Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 96-03; Pacific View Estates; Tentative Map (CT) (5)DECEMBER 2,1996 TO: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN FROM: Teresa Woods SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES - CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96- 03/SDP 96-04 - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, Hillside Development Permit and Site Development Plan to subdivide an 8.52 acre site into 30 single family lots, 3 lots to provide legal access to adjacent property and 3 open space lots, for a total of 36 lots on the property. Seven of the units are proposed to contain 460 square foot, first floor, second dwelling units. The property is located on the north side of Carlsbad Village Drive at Donna Drive, in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation is for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and approval for CT 96-03, PUD 96-03, HDP 96-03, and SDP 96-04, subject to conditions. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant is proposing to subdivide and develop 30 small lot single family residences and seven second dwelling units on the north side of Carlsbad Village Drive at Donna Drive. The site is Zone RA-10,000 and has a General Plan designation of Residential Low-Medium (RLM). The applicant has requesteaa-5ft|% density bonus as an incentive for providing the affordable units on-site. The density bonus has been requested under the Density Bonus Ordinance Chapter 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. At 4.89 dwelling units pre acre, the project does exceed both the General Plan range (0-4 du/ac) and the Growth Management Control Point of 3.2 du/ac. This density increase is permitted pursuant to General Plan Land Use Policy C.2, and therefore, the project as proposed, is consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan. The proposed project also complies with the Planned Development Ordinance, Small Lot Architectural Guidelines, Hillside Development Ordinance and all other policies and ordinances applicable to the project. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative tract map, planned unit development, hillside development permit and site development plan to allow the construction of 30 single family homes. Seven of the proposed units contain 460 square foot, first floor, second dwelling units. The project also contains 3 lots to provide legal access to adjacent property and 3 open space lots, for a total of 36 lots on the property. The property totals 8.52 gross acres is presently undeveloped and has been previously disturbed. The majority of the project site containso 03/SlMPxPACIFIC VIEW ESTATES VI 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96- DECEMBER2, 1996 PAGE 2 disturbed habitat (4.37 acres). Low quality coastal sage scrub (1.95 acres) exists within the central portion of the site with approximately 2.2 acres of the site occupied by southern mixed chaparral. The project as conditioned, would be required to mitigate for impacts to the coastal sage scrub. The topography of the site is varied consisting of gently sloping to steep hillsides, which generally slope down to the east and west. The site is zoned RA-10,000 and has a General Plan designation of Residential Low-Medium (RLM). The project site is located on the north side of Carlsbad Village Drive at Donna Drive. The General Plan designation to the east is Residential Medium High (RMH), to the north and west is Residential Medium (RM), and to the south is Residential Low-Medium (RLM). The zoning in the area varies; to the north is RDM, to the east and west is P-C and to the south is R-l-10. The proposed project is compatible with the small-lot, single family and large-lot, single family developments to the north, multiple family apartments to the west and single family development to the south across Carlsbad Village Drive. There is vacant property to the west that is designated by the General Plan for RM residential densities which permits a range of 4-8 du/ac with a Growth Control Point of 6 du/ac, with which the proposed project would be compatible. There are also three parcels to the north of this site which range in size from .78 - 1 acre in size. Each of these parcels currently contains one single family home, and could be further subdivided in the future. These parcels are designated RLM in the Carlsbad General Plan. The proposed single family residential development will be compatible with these properties. The 30 proposed single family residential lots range in size from 5,500 to 13,924 square feet. The proposed project will contain 30 single family units which will be two-story, 30-feet in height, and range in size from 2,105 to 3,016 square feet. Seven of the units will contain 460 square foot second dwelling units, to be located on the ground floor of the homes. The project will feature early California architecture consisting of tile roofs with varying roof lines, and stucco exteriors. The proposed project is subject to the following regulations: A. Carlsbad General Plan (Residential Low-Medium) 0-4 du/ac with a Growth Control Point of 3.2 du/ac); B. Planned Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) and Residential Agricultural (RA-10,000) Zoning (Chapter 21.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); C. Hillside Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); D. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) and Density Bonus Ordinance (Chapter 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); and E. Growth Management (Local Facilities Management Zone 1). ESTAlSWPACIFIC VIEW ESTATUPF1 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP DECEMBER 2, 1996 PAGE 3 Attachments: 1. Location Map 1. Reduced Site Plan and elevationsS lAn X 11" 2. EIA Part II, Mitigated Negative Declaration PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/ HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 SITE PLAN PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Left Side View ^'' • 1. 1 '1 i ^\ M i M r— - ----- • :D D i Right Side View Front View - 2574 ««= fr^ Rear View Pacific View Estates Elevations Style I Planl 8a£ « I f8 r i E 1 . -•]— i H IN 111 n n .u D t=n .-.*£, «4*"B ftr& n M ! ' • P=I- rj°i \ ii r ', *• i '• | t i Pacific View Estates Elevations Style II Plan 2 t I, ! I Hi Erl A E Pacific View Estates Elevations Style III Plan 3 Iti i I A( City of Carlsbfa 96305 Fire Department Bureau of Prevention Plan Review: Requirements Category: Fire Conditions Date of Report: Tuesday, October 29,1996 Contact Name Terry Woods Reviewed by: Address City, State CA Bldg. Dept. No.Planning No. CT96-03 Job Name Pacific View Estates Job Address Carlsbad Village Ste. or Bldg. No. Approved - The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans; information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore any changes to these items after this date, including field modifica- tions, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to construct or install improvements. Disapproved - Please see the attached report of deficiencies. Please make corrections to plans or specifications necessary to indicate compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. For Fire Department Use Only Review 1st 2nd 3rd CFD Job# 96305 File# Other Agency ID 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad, California 92008 (619) 931-2121 Requirements Category:Conditions 96305 Deficiency Item: Pending 01 Building Permits Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be approved by the Fire Department. Proposed language: Prior to issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall evaluate building plans for conformance with applicable fire and life safety requirements of the state and local Fire Codes. Deficiency Item: Pending 02 Hydrants Additional on-site public water mains and fire hydrants are required. Proposed change for Industrial and multi family: Provide additional public fire hydrants at intervals of 300 feet along public streets and private driveways. Hydrants should be located at street intersections when possible, but should be positioned no closer than 100 feet from terminus of a street or driveway. Proposed change for single family residences: Provide additional public fire hydrants at intervals of 500 feet along public streets and/or private driveways. Hydrants should be located at street intersections when possible, but should be positioned no closer than 100 feet from terminus of a street or driveway. Deficiency Item: Pending 03 Site Plan/Hydrants Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval, which depicts location of required, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydrants. The plan should include off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project. Deficiency Item: Pending 04 Site plan/access Applicant shall submit a site plan depicting emergency access routes, driveways and traffic circulation for Fire Department approval. Deficiency Item: Pending 05 Access during construction An all weather, unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicles shall be provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fire Chief, the access road has become unserviceable due to inclement weather or other reasons, he may, in the interest of public safety, require that construction operations cease until the condition is corrected. 06 Combustible construction materials on siteDeficiency Item: Pending All required water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be operational before combustible building materials are located on the construction site. Deficiency Item: Pending 07 Security gate systems Prior to final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access shall be equipped with a "Knox", key-operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall contact the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to installation. Page 2 10/29/96 Requirements Category:Conditions 96305 Deficiency Item: Pending 08 Fire lanes Prior to building occupany, private roads and driveways which serve as required access for emergency service vehicles shall be posted as fire lanes in accordance with the requirements of section 17.04.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Deficiency Item: Pending 09 Brush clearance Native vegetation which presents a fire hazard to structures shall be modified or removed in accordance with the specifications contained in the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines Manual. Applicant shall submit a Fire Suppression plan to the Fire Department for approval. Proposed new condition Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall obtain fire department approval of a wildland fuel management plan. The plan shall clearly indicate methods proposed to mitigate and manage fire risk associated with native vegetation growing within 60 feet of structures. The plan shall reflect the standards presented in the fire suppression element of the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines Manual. more below Prior to occupancy of buildings, all wildland fuel mitigation activities must be complete, and the condition of all vegetation within 60 feet of structures found to be in conformance with an approved wildland fuel management plan. Deficiency Item: Pending 12 Emergency response maps The applicant shall provide a street map which conforms to the following requirements: A 400 scale photo-reduction mylar, depicting proposed improvements and at least two existing intersections or streets. The map shall also clearly depict street centerlines, hydrant locations and street names. Deficiency Item: Pending 13 Monument sign A monument sign shall be installed at the entrance to the driveway or private street indicating the addresses of the buildings on site. Page 3 10/29/96 PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 •FAX: (619) 722 6358 Telephone: (619) 722 6358Fai:(619)720-9785 Tel:(6r9) 720-9785 October 28, 1996 Ms. Terry Woods, Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: CT 96-03 APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP and support documents. 8.52 Acres, 30 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167-250-16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive. Dear Terry, Enclosed please find an October 27, 1996 North County Times newspaper article I thought would interest you. I can relate to this problem. I too just went through this same scenario to consider building apartments to satisfy the SDU requirements. I found apartments to be a BIG LOSER!! Does the City have any relief type program for fees or redevelopment incentives? Perhaps a study should be made to consider possible solutions. Just a thought! Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Don L. Jack Managing Member OCT 2 8 1996 i f / m l^lf*^1..- i-ssritesV I**'" -' •:*? *«»»9 •-. - -.?.;$ . '..•:' * " •--•••- !M .. MSBMBf*^Tfy ,«"*s**& * T5%a rW'*''*;?!»- ?*i*dP W1P»<i% T fe'1^- "• "- fi •"^•"" - r- r' **" * f •,'.;"" -- ' ' gjg{J'-r _* Vf V •' ' 'G^f^'-' S®3 ••>• ^?;% ^!-.,-, «vifi I'^tji in ^wi^ssm ;f;/i i.» *-•:•<-<••' ,;,. ., i-^-.-i-- iM.t..v>V"-wl wMv .(Mi h.i-'-. v.tso /-(vx-j 1 '>m. i>u> .; . .'M-ilU! 7n ' •;;!iii,i)-. Kfi" ih" (UUi < -i'lVi'tsv' •'V.iHiis'i. t>i' Hi r'.mt •).•'. •••-!'':.' li il)- •! -: : ti (Ii ip;'. *>$»:' ••' 'if ',••'•;' >• :-'i .:•!:" it:-' '(n.i^ tfl'.l !:-. i'^U.UU'iv h-)*,h'.'S UlO.il >'! 'v"i,<)U() jii'V VHMt - - of 113 pfcl - <nx.' -• tiiiiO a v»i ivatc i:ic'- ^X1.*,,-- ii^svs^vS -y^H'"1"!"x"(l1 -study ,-.n.,.j.ifr.-«'. s.v Ao^v -.';-;;„;,, „>„.»;>,» ro, r.-;. f-"v-^-(-;rx-. il.;,,?-.. ,.,,- :7)«w.s-..w!.K-i<-.»«••v;.v i"'_;11;. .;,.,- ..- .,.!...-- «;");; .,;;,;;',;r;v?i';,f<,..(f.J.-T..--«'--- ; ••i.'.II ',!):! HI •> ^ '" ' ' ' . . •„.,.: ; : '! -UIl-j', '•' ••;'" '', , ,-;.,,.. . ,1' • ; !rl ; ! '. If1 I! 'i'i'n-; hii'.h C!i),t Cor Sow-i s'>!!U I'.rri1-: v.'i1! I'.t-i",! itjf Ilil^ * \.ii i'i '•() ) i.iXiH",ii V At Ihr '' -:i ' >,;!! \\hvi'; i !• ' ' '.' .' .-"• . •' !' :.,-•"•'! !ir>i hi, H\ in rhe :ii.'T.u«l ;>i.'.:'!•<•• "i , .•,!••,;-. ifj.:;-"i.'...!•; UKLI^J .'.i-n!'.,« ' :-"' • ; • " i>i-i '•'•- i'!n;a .. •"<.!• iu-ii »!n'i{:"< st^Hii!«:iv-,-. • ' ' '•;- i> c; • C^-.:' t )' .• .. ih. .'..;•?/ ' ' ' "•.!•'••!'.. .! ..-•. i,v iy i.Ht.-hri'.'iticd. :,i-i •;•-il-.:-''. i !".ii.y' •.-.'.!,.•>!< .-it'ii'.'ios'is tin « vi-.' f. "' *'.•-(• ••:•.''>.••;'ti.--:.-v •.>< i i'.Vii ,';!il'C>li '11;....;'..•. ..j'.<-. i1' M U' ;"•.>!•« ,'-y !'*( <\! ' '-I '> Municipal Water District 5950 El Camino Real. Carlsbad. CA 92008 Engineering: (619) 438-3367 Administration: (619) 438-2722 FAX: 431-1601 Date: Planning Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 CMWD No SUBJECT: In response to your inquiry of \^Ji_i \Lo |^lL7>O ,the District has reviewed subject project and the Carlsbad Municipal Water District conditions for potable water, reclaimed water and sewer systems are as follows: 1. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can be met 2. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application for meter installation. "Serving Carlsbad for over 40 years" Page 2 City of Carlsbad 3. Sequentially, the Developers Engineer shall do the following: A. Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirements. Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs from appropriate parties. B. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning Department for processing and approval. C. Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement plans, a meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review, comment and approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages (ie - GPM - EDU). 4. This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final map. 5. "cc^JL -SJrV/vrr -cu. Ilyou have any questions, please contact the undersigned. ichard Goedert Engineering Technician RG:jm October 17, 1996 Comments on Application No. CT96-03- Pud 96-03 Changes that can be made on Engineering Improvement Plan submittals for project: 1. Lot 15, move street light to extension of common lot line between lots 15 and 16. 2. Street "A", add additional street light to mid block of street, suggest extension of lot lines 3&4 October 10, 1996 TO: TERESA WOODS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER FROM: Associate Engineer Quon VIA: Principal Civil Engineer PROJECT ISSUES STATEMENT PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES, CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/SDP 96-04/HDP 96-03 The Engineering Department has completed its review of the resubmitted project application for completeness and/or engineering issues. The project application is now or was previously found complete for the purpose of continued engineering review. The project application does contain some engineering issues or concerns which remain to be resolved by the applicant. All engineering issues should be fully resolved or addressed prior to resubmitting the project for our review. The outstanding engineering issues or concerns are as follows: 1 Please provide documentation relative to the assignment of the existing 45' access easement offsite on Donna Drive. Additionally, the width of this easement scales to 40' as opposed to the 45' dimension. 2. The plans show a lot line bisecting the lot containing the water tank. Our understanding is that the water tank is located on a separate lot owned by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 3. It is still unclear as to what steps the applicant has taken to utilize the portion of "B" Street, which is proposed on property owned by the City of Carlsbad/Carlsbad Municipal Water District. As a City contact regarding this issue, the applicant should call Chuck Walden, at (619) 434-2890. 4. The right-of-way width for "A" Street is to be 51', with a curb-to-curb width of 36', and not the 31' curb-to-curb width shown on Sheet 2. Also, retaining walls are not allowed to encroach into the right-of-way. 5. The retaining wall proposed at the intersection of Wintergreen Drive and "B" Street will block sight distance. Please note that intersections require a triangular area, measured 25' from the end of the curb return, to be free of any obstructions in excess of 30" in height. Please outline this triangular area on the tentative map. ^_— ^Th)e-T¥"opo^e€kRV parking area is^to-bevdesigrjed-s® thajjutehtcisa can maj3e<^vjj^wittiin___ vV' me pafkifig areV^HTo^lonkLbatfeto bacK-odfonto the street. ^ --- " 7. There appears to be inadequate area on both panhandle lots for vehicles to turnaround so that they can drive down the paved access road. This comment is related to additional concerns regarding the required parking on these lots, which are addressed in the Planning Department comments. Additionally, the driveway for access to the panhandle lots are to be clear of slopes, walls, and other site elements. 