2001-53
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2001-53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR A PROPOSED
REMEDIAL GRADING AND BUILDING PAD CONSTRUCTION PLAN, FOR LOTS 4
AND 6 OF THE COPPER CREST SUBDIVISION, LOCATED WITHIN THE
HILLSIDE/INLAND BLUFF OVERLAY ZONE, THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR)
ZONING DISTRICT AND THE OLIVENHAIN COMMUNITY AREA OF THE CITY
OF ENCINITAS
(CASE NO. 00-073 DR/V/EIA; APN: 264-240-08 & -26)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Design Review Permit and Variance to exceed
the 20% allowance for encroachment into steep slopes was filed by Bruce Wiegand to allow for remedial
grading and building pad construction on two existing lots in the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone, and the
Olivenhain Community Area of the City of Encinitas, in accordance with Chapters 23.08 (Design
Review) and 30.78 (Variances) of the Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located in the
Rural Residential Zoning District, legally described as:
LOTS 4 AND 6 OF ENCINITAS TRACT NO. 88-115 TM, IN THE CITY OF
ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 12644, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 5, 1990.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on the
application on August 2, 2001, at which time all those desiring to be heard were heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered, without limitation:
1.
The August 2, 2001, agenda report( s) to the Planning Commission with attachments;
2.
The General Plan, Municipal Code, and associated Land Use Maps;
3.
Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
4.
Written evidence submitted at the hearing;
5.
Pad Size Exhibit, dated received by the City on January 21,2001;
6.
Slope Analysis, consisting of 1 sheet, dated received July 14,2000, Slope Planting
Plan, consisting of 1 sheet, dated received July 23, 2001, and proposed Grading
Design Plan, consisting of 1 sheet, dated received July 14, 2000; and
CD:MRH:G :Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings pursuant to Chapters
23.08 (Design Review) and 30.78 (Variances) of the EncinitasMunicipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Encinitas hereby approves application Case # 00-073 DRIV /EIA subject to the following
conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT liB")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission, in its independent
judgment, has reviewed the Environmental Initial Study prepared for the project and has determined
that the proposed project will not cause any significant environmental impacts, and a Negative
Declaration is hereby adopted in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). This project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on
wildlife resources as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code, and, therefore, a
Certificate of Fee Exemption shall be made with De Minimus Impact Findings.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of August, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Bagg, Birnbaum, Crosthwaite, Jacobson, and Patton
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
oL~
Adam Birnbaum, Chair of the
Encinitas Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Sandra Holder
Secretary
NOTE: This action is subject to Chapter 1.04 of the Municipal Code, which specifies time limits
for legal challenges.
CD:MRH :G:Reports/RPCOOO73DR VO8020 1
2
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. PC 2001-53
Case No. 00-073 DR/V/EIA
FINDINGS FOR DESIGN REVIEW
STANDARD: Section 23.08.072 of the Encinitas Municipal Code provides that an application
for a design review permit must be granted unless, based upon the information presented in
the application and during the Public Hearing, the authorized agency makes any of the
following regulatory conclusions:
a.
The project design is inconsistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or the provisions of
the Municipal Code.
Facts: The project is located within the Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District of the City
of Encinitas. The Design Review Permit and Variance is requested for proposed remedial
grading and pad construction for future custom designed single-family structures on two
existing lots within the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone. The project does not lie within
the boundaries of a Specific Plan Area or the City's Coastal Zone. The two, 2-net acre lots
have 1.02-acres (Lot 4) and 1.06-acres (Lot 6) of sloped area exceeding 25% in gradient.
51 % of Lot 4 and 53% of Lot 6 are in slopes of greater than 25% grade. The project design
proposes to encroach onto nearly all of the steep sloped areas on the site for required
remedial grading efforts and pad construction. The project will involve a net balance of
soil grading based on an estimate of 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of cut, fill, lime
treatment, replacement and recompaction due to the remedial grading recommendation of
the Geotechnical Report. The site's underlying soils are unstable and two landslides exist.
Discussion: Municipal Code Section 30.34.030B2(c) provides a deviation in the
encroachment allowance of up to 20 percent into the steep sloped areas of the entire
parcel through the Design Review process where necessary to maintain a minimum
development right when it is found that there is no feasible alternative siting or design
which eliminates or substantially reduces the need for such construction or grading.
