area is not conveniently located to all the units. Particularly, the units located in the east wing cannot easily gain access to the storage area. Residents must walk down the hallway corridor, travel down the elevator, then walk across the subterranean garage to get to the storage area. This route is particularly inconvenient if large items must be transported from the storage areas to the units. Under normal circumstances, staff would recommend denial of the project based on the inaccessible location of the open parking lot and the storage areas. This project is unusual in that it is being built as a time-share condominium. As indicated by the letter from Paul Graham of Rancho La Costa, the typical residents of this project would be people visiting the resort. Most visitors arrive by common carrier and are driven to the resort by limousine. The clientel is both national and international. Staff believes this project constitutes a unique development that is well suited to a time-share condominium development because of its proximity to the La Costa Hotel & Spa, a successful resort development. The types of residents that can be expected to live in a time-share project such as this would not need the amount of parking that is being provided. Staff believes that one parking space per unit in a convenient location is sufficient to meet the needs of this project. As an added note, in the new PUD Ordinance, staff is recommending that a ratio of 1 parking space per unit be the standard for a time-share project. Similarly, the amount of storage space required for a time-share unit is not expected to be as great as a normal condominium. Staff feels the design of the storage areas is acceptable for a time-share project. When considering the design criteria for both parking and storage, the intended use of the project must be considered. Certainly, the use of the project directly relates to its design. In the case of this time-share project, staff believes that the design of the storage area and parking lot can be justified. Since both the development standards and design criteria can be met by this project, staff is recommending approval of CT 81- 39/CP-185. Major Planning Issues (V-327) 1. Can the four mandatory findings for a variance be made for this project? -3- Discussion The variance request is to increase the building height from the required 35 feet to 40 feet along the south side of the building. The reason for the increased height is because the existing grade level must be raised to remove the property from the 100 year floodplain. The appearance of the project from the street and adjacent properties will be similar to a project 35 feet in height because the lower story (subterranean garage) will be hidden from view by mounding rip-rap and landscaping. The actual visual height would be less than 35 feet. Staff is recommending approval of the variance request because all four of the mandatory findings can be made. Specifically, the property's existing location in a floodplain constitutes an extreme and unusual circumstance which does not generally apply to other properties in the vicinity. If the project was not lo- cated in a floodplain, it could be built without the need for a variance. Secondly, without a variance, the project would be denied a prop- erty right that other properties in the same vicinity enjoy be- cause other properties have developed three story buildings simi- lar to the proposed request. The property's location within a floodplain requires special grading techniques which would not allow the development of a three story structure without a var- iance . Finally, approval of this height variance would not be injurious to the public's health and welfare nor be detrimental to the Carlsbad General Plan, since the height of the building will not detrimentally encroach upon adjacent properties nor create any dangerous or unsafe circumstances, or adverse visual impacts. Staff is, therefore, recommending approval of V-327. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration dated December 7, 1981. IV. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Neg- ative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Reso- lution Nos; 1905, 1906 and 1907, recommending APPROVAL to the City Council of CT 81-39/CP-185 and APPROVING SUP-5 and V-327 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. -4- 1^ \^ ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Resolution Nos: 1905, 1906 and 1907 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Letter from Paul Graham, dated October 29, 1981 6. Memo from Les Evans, dated December 9, 1981 7. Memo from County Flood Control District, dated December 4, 1981. 8. Reduced Site Plan and Elevation Plan 9. Environmental Documents BH:ar 12/16/81 -5- LOCkTiO LA COSTA CASE ^30. CT81-39/CP-185/SUP-5/v-327 APPLICANT CONDO V VICINITY MAP BACKGROUND DATA SHECT CASE ^D: ZC-24 8, SU^«5, CT 81-39/CP-185, and V-j^7 APPLICANT: RANCHO LA COSTA, INC. REQUEST AND LOCATION; unit "Timeshare" condominium project; south east corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. LEXaAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3 of La Costa Condominium No. 4, according to Map 6520 filed October 21, 1969 - Assessors Parcel Number: 216 _ 210 _ -04 . (216-123-01) ^'^^ No. of Lots 78 units • . . . . GENERAL PLAN AND 20NII-3G General Plan Land Use Designation RH/0 Density Allowed 20-30 du/ac Density Proposed 23.1 Existing Zone R-P (w/floodplain overlayjpjxiposed Zone R-P (w/out floodplain - : "overlay) Surroimding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use North L^ Costa Hotel & Spa Grounds South Floodplain East P-C La Costa Hotel & Spa Grounds West County (E)-(8). Batiquitos Lagoon PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad, dated September 24, 19 81 Water District • Costa Real Water. District Sewer District Leucadia County Water District EDU's Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated September 17, 1981 (Other: ENVIRQNMElSnAL IMPACT ASSESSMEOT Negative ^Declaration, issued'Dec. 7,-19 81 Log No. Other, E.I.R. Certified, dated * If' aftar the infonnation,scpu have submitted has been r^''.^wed, it is determined that further informatio: ; required, you will be so ac ^ed. APPLICANT! Rancho La Costa, Inc. Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Business Address 483-9111 AGENT: Telephone Nunber Mr. Paul Graham Name 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Business Address MEMBERS: 438-9111 Telephone Number See Attached Sheet A Name -(individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Home Ziddresa Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number Name Home Address Business Address Telephona Number Telephone Nunber (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be* relied upon as being true and correct until anended. Rancho La Costa, Inc, Applicant BY Aqent. — T>=.^t- SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION SHEET ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, MAJOR CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, SPECIAL USE PERMIT ATTACHMENT A Chairman of the Board Mr. Allard Roen c/o Rancho La Costa Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92008 (714) 438-9111 President: Mr. Merv Adelson Lorimar Production, Inc. 10202 W. Washington Blvd, Culver City, CA 90230 (213) 836-3000 Vice President: Mr. Irwin Molasky Paradise Development Co. 3111 S. Maryland Parkway Las Vegas, Nevada 89109 (702) 735-0155 Vice President: Mr. Irv Roston c/o Rancho La Costa Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92008 (714) 438-9111 Vice President: Mr. Burton Kramer (Address same as Irv Roston) Secretary: Jack Donnelley, Esq. Donnelley & Hulden 3366 Fifth Avenue San Diego, CA 92103 (714) 299-8350 Asst. Secretary; Ms. Elaine Thomas c/o Rancho La Costa Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92008 (714)438-9111 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAO, CALIFORNIA 92008 I: 438-5591 Citp of tavl&hah NEGATIVE DECLARATICN PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Costa Del Mar Road. The southeast comer of El Camino Real and PROJECT DESCRIPTICN: 1) Zone Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay, 2) Tentative Tract M^ and Caidominium Pennit for a 78 unit condo- minium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zone, and 4) a Variance of the 35' height limitation. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an envirorunKital review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Iitplementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaraticm (declaration t:hat the project will not have a significant iitpact on the envircsiment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaraticxi with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit oomments in writing to the Planning Departnnent within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: December 7, 1981 CASE NO: CT 81-39/CP-185 V-327/SUP-5 /ZC-24 8 APPLICANT: Randio La Cost^;, In HAGAMAN ling Director PUBLISH DATE: December 9, 19 81 NEH4 5/81 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 438 - 5591 Citp of Carlflibab PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATICN PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Conditional Negative Declaration for the following project: project Description: 1) Zacie Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay, 2) Tentative Tract map and Condominium Permit for a 78 unit oondominium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zone, and 4) a Variance of the 35' height limitation. Project address/Location: Costa Del Mar Road. The southeast corner of El Camino Real and Anticipated significant iitpacts; As conditioned, no significant adverse environmental impacts are anticipated. We need to know your ideas about the effect this project might have oa the environment and your suggestions for ways the project could be revised to reduce or avoid any significant environmental damage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environ- mental review of this project. Your comments on the environmental inpact of the prcposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no later than November]^, 1981. DATED: November 6, 1981 '^^J^-'t^^^^-^^t^ CASE NO: CT 81-39/CP-185/V-327/ SUP-5 APPLICANT: Rancho La Costa, Inc. PUBLISH DATE: November 14, 1981 JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Directo: • im'IROr^^TAL IMPACT A-SSESSNliZNT TORM - Part II (To Be Completed Ev Tl'.e PLANNING DEPARlTvENT) 0 -^C 2He l<-T Bt-2j/cP iSi'/ CASE NO. 5UP - • DATE: (I I. BACKGROUND 1. _ APPLICANT; Rp^^icuv L(\ Co STA 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Zl QQ Costc< Dei MOA fU^ 3. DATE CHECKLIST SUBMITTED: II. •- maRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' (EXI'LAN^TIONS OF ALL AFFIRxMATIVE ANSl'vEPvS ARE TO BE MITTEN UNDER • Section III - DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION) 1. Earth Will.the proposal have signi- ficaixc results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? c. Qiange in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or pliysical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils; either on or off tlie site? f. Changes in deposition or ero- sion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which mny modify the cliaiincl of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Yes 'Maybe No X JL ND 2 Yes Maybe No 2. Air: Will the proposal have signi-- results in: . a. Air"emissions or deterioration of ambient, air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, • mositure or temperature, or any • change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3. Water: Will the proposal have sigi- ficant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water move- ments, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of sur- face water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, • or in any alteration of surface .water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the\direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through ' direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? '2- Yes Maybe No ^' Plant Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? • b. Reduction of the numbers of • any unique, rare or endangered • species of plants? • c. Introduction of new ^species of plants into an area, 'or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? • , d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of • any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Ci Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. • Noise. Will the proposal signi- HTicantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the pro- posal significantly produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proix:)sal have significnnt results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of ' en,area? - .