8. With regard to Lot 36, we cannot support any use on this lot which requires vehicular access. There are safety concerns since the lot would be located on the inside of a curve with minimum vehicular sight distance, and fronting a major arterial with heavy traffic volumes. The plans should note that both lots 36 and 32 are designated as open space lots and to held and maintained by a homeowners association. 9. Donna Drive is to have at least 50' of tangent at its intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive, measured from the extension of the face of curb. Additionally, the detail of this intersection should be more explicit in showing the right-of-way lines, the limits of street improvements for the project, and where these improvements will join existing. 10. Please provide a letter from the property owners of the parcel adjacent to "A" Street indicating their concurrence with the proposed access layout to their parcel. 11. Please return the red-lined check print with the next submittal. Attached is a redlined check print set of the project. Please forward this plan set to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. The applicant must return this plan set with the corrected plans to assist us in our continued review. If you have questions regarding any of the comments above, please contact me at extension 4380. KENNETH W. QUON Associate Engineer CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMISSION REVIEW AFFIATION I. APPLICANT/DEVELOPMENT TEAM INFORMATION Name of Applicant: Vf T«0 AHHr«c. PACIFIC VIEW LTD.Madug Address. p Q ^ ^ CARLSBAD) CA 92018 Telephone No.: (619) 720-9785 Identify Development Team (ie., developer, builder, architect, etc.): DEVELOPER: PACIFIC VIEW LTD., P.O. BOX 2198, CARLSBAD, CA 92018 OWNER: PACIFIC VIEW LTD., P.O. BOX 2198, CARLSBAD, CA 92018 BUILDER: PACIFIC VIEW LTD., P.O. BOX 2198, CARLSBAD, CA 92018 ARCHITECT: TRE ARNOLD, 5604 OLD RANCH ROAD, OCEANSIDE, CA 92057 . GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION **** PACIFIC VIEW LTD. Describe General Location of Project: The property is located at the northwest corner of Carlsbad Village Drive at the intersection of Donna Way. This is behind the Elm Reservoir. __ . . . ,. Vacant Land, No Address. The property consists of 8.52 acres located withinProject Address: „ „ i, . . , *• *• *the City of Carlsbad. Site Parcel No(s).: The ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. is 167-250-16-00 Total Number of Affordable Units Required (if applicable): FTVF Total Number of Affordable Units Proposed: — SEVEN (7) Type of Units (ie., garden apartments, detached, etc.): ' We feel this is superior design as each SDU is downstairs and attached but fully nf rim main home, see attached "DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION". Size (in square feet) of each Unit:Each unit is 460 square feet. Bedroom Size Distribution of Units: The bedroom is roughly 12* x 11.5* and consists of 130 square feet. Describe any special features/amenities to be included within project: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PROJECT "NARRATIVE/INFORMATION" Housing Commission Review Application Page 1 12 g 93 ID. TERMS OF AFFORDAEHKT FOR AFFORDABLE UNITS (ATTAHBlDDrnONAL INFORMATION IF NECESSARY) Targeted Income Levels (as % of area median): RENTAL UNITS @ 70-80% of COUNTY MEDIAN Target Population (ie., families, seniors, etc): TWO - SENIORS OR FAMILY Monthly Rent (by bdr. size) or Sales Price of Units: $637 to $729 RENT PER MONTH Term of Affordability (ie., 30 yrs, life of project, etc.): 30 Yrs. Projected Schedule for Construction of Affordable Housing Units: Mid to Late 1997 If the affordable units are being constructed to satisfy the City of Carlsbad's Inclusionary Housing requirement, how will they be phased with respect to construction of the market rate units? Please Explain Project Phasing: The proposed 2nd dwelling units will be built in conjunction with and in proportion to the market rate units. IV. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Please attach a copy of development and operating financial proformas showing sources and uses of funds to accomplish the affordable units proposed in this application. In the proformas, please identify your subsidy sources and appropriate justifications for use of these sources. N/A Describe the local financial assistance or incentives, if any, including specific terms desired for the affordable housing project which you are, or will be, requesting from the City of Carlsbad: NONE Identify any other project conditions which may be relevant to project feasibility: No other known conditions. Housing Commission Review Application Page 2 12/8/93 V. REQUIRED ATTACHMENl^^ APPLICATION «M^^.^^.^«—MMMMMMMM^^^HM^^ The following items must be attached to this application: • Site Development Plan for Affordable Housing Units; • Narrative describing how the project meets the Housing Needs and Priorities as expressed within the City of Carlsbad's Housing Element and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy; • Narrative on the project's consistency with the City of Carlsbad's Affordable Housing Policies as expressed in the Housing Element, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, General Plan and other related documents; • Development and Operating Financial Proformas indicating sources and uses of funds for the project, including justification and identification of subsidy sources; • Complete description of financial assistance or incentives including specific terms that are, or will be requested from the City of Carlsbad for the project, if applicable; and, • Completed Disclosure Statement of Ownership Interests within the project. VI. APPLICATION SIGNATURES PACIFIC VIEW LTD P.O. BOX 2198 Property Owner Name, Address and Telephone No.: I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that I am the legal owner of the subject property and that the above information is true and correct to the best ef my knowledge. Signature D. JACK, MANAGING MEMBER Pate 10/31/96 I, the undersigned applicant, do hereby certify that I am the representative of the legal owner of the subject property and that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Applicant Signature:Date 10/31/96 D. JACK, MANAGING MEMBER THE BOX BELOW IS FOR CITY USE ONLY Date Application Received: Application Received By: Staff Recommendation: Date of Housing Commission Review: Action on Application by Housing Commission: Other Comments: Housing Commission Review Application Page 3 12/8 93 PKrTjECT NARRATIVE/INFORPJJTION 10/31/96 PROJECT NAME: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES APPLICANT NAME: PACIFIC VIEW LTD. NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located at the northwest corner of Carlsbad Village Drive at the intersection of Donna Way. This is behind the Elm Reservoir. Abutting the subject property on the south is the major traffic thoroughfare, CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE which runs east and west serving principally between El Camino Real and the Interstate 5 Freeway. Directly north of the site is a small lot Condominium project on Wintergreen Drive identified as the "Hillgate Estates", (city development No. 88-02). To the west of the site is the collector traffic artery "HOSP WAY". Additionally to the west is an existing high density older condominium project with small lots (Minimal Lot Size = 3,266 s.f.). Directly on the east is the three (3) story "OCEAN CREST APARTMENT" complex on Calle Arroyo Street. The entire area is presently 97% fully developed except for the subject 8.52 acre parcel and but one other adjacent parcel, i.e. roughly 2 acres in size. This entire area was built out many years ago, (circa 1970-1988). The subject property now essentially stands alone as an undeveloped pocket within the City's core. LAND USE/ ZONING: The property will be developed as a PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ("PUD"). PACIFIC VIEW'S actual density will be only 4.34 units per acre, (i.e. 30 lots/homes + 7 Secondary Dwelling Units ("SD") = 37 units divided by 8.52 acres = 4.34 u.p.a.). Even in a worst case scenario by subtracting all slopes to thereby use just 7.565 net acres, PACIFIC VIEW'S net density is still only 4.89 u.p.a.. This is consistent with Carlsbad's zoning ordinances, the surrounding area density usage and within city requirements, hi fact, PACIFIC VIEW'S density is substantially less than every other surrounding • abutting project. LOTTAGE : Five (5) of PACIFIC VIEW'S lots are density bonus in exchange for PACIFIC VIEW'S dedication of seven (7) Secondary Dwelling Units, ("SD"). PACIFIC VIEW'S Plan 3 was redesigned, enlarged and widened to accommodate this dedication of seven (7) SD units as affordable housing within the City. PACIFIC VIEW lots were designed to be a minunal 55' - 60' wide. Yet, floor plans are only 37', 39', and 41* wide. This then allows the project to enjoy larger side yards. The minimal is 5* however in most cases, we actually have as much as a 10' side yard. This is good design! Moreover, with the use of 3* garden seat walls in key areas, such allows an increase in the size of each building pad and helps provide for varied pad elevations. This gives a feeling of privacy and renders excellent curb appeal as PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES will NOT be a mundane repetition of boring boxes all on one flat plain. PACIFIC VIEW's median average SD lot contains 8,042 square feet, (i.e. 56,293 s.f. / 7 units = 8,042 s.f. per lot). SD UNIT DESIGN: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES has three (3) separate floor plans. All home designs are two (2) story. All meet city height limitations and city design guidelines. Plan 3 is our largest plan at a little over 3,000 square feet which has an average lot coverage ratio of only 29.3%. PACIFIC VIEW'S Plan 3 will host our Secondary Dwelling Unit. These SD units are considered great "Granny Flats" because unlike most, PACIFIC VIEW'S SD units boasts a DOWNSTAIR location. Down stairs (i.e. ground floor) apartments are considerably more desireable however historically in short supply within the City. Ground floor locations are of paramount need by the elderly, the convalescing or the handicapped. We feel our ground floor SD units are of vital benefit to the community. For this reason we have made an earnest effort NOT to compromise this ground floor design by simply placing our SD unit upstairs over the garage. This has been difficult and took many redesigns to maintain the quality floor plans we require, all while keeping our SD unit at ground floor elevation. Each Secondary Dwelling Unit consists of a very efficient 460 square feet which is perhaps the equivalent of possibly 600+ square feet in a typical standard SD apartment. Simply, In this DOWN STAIRS apartment design, ALL space is fully usable. We have NO wasted halls, NO wasted entry foyers, and NO wasted stairs! Our Secondary Dwelling Unit boasts superior design. Each is totally independent and separated from the main home by a sound-proof demising wall. Our conception provides each SD unit with their own private exterior front door entrance. And unlike others, each have their own small private garden area. Each SD unit enjoys the security of then- own private under roof ATTACHED garage, a standard size washer and dryer facility, and a large full sized kitchen. Moreover, each apartment has a full size private bath, a spacious bedroom with great closet storage, and a generous Living Room. Extra storage is provided in the attached Garage. We feel this is quality living and superior design. COMMON FACILITIES: The PACIFIC VIEW development has a dedicated common area recreational lot identified as Lot No. "31". Said lot exceeds one full acre (47,607 square feet) in green landscaping and open space. A flat park like area provides for active or relaxing leisure time. This recreational lot can be accessed by way of either "A" Street or "B" Street via a 4' asphalt trail. Said trail encircles a full sized regulation volleyball court and large grass commons. Such is also large enough for regulation Croquet, Badminton, Lawn Tennis and a Shuffle Board Court. Along the outer perimeter will be plenty of surrounding plants and trees, (Eucalyptus Citriadoras, California Peppers, and other trees and flora acceptable to City Parks and Rec.). Several picnic tables and park bench seats are planned for quiet time or walking stops along the trail. A Barbecue is proposed for entertaining and picnics. The development has set aside a 1,200+ square foot screened area designated at the top of "A" Street to accommodate future RV parking. COMMITTEE REQUEST: In lieu of submitting for a higher density land use similar to the abutting projects, our request is for a lower density development of only 30 single family lots. PACIFIC VIEW will house 30 homes and 7 Secondary Dwelling Units in a quiet neighborhood setting. Our design and density is within compliance of all PUD zoning requirements and City standards. In fact PACIFIC VIEW'S design exceeds standard side yard setbacks and is of lesser populace density. This is our fourth (4th) major redesign to accommodate city requests. Todate we have obtained twelve extensive and costly Bio-Technical studies or the like. ALL have been with favorable results reflecting that our requested development will have NO environmental significance. We have submitted a study on the California Pocket Mouse, the California Coastal Sage, three (3) separate Gnatcatcher studies, a Tree analysis, two (2) traffic studies, two (2) sound control investigations, an archeological probe, and a paleontology study. These studies were over-viewed by Master Consultant A. Hayworth of DuDek and Associates and approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Department of the Interior. The site is effectively devoid of all sensitive animals or plant species other than commons squirrels and rabbits. CONCLUSION: The granting of our request is reasonable as our application is within the city's zoning requirements. For now nearly two (2) years we have repeatedly met with the City for guidance and habitually followed the City's requests. Approval of this submittal will allow our project to enjoy the same rights already given to and possessed by other recently approved Carlsbad housing tracts.... and also already given to those surrounding projects abutting our development, all of which bear higher densities than this application. The granting of this request will not be of detriment or injurious to public welfare nor, as proven by said studies, will NOT negatively affect any natural resources. Further, this request will not substantially increase local traffic, nor will it in any way bear any adverse visual restrictions or impact on vehicular street safety. Should you have any questions or if I may be of any assistance, please don't hesitate to call me direct at (619) 720-9785. Thanking you in advance for your consideration in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES D. Jack Managing Member City of Carlsbad Planning Department October 10, 1996 Don Jack Pacific View LTD PO Box 2190 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 - PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Hillside Development Permit and Site Development Plan, application nos. CT 96-03/PUD 96- 03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04, as to its completeness for processing. The items requested from you earlier to make your Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Hillside Development Permit and Site Development Plan, application nos. CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Teresa Woods, at (619) 438-1161, extension 4447, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:TW:vd Attachment c: Gary Wayne Adrienne Landers Bobbie Hoder Bob Wojcik File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 ISSUES OF CONCERN No. CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 - PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Planning: 1. The maximum lot coverage allowed is 40 percent. Please indicate the maximum lot coverage proposed for the lots. 2. Lots 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, and 13 are less than 5,480 square feet in size, which is the smallest lot on the project to the north. This project must contain lots equal to or greater in size than the adjacent previously subdivided projects. Please revise plans as appropriate. 3. Please submit letters from all relevant property owners indicating that the proposed offsite grading is acceptable. 4. The location and size of the RV storage facility is not acceptable, as it is less than 600 sq. ft. in size (exclusive of driveway access and aisles), is located within the required front yard, and is impossible to screen from view of Street A. Please revise plans as appropriate. 5. There are numerous retaining walls proposed on the project. As discussed previously, the use of side yard retaining walls is discouraged but a maximum height of 3' may be acceptable, please revise plans as appropriate. The proposed rear yard retaining walls on Lots 25 and 26 ranging from 1' to 5' in height are acceptable. This plan includes several retaining walls located at the edge of a street right-of-way which is unacceptable. Retaining walls along a street must be setback from the right-of-way a minimum of 5' and heavily landscaped in front of the wall. If the retaining wall must be over 6' in height, a sensitive wall design will be required. There are several retaining walls shown on the plan that are partially screen-out. If these are proposed retaining walls, the heights must be shown on the plans. The retaining wall as proposed on Lot 20 is not acceptable as it blocks the view of vehicles. Please discuss the wall location and height limitations with the Engineering Department. A new 6' high wall, located behind Lots 5-8, is proposed. This wall is located on the property line and cannot be adequately screened from Hosp Way as proposed. Please revise this proposed wall design. An 8' high wall is proposed along the trail between Donna Drive and the recreation area. An 8' wall is excessive, please revise plans to reduce this wall height. It is preferable to bench the slope for purposes of the trail, and to eliminate the use of walls altogether. Please note that staff believes that the proposed use of so many retaining walls is the result of putting too many lots on this hillside property. Although the additional units may be approved as an incentive to providing affordable housing, and the density may be compatible with the surrounding area, the project design must stand on its own. To improve project design, it is advisable to reduce the number of lots proposed on this project. 