Absent the need for remedial grading to address the unstable soil and landslide
conditions, the proposed pad grading encroachment calculations would be below the 20%
maximum encroachment permitted through Design Review. However, all remedial
grading efforts count towards the maximum encroachment calculations even though they
will result in the replacement of slopes contoured to resemble existing conditions.
Therefore, the combination of remedial grading and pad construction requires the
applicant to request a Variance to exceed the maximum 20% encroachment standard.
Due to the overall sloping nature of the project site the proposed pad locations are sited in
the most appropriate location on the lots for proposed pads comparative in relative size to
surrounding existing pads and structures. The proposed private driveway grading which is
necessary for access adjacent to the site to the three existing upper lots lying to the west and
CD:MRH :G:Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
3
for access to the more developable portion of the subject lots can be exempt from
encroachment limitations as no less environmentally damaging alternative exists.
Due to required remedial grading, no feasible alternative siting or design eliminates or
substantially reduces the need for such construction or grading, and the bulk and scale of the
proposed structure has been minimized to the greatest extent feasible commensurate with
preserving the physical slope characteristics of the site. The proposed grading creates pads
that conform to the surrounding existing pads in overall area and general shape with respect
to natural contours.
Conclusion: Therefore, with the approval of a Design Review Permit and Variance to the
standards of the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone, the Planning Commission finds that the
project design is consistent with the General Plan and the provisions of the Municipal Code.
b.
The project design is substantially inconsistent with the Design Review Guidelines.
Facts: A Design Review Permit and Variance to exceed the 20% maximum encroachment
allowance of the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone for the proposed remedial grading and
pad improvements is required by Municipal Code.
Discussion: The project substantially conforms to site, building, landscape and privacy
design standards. Adequate access will be provided to serve the future single-family
structures and the development meets all applicable development standards of the Rural
Residential Zoning District.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the project design is
substantially consistent with the Design Review Guidelines.
c.
The project would adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
Facts: The proposed project consists of remedial grading and pad construction
improvements to create finished building pads and access driveways for new single-family
residences on two existing legal lots in the Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District, the
HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone, and the Olivenhain Community Area of the City of
Encinitas. An Environmental Initial Study was performed for the proposed project by
environmental consultant Curtis Scott Englehorn and Associates. A Negative Declaration
will be adopted with the project's Design Review Permit and Variance approval..
Discussion: No aspect of the use has been identified which would have any significant
adverse effect on the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. The Planning
Commission, in its independent judgment, has reviewed the Environmental Initial Study
prepared for the project and has determined that the proposed project will not cause any
significant environmental impacts due to project design.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission fmds that the project will not adversely
affect the health, safety, or general welfare ofthe community.
CD :MRH :G:Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
4
d.
The project would cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in
appearance or value.
Facts: The proposed grading creates pads that conform to the surrounding existing pads
in overall area and general shape with respect to natural contours. The applicant
provided a Pad Size Exhibit depicting the pad sizes proposed for the site and a
comparison of surrounding, existing residential pads in order to assess relative bulk and
mass. The surrounding properties within a 700-foot radius of the subject property and in
the same zoning designation have pads ranging from approximately 13,000 to 57,000
square feet. This project proposes grading improvements for pads of 22,100 and 22,500
square feet. The slopes created by the remedial grading will be contour graded such that
the finished slopes resemble the general shape of the existing steep sloped land.
Discussion: No evidence has been submitted which shows that the proposed development
will cause material depreciation to the appearance or value of the surrounding
neighborhood. The proposed remedial grading and single-family residence project is similar
in design and intensity to surrounding, existing residential uses in the general area.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the project will not cause the
surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value.
CD:MRH:G :Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 I
5
FINDINGS FOR A VARIANCE
STANDARD: Section 30.78.030 of the Encinitas Municipal Code provides that a variance
may be granted only when, based upon the information presented in the application and
during the Public Hearing, all of the following findings of fact can be made:
A.
A variance from the terms of the zoning regulations shall be granted only when, because of
the special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning regulations deprives such
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classification.