• •A y- < t Yes Maybe No .A- ^* Natural Resources. Will the pro- posal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of haz- ardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. • Population. Will the proposal significantly alter the location, distribution, density, or gro^vth rate of tlie hiiman population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal signi- ficantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. ' Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal liave significant re- sults in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing trans- portation systems? d» Alterations to present pattems of circulation or move- ment of people and/or goods? Alterations to watcrbornc, rail or air traffic? f, Increase in traffic har.ards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X -4- Yes Maybe No 14. jPublic Sendees. Will the pro- posal have a significant effect ui»n, or have significant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the follovdng areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? • c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facili- ties, including roads? f. ' Other governmental services? -Ensrgy. Will the "proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? •b.- Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the develop- ment of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal have' significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17 s ' llnmnn Hen 1th. Will the proposal liave signigicant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential licallh hazard (excluding mental licalth)? X X X JL X •A 1 1 Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the pro- posal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant ' archeological or historical site, ' structure, object or building? . X X X 21. ANALYZF VIABLE. ALTERNATI\T;S TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) PHASED DFvELOPMriNl' OF Iffi PROJECT; b) ALIERMATE SITE DESIGNS; c) ALTEmTE SC^E OF DEVELOPffiMT; d) ALTERNATE USES FOR THE SITE; e) DE\T:LOPMENT AT SOW: FUTURE TBE RATbTR THAN NOW; f) ALTERNATE SITES FOR TIIE PROPOSED USE; g) NO PROJECT ALTEmTIVE. to •• .A- Yes Maybe No 22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE THE POTEN- TIAL TO DEGRADE THE.QU/\LITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, OR CURTAIL THE DIVERSITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT? b) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE THE POTEN- TIAL TO ACHIR^E SHORT-TERM, TO THE DISADVANlivGE OF LONG-TERM, ENVIROI^ENTAL GQUS? (A SHORT- TERM IMPACT ON HE BNVIRO>iMENT IS ONE WHICH'OCCURS IN A RE- • LATIVELY BRIEF, DEFINITIVE PERIOD OF TIME 1\F1ILE LONG-TERM BRACTS WILL E^'DU^^E UELL INTO THE FUTURE.) c) DOES THE PROJECT IMPACTS WHICH ARE INT)IVIDUALLY LIMITED, BUT CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE? (A PROJECT MAY IMPACT ON TIVO OR mm SEPARATE RESOURCES MRE THE IMPACT ON EACH RE- SOURCE IS RELATIVELY SMALL, BUT IVWERE THE EFFECT OF THE TOTAL OF THOSE IMPACTS ON THE • ENVIRONMENT IS SIGNIFICAOT.) . d) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE EN\aRON- MENTAL EFFECTS VMICH IV'ILL CAUSE vSUBSTANTIAL AD\^RSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS, " • " EITHER DIRECTLY OR INTIIRECTLY? A. A. III.' DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVAI.UTION 6€vu»fU<cf?cVi pyz^iyd , ^a^j5<yyj.jtj^ CXLL 'J ^^^i^z-i^^ S^^•f^'^ t^cti"}"-^ TI/YZU^O-I dxjyK^ AAU^<^ ' ^ /n-ctl:^. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EV^AI.UATION (Continued) IV. DETERMINATION. (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPART^IENT) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLAJUTION will be prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A conditional negative declaration will will be prepared. ' • ^ I find the proposed project MW have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: V. MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) MITIGATING M^SURES (Continued) VI • APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING M&\SURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVaSvED THE ABOVE MITIGATIONG NEA- SURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date: Signature of Applicant 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAO, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp Df CarlsfOab. TELEPHONE: (714) 729 1181 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION County of San Diego 1416 Ninth Street 220 West Broadway Room 1311 San Diego, CA 92101 Sacramento, CA 95814 . This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad on • - • • approved the folloiving project: Project Description: • ' ••' M. .... W • • . . ••_ _. . . . •_• • - . Project address/Location: Tlie City made the following determinations regarding the environmental * impact of the above described project: 1. .The project will, will not, have a significant effect on the environment. • ' . 2« An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures yere; were not, made a condition of the approval of the project. • 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations , was, was not, adopted for this project. S. ' The Project went through prior environmental review or was part of a larger project which went through prior environmental review. ND 5 PC 2 NOTICE OF DETERMm\TION (Continued) A copy of the_^ Negative Declaration EIR with supporting document is available for public review at the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. • DATE: ' ... CASE NO: ^ SIGNED: JAMES C. HAGAMAN APPLICANT: : .Planning Director • ' City of Carlsbad ND 5 PC 2 DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES • Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 • Building Department (714) 438-5525 • Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 • Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 • Planning Department (714) 438-5591 County Clerk County of San Diego Attn: Mail Drop C-11 220 West Broadway San Diego, CA 92101 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Ctt|> of tavUhah NOTICE OF DETERMINATION This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad on January 19, 1982, approved the following project: Project Description: 1) Zone Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay, 2) Tentative Tract Map and Condoninium Pennit for a 78 unit condoininium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zone, and 4) a Variance of the 35' height limitation. Project Address/Location: The southeast corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. Itie City made the following determinations regarding the environmental inpact of the above described project: 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact report was prepared for a Master Plan within v*iich this project is located pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of this project. 