6. A single family residential planned development is required to provide both common and private recreational amenities. To count as a private recreational amenity, the rear yards must have a minimum dimension of 15' x 15'. Please revise plans to provide a minimum of 15' x 15' rear yard on Lots 22 and 25. 7. On a public street the minimum lot width is 35 feet at the property line. Lots 23 and 24 are less that 35 feet in width. Please revise these lot widths as appropriate. 8. The proposed recreation area with the multi-purpose court and passive lawn areas with tables is acceptable. Please consider installing a permanent barbeque on the site. This would permit the lawn areas to be used by residents for larger gatherings, without having residents bring a personal barbeque, which would likely be difficult to carry down the trail from Donna Drive to the recreation area. 9. Please submit documentation that the proposed use of City property has been authorized by the Water District and City Attorney. The document provided should authorize the proposed improvements. 10. Proposed Lot 36 is not acceptable as a residential unit. Staff's support of the additional residential lots, as an incentive to provide affordable housing on the site, is subject to the project not exceeding the maximum number of lots permitted within the RLM General Plan range, which is 30 lots. 11. Please add the net acreage to the site (7.565 net acres) to the plans. 12. Although the Second Dwelling Unit (SOU) Ordinance does not preclude direct entry from a SOU into the main house, this access may be an issue with the Housing and Planning Commissions, as it indicates, that as designed, the SDU's are not likely to be rented as affordable. 13. The proposed fill of the existing 40%+ slope on Lot 18 is not permitted under the Hillside Development Ordinance regulations. Please revise plans to retain this existing slope area. As we discussed earlier, the existing slopes in excess of 40% located at the connection of Streets "A" and "B" with Wintergreen Drive and the alteration of the 40% + slope adjacent to Carlsbad Village Drive, may be exempted from the Hillside regulations because they are slopes previously disturbed by authorized grading which require additional disturbance in order to provide necessary access to the site and to provide appropriate site drainage. This condition does not exist for the slope on Lot 18. 14. Please add the total cubic yards of grading per acre to the plans. Engineering: 1. Please provide documentation relative to the assignment of the existing 45' access easement offsite on Donna Drive. Additionally, the width of this easement scales to 40' as opposed to the 45' dimension. 2. The plans show a lot line bisecting the lot containing the water tank. Our understanding is that the water tank is located on a separate lot owned by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 3. It is still unclear as to what steps you have taken to utilize the portion of "B" Street, which is proposed on property owned by the City of Carlsbad/Carlsbad Municipal Water District. As a City contact regarding this issue, you should call Chuck Walden, at (619) 434-2890. 4. The right-of-way width for "A" Street is to be 51', with a curb-to-curb width of 36', and not the 31' curb-to-curb width shown on Sheet 2. Also, retaining walls are not allowed to encroach into the right-of-way. 5. The retaining wall proposed at the intersection of Wintergreen Drive and "B" Street will block sight distance. Please note that intersections require a triangular area, measured 25' from the end of the curb return, to be free of any obstructions in excess of 30" in height. Please outline this triangular area on the tentative map. 6. There appears to be inadequate area on both panhandle lots for vehicles to turnaround so that they can drive down the paved access road. This comment is related additional concerns regarding the required parking on these lots, which are addressed in the Planning Department comments. Additionally, the driveway for access to the panhandle lots are to be clear of slopes, walls, and other site elements. 7. With regard to Lot 36, we cannot support any use on this lot which requires vehicular access. There are safety concerns since the lot would be located on the inside of a curve with minimum vehicular sight distance, and fronting a major arterial with heavy traffic volumes. The plans should note that both Lots 36 and 37 are designated as open space lots and to be held and maintained by a homeowners association. 8. Donna Drive is to have at least 50' of tangent at its intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive, measured from the extension of the face of the curb. Additionally, the detail of this intersection should be more explicit in showing the right-of-way lines, the limits of street improvements for the project, and where these improvements will join existing. 9. Please provide a letter from the property owners of the parcel adjacent to "A" Street indicating their concurrence with the proposed access layout to their parcel. 10. Please return the attached redlined check print with the next submittal. City of Carlsbad Planning Department October 8, 1996 Ron Grunow R.D.G. Consultants 3042 Harding Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 - EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES We are in receipt of your request for a 90 day extension to complete your applications. We have received your project resubmittal dated September 16, 1996, which is currently under review. We understand you have been working diligently with staff to resolve the complex issues associated with your project and therefore, grant your request for a 90-day extension to December 25, 1 996, to get your applications complete. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (619) 438-1161, extension 4447. Sincerely, TERESA A. WOODS Associate Planner c: Don Jack, Pacific View Ltd., PO Box 2190, Carlsbad, 92008 Adrienne Landers 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1 576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 TV. Ll. Cj. , Planning Consultants Engineering Project Management 3042 HARDING STREET - CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TELEPHONE (619) 729-0150 - FAX (619) 729-0282 October 8, 1996 Ms. Teresa Woods Carlsbad Community Development, Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-5176 Re: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES-Donna Street & Carlsbad Village Drive-Tentative Map No. CT 96-03 DearTerrif This letter is written as a formal request for extension of the application for the subject project. As you know we have been working diligently with staff to resolve all the issues related to this proposed development. To that end, I hereby respectfully request a 90 day extension to the application of the subject project. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. If you should have any questions or if I can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely,' . . RDG CONSULTANTS Ronald D. Grunow, P.E. Enclosure PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 - FAOC (019) TOO 0000 Telephone! (610) 722 6058 September 25, 1996 Mr. William E. Plummer, District: Engineer Carlsbad Municipal Water District 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 438-3367 * RE: ELM STREET RESERVOIR. CARLSBAD TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CT 96-03, 30 single family detached residential homes. APN 167-250-16; N.E. Corner of Donna at Carlsbad Village Drive. Dear Mr. Plummer, Thank you for our meeting of July 30, 1996. In response to our former discussions and my letter of May 31, 1996, we have redesigned the above Tentative Tract Map. I have enclosed a fresh copy for your review. Essentially, our request has not changed from prior conversations. Simply, our proposal is an exchange. That is, the Carlsbad Municipal Water District's ("the Distrlct(s)") excess Elm Reservoir property known as "surplus land", in trade for the value of our surrounding Elm Reservoir street and landscaping improvements. Such will be in conjunction with our tract CT-96-03 development and beneficial to all as said surplus land will be used in favor of the public as street right- of-way. As illustrated by the enclosed drawings, area "A" consists of 846 square feet at the N.E. corner of Carlsbad Village Drive and Donna Drive. Area "B" is 5,145 square feet located on our proposed public street identified as "Bn. The total equates to 5,991 square feet, (I.e. 846 + 5,145 s.f.). Formulated upon comparative data, the realistic value of the District's subject 5,991 square feet is $1.35 per square foot for a total of $6,945.75, (i.e. $1.35 x 5,991 square feet). As noted by the enclosed letter from Engineers, R.D.G. Consultants, the value of the improvements which we propose in trade is $10,705.50 (i.e. $1,689.25 * $9,016.25). Yet actually, this number is conservative in the District's favor as we propose to also (of course with your approval and on going direction), substantially enhance present landscaping improvements which now enclose the Elm Reservoir. In essence, we estimate the real value of our contribution to this exchange at approximately, $17,000 - $20,000. Finally as discussed, our request Is for the District's approval to realign the existing Elm Reservoir's easement as illustrated by the enclosed Tract Map. Such now encumbers our property on the south and west as a 15* water easement. As we agreed, said realignment will be more efficient for the District as well as our project. Z0d UldAT:T 966T 90'^°N SBL& 02<1 6T9 : '°N SNOHd *NbDia3Nb LOT 115.041 S.F.P=263-0 27 :-x 7,400 S.F. P=248-0 LOT 28 \5,179 S.F. P=261.0 5,103 S.F.P=260.0 EX. 151 WATER E>SEMEMT TO 5E ABANDONED s m01 OJ il kD^JGO (A! F-rom : *FflRUEST PMERICflN* PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 Nov. 06 1996 l:20PM P04 Mr. William E. Plummer, District Engineer Carlsbad Municipal Water District f September 25, 1996 ' Page 2. of 2. In summary, the above exchange is for value that our project will infuse. Said F value is in trade for a small land surplus owned by the District. This exchange is In favor of the public. That is, said surplus land will escheat from one public agency, (i.e. the District), to instead another public agency, i.e. the City of Carlsbad. All of which shall [ be for the benefit of the public as a street thoroughfare. As for the realignment of the District's existing Elm Reservoir's easement which [ now encumbers our property, this will also benefit the District as well as our project design. It will be more efficient for the District as the District's easement will Increase r from 15' to instead, a 20' wide easement. Moreover, this realignment will alleviate much risk of homeowners invading the District's easement with homeowner plantings of future trees and plants within these confines. r In closing, we are now at final resolution, Our tract now meets all City requirements and thus we need to resolve this issue. Therefore, we are respectfully asking ,- if you will now begin the process for this exchange so that we may move forward with the I above provisional agreements. As discussed in our July 30, 1996 meeting and my May 31, 1996 letter, these requests are reasonable and beneficial to all concerned. r Again, we are most appreciative of your considerations and helpfulness. It has been a pleasure working with you and the District. Should you have any further questions, [ please don't hesitate to call me direct at (619) 720-9785. Thanking you in advance for I your prompt response and consideration in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW LTD. Don L. Jack Managing Member DLJ/m Enc. Rrom : *FFlRUEST PlMERICflN*PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 Nov.06 1996 i:21PM P05 tcbnsultants .Planning Engineering Project Management 3042 HARDING STREET -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ;«2008 TELEPHONE (619) 729-0150 -PAX (61») 729-0282 Per your request, I have enclosed an estimate of probable cost for the surface improvements over the property within the Carlsbad Municipal Water Dist. Elm Reservoir Site affected by your development and ear-marked to be public roadway. 'A' Curb & Gutter - 'A' Sidewalk - 'A' Street Surfacing • 'A' Landscaping - 'B1 Curb ^Gutter- 's* Sidewalk - 'B1 Street Surfacing • 'B1 Landscaping- 35 L,F. @ $7.50 = 219 SF.@ $1.50 = 245S.F.@$pl= 330 S.F.@ $2.40 = TOTAL $262.50 $328.50 $306.25 $792:00 $1,689.25 204 L.F. @ $7.50 = $ 1,530.00 1020 S.F. @ $1.50 = $1,530.00 2845 S.F. @$1.25 - $3,556.25 1000 S.F. @ $2.40 = $2400.00 TOTAL $9,016.25 . ' • •-• . • '.•••;.• -•-.-•'•'^it/ ^;.T-«:V:-••;-:.'•; .••••••- ".ij Ciitimalc does uoi include landscape improvements over the taw. site property whirl wil' icinain under Water Dist. jurisdiction. Should you have any questions or if 1 can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. r r r r r r Ronald D. Prom : *FflRUEST flMERICflN* PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 Nov. 06 1996 l:22PM P06 u/oe/.. cm Carlsbad Municipal Water District 595° El Camino Real> Engineering: (619) 436-3367 Administration: (619)438^2722 FAX: 431-1601 Novembers, 1996 Don L. Jack Pacific View Ltd. P.O. Box2198 Carlsbad, California 92018 Re: Elm Street Reservoir, Carlsbad Tentative Tract Map C.T. 86-103 Pacific Views Estates, PUD 96-03, CMWD Project No. 96-518 Dear Don: The District has completed its review of your letter dated September 25, 1996, regarding the proposed Improvements around the subject reservoir. The site plan attached to your letter reflects sidewalk, street Improvements around the site, and potential areas that need to be declared excess land by the District. The plan submitted is acceptable. The declaration of the excess land is also satisfactory. The costs presented In your letter will need to be substantiated through a licensed appraiser regarding the value of the excess property. Your proposal to realign the water pipeline and dedication of a 20-foot wide easement is also acceptable. Details regarding the realignment will need to be approved through the District. Sincerely, CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT WlLllAM E. PLUMMER, P. District Engineer WEP:sj8 CMWD 96-518 "Serving Carlsbad for over 40 years" PACIFIC VIEW LTD. P.O. BOX 2198 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, 92018 TELE:(619) 720-978$; FAX:(619) 72O-9785 TELECOPIER FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 6/18/96 TO: MR. KEN QUON, P.E., ENGINEERING PROJECT MANAGER CITY OF CARLSBAD, 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 EXT. 4447, FAX:438-0894 REt PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 ACRES, 37 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DETACHED HOMES. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 167-250- 16; LOCATED AT N.E. CORNER OF DONNA DRIVE AT CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE, CITY OF CARLSBAD DEAR KEN, IN RESPONSE TO YOUR REQUEST, ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND A COPY OF MY SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 LETTER TO THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT AND THEIR APPROVAL/ACCEPTANCE LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 6, 1996. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO CALL ME AT (619) 720-9785. THANKING YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE, I AM, RESPECTFULLY, DON L. JACK MANAGING MEMBER T0d Wd9T:T 966 T 90 •«•**! £8i6 02<L 6T9 : '°N BNOHd *NtOia3Wd *SS12*315^ City of r^^rt <=***** ri+* Engineering De.'parts-ynent July 3, 1996 fc ^<$-* ^V&e Mr. Don Jack PACIFIC VIEW LTD. P.O. Box2190 Carlsbad, CA 92008 PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES, CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/SDP 96-04/HDP 96-03 As a follow-up to our meeting of June 17, 1996, and the Planning Department's letter of June 19, 1996, the following is a list of the Issues of Concern from the Engineering Department with regard to the above referenced project: 1. Donna Drive is to have at least 50' of tangent at its intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive. 2. The "head-in" parking stalls proposed at the end of "A" Street and on "B" Street near Donna Drive are not allowed. 3. The applicant must demonstrate how the right-of-way is to be obtained for the offsite portion of Donna Drive, which is proposed on a City owned parcel; and a portion of "B" Street, which is proposed on property owned by the City of Carlsbad/Carlsbad Municipal Water District. As a City contact regarding this issue, the applicant should call Chuck Walden, at (619) 434-2890. 4. With regard to the Wintergreen Drive/"B" Street intersection, a triangular area, measured 25' from the end of the curb return and free of any obstructions in excess of 30" in height, must be maintained for sight distance purposes. Please outline this triangular area on the tentative map. 5. The required frontage width for panhandle lots adjacent to one other is 15', such as on Lots 22 and 23. Additionally, this area is for access to the panhandle lots and is to be clear of slopes, walls, and other site elements. 6. Please provide a letter from the property owners of the parcel adjacent to "A" Street indicating their concurrence with the proposed access layout to their parcel. 7. Please note that a condition of this tentative map will require the applicant to obtain letters from adjacent property owners indicating their approval of the proposed offsite grading for this project. 