The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-06-20; Planning Commission; ; CT 97-23X1|SDP 97-26X1 - MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION - PHASE II EXTENSION... Th,City of CARLSBAD Planning Depa!ent • A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: June 20, 2001 Item No.@ Application complete date: June 9, 2000 Project Planner: Elaine Blackbum Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: CT 97-23xl/SDP 97-26xl -MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -PHASE II EXTENSION -Request for a two-year extension of time for a Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Plan for Phase II of the Magnolia Subdivision located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Magnolia A venue and Adams Street. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4975 ADOPTING a Negative Declaration and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4934 and 4976 APPROVING CT 97-23xl and SDP 97-26xl based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission considered this request for extension at a public hearing on May 16, 2001. At that time, some questions arose regarding the appropriate inclusionary housing requirement(s) to apply to the project. After discussion with the Assistant City Attorney, staff is recommending that it is appropriate to apply the originally-approved inclusionary housing condition for the project with the following exception. The applicant was originally required to provide one affordable second dwelling unit and to purchase a .5 affordable credit. The applicant is now willing to provide two affordable second dwelling units provided they not be required to meet current income qualification restrictions. Staff and the Assistant City Attorney believe this is the appropriate method ofresolving the inclusionary housing questions for this project. Therefore, staff proposes the following changes to the May 16th documents for this project: 1. Revise Condition No. 2 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4934 to read as follows: "All of the conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4284 dated July 1, 1998 for CT 97-23 are incorporated herein by reference and remain in effect except for Condition No. 13, which is replaced by Condition No. 3 below, and except for Code Reminder No. 53, which is replaced by new Condition No. 3 in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4976 for SDP 97-26xl." CT 97-23xl/SDP 97-26xl,MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -PHAS"I EXTENSION June 20, 2001 Pa e2 2. Add new Condition No. 3 to Planning Commission Resolution No. 4934, reading as follows: "Prior to the approval of the final map for Phase II of this project the Developer shall amend his Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to provide and deed restrict 2 dwelling units (including: one second dwelling unit on Lot 7 and one second dwelling unit on Lot 6) as affordable to lower-income households for the useful life of the dwelling units, in accordance with the requirements and process set forth in Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The draft Amended Affordable Housing Agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Director no later than 60 days prior to the request to final the map. The recorded Amended Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors in interest." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4975 (Neg Dec) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4934 (CT) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4976 (SPP) 4. Staff Report dated May 16, 2001 with attachments EB:mh '• City of CARLSBAD Pllmnlng Departm! t}JflO A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: May 16, 2001 Item No.® Application complete date: June 1, 2000 Project Planner: Elaine Blackbum Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: CT 97-23xl/SDP 97-26xl -MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -PHASE II EXTENSION -Request for a two-year extension of time for a Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Plan for Phase II of the Magnolia Subdivision located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Magnolia A venue and Adams Street. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4975 ADOPTING a Negative Declaration and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4934 and 4976 APPROVING CT 97-23xl and SDP 97-26xl based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The owners of the Magnolia Subdivision (CT 97-23/SDP 97-26) have requested a two-year time extension for the tentative map and site development plan for Phase II of this nine (9) lot residential subdivision located north of Magnolia Avenue and west of Adams Street. Phase I includes four lots which will take access off Magnolia A venue. Phase II includes five lots which will take access off Adams Street. A final map has been recorded on Phase I and construction has begun. The developer is working on grading and improvement plans for the remaining phase (Phase II). The financial issues with development and improvement of Phase 1 have hampered progress toward final map approval of the second phase of this subdivision. This proposed two- year extension of CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 will allow Phase II of the final map to be filed after the applicant has proceeded with the final design. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 was approved for a nine-lot subdivision located north of Magnolia Avenue and west of Adams Street. The applicant is requesting that the tentative map and site development plan for Phase II of the subdivision be extended for two years until July 1, 2002. (This two-year time period would be retroactive to July 1, 2000.) The tentative map and site development plan were approved by Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4283, 4284, and 4285, which included approval of a Negative Declaration and specific conditions of development. The approval of the original map and site development plan would have expired on July 1, 2000. The applicant made a timely and complete submittal and staff has agreed to process the request for a two-year extension due to financial and design issues. However, staff CT 97-23xl/SDP 97-26xl ~vIAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -PHAS!: EXTENSION May 16, 2001 Pae 2 workload and processing issues have delayed the presentation of this item to the Planning Commission. Staff concurs with the applicant that his financial and design situation has limited his ability to diligently pursue those acts required to obtain a final map for the second phase of the subdivision within the original approval time period. The original conditions of approval, cited in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4284 and 4285 are still applicable to the project with the exception of one Code Reminder which is being replaced with a new updated condition which addresses the proposed new expiration date. Staff received the extension application and has scheduled the extension in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. If the Planning Commission chooses to approve the extension as recommended by staff, the SDP will also need to be extended. (The SDP has an expiration date of 24 months from the date of approval, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.58.020(b).) IV. ANALYSIS The applicant has been diligent in pursuing all items requested for the CT/SDP extension. Engineering staff has reviewed the project for compliance with all applicable sections of Title 20 (Subdivisions) and the State Map Act and has concluded that the project still satisfies all applicable requirements. The proposed lot sizes and configurations are in compliance with all applicable subdivision and zoning requirements and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The Site Development Plan was required only because the applicant was proposing to provide his affordable housing requirement in the form of a second dwelling unit on Lot 7 and payment of a partial fee. He still proposes to do so, and that proposal still satisfies all applicable inclusionary housing requirements. Therefore, the project rem;nns m compliance with all applicable subdivision, zoning, and inclusionary housing requirements. In addition, the project remains consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Growth Management regulations. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project (the CT/SDP extension) has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). When the original tract map and site development plan were reviewed it was determined that the scope of the project had been analyzed in MEIR 93-01 (General Plan Update), for which a Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted relative to cumulative regional impacts to circulation and air quality. Other than those identified regional impacts, it was determined that there were no project-related potentially significant environmental impacts. The project was reviewed again for the proposed extension. Included in the review were those previous environmental documents. It was determined that the project still will result in no potentially significant impacts beyond those previously identified regional CT 97-23xl/SDP 97-26xl ~\1:AGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -PHAS~ EXTENSION May 16, 2001 Pae 3 impacts which are not project-related. Therefore, the Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration on April 9, 2001. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4975 (Neg Dec) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4934 (CT) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4976 (SDP) 2. Location Map 3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4283, 4284 and 4285, dated July 1, 1998 EB:cs:mh SITE • MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION CT 97-23x1/SDP 97-26x1 I City of CARLSBAD Planning Departm. A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: July 1, 1998 ItemNo.@ Application complete date: February 17, 1998 Project Planner: Elaine Blackbum Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 -MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION -Request for a Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Plan to create and develop a 9-lot residential subdivision on a 2.138-acre site located on the Northwest corner of the intersection of Magnolia A venue and Adams Street within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4283 APPROVING a Negative Declaration and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4284 and 4285 APPROVING CT 97-23 and SDP 97-26 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The proposed project is for the creation of a 9-lot/10-unit residential subdivision on an in-fill parcel at the Northwest corner of Magnolia Avenue and Adams Street. The project will consist of 9 single-family detached residences, one of which will provide a second dwelling unit for the purpose of satisfying the project's inclusionary· housing requirements. The project requires a Tentative Tract Map and a Site Development Plan (for the second dwelling unit). The proposed project has a higher density (4.67 du/ac) than normally allowed by the General Plan (RLM) designation ( 4.0 du/ac) for the site and would require the approval of 4 dwelling units from the Northwest Quadrant excess dwelling unit bank. Because the project falls under special density criteria established by the General Plan, the additional density is consistent with the General Plan. With regard to the taking of dwelling units from the excess dwelling unit bank, the project is in the first (highest) priority category for approval of additional dwelling units from the bank. (See Section B of this report.) There are no planning issues associated with the proposal, and staff supports the project. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The project site is a 2.138-acre parcel located on the Northwest corner of Magnolia Avenue and Adams Street. It is a generally-flat in-fill parcel containing no sensitive vegetation. The site is currently undeveloped. The proposed project is for the creation and development of 9 residential lots with single family detached residences, one of which will incorporate a second dwelling unit attached to the back of the detached garage. The proposed residential lots range from 7,650 square feet to 15,220 square ft '-I CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 -M.OLIA SUBDIVISION July 1, 1998 Pae 2 • feet in size. The proposed residences contain 1,693 square feet of living area. The second dwelling unit will contain 406 square feet. The primary structures will have a stucco exterior and will be two-stories. The detached garage with the second dwelling unit will be one-story. The project site is designated for RLM (Residential Low-Medium) development on the General Plan and is zoned R-1-7,500. The properties to the North, South and East of the site are also designated RLM and zoned R-1-7,500 or R-1. The properties to the West are designated T-R/O (Travel-Recreation/Office) and are zoned R-3. Surrounding development to the North, South, and East consists of single-family detached units generally. To the West (in the R-3 Zone) are some multi-family developments and hotel/motel uses. The surrounding lots vary greatly in size. The lots to the West (containing non-residential uses) are, of course, considerably larger than the single-family lots, and their size is not relevant to the consideration of the proposed project. The single family lots to the North, East, and South of the project generally range from about 7,500 square feet (the smallest) to about 19,200 square feet (the largest). Most are between 9,000 and 13,000 square feet in size. IV. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. Carlsbad General Plan RLM (Residential -Low to Medium Density) designation regulations and City Council Policy No. 43 " ... Guidelines For Allocation of Proposition E "Excess" Dwelling Units"; B. Subdivision Map Act C. R-1-7,500 Zone regulations (Chapter 21.10 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); D. Inclusionary Housing regulations (Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); and, E. Growth Management regulations. The recommendation for approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The project's compliance with each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. A. General Plan and City Council Policy No. 43 The General Plan designation of the project site is RLM (Residential Low-Medium). The RLM designation allows a range of 0-4 dwelling units per acre ( du/ac) and has a Growth Control Point of 3.2 du/ac. The site has a zoning designation of R-1-7,500. The density of the proposed project is 4.67 du/ac. The project density of 4.67 du/ac exceeds the Growth Control Point and the RLM range. Normally this situation would not be consistent with the General Plan. However, there are some locations in the City (like this one) where the General Plan designation and the Zoning CT 97-23/SDP 97-26-M.ULIA SUBDIVISION July 1, 1998 • Pa e 3 designation are generally consistent, but the zoning wuuld allow a higher unit yield than the General Plan would allow. The General Plan contains specific wording to address these situations. The Land Use Element provides that: Criterion 1: If the zoning of the site would allow a higher density than the General Plan maximum would allow, and, Criterion 2: if the project is compatible with the General Plan goals, objectives, and policies, and, Criterion 3: if the project does not exceed the maximum density allowed by the range by more than 25%, then the project may be found consistent with the General Plan. Staff believes the proposed project/site meets each of these criteria in that: 1) The zoning of the site would allow a higher density (5.7 du/ac) than the General Plan maximum would allow ( 4 du/ac) as follows: If this 2.13 8-acre parcel were divided into 7,500-square foot lots, as allowed by the R-1 Zone, it would result in 12.41 lots. (The site contains no biological, slope, or other constrained areas. Therefore, the entire site is considered "developable".) Development of 12 residential units would result in a density of 5.7 du/ac. Therefore, criterion 1 is met. 2) The proposed project is, aside from the density, consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. The Land Use Element for Residential land uses has a goal of providing "a variety of housing types and density ranges to meet the diverse requirements of residents" "while retaining the present predominance of single-family residences". The proposed project is consistent with this goal in that it will provide moderate sized homes in a single-family detached product type. The Land Use Element for Residential land uses also has an objective of preserving "the neighborhood atmosphere and identity of existing residential areas". The proposed project is consistent with this objective in that the proposed single-family detached product type is in keeping with and preserves the identity of the existing neighborhood. Therefore, criterion 2 is met. 3) The project does not exceed the maximum density allowed by the range by more than 25%. The maximum density allowed by the range for the subject site is 4.0 du/ac. The proposed project density of 4.67 du/ac exceeds the maximum allowed density by only 17 %. Therefore, criterion 3 is met. For these reasons, staff believes that the proposed project can be found to be consistent with the General Plan goals, objectives, and policies, and is consistent with the density designation through application of the special density allocation