Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-29; Planning Commission; ; EIR 98-07|GPA 98-01|MP 149Q|MP 98-01|LFMP 10|LFMP 11B|CT 99-03|HDP 99-01|SUP 01-04|SUP 99-01| CT 99-04|PUD 01-08|HDP 99-02|SUP 01-03 - VILLAGES OF LA COSTAr ' t 'he City of Carlsbad Planning Departme, A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: August 29, 2001 ItemNo. (!) Application submittal date: February 13, 1998 Project Planner: Don Neu Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham Glen Van Peski SUBJECT: EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(O)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B)/CT 99- 03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA -Request for a recommendation of approval for the certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report, and approval of Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; General Plan Amendment; La Costa Master Plan Amendment; Villages of La Costa Master Plan; Zone 10 Local Facilities Management Plan; Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment; Master Tentative Map, Hillside Development Permit, El Camino Real Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit, and a Floodplain Special Use Permit for The Greens Village; Master Tentative Map, Planned Unit Development Permit, Hillside Development Permit, and Floodplain Special Use Permit for The Ridge and Oaks Villages; and Street Right-of-way Vacations. Proposed land uses include 2,390 dwelling units of various product types and lot sizes, a 7.9 acre business park, two community facilities sites, a community park site, an elementary school site and the preservation of 834.9 acres (45%) of the 1,866.4 acre project site as HCP open space, and an additional 68.4 acres as non-HCP open space. The project is located in the southeastern quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, within Local Facilities Management Zones 10 and 11. The Greens (Zone 10) portion of the project site is generally located approximately 2,500 feet south of Palomar Airport Road, east of El Camino Real, north of Alga Road, and west of Unicornio Street. The Ridge and Oaks (Zone 11) portion of the project site is located north and east of La Costa A venue, south of Alga Road, east of El Fuerte Street, and straddles portions of Rancho Santa Fe Road. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5010 RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION of BIR 98-07 and RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5011, 5012, 5013, 5014, 5015, 5016, 5017, 5018, 5019, and 5020, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of GPA 98-01, MP 149(Q), MP 98-01, LFMP 10, LFMP ll(B), CT 99-03, HDP 99-01, CT 99-04, PUD 01-08, and HDP 99-02, ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5021, 5022, and 5023, APPROVING SUP 01-04, SUP 99-01, and SUP 01-03, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. ' EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e2 II. INTRODUCTION The project area consists of 1,866.4 acres located within the southeast quadrant of the city within Local Facilities Management Zones 10 and 11. On June 7, 1995 the Section lO(a) Implementation Agreement and Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP/OMSP) among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the City of Carlsbad, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Villages of La Costa prior land owner, and other conservation groups became effective. The HCP/OMSP covers the entire Villages of La Costa Master Plan area and established areas of the property to remain as conserved habitat and areas that could be developed. The goal of the HCP/OMSP is to preserve habitats within the City in a mix and configuration that will ensure the persistence, diversity, and species richness of natural communities within the city and region over time. It is within this context that the proposed Villages of La Costa Master Plan and other related development applications were designed. Proposed land uses include 2,390 dwelling units of various product types and lot sizes, a 7.9 acre business park, two community facilities sites, a community park site, an elementary school site and the preservation of 834.9 acres (45%) of the 1,866.4 acre project site as HCP open space, and an additional 68.4 acres as non-HCP open space. The Proposed Project includes the following discretionary actions: 1) a General Plan Amendment; 2) an amendment to the existing La Costa Master Plan (MP 149 (0)) to remove the project area; 3) the adoption of a new master plan for the property entitled the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) that creates three Villages named The Greens, The Ridge and The Oaks; 4) a Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 10; 5) a Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Zone 11; 6) two Master Tentative Maps; 7) Hillside Development Permits; 8) Special Use Permits; 9) a Planned Unit Development Permit; 10) Street Right-of-Way Vacations; and 10) Certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approval of Candidate Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. A detailed description of the discretionary actions is included in the PROJECT DESCRIPTION section of this report. The proposed project actions are in compliance with all applicable plans, ordinances, standards and policies. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The Villages of La Costa Master Plan provides for a variety of land uses. A maximum of 1,796 single-family dwelling units are planned for within 27 single-family home neighborhoods. Minimum lot sizes within these Neighborhoods range from 4,500 square feet to 11,000 square feet. Lot sizes have been selected for compatibility with existing single-family neighborhoods located adjacent to the Master Plan area as well as to provide a range of housing opportunities. Six multiple family housing neighborhoods are provided by the master plan and will allow for a maximum of 594 dwelling units. Four of these six neighborhoods provide for townhomes or single-family de~ached units on lots with a minimum area of 3,500 square feet. The other two multiple family housing neighborhoods provide for a total of 351 apartments. A total of 2,390 dwelling units are proposed for the project. • f EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e3 Preservation and enhancement of Open Space is an important aspect of this Master Plan. Areas proposed to be designated Open Space by the General Plan constitute approximately 892 acres or 48% of the Master Plan area. The Master Plan includes open space for the preservation of natural resources (HCP/OMSP) and open space for outdoor recreation. The proposed Alga Norte Community Park site is located within the northwest area of the Master Plan. Related to the provision of outdoor open space and recreation areas is the pedestrian system of the master plan. Included within the master plan is a pedestrian circulation network that incorporates sidewalks, local trails, and city-wide trails within each of the villages. A single Planned Industrial site is provided in the extreme northwest comer of The Greens Village adjacent to El Camino Real. The Planned Industrial site is approximately 7.9 gross acres in area and will allow for research and development, light manufacturing, warehousing, storage, business and professional offices, and utility uses. This proposed use is compatible with the Planned Industrial uses existing adjacent to the west in addition to those being planned to the north. Two Community Facilities areas are designated in the master plan. The first is a 7 .9 gross acre area planned for La Costa Greens adjacent to the east side of El Camino Real in the area of the Camino Vida Roble intersection. The second community facilities area is 6.6 gross acres in the area planned for La Costa Oaks adjacent to the east side of Rancho Santa Fe Road north of the future Questhaven Road (San Elijo Hills Road) intersection. The community facilities sites are intended to meet some social/human service needs and could include uses such as day care, worship, youth and senior citizen activities. The Master Plan identifies one elementary school site and one alternative elementary school site within La Costa Greens and the Carlsbad Unified School District. The primary school site is located immediately north of the Community Park on the west side of future Alicante Road. An alternative school site is located to the east of Alicante Road and north of Poinsettia Lane. The alternative site is provided in the event the City determines that the entire Alga Norte Site Irrevocable Offer of Dedication is needed for park purposes. On August 7, 2001 the City Council directed staff to initiate actions to acquire 32.9 acres of park land via an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication established by the 1996 Parks Agreement. Two additional possible permanent sites for Fire Station 6 are provided for in the master plan. Both sites in addition to the City owned site are also evaluated in the Program EIR. At this time the City has not committed to acquiring either of the sites for the permanent location of Fire Station 6. The temporary Fire Station 6 is located at 3131 Levante Street southwest of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue. Construction of or improvements to several General Plan Circulation Element Roadways are included as part of the overall development. As part of the project Poinsettia Lane east of El Camino Real will be built. The outside lanes, median improvements, curb, gutter and sidewalks along Rancho Santa Fe will also be constructed. Melrose Drive south of Rancho Santa Fe Road is also a General Plan Circulation Element Road to be constructed as a part of the Villages of La Costa project. Improvements to Alga Road and El Camino Real along the project's frontage are also planned. t BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e4 Morrow Development is requesting approval of a number of discretionary actions to permit the development of the proposed Villages of La Costa Project. The following is a list of the approvals requested: 1) General Plan Amendment. The proposed General Plan Amendment is to designate the conservation areas established by the HCP/OMSP as open space and to move the allowable residential dwelling units designated for the HCP/OMSP's "Conserved Habitat Area" into other areas designated as the "Impact Areas". The exhibit attached to the Planning Commission Resolution for the General Plan Amendment shows the proposed changes graphically. A graphic showing the existing and proposed General Plan Land Use Designations is also provided on page 3-3 of the Program BIR. The General Plan Amendment would also change the open space boundary on the General Plan's Open Space and Conservation Map to conform to the adopted HCP/OMSP, and would remove the Secondary Arterial designation of La Costa A venue, east of Camino de los Coches on the General Plan's Circulation Map. The amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map is as follows: Existing General Plan Land Use Designations: Residential Low Density (RL) Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM) Residential Medium Density (RM) Elementary School (E) Open Space (OS) Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations: Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM) Residential Medium Density (RM) Residential Medium-High Density (RMH) Planned Industrial (PI) Community Facility (CF) Elementary School (E) Open Space (OS) 2) La Costa Master Plan Amendment. An amendment to the existing La Costa Master Plan is proposed to remove the Northwest Area and the Southeast Area (including the Rancheros) from the plan. The original plan was adopted by the City in 1972 and has undergone several amendments ("A" through "O") since that time. In 1990 Amendment (0) to Master Plan 149 was prepared and adopted for the Southwest Area, Arroyo La Costa, and subsequently developed as "La Costa Valley". At the time of approval of the most recent amendment, the City directed that a revised master plan also be prepared for the remaining two future development areas. 3) Villages of La Costa Master Plan. The Villages of La Costa Master Plan will apply to the two future development areas of Master Plan 149(0). These two remaining areas are proposed to be removed from existing Master Plan 149 and be renamed and configured for development into three distinct planning villages with modified land use designations. t EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 5 (A.) The Northwest Area has been renamed La Costa Greens and consists of 660.7 gross acres and a maximum of 1,038 dwelling units. Also included in La Costa Greens are an elementary school site, public park site, community facilities site, and a 7 .9-acre business park. (B.) The northern portion of The Southeast Area, formerly known as The Rancheros has been renamed La Costa Ridge and consists of 493.1 acres with a maximum of 320 dwelling units. (C.) The southern portion of The Southeast Area has been renamed La Costa Oaks and consists of 712.6 acres with a maximum of 1,032 dwelling units. A community facilities site will also be located in The Oaks. The total number of dwelling units for the three villages is a maximum of 2,390 units on 1,866.4 acres. Approval of the Master Plan will establish the character and intensity of land use and development standards for the proposed project. The project area is presently zoned Planned Community and Chapter 21.38 requires the adoption of a master plan to guide future development. 4) Zone 10 Local Facilities Management Plan. The Growth Management Program, Title 21, Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code requires that each facilities zone have an adopted zone plan. The new Zone 10 Plan describes all public facilities requirements and sets forth the timing of installation and financing for all public facilities within La Costa Greens. 5) Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment. The proposed amendment to the existing plan is necessary to address the revised land use designations. The Local Facilities Management Plan has been updated to be consistent with the Land Uses proposed in the La Costa Ridge and La Costa Oaks as well as to update the plan to reflect development that has occurred within the zone. The amended Zone 11 Plan describes all public facilities requirements and sets forth the timing of installation and financing for all public facilities. 6) Master Tentative Tract Map for the Greens. A Master Tentative Tract Map is proposed for The Greens Village. The map proposes subdividing the area into separate lots to create the open space areas and neighborhood development area boundaries. Also included is mass grading of the development areas in addition to major infrastructure improvements such as circulation element roads, utilities and drainage improvements. Recordation of the map and construction of improvements are planned to be completed in phases identified on the map. Development of neighborhoods where individual units would be sold will require further subdivision. 7) Hillside Development Permit for La Costa Greens. Proposed grading of The Greens must be in conformance with the Hillside Development Regulations. The purpose of this permit is to review the proposed grading for conformance with the regulations. 8) El Camino Real Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit for La Costa Greens. El Camino Real has been designated as a scenic corridor and has an adopted set of standards that applies to property within certain distances of this roadway. The Special Use Permit is necessary to determine if the proposal is in conformance with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. 9) Floodplain Special Use Permit for La Costa Greens. A Floodplain Special Use Permit is required before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazards, flood-related erosion hazards or mudslide areas, as established in Section 21.110.070 of the Municipal Code. The permit is required as grading is proposed within the 100-year floodplain as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 6 10) Master Tentative Map for The Ridge & The Oaks. A single Master Tentative Tract Map is proposed for The Ridge and Oaks Villages. The map proposes subdividing the area into separate lots to create the open space areas and neighborhood development area boundaries. In addition, the map includes subdividing into residential lots Neighbor- hoods 3.8 and 3.9 of The Oaks. Also included is mass grading of the development areas and finish grading of the Neighborhood 3.8 and 3.9 lots in addition to major infrastructure improvements such as circulation element roads, utilities and drainage improvements. Recordation of the map and construction of improvements are planned to be completed in phases identified on the map. Development of the remaining neighborhoods where individual units would be sold will require further subdivision. 11) Hillside Development Permit for The Ridge & The Oaks. Proposed grading of The Ridge and The Oaks must be in conformance with the Hillside Development Regulations. The purpose of this permit is to review the proposed grading for conformance with the regulations. Because both villages are included on a single master tentative map that includes the proposed grading a single Hillside Development Permit is used to analyze the proposed grading. 