8. It appears that additional offsite grading will be required for Lot 23 to meet the proposed pad elevation of 245.0. If you have questions regarding any of the comments above, please contact me at (619)438-1161, extension 4380. KENNETH W. QUON Associate Engineer c: Teresa Woods, Associate Planner 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-0894 PACIFIC VIEW LTD. P.O. Box 2198 Carlsbad, California, 92018 Tele:(619) 720-9785; Fax:(619) 720-9785 TELECOPIER FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 7/3/96 Wed 10am TO: Ms. TERRY WOODS, Project Manager City of Carlsbad, 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 Acres, 30 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167-250- 16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Terry, In response to our July 1, 1996 meeting and our discussions this morning, enclosed herein please find a copy of our redesign for 30 lots instead of 37 lots, for your review with Staff before we effect a full redesign. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at (619) 720- 9785. Thanking you again for your assistance, I am, Don L. Jack Managing Member City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 19, 1996 Don Jack Pacific View LTD PO Box 2190 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04/GPA 96-03/ZC 96-02 - PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Hillside Development Permit, Site Development Plan, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change application nos. CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04/GPA 96-03/ZC 96-02, as to its completeness for processing. All of the items requested of you earlier have not been received and therefore your application is still deemed incomplete. Listed below are the item(s) still needed in order to deem your application as complete. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, March 25, 1996, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Teresa Woods, at (619) 438-1161 extension 4447, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:TW:kr c: Gary Wayne File Copy Adrienne Landers Data Entry Ken Quon Planning Aide Bobbie Hoder 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE APPLICATION: No. CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04/GPA 96-03/ZC 96-02 PLANNING: 1. Please submit a written response on how the project complies with the Hillside Development Permit Ordinance Section (21.95.060(j)). This section addresses when it may be appropriate to exceed 8,000 cubic yards of grading per acre. ISSUES OF CONCERN PLANNING: 1. Density is an issue on the project. Although an increase in density may be compatible with the surrounding land uses, under Growth Management in the City, there are only a few ways to achieve additional units over those allowed by the General Plan. The following is a summary of the options which we discussed in our meeting of June 17, 1996. • Rezone to R-1 zoning and process the project using City Council Policy 43. Under this option, only 30 units would be allowed on the site as you are limited to the General Plan range of 0-4 dwelling units per acre (4 dwelling units per acre maximum). For calculating density, second dwelling units count as a unit. Also, please note that some of the proposed lot sizes are smaller than surrounding developed lands. To process a Policy 43 determination the lot sizes must be equal to or greater than surrounding subdivided property. • Request a density bonus. Issues related to the density bonus include the number of units allowed, number of affordable units provided, and design of affordable units. • Rezone to R-1 zoning and process a General Plan Amendment for the additional units. General Plan amendments in Carlsbad require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report to address cumulative impacts of traffic and circulation. 2. The maximum lot coverage is plotted as 43%. The maximum allowed under RD- M zoning is 50%. However, if you request to rezone to R-1 zoning, or keep the existing RA-10,000 zoning, the ordinance limits the lot coverage to 40%. 3. The second dwelling unit size now meets the intent of the second dwelling unit ordinance. The proposal must now be reviewed and approved by the housing team. 4. Please submit information on surrounding property acreage, densities, and lot sizes to support your request for a General Plan Amendment and zone change. Note that a request for a Policy 43 determination requires that the project contain lot sizes equal to or greater than surrounding subdivided land. 5. Side yard setbacks to the retaining wall are to be a minimum of five feet. The following appear to be closer than 5 feet: Lots 4, 5, and 35. Please review and make any necessary changes. 6. The maximum acceptable height of side yard retaining walls is 3' and the maximum acceptable rear yard retaining wall is 6'. Please identify whether the unmarked retaining walls are 3' or less in height. Also, please note on the site plan, the height of rear yard walls 7. Lot 29 still does not meet the intent of a "flag lot". Please redesign this lot to meet the intent of a "flag lot". 8. Please submit letters from all relevant property owners indicating that the proposed offsite grading is acceptable. 9. Lots 21, 22 and 29 are proposed as panhandle lots. Please submit a site plan layout illustrating compliance with panhandle lot design standards pursuant to Section 21.10.080 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 10. The slope along Carlsbad Village Drive, next to the water tank, must be fully landscaped with trees. Please show the screen/noise walls proposed for lots 36 & 37 on site plan. 11. Please submit a tree survey. 12. The location of the RV storage facility is not acceptable, as it impacts existing residents. Please relocate to reduce impacts on existing residents. 13. The useable rear yards on the following lots appear too small: 22, 31, 30, 29, 28, 19, 18, 17, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, and 1. Rear yards must have a minimum dimension of 15' X 15'. Please make changes as necessary. 14. The minimum width for side yards is 10% of the lot width, with a 5' minimum side yard. Several of the lots appear to have side yards of less than 5'. Please make changes as necessary. 15. 16. To meet Small Lot Architectural Guideline #7, Plan 1 (two car garage model) must be plotted for at least 25% of the lots (or 10 times). The maximum number of 3-car garages is 75%. The use of City property for public streets is an issue, proposal must be worked out with the Water District. Plummer with the water district, to resolve the issues. ENGINEERING: The details of such a Please work with Bill 1. Engineering issues will be sent under separate cover. PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 FAX: (619) 722 6358 Telephone: (619) 722-6358 JUNE 17, 1996 Ms. Terry Woods, Project Manager and Associate Planner City of Carlsbad, 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 Acres, 37 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167- 250-16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Ms. Woods, We have been advise by our attorney that "TOT-LOTS" in common area recreational facilities now carry too much liability to be a sound endeavor. Therefore, this letter will serve to inform you that PACIFIC VIEW LTD. does hereby withdraw its intent to incorporate a "TOT-LOT" within the Common Recreational Area for the above referenced project. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at ( 61 9 ) 720—9785. Thanking you again for your consideration in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW LTD. Don L. Jack Managing Member PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 FAX: (619) 722 6358 Telephone. (019) 722-6358 JUNE 17, 1996 Ms. Terry Woods, Project Manager and Associate Planner Mr. Ken Quon, P.E., Engineering Project Manager City of Carlsbad, 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 Acres, 37 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167- 250-16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Ms. Woods and Mr. Quon, Thank you Ms. Woods for meeting with me this morning. In accordance with City request, enclosed herein please find a "TREE SURVEY" and plotted site overlay from R.D.G. Engineering Consultants on the above referenced project. This is our twelfth study preformed on this project. Additionally submitted herewith, the approval letter for grading and access as requested by the City from the abutting property holder, MR. KENNETH DABBS, APN 167-250-04. The Carlsbad Water District and others letters are pending and will be forthcoming during planning commission and City Council processing. Finally, enclose please find a copy of our June 16, 1996 letter requesting approval to build our common area recreational facilities in phase three (3) instead of phase 1 or 2. We have made inquiries with the California Department of Real Estate. Apparently, it is quite acceptable to build out the recreational facilities in later phases. In fact, this is the case with many smaller developments provided they do not advertise their recreational facilities until completed or, simply bond for the future development thereof. As we have discussed, this request is to help our project amortize the heavy up front costs burdened by Phase 1 and 2. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at (619) 720-9785. Thanking you again for your consideration in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW LTD. Don L. Jack Managing Member PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 FAX: (619) 722 6358 Telephone. (619) 722-6358 JUNE 16, 1996 Ms. Terry Woods, Project Manager and Associate Planner Mr. Ken Quon, P.E., Engineering Project Manager City of Carlsbad, 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 Acres, 37 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167- 250-16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Ms. Woods and Mr. Quon, This letter will serve as our request to build the PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES recreational facilities with phase three (3) instead of our first two (2) phases. Please let me explain. Due to conservative lender requirements, our phase one will consist of three (3) models and only four (4) production homes, (production denoting units to be sold). Phase two (2) will consist of ten (10) units. Therefore, the combined production homes for sale in both phases one and two total only 14 units. (Fourteen (14) homes equates to about the same size typical to just one (1) phase in an average tract consisting of 100 or more production homes.) Yet PACIFIC VIEW'S phases one and two which consists of only 14 homes is dis- proportionately saddled with the entire tracts (i.e. 37 homes) cost for sensitive species mitigation. That is phase one and two must suffer the full expense of acquiring substitute coastal sage lands for the whole tract so that our project may qualify for the 4-D habitat program. Simply, we have only 14 homes to fully amortize the entire tracts mitigation costs. Moreover, the fourteen units of phases one and two alone must pay for the entire cost of grading all 37 lots, i.e. again, the entire tract. Additionally, phase one and two is forced to pay for most if not all of the project's cost of infrastructure, sewer, water, gas, electric, cable tv, telephone, street lights, electrical vaults, street paving, curbs, and gutters. The above doesn't even consider the enormous front end costs which smother phase one and two with more than $200,000 in front end costs attributable to models, furniture, upgrades, irrigation, landscape, fencing, signs, brochures, sales office facilities, and marketing. Ms. Terry Woods, Associate Planner Mr. Ken Quon, P.E. JUNE 16, 1996 Page 2 of 2. Finally, if we are required to build out the subject recreational facilities before the costs of the maintenance for same can be fairly prorated among at least half of our 37 homes, then according to the California Department of Real Estate, the builder is required to subsidize all Homeowner Association dues to make up the difference. This easily amounts to several thousands of wasted dollars and would place an unusual and unfair hardship on such a small development. Further, the California Department of Real Estate indicates that our request is not uncommon. In fact, it is an acceptable practice. Our requested scenario is the case with many such smaller developments to thereby build the recreational facilities in later phases. Such is based upon posting a bond for the future development of said facilities or, simply not advertise any such recreational facilities until completed. As previously stated, our request is essential. It is required to help amortize the excessive up front costs levied upon our initial two (2) phases. In conclusion, even though the PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES is but 37 homes, in lieu of building just the bear minimum requirements, we have diligently worked and planned to build a first class recreational facility. One which provides all the same typical amenities indicative to larger tracts which by size enjoy the luxury of easily amortizing such expense. But to accomplish this, it must be realistically phased. The front end costs of a smaller development such as ours is as noted above, dis-proportionate and staggering. It is difficult for such a small project to be successful unless keen economic development procedures are carefully maintained with balanced phases. We feel this request very reasonable as only about l/3rd of our project will be built prior to our common area recreational facility being completed. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at (619) 720-9785. Thanking you again for your consideration in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEW Don L. Jack Managing Member PACIFIC VIEW LTD. P.O. BUM 2198 Carlsbad, California, 92018 Tele:(619) 720-9785; Fax:(619) 720-9785 TELECOPIER FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 6/18/96 Tue 8am 1*0. I-IA. • xc^t* UUWIA, c~»n«f xi City of Carlsbad, 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES. CT 96-03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. 8.52 Acres, 37 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167-250- 16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Ken, In response to your paragraph 18 of the "ISSUES OF CONCERN" under r-.noii «ccn.iMd uii imgu 0, uiiuiuocU ylcooc fiiul uiu 3uii iLn^iiicuis uypiuvul iui fn aim no positive drainage. Should you have any questions, pleaae don't hesitate to call me at (619) 720- 9785. Thanking you again for your assistance, I am, Respectfully Don L. Jack Managing Member T0d Nb9l:8 966T 8T'unp 8S£9 ttL 6T9 : '°N BNDHd »<NbDia3Wb AdTech Engineering Inc. 7950 Silverton Ave. Suite 116 San Diego CA 92126 Phone: 1-8QQ-98-AdTech Phone:549-0588 Fax:(619) 549-1541 June 14, 1996 To: City of Carlsbad RE: Tentative Tract Map CT 96-03, Single Family Detached Homes APN 167-250-16, 8,52 acres, NE corner of Donna at Carlsbad Village Dr. This is regarding your request pertaining to drainage issues for the above mentioned property. Based on our investigation, the soil at the above site is not significantly prone to erosion and thus it permissible to use positive drainage at 2% away from the structure and 1% for all drainage swales. It is also permissible that flow lines be within 5 ft distance away from the structure at 2% and 1% for all drainage swales. It is herein stipulated that the requirements of the soil report by AdTech Engineering (AdTech File No. 95080-2) original date 10/16/95 updated 4/10/96 be followed in particular with respect to footing depth below grade. Thank you. Sincerely, ~^ TP-«JJ^ Ziad Bayasi, P.E. Principal Z0d Wb9T:8 966T BT'BS£9 619 : 'ON 3NOHd The Dabbs Family Trust P.O. Box 619, 3160 Donna Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92018 June 3, 1996 Mr. Ken Quon, Project Manager City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 RE: Dabbs residence (APN 167-250-04) and Tract Map CT 96-03 Dear Mr. Quon, We intend to divide our lot into two parcels. Therefore we have requested that the abutting development CT 96-03, i.e. Pacific View Estates, provide our property with two (2) separate 20* accesses instead of one 32' access. Our request was for one access from "A" Street, and another access from "B" Street. We concur with the proposed access layout and offsite grading on our property and agreed to pay extra costs if any, which are attributable to the additional access from "A" Street. Sincerely, The Dabbs Family Trust Kenneth R. Dabbs PACIFIC VIEW LTD. A COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O. Box 2198, Carlsbad, California 92018 FAX: (619) 722-6358 Telephone: (619) 722-6358 MAY 24, 1996 Ms. Terry Woods, Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 Ext. 4447, Fax:438-0894 RE: CT 96-03 APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (revised from initially 95-7) and support documents. 8.52 Acres, 37 Single Family Residential Detached Homes. Assessor Parcel No. 167-250-16; Located at N.E. Corner of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive, City of Carlsbad Dear Ms. Woods, With this latest submittal, we now feel we have addressed and resolved every possible City concern to the best of our ability. Therefore in hopes of saving time and to promptly move forward, we have enclosed the 600' radius map of surrounding property owners including two (2) sets of corresponding address labels. We do have a request regarding our application. Will you kindly use the partnership entity, i.e. PACIFIC VIEW LTD., as the applicant in lieu of our individual names. Lastly, should you have any questions or need any additional information, please don't hesitate to call. Rest assured we will promptly respond. Submitted herewith, please find the following forms and support documentation: 1. Copy of the Legal Agreement/Recorded Easement between the Dabbs residence (APN 167-250-04) and our subject property. 2. "LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION" for GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT from "RLM" (0-4 DU/ac.) to instead, MRM" (4-8 DU/ac.) use designation and respective $2,500 fee, and 3. ZONE CHANGE application from "RA-10,000" to instead RD-M, and the $850 fee. 4. A revised May 20, 1996 "DISCLOSURE STATEMENT". 5. A revised May 24, 1996 Project "DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION". 6. A revised April 8, 1996 ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS. 7. An April 11, 1996 Archeological CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY. 8. 600* radius Property Owners List, 2 sets of address labels and accompanying 600* radius map. 9. 