Facts: The current pad grading project design proposes to encroach onto nearly all of the
site's steep sloped areas. The project application requests a Variance from the standards of
the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone in order to exceed the 20% maximum encroachment
allowance into steep slopes. The two, 2-net acre lots have 1.02-acres (Lot 4) and 1.06-acres
(Lot 6) of sloped area exceeding 25% in gradient. 51 % of Lot 4 and 53% of Lot 6 are in
slopes of greater than 25% grade. The project will involve a net balance of soil grading
based on an estimate of 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of cut, fill, lime treatment,
replacement and recompaction due to the remedial grading recommendation of the
Geotechnical Report. The submitted Geotechnical Report for the project concludes that the
site's underlying soils are unstable and two landslides exist. The City's third party
geotechnical review consultant, Geopacifica Geotechnical Consultants, reviewed the
Geotechnical Report and project information to determine if the recommended remedial
grading was necessary and in accordance with the requirements of the City and generally
accepted standards of care for soils and geologic reports.
Discussion: Special circumstances exist applicable to the property's soil characteristics that
deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under the
identical Rural Residential zoning designation. Based upon a detailed review of the
proposed project, submitted geotechnical information, and site visits, the consultant
found the recommended remedial grading proposal acceptable from an engineering and
geologic standpoint. Absent the need for remedial grading to address the unstable soil
and landslide conditions, the proposed pad grading encroachment calculations would be
below the 20% maximum encroachment permitted through Design Review. However, all
remedial grading efforts count towards the maximum encroachment calculations even
though they will result in the replacement of slopes contoured to resemble existing
conditions. Therefore, the combination of remedial grading and pad construction
requires the applicant to request a Variance to exceed the maximum 20% encroachment
standard.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that due to special circumstances
applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, and adverse geotechnical
conditions, the strict application of the zoning regulations deprives such property of
privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
CD:MRH:G:Reports/RPCOOO73DR VO8020 I
6
B.
Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment
thereby authorized will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which property is situated.
Facts: Limited grading into existing slopes steeper than 25% gradient is permitted by
Municipal Code. Municipal Code Section 30.34.030B2( c) provides a deviation in the
encroachment allowance of up to 20 percent into the steep sloped areas of the entire
parcel through the Design Review process where necessary to maintain a minimum
development right when it is found that there is no feasible alternative siting or design
which eliminates or substantially reduces the need for such construction or grading. The
project's remedial grading and pad construction design proposes to encroach onto nearly all
of the steep sloped areas which are shown on the submitted Slope Analysis and requests a
Variance from the standards of the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone in order to exceed
the 20% maximum encroachment allowance into steep slopes. The slopes created by the
remedial grading will be contour graded such that the finished slopes resemble the
general shape of the existing steep sloped land.
Discussion: Granting a Variance to the 20% maximum encroachment allowance will not
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties
in the same vicinity and in the same zone in which the property is situated as construction of
one single-family dwelling for every 2.0 net acres is a land use permitted by right in the
Rural Residential zone. Absent the need for remedial grading to address the unstable soil
and landslide conditions, the proposed pad grading encroachment calculations would be
below the 20% maximum encroachment permitted through Design Review. However, all
remedial grading efforts count towards the maximum encroachment calculations even
though they will result in the replacement of slopes contoured to resemble existing
conditions. Therefore, the combination of remedial grading and pad construction
requires the applicant to request a Variance to exceed the maximum 20% encroachment
standard. Special physical circumstances exist applicable to the property's soil and
geotechnical characteristics that deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under the identical zoning designation. The site's underlying
soils are unstable and two landslides exist.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission fmds that granting this project a
Variance from the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay Zone Standards will not constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the same
vicinity and zone in which the property is situated.
C.
A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property which authorizes a use or activity
which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations governing the parcel
of property. The provisions of this section shall not apply to use permits.
Facts: The application proposal is for remedial grading to correct existing underlying
adverse geotechnical conditions and the construction of new pads for the future construction
of custom single-family residential structures on two existing legal lots located within the
Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District and the HillsidelInlandBluffOverlay Zone.
CD :MRH :G:Reports/RPCOOO73 D R VO8020 1
7
Discussion: The proposed remedial grading and residential pad construction is proposed for
the future construction of custom single-family structures, which is a land use permitted by
right on property within the Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District and the applicant is not
proposing a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning
regulations governing the parcel of property.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission fmds that the project does not include an
activity that is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations governing the
parcel of property.
D.