12) Floodplain Special Use Permit for The Ridge & The Oaks. A Floodplain Special Use Permit is required before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazards, flood-related erosion hazards or mudslide areas, as established in Section 21.110.070 of the Municipal Code. The permit is required as grading is proposed within the 100-year floodplain as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 13) Street Right-of-Way Vacations. Several existing street right-of-way reservations within the project area would be vacated and relocated. 14) Certification of the Environmental Impact Report. A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project. The Program EIR includes an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the following issue areas: -Land Use & Community Character -Noise -Landform Alteration -Air Quality -Visual Quality & Aesthetics -Geology/Soils -Biological Resources -Hydrology, Water Quality & Drainage -Archaeological Resources -Public Facilities & Services -Paleontological Resources -Human Health and Safety Hazards -Transportation -Population and Housing Additional sections required by CEQA are also included in the Program EIR. General Plan, Zoning & Existing Land Use for Adjacent Properties The following tables provide the General Plan Land Use Designation, Zoning designation, and existing land use for property adjacent to each of the three villages. EIR 98-07/GPA 98-0l/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP l l(B.CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 200 I Pa e7 a e -a T bl I L C osta G reens Ad. lJacent L dU an ses an lpp 1ca e esumat10ns dA r bl D . General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use North OS,RLM,RL L-C Agriculture & Open Space South RMH, RM, RLM, OS RD-M, R-1, R-1-Condominums, Single 10000, RD-M-5000 Family -Detached East RM,RLM,OS L-C, P-C, OS, R-1 Agriculture, Open Space, Single Family- Detached West PI, RM, RMH, RLM, P-M, RD-M, L-C, E-Business Park, Multi- C A, RD-M-Q, C-1-Q Family Residential, Condominums, Office-Retail a e -a OS a Lge lJacen an T bl 2 L C t Rid Ad. tl d U ses an .pp 1ca e es1gna ions dA r bl D . t General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use North RMH,RM RD-M, RD-M-Q Condominums, Single Family-Detached South RMH,RLM P-C Condominiums, Single Family- Detached East RM, U, OS RD-M-Q, P-U, P-C Single Family - Detached, Meadowlark Wastewater Treatment Facility West RMH, RM, E, RLM, RD-M, R-2, OS, R-1, Condominums, OS,RL R-1-15000 Duplexes, Elementary School, Open Space, Single Family- Detached a e -a T bl 3 L C osta s l]acent Oak Ad. L dU an ses an .pp 1ca e es1gna 10ns dA r bl D . f General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use North OS, U OS, P-U Open Space, Meadowlark Wastewater Treatment Facility South RLM,RL P-C, R-1-40000 Single Family- Detached, Vacant BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 8 a e -a T bl 3 L C osta s LJacent Oak Ad' L dU an ses an ,pp 1ca e esumat10ns dA I' bl D . East RL, City of San R-1-40000, SP (City Vacant, Single Marcos -Industrial, of San Marcos), LD Family-Detached Multifamily, OS (City of Encinitas) General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use West RLM P-C Single Family- Detached Site Description The existing physical characteristics of each of the three villages will be described separately. The project site is primarily undeveloped and unimproved with the exception of several water tanks, access roads and paths, a ranch house and various public utilities. The Greens surrounds a portion of the La Costa Resort and Golf Course, but the golf course is not a part of the project site. The Greens encompasses approximately 660.7 acres located generally northeast of the intersection of Alga Road and El Camino Real. Topgraphically, The Greens is dominated by a north-south draining valley. The majority of The Greens is characterized by moderately sloping hillside terrain. Elevations range from 80 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) at the golf course boundary to 400 feet AMSL at one point along the eastern border. Thirteen habitat types occur on this area of the property with no one type covering more than 38 percent of the area. The most prominent vegetative communities within The Greens includes Diegan coastal sage scrub, southern maritime chaparral and non-native grasslands. A ranch house and several out-buildings are located east of the offsite golf course and a number of dirt roads cross the site. Numerous public utilities, a sewer pump station and SDG&E transmission lines are located on the property. The Ridge includes approximately 493.1 acres generally located southeast of El Fuerte Street and Alga Road and northwest of San Marcos Creek. The northern portion of the site is dominated by a single, roughly dome-shaped hill. South of this landform, the terrain consists of northeast- southwest trending ridgelines separated by southward draining canyons. Elevations within The Ridge range from 80 feet AMSL in the bed of San Marcos Creek to about 725 feet AMSL near an existing water reservoir in the north-central portion of the village. San Marcos Creek flows along the southerly boundary of The Ridge and contains a waterfall feature, commonly referred to as Box Canyon. Existing vegetation within the village consists primarily of coastal sage scrub, with the remainder consisting of southern mixed chaparral and disturbed habitat. Existing improvements within The Ridge include the Meadowlark Wastewater Treatment Plant within the eastern portion in addition to a public water tank located near the northern area. A dirt access road from Alga Road extends south to the water tank. A buried water line extends westward from the tank to El Fuerte Street. An SDG&E transmission line within a 200-foot easement crosses the southern part of the site. Several other dirt roads and old fence lines are present on The Ridge. The Oaks encompasses approximately 712.6 acres of largely undeveloped land located on both sides of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Topographically, the area is characterized by irregular ridge- and-canyon terrain. A tributary to Encinitas Creek is located along the southern boundary. I BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 9 Elevations range from a high of approximately 990 AMSL along the east-central property boundary to a low of approximately 285 AMSL along San Marcos Creek at the northwest boundary with The Ridge. Existing vegetation is similar to The Ridge and primarily consists of coastal sage scrub, southern mixed chaparral and disturbed habitat. The Stanley Mahr Reservoir (La Costa Dam), and the Denk Reservoir (steel water tank) are located on parcels that are not part of the project. Buried water lines, SDG&E transmission towers, access roads and remnants of at least two generations of mining activity with associated excavations and waste-fill are present on-site. Prior Actions on the Site The project site is currently subject to the requirements of the La Costa Master Plan (MP 149(0)). Master Plan 149 was adopted by the City in 1972 and has been amended several times since its initial adoption with the most recent amendment occurring in 1990. At the time Amendment "O" was approved, the City directed that a revised master plan be prepared for the remaining two future development areas. Amendment "P" was submitted for the La Costa Town Center project on August 31, 1993 but was withdrawn on January 12, 1996. The amendment was related to a proposal to change a portion of the site referred to as M.A.G. Properties from residential and open space to commercial and office. More detail regarding the La Costa Master Plan is provided in the section of this report where amendment 149(Q) is analyzed. Applicable Regulations The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances, standards and policies: ❖ Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ❖ General Plan ❖ Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan dated June 1995 ❖ La Costa Master Plan (MP 149(Q)) ❖ Planned Community (P-C) Zone, Chapter 21.38 of the Municipal Code ❖ Growth Management, Chapter 21.90 of the Municipal Code ❖ Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20 of the Municipal Code ❖ Planned Development Ordinance, Chapter 21.45 of the Municipal Code ❖ Hillside Development Regulations, Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal Code ❖ El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards ❖ Floodplain Management Regulations, Chapter 21.110 of the Municipal Code. ❖ Streets and Highways Code Section 2381, 8300 -8363 and Government Code Section 65402 (a) IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis section discusses compliance with each of these applicable regulations/policies utilizing both text and tables. The format follows the discretionary actions being requested to permit the development of the Villages of La Costa Project. --EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 10 A. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT -GPA 98-01 The existing General Plan (September 6, 1994) is not consistent with the approved HCP/OMSP (June 7, 1995), because the General Plan allocates development to areas subsequently designated as Conserved Habitat Areas by the HCP/OMSP. The Implementation Agreement for the HCP describes the need to finalize the HCP/OMSP boundaries as part of the required General Plan Amendment and the proposed project. The proposal establishes permanent boundaries for preservation of Conserved Habitat Areas and the associated boundaries for the Impact Areas ( developable areas) within each of the three villages. Therefore, an amendment to the General Plan is proposed to accomplish the following: 1) to revise open space and areas designated for development on the Land Use Map of the General Plan to be consistent with the Conserved Habitat and Impact Areas provided by the HCP/OMSP; and, 2) to shift allowable dwelling units and other development out of the Conserved Habitat Areas and into the Impact Areas designated within the HCP/OMSP. A comparison between the existing General Plan land uses and those proposed as part of the amendment are depicted on page 3-3 of the Program EIR in addition to · the exhibit attached to the Planning Commission General Plan resolution. To maintain consistency the Official Open Space and Conservation Plan is also being amended. The final part of the General Plan Amendment is to remove the Secondary Arterial designation of La Costa A venue, east of Camino de los Coches, as shown on the General Plan's Circulation Plan. La Costa Avenue is shown as a Secondary Arterial by the General Plan, entering The Oaks at its southwest comer and connecting to Rancho Santa Fe Road. The proposed General Plan Amendment would terminate La Costa Avenue's designation as a Secondary Arterial at Camino de los Coches. Open Space Boundary Adjustment One of the fundamental issues with the proposed General Plan Amendment is the preservation of open space and the adjustment of the open space boundaries. As previously mentioned the approved HCP/OMSP established the areas for preservation on the entire project area. These areas were established based on biological information independent of any project proposal. The amendment will designate the preservation areas as open space on the General Plan Land Use Map. Associated with this amendment is the shifting of allowable density from the areas to be designated as open space to areas where development can occur. In order to adjust the boundaries of any open space shown on the "Official Open Space and Conservation Map" dated September 1994 the findings listed in implementing policy C.20 of the Open Space Planning and Protection Section of the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element are required to be made. The three required findings and affirmative justification for each are listed on pages 4.1- 15 through 4.1-18 of the Villages of La Costa Program EIR, in the Planning Commission Resolution for the General Plan Amendment and follow here. (1) The proposed open space area is equal to or greater than the area depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map. Project Finding: The Official Open Space and Conservation Map defines approximately 170 acres of La Costa Greens and 242 acres of La Costa Ridge/Oaks as either "Existing/ Approved Open Space," "Constrained Open Space," or both , for a • BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(1,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 11 total of 412 acres. The proposed project designates 246 acres of The Greens and 657.3 acres of The Ridge/Oaks as Open Space, including HCP Open Space and Non- HCP Open Space, for a total of 903.3 acres. Because the proposed open space areas are greater than the areas depicted on the City's Official Open Space and Conservation Map, the proposed project is consistent with this Finding. (2) The proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or greater than that depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map. Project Finding: The proposed revision to the Official Open Space and Conservation Map would bring the City's General Plan into conformance with the approved HCP/OMSP, as well as expand the open space designation to cover 903.3 acres of the site comprised of 834.9 acres of HCP Open Space and 68.4 acres of Non-HCP Open Space. As discussed in Section 4.4, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, of the Program EIR for the Villages of La Costa, there would be a net increase ofDiegan coastal sage scrub (59.4 acres), southern maritime chaparral (12.9 acres), southern mixed chaparral (22.1 acres), grasslands (22.9 acres) and riparian habitats (14.4 acres) which would provide greater preserve value for the ability of the HCP to support several species. In addition, rare plants that would benefit from the preserve additions include the Palmer's grappling-hook ( 45 plants), Del Mar manzanita (2 plants), summer holly (2 plants), Englemann oak (lplant), California adolphia (200 plants), and ashy spike-moss (unknown number of plants). The additions to the HCP also would benefit the coastal California gnatcatcher within both The Greens and The Ridge/Oaks by adding habitat adjacent to preserved coastal sage scrub areas and by providing a relatively large patch of coastal sage scrub adjacent to an existing utility easement on the southern half of The Greens. Several additional coastal sage scrub- dependent species ( orange-throated whiptail, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, etc.) on both project sites would benefit from additions to the preserve. In addition, foraging habitat for raptor species such as the northern harrier, white-tailed kite, Cooper's hawk, burrowing owl, and golden eagle would be moderately increased within The Greens and The Ridge/Oaks. (3) The proposed adjustment to open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as shown on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map. Project Finding: As discussed in Section 4.4, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, of the Villages of La Costa Program BIR, all habitat areas proposed to be added to the HCP preserve abut existing preserve areas identified in the HCP/OMSP. Some of the additional habitat areas are large and, therefore, contribute more habitat value. The habitat areas proposed to be removed from the previously designated 1995 HCP/OMSP are small and scattered patches on the periphery of the HCP/OMSP preserve. Most patches proposed for removal are less than one-acre in size. As demonstrated in Section 4.4 of the Program BIR, no significant adverse impacts to the HCP/OMSP would occur. BIR 9s-011GPA 9s-011MP,9(Q)IMP 9s-011LFMP 101LFMP 11clcT 99-03/HDP 99-ol/sUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 12 General Plan Developable Land Use Designations and the Shift of Allowable Density The project includes the shift of allowable dwelling units and other development out of the Conserved Habitat Areas and into the Impact Areas designated within the HCP/OMSP. The major issues with this relocation of development were compatibility with existing and planned adjacent land uses, not exceeding the existing planned development potential for the properties, and compliance with the public facilities requirements and performance standards of the Growth Management Program. Under the current General Plan Land Use designations including the Growth Management control points and the Constrained Lands Ordinance, Section 21.53.230 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed within the project area would be 3,070 dwelling units. The proposed project would allow for the development of a maximum of 2,390 dwelling units, or 680 fewer units. The maximum number of units is established by the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. To establish the appropriate General Plan Land Use Designation the existing land use and lot size of adjacent properties was determined. The project places similar land uses and lot sizes along the perimeter of the project. Transitions to other lot sizes are accomplished internal to the master plan. No land use incompatibility impacts would be created by