1 notarized original and 1 copy of the PUBLIC FACILITIES FEE AGREEMENT. 10. 5 (Five) copies of "Slope Analysis/Constraints Map". 11. 5 (Five) copies of "Site Sections" to accompany said Slope Analysis. pv_app V MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 24, 1996 12. 1 (one) copy of Streets "A" & "B" Profiles. 13. 1 (one) "SCALE MAP" of Surrounding Property Acreage, Density, Zoning, land use, and Average Lot Size. 14. 1 (one) copy of an 8 1/2" x 11" reduced site plan. 15. 1 (one) copy of an 8 1/2" x 11" reduced Plans 1R, 2, & 3 building elevations, TERRY r Building ftesigas are COWIDENTIALII Any ^sista&ce y^ eat* provide ia maintaining this projects confidentiality would be appreciated. Thanks for yam help. 16. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 revised TENTATIVE MAP, (2 pages). 17. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 "PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN". 18. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 "SITE PLAN". 19. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 revised PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE plan. 20. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 revised RECREATIONAL LOT site details. 21. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 revised ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. 22. 10 (Ten) copies of the May 24, 1996 revised ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES. 23. Engineering Departments original RED LINES. 24. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL BOARD w/Stucco, Paint, Roof Tiles, & Brick samples. 25. A check in the amount of $3,350.00. Further, this letter addresses in the same chronological order as presented by Mr. Holzmiller's April 19, 1996 letter, the PLANNING and ENGINEERING departments, "LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED", and list of "ISSUES OF CONCERN", fa response to each such item numbers, we submit the following in the same respective order: "OF TmtS HEEDED Enclosed herein, please find the City's applications for a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ($2,500) from RLM (Residential Low-Medium) to instead RM (Residential Medium) and a ZONE CHANGE from RA-10,000 to instead, RD-M, ($850), and a check in the amount of $3,350.00. Our submittals have been corrected to reflect 4.89 (37 homes / 7.56 Net Dev. Ac. = 4.89 UPA) dwelling units per acre. 2. We have added a north arrow and scale to each of the plan diagrams submitted. 3. We have added (CT 96-03) to each of the plan diagrams submitted. 4. All lots are now labeled with the exact square footage. 5. As requested, we have plotted a maximum Plan 3 building structure on our smallest plan 3 lot to illustrate a worst case scenario. In general, lot sizes range from 4,022 to as large as a 14,601 with the exact average at 6,538.5 square feet. Plan 1 is the smallest plan and on an average lot, has a lot coverage of 23% while Plan 3 our largest has a coverage of approximately 32%. 6. This item prompted a call from our architect to our Project Planner, Ms. Woods. pv app t *MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 24, 1996 As noted on the enclosed pages A4, AS & A6, all homes have now been labeled with height, and all are in compliance with Carlsbad height ordinance. Our highest 2-story structure is 30'-0" while plans 1 and 2 are much less. 7. Enclosed herein, please find a construction material board with color samples. 8. We submit herewith, 5 copies of the Slope Analysis/Constraints Map and 5 copies of Site Sections. Such includes vertical and horizontal scales. We have provided the required three (3) sections. Additionally we submit two (2) extra sections, (i.e. Sections "D-D" and "E-E"). These additional sections will assist you in analyzing our grading impact upon the "Line of Site View" for the Elm water reservoir. As illustrated, our Elm water reservoir grading impact will be essentially nil. Simply, our grading WILL NOT expose the Elm water reservoir anymore than presently exposed to public viewing. 9. We have illustrated with the site plan, grading plan, landscape plan, building plans, and elevations that the project fulfills the design standards of hillside development. We have 8.52 acres on-site and 0.70 acres off-site, for a total of 9.22 acres. As reflected by the grading quantities, we have LESS than 7,999 grading cubic yards per acre and meet the design standards for hillside development. ENGINEERING: 1. We have provided a typical detail for all landscaping seatwalls. Said landscaping seatwalls have been used for side yards and DO NOT exceed a maximum 3* high. All retaining walls have been labeled on both ends and in the middle with top and bottom elevations per request. 2. Enclosed herein, please find a profile of all streets which exceed 7% grade. 3. We have provided a plan view of the extension of Donna Drive at Carlsbad Village Drive. 4. The width and location of all existing, proposed public and private easements has been reflected on the enclosed "Slope Analysis/Constraints Map" including a table identifying any such easements. 5. Enclosed herein, please find 10 copies of the Preliminary Grading Plan. 6. Storm drains which serve this project have been identified. »• -: :. "ISSUES OF CONCERN" 1. Seven of our Plan 3's incorporate a secondary dwelling unit to mitigate the City's Inclusionary Housing fees. They are identified on the Site Plan as "SA" meaning "Studio Apartment" and consist of lots 4, 13. 19, 23, 28, 29, and 37. As requested, we have substantially enlarged this "Granny Unit/Apartment Flat". We have redesign this floor plan to increase the Apartment Flat by 116 square feet. We pv app MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 23, 1996 believe this down stairs unit is more efficient due to the lack of wasted stairs. Moreover, we feel as a downstairs apartment, it is more desirable and ideal for older occupants. We have designed this apartment to be totally independent of the main home. Each Apartment consists of a very efficient 353 square foot and boast its own full private bathf large closet, complete full size Kitchen facilities, and great storage space. Each is fully self-contained with its own separate exterior entrance, fully sound-proof demising walls, and private "under roof" garage parking available. 2. -^Enoteaed ploaco find a neighboring community map showing surrounding property acreage, density and average lot sizes vJi«-i- Fo^-J-owo • 3. The Recreational area is serviced by two (2) paved paths, i.e. one form each street. The path from "B" Street is 41 wide while Street "A" shall be 10' wide and paved to accommodate vehicular maintenance pool access. The plans have been labeled accordingly. 4. The proposed structural separations now equals or exceeds 5' as required. Most lots are designed at a minimal 50' wide yet, PACIFIC VIEW ESTATE floor plans are only 37' and 38' wide. This then allows the project to enjoy side yard setbacks with a minimal of 5', to as much as 8' from the property line. In fact as now designed, in many cases we exceed standard side yard setbacks at typically 7' and 5* setbacks, instead of 5' and 5' respectively. 5. All side yard walls between, houses have now been redesigned not to exceed a maximum height of 3' and 6'Thaximum rear yard walls. Moreover, the project has been redesigned to incorporate a planted buffer area between the wood stake fence and any such retaining walls. £ voa-n v»/r THC Bxc&yno** of TI/OO 6. Floor Plan number 2 has been redesigned to incorporate a 10* wide, 1 story elevation for its entire depth. With this redesign, both plans I & II now consist of such 1 story elements. Our project now exceeds guideline requirements. 7. As per your request, both streets have been renamed to Street "A" and Street "B". 8. It is unreasonable to lose a perfectly good and in fact, one of our more desirable lots simply because Lot 29's access width does not meet 33'. We compare our Lot 29 to the city approved Lot 46 in the abutting Wintergreen Tract No. 88-2. Said Lot 46 has a 27* frontage, is just 87" form our property line, and has the same qualities as our lot 29. This whole problem is a result of our "B" Street being required by the City to connect to Wintergreen Drive, thus causing the current restrictive lot configuration. We lost the efficiency of our originally designed cul-de-sac. And due to the unfavorable conditions resulting from this sites unusual topography, we have lost at least one lot due to this connection to Wintergreen. Further, our tract will suffer increased future vehicle traffic and noise which in turn yields less privacy and a reduction in property desirability, value, and quality of life. Moreover, such has created a hardship to greatly lower "B" Street to the same elevation as pv app MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 23, 1996 Wintergreen Drive and increased our grading costs by several thousands of dollars. We have relied upon this lot 29 under the definition of a flag or panhandle lot and cannot find definitive code to the contrary. We respectfully request staff support on this issue as we feel it's simply a matter of interpretation. 9. Lot 38 will be held and maintained by the projects home owners association. A notation to this effect has been made. 10. With regards to off-site grading, we have met with the adjacent property owners and will procure letters for permission to grade. 11. The site has been redesigned to exclude all slopes exceeding 30'. 12. Lots 22 & 23 (formally lots 21 & 22) have been redesigned to each accommodate a 15' frontage with a total 20' improved driveway in a joint easement ensuring common access per code. 13. In accordance with your request, we have minimized grading wherever possible yet, as noted in response to number 8 above, Sections "D-D" and "E-E" are "Line of Site Views" which illustrates that in fact, our grading WILL NOT expose the Elm water reservoir any more than presently exposed to public viewing. 14. Enclosed herein, please find site details for Lot 44, our recreational lot. Said lot "44" exceeds 8/10th of an acre (35,945 square feet) in green landscaping and a 7,400+ square foot active area pad. The recreations planned for this common area consists of a fenced community private pool with an 8* octagon spa, an immense sun deck area, a barbecue, an enclosed children's Tot-Lot, a huge handicap bath, a 300'+ canopy lattice veranda, of an outside shower, a large open rectangular grass belt large enough for Volleyball, Croquet and other such active sports, and perhaps a shuffle Board Court. Further, we have incorporated 4 common area parking stalls on "A" Street, and 2 parking stall on "B" street. 15. In response to item 15, Lot 41 for a total of 1460 s.f., has been earmarked and set aside to accommodate recreational vehicle storage. 16. Our tree study should be completed next week for immediate submittal to the City. 1.taaccbrdance with your request, the plans have been modified to incorporate improvements to Donna Drive PLUS a 12* half street for a total of 42* wide. 2. As submitted with our March 25, 1996 Tract Map Application, we have completed a traffic study which reflected that a traffic signal IS NOT WARRANTED OR NEEDED for Carlsbad Village Dr. at Donna Drive. pv app MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 23, 1996 3. We have met twice with the Carlsbad Municipal Water District and their acknowledgment letter will be forthcoming. 4. This has boon incorporated in accordance with the Engineering Dopartmcnta rani lf*ff f" _» 7 5. This has been completed as noted in paragraph 12 above. 6. As noted in paragraph 8 above, it is unreasonable to lose a perfectly good and in fact, one of our more desirable lots simply because Lot 29's access width does not meet 33'. We compare our Lot 29 to the city approved Lot 46 in the abutting Wintergreen Tract No. 88-2. Said Lot 46 has a 27' frontage, is just 87' form our property line, and has the same qualities as our lot 29. This whole problem is a result of our "B" Street being required by the City to connect to Wintergreen Drive, thus causing the current restrictive lot configuration. We lost the efficiency of our originally designed cul-de-sac. And due to the unfavorable conditions resulting from this sites unusual topography, we have lost at least one lot due to this connection to Wintergreen. Further, our tract will suffer increased future vehicle traffic and noise which in turn yields less privacy and a reduction in property desirability, value, and quality of life. Moreover, such has created a hardship to greatly lower "B" Street to the same elevation as Wintergreen Drive and increased our grading costs by several thousands of dollars. We have relied upon this lot 29 under the definition of a flag or panhandle lot and cannot find definitive code to the contrary. We respectfully request staff support on this issue as we feel it's simply a matter of interpretation. 7. Lot 38 will be held and maintained by the home owners association. 8. In compliance with your request, the boundaries of the two (2) abutting parcels, i.e. the Reginald Marron residence (APN 167-570-10), and the Dabbs residence (APN 167-250-04), have been identified on our tract map. However the other parcel, i.e. the Sylvester Marron residence (APN 167-570-9) does not abut our property nor is it contiguous to our property. 9. We have no problem with lot line adjustments as long as we are not involved in same nor are we required to pay for same. As noted in paragraph 12 below, it is not our legal responsibility to effect any such lot line adjustments. Regarding Dabbs, our responsibilities were clearly set forth by a previous legal agreement between all parties. Said agreement was recorded on June 7, 1991. The City was part of this agreement and executed the same, (please see copies enclosed). 10. In accordance with your request, Street "A" (formally Rue Le Margaret) has been widened to a public street at a width of 51' which meets city standards for a single loaded street. 11. All lot corners including lots 22, 23, 39, 40, 41 and 42 have been designed to intersect with the public street at basically perpendicular angles. pv app MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 23, 1996 12. As noted in paragraph 8 & 9 above, it is not our legal responsibility to improve the access for the Sylvester Marron property (APN 167-570-9). Sylvester Marron's legal access is located off Doreet Way. Please understand that said Sylvester Marron property DOES NOT ABUT nor does it touch our property. We have been told that when the tract developer for Tract No. 88-2, (i.e. Wintergreen Drive and Doreet Way), made an effort to build this access from Doreet Way, hi 1989, Sylvester Marron refused to allow said improvements to be made. Please note, at present NEITHER the Sylvester Marron residence (APN 167-570-9), NOR the Reginald Marron residence (APN 167-570-10) have any LEGAL grounds to access over our property. In fact, they are allowed to trespass only by our properties continued permission. There is NO prescriptive easement rights for EITHER Sylvester Marron (APN 167-570-9) or Reginald Marron (APN 167-570-10), (please see First American Preliminary Title Report). Be this as it may, we intend to grand deed title ownership in said lot 42 to Reginald Marron (APN 167-570-10). As for Sylvester Marron (APN 167-570-9), we suppose he will continue to access his property over his brother's (Reginald Marron (APN 167-570-10)) site. 13. We have met with the two (2) abutting property owners, i.e. the Reginald Marron residence (APN 167-570-10), and the Dabbs residence (APN 167-250-04). Dabbs intends to divide his lot into two (2) lots and has indicated that he would therefore prefer two (2) separate 20' accesses instead of just one (1) 32' access. Such prompted our May 7th, 1996 telephone call for permission from Mr. Ken Quon at the City. And thus, we have redesigned to now provided Dabbs with both a 20* access to public street "A" for the lower half of his lot, and a 20* access to public street "B". Said accesses are identified as lot numbers 40 and 39 respectively. A letter from Dabbs will be forthcoming. 14. All off-site grading letters will be provided during City processing. 15. In accordance with your request, Rue Le Margaret has been widened to a public street at a width of 51' which meets city standards for a single loaded street. 16. We have purposely designed the project so that all lots drain to the street. Thank you for your drainage suggestion to the rear however at present we feel the existing plan works quite well. 17. Per your request, we have removed all slopes in access of 30'. 18. The soils engineer has review the plans and shall provide a letter advocating approval of positive drainage at 2% away from any structures and 1% for all drainage swales. Moreover if needed, a letter providing approval for surface drainage flow lines at less than 5' from the structure where applicable. 19. We have made this correction to show that daily traffic generated is at the rate of 10 ADT/per unit. pv app MS. TERRY WOODS Carlsbad Associate Planner May 23, 1996 20. We have renumbered the lots in accordance with City request. Simply, all lots are now numeric and in order from left to right and then for best clarification, in reverse for those lots which are non-buildable. 21. Enclosed herein please find the original red lines. In closing, the many studies and redesigns required has greatly detained the timely progress of this projects. If you see any means possible to accelerate processing, it would be truly appreciated. Thanking you again for your consideration and prompt attention in this matter, I am, Respectfully, PACIFIC VIEWLTD. Don L. Jack Managing Member o pv app ° I - \OO RECEIVED OCT 61995 ft r/"f. State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD Page 1 of 5 . Permanent Tr1no»1al: Temporary Number: Agency Designation: Supplement ( } SDM-V-2038 1 . 2. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9. County: San Diego USGS Quad: San Luis Rey (7. 5') '68 UTM Coordinates: Zone 11 / 469480 Township US Range 4W . 