4. A statement of Overriding Ccxisiderations was not adopted for this project. 5. The Project went through prior environmental review or was part of a larger project which went through prior environmental review. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supporting document is available for public review at the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. DATE: February 17, 1982 CASE NO: CT 81-39/CP-185/V-322/ SUP-5/ZC-248 APPLICANT: Rancho La Costa, Inc JAMES C. HAGAMAN ' Planning Director DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES • Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 • Building Department (714) 438-5525 • Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 • Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 • Planning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp of Carls(bab PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRCNMENTAL COVIPLIANCE Please Take Notice: The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the project described below have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed. Project Title: Grading Permit - Condo 5 Project Location: S/E comer of El Camino Real and Costa del Mar Project Description: Grading permit: 8,500 cubic yards of excavation; 22,800 cubic yards of embankment; and 14,300 cubic yards of import, for the Condo 5 condcminium project. The grading within the flood plain has been considered as part of CT 81-39/CP-185 and SUP-5 Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of publication. Dated: February 10, 1982 Case No: P. E. 2.824 Afplicant: Rancho La Costa, Inc. Publish Date: February 20, 1982 PC 1 DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES • Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 D Building Department (714) 438-5525 O Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 • Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. •(714)438-5611 D Pianning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 9200 Citp of Carl^bab PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRCNMENTAL CO-IPLIANCE Please Take Notice: The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the project described below have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed. Project Title: Grading Permit - Condo 5 Project Location: S/E comer of El Camino Real and Costa del Mar Project Description: Grading permit: 8,500 cubic yards of excavation; 22,800 cubic yards of embankment; and 14,300 cubic yards of import, for the Condo 5 condcminium project. The grading within the flood plain has been considered as part of CT 81-39/CP-185 and SUP-5 Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. Ccminents from the public are invited. Please submit cannents in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of publication. Dated: February 10, 1982 Case No: P. E. 2.82/1 Applicant: Rancho La Costa, Inc. Publish Date: February 20, 1982 PC 1 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 438 - 5591 Citp of Cad£(bab NEGATIVE DECLARATICN PROJECT AE©RESS/LOCATION: The southeast comer of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTICN: 1) Zcxie Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay, 2) Tentative Tract Map and Condoninium Permit for a 78 unit condo- minium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zoie, and 4) a Variance of the 35' height limitation. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an envircamental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant iitpact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaraticai with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. 92008. Catments from the public are invited. Please submit oortments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: December 7, 19 81 JAMBS/C. HAGAMAN CASE NO: CT 81-39/CP-185 P^^prUng Director V-327/SUP-5 /ZC-248 APPLICANT: Rancho La Costa, Inc; PUBLISH DATE: December 9, 19 81 ND-4 5/81 Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Son Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, js. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbdd Joumal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and thatthe notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The Planning Department ofthe City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration for the fol- lowing project: Project Description: 1) Zone Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay. 2) Tentative Tract map and Condominium permit for a 78 unit condominium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zone, and 4) a Variance of the 35' height limitation. Project Address/Location: the southeast corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. Anticipated Significant Impacts: As conditioned, no significant adverse environmental impacts are anticipated. Weneedtoknowyourideasabout the effect this project might have on the environment and your sugges- tions for ways the project could be revised to reduce or avoid any sig- nificant environmental damage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environ- mental review of this project. Your comments on the environ- mental impact of the proposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no later than November 27, 1981. Dated: November 6, 1981 Case No: CT 81-39/CP-185/V-327/ SUP-5 Applicant: Rancho La Costa, Inc. JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director CJ S688: November 14, 1981 •November- -14 19 31 19 19. 19 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on thr I4th of day November 1981 r y. Clerk of the Printer 1M/&S1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Conmission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chanibers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, Deceitber 23, 1981, to con- sider approval of 1) Zone change to delete flood overlay zone, 2) 78 unit tentative tract map and condominium permit for a time share condominium, 3) a Special Use Permit to develop in a flood plain, and 4) a Variance to increase the height limit fron 35 feet to 40 feet on property generally located on the south side of Costa del Mar, east of El Camino Real in the RP zone and more particularly described as: Lot 3 of La Costa Condominium No. 4, 6520 and a portion of Lot 14 in Section 35, T. 12 S., R 4 W., S.B.M., according to official plat t±ereof, in t±ie County of San Diego. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Planning Department at 438-5591. CASE FILE: ZC-248/CT 81-39/CP-185/SUP-5/V-327 APPLICANT: Condo '5' Rancho La Costa, Inc. PUBLISH: December 12, 1981 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION LOCATiOE^ LA COSTA CASE NQ. ZC-248/CT8V39/CP-185/SUP-5/V-3?7 APPI ir AMT CONDO y VICINITY MAP Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 55 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, RECEIVED FEB 2 5198a CITY OR CARLSBAD Planning Dep? ent I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am prmci pal clerk of the printer of the CaNsbad Joumal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE j_.PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The rlanning Department has deter-mined that the environmental effects of the project described be- low have already been considered in conjunction with previously cer- tified environmental documents and, therefore, no additional en- vironmental review will be re- quired and a notice oif determina- tion will be filed. Project Title: Grading Permit — Condo 5. Project Location: S/E corner of El Camino Real and Costa del Mar. Project Description: Grading permit; 8,500 cubic yards of excava- tion; 22,800 cubic yards of embank- ment; and 14,300 cubic yards of im- port, for the Condo 5 condominium project. The grading within the flood plain has been considered as part of CT 81-39/CP-185 and SUP-5 Justification for this determina- tion is on file in the Planning De- partment, City Hall, 1200 Elm Ave- nue, Carlsbad, CA. Comments from the public are invited. Please sub- mit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of publication. Dated: February 10, 1982 Case No.: P.E. 2.82.4 Applicant: Rancho La Costa, Inc JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director CJ S583: February 20, 1982 .February. .20... 19 82 . 19... 19 19, 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on the ?Qth day of —February 1982 1 M-10/81 Clerk of the Printer Ca risba d Journ a I Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, js. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad JOUmal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of Son Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA- TION: The southeast corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1) Zone Change to delete the Flood Plan Overlay, 2) Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit for a 78 unit condominium project, 3) Special Use Permit to develop in the flood overlay zone, and 4) A Variance of the 35' height limita- tion. The City of Carlsbad has con- , ducted an environmental review of the above described project pur- suant to the Guidelines for Imple- mentation of the California En- vironmental Quality Act and the ' Environmental Protection Ordi- nance of the City ofCarlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject proj- ect. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declara- tion with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carls- bad, CA. 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance. Dated: December 7,1981 Case No: CT 81-39/CP-185 V-327/SUP-5/ZC-248 Applicant: Rancho La Costa, Inc. JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director CJ W220: December 9, 1981 .T:ep.e;iib?r. 9.... 198:1. 19 19 19, 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Oiego, State of California on the 9th day of December 1981 1M/6/81 y.A--t-y^ cy Clerk of the Printer DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES • Asslslant City Hanajet (714) 438-5596 • Building Deparlme-nt (714) 433-5525 • Engineering Department (714)438-5541 n Housing & Redevaiopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714) 438-5611 Planning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp of Cad^bab December 20, 1982 Barry Bender 365 S. Rancho Santa Fe Rd., Suite 100 San Marcos, CA 92069 Dear Barry: This letter is in response to your request for written confirma- tion of information given to you regarding the Condo 5 project and Villages G and J in Calavera Hills. CT 81-39/CP-185 - Condo 5 If the Condo 5 timeshare project required an extension of the tentative map, staff would not require that all resident parking spaces and storage areas be located within 150 feet of the unit they were assigned to. CT 82-1S/CP-213 - Village J Individual utility meters rather than group meters should be utilized for Village J. CT 82-8/PUD-41 - Village G In regards to your request to divide Lot 109 of Village G, we have consulted v/ith the City Attorney's Office and they have given us the following information. The City Attorney's Office does not have any problem with the City Engineer determining that the proposed final map is in substantial conformance with tentative map if the following conditions are met: 1. The subdivision will have one final map; 2. No additional dwelling units are added; December 20, 1982 Page Two 3. Ail public improvements are put in according to the original resolution of approval; 4. The additional lines do not make a difference to the City Engineer. Hopefully, this letter supplies the written verification that you needed. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me. MIKE HOWES Assistant Planner MH:kb cc: Michael Holzmiller Bill Hofm.an ****REVISED 3/6/81 **** LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR SEWER SERVICE Ovmer's Name Rancho La Costa, Inc. Phone No. 436-4?S? Mailing Address Costa Del Mar Road r;^rUh;^d. CA Q?nn« Service Address; Tract Description: Condo 5 Assessor's Parcel No. Type of Building Condominiums Lateral Size: 4" Extra Footage: _ SEV/ER PERMIT ISSUED UPON RECEIPT OF BUILDINS PERMIT. BUILDING PERMIT MUST BE , OBTAINED \i{.SlSid3!