the proposed general plan land use designations of property. Compliance with Applicable General Plan Goals The General Plan is divided into eight elements. Proposed project consistency with applicable environmental goals of each of the eight elements is contained on pages 4.1-19 through page 4.1- 30 of the Villages of La Costa Program BIR. The proposed amendment is also in compliance with the additional General Plan Goals, Objectives or Policies depicted in the following table: a e -T bl 4 G enera 1 Pl C an r omp rnnce Element Goal, Objective or Policy Project Consistency Land Use Objective B.2 -Create a Proposed Open Space visual form that is pleasing to designations create large the eye, rich in variety, contiguous conservation areas reflecting environmental that are visually pleasing and values reflect the environmental value of the areas Land Use Policy C.4 -Encourage The general plan amendment clustering when it is provides for the shift of compatible with adjacent dwelling units out of the development. conservation areas resulting in a clustering of development. • EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP~9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 13 Element Land Use Land Use Land Use Circulation Housing Public Safety Table 4 -General Plan Compliance Goal, Objective or Policy Policy C.6 -Review the architecture of buildings to ensure the quality and integrity of design and enhancement of the character of each neighborhood. Policy C.8 -Provide for a sufficient diversity of land uses so that schools, parks and recreational areas, churches and neighborhood shopping centers are available in close proximity. Policy C.12 -Develop and retain open space in all categories of land use. Streets & Traffic Control Policy C.18 -Require new development to dedicate and improve all public rights-of- way for circulation facilities needed to serve development. Policy 3.6.a -A minimum of fifteen percent of all units approved for any master plan community shall be affordable to lower income-households. Airport Hazards Policy C.3 - Review development proposals in the Airport Influence Area to ensure design features are incorporated to address aircraft crash and noise hazards. Project Consistency The proposed master plan contains development standards and architectural guidelines as well as a review process to ensure that the desired level of quality is attained. The proposed land use designations and master plan provide for an elementary school site, a community park, and community facility uses. The project site is in close proximity to existing or planned commercial sites. The project includes open space for the preservation of natural resources and open space for outdoor recreation. Dedication and improvement of all circulation facilities needed for the project as well as citywide facilities identified on the circulation plan will be completed. The removal of the Secondary Arterial designation on a portion of La Costa A venue is consistent with the project traffic volumes. Two areas of the property are proposed to be designated RMH to accommodate affordable housing developments. Land uses have been sited to be compatible with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport. • BIR 98-07/GPA 98-0l/MP\9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 14 Circulation Element Amendment Removal of the Secondary Arterial designation of La Costa A venue, east of Camino de los Coches on the General Plan Circulation Map is proposed. Based on projected traffic volumes the roadway is not needed to provide a connection to a roadway shown as Melrose Drive south of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Conceptual lotting plans for The Oaks indicate that a local street will be provided to make a more circuitous connection. This will aid in controlling vehicle speeds by reducing the width of the paved road surface. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment including the revision to the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, and the Circulation Plan will create consistency between the General Plan, the HCP/OMSP, and the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. B. LA COSTA MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT-MP 149(Q) An amendment to the existing La Costa Master Plan is proposed to remove the Northwest Area and the Southeast Area (including the Rancheros) from the plan. The original plan was adopted by the City in 1972 and has undergone several amendments ("A" through "O") since that time. Amendment "P" was submitted and withdrawn. In 1990 Amendment (0) to Master Plan 149 was prepared and adopted for the Southwest Area, Arroyo La Costa, and subsequently developed as "La Costa Valley." At the time of approval of the most recent amendment, the City directed that a revised master plan also be prepared for the remaining two future development areas. This requirement was imposed as the existing plan is not up to date with current regulations and policies. The revised master plan is The Villages of La Costa Master Plan (MP 98-01). The proposed amendment to the La Costa Master Plan will delete the Northwest Area and the Southeast/Rancheros Area from the plan and have those areas included in the proposed project. The Villages of La Costa Master Plan complies with the requirements of the Planned Community Zone and properly implements the applicable General Plan provisions for the site. C. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN -MP 98-01 The project proposes renaming and reconfiguring the former Northwest and Southeast/Rancheros areas as well as modifying the land uses designated within them as part of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. The Northwest Area would be renamed La Costa Greens, consisting of 660. 7 gross acres and providing for a maximum of 1,038 residential dwelling units. The Rancheros portion of the Southeast Area would be renamed La Costa Ridge and would consist of 493.1 acres and a maximum of 320 residential dwelling units. The remaining portion of the Southeast Area would be renamed La Costa Oaks and would consist of 712.6 acres and a maximum of 1,032 residential dwelling units. In total, the maximum number of dwelling units planned for the three villages would be 2,390 units on 1,866.4 gross acres. Additional uses include a business park, elementary school site, public park, community facilities, and roadways, as well as open space and habitat preservation. Included as attachments to this report are copies of the village development plan and village development plan table for all three villages. Pursuant to Chapter 21.38 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Planned Community Zone), adoption of the master plan will establish the type and intensity of land use and the zoning and EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP-,49(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 15 development standards for the property. Table 5, Villages of La Costa Master Plan Land Use Summary, provides an acreage and land use tabulation for the master plan. T bl 5 v·n a e -1 ages o fL C a osta M aster Pl L d U S an an se ummary Land Use Gross Acreage Total Gross Acreage Residential The Greens The Ridge The Oaks Development Low Medium 311.9 146.4 327.7 786.0 Density (0-4 du/ac) Medium Density 8.6 0.0 13.8 22.4 (4-8 du/ac) Medium High 30.3 11.5 16.0 57.8 Density (8-15 du/ac) Residential 350.8 157.9 357.5 866.2 Subtotal Non-Residential Business Park 7.9 0.0 0.0 7.9 Elementary 7.2 0.0 0.0 7.2 School Public 27.2 0.0 0.0 27.2 Community Park Community 7.9 0.0 6.6 14.5 Facilities HCP Open Space 1 212.6 324.3 298.0 834.9 Non-HCP Open Space 2 33.4 10.9 24.1 68.4 Major Roads 3 13.7 0.0 26.4 40.1 Non-Residential 309.9 335.2 355.1 1000.2 Subtotal PROJECT 660.7 493.1 712.6 1866.4 TOTAL Chapter 21.38, Planned Community Zone, of the municipal code contains the requirements for the content of a Master Plan. The Villages of La Costa Master Plan contains all information required by the municipal code. The plan consists of seven chapters and appendices. The following is a general listing of the content of each chapter and the appendices: 1 Includes open space which is proposed as part of the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). 2 Includes utility corridors and manufactured slopes proposed in open space planning areas. 3 Includes Poinsettia Lane in La Costa Greens and Rancho Santa Fe Road in La Costa Oaks. BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP-,49(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 16 Chapter 1.0 -Introduction -The introduction includes information such as the organization and scope of the plan, a project description, master applications, master plan goals, and relationship to the La Costa Master Plan as well as the HCP /OMSP. Chapter 2.0-General Plan and Land Use Provisions -This chapter covers the proposed General Plan Land Use Designations, Zoning Description, legal description for the area subject to the plan, a land use summary, general provisions, and a summary of the Growth Management performance standards as they apply to the project. Chapter 3.0 -Development Review Process -Within Chapter Three the development review process is set forth. It establishes the permits required for the various uses contemplated for the neighborhoods within the Villages of La Costa. Chapter 4.0 -Master Plan Development Standards and Guidelines -Chapter 4 contains a set of standards and guidelines that apply to all three of the villages. The chapter includes requirements for grading, hillside and hilltop development, circulation standards, architecture/site planning standards, the master plan landscape concept, wall and fencing standards, signage, lighting, and screening and edge treatments. Chapter 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 -La Costa Greens. Ridge & Oaks Village Development Plan -The three villages are each covered in a separate chapter. Chapter 5 provides the village land use plan, public facilities, a phasing plan, landscape concept plan, architectural concept and development standards for the The Greens Village. Chapter 6 covers the same topics for The Ridge and Chapter 7 covers The Oaks. Chapter 8.0-Appendices-The appendices include the following information: Appendix A -Legal Descriptions Appendix B -Conceptual Grading Plans Appendix C -Conceptual Lotting Plans Appendix D -Encumbrance Exhibits Appendix E-Neighborhood Density Calculations The standards and design guidelines provided in the master plan are adequate to properly develop the project site. The standards and design guidelines will be implemented when the required development permits are submitted for each neighborhood (planning area). Master Plan Issues A number of issues were identified during the creation of the master plan. These issues and how the master plan is structured to respond to each is described in this section. Land Use Compatibility -A great deal of the project site perimeter contains existing development. In order to ensure that no compatibility problems were created in these areas, the product type and lot size minimum proposed has been selected to be close to what exists offsite adjacent to the proposed project. Transitions to other product types or lot sizes occur within the master plan development. Proposed non-residential development was selected to be compatible EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP-,49(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 17 with adjacent non-residential development. Section 4.1 of the Villages of La Costa Program EIR covers in greater detail the issue of land use compatibility at the project boundaries beginning on page 4.1-37. Circulation -The project will be constructing or making improvements to several circulation element roads as described previously in this report. For that portion of Melrose Drive (Street "C") shown south of Rancho Santa Fe Road on the General Plan Circulation Plan the right-of- way will be dedicated for a major arterial, but the improvements will be made to secondary arterial standards. This is being done, as it does not appear that the City of Encinitas will extend this roadway into the Olivenhain area. By obtaining the right-of-way for a major arterial should the City of Encinitas desire to extend the roadway in the future, and the traffic volumes warrant major arterial improvements, the necessary right-of-way will be available. Comparison of the Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Proposed to the La Costa Master Plan & Growth Management -The existing La Costa Master Plan provides for a maximum of 7,053 dwelling units. Subsequent to the adoption of the existing Master Plan, the City amended the General Plan and adopted the Growth Management Plan as a component of the General Plan. The Growth Management Plan establishes density control points for each residential General Plan land use designation. The City also adopted Municipal Code Section 21.53.230, the "Constrained Lands Ordinance," which sets criteria for the restriction of development on open space and environmentally sensitive lands. With implementation of the current General Plan, consideration of the Growth Management control points and implementation of the Constrained Lands Ordinance, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed within the project area would be 3,070. The proposed Villages of La Costa Master Plan allows for a maximum of 2,390 dwelling units, or 680 fewer units. Affordable Housing -The project is required to comply with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Chapter 21.85 of the Municipal Code. The ordinance requires that 15 percent of the total units be affordable. The project requirement is a total of 359 affordable units based on the maximum number of units allowed by the master plan. Should fewer units be approved this requirement will be less. Fewer affordable units may also be required at the discretion of the City Council for providing units with 3 or 4 bedrooms if this is desirable in satisfying the city's state-mandated affordable housing requirement as well as provisions of the Housing Element. The master plan includes two affordable housing sites both of which are planned to be developed with multi-family apartments. The first site is Neighborhood 1.15 in The Greens that will have a maximum of 180 units. The second site is Neighborhood 3.6 of The Oaks that will have 171 units. The remaining 8 units will be provided as rent restricted second dwelling units. The required Site Development Plan for the affordable units has been delayed until prior to the first final map for any individual neighborhood subdivision except Neighborhoods 3.8 and 3.9, or the first development permit for any neighborhood which does not require a final map. This is proposed because of the substantial benefit derived to the City and the region through the timely grading and ultimate completion of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Poinsettia Lane. These improvements are included on the master tentative maps which will need to be finaled to provide for the road construction. Neighborhoods 3.8 and 3.9 are included on the master tentative map for The Oaks to eliminate the need to move dirt across Rancho Santa Fe Road after it is completed as well as to minimize impacts to adjacent residential neighborhoods. • -EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 18 Community Facilites, Daycare and R.V. Storage -The master plan provides areas for community facilities and daycare uses as required by the Community Facilities Zone, Chapter 21.25 of the Municipal Code. The total required community facilities acreage is 10.08 acres. The master plan is providing 13.25 net acres and 14.5 gross acres. The daycare site is located within Area 1.2 of The Greens. Two recreational vehicle storage sites are proposed. One site is located within The Greens and the second is within The Oaks. Landscaped Parkways -The master plan proposes landscape parkways adjacent to the curb. The minimum width for the parkway is 4 ½ feet. Maintenance of the parkways will be the responsibility of the Homeowner Associations. Fire Protection Zones -One of the issues associated with the extensive amount of habitat preservation included with the project is the placement of the fire protections zones as well as the implementation of other measures to reduce the risk of wildland fire hazards. Fire Department staff have reviewed the master plan and required additional standards to address this issue. They include clarifying that in the 20 feet closest to the structure in the 60 foot fire protection zone no structures are allowed including patio trellises, arbors, fire pits, gazebos, enclosed porches and balconies. This requirement is also to be written as a separate disclosure to buyers. In addition, all fencing within the fire protection zones is to be non-combustible, specifically no wood fencing. Alga Norte Park Site/ School Site -Provision of a site for the future Alga Norte Park is subject to the requirements of the 1996 Parks Agreement between the City of Carlsbad and Real Estate Collateral Management Company (RECM). The agreement chronicles the park requirements from the various areas developed by the applicant's predecessors in title and lists the existing park credits. The Parks Agreement required the