1/4 of 1/4 Map Coordinates: 357 mmS 185 mmE (from NW Location: Elm Avenue ex te ns i o n/ ad j ace nt to Ris of ridge tops/eastern portion overlooks El Cam Preh istor 1c X Historic Site Description Light to moderate shell and (15') Phntorev i sed 1975 Easting / 3670260 northing ( ) of 1/4 of Section Base(t!er.) SBM (X) corner of map) 6. Elevation: 240-260 ft ( ) ing Glen subdivision/on undeveloped portion i no Rea 1 / southeast of Buena Vista Lagoon ( j Protohlstoric artifact scatter comprising four lod - possibly extension of W-143/146 village compl ex /grou ndsto ne , flaked stone tools, cores. deb 1 1 age/m 1dde n deposits ( ) Area: 125 n(length)x 60 m(width) 5890 m . Method of Determination scaled topo map 11. Depth : approx. 100 cm Method of Determination; visual Inspection of cuts 12. Features:None observed 13, 14. 15. 17. Artifacts: Collected during monitoring: 2 manos, 3 hammers, 2 scraper planes, 6 scrapers, 3 cores. 16 flakes/material types noted: fine-grained metavolcanic (felsite). medium- to to coasr e-gra 1 ned metavolcanic, granitic, quartz ( ) Non-Artifactual Constitutients: Shell: Chione. Aequipccten, Polinices, Laevicardiurn, Ha 1 lot i s ( ) Date Recorded:10/14/86 16. Recorded By:Cardenas/Robbi ns-Wade/Serr( ) Affiliation and Address:RBR & Associates, Inc. 233 A Street. Ste. 804. San Diego 921Q1> ) City of Carlsbad Planning Department April 19, 1996 Don Jack Pacific View LTD P.O. Box2190 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 - PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development, Hillside Development Permit and Site Development Plan, application nos. CT 96-03/PUD 96- 03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-042, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner bv appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, March 25, 1996, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Teresa Woods, at (619) 438-1161 extension 4447, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MH:TW:bk c: Gary Wayne Adrienne Landers Ken Quon Bobbie Hoder Bob Wojcik File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE APPLICATION: No. CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/HDP 96-03/SDP 96-04 PLANNING: 1. The proposed Planned Development at a density of 4.76 dwelling units per acre will require a General Plan amendment from RLM to RM and a zone change from RA-10,000 to RD-M. Please submit applications for these discretionary applications. Please revise plans to reflect 4.76 dwelling units per acre. 2. Please add a north arrow and scale to each of the plans submitted. 3. Please add the Tentative Map number (CT 96-03) to the upper right hand corner of the tentative map cover sheet. 4. Please add the lot areas for the recreation Lot "A", open space Lot B, and access Lots C & D to the tentative map. 5. Please put the typical and maximum building lot coverage for the project on the plans. 6. Please indicate building elevations, compliance with Carlsbad Height Ordinance 21.04.065. 7. Please submit construction material board and color samples. 8. Please submit five copies of the slope profiles. Please include vertical and horizontal scale. A minimum of three slope profiles shall be provided and indexed on the constraints map. See Section 21.95.020(b) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code for additional requirements. 9. Please show with the site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and building plans and elevations how the development fulfills the following Hillside Development and Design Standards (Section 21.95.060) (1) contour grading; (2) area or extent of grading; (3) screening of graded slopes; (4) view preservation and enhancement; and, (5) hillside drainage. ENGINEERING: 1. Top and bottom elevations for all fences, walls, and retaining walls. Show these elevations at each end of the wall and in the middle. Also show the worst condition elevation. 2. A profile of all streets with grades in excess of 7%. 3. The tentative map is to include a plan view of the extension of Donna Way to its intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive. Contours and existing topography should also be included sufficient to determine the potential location of future access for adjacent undeveloped properties. 4. Width and location of all existing or proposed public and private easements. Please provide a table that identifies each easement and numbered to correspond 5. with those in the preliminary title report. The table should include the date, file number, and future disposition of each easement. A preliminary grading plan with more legible contours and the location of proposed cut/fill lines. 6. Location of storm drain facilities that will be served by this project. ISSUES OF CONCERN PLANNING: 1. 3. 4. The proposed second dwelling units, at 237 square feet, are .too small. The plans do not show where kitchen facilities will be accommodated, and even without kitchen facilities, there is barely enough room for a twin bed. Please revise plans to provide adequate living space for the second dwelling units. If units are proposed as studios, they must be able to accommodate a kitchen table, sitting area and typical bedroom furniture. Please indicate which lots would contain the second dwelling units. Please submit a map showing surrounding property acreage, densities, and average lot sizes to support your request for a General Plan amendment and zone change. Please indicate that the proposed trail connecting Rue Le DaVid with recreation area is proposed to be constructed of asphalt or concrete. the The proposed structural separation between units and retaining walls is not adequate. The minimum separation is 5-feet (with certain intrusions allowed to encroach up to 2-feet per Section 21.46.090 of the Carlsbad Municipal code). The project as proposed includes side yard retaining walls up to 7-feet in height. Staff does not support retaining walls in excess of 3-feet in height. Rear yard retaining walls may be acceptable up to 6-feet in height. Side and rear yard fences are not permitted to exceed 6-feet in height, which includes retaining wall/fence combinations. An acceptable solution is as illustrated below, however if you have an alternative, please submit it for our review. 6. The following are comments regarding compliance with small lot architectural guidelines: (1) In compliance with guideline #1, Plan 1 must be plotted every three units. (2) In compliance with guideline #7, Plan 1 must be plotted for at least 25% of the project (currently proposing to plot Plan 1 20%). 7. Please label streets "A", "B", and "C". Please note that Donna Drive will likely be required to be maintained to the 90 degree turn to Wintergreen. Also, street names must comply with the City's street naming policy (Rue is not an acceptable street name). The issue of street names will be addressed prior to final map. 8. Proposed Lot 28 does not meet the definition of a flag lot which must be located behind another lot. Please increase the lot frontage to 33-feet minimum to meet City standards. 9. Please number and show maintenance responsible for the lot on the south side of Carlsbad Village Drive. This lot cannot be left as a remainder parcel. 10. Off-site grading is proposed in several locations. This area must be included in the grading calculations for the site. Please revise calculations if necessary. Also, please submit letters from the property owners indicating that the proposed off- site grading is acceptable. 11. Slopes in excess of 30-feet are proposed on the project. Slopes in excess of 30- feet are generally not permitted pursuant to the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. Please revise plans as necessary consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance and Development Guidelines and submit slope profiles and typical cross sections for these larger slope areas. 12. Lots 21 and 22 are proposed as panhandle lots. Please submit documentation that these lots comply with the panhandle lot development standards of Section 21.10.080 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Also, please revise plans to show 30- feet minimum useable driveway access to double panhandle Lots 21 and 22. 13. The existing manufactured slope on the south portion of Lots 34-36 should be maintained to the greatest extent possible. This slope helps screen the water tank as viewed traveling westbound on Carlsbad Village Drive. Also, try to bring the slope down from Lot 36 to Lot 34 more gradually (naturally). 14. Please show site details for the recreation lot. 15. Please show where the recreation vehicle storage facility will be provided on the site per Section 21.45.090(k). A minimum of 720 square feet, exclusive of the driveways and approaches is required for the project as proposed. 16. There are numerous mature trees on the site. Please submit a tree survey which identifies the following: (1) tree types; (2) trees to be preserved on the site; (3) trees to be removed on the site; (4) health status of the trees; and (5) trees to be relocated or replaced. Please note that eucalyptus trees are a tree of community importance, especially in this part of the City. Generally, projects with large numbers of eucalyptus trees are designed incorporating the eucalyptus tree. ENGINEERING: 1. The required width of offsite improvements for Donna Way is half-street plus 12', for a total improved width of 42'. This width includes a 10' wide area for sidewalk and utility easement, a 32' paved street width, and asphalt concrete curb on the west side of this street. 2. An intersection analysis will be required to determine if a traffic signal is warranted at the Carlsbad Village Drive/Donna Way intersection. Speed survey information for this survey will be provided by the City. 3. It appears that the offsite portion of Donna Way and a portion of Rue Le DaVid is to be constructed on property owned by the City of Carlsbad/Carlsbad Municipal Water District. The applicant should provide notes on the plans and submit information as to what steps have been taken to obtain permission to proceed with these improvements. 4. With regard to the Wintergreen Drive/Rue Le DaVid intersection, a triangular area, measured 25' from the end of the curb return, and free of any obstructions in excess of 30" in height must be maintained for sight distance purposes. Please outline this triangular area on the tentative map. 5. The required frontage width for panhandle lots adjacent to one other is 15', such as on Lots 21 and 22. Additionally, this area is for access to the panhandle lots and is to be clear of slopes, walls, and other site elements. 6. The 20' frontage width of Lot 28 does not meet the required width of 33'. 7. The triangular shaped area on the south side of Carlsbad Village Drive should be designated as a lot, and not as "not a part." 8. For reference purposes, the boundaries of the three adjacent parcels located to the north of the project should be shown on the Index Map. 9. Rather than create separate lots to maintain access to adjacent offsite parcels, lot line adjustments will be required that will consolidate Lots C and D to their respective offsite parcels. Please note the intent for a lot line adjustment on the tentative map. 10. If Rue La Margaret is a private street, then offsite parcels with access to this street from Lot C will have to be included as part of the Planned Development application. 11. The corners of Lot D at its intersection with Rue Le DaVid should be rounded. Additionally, slopes from the adjacent lots should not encroach into Lot D. 12. Please note on the tentative map that this project will provide for the installation of access improvements through Doreet Way for the adjacent offsite parcel. 13. The applicant must submit letters from the property owners of the three adjacent parcels indicating their concurrence with the proposed access layout to their respective parcels. 14. The applicant must submit letters from the property owner indicating their approval of the proposed offsite grading for this project. 15. In accordance with City standards for a public street, the required right-of-way width for Rue La Margaret is 56'. If it is intended for this street to be private, this should be clearly noted and mapped appropriately on the tentative map. 16. If adequate drainage facilities can be provided, and in order to reduce grading and slope heights, we would consider an alternative design for those lots located on the west side of Rue La Margaret to drain towards the rear of the lots. 17. Slopes in excess of 30' in height, such as behind Rue Le Margaret, require a bench and brow ditch. 18. The typical lot detail on sheet 1 indicates that sideyards may be designed with a width as narrow as 5'. Please note that the City requires finish grading provide a positive drainage of 2% to swale a minimum 5' away from the face of building. This issue may be resolved by having the Soils Engineer prepare a letter indicating their approval of the proposed drainage design. 19. It appears that the Average Daily Traffic, as shown on sheet 1, was calculated using the generation rate of 8 ADT/unit (multiple family ADT rate). This single family project should shown an Average Daily Traffic generation rate of 10 ADT/unit. 20. Lots are to be numbered consecutively on the tentative map. Please redesignate Lots A through D with a lot number. 21. Attached is an Engineering Department redlined check print set of the project. The applicant must return this plan set with the corrected plans to assist us in our continued review. If you have questions regarding any of the Engineering comments above, please contact Ken Quon at (619) 438-1161, extension 4380. April 15, 1996 TO: TERRI WOODS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER FROM: Associate Engineer Quon VIA: Principal Land Use Engineer ^ "<?" VIA: Assistant City Engineer COMPLETENESS REVIEW AND INITIAL ISSUES STATEMENT PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES, CT 96-03/PUD 96-03/SDP 96-04/HDP 96-03 The Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete items: 1. North arrow and scale on sheet 2 of the tentative map and sheet 1 of the site development plan. 2. Top and bottom elevations for all fences, walls, and retaining walls. Show these elevations at each end of the wall and in the middle. Also show the worst condition elevation. 3. A profile of all streets with grades in excess of 7%. 4. The tentative map is to include a plan view of the extension of Donna Way to its intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive. Contours and existing topography should also be included sufficient to determine the potential location of future access for adjacent undeveloped properties. 5. Width and location of all existing or proposed public and private easements. Please provide a table that identifies each easement and numbered to correspond with those in the preliminary title report. The table should include the date, file number, and future disposition of each easement. 6. A preliminary grading plan with more legible contours and the location of proposed cut/fill lines. 7. Location of storm drain facilities that will be served by this project. In addition, the Engineering Department made a preliminary review of the project for Engineering issues. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to conditioning of the project are as follows: 1. The required width of offsite improvements for Donna Way is half-street plus 12', for a total improved width of 42'. This width includes a 10' wide area for sidewalk and utility easement, a 32' paved street width, and asphalt concrete curb on the west side of this street. 2. An intersection analysis will be required to determine if a traffic signal is warranted at the Carlsbad Village Drive/Donna Way intersection. Speed survey information for this survey will be provided by the City. 3. It appears that the offsite portion of Donna Way and a portion of Rue Le DaVid is to be constructed on property owned by the City of Carlsbad/Carlsbad Municipal Water District. The applicant should provide notes on the plans and submit information as to what steps have been taken to obtain permission to proceed with these improvements. 4. With regard to the Wintergreen Drive/Rue Le DaVid intersection, a triangular area, measured 25' from the end of the curb return, and free of any obstructions in excess of 30" in height must be maintained for sight distance purposes. Please outline this triangular area on the tentative map. 5. The required frontage width for panhandle lots adjacent to one other is 15', such as on Lots 21 and 22. Additionally, this area is for access to the panhandle lots and is to be clear of slopes, walls, and other site elements. 6. The 20' frontage width of Lot 28 does not meet the required width of 33'. 7. The triangular shaped area on the south side of Carlsbad Village Drive should be designated as a lot, and not as "not a part." 8. For reference purposes, the boundaries of the three adjacent parcels located to the north of the project should be shown on the Index Map. 9. Rather than create separate lots to maintain access to adjacent offsite parcels, lot line adjustments will be required that will consolidate Lots C and D to their respective offsite parcels. Please note the intent for a lot line adjustment on the tentative map. 10. If Rue La Margaret is a private street, then offsite parcels with access to this street from Lot C will have to be included as part of the Planned Development application. 11. The corners of Lot D at its intersection with Rue Le DaVid should be rounded. Additionally, slopes from the adjacent lots should not encroach into Lot D. 12. Please note on the tentative map that, with the approval of the adjacent property owner, this project will provide for the construction of access improvements through Doreet Way for the adjacent offsite parcel. 13. The applicant must submit letters from the property owners of the three adjacent parcels indicating their concurrence with the proposed access layout to their respective parcels. 14. The applicant must submit letters from the property owner indicating their approval of the proposed offsite grading for this project. 15. In accordance with City standards for a public street, the required right-of-way width for Rue La Margaret is 56'. The City would consider requiring only a 51' right-of-way width if this street remains single-loaded and an application is submitted for an Engineering Modification. If it is intended for this street to be private, this should be clearly noted and mapped appropriately on the tentative map. 16. If adequate drainage facilities can be provided, and in order to reduce grading and slope heights, we would consider an alternative design for those lots located on the west side of Rue La Margaret to drain towards the rear of the lots. 17. It appears that additional offsite grading will be required for Lot 22 to meet the proposed pad elevation of 245.0. 