& No. Units 80 Connection Fee $-jpn Qnp 6" @ $ 8" Saddle Easement Connection Extra Depth: @ $ Amount Rec'd $ transferr Ck. No/Cash Date Rec'd By 9/26/80 e. demps'ey Lateral Fee 2d from other projects „ ^ A t- ^ Prorated Sewer Service Fee Total $120,000 The application must be signed by the owner (or his authorized representative) of the property to be served. The total charges must be paid to the District at the time the application is submitted. If a service lateral Is required, it will be installed by the Leucadia County Water District. The service lateral is that part of the sewer system that extends from the main collection line in the street (or easement) to the point in the street (at or near the applicant's property line) where the service lateral is connected to the applicant's building sewer. The applicant is responsible for the construction, at the applicant's expense, of the sewer pipeline (building sewer) from the appli- cant's plumbing to the point in the street (or easement) v;here a connection is made to the service lateral. The connection of the applicant's building sewer to the service lateral shall be made by the applicant at his expense. The connection must be made in conformity with the District's specifications, rules and regulations; and IT MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT BEFORE THE SEWER SYSTEM MAY BE USED BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT, OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MUST NOTIFY THE DISTRICT AT THE TIME INSPECTION IS DESIRED. ANY CONNECTION MADE TO THE SERVICE LATERAL OR COLLEC^^ TION LINE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL AND INSPECTION BY THE DISTRICT WILL BE CONSIDERED INVALID AND WILL NOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED. The prorateci sewer service fee is based upon the date the District estimates that service will begin and covers the balance of the fiscal year. There will be no additional fee or refund if service actually conmences on a different date. For succeeding fiscal years, the sewer service fee will be collected on the tax roll in the same manner as property taxes. The undersigned hereby agrees that the above information given is correct and agrees to the conditions as stated. 9-26-80 Ov/ner's Signature Vice President DflMrm I /i rn<;Tfl INC. Date 13392-13471 Account No. j^i-~^^^Car\shad Unified School District 801 Pine Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 729-9291 'Excellence In Education' BOARD OF TRUSTEES RICHARD R. O'NEIL, M.D. President MARY A. SCHERR Vice President JOHN J. MAMAUX Clerk THOMAS L. CURTIN, M.D. Mennber W. ALLAN KELLY Member DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION PHILIP GRIGNON, Ed. D. District Superintendent RICHARD BREEN Maintenance/Operations SUSAN H. LARCEN Instructional Services GLEN WHITENER Business Services September 24, 1981 Ms. Mary Marcus, Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. James C. Hagaman, City Planning Director Gentlemen: Reference: Rancho La Costa, Inc. Condominium No. 5 78-unit Condominium Our District has reviewed the proposed 78-unit Condominium No. 5 generally located on the southeast corner of El Camino Real and Costa del Mar Road, as referenced above, and has evalu- ated the impact of that development on the facilities of our District. This letter supersedes our letter of November 9, 1979, wherein the project consisted of only 48 units. The Governing Board wishes to advise the City officials and the residents of Carlsbad that as residential units are added to the community, it is likely that many classes in the District will be crowded, resulting in possible impairment to the educational and transportational services offered to the students. It is also likely that school schedules may have to be changed, resulting in an increase in the year-round program, or double sessions, or both. However, the District is able to assure you that school physical facilities will be available concurrent with need for this develop- ment as it is presently proposed. Very truly yours. Philip Grignon, Ed.D. District Superintendent aw cc Rancho La Attention; Costa, Paul Inc. Graham tncostn October 29, 1981 Mr. Mike Holzmiller City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 Subject: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, CONDOMINIUM 5, RANCHO LA COSTA, INC. Dear Mr. Holzmiller: This project description is bring written to provide you with a full range of information on our proposed development, known as Condo 5, and as a response to some questions raised by yourself and the Assistant City Attorney. The principals of Rancho La Costa designed Condo 5 as a time share project only after lengthy observation of the market forces that have made La Costa successful. As an example, immediately to the east of the project site are 96 Chateau condominiiams which, although wholly owned by individuals, have a variety of occupancy uses. Some are occupied by their owners on a year-around basis, some are only seasonably occupied and others are listed with the Hotel to be rented on the same basis as Hotel rooms. Additionally, a good part of the Resort's clientele are repeat guests who have expressed a desire for more spacious and luxurious accommodations. Condo 5 is estimated to cost, as presently designed, $7,200,000 and should adequately fill that need. The typical La Costa guest visits the Resort as a point destina- tion with every intention of spending the vast majority of time on the premises. Because La Costa is a resort it is rarely used as a place to stay while in the area for other reasons. Conse- quently, most visitors arrive by common carrier and are brought by limousine to the Resort. A comparative few arrive by private car. As a matter of interest, approximately 3000 landings at Palomar Airport, by corporate, private or chartered jet aircraft, are directly attributable to La Costa guests each year. COSTA DEL MAR ROAD • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 9200S • AREA CODE 714 • TELEPHONE '43S-9111 Mr. Mike Holzmiller October 29, 1981 -2- As we will be marketing Condo 5 on a national and international basis, we expect the owners of Condo 5 to follow the same use patterns of our present visitors. The currently vacant site for Condo 5 is at the main entrance to the La Costa Resort complex. Being a substantial building of 78 units, the facility was set back from El Camino Real as far as practical within the confines of the property. The result is a project with an abundance of open green space as a foreground. The project is in conformity with the zoning ordinance, although a small height variance will be necessary due