reservation of up to 32.9 acres within the Northwest portion of the Villages of La Costa as a potential future site for Alga Norte Park. Section 4.8 of the agreement requires the project applicant to include the location for the park reservation in its future planning as well as to provide for alternative development should the City determine to satisfy all or a portion of the Southeast Quadrant requirement from other property or in another manner. Pursuant to the 1996 Parks Agreement RECM has excess parkland dedication credits in the amount of 6.381 acres. The project has a requirement for 16.62 acres of parkland. When the existing credit is subtracted from the project requirement a total of 10.239 acres are required for the project. The City has the ability to purchase the park site acreage in excess of the amount required for the project at a cost of $175,000 per acre. Section 4.31 requires the City to make its determination of the final configuration of the desired site for Alga Norte Park on or before the date of approval of the first master tentative map within Local Facilities Management Zone 10. The first master tentative map for LFMP Zone 10 is proposed concurrently with the master plan. As permitted by the parks agreement the project applicant is providing for an alternative land use on part of the area that is in excess of what is required for the project. The alternative use proposed is a site for an elementary school for the Carlsbad Unified School District. This alternative would include shared parking facilities for the uses and could also include sharing of play fields. An alternative school site is proposed in Neighborhood 1.7 of The Greens. On August 7, 2001 the City Council considered a recommendation from the Recreation Department • -BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 19 to acquire the entire 32.9 acres of park land via an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication established by the 1996 Parks Agreement. The City Council directed the Recreation Department to acquire the entire 32.9 acres for park use. Prior to the City Council's action a letter was submitted by the school district commenting on both sides. Pursuant to the provisions on pages 19 and 21 of the General Plan Land Use Element the school district will be notified when a development application has been filed at which time the district will need to notify the City whether or not it wants to initiate action to proceed with acquisition of a school site in the proposed subdivision. The master plan has been conditioned to delete Area 1.4 and expand Area 1.5 to incorporate that area. The Area 1.4 designation will be left for possible use on the alternative site shown in Neighborhood 1.7. A floating school site is proposed on the General Plan for Neighborhood 1.7. Fire Station 6 Site -Two additional possible alternative sites are provided for in Neighborhood 3.6 of the master plan for Fire Station 6. A temporary station is currently located at 3131 Levante Street. The master plan provides for the development of either site through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Fiscal Impact Analysis -A fiscal impact study titled Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master Plan Amendment 149(Q) and Related Documents by Onaka Planning & Economics was prepared in conjunction with the Villages of La Costa Master Plan as required by the Planned Community Zone. The fiscal impact analysis is on file with the Planning Department. Copies have been provided to the Planning Commission. Development Standards and Guidelines -The project application was submitted on February 13, 1998. During the preparation of the standards and guidelines for the master plan city staff and the project applicant have worked to develop controls to ensure that the master plan achieves a high level of quality in the built environment, as well as a character unique in some respects to the project. The development standards and guidelines were prepared based on existing ordinances, policies and good planning principles. Attached to this report is a series of tables comparing the proposed standards and guidelines of the master plan to existing city standards. Over the past two years, Planning Department staff has been engaged in an effort resulting in a proposed amendment to the Planned Development Ordinance and City Council Policy 44 (Small Lot Architectural Guidelines). A number of the proposed standards for the ordinance and policy originated in some form with the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. A table making a comparison to the proposed amended ordinance and policy has not been included. At the time of the preparation of this report the new proposals had not been approved by the City Council. In addition, because of the extensive amount of effort and considerable time involved in the preparation of the project plans and documents it is not appropriate to expect that the Villages of La Costa would be in conformance with an ordinance and policy that was not in place during the processing of the project. D. ZONE 10 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -LFMP 10 A Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) has been prepared for Zone 10 pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Ordinance, Chapter 21.90 of the Municipal Code. No LFMP has ever been previously adopted for Zone 10. Zone 10 comprises 756.6 acres. There are six property owners within the zone. The project applicant controls 660.7 acres or just over 87 • • BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e20 percent of the land area of Zone 10. The City Council authorized Morrow Development to prepare the Zone 10 LFMP. The proposed zone plan covers the entire zone and analyzes the requirements for the eleven public facilities included within the growth management program. For each of the eleven public facilities the plan lists the required performance standard, provides a facility planning and adequacy analysis, required mitigation, and financing sources for any required mitigation. The zone will be in compliance with the required performance _standards by satisfying the general and special conditions listed in the zone plan. The impacts of the build out of The Greens Village in Local Facilities Management Zone 10 are summarized below: a e -e T bl 6 Th Gr eens LFMPZ one 10 S ummary STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE W/STANDARDS City Administration 3,609 sq. ft. Yes Librarv 1,925 sq. ft. Yes Waste Water Treatment 1,108 EDU Yes Parks 7.218 Acres Yes Drainage BasinD Yes Circulation 21,160 ADT Yes Fire Station #2 & #5 Yes Open Space NI A per Citywide Plan Yes Schools CUSD Students -K-5: 153.1; Yes 6-8: 73.1; 9-12: 97 SMUSD Students -K-5: 119; 6-8: 45; 9-12: 54 Sewer Collection System 1,108 EDU Yes Water 243,760 GPD Yes E. ZONE 11 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -LFMP 11 (B) An amendment is proposed to the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 11 to reflect the proposed changes in land use. The plan has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The proposed document is the second amendment to the Zone 11 LFMP. Amendment number 1 dated December 14, 1993 was the approval of a financing plan for Zone 11 and 12. Zone 11 includes approximately 2,252.8 gross acres. The project applicant controls approximately 1,234.4 gross acres or almost 55 percent of the land area of Zone 11. The total number of dwelling units projected for build out of the zone is 3,694. A total of 1,885 dwelling units are existing in the zone, another 319 are approved, and 1,490 future units remain to be approved and constructed. The combined total of The Ridge and The Oaks accounts for 1,352 of the remaining future units. The City Council authorized Morrow Development to prepare the Zone 11 LFMP. The proposed zone plan covers the entire zone and analyzes the requirements for the eleven public facilities included within the growth management program. For each of the eleven public facilities the plan lists the required performance standard, provides a facility planning and adequacy analysis, required mitigation, and financing EJR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP '49(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e21 sources for any required mitigation. The zone will be in compliance with the required performance standards by satisfying the general and special conditions listed in the zone plan. The impacts of the build out of The Ridge and The Oaks Villages in Local Facilities Management Zone 11 are summarized below: a e -e s an e .ge one T bl 7 Th Oak d Th Rid LFMP Z 11 S urnmary STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE W/STANDARDS City Administration 4,701 SQ. ft. Yes Library 2,507 SQ. ft. Yes Waste Water Treatment 1,352EDU Yes Parks 9.402 Acres Yes Drainage BasinD Yes Circulation 15,460 ADT Yes Fire Station #6 & #2 Yes Open Space NI A per Citywide Plan Yes Schools EUSD Students -Elem.: Yes 324.6; SDUHSD -Mid.: 291.3; High: 291.3 SMUSD Students -K-5: 105.2: 39.8-12: 48.4 Sewer Collection System 1,352 EDU Yes Water 608,510 GPD Yes F. MASTER TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE GREENS -CT 99-03 The Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20 of the Municipal Code requires that a tentative tract map be filed for the division of property into five or more lots. The applicant has filed two master tentative tract maps. One map is for The Greens Village. The second covers both The Ridge and The Oaks. Between both master tentative maps the entire area of the master plan will be subdivided. The master tentative map for The Greens would create 49 lots on 660.7 acres. Most of the lots being created correspond with the Neighborhood boundaries established in the master plan. A number of the Neighborhood Planning Areas and the Open Space Areas depicted in the master plan are comprised of multiple lots. The lots range in size from 0.4 acres to 115.9 acres in area. Also included are four lots for active recreation areas. These recreation area lots will be shared by several of the future residential neighborhoods that will be developed pursuant to Planned Development Permits. The lots are being created on the master tentative map so that the master developer can retain ownership of the recreation areas to facilitate development of the areas without relying upon the guest builder to complete them. Many of the recreation lots will be used to satisfy the active recreation area requirement of more than a single master plan neighborhood. Creating the lots with the first final map also provides more expedient delivery of the recreation facilities. Most of the developable lots will require the approval of separate tentative maps to create the residential lots within the neighborhoods. l • • EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e22 Included on the master tentative map are major infrastructure improvements and grading. The infrastructure improvements include roads such as Poinsettia Lane, Alicante Road, an extension of Estrella De Mar north of Alga Road and a westward extension of Dove Lane. Water, sewer, reclaimed water, storm drains, street lights and other utilities will also be included in the major roadways shown on the master tentative map. Many of the trails included in the master plan will also be constructed as part of this map. The master tentative map shows the final map, grading, and improvements occurring in up to four phases consistent with the phasing identified in the master plan. Proposed grading is evaluated in the following section of this report covering the Hillside Development Permit (HDP 99-01) for The Greens. As designed and conditioned the master tentative tract map complies with all city requirements, including the Subdivision Ordinance, and the State Subdivision Map Act. The project as conditioned would provide all necessary improvements and all findings required by Title 20 can be made and are contained in the Planning Commission Resolution for CT 99-03. The project is therefore consistent with Title 20, the Subdivision Ordinance. G. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE GREENS -HDP 99-01 A Hillside Development Permit is required for The Greens as the property contains slopes of 15 percent or greater and has an elevation differential greater than 15 feet. The purpose of this permit is to review the proposed development of The Greens for conformance with the Hillside Development Regulations, Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal Code. The development proposal is in conformance with the purpose and intent in addition to the other provisions of the regulations. A one sheet exhibit titled, "Hillside Deyelopment Ordinance Exhibit for La Costa Greens" has been provided to graphically depict the location and size of slopes and grades related to the Hillside Development and Design Standards listed in Section 21.95.120 of the regulations. The exhibit should be referred to when reviewing this section of the report. Development of Natural Slopes of Over Forty Percent Gradient The project's hillside slope conditions and undevelopable areas have been identified on the constraints map. Approximately 45.2 acres are comprised of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. Grading proposed on the master tentative map will encroach into 17 .3 acres of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. Of these 17.3 acres, approximately 15.8 acres would be graded for proposed development and 1.5 acres would be graded to accommodate Circulation Element roads. The proposed grading of these areas is permitted as being grading associated with a Circulation Element Road that is a permitted Exclusion per Section 21.95.130 (A)(2) or areas that do not meet all four of the criteria of Section 21.95.120 (B). Many of the areas do not equal the 10,000 square foot minimum and the remainder are slopes that do not - comprise a prominent land form feature. Volume of Grading The standards require that the volume of grading be minimized. The relative acceptability of hillside grading volume is determined as O -7,999 cubic yards per graded acre (cy/ac) is acceptable, 8,000 -10,000 cy/ac is potentially acceptable, and greater than 10,000 cy/ac is unacceptable. In The Greens the grading volume is 9,960 cy/ac after adjustments are made to BIR 98-07 /GP A 98-01/MP '49(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP I l(B'CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e23 exclude grading associated with circulation element roads and collector streets pursuant to Section 21.95.130 (A)(2). Grading volumes in the "potentially acceptable" category require justification. The development areas are constrained by the preservation of HCP area, which comprises relatively flat portions of the site. Therefore, development is limited to areas containing topography that must be graded to create flat and gently sloping development pads. In addition, the alignments of Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road are established by the City's General Plan, further constraining development and shaping its placement. In addition to these constraints, The Greens will provide a public park and school site, which require large, flat development pads that require substantial grading. Slope Height Manufactured slopes shall not be greater than 40 feet in height unless an exclusion is provided pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.95.130 or a modification is granted pursuant to Section 21.95140. Thirteen permanent manufactured slopes would exceed a height of 40 feet. Exclusions are permitted for the majority of these slopes because they meet one or more of the following: 1) Hillside areas where a circulation element roadway or a collector street must be located provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other city standards; 2) Grading volumes, slope heights and graded areas which are directly associated with circulation element roadways or collector streets, provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other City standards; or 3) Hillside areas that have unusual geotechnical or soil conditions that necessitate corrective work that may require significant amounts of grading. The remainder of the slopes qualify for a modification pursuant to Section 21.95.140 (A) as the modification will result in more open space or undisturbed area than would a strict adherence to the regulation. Contour Grading The Hillside Development Regulations require that all manufactured slopes which are greater than twenty feet in height and two hundred feet in length and which are located adjacent to or substantially visible from a circulation element road, collector street or useable public open space area shall be contour graded. The project complies with this standard with the exception of some areas along Alicante Road and Poinsettia Lane. These proposed slopes are curve-linear and contour graded where possible. The remaining slopes in these areas meet the criteria for the granting of a modification pursuant to Section 21.95.140 (A) as the proposed modification will result in significantly more open space or undisturbed area or be more aesthetically pleasing and natural appearing. Additional contouring would decrease the proposed addition of HCP open space or extend slope