18. The typical lot detail on sheet 1 indicates that sideyards may be designed with a width as narrow as 5'. Please note that the City requires finish grading provide a positive drainage of 2% to swale a minimum 5' away from the face of building. This issue may be resolved by having the Soils Engineer prepare a letter indicating their approval of the proposed drainage design. 19. It appears that the Average Daily Traffic, as shown on sheet 1, was calculated using the generation rate of 8 ADT/unit. for this project was shown on the plans for Average Daily Traffic is 10 ADT/unit. 20. Lots are to be numbered consecutively on the tentative map. Please redesignate Lots A through D with a lot number. Attached is a red lined check print set of the project. Please forward this plan set to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. The applicant must return this plan set with the corrected plans to assist us in our continued review. If you have questions regarding any of the comments above, please contact me at extension 4380. KENNETH W. QUON Associate Engineer United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ecological Services Carlsbad Field Office 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, California 92008 February 28, 1996 Don L. Jack Farwest American Enterprises 1727 Oceanside Blvd., Suite A Oceanside, California 92054 Re: Pacific View Ltd. Project, Sensitive Species Surveys Dear Mr. Jack: This letter responds to your request that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provide written comments regarding mitigation and processing requirements for the above referenced project (Project). In a previous letter from the Service, dated November 24, 1995, we responded to your October 25, 1995 letter by stating that project- related impacts to coastal sage scrub would be appropriately mitigated offsite provided that sensitive species are not found on the project site. We recommended that focused surveys be conducted to determine the presence or absence of the California gnatcatcher and any sensitive plant species which may occur on the property. We subsequently received a report dated January 11, 1996, regarding sensitive species surveys conducted on the subject property by Dudek and Associates. The Service is satisfied with this report and, based on the information provided, concurs that the species evaluated are unlikely to occur on-site. Due to the isolated nature of the subject site, its location outside of any local preserve planning area, and the absence of sensitive species, the Service believes that project-related impacts to coastal sage scrub would be appropriately mitigated offsite, in an area of high long-term conservation value within the City of Carlsbad or other coastal area, at a 1:1 ratio for 1.95 acres of coastal sage scrub. The Service also concurs that the project is appropriate for processing under the interim habitat loss provisions of the Natural Community Conservation Planning Program for coastal sage scrub. Mr. Jack Thank-you for providing the additional information we requested regarding the subject project. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Ellen Berryman at the Carlsbad Field Office (619/431- 9440). Cobetich Field Office Supervisor CC: Bill Tippets, CDFG Don Rideout, City of Carlsbad #l-6-HC-96-74 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ecological Services Carlsbad Field Office 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, California 92008 C" January 31, 1996 4 * Don L. Jack Farwest American Enterprises 1727 Oceanside Blvd., 'Suite A Oceanside, California 92054 Re: Pacific View Ltd. Project, Sensitive Species Surveys Dear Mr. Jack: This letter responds to your request that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provide written comments regarding mitigation and processing requirements for the above referenced project (Project). In a previous letter from the Service, dated November 24, 1995, we responded to your October 25, 1995 letter by stating that project- related impacts to coastal sage scrub would be appropriately mitigated offsite provided that sensitive species are not found on the project site. We recommended that focused surveys be conducted to determine the presence or absence of the California gnatcatcher and any sensitive plant species which may occur on the property. We subsequently received a report dated January 11, 1996, regarding sensitive species surveys conducted on the subject property by Dudek and Associates. The Service is satisfied with this report and, based on the information provided, concurs that the species evaluated are unlikely to occur on-site. Due to the isolated nature of the subject site, its location outside of any local preserve planning area, and the absence of sensitive species, the Service believes that project-related impacts to coastal sage scrub would be appropriately mitigated offsite, in an area of high long-term conservation value, at a 1:1 ratio. The Service also concurs that the project is appropriate for processing under the interim habit loss provisions of the Natural Community Conservation Planning Program for coastal sage scrub. Mr. Jack Thank you for providing the additional information we requested regarding the subject project. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Ellen Berryman at the Carlsbad Field Office (619/431- 9440) . Gail C. Kobetich Supervisor cc: Bill Tippets, CDFG Don Rideout, City of Carlsbad #l-6-HC-96-74 0 'R 0 U R K E ENGINEERING January 18, 1996 Mr. Don L. Jack PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES P.O. Box 2198 Carlsbad, CA 92018 5 •"'•^i^/ 2237 Faraday Avenue Suite 120 Carlsbad California 92008 619 431-6763 FAX: 619 431-0672 415 N. Vineyard Avenue Suite 200 Ontario California 91764 909467-0221 FAX: 909 467-0178 2677 N. Main Street Suite 860 Santa Ana California 92705 714541-9011 Re: Traffic Impact Analysis for a 48 Unit Residential Development, City of Carlsbad Dear Mr. Jack: O'Rourke Engineering has completed the traffic impact analysis for the above referenced project. The results of the analysis are summarized below. Background Pacific View Estates is proposing to develop up to 48 single family residential units north of Carlsbad Village Drive and south of Wintergreen Drive in the City of Carlsbad. The City requested that a signal warrant analysis be conducted at the intersection of Carlsbad Village Drive and Donna Drive (Donna Court) since it is a primary intersection for the project. O'Rourke Engineering was retained to prepare that traffic signal warrant analysis. The analysis was conducted to determine the need for signalization and to calculate the project traffic as a percent of the total traffic at the intersection. The project location is shown in Attachment 1-A. Existing Traffic Volumes Existing approach volumes at the intersection were counted between July 10 and July 12, 1995 and were provided by the City of Carlsbad. The peak hour traffic at the intersection was taken to be between 5:00 PM and 6:00 PM. Peak hour turning movement counts were conducted by Counts R Us at the intersections of Carlsbad Village Drive/Donna Drive and Hosp Way/Wintergreen Drive. The traffic count sheets and the figure illustrating the PM peak hour turning movement volumes are provided in Attachment 1-B. Carlsbad • Ontario • Santa Ana • Florida Mr. Don L. Jack Traffic Impact Analysis for a 48 Unit Residential Development, City of Carlsbad Page 2 Project Traffic Volumes All access for the project is proposed off of Carlsbad Village Drive on Donna Court, a new street to be aligned opposite the existing Donna Drive. The project is anticipated for as many as 48 single family residential units. It is expected to generate up to 480 daily trips, including 39 trips (8 inbound/31 outbound) during the AM peak hour, and 48 trips (34 inbound/14 outbound) during the PM peak hour. These trips were determined using the rates published in the San Diego Association of Government (SANDAG) Trip Generation Manual of 10.0 daily trips per dwelling unit, 0.8 trips per dwelling unit in the AM peak hour and 1.0 trips per dwelling unit in the PM peak hour. The project trips were assigned to the roadways based on the existing network and traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site. The project trips and the "existing plus project volumes" in the PM peak hour are shown in Attachment 1-C. Analysis The signal warrant analysis was conducted for the study intersection for existing and existing plus project conditions using the methodology published in Chapter 9 of the Caltrans Traffic Manual. Warrants 1, 2, 8, 9, and 11 were analyzed for the existing conditions. For existing plus project conditions, the minimum peak hour signal warrant (Number 11) analysis was conducted since the peak period is the worst case scenario. The signal warrant analysis results indicate that the intersection does not warrant a traffic signal under existing or existing plus project conditions. The signal warrant analysis worksheets are provided as Attachment 1-D. Project Traffic Contribution The project is expected to add up to 48 new trips to the intersection Carlsbad Village Drive and Donna Drive (Donna Court) during the PM peak hour. This volume is 5.34 percent of total traffic during the PM peak hour. The results of the signal warrant analysis and the projects contribution to total traffic indicate that the proposed project will not have a significant impact at the intersection of Carlsbad Village Drive and Donna Drive (Donna Court). Mr. Don L. Jack Traffic Impact Analysis for a 48 Unit Residential Development, City of Carlsbad Page 3 It has been a pleasure working with you and if you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, O'ROURKE ENGINEERING President Attachment b:\carls25u.r PROJECT SITE *» A NTS O'ROLJRKE ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 1-A LOCATION MAP 48 D.U. RESIDENTIAL - CARLSBAD PROJECT SITE i » A NTS O'ROLffiKE ATTACHMENT 1 -B EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME PM PEAK HOUR 48 D.U. RESIDENTIAL - CARLSBAD • DEC-01-'95 PRI 16:55 I ATTACHMENT 1-B1 C IROURKE ENGINEERING TEL NO:619-4 IF CftRLSBAD COMM- DE FAX NO. ttBBB P04 P. 04 *«nt>r«t«d Oy mCSOOO Version 2.01 Copyright 1990-1992 Nitron Qyatwn. Corporation Location .... ...... Carlsbad Village Dr. Location Code ..... 1188County ............ San Diego Recorder Set ...... 07/10/95 10:29 Recording Start ... 07/11/35 00; 00 Renording Snd ..... 07/12/35 10:15 Sample Time ....... 15 Minutes Operator Number ... 77 Machine Number .... 9982 Channel ........... 1 Divide By ......... 2 '500' w/o Donna Dr Two-Way ........... No Tuesday 07/11/95 Channel: 1 Direction* a S3S& fliSfi P»j>g MPO 0701? flflOQ OggO 1.000 JJCa 1200 130P 1AOO 121)0 160g 1700 1800 1900 2000 14 22QQ »M 2iQ£ Tqralt 7 12 16 IB 52 114 138 190 217 248 280 260 296 308 531 4*3 390 25$ 2*4 202 139 72 W 9 4 S 4 3 3 8 15 41 45 61 73 67 73 73 84 84 116 104 66 64 6S 4fi 20 10 3 1 2 2 3 12 Z7 40 48 46 52 60 63 66 SI «4 132 114 69 75 46 26 10 8 6 1 4 4 # 10 54 26 *4 49 69 82 68 71 74 92 122 BS 62 SS 53 39 22 3 2 2 2 5 6 J2 35 29 53 61 5* M 56 66 69 121 113 W. 61 67 40 26 12 AM Peak Hour .................... 10:45 co 11:45 (255 vehicles) AM Peak Hour Factor ............. 97.3% PM Peak Hour .................... 16:45 to 17:45 (491 vehicles) PM Peak Hour Factor ............. 93.0* : Weda«»d*y 07/12/95 Channel; 1 Direction: S 0100 QZfifl JJH32 plpjd QSqQ flgno OTOJ} OJgO OOOJj poo 110g izoo JJJJJ J^OO ISpj iggfi 1^0 ISOQ 21^0 2200 g^OO 2400 Totals 42 13 r 13 6 Z 9 4 2 7 8 X 13 3 0 11 1 4 4 J 9 25 4| 124 150 193 4B 2 Z 6 24 33 42 48 4 6 6 31 44 « 1 1T K 24 32 61 2 6 17 41 41 48 AM Peak Hour ................... . 09 .15 to 10<15 (193 vehicles) AM Peak Hour Factor ............. 61.6% PM Peak Hour .................... Unavailable PM Peak Hour Factor ............. Unavailable 74 -Hour Moving TOtp.al 01:00- 4403 02:00- 44t« 03:00- 4402 04:00- U01 OSlOO- 4394 06:00- 4401 07,00- 4303 09:00- 44U 10:00* 4417 lliOO- X/A 12:00* N/A 13:00- M/A 14:00- N/A ISifiO- M/A 17;QQ- H/A 1»iOO- N/A 19lOO- N/A 10:00* K/A 21:00- N/A 22(00* H/A 23iOrt- N/A Ofl»00- ^402 16:00- N/A 24:00- «/A '• - *. i." •V,^ - : DEC-CM--95 FRI 16:54 IJ^IROURKE ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 1-B2 C^JOF CARLSBAD COMH. DETEL 8S88 P02 P. 02 0«ntr«r«ef 6X HSC3COO V«r«ton 2.01 .,,,. WO-1992 n<tr«« Sy«t«iw Corporation carls&aa village Dr. '250' t/a Donna fc.Location Coda ..... 1191County ............ San DiegoRecorder Set ...... 07/10/95 iiii'i . Recording Start ... 07/11/95 00:00 Recording Bud ..... 07/12/95 10:30 sample Time ....... 15 Minutes Operator Number ... 77 Machine NumJber .... 3252channel ........ ... 1Divide By ......... 2 Summation ......... Two-way ........... Tuesday 07/11/95 awmeli 1 Direction* W jjjpjfl 2322 {£22 Eflfl £423 SZ2S SS&2 222S M2 HSfl -^oo 1325 j40£ isifl uoo. JXflfl 332, 1222 2222 1122 2222 aoo 2^00 i4 r u at a? 3*9 315 230 e?4 zn z»i 227 293 ws 311 2§3 20* ' 13* ni 77 52 8 6 0 2 2 13 56 65 9 2 0 1 2 16 58 78 3 S 0 1 7 20 66 109 1 1 3 3 3 32 77 121 AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Factor .... frM Faak Hour PM Peak Hour Factor .... 17 82 71 75 73 47 77 33 72 67 74 61 78 69 67 40 69 82 57 60 07:30 81. S%** J. A 9 V IS -45^ W « •• W 66.7% 39 30 S6 64 Sfi »7 64 36 to 08 tn 1 7WW? X S 78 69 71 73 :30 •45. ** 9 73 82 66 72 85 61 92 64 70 71 64 57 49 46 SO 34 99 SS 37 21 36 30 22 21 26 25 18 0 11 12 IS 14 (395 vehiclas) / V\ j •1 0 u«>vtJr veil.• ft 1 x A \1CJ.«S; Wedn««d»y 07/12/95 Channelt 1 Direction: W £12fi fl522 ojfifl £££2 £§o$ 0^ fiZfifl flftOO 0900 1000 llfifi JZfifi Jlfifl i*nn isoo 1609 ITOO isgo IMP aeog aipg 2200 2J2S2 MOO 29 12 7 S 3 2 « 8 7 Jl 77 236 332 314 291 155 2 X 0 TO $2 65 89 59 70 1 Z 4 15 45 73 66 70 69 3 1 14 24 51 00 73 83 I 1 13 2ft 06 10* 8* 79 1465 AM Peak Hour .................... 07: is to OS. is (356 vehicles)AM Peak Hour Factor ............. 85. SV PM Peak Hour .................... Unavailable PM Peak Hour Factor ............. Unavailable 24 -pour Moving Total 01 tOO- 4367 02:00- 4362 03:00- &367 MiOO- 4167 OStOO- OB* 00 1 00- 4X31 lOlOO- 4362 11(00- M/A 1Z:00- N/A 13iO> U/A I7i00- N/A 18:00- N/A 19:00- N/A 20:00- N/A 21:00- N/A 06:00- 43«0 14:00- N/A 22sOO- N/A OT.'OO- 4359 ISitO- N/A 23:00- N/A UB:GO* 16iOO- MM 24:00- N/A DEC-01-'95 FRI 16:56 ID:OROURKE ENGINEERING TEL N0:619-42fc0672 8888 Pi ATTACHMENT 1-B3 ; CH^F CARLSBAD COIffl DE FAX NO, 4W94 ' .: P.06 Yfllwnff CQF"1^ Report '.. f<flG£ 16f 0«fl>rat«cf by MSCZOCa Vcmlon 2.01 Copyright 1990-1993 Mltren tyat«M Location Donna Drive"50* e/o Carlsbad Village Dr. <i^ Location Code 1189 County San Diego Recorder Set ...... 07/10/95 10:43 Recording Start ... 07/11/9S 00:00 Recording End 07/12/95 10.15 Sample Time 15 Minutes Operator Number ... 53Machine Number .... 9372 Channel 1 Divide By 2 Summation ..., No Two-Way No Tuesday 07/11/95 Channeli 1 Direction: N 0100 04QQ 0500 O&OQ Q70Q 0800 0000 IQOD ITOfl. 1200 UQQ UOQ 15QO T6QO 17QO 1fidp 1900 ZQQO ^1QO ZZQQ 10 30 61 S7 50 34 47 su 44 4ft 39 56 46 £0 32 27 25 H 7 723 0111 0000 000 2010 AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM freak Hour 0 0 1 029 OL e» S 0 4 21 Parlor . Factor . 12 12 23 10 16 19 10 12 AT 19 r 11 6 10 IS « 44 ••11 17 13 H 07:30 €8.5% 17:45 73.0* 12 15 to to 6 10 12 11 U *912 16 6 08:30 18 :45 10 9 20 9 10 6 ? 12 11 6 6 6 11 13 19 10 46 (63 vehicles) (60 vehicles) 5 3 4 2 0 Wednesday 07/12/9S Ch*aa«li 1 D4raction: N filfifl Q2M SSSSL Q4CQ S§2° SS9S fiM 2222 SSflQ WOP Hfifl U22 122° Hflft J5£2 U&Q IZfifi Iflflfi JM 22QQ ZM 222fi OfiS 3M2 I S 3 0 0 10 29 59 43 35 10 *17 3 2 1 0 0 1 0 12 12 17 10 1 0 1 0 0 1 5 10 16 5 1 3 1 0 0 6 • 14 9 13 0 0 0 0 0 2 16 S3 10 18 AM Peak Hour 07:30 to 08s30 (6S vehicles) AM Peak Hour Factor 70.7% PM Peak Hour Unavailable PM Peak Hour Factor Unavailable Movi,nq Total OliOO- 726 02iOO- 750 03iOO- 731 0*iOO- 730 05:00> 730 WsOO- T30 OTsOO- 7» W.OO- 72T Q9iOO- 713 10:00- T16 11:00- N/A TZlOO- H/A 15100- H/A H:00- »/A 15:00- H/A lAiOO- "/A 17:00- M/A W«00- N/A 19sOO- N/A 20:00' «/A 21iOO- M/A 22:00- N/A ZSsOO- M/A 2*iOO- K/A PROJECT SITE \ ^POTENTIAL CONNECTION XX (XX) - PROJECT TRIP (EXISTING PLUS PROJECT) O'ROUflKE ATTACHMENT 1-C PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME 48 D.U. RESIDENTIAL - CARLSBAD 9-6 ATTACHMENT 1-D 1-1992 iafsammmaaatmtammmmmmm AFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual Figure 9-1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS DIST CO RTE PM Minor St: T)ONNA C.£ Critical speed of major stre In built up area of isolated ?URT community of < 10,000 CALC CHK _ J£ ODDrur- DATE 1 1 -3 DATE f.rjtical Approach SpRfid . *f O • *•* Critical Approach Speed P-5-"0 snor } RURAL (R) D J D URBAN (U) o-^o mph mph WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume APPROACH LANES Both Apprchs. Major Street Highest Apprch. Minor Street MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) U 500 (400) 150 (120) 350 (280) 105 (84) U 2 or more 600 (480) 200 (160) 420 (336) 140 (112) 100% SATISFIED YES D NO 80% SATISFIED YES D NO Hour so 44-tfe WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic APPROACH LANES Both Apprchs. Major Street Highest Apprch. Minor Street MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) U R 750 (600) 75 (60) 525 (420) 53 (42) U 2 or more 900 (720) 100 (80) 630 (504) 70 (56) / /V 100% SATISFIED YES D NO 80% SATISFIED YES D NO \' Hour 511 50 (bO WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume 100% SATISFIED YES D NO REQUIREMENT Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 100 or more for each of any four hours or is 1 90 or more during any one hour; AND There are less than 60 gaps per hour in the major street traf- fic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross; AND The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 feet; AND The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow on the major street. FULFILLED Yes Yes Yes Yes D D D D No No No No D D D D The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown. 9'8 ATTACHMENT 1-D TRfir¥lC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1391 Figure 9-3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT 8 - Combination of Warrants SATISFIED YES D NO REQUIREMENT TWO WARRANTS SATISFIED 80% WARRANT 1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME 2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC V FULFILLED YES D NO gj WARRANT 9 - Four Hour Volume SATISFIED* YES D NO 2or ,o* / .