criteria established in the General Plan Land Use Element. CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 -M.OLIA SUBDIVISION July 1, 1998 Pae 4 The project needs 4 units from the City's excess dwelling unit bank. (Ten units are proposed, and 6 units are allowed at the Growth Control Point of 3.2 du/ac.) City Council Policy No. 43 establishes guidelines and prioritization categories for the allocation of Proposition E (i.e., Growth Management) "excess" dwelling units in the City. The proposed project is in the first (highest) priority category, which includes in-fill single-family R-1 subdivisions which meet all development standards and which have lot sizes equal to or greater than adjacent R-1 properties. The proposed project will contain lots ranging in size from 7,650 to 15,220 square feet. The surrounding R-1 properties have a variety of lot sizes and configurations but are generally smaller than the proposed project lot sizes. The single-family residential lots surrounding the project site are generally 9,000 to 13,000 square feet in size. It should be noted 'that, when the growth management ordinance was adopted, the additional units expected on this and similar sites (due to the R-1-7,500 Zoning discussed above) were placed in the quadrant's excess dwelling unit bank. Therefore, in essence, the 4 units to be withdrawn from the bank for this project have already been placed into the excess dwelling unit bank in anticipation of this development. B. Subdivision Map Act regulations The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed project and has concluded that the subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision regulations. The project is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan and Title 21. It is also compatible with surrounding residential land uses and provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive/natural heating or cooling opportunities through structure separation and unit design. The R-1-7,500 Zone requires a minimum 7,500 square foot lot size. Each of the proposed lots exceeds the minimum requirement and can easily accommodate the proposed residential development at the density proposed. Finally, the proposed subdivision will not cause any substantial environmental damage. The project grading involves approximately 250 cubic yards of grading for Phase I (Lots 1 through 4) and 550 cubic yards of grading for Phase II (Lots 5 through 9). The grading will be balanced on site. The developer will be required to offer various dedications ( e.g., drainage easements, street right- of-way) and will be required to install street lights. C. R-1-7,500 Zoning regulations The proposed project meets or exceeds all applicable requirements of the R-1-7,500 zone as demonstrated in Table C below. All lot sizes and lot widths exceed the minimum requirements for the zone, and all required setbacks are provided. The proposed lot coverage is less than the maximum allowed. The proposed structures are within the allowed building height for the zone. All of the proposed primary units are two-story structures. The detached garage with second dwelling unit is a one-story structure. Table C: R-1 ZONE COMPLIANCE STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED Min. Lot Size 7,500 sf 7,650 sf -15,220 sf CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 -MA-OLIA SUBDIVISION July 1, 1998 Page 5 • ·Table C: R-1 ZONE COMPLIANCE STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED Min. Lot Width 60' 60' -85' Max. Lot Coverage 40% 40% Min. Front Yard Setback 20' 20' Min. Street Side Yard Setback 10' n/a Min. Side Yard Setback 5' -10' 6' -10' (10% of lot w~dth) Min. Rear Yard 10' -20' 12' -18' (2 x req' d side yard) Max. Building Height 30' /2 stories (with pitch) 23'8" D. Inclusionary Housing regulations The City's Inclusionary Housing regulations (Chapter 21.85) require that a minimum of 15% of all approved units in any residential specific plan or qualified subdivision be made affordable to lower income households. The inclusionary housing requirement for this project would be 1.5 dwelling units. Because this project contains seven or more new lots/units, it is required to satisfy its inclusionary housing requirements by construction of new affordable units. The applicant is proposing to satisfy this requirement by constructing and deed restricting one second dwelling unit and purchasing a .5 credit for the remaining required partial unit. Therefore, the proposed project complies with all applicable inclusionary housing requirements. (See Table "D" below.) The proposed second dwelling unit will be located behind the detached garage for the primary unit. The second dwelling unit will contain 406 square feet of area. Parking for the second dwelling unit can be provided by either the single-car enclosed garage attached to the primary residence or as a tandem space in front of the garage. (This is allowed when the garage has a setback of at least 20' .) The City's Housing Commission considered the proposed second dwelling unit at its meeting of May 14, 1998 and recommended (5-1) that the proposed unit be approved to satisfy the project's inclusionary housing requirements. Table D: INCLUSIONARY HOUSING STANDARD REQUIRED PROVIDED COMPLIANCE Inclusionary 1.5 dwelling units 1 detached second Yes Requirements(Units/F ees) dwelling unit and a .5 credit E. Growth Management The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the Northwest quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in Table E below. All of the facilities necessary for the proposed development have already been provided for in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1. This is due to the assumptions made when the City's Growth Management regulations and facilities requirements were originally established. In locations CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 -MA.OLIA SUBDIVISION