heights. The project also complies with or requires the neighborhood development plans to meet the remaining development standards of the Hillside Development Regulations including landscaping, hillside and hilltop architecture, slope edge building setbacks, and drainage. • -EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e24 H. EL CAMINO REAL SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE GREENS -SUP 01-04 El Camino Real is subject to a set of scenic corridor guidelines. Three neighborhoods or planning areas within the northwestern portion of The Greens are subject to the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor Guidelines. Those guidelines require the review and approval of a Special Use Permit to assure compliance with the guidelines. Future development of these areas will require approval of a Special Use Permit as buildings will be proposed at that time. Neighborhoods 1.1 through 1.3 of The Greens are subject to the development standards of Area 4 of the guidelines. The primary standard applicable to the project at the master tentative map stage is the grading limitation. The standard limits cut or fill to within 15 feet of original grade in the area applicable to the standard. The proposed grading is in conformance with this standard. I. FLOODPLAIN SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE GREENS -SUP 99-01 The Floodplain Management Regulations are included in Chapter 21.110 of the Municipal Code. The purpose of the chapter is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas. Areas of the project site and the existing golf course are located within an area designated as a special flood hazard area inundated by a 100-year flood. A 100-year flood is defined as a flood which has a one percent annual probability of being equaled or exceeded. A Special Use Permit is required to be obtained in addition to any other required permits or entitlements before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazard. Hydrology studies have been prepared for the project and reviewed by staff of the Engineering Department. The proposed grading and drainage improvements will modify the location of the 100-year flood. The after project improvements 100-year flood area will not be located within areas where structures are proposed. The necessary findings to approve the Floodplain Special Use Permit for The Greens can be made. J. MASTER TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE RIDGE & THE OAKS -CT 99-04 A single master tentative map is proposed to include The Ridge and The Oaks. The map would create 248 lots on 1,200.2 acres. Like the master tentative map for The Greens most of the lots being created correspond with the Neighborhood boundaries established in the master plan. A number of recreation area lots are also being created on this map. Neighborhoods 3.8 and 3.9 of The Oaks Villages will be completely subdivided as described in the master plan section of this report. A total of 161 residential lots are created between both neighborhoods. The proposed lots comply with the requirements of the master plan for lot area and minimum width in addition to the design standards of Title 20, Subdivisions, of the Municipal Code. A Planned Unit Development Permit is being processed concurrently with the map as one is required by the master plan because of the 6,000 square foot minimum lot size for Neighborhood 3.9. The majority of the remaining residential neighborhoods will require the approval of separate tentative maps. Mass grading and major infrastructure improvements are included on the master tentative map. The infrastructure improvements include roads such as Melrose Drive south of Rancho Santa Fe Road, partial improvements to Rancho Santa Fe Road, a part of La Costa Avenue and others. Much of Rancho Santa Fe Road will be constructed as a city capital project. Water, sewer, EIR 98-07/GPA 98-0l/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e25 reclaimed water, storm drains, street lights and other utilities will be included in the roadways shown on the master tentative map. A number of the trails included in the master plan will also be constructed as part of this map and are shown on the plan. As depicted on the master tentative map the final map, grading, and improvements may occur in up to five phases. Grading proposed on the master tentative map is evaluated in the section of this report for the Hillside Development Permit (HDP 99-02) for The Ridge and The Oaks. The master tentative map as designed and conditioned complies with all city requirements, including the Subdivision Ordinance, and the State Subdivision Map Act. The project as conditioned would provide all necessary improvements and all findings required by Title 20 can be made. The required findings are contained in the Planning Commission Resolution for CT 99-04. The project is therefore consistent with Title 20, the Subdivision Ordinance. K. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE OAKS -PUD 01-08 A Planned Unit Development Permit is required for Neighborhood 3.9 of The Oaks Village as the minimum lot size for this area pursuant to the Villages of La Costa Master Plan is 6,000 square feet. The master plan provided for Planned Unit Development Permits to be processed to create lots less than 7,500 square feet in area without including proposed floor plans, building elevations, and plotting of units. An amendment to the Planned Development Permit will be required to approve architecture and plotting for the units as well as the common recreation area improvements. Compliance with architecture and site planning as well as neighborhood special development standards of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan will be reviewed as part of the amendment. A common active recreation area lot is proposed in Neighborhood 3.9 that is greater in size than the applicable requirement. All lots have a minimum lot width of 50 feet with most being much greater than the minimum width. A common HOA lot is proposed between the residential lot lines located at the top of slope and the right-of-way of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The width of this lot is 50 feet and greater with the exception of where deceleration lanes are provided into the neighborhood on southbound Rancho Santa Fe Road. In those areas the HOA lot narrows to a minimum width of 40 feet. Portions of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road ( old alignment) adjacent to the neighborhood will be removed leaving a 10-foot wide section to be used as a trail. The remaining right-of -way width will be landscaped. L. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE RIDGE & THE OAKS -HDP 99- 02 A Hillside Development Permit is required for The Ridge & The Oaks as the property also contains slopes of 15 percent and greater and has an elevation differential greater than 15 feet. The Hillside Development Permit is needed to review the proposed development shown on the master tentative map for The Ridge and The Oaks for conformance with the Hillside Development Regulations, Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal Code. The proposed development is in conformance with the purpose and intent in addition to the regulations contained within the Municipal Code. A single sheet exhibit titled "Hillside Development Ordinance Exhibit Villages of La Costa" prepared by Hunsaker & Associates has been provided to graphically depict the items related to compliance with the Hillside Development and Design Standards listed in Section 21.95.120 of the Municipal Code. The exhibit should be referred to for assistance when reviewing this section of the report. ' --EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e26 Development of Natural Slopes Over Forty Percent Gradient Depicted on the constraints map for The Ridge and The Oaks are the hillside slope conditions and undevelopable areas. Approximately 187.4 acres of The Ridge and The Oaks are comprised of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. Grading proposed on the master tentative map will encroach into 10.1 acres of natural slopes having gradients above 40 percent. Of these 10.1 acres, 8.6 acres would be impacted by development and 1.5 acres would be impacted by Circulation Element roads. The proposed grading of these areas is permitted as being grading associated with a circulation element road that is a permitted Exclusion per section 21.95.130 (A)(2) or areas that do not meet all four of the criteria of Section 21.95.120(B) particularly that they do not comprise a prominent landform feature. Volume of Grading One of the standards of the Hillside Development Regulations is directed at minimizing the volume of grading proposed. The relative acceptability of hillside grading volume is determined as 0-7,999 cubic yards per graded acre (cy/ac) is acceptable, 8,000-10,000 cy/ac is potentially acceptable and greater than 10,000 cy/ac is unacceptable. In The Ridge and The Oaks the grading volume is 8,950 cy/ac after adjustments are made to exclude grading associated with circulation element roads and collector streets pursuant to Section 21.95.130 (A)(2). Grading volumes in the "potentially acceptable" category require justification. Several factors make these volumes acceptable under the circumstances. First, the large total acreage of biologically significant located natural open space for large preserve areas and corridor linkages occupied some of the flatter terrain and forced development into steeper areas resulting in more grading. Second, alignments and grades for major circulation element roads such as Rancho Santa Fe Road are generally fixed, thus constraining available development areas, dictating internal street elevations and alignments and thereby constraining developable areas. Slope Height Manufactured slopes shall not be greater than 40 feet in height unless an exclusion is provided pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.95.130 or a modification is granted pursuant to Section 21.95140. Eleven permanent manufactured slopes in The Ridge and The Oaks would exceed a height of 40 feet. Exclusions are permitted for the majority of these slopes because they meet one or more of the following: 1) Hillside areas where a circulation element roadway or a collector street must be located provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other city standards; 2) Grading volumes, slope heights and graded areas which are directly associated with circulation element roadways or collector streets, provided that the proposed alignment(s) are environmentally preferred and comply with all other City standards; or 3) Hillside areas that have unusual geotechnical or soil conditions that necessitate corrective work that may require significant amounts of grading. The remainder of the slopes qualify for a modification pursuant to Section 21.95.140 (A) as the modification will result in more open space or undisturbed area than would a strict adherence to the regulation. This is particularly applicable for the slopes adjacent to proposed open space. ., EIR 98-07/GPA 98-0l/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e27 Contour Grading The Hillside Development Regulations require that all manufactured slopes which are greater than twenty feet in height and two hundred feet in length and which are located adjacent to or substantially visible :from a circulation element road, collector street or useable public open space area shall be contour graded. The project complies with this standard with the exception of areas adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road where the roadway goes through the HCP preserve area. The remaining areas are curve-linear and contour graded. The Rancho Santa Fe Road slopes adjacent to the HCP Preserve Areas meet the criteria for the granting of a modification pursuant to Section 21.95.140 (A) as the proposed modification will result in significantly more open space or undisturbed area or be more aesthetically pleasing and natural appearing. Additional contouring would extend into HCP open space and extend slope heights. The project also complies with or requires the neighborhood development plans to meet the remaining development standards of the Hillside Development Regulations including landscaping, hillside and hilltop architecture, slope edge building setbacks, and drainage. M. FLOODPLAIN SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE RIDGE & THE OAKS -SUP 01- 03 The Floodplain Management Regulations are included in Chapter 21.110 of the Municipal Code. The purpose of the chapter is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas. Areas of the project site adjacent to San Marcos Creek are located within an area designated as a special flood hazard area inundated by a 100-year flood. A 100-year flood is defined as a flood which has a one percent annual probability of being equaled or exceeded. A Special Use Permit is required to be obtained in addition to any other required permits or entitlements before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazard. The only development area partially within the limits of the 100-year flood is the southeast comer of Neighborhood 2.6 of The Ridge. Hydrology studies have been prepared for the project and reviewed by staff of the Engineering Department. The proposed grading and drainage improvements will modify the location of the 100-year flood. The after project improvements 100-year flood area will not be located within areas where structures are proposed. The necessary findings to approve the Floodplain Special Use Permit for The Ridge and The Oaks can be made. N. STREETRIGHT-OF-WAYVACATIONS There are several existing street right-of-way reservations located within the project that would be vacated and relocated. In The Greens, the existing Poinsettia Lane right-of-way would be vacated and relocated approximately 100 feet north of its existing planned alignment. Street vacations are also required for the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Avenue intersection and the Rancho Santa Fe/Questhaven intersection realignment with The Ridge and The Oaks. A small portion of Corintia Street west of Xana Way will be vacated as a result of the proposed gated private streets for Neighborhoods 2.1 through 2.5 of The Ridge. Lastly, as part of the proposed project or the City Rancho Santa Fe Road project, the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road truck by- pass street right-of-way would be vacated. Construction of the new Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment is being undertaken as a separate project by the City and was previously evaluated in BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP ll(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e28 the Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR (SCH No. 90010850). This separate project was approved by the City on June 2, 1992. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT-EIR 98-07 A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The EIR addresses the environmental impacts associated with all discretionary applications for the proposed project including ultimate buildout of the entire project. To determine the areas of potential impact city staff prepared an initial study and issued a Notice of Preparation (''NOP") on December 23, 1998, distributing it to all Responsible and Trustee Agencies, as well as other agencies and members of the public. A number of written responses were received and city staff scheduled two separate public scoping meeting sessions in order to increase opportunities for public input. Notices of the scoping meeting were sent to all property owners within a 600-foot radius of the project boundaries as well as being published in the newspaper. The two public scoping sessions took place June 30, 1999 and July 14, 1999 at the Public Safety Center. At the scoping sessions, the public was invited to comment on the scope and content of the EIR. Approximately 155 people signed in at the scoping sessions and comments were received and considered in both verbal and written form. After consideration of all of the foregoing city staff developed a detailed scope of work for the EIR. The EIR analyzed the following areas of potential environmental impact: 1) Land Use and Community Character 2) Landform Alteration 3) Visual Quality 4) Biological Resources 5) Archaeological Resources 6) Paleontological Resources 7) Transportation 8) Noise 9) Air Quality 10) Geology/Soils 11) Hydrology, Water Quality and Drainage 12) Public Facilities and Services 13) Human Health and Safety Hazards 14) Population and Housing Additionally, the Draft EIR includes other sections required by CEQA such as an Executive Summary, Project Description, Cumulative Effects, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, Growth Inducing Effects and Alternatives. On January 25, 2001, the Draft Program EIR was published and the City notified interested Responsible and Trustee Agencies, as well as other interested agencies. Approximately 2,985 "Notice(s) of Completion of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Villages of EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 1 l(B,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e29 La Costa Project" were sent to all members of the public who had signed the interested party list at the scoping sessions or otherwise requested notification, as well as to all property owners within 600 feet of the proposed project based on the most recent tax assessor's rolls. The ''Notice of Completion" commenced an initial 45 day public review and comment period initially expiring March 12, 2001. On February 8, 2001, at the request of a member of the public, the City extended the public review and comment period to a total of 60 days, expiring March 26, 2001 in order to give the public additional opportunity to review and comment in writing. The "Notice of Completion" advised that the Draft Program EIR was available for review at four locations: the City of Carlsbad Planning Department; the City Clerk's Office; the Carlsbad Main Public Library and the Georgina Cole Public Library. Complete copies were also available for purchase, with or without the Appendices, through the Planning Department. The City established the cost of purchased copies at less than the actual reproduction cost. The analysis contained in the EIR concluded that all significant impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance with the exception of landform alteration ( direct), visual quality/aesthetics (cumulative), transportation (cumulative), noise (cumulative), air quality (cumulative) and hydrology/water quality/drainage (cumulative), which would be considered cumulatively significant and unmitigatible. Direct impacts, also referred to as primary effects, are those caused by the project and that occur at the same time and place. In contrast cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact of several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other, closely related past, present, or reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects. The cumulative impacts all arise from the marginal contribution the proposed project will make, when combined with the impacts from existing and other future projects, to pre- existing conditions that fail to meet applicable standards currently. A total of 50 comment letters were submitted prior to the close of the review period. Responses were prepared for each of the 50 letters and mailed to the commentor on July 16, 2001. The response transmittal letter also provided notice of the availability of the Final Program EIR. Included as a part of the Final Program EIR is a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP is also attached to the Planning Commission Resolution for the EIR. Under CEQA, before a project which is determined to have significant, unmitigated environmental effects can be approved, the public agency must consider and adopt a "statement of overriding considerations" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15043 and 15093. As the primary purpose of CEQA is to fully inform the decision makers and the public as to the environmental effects of a proposed project and to include feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce any such adverse effects below a level of significance, CEQA nonetheless recognizes and authorizes the approval of projects where not all adverse impacts can be fully lessened or avoided. However, the agency must explain and justify its conclusion to approve such a project through the statement of overriding considerations setting forth the Proposed Project's general social, economic, policy or other public benefits which support the agency's informed conclusion to approve the project. The CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations are attached to the Planning Commission Resolution for the EIR. .. BIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(1,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03-VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pae 30 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5010 (BIR 98-07) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5011 (GPA 98-01) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5012 (MP 149(Q)) 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5013 (MP 98-01) 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5014 (LFMP 10) 6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5015 (LFMP 1 l(B) 7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5016 (CT 99-03) 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5017 (HDP 99-01) 9. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5018 (SUP 01-04) 10. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5019 (SUP 99-01) 11. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5020 (CT 99-04) 12. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5021 (PUD 01-08) 13. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5022 (HDP 99-02) 14. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5023 (SUP 01-03) 15. Location Map 16. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form 17. Disclosure Statement 18. Village Development Plans & Tables 19. 8 ½" x 11" Tentative Map Exhibits 20. Development Standards Comparison Tables 21. Final Program BIR for the Villages of La Costa, dated July 16, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 22. La Costa Master Plan Amendment MP 149(Q) (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department 23. Villages of La Costa Master Plan, dated December 2000 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 24. Zone 10 Local Facilities Management Plan, dated June 2000 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 25. Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan, dated June 2000 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 26. Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master Plan Amendment 149(Q) and Related Documents, dated December 19, 2000 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 27. Master Tentative Map for The Greens -Full Size Exhibits "A" -"DDD", dated August 29, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 28. Hillside Development Ordinance Exhibit for La Costa Greens -Full Size Exhibit "EBE", dated August 29, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 29. Master Tentative Map for The Ridge & The Oaks -Full Size Exhibits "FFF" - "SSSS", dated August 29, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) 30. Hillside Development Ordinance Exhibit for The Ridge & The Oaks -Full Size Exhibit "TTTT", dated August 29, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP,9(Q)/MP 98-01/LFMP 10/LFMP 11(,CT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 -VILLAGES OF LA COSTA August 29, 2001 Pa e 31 31. Landscape Concept Plan for The Villages of La Costa -Full Size Exhibits "UUUU" -"YYYY", dated August 29, 2001 (previously distributed; copy on file in the Planning Department) DN:cs VILLAGES OF LA COSTA EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(Q)/MP 98-01/ LFMP 10/LFMP 11 (B)/CT 99-03/HDP 99- 01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/ PUD 01-08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 'I -CITY OF CARLSBAD • GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMP ACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: The Villages of La Costa-EIR 98-07/GPA 98-01/MP 149(O)/MP 98- 01/LFMPlO/LFMP ll(B)ICT 99-03/HDP 99-01/SUP 01-04/SUP 99-01/CT 99-04/PUD 01- 08/HDP 99-02/SUP 01-03 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 10 & 11 GENERAL PLAN: RLM, RM, RMH, PI CF E andOS ZONING: Planned Community (P-C) & Special Flood Hazard Area DEVELOPER'S NAME: ~M_o_rr_o_w_D_ev_e_lo ...... p~m_e_n_t _______________ _ ADDRESS: 1903 Wright Place, Suite 180, Carlsbad, CA 92008 PHONE NO.: (760) 929-2701 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 213-030-11, 215-021-07, 215-030-06, 215-030-14, 215-031-08, 215-052-15, 215-061-01, 215-061-09, 215-480-02, 222-151-80, 222-470-23 & 25, 223- 010-12, 18, 19, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 223-011-02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 223-021-08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 223-050-49 51 52 53 54 59 65 67 69 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 1,866.4 AC., 2,390 DU, 137,670 SQ. FT. of Planned Industrial, Community Facilities, Community Park & Elementary School ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: ________________ _ A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage= 8 310 Library: Demand in Square Footage= 4432 Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 2 460 Park: Demand in Acreage = 16.62 Drainage: Demand in CFS = NIA Identify Drainage Basin= =D _____ _ (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) Circulation: Demand in ADT = 36 620 (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) Fire: Open Space: Schools: (Demands to be determined by staff) Sewer: Served by Fire Station No. = _2~5~&~6 ___ _ Acreage Provided= ~N~/A-=-------- 1, 641. 8 students Demands in EDU 2 460 Identify Sub Basin= N=--c;...:/A-=-------- (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) Water: Demand in GPD = 852 270 L. The project is 680 units below the existing Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. --City of Carlsbad ■ :.f fij ,i,ii,i·I •14-Ei, I, ,f§ ,, I DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information must be disclosed: 1. APPLICANT List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Morrow Development, Inc. PO Box 9000-685 Carlsbad, CA 92018-9000 2. OWNER List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Real Estate Collateral Management Inc. -----------------450 §-street, Suite 620 San Diego, CA 92101 · 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names and addresses of all individuals owning more than 1 0 % of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Freqerick M. Arbuckle, Jr. Morrow Development, Inc. P.O. Box 9000-685 Carlsbaa, CA 92Ql8 9QQQ 4. If any person identified pursuant to ( 1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the trust. N/A 2075 Las Palmas Dr.• Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 ·• (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-0894 5. Have you had me than $250 worth of business tra-ted with any member of City staff,· Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve { 1 2) months? D Yes I:xl No If yes, please indicate person(s): ___________ _ Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. • Real Estate Collateral Management Morrow Development, Inc. Print or type name of owner company Print or type name of applicant •,•I-.. ,.; •• '"· l· Disclosure Statement 1 0/96 Page 2 of 2 --- ..... ' il'llll'lr . * Alternative School Location. See Fig. 5-1a NOTE: THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS LARGER IN EACH NEIGHBORHOOD THAN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES SHOWN ABOVE. . ff f/ LA COSTA 1'7'f VILLAGES OF --7 I I I I '------...- THE GREENS DEVELOPMENT PLAN Page 5-3 VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN NEIGHBORHOOD/ OPEN AREA REFERENCE ~-( " . . ,, ., .. . ,, ,. '' . " I.I 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 I.II 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 I.A I.B I.C I.D 1.E JHA\VLC MP LA COST A GREENS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXHIBIT 5-A VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE LA COSTA GREENS MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCESS LAND USE ZONING GROSS DESIGNATION ACRES Maximum Allowable Development Type Dwelling Units ., ,_,' . " .. .. . .. •:, •, ,>,, .. . .. < {' .. ., ' . ' ... '< • . ,, ~ , . . . Pl P-M 7.9 -Planned Industrial, 137,650 Sq. Ft. C-F C-F 7.9 -Community Facilities, 6.85 Net Acres RM RD-M 8.6 44 Townhomes/SFD 3,500 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size E O-S 7.2 -Elementary School OS O-S 27.2 -Community Park RLM R-1 37.9 96 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 42.1 127 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 45.8 87 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 25.9 74 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 40.0 64 SFD -9,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 14.5 34 SFD-5,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 30.4 38 SFD -11,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 12.7 32 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 22.7 59 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RMH RD-M 14.3 180 Multiple Family (Affordable Housing) RMH RD-M 16.0 96 Townhomes/SFD 3,500 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size RLM R-1 39.9 107 SFD -4,500 Sq. Ft. Min. Lot Size OS O-S 124.4 -IICP/Open Space OS O-S 14.7 -IICP/Open Space OS O-S 36.4 -IIC'P/Open Space OS O-S 30.6 -HCP/Open Space OS O-S 3.4 -HCP/Open Space 5-4 December, 2000 - - VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN NEIGIIBORIIOOD/ LA COST A GREENS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXHIBIT 5-A VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE LA COST A GREENS LAND USE GROSS MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCESS OPEN AREA DESIGNATION ZONING ACRES Maximum Allowable REFERENCE Development Type Dwelling Units ,,,,>' "" ... ', " ..... , • .. ' ,'" ', , . : .. ... .. '"· >, ','' V• '\ • '• . , . •' .. . :· ·:: .. ,, ' ,, .,'" .. ~, ' ' '·\. ' ,,,,' '..: .. .. ... . . •:, , . ·i:, -,, , , l.F OS O-S 22.4 -HCP/Open Space l.G OS O-S 4.5 -Utility Corridor/Open Space 1.H OS O-S 3.1 ---Utility Corridor/Open Space I.I OS O-S 6.5 ---HCP/Open Space Circulation Element Roadways --13.7 -Circulation Element Roadways <,, , ., . . ~ . ' ' ... ':,•• ; ... ,',. ... '. ,'",' ,, ... .. .. .. ' •, : ., ... ,, VILLAGE TOTALS: 660.7 1,038 5-5 JHA\VLC MP Decemher, 2000 ... ,•, .. , . - ., - ' \ ?~@. HCP LOCATED WITHIN ~~ NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES NOTE: THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS LARGER IN EACH NEIGHBORHOOD THAN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES SHOWN ABOVE. /7f VILLAGES OF VI/ LACOSTA - • • ' ~°'.: •• I THEOAKS . :. --DEVELOPMENT AREA THE RIDGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Page 6-3 VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN LA COST A RIDGE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXHIBIT 6-A VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE LA COSTA RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD/ OPEN AREA LAND USE REFERENCE DESIGNATION ZONING " 2.1 RLM R-1 2.2 RLM R-1 2.3 RLM R-1 2.4 RLM R-1 2.5 RLM R-1 2.6 RMH RD-M . 2.A OS O-S 2.B OS O-S VILLAGE TOTALS: 1 Neighborhood 2.1 includes 16.1 acres of HCP open space. 2 Neighborhood 2.2 includes 8.1 acres of HCP open space. 3 Neighborhood 2.3 includes 1.2 acres of HCP open space. 4 Neighborhood 2.5 includes 9.8 acres of HCP open space. MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCESS Maximum Allowable GROSS ACRES Dwelling Units Development Type ' 49.41 55 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size/ HCP 37.52 38 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size/ HCP 41.03 68 SFD -10,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size/ HCP 22.3 35 SFD-I 0,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 40.44 66 SFD -6.000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size/ HCP 11.5 58 Townhomes/Small Lot Single Family Units 284.55 -HCP/Open Space 6.5 -HCP Open Space 493.t 320 5 Neighborhood 2.A includes 282.6 acres of HCP open space and 1.9 acres of Non-HCP open space to accommodate a sewer easement and service road. 6-4 JHA\VLC MP December, 2000 - - ~ GREENBELT/ ~ DRAINAGE CORRIDOR * ALTERNATIVE FIRE STATION LOCATIONS NOTE: THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS LARGER IN EACH NEIGHBORHOOD THAN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES SHOWN ABOVE. . Vf/ LA COSTA 'f' VILLAGES OF \_) 3.15 h.c ¢J90 i~ \\ "~ . ., ~ - 3.15 1fr.J¥:· THE OAKS DEVELOPMENT PLAN Page 7-3 VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN NEIGHBORHOOD/ LA COSTA OAKS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXHIBIT 7-A VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE LA COSTA OAKS LAND USE OPEN AREA DESIGNATION ZONING GROSS ACRES MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCESS Maximum Allowable Development Type Dwellinl! Units :::,_ -: \:' : ,:,::,, )(J:,;t'--~,--'"':~;_::~ )\ ~:--~:--~ J":;: ;rt'>::'•,_:~;._\❖ 3'" (-~,~<':~:~;~3-_,, ~-/~/_:r ~\,;•'.:_ ::\•< ;\'!~--/)' ,;;>,_ :, <•: ,{'; S -~-:,, \ ~;}, ', ;,' ~-',f-' \ ~--~~: --~ _.;;~: ::,,,.._ A>' •:, '," : -_~, < ,: ~:~ ,,/} ~~:Av-~:",\,",)<~\~: ~\: _:-~_-j7 3.1 RLM R-1 27.9 76 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.2 CF C-F 6.6 -Community Facilities 3.3 RLM R-1 46.6 138 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.4 RLM R-1 14.5 45 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.5 RLM R-1 13.9 46 SFD -5,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.6 RMH RD-M 16.0 171 Multi-Family (Affordable Housing)m. 3.7 RM RD-M 13.8 45 Townhomes/Small Lot 3.8 RLM R-1 26.4 74 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.9 RLM R-1 32.0 88 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.10 RLM R-1 16.4 36 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.11 RLM R-1 22.5 53 SFD -6,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.12 RLM R-1 15.4 27 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.13 RLM R-1 37.8 62 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.14 RLM R-1 29.4 66 SFD -I 0,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.15 RLM R-1 44.9 105 SFD -7,500 Sq. Ft. Minimum Lot Size 3.A O/S O-S 116.5 -HCP Open Space 3.B O/S O-S 177.6 -HCP Open Space 3.C O/S O-S 9.5 -Utility Corridor 3.D O/S O-S 6.0 -Open Space 3.E O/S O-S 12.5 -Open Space Circulation Element Roadways --26.4 -Major Roadways t ~--'.:, -❖~; ;:;J,.,: t :,,:/_~.,_--·-._::'-';.