No variance shall be granted if the inability to enjoy the privilege enjoyed by other property
in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification:
1. Could be avoided by an alternate development plan which would be of less significant
impact to the site and adjacent properties than the project requiring a variance;
2. Is self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner or the owner's
predecessor,
3. Would allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to
the zoning code;
4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
Facts: The application request is for remedial grading to correct existing underlying
adverse geotechnical conditions and the construction of new pads for the future construction
of custom single-family residential structures, which is a use permitted within the Rural
Residential (RR) Zoning District. The Variance sought is relief from the 20% maximum
encroachment allowance requirement of Municipal Code Section 30.34.030 (HillsidelInland
Bluff Overlay Zone).
Discussion: An alternate development plan, without approval of a Variance to
exceed the 20% maximum encroachment allowance of the HillsidelInland Bluff Overlay
Zone would deprive the applicant of a minimum development right by necessitating the
construction of relatively small pads for residential structures inconsistent with existing pads
and residential structures in the immediate vicinity. Additionally, if the Variance request
were denied, the underlying soil and adverse geotechnical issues would not be resolved and
would be a detriment to any development on the subject sites. The proposed encroachment
into steep slopes for remedial grading and pad construction will not create any adverse effect
to the other uses in the area, and will not adversely impact any existing views to, through
and from the project site.
Grading is necessary to provide a developable building envelope on the steeply sloping
topography and to remedy the existing soil and geotechnical problems. No significant
vegetation, trees or riparian habitats are present on the site and the steep slopes resulting
CD:MRH:G :Reports/RPCOOO73DR VO8020 1
8
from the remedial grading improvements will be significantly planted with a combination of
hydroseed, shrubs and trees adapted for growth in semi-arid climates with little or no
irrigation in order to increase slope stability. The proposed remedial grading and pad
construction with a variance from the 20% maximum steep slope encroachment allowance
of the Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone would not allow such a degree of variation as to
constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Zoning Ordinance because the constrained
conditions are caused by existing soil and geotechnical conditions present on the site due to
no action of the property owner. As designed and conditioned, the remedial grading and pad
construction project will not constitute a private or public nuisance and it has been
determined that the project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a
Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the Variance can not be
avoided by an alternative development plan that would be less of an impact to the existing
and surrounding property than the plan requiring the Variance, is not self induced, does not
constitute a degree of variation which could be considered a rezoning or other amendment
of the Zoning Code, and does not authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or
private nuisance.
CD:MRH: G:Reports/RPCOOO73DR VO8020 1
9
Applicant:
Location:
ATTACHMENT"B"
Resolution No. PC 2001-53
Case No. 00-073 DR/V
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Wiegand
Lots 4 and 6 on Wiegand Street of the Copper Crest subdivision.
(APN's 264-240-08 & -26)
SC1
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS:
SC2
SC5
This approval will expire on August 2, 2003, at 5 :00 PM, two years after the approval of this
project, unless the conditions have been met or an extension of time has been approved
pursuant to the Municipal Code.
This project is conditionally approved as set forth on the application and project drawings
including Slope Planting Plan, consisting of 1 sheet, dated received July 23, 2001, and
proposed Grading Design Plan, consisting of 1 sheet, dated received July 14, 2000, all
designated as approved by the Planning Commission on August 2, 2001, and shall not be
altered without express authorization by the Community Development Department.
SCA Prior to the granting of a grading permit for the project, the property owner shall execute and
record, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department and the Engineering
Services Department, a document that places the existing steep slopes on the property not to
be disturbed by the grading, as well as the steep slopes that will be created by the grading on
the property, into an open space easement.
G1
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
G2
G4
This approval may be appealed to the City Council within 15 calendar days from the date of
this approval in accordance with Chapter 1.12 of the Municipal Code.
Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall cause a covenant regarding real
property to be recorded. Said covenant shall set forth the terms and conditions of this grant
of approval and shall be of a form and content satisfactory to the Community Development
Director.
CD:MRH:G :Reports/RPCOOO73DR VO8020 1
10
G5
G13
L1
L2
DR1
DR3
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Municipal
Code and all other applicable City regulations in effect at the time of Building Permit
issuance unless specifically waived herein.
The applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but
not be limited to: Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, School
Fees, Traffic Mitigation Fees, Flood Control Mitigation Fees, Park Mitigation Fees, and Fire
Mitigation/Cost Recovery Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees shall be made prior to
building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the Community Development and
Engineering Services Departments. The applicant is advised to contact the Community
Development Department regarding Park Mitigation Fees, the Engineering Services
Department regarding Flood Control and Traffic Fees, applicable School District(s)
regarding School Fees, the Fire Department regarding Fire Mitigation/Cost Recovery Fees,
and the applicable Utility Departments or Districts regarding Water and/or Sewer Fees.