to the design of the three-story building. The building has a fairly large overall plan which allows underground parking for 78 cars and includes storage space for each unit. The balance of uncovered spaces are placed on the site at the only location available — between the building and El Camino Real. Because of this location and the large footprint of the building, it is virtually impossible to plan the parking so that no space (outdoors) is further than 150 feet from the most remote dwelling unit. The well established pattern of the La Costa visitor bears out the fact that rarely is one space per unit needed and in no case will additional parking be required, although it will be in place. This statement is easily verified by the adjacent Chateau garages which are normally about 25% occupied. Because of this low demand for parking by time-share and/or condo- minium owners, we consider the outside parking to be in excess but useful during some of the major sports tournaments held at La Costa. The functional relationship of this building to the balance of the Resort is a pedestrian-oriented complex and is best maintained with the building positioned as it is and the continuity of La Costa not interrupted. The 78 units in the project will be equipped with a small kitchen, two (2) baths, washer, dryer and ample closet and storage space. Additionally, each floor will contain maid storage and other general space. The main floor will contain an atriiam space that will act as a passive game room. The garage level will have central maid stor- age/supply, trash areas enclosed within the building, central room service maintenance areas and storage for the units. The building will be staffed 24 hours per day by security and opera- tional personnel. Mr. Mike Holzmiller October 29, 1981 -3- Because all units will be fully furnished, including the patios, there is no no need for major storage areas within the units themselves. All storage requirements are fully met but in a way that is best for the La Costa owner/user. Condo 5 will have an on-site exclusive swimming pool but its owners will also have the opportunity to enjoy the facilities of the Resort. Exact arrangements, however, have not been finalized at this date. While Condo 5 may not precisely meet the design criteria of the Condominium Ordinance, in regards to guest parking and unit storage, it was conceived and designed as an additional facility of La Costa with the characteristics of the typical guest in mind. The owners/users and this facility will be fully and permanently integrated with the La Costa Resort complex, further expanding this internationally known community asset. Condo 5 will be registered with the DRE as both a time share and a condominiiim project. The rationale for this direction is the large number of units that would have to be sold on a time share basis, i.e. 4056 sales based on one week owner occupancy. If the market does not respond as anticipated. La Costa desires to reserve the right to sell some units as condominiums and will have the parking and storage spaces in place to meet the require- ments of the Condominium Ordinance. In summary, it must be recognized that the unique characteristics of the typical Resort guest and of the owners/users of the Chateaus has led us to design this project to meet the market forces distinctive to La Costa. Sincerely, RANCHO LA COSTA, INC. Paul Graham Vice President PG:ph MEMORANDUM DATE: December 9, 1981 TO: Planning Director FROM: City Engineer :or ^ SUBJECT: SUP-5/C0ND0 5 - Condominium Complex South of Costa Del Mar and East of El Camino Real In accordance with Section 21.31.100 of the Municipal Code, I have reviewed the subject application and hereby present the following report: The drawings and calculations for the latest Condo 5 plans were reviewed by my department and the County of San Diego Department of Sanitation and Flood Control. It was deter- mined by them and by us that the proposed improvements adequately protect the proposed development from the effects of erosion and inundation related to a 100-year flood. In addition, it was determined from a comparison of before-grading and after-grading conditions that the encroachment into the San Marcos Creek flood plain will have a minimal effect on the 100-year flood water surface for the adjacent and upstream channel areas. It is, therefore, my finding that a special use permit be issued with the following conditions: 1. The proposed development plan remain substantially as shown on Condo 5 CT81-39 Exhibit 'A' dated November 20, 1981 and SUP-5 Exhibit 'X' dated December 8, 1981. 2. Improve the channel flow capacity at cross section 6 as shown on SUP-5 Exhibit 'X' dated December 8, 1981. 3. Reshape the trapezoidal channel improvements at cross sec- tion 11 as shown on SUP-5 Exhibit 'X' dated December 8, 1981, 4. Provide rock slope protection along the fill slope adjacent to the proposed structure. The location of the proposed rock slope protection will be shown on the final grading plan. DAH:ls ,occc>' R. J. MASSMAN, Director Offices of: Countv Engineer County Road Commissioner County Surveyor County Airports Flood Control Liquid Waste Solid Waste Transportation Operations COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 2 5555 OVERLAND AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 TELEPHONE: (714) 565-5177 December 4, 1981 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TOM HAMILTON First District PAUL W. FORDEM Second District ROGER HEDGECOCK Third District JIM BATES Fourth District PAUL ECKERT Fifth District City of Carlsbad Engineering Department 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attention: David A. Houser Dear Sir: Subject: Third Review of Backwater Analysis for Second Revision to Condo 5 SUP-3 At your request this department has reviewed the proposed revision of the SUP-3 project. The project would encroach into the north overbank flood plain of San Marcos Creek upstream of El Camino Real bridge. The following table is a summary of the results of HEC-2 analysis done by the developer's engineer: TABLE 1 - 100-year Flood Summary Existing Proposed Cross Section Number WSEL Velocity WSEL Velocity 5 13.13 7.4 13.13 7,4 6 13.27 7.9 12.95 9.1 7 13.86 7.0 13.77 6.5 8 14.06 6.7 14.01 6.0 9 14.33 5.4 14.28 5.0 9+64 14.46 4.6 14.37 4.5 11 14.51 5.5 14.57 3.6 12 14.57 5.6 14.51 4,2 City of Carlsbad - 2 - December 4, 1981 Table 1 indicates that the project would increase the 100-year water surface elevation .06 ft. at cross section 11 and the channel velocity 1.2 fps at cross section 6. These deviations are generally within the accuracy of the analysis. At cross section 6, the water surface elevation would be at least 13.13 which would lower the velocity. After inspection of the cross section plots it appears the following would be advantageous: 1. Improve the channel flow capacity at cross section 6. 