~:.: ::-~:/~< ,,,.,Y~ ,, ;_:_r, ' .. :·", ,':, ' ,_ ,_,--., f _, __ .,'/; ,:·,r---:--;;;,_;;:;~~~ --❖• :~·:-11,:f t: ~1-1"/-l: ' ::✓ ~-, ,:;;~<';:, ::· ,,_/ :;'i,.,, f<; ;t")-:' :) , ·, .'• i · , :,, ~ -'J} ~-k,. -ix~:,:•:" :,,(\,' :·:;" '!'. >, ~;~--, ':,' _, ,,,_ ~~-:\[, -,-'i:/',,~,; (,. '-:--' , ; J.,, VILLAGE TOTALS: 712.6 1,032 (I) To obtain net developable acres, all of the I 00 percent constrained areas and one-half of the areas having 25-40 percent slopes are subtracted from the gross acreage figure. (2) An additional eight units will be provided as rent restricted second dwelling units at locations to be selected during the site planning process. 7-4 JHA\VLCMP December. 2000 - - I / i I \ SCALE; NONE 7 ~ --7 I I I I I L __ ACHMENT 19 lM. COMPOSITE OF LA COSTA GREENS 9 ' I PREPARED BY: C~~~TS ~900 Pa.teur Court. Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 760-931-nOO Fox: 760-931-8680 odoy0odoyeon:sultonts.com Ci1al EngiM«in9 Plonning Processing Surveying lfref: 9602111P, 9602GRD C:\J08S\961002\9602TM\9602208.DWG 7-16-01 5:37:16 pm f OS LOT234 OS LOT200 OS LOT234 OS LOT199 Villages of La Costa Oaks and Ridge OS LOT 177 0 ,__ ...,......-.-LOT NUMBERS OSLOT196/ I (TYPICAL) PLANNING 10179 Huennekens Street ENGINEERING San Diego, Ca 92121 SURVEYING PH(858)558-4S00· FX(858)558·1414 c:i ._ ____________________ ,..;;;; _______ ..... _...,._....., ___ """"""' ____ ...,. ___________________ t_,~s:: ....ii R•\0071\8.Pln\007lxl35 8,5 x 11 Lot Exhibit-for Cii;y,ciwg[ 0812]Jul-18-2001•09•3..:.. Standard Front Yard Setback Setback rear yard Side Yards ■ ■ ■ AA.. TTACHMENT 20 -COMPARISON OF R-1 ORDINAI'I~ VS. VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLA~ Existing Ordinance I \ 'LC Master Plan I Justification 20' minimum ■ 15· minimum average 20· The reduct10n 111 setback from by neighborhood to 20· min. to 15· min.\\' a 20· To any part of habitable area average. recognizes the need to structure provide variety to the ■ Calculate first by lot then Calculate to nearest streetscape. This standard will point by average of eliminate the ·walling· effect neighborhood where every unit is set at the II Lot: average by building minimum front yard setback. planes (having a The reduction in setback also minimum of I 00 SF) to promotes the use of alternative property line design layouts for garages if setback is 15' for without impacting rear yard 0 areas. more then 33% of frontage then whole lot is deemed at 15' setback 0 if setback is 15' for less than 33% frontage than average of all planes used. Calculate neighborhood Twice side yard Varies by neighborhood The Master Plan defines the minimum dimension for rear yards within the individual neighborhood sections. This approach takes into account varying unit types and neighborhood characteristics. The minimum requirements set forth in each neighborhood section are consistent with the existing ordinance. ■ 10% width each side ■ 20% lot width of the The proposed requirement Max 10' minimum minimum neighborhood provides for flexibility to ■ distribute the required setback 5' each side lot size for lots over 60' wide for site planning consistent with ■ Limited flexibility in the standards and guidelines ■ Max 20' minimum 5' established in the Master Plan. modifying side yard sizes subject to each side The revised setback requirement special ■ Flexibility to distribute will provide a non-uniform circumstances and setback between both side separation between units thereby Planning Director yards while preserving creating interest and variation in Approval minimum of 5 ft. the streetscape. It allows ■ Comer street side -■ 5' each side yard end of distribution of the yard requirement in excess of 5' from Minimum 10 feet cul-de-sac. one side to the other in order to ■ A round or octagonal maximize separation. The Page 1 of 8 -COMPARISON OF R-1 0RDINA1'-. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAI'\ Standard Existing Ordinance I VLC Master Plan I Justification entry tower may encroach aggregate side yard requirement 2' into setback for max. has not changed from the 8', roof eaves may add 1 · existing ordmance. to the encroachment and shall be located within the larger side yard ■ Comer street side setback -10 feet min. Placement of Addresses accessory Per Rl code Consistent with existing Buildings structures ordinance Second ■ Admin permit Per Per 21.10.015 and shall also Consistent with existing Dwelling 21.10.015 comply with 21.85 if units are ordinance Units provided as inclusionary housing Minimum ■ 7500 square feet 7500 square feet Consistent with existing Lot area ordinance Lot Width ■ 7,500 SF up to Lot widths varies from 60' to The reduction in lot widths for 10,000 SF: 60' 70' those lots in excess of 10,000 sf ■ 7,500 SF: 60' ft is due to the topography of the ■ 10,000 SF to 20,000_ project area and the SF: 75' ■ 9,000 SF: 70' implementation of the ■ 20,000 SF & more ■ 10,000 SF: 70' HCP/OMSP to preserve 80' sensitive habitats. ■ 11,000 SF: 70' Resident ■ 2 car garage with ■ 2-car garage with 20 ft by Consistent with existing Parking 20'by 20' interior 20 ft interior ordinance measurement measurement. ■ Alternative: two 12 ft. x 20 ft. one car garages; other 3 car options as outlined Street ■ No requirement ■ 40 ft; 2 lanes of parking The proposed street width is Width, consistent with current Parkways, ■ 5 ft non-contiguous engineering standards. The Trees sidewalk on both sides. proposed improvements include ■ Landscaped Parkway a 5' non-contiguous sidewalk with a curb adjacent 4½' landscape parkway. The effect of this proposal is that land currently appearing as a front yard setback area is relocated as a landscaped parkway to separate the vehicular and pedestrian traffic while maintaining the same distance from the unit to curb. Page 2 of 8 -COMPARISON OF R-1 0RDINAI\. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAI\' Standard Existing Ordinance I VLC Master Plan I Justification Building 30 ft. with roof pitch 30 feet with roof pitch greater Consistent with ex1stmg Height greater than 3: 12, or than 3:12 ordinance 24 ft with roof pitch less than 3: 12 for 1 ots under 20,000 SF 35 ft. or three stories on lots greater than 20,000 SF with min 3:12 roof pitch Building 40% of gross lot area. ■ 2 story 40% net pad area The increased lot coverage for coverage Coverage includes 1 story 50% net pad area single-story units provides the exterior stairways, ■ flexibility necessary to arcades, bridges ■ Coverage excludes implement the standards and permanent structural covered porches; guidelines in the Master Plan for elements ie balconies, overhanging balconies alternative garage designs and oriel windows, garages, less than 8 '; and porte fa9ade articulation. Proposed lot covered carports. cocheres coverage is based on the net pad area. Garage ■ 20 ft ■ 20 ft where garage faces The Master Plan is proposing setbacks street additional provisions for garage ■ 2 car with minimum designs to encourage the living dimension of ■ 15 ft side-loaded garage area of the dwelling unit rather 20'x20' ■ Requires a mix of 2,3 and than the garage to be the ■ No restriction on 2-door garages, offset. prominent feature to the street. number of three car The revised standard is also ■ 3-car garages fronting the garages fronting the street are permitted on proposed to discourage front street. building facades with 3 car 25% of the lots garages in a row facing the ■ An additional 25% of the street. units may have 3-car garages fronting the street provided that the garages do not exceed 50% of the units' frontage ■ Three car garage shall have a plane change of min. 18" ■ Garage setback is from face of door to R.O.W. or sidewalk and excludes projections ■ Vary types of garage layouts that may include: side loaded; split with one portion side loaded; split w/ house between; Page 3 of 8 -COMPARISON OF R-1 0RDINAl\. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN Standard Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan Justification tandem; recessed 6 · ' behind house faqade: and deeply recessed on back half of lot. Allowable Encroachments ■ Non-habitable porches up These features proYide encroach-permitted pursuant to to 5' wide with 10' additional building articulation. ments Zoning Ordinance minimum setback. create a stronger relationship Section 21.46.120: with the street and are consistent 2 ft. encroachment ■ Non-habitable balconies with the pedestrian oriented allows for listed items up to 6' wide with 10' goals of the Master Plan. minimum setback. Front None ■ 25% of homes must have See comment above. Porches, porch 5 ft. deep across Open Court-33% of front of home or a yards, balcony or a courtyard, Balconies whichever is consistent with the architectural style. ■ Minimum setback 10 ft. ■ Incorporate a variety of railings/ low walls ■ Vary roof element over porch Single-story None ■ For neighborhoods on This standard is proposed to Units ridgelines/hillsides, as reduce the overall building mass identified in the Master visible on ridgelines and hilltops Plan, which are visible from circulation element from a circulation roadways and lessen the visual element roadway, at least impact of residential 20% of the units shall be development along these areas. single-story. Design 2 car garage with See Following Table See the attached table for restrictions 20'x20' minimum Requirements apply to lots additional design requirements dimension 7,500 SF and greater in for units developed on lots architecturally integrated addition to small lots greater than 7,500 SF. with the dwelling unit exterior Dwelling units shall have permanent foundation Exterior siding materials shall be stucco, masonry, wood or brick Page 4 of 8 Standard -COMPARISON OF R-1 0RDINAN. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN Existing Ordinance unless alternative material approved by the land use planning manager All roofs shall have a pitch of at least 3 inches in 20 inches unless approved by land use planning manager. No roof shall be made of corrugated, extruded or stamped metal. All dwelling units shall have a minimum width of twenty feet. VLC Master Plan Justification Page 5 of 8 -COMPARISON OF R-1 0RDINA.l\. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN ADDITIONAL CRITERIA VLC MP 7500 sq. ft. & Greater lots Type and number of Units / Restriction 3 -two story units in a row with less than 15' One home of 3 must have smgle story edge between homes min. 10' deep on one side max. platelme 15 · 3 -two story units in a row with 15 to 20' Same as above except min 5' deep between homes Neighborhood Requirement 33% homes must have min. 3' deep single story element on front (40% width). Porches, balconies, porte cochere count. -Neighborhood Requirement Combination of 1 & 2 story on lots over 5,000 SF Neighborhood Requirement -Two Story Must include some single story features Homes Neighborhood Requirement-Floor Plan Min. 3 Floor Plans per Neighborhood Neighborhood Requirement -Front Building • 50% homes must have 18" offset planes Planes with min. 10' between front and rear planes. • Each plane is 30 SF minimum . • 3 planes for lots under 45' wide • 4 planes for lots over 45' wide • Number of planes maybe reduced to 2 planes if a landscaped courtyard is included. Neighborhood Requirement -Rear Building • 50% homes must have 18" offset planes Planes with min. 3' between front and rear planes. • Each plane is 30 SF minimum . • 3 planes for lots under 45' • 4 planes for lots over 45' Neighborhood Requirement -Sideyard Setback 50% homes shall have offsets so that one side has 7' average setback Roofs Requires Directional Variety Roofs At top of tall slopes, parallel to the slope. Roofs • Vary heights and massing by neighborhoods • Vary direction • Vary color within Neighborhood Neighborhood Requirement -Porches • 25% of homes must have porch min. 5' deep across 33% front of home or a balcony or a courtyard Page 6 of 8 -COMPARISONOFR-1 0RDINA1\. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN Type and number of Units Elevations Neighborhood Requirement -Elevations Neighborhood Requirement -Front Elevations Neighborhood Requirement -Front Elevations Neighborhood Requirement -Side and Rear Elevations, facing public or private streets Neighborhood Requirement -Colors Neighborhood Requirement -Homes Adjacent/Across Street Neighborhood Requirement-Streetscape I Restriction • Min. setback 1 0' • Incorporate a variety of railings/low walls • Vary roof element over porch 50% of openings on front elevation shall be recessed or projected a min. 2". • Min. 3 Elevations per Floor Plan • • Incorporate "Handcrafted Detailing" Incorporate a variety of accent features Windows shall incorporate min. one of the following: deep recessed windows; paned windows; decorative window ledges; window lintels; accent/varied shapes; window boxes: wood trim surrounds; accent colors; arched elements; shutters; or, raised stucco trim Incorporate a min. of 4 of the following: a variety of roof planes; deeply recessed windows and doors; paned windows and doors; exposed roof beams or rafter tails; decorative window ledges; accent materials such as stucco, wood siding and stone; window and door lintels; dormers; accent and varied shape windows; window boxes and planters with architecturally evident supports; exterior wood elements; variations in colors of stucco and other elements; accent colors on doors, shutters or other elements; stucco wainscoting; covered balconies; arched elements; shutters; or, raised stucco trim around windows and doors. Incorporate a min. of 2 from above. • Consistent with architectural style • Warm, earth tones preferred • Earth tone required for L.C. Ridge • Min 3 color schemes per floor plan • Prohibit same color on same architectural style when adjacent or across street • Different color • Different elevation • Vary lot sizes within a neighborhood if possible • Vary floor plan types to include courtyard Page 7 of 8 • -COMPARIS0NOFR-1 ORDLNA. .. VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN Type and number of Units Garages Neighborhood Requirement-Garages I Restriction plans and various garages locations Requires a mix of 2, 3 and 2-door garages. offset • Max. 50% of homes may have 3 car garages fronting street • Three car garage shall not exceed 50% of frontage • Three car garage shall have a plane change of min. 18" • Garage setback is from face of door to R.O.W. or sidewalk and excludes projections • Vary types of garage layouts to include: side loaded; split with one portion side loaded; split w/ house between; tandem; recessed 6' behind house fac;ade; and deeply recessed on back half of lot. Page 8 of 8 • • Standard Arterial Setbacks Front Yard Setback COMP .