The project is subject to Chapter 23.26 of the Municipal Code (Water Efficient Landscape
Program), which requires a landscape and irrigation plan to be prepared by a State licensed
landscape designer. The requirements for the plans are listed in Chapter 23.26. The
landscape and irrigation plans must be submitted as part of the building permit application
for the project.
All required plantings and automated irrigation systems shall be in place prior to use or
occupancy of new buildings or structures. All required plantings and automated irrigation
systems shall be maintained in good condition, and whenever necessary, shall be replaced
with new materials to ensure continued compliance with applicable landscaping, buffering,
and screening requirements. All landscaping and irrigation systems shall be maintained in a
manner that will not depreciate adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect
adjacent properties. All irrigation lines shall be installed and maintained underground
(except drip irrigation systems).
Any future modifications to the approved project will be reviewed relative to the findings
for substantial conformance with a design review permit contained in Section 23.08.140 of
the Municipal Code. Modifications beyond the scope described therein may require
submittal and approval of an amendment of the design review permit by the authorized
agency.
All project grading shall conform with the approved plans. If no grading is proposed on the
approved plans, or subsequent grading plans are inconsistent with the grading shown on the
approved plans, a design review permit for such grading shall be obtained from the
authorized agency of the City prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
CD :MRH:O :Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
11
E1
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
E2
EG3
EG4
EG5
EG7
EG9
EGlO
ED1
REGARDING
All City Codes, regulations, and policies in effect at the time of building/grading permit
issuance shall apply.
The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to the commencement of any clearing or
grading of the site.
The grading for this project is defined in Chapter 23.24 of the Encinitas Municipal Code.
Grading shall be performed under the observation of a civil engineer whose responsibility it
shall be to coordinate site inspection and testing to ensure compliance of the work with the
approved grading plan, submit required reports to the Engineering Services Director and
verify compliance with Chapter 23.24 of the Encinitas Municipal Code.
No grading shall occur outside the limits of the project unless a letter of permission is
obtained from the owners of the affected properties.
All newly created slopes within this project shall be no steeper than 2: 1.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any proposed construction site within this
project the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the Engineering Services
Director for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and
requirements the Engineering Services Director may impose with regards to the hauling
operation.
In accordance with Section 23.24.370 (A) of the Municipal Code, no grading permit shall be
issued for work occurring between October 1 st of any year and April 15th of the following
year, unless the plans for such work include details of protective measures, including
de silting basins or other temporary drainage or control measures, or both, as may be deemed
necessary by the field inspector to protect the adjoining public and private property from
damage by erosion, flooding, or the deposition of mud or debris which may originate from
the site or result from such grading operations.
Drainage Conditions
ED2
The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to
prevent any offsite siltation. The developer shall provide erosion control measures and shall
construct temporary desiltation/detention basins of type, size and location as approved by
the Engineering Services Director. The basins and erosion control measures shall be shown
and specified on the grading plan and shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Services Director prior to the start of any other grading operations. Prior to the
removal of any basins or facilities so constructed the area served shall be protected by
additional drainage facilities, slope erosion control measures and other methods required or
CD:MRH:G: Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
12
ED3
ED5
EU1
Utilities
EU2
EU3
EU4
approved by the Engineering Services Director. The developer shall maintain the temporary
basins and erosion control measures for a period of time satisfactory to the Engineering
Services Director and shall guarantee their maintenance and satisfactory performance
through cash deposit and bonding in amounts and types suitable to the Engineering Services
Director.
A drainage system capable of handling and disposing of all surface water originating within
the subdivision, and all surface waters that may flow onto the subdivision from adjacent
lands, shall be required. Said drainage system shall include any easements and structures as
required by the Engineering Services Director to properly handle the drainage.
The developer shall pay the current local drainage area fee prior to approval of the final map
for this project or shall construct drainage systems in conformance with the Master Drainage
Plan and City ofEncinitas Standards as required by the Engineering Services Director.
The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations and design requirements of the
respective utility agencies regarding services to the project.
The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G. & E., Pacific Bell, and
other applicable authorities.
All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground including existing
utilities unless exempt by the Municipal Code.
CD:MRH: G :Reports/RPCOOO73 DR VO8020 1
13