& / ,oy.«0 Approach Lanes One more ^ / ^" / ^' / ^" I Both Approaches - Major Street Highest Approaches - Minor Street / /bol 2^ (9^ 3>b l^t^ U-fc IbMl (bo * Refer to Figure 9-6 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. WARRANT 10 - Peak Hour Delay (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) SATISFIED YES D NO 0 1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; AND YES D NO D 2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND vcc r—i -—>T to | I NU L.-J 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. YES NO D WARRANT 11 - Peak Hour Volume SATISFIED* YES D NO 2 or , C0 x .^o x . r>y r o Approach Lanes One more \Jo' / \^' / \^> '/ ^' 1 Both Approaches . - . Major Street Highest Approaches - Minor Street / /\otfv v\^^h ^\ vi\o ^\ V>o Refer to Figure 9-8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-9 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown. 9-12 ATTACHMENT 1-D TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1991 400 8 Q.> 300 "8:^ cc < 200 M o in 25 3 O Xgx 100 Figure 9-7 FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING CONDITIONS 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE ' NOTE: 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 60 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. 9'14 ATTACHMENT 1-D TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1991 500 IQ.> I O 400 300 CC 01 g i I 200 o o 100 300 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) PM PEAK HOUR 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) • 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)r 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES (794, 46) EXISTING PLUS PROJECT VOLUMES (824, 50) r NOTE: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. Carlsbad Unified School District 801 Pine Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008-2439 (619) 729-9291 FAX# (619) 729-9685 *. . . Where All Students Learn Excellently" January 18, 1996 State of California Department of Real Estate 107 South Broadway, Room 7111 Los Angeles, Ca. 90012 Re: Developer - PACIFIC VIEW, LTD. Project - 45 future single family homes Located on 8.52 acres at North East Corner of Donna Way at Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 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: Buena Vista Elementary School (K-6) 1330 Buena Vista Way Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 (619) 434-0607 Valley Junior High School (7-8) 1645 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 (619) 434-0641 Carlsbad High School (9-12) 3557 Monroe Street Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 (619) 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 elementary 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 fact, may attend school across town. You should also be aware that there are no school buses for regular students. Sincerely, John H. Blair \ssi?tant Superintendent, Business Services JHB:ag Enclosure: CUSD map FrS>m : *FflRUEST flMERICflN*PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 Nov. 05 1996 3:18PM P02 DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Engineering & Environmental Sciences 11 January 1996 Corporate Office! 605 Third Street Encinitas, CA 92024 (619)942-5147 Fax (619) 632-0164 OoronM Office: 1180 Olympic, SniU'202 Corona, CA 91719 (909)270-3177 F»x (909)270-3180 1048-01 r r Mr. Don Jack ' Pacific View Limited P.O. Box2198 Carlsbad, CA 92018 Re: Pacific View Limited Sensitive Species Surveys Dear Mr. Jack, A biological survey was conducted on the Pacific View Limited property to either determine the presence/absence or assess the potential for occurrence for several sensitive species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requested focused surveys for a number of species in a letter dated 24 November 1995. A later conversation between yourself and Ellen Berryman, USFWS, concluded that a habitat assessment by a qualified biologist would also be acceptable for those species for which occurrence cannot be determined until a much later date. The species listed in the letter from the USFWS include: California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) Encinitas baccharis (Baccharis vanessae) Del Mar manzanlta (Arctostaphylos glahdulosa ssp. crass/folia) Del Mar Mesa sand aster (Corethrogyne f/lagfnffolia ssp. linifolia) Orcutt's spineflower (Chorlzanthe orcuttlana) Pacific Pocket Mouse (Perognathus longimembrls pacificus) The Pacific View Limited property is located on Carlsbad Village Drive between Monroe Street and El Camino Real. The property is 8.52 acres with all but a small amount located on the north side of Carlsbad Village Drive. A reconnaissance survey was conducted by Anita M. Hayworth on 28 January 1995 to identify and quantify the habitat types. Three habitat types were determine to be present on the property: coastal sage scrub (CSS) '1.95 acres southern mixed chaparral 2.20 acres disturbed habitat ' 4.37 acres The CSS habitat is located in two patches: at the southwestern end and at the northern portion adjacent to the chaparral habitat. The chaparral habitat is comprised of predominantly lemonadeberry with a mixture of CSS and chaparral species but the structure and impenetrability of chaparral. The disturbed habitat includes areas devoid of vegetation, solid stands of eucalyptus trees, or landscape and ornamental vegetation. Biologists at Dudek & Associates (DUDEK) with the proper expertise conducted surveys of the property in order to either determine the presence/absence or the potential for occurrence of the species listed above. In conjunction with searches for those species, any other rare, threatened, endangered, or regionally sensitive species that were encountered were also recorded. The following sections discuss the results of the surveys for the sensitive bird, mammal and plant species. ; 1 On February 3,1994 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) emergency-listed the Pacific pocket mouse as endangered, citing "imminent danger of extinction due to habitat loss and fragmentation, and predation by feral and domestic cats (USFWS 1994)." The Pacific pocket mouse had not been seen in over 20 years until a small population was found on the Dana Point Headlands in July 1993 (USFWS 1994). Trapping programs for the Pacific pocket mouse on MCB Camp Pendleton in northern San Diego County and in association with the Fouthill TraiispoiUilion ConIdoi (FTC) projwutht southernOraiiyBCouiily in 1995 subsequuritly documented at least three previously unknown populations (P. Behrends, pers. obs. 1995; L. Dawes USFWS, pers. comm. 1995; A. Johnston, Michael Brandman Associates, pers. comm. | 1995). Recent studies documenting the presence of the pocket mouse appear to confirm the habitat rVWiflimit^ coastal sagebrush (Artemisia callfomlca) on sandy, friable soils (P. Brylski, pers. comm. 1994). Interestingly, the vegetation on the Dana Point site appears open, but vegetation ' transects revealed a coverage of approximately 85 percent. Habitat on a site north of Basilone Road and the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station supports sparse coastal sage scrub and Gaviota fine sandy loam (Behrends, pers. obs.; Bowman 1973). Similarly, occupied ' sites along the proposed FTC corridor support sparse sage scrub and sandy loams and gravelly J loamy sand soils on 9 to 30 percent slopes (Johnston, pers. comm. 1995). Finally, a population found north of the Santa Margarita River was found in sandy soils (Dawes, pers. comm. 1995). It is important to note that traplines set in relatively dense sage scrub and chaparral or on clay soils yielded high numbers of the California pocket mouse (Chaetodipus californlcus) and woodrats (Neotoma spp.), but no Pacific pocket mice (Behrends 1995; I Johnston 1995). Methods \ The site was inspected by DUDEK biologist Philip R. Behrends, Ph.D. for its potential to support the Pacific pocket mouse on 5 January 1996. Dr. Behrends holds a federal permit (PRT-756268) and State Memorandum of Understanding to conduct trapping studies of the ] Pacific pocket mouse. Because of the small size of the site, it was possible to walk trails throughout the entire site in search of habitat areas that appeared to be suitable for the pocket mouse. Because this species leaves no diagnostic surface sign revealing its presence (e.g., unique burrows or scat, discernable tracks), judgement of a site's potential to support this species must be based on its mapped historic range and habitat characteristics. Confirmation of its presence or absence on a site requires a live-trapping study. Weather conditions during the survey included clear skies, an air temperature of 64 degrees Fahrenheit, and light westerly breezes of 4-7 mph. Potential of Site to Support Pacific Pocket Mouse The recent discoveries of small populations of the Pacific pocket mouse have caused the • USFWS to more frequently request trapping programs on coastal project sites. There is still relatively little understanding of the habitat requirements of the pocket mouse and the populations that have been found appear to be very limited in their size and distribution. Because of our lack of knowledge of this species, it is important to conduct field i £0d Wd0S:£ 966T S0 '^°N £8<!L6 ®ZL 6T9 : '°N 3NOHd *NbDI&SWd From : *FflRUEST flMERICflN* ^_ ^ PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 _^ ,_ Nov. 05 1996 3:21PM P04 r r r SUMMARY Surveys were conducted on the Pacific View Limited property, Carlsbad, California by DUDEK biologists in January 1996. The surveys either determined the presence/absence of sensitive species or assessed the potential for occurrence of sensitive species based on the habitat and conditions onsite. One sensitive plant species, ashy spike-moss was observed onsite. This species is still fairly widespread and is on List 4 of the California Native Plant Society. List 4 is basically a watch list for plants of limited distribution. Currently, this species is not considered rare and is not eligible for listing, however it occurs in a habitat that is declining in distribution and thus Is evaluated for consideration during preparation of environmental documents. Other potentially present and detectable perennial plant species were not observed and the potentially present annual plants which would not be detectable at this time of year are unlikely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat. The site is unlikely to support the pacific pocket mouse due to the very small amount of suitable habitat and the isolated nature of the habitat. The survey for the California gnatcatcher determined that the gnatcatcher is not present onsite. Please feel free to contact me with questions or if you require additional information. Sincerely, DUDEK & ASSOCIATES Anita M. Hayworth Ecologist/Senior Project Manager LITERATURE CITED Bowman, R. H. 1973. So/7 Survey of San Diego Area, California, Part 1. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. 104 pp. Hall, E. R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2nd ed. Hickman, J. C., ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: .Higher Plant of Ca/ifornfa. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA. 14OO pp. Skinner, M.W. and B.M. Pavlik, eds. 1994. California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. CNPS Special Publication No. 1 (Fifth Edition). United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1994. Federal Register, Part 8, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Emergency Rule to List the Pacific Pocket Mouse as Endangered. Federal Register, 59 (No. 23) 50 CFR Part. 17. Department of the Interior. From : *FflRUEST PMERICflN* ^ PHONE No. : 619 720 9785 Nov. 05 1996 3:22PM P05 RESULTS OF THE RARE PLANT SURVEY ' A focused survey for rare plants was conducted on the Pacific View Limited project site on r 5 January 1996, by DUDEK biologist John W. Brown, Ph.D. Although the timing of the ! survey was suboptimal for the detection of most annuals, the majority of the plant species of concern on the project site are perennials that can be detected at any time of year. r The site supports disturbed habitat, coastal sage scrub, and "lemonadeberry woodland," a plant community dominated by coastal sage scrub plant species but characterized by a dense, woody, evergreen aspect that is more similar to southern mixed chaparral than coastal sage ! scrub. No "typical" chaparral, characterized by dominance of chamlse (Adenostoma fasciculawm], mission manzanita (Xylococcus bicolort, and wild-lilac (Ceanothus spp.), Is present onsite. One plant species listed in the California Native Plant Society's Inventory ' (Skinner and Pavlik 1994) was observed: ashy spike-moss (Selaglnella cinerascens). This species was common, represented by several large patches in the western portion of the site. In addition, approximately 100 individuals of sand-aster (Lesslngto fllaglnlfolla) were observed ' onsite. However, because of the dry condition of the flowers, it was impossible to determine ' whether these represented one of the sensitive varieties of sand-aster, alt of which have been 'synonymized in the Jepson Manual (Hickman 1993). Given the absence of chaparral onsite, it is likely that these plants do not represent the sensitive variety linifolla (Del Mar Mesa sand- ' aster) which typically is restricted to southern maritime chaparral in coastal San Diego County. Potentially occurring rare plants such as Del Mar manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa var. ' crass/folia), wart-stemmed ceanothus (Ceanothus vertvcosus), Nuttall's scrub oak (Quercus c/umosa), and Encinitas baccharis (Baccharis vanessae), which are components of coastal r chaparral, were not observed onsite and are highly unlikely to be present. These are perennial ' shrubs that can be detected any time of the year. Orcutt's spineflower (Chorizanthe orcuttfi), an exceedingly rare annual species, is nearly ' impossible to detect during the time of year of the survey. However, based on the absence of coastal chaparral, with which this species typically Is associated, it is unlikely that Orcutt's spineflower is present. RESULTS OF PACIFIC POCKET MOUSE SURVEY Pacific Pocket Mouse Background Information The Pacific pocket mouse, at 7-9 g, is one of the smallest members of the genus Perognathus. ' The species P. longimembris, as a whole, occupies a variety of habitats throughout the southwest, including desert, shrub-steppe, arid woodland, sage scrub, grassland, and ruderal habitats. The Pacific pocket mouse, which is one of 19 subspecies of P. longimembris (Hall ' 1981), is restricted to the coastal plain and historically was found between El Segundo in Los ' Angeles County and the Tijuana River Valley in the U.S., and northern Baja California, Mexico. It typically occurs within two miles of the coast and below 600 feet. The Pacific pocket mouse is thought to occupy loose sandy soils supporting sparse coastal sage scrub, non- ' native grassland, and ruderal habitats (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1994). However, Grinnell (1916) reports in field notes that Frank Stephens collected Pacific pocket mouse in ' gravelly soils 10-12 miles north of Oceanside in 1903. ' investigations of potential sites whenever possible. However, the site has very limited potential to support the Pacific pocket mouse'for two main reasons: 1. The generally dense California sagebrush-dominated vegetation found on much of the western portion of the site would be atypical habitat for the species, which typically is found in sparse sage scrub and disturbed habitats underlain by sandy, sandy loam, and gravelly loamy sand soils. The eastern portion of the site, which Is dominated by dense stands of lemonadeberry and toyon, is unsuitable for the pocket mouse. 2. The site is surrounded primarily by residential development. The area of the project site with perhaps the greatest potential to support the pocket mouse, albeit still low. is a small 1 -2-acre area located in the western portion the site. The coastal sage scrub in this area is more open and soils consists of Marina loamy coarse sand (Bowman 1973). Certainly, if the pocket mouse was not in this area, it is highly unlikely to be elsewhere on the site. Nonetheless, the potential for pocket mouse is low because of the small area of apparently suitable habitat. In conclusion, based on a walkover survey, the site has very limited potential to support the Pacific pocket mouse. However, live-trapping would be necessary to confirm the status of the pocket mouse on the site. RESULTS OF CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER SURVEY A focused survey for the California gnatcatcher was conducted on the Pacific View Limited project site on 28 January 1995 and 5 and 11 January 1996 by DUDEK biologist Anita M. Hayworth.' Ms. Hayworth holds a federal permit (PRT-781086) to conduct surveys for the gnatcatcher. The California gnatcatcher is listed as threatened by the USFWS. It occurs primarily in California sagebrush dominated CSS. A three visit survey was conducted on the property. The survey was conducted following the currently accepted protocol of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Scientific Review Panel. All areas of native vegetation were visited during each survey. The route used to survey the habitat varied during each visit and was arranged to ensure complete coverage of the habitat during each visit. The weather conditions were generally pleasant and mild. Temperatures ranged from 64 to 69°F. The winds were low (0-3 MPH) and skies were clear. The time of day for the surveys was 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. for two of the visits and 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. for one visit for approximately two hours for each visit. A tape of recorded vocalizations was used frequently in order to elicit responses from the species, if present. No California gnatcatchers were observed on the property. No brown-headed cowbirds were observed during any of the visits. The CSS habitat located onsite is potentially suitable for the gnatcatcher, however it is very small in size (1.95 acres) and the property is surrounded by development thus rendering the site incapable of supporting the gnatcatcher. y j 4 90d 966T S0 -SBL6 619 : '°N 3NOHd