July 1, 1998 Pae 6 • where the zoning would allow greater yield than the General Plan designation would allow, it was assumed (for worst-case facilities planning purposes) that the greater yield would actually occur. Therefore, it was assumed that the subject site would develop under R-1-7,500 requirements which would have yielded 12 dwelling units. For this reason, no additional or special conditions need to be added to the proposed project to ensure compliance with the adopted growth management standards. The project requires that 4 units be taken fro:m the excess dwelling unit bank. Table E: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE TABLE STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE City Administration 23.17 sf Yes Library 18.54 sf Yes Waste Water Treatment n/a Yes Parks n/a Yes Drainage n/a Yes Circulation 96ADT Yes Fire Stations No. 1 & 3 Yes Open Space n/a Yes Schools CUSD Yes Sewer Collection System 10 EDU Yes Water 2,200 GPD Yes The proposed project is 4 units above the Growth Management dwelling unit allowance. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The general scope of this project was analyze in MEIR 93-01 for which a Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted relative to cumulative regional impacts to circulation and air quality. Other than those identified regional impacts, it has been determined that the impacts peculiar to this project will not result in any significant environmental impacts. Therefore, a Negative Declaration was issued ~y the Planning Director on April 6, 1998. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4283 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4284 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4285 4. Location Map 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form 7. Disclosure Statement 8. Full Size Exhibits "A" -"C" dated July 1, 1998 EB:kc:mh • • MAGNOLIA SUBDIVISION CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 • • BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 CASE NAME: Magnolia Subdivision APPLICANT: Michael D. O'Gara REQUEST AND LOCATION: 9-lot/10-unit residential subdivision LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of Lots 13 and 17 APN: 205-191-13 & 17 Acres: 2.138 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: "-9--=-lo=-=t=s/--=-10.;::...---=un=1=·ts"------ GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: =-RL==-M'-=-------------------------- Density Allowed: =-3.=2~d~u/~a=c'-------Density Proposed: _4~.6~7~d~u/~a;.;..:c ________ _ Existing Zone: R-1-7 500 Proposed Zone:N =-:.:...:/A=-=------------- Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) Site North South East West Zoning R-1-7,500 R-1-7,500 R-1 R-1 R-3 Land Use undeveloped single family residential single family residential single family residential multifamily, hotel/motel PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: CUSD Water District: CMWD Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): -=-l~0=E=D_U~-------------- Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: =Ja=n=u=a"-'ry'"---=-'15"""'-"1"""9~9-"-8 _____________ _ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ~ Negative Declaration, issued =--'A~p=ri=l-=-6.,_, =19'"""9-"8'------------------- D Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated ______________ _ D Other, _______________________ _ • 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: Magnolia Subdivision -CT 97-23/SDP 97-26 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: l GENERAL PLAN: =RL=M"-------- ZONING: =R=----=-1:.....-7.:....i=:....50::....:0;___ _____________________ _ DEVELOPER'S NAME: =-M=ic=h=a=el"""D:::;...•=-O:::;...'.....::G=ar=a:;:.__ _______________ _ ADDRESS: PO Box 1633. Carlsbad CA 92018 PHONE NO.: (760) 434-7563 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: =20=5'-'-1"""'9 ...... 1--"'1=3...!:C&"---1!...!7 _____ _ QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): =2."°-1-=-ac=-------------- ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: =n/-=a ________________ _ A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage= =2=3-=1..:...7 ____ _ Library: Demand in Square Footage= -=-1=8·=5-'-4 ____ _ Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) n/a Park: Drainage: Demand in Acreage = Demand in CFS = n/a n/a Identify Drainage Basin= =B=B=C ____ _ (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) Circulation: Demand in ADT = 96 (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) Fire: Open Space: Schools: Served by Fire Station No. = ""'-1 =&"-'3"------- Acreage Provided = =n/'""'a'------- CUSD (Demands to be determined by staff) Sewer: Demands in EDU Identify Sub Basin = (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) Water: Demand in GPD = 10 2 200 L. The project is 4 units above the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. . ·. • • City of· Carlsbad ■46ieleli,i•l·l4·Ei,ie,t4,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 2. 3. 4. List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Michael D. O'Gara P.O. Box 1633 Carlsbad, CA 92018 OWNER List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Ettore & Geraldine Bertagnolli P.O. Box 1633 Carlsbad, CA 92Dl8 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 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 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. 2075 Las Palmas Dr.• Carlsbad. CA 92009-"1576'• (6"19) 438-"1"161 • FAX (6"19) 438-0894 t.,..-1044 5. Have you had m.han $250 worth of business tran.ed with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? ,/ D Yes @N~ 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." /J p:.-t(-t:/V-e_ s ~ ~t(;_ ~Jl'A.--IJ i A.I e F: 7it2--'r ~ntLllt' Print or type name of owner W!d&L!!~ 11/f~'? Signature of applicant/date f!/1 e_/u,.dp. tJ &~~-4 Print or type name of applicant Disclosure Statement 10/96 Page 2 of 2