2. Reshape the trapezoidal channel improvements at cross section 11. The project will have minimal effect on the 100-year flood plain of San Marcos Creek provided improvements in flow capacity are made to the channel. Rock slope protection should be provided and the finished floor of the building should be at least one foot above the 100-year flood level. If you need further information, please contact Ken Hanson at 565-5509. Very truly yours. yf'\ R. J. MASSMAN, Director Department of Public Works RJM:KH:lm 1 CASE NO.: CT 81-39/CP-185 DATE RECEIVED: 9-24-81 APPLICANT; RANCHO LA COSTA, INC. ^0 P'^ \l' ZXl Z.C - REQUEST: 78 unit condo, pool, garage, parking lot ENVIRONMENIAL EXEMPT OR EXCEPTED: Posted: ;Q.-/8"2-2- Prior Compliance: S Pi±)lished; 2-2o'^'^ Filed: Filed: 2.'18"Z1- NEGATTVE DEdARATICN: Posted: /2-*?-8f Published; {Z.-^'Bi Notice of Determination:7- EiSlVIRCMffiNTAL IMPACT REPORT: ' ' Nbtice of Nbtice of Notice of Preparation: Completion: Determination: PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Date of Hearing: ^ ^ & / 2. Publication; /2. -IX'^^ ^ 3. Nbtice to Property Owners; I2.~ ll - " $1 4. Resolution Nb. fOl Co, H 0 ,1907 Date; /A-X^A - ^ / ACTION: fiiPfi^jj £, (Continued to: 5. Appeal: CITY COUNCIL 1. Date of Hearing; /.y Q - 9' Sl 2. Notices to City Clerk; ; o? - ^ V- 3. Agenda Bill: / , ^-^^ ^(i 4. Resolution Nb. / 9 06 Date: /- ) '^- 'i^;3 ACTION; ^pf9£nU^b 5. Ordinance No.Date; CORRESPCMDENCE Staff Report to Applicant: Resolution to Applicant: - ^ ^ AR^LICATIC:IM BlZone Change • General Plan Amendment GlTtentative Tract Map • Planned Unit Developmait 13 Major Ctondcndiuum Pennit • Minor Condominirffn Pennit • Master Plan REQUEST •Precise Development Plcin • Specific Plan • site Development Plan • Conditional Dse Pennit —^ y§riance By Dale JJaegleT^AIA* ) ^'fanning GatgiassiCTrT)eti?TreiM Special Use Pennit *(see attached) Conplete Description of project (attach additionaQ. sheets if necessary) La Costa Condo 5 is a proposed' residential development, consiting of 78 "time sharing" condominium units. As proposed, the project consists of a three story condominium buildina located above an underground prarking garage, a swimming pool, and a paved parking lot. Implementation of the project will involve relocating an existing sewer line within the proiect area.. _Flood proofing would be required since the proposed condominiiom building is partialp.] within tiie floodplain-(F-PL-.oyerlax goneV —, _ Location of Project The proposed development is lbca:ted in the southern portion of the City of Carlsbad within the Rancho La Costa Community. The site is situated approx- imately 0 . 2 miles north of the rntersecti nn nf T.a rnsta avennp ;^nd CPimir^n Legal Description (conplete) (cont. see attached) AlI--^thar-portion of Lot 14 in Section 35. Township 12 South. Range 4 West. San Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat thereof, in the City of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, State of California^ i3.eing--mQre_jiar±icular3|y described as follows: (cont. gee attached) Pxoposed Zone R-P iSiaire (Print or Type) Rancho La Costa, Inc. Jfeiling Address 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Zone R-P F-^P Overlay Assessors Pcsxcel Nnmber 216-210-04, Por. 216-123-01 General Plan Residential [Existing Xjcind Use Private recre High Density/Professional facility (equestrian related use (RH/O) {riding ring)with adjoining (conj ) Proposed General Plan NO CHANGE Site Acreage 3.2g Owner Applicant Name (Print or Type) Rcingjip. La QogtaInc, Mailing Address 2100 Costa Del Mar Road City and State Zxp Telephone Carlsbad. CA 92QQ8 438-9111 City and State Zip Telephone Carlsbad, CA 92008 438-9111 I CEI^TIFY TIIAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AD© 1HAT Ali 'lilE ABTA'E INE'CRMATIOJ IS TRUE :'\MD COIMECT TO HE BEST OF MY KNOv^LEDGS I CERTIFY THAT I m TdE OWNER'S REPRESEbWIVE AND THAT ALL 'IHE ABO^v^E INFORMATION IS TRUE Pl<D COBKECT TO THE BEST OF MY KSOvLEDGE DA^E DAIE J.'ata Application. Sec'd Fees Rec^ive-a' P/?cei.pt Nb. . t5o 7 ^ I.^Tte ^licsitxaa EteceiveKal Staff Assigned Case N-umber LOCATION OF PROJECT (cont.) and is bounded on the north by Costa Del Mar Road, on the west by El Camino Real, on the south by San Marcos Creek, and on the east by condominiums and tennis courts of the La Costa Resort. EXISTING LAND USE (cont.) asphalt paved parking area, remainder of site is vacant land. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (cont.) Beginning at the most Northerly corner of Lot 3 in La Costa Condo- minium No. 4, according to Map thereof No. 6520, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County; Being a point in the arc of an 801.00 foot radius curve concave North- westerly, a radial line to said point bears South 38°33'43" East; thence South 31°34'14" East along the Easterly line of said Lot 3 a distance of 89.00 feet; thence South 65°31'08" East 72.33 feet; thence continuing along said Easterly line and its Southerly prolongation South 31°34'14" East 155.00 feet; thence South 58° 25 "46" West a distance of 352.50 feet to the Easterly line of a 150.00 foot San Diego Gas & Electric Company easement per Original Record 6301/162; thence South 75°59'14" West a distance of 152.53 feet to the Westerly line of said 150.00 foot easement; thence North 24°27'21" West along said Westerly line a distance of 313.39 feet to a point in the arc of a non-tangent 50.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly a radial line to said point bears North 41°05'44" West; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 31°06'05" a distance of 27.14 feet to a point of reverse curvature with an 801.00 foot radius curve concave Northerly, being the Southerly right of way line of Costa Del Mar Road as shown on said Map No. 6520; thence Easterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 28°34'04" a distance of 399.3 8 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.