• SON OF PLAN~'ED DEVELOPMEN~RDINANCE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN Existing Ordinance • Secondary-30ft. • Major-40 ft • Prime -50 ft. • 20'; however, setbacks may be varied to a 15 foot average with a 10' mm1mum. • 5' from a private driveway • 20' for garages that face public/private street • Calculate to nearest point • • • • • ■ ■ ■ VLC Master Plan Secondary -30 ft . Major -50 ft . Prime -50 ft . For lots less than 7,500 SF but greater than 5,000 SF: 15' minimum average 20' by neighborhood to habitable area 20' for garages that face public/private street 15' for side-loaded garages Calculate first by lot then by average of neighborhood No Neighborhood average ■ Lot: average by building planes (having over 100 SF) to property line o if setback is 15' for more then 33% of frontage then whole lot is deemed at 15' setback o if setback is 15' for less than 33% frontage than average of all planes used. For lots less than 5,000 SF ( detached single-family units): • 15' minimum from public or private streets • 10' minimum for side- loaded garages • 5' minimum from motor courts or driveways Justification The proposed increase m setback for major roadways creates a consistent appearance throughout the Master Plan area providing a visual as well as spatial buffer between roadways and residential uses. The setbacks are consistent with the existing ordinance and in some instances more restrictive recognizing the need to provide variety to the streetscape. This standard will eliminate the 'walling' effect where every unit is set at the minimum front yard setback. The setbacks also promote the use of alternative design layouts for garages without impacting rear yard areas. The standards promote a variety of setbacks, building articulation and encourages the use of porches in the front of the unit. Page 1 of 8 • Standard COMP.SON OF PLA.J\TNED DEVELOPMEl'\4l>RDl~A~CE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLA~ Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan • Unenclosed porches may extend up to 5 feet unto the required setbacks, but no closer than 10 feet from the front property line • Garages shall be setback a minimum of 5' from motor courts, driveways, or if located at the rear of a lot, from private streets. o If any habitable space is located above the garage, the livable portion must maintain a minimum 10' setback from the front or rear property lines Single-family cluster homes: • Units shall maintain a minimum 10' habitable area setback from public or private streets • Minimum 20' setback required for garages fronting on public or private streets • Garages shall be setback a minimum of 5' from motor courts and driveways o If any habitable space is located above the garage, the livable portion must maintain a minimum 10' setback from the front or rear property lines Justification Page 2 of 8 • • Standard Street Side Setback (Corner Lots) Distance Between Single-story and Two- story Residential Structures COMP.SON OF PLA1'1NED DEVELOPME1'\41tRDl~A~CE VS •. VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLA~ Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan Justification Attached units on common lots: ■ All structures shall maintain an average setback of 15' from private streets, excluding porches and typical architectural feature projections ■ Porches and side-loaded garages may intrude into the required setback but shall maintain a min. setback of 11 ' for porches and 10' for side- loaded garages. ■ Setbacks off of a motor court or driveway shall be 5' for garages and 8' for habitable spaces 10 foot minimum 10 foot minimum Consistent with existing ordinance ■ Distance between For lots less than 7,500 SF The proposed requirement single-story but greater than 5,000 SF: provides for flexibility to residential structures: 25% lot width of the distribute the required setback for ■ site planning consistent with the Not less than 10 ft; minimum neighborhood standards and guidelines ■ When more than 10 lot size for lots under 60' established in the Master Plan. residential structures wide. The revised setback requirement in a row, the distance ■ Max 20' minimum 5' in conjunction with the between two and three each side requirements for building mass story residential and fa9ade articulation will structures shall not be ■ Flexibility to distribute provide a non-uniform separation less than 20 ft and the setback between both between units thereby creating distance between two-side yards while interest and variation in the story and one story .. preservmg m1mmums. streetscape. shall not be less than ■ 5' each side yard end of 15 feet cul-de-sac. ■ Architectural features A round or octagonal ■ may project two feet entry tower may into the required encroach 2' into setback distance between for max. 8', roof eaves buildings may add 1 ' to the encroachment and shall Page 3 of 8 • Standard Resident Parking Visitor Parking COMP.ON OF PLA.l\1''ED DEYELOPMEN~RDI:\A~CE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COST A MASTER PLAN Existing Ordinance I VLC Master Plan ! Justification be located withm the larger side yard For lots less than 5,000 SF: • All habitable portions of structures shall maintain a minimum internal side yard setback of 5' • Minimum distance between living units shall be 10', excluding architectural feature projections and wrap- around porch encroachments Single-family cluster homes: • Minimum distance between homes on common lots shall be 10' excluding architectural feature projections and wrap-around porch encroachments Attached units on common lots: • Buildings internal to the development shall maintain a 10' building separation 2 full size covered spaces, • 2-car garage with 20 ft Consistent with existing except for studio units by 20 ft interior ordinance which shall be provided measurement. with a ratio of 1.5 spaces Alternative: two 12 ft. x per unit, one of which • shall be covered 20 ft. one car garages; 3 car options as outlined • Studio units shall be provided 1.5 spaces per unit. One space shall be covered • 10 dwelling units or Same as current Planned Consistent with existing less: 1 space/ 2 DUs Development Ordinance ordinance standards • Greater than 10 DUs: Page 4 of 8 • Standard Building Setbacks from Open Parking Recreational Space Open/ Recreational Space Dimensions Private Yard Dimensions Private Streets COMP.SON OF PLA."l\,.N"ED DEVELOPMENtltRDINANCE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLA!\' Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan Justification 5 spaces for the 10 units, plus 1 space/ 4 DUs • 45% may be compact spaces • Credit for on-street parking for single- family or duplex units Not less than 5 feet 5 ft minimum Consistent with existing ordmance • 200 SF total per unit • Minimum 15' x 15' area Consistent with existing for lots under 7,500 ordinance. The Master Plan • 100 SF per unit common contains additional parking SF area requirements for recreational • Private and common areas not found in the current Recreational Space Parking: facilities must be ordinance to encourage use by provided • Common recreation areas under 8,000 SF: residents. • 50% Common/SO% none required. Private • Common recreation • No parking areas over 8,000 SF: requirements 1 stall per 20 homes 0 within ¼ mile radius; 0 1 stall per 15 homes outside ¼ mile radius 0 On-street parking along the frontage of the rec area may satisfy this requirement as long as the spaces are not required to meet the residential visitor parking requirement. Minimum of 10 ft. Minimum of 10 ft Consistent with existing ordinance 15 ft. X 15 ft. 15' X 15' Consistent with existing ordinance • 30 ft; 2 lanes, no • 40 ft; 2 lanes of The proposed street width is parking, 12 units parking for public consistent with current Page 5 of 8 Standard Driveways RV Storage PUDLot COMP.SON OF PLAN1''ED DEVELOPME!\~RDl:'IA:'ICE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAI\' Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan Justification or less streets engineering standards. The • 32 ft; 2 lanes • 5 ft non-contiguous proposed improvements mclude a parking on one sidewalk on both 10 · parkway that provides for 5 · side sides of sidewalk and a landscape • 3 6 ft; 2 lanes • Landscaped parkways parkway adjacent to the curb . parking on both • The width of private The effect of this proposal is that sides streets will be land currently appearing as a front • No parkways established at the yard setback area is relocated as a tentative map stage. landscaped parkway to separate the vehicular and pedestrian traffic while maintaining the same distance from the unit to curb. 30 ft. For single-family cluster The reduction in width for low homes: intensity use driveways is to • Driveways serving four increase pedestrian safety and to or less single-family create a more visually-pleasing clustered units may be environment for residents. reduced to 24 ft. in width For attached units: • Driveways serving 10 or less units may be reduced to 24 ft. in width For all projects with 10 or For lots less than 7500 sq ft Consistent with existing more units: • 20 SF of RV parking per ordinance • 20 sq. ft. for each unit home. • Not less than 200 SF • Not less than 200 SF shall be provided shall be provided • Minimum lot size for Lot widths varies from 40' to Consistent with existing single-family homes: 50' for lots under 7,500 SF: ordinance 3,500 SF • 3,500 SF: 40' • Minimum street • 4,500 SF: 45' frontage for linear or 5,000 SF: 50' semi-linear streets: 40 • ft. • 6,000 SF: 50' • Minimum street frontage on sharply curved streets or cul- de-sacs: 35 ft., 40 ft. average • Frontage on cul-de- sac bulbs: 25 ft. if guest parking is provided near the end Page 6 of 8 < ;. Standard Building Height Second Dwelling Units Building coverage Front Porches, Open Court- yards, Balconies Single-story Units COMP.SON OF PLA.'/\1''ED DEVELOPMEI\.JRDl}';A~CE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLA}'; Existing Ordinance VLC Master Plan I Justification of the cul-de-sac I Single family and duplex: All units except attached Consistent with ex1stmg ■ 30 ft. with roof pitch units: ordinance greater than 3 : 12 ■ 30 feet with roof pitch ■ 24 ft with roof pitch greater than 3 : 12 less than 3: 12 Attached units: ■ 35 feet with roof pitch greater than 3 : 12 Second dwelling units ■ Conforms to existing PD Consistent with existing may be permitted on lots Ordinance Section ordinance which are developed with 21.45.090 (p), et. seq. detached single-family Shall also comply with residences according to ■ the provisions of Section 21.85 if units are 21.10.015 (c), and subject provided as inclusionary to additional requirements housing (21.45.090 (p)) No maximum coverage ■ 2 story 40% net pad area The increased lot coverage for 1 story 50% net pad area single-story units is provided to ■ implement the standards and ■ Coverage excludes guidelines in the Master Plan for covered porches, alternative garage designs and overhanging balconies fa9ade articulation. less than 8' and porte cocheres ■ None ■ 25% of homes must have These features provide additional porch 5 ft. deep across building articulation, create a 33% of front of home or stronger relationship with the a balcony or courtyard street and are consistent with the whichever is consistent pedestrian oriented goals of the with the architectural Master Plan. style ■ Minimum setback 10 ft. ■ Incorporate a variety of railings/ low walls ■ Vary roof element over porch ■ None ■ For neighborhoods on This standard is proposed to ridgelines/hilltops which reduce the overall building mass are visible from a visible on ridgelines and hilltops circulation element from circulation element roadway, at least 20% of roadways and lessen the visual the units shall be single-impact of residential development along these areas. Page 7 of 8 ). Standard Design restrictions COMP-SON OF PLA..l'l'NED DEVELOPMEA>RDl~A~CE VS. VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLA~ Existing Ordinance Small Lot Guidelines (Council Policy 44) VLC Master Plan story. See Council Policy 44 analysis table Justification along these areas. Page 8 of 8 ◄ V, ,. -DESIGN GUIDELINES EVALUATIOJ\. CURRENT POLICY No. 44 AND VLC MASTER PLAN Guidelines in Current Policy No. 44 Where (3) two-story units occur in a row and they are situated less than 15' apart, at least (1) unit must have a single story building edge not less than 10 feet in depth. The roof covering the single story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the 2-story element to the unit (this is not intended to preclude long shed-type roofs falling to a single-story element). (Guideline #1) Where (3) two-story units occur in a row and they are situated 15 to 20 feet apart, at least ( 1) unit must have a single story building edge not less than 5 feet in depth. The roof covering the single story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the 2-story element to the unit ( this is not intended to preclude long shed-type roofs falling to a single-story element). (Guideline #2) Per project, 33% of all units shall have a single story edge a minimum of 40% of the total perimeter. For the purpose of this guideline the single-story edge shall be a minimum depth of 3 '. (Guideline #3) Per project, 50% of the units in a project, there shall be at least 3 separate building planes on street side (front) elevations of lots with 45' of frontage or less, and 4 separate building planes on street side (front) elevations oflots with a Villages of La Costa Master Plan In neighborhoods where there are three two-story units m a row situated less than 15 feet apart, at least one of the three units shall have a single-story building edge. The depth of the single-story edge shall be no less than 10 feet and shall run the length of the building. The roof covering the single-story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the two-story element to the unit (this is not intended to preclude long shed-type roofs falling to a single-story element). Single story shall be defined as a plateline maximum of 15 feet. In neighborhoods where there are three two-story units in a row situated between 15 and 20 feet apart, at least one of the three units shall have a single story building edge with a depth of not less than 5 feet running the length of the building. The roof of the single story element shall be substantially lower than the roof for the two-story element of the building (this is not intended to preclude long shed-type roofs falling to a single-story element). Single story shall be defmed as a plateline maximum of 15 feet. On a neighborhood basis, thirty- three percent (33%) of the units shall have a single-story element that is forty percent (40%) of the front elevation width. The minimum depth of this element shall be 3'-0". Porches and porte cochere elements shall qualify as a single-story element. For at least 50% of the units in the neighborhood, there shall be at least three separate building planes on street side elevations (front elevations) of lots with 45 feet of frontage or less, and four separate building planes on street side Difference Consistent with existing policy Consistent with existing policy The Master Plan states that the single-story element be applied to 40% of the front elevation while the current guidelines apply to the total perimeter of the building. The Master Plan is focusing the single story element on the front elevation side in order to create a pedestrian scaled streetscape. Consistent with existing policy Page 1 , ( -1., } • DESIGN GUIDELINES EVALUATION. CURRENT POLICY No. 44 AND VLC MASTER PLAN Guidelines in Current Policy No. 44 frontage greater than 45'. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18" and shall include but not be limited to building walls, windows and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 10' and a plane must be a minimum of 30 SF to receive credit under this section. ( Guideline #4) Per project, 50% of the units in a project, there shall be at least 3 separate building planes on rear elevations of lots with 45' of frontage or less, and 4 separate building planes on rear elevations of lots with a frontage greater than 45'. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18" and shall include but not be limited to building walls, windows and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 3' and a plane must be a minimum of 30 SF to receive credit under this section. ( Guideline #5) Villages of La Costa Master Plan elevations (front elevations) of lots with a frontage greater than 45 feet. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include but not be limited to building walls, windows and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 10 feet. A plane must be a minimum of 30 sq. ft. to receive credit under this section. The outside edge of porches and balconies meet this criteria. For at least 50% of the units in a neighborhood, there shall be at least three separate building planes on rear elevations of lots with 45 feet of frontage or less, and four separate building planes on rear elevations of lots with a frontage greater than 45 feet. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to, building walls, windows, and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane, and the rear plane on the rear elevation shall be 3 feet. A plane must be a minimum of 30 square feet to receive credit under this section. Difference Consistent with existing policy Per project, 50% of all units shall At least 50% of the units in each Consistent with existing policy have one side elevation with a 7' neighborhood shall have one side average sideyard setback. elevation where there are sufficient (Guideline #6) Three-car garages limited to 75% of the total units where average lot size is 5,000 SF or less. Three-car garages shall incorporate a mixture of 2-door, 3-door and offset (2 planes min. 12") 2-door designs. offsets or cutouts so that the side yard setback averages a minimum of7 feet. Neighborhoods with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet or greater shall limit the number of units with three-car garages in a row facing the street to 25% of the units in the neighborhood. An additional 25% of the units within the same neighborhood may have 3-car garages if the combined garage area The Master Plan limits the number of three-car garages to 50% versus 75% allowed in current ordinance. Current ordinance is for lots smaller than 5,000 SF while the Master Plan provisions apply to all lot sizes. Page 2 • DESIGN GUIDELINES Ev ALVA TION. CURRENT POLICY No. 44 AND VLC MASTER PLAN Guidelines in Current Policy No. 44 (Guideline #7) Villages of La Costa Master Plan does not exceed more than 50 percent of the home's frontage. Three car garages are not considered "in-a-row" or "side-by- side" if split by living space or an open area 10 feet wide or more across. Difference 50% of exterior door and window Fifty-percent (50%) of exterior Consistent with existing policy openings shall be projected or openings (doors/ windows) in the recessed a minimum of 2 inches front of each unit shall be recessed and shall be with wood or colored or projected a minimum of 2 inches aluminum window frames. or shall be trimmed with wood or (Guideline #8) The predominant roof framing for each floor plan in a project shall exhibit directional variety to the other floor plans and to the street. (Guideline #9) raised stucco. Colored aluminum window frames shall be used (no mill finishes). The predominant roof framing for each floor plan in a neighborhood shall exhibit directional variety to the other floor plans of the same neighborhood. Consistent with existing policy Page 3