HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-03; City Council; 14; Grand Hope Medical Office Building (SDP 2023-0025)CA Review ___AF___
Meeting Date: Dec. 3, 2024
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Lauren Yzaguirre, Associate Planner
lauren.yzaguirre@carlsbadca.gov, 442-339-2634
Subject: Grand Hope Medical Office Building (SDP 2023-0025)
District: 1
Recommended Action
Hold a public hearing and:
1.Adopt a resolution approving a site development plan to demolish an existing medical office
building and construct a 10,671-square-foot, two story, 34-foot-tall, 3-tenant medical office
building with private balconies, a 395-square-foot shared balcony on the second floor and a
one-story, 2,803-square-foot enclosed parking garage consisting of four parking spaces and
two lift spaces (two parking spaces per lift) for a total of eight spaces on a 0.16-acre property
located at 2879 Hope Avenue in the northwest quadrant of the city, the Village & Barrio
Master Plan and Local Facilities Management Zone 1.
Executive Summary
The City Council is being
asked to approve a site
development plan to
replace an existing medical
office building at the
northwest corner of Hope
Avenue and Grand Avenue
with a 10,671-square-foot,
two story, 34-foot-tall, 3-
tenant medical office building with private
balconies, a 395-square-foot shared balcony on
the second floor and a one-story, 2,803-square-
foot enclosed parking garage.
The site is within the Village Center District of the
Village & Barrio Master Plan outside of the Coastal Zone. The Village Center District allows for a
variety of mixed-uses, including retail, residential, office and restaurants. Medical offices are a
permitted use in the district.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 1 of 23
The Planning Commission considered the application on Oct. 16, 2024, and voted to recommend
approval of the project to the City Council with minor modifications.
The Village & Barrio Master Plan (Section 6.3.3) requires the City Council’s approval for this site
development plan because the project would construct of a new building over 5,000 square feet
of gross floor area.
Explanation & Analysis
Project description
The property is currently developed with an existing one-story, 1,456-square-foot medical office
building and a 10-space surface parking lot.
The developer is proposing to demolish the existing medical office building and construct a
10,671-square-foot, two-story, 34-foot-tall, three-unit, medical office building. The building will
contain three tenant spaces and includes a 2,051-squre-foot ground floor unit (unit 1) and a
2,0730-square foot and 2,084-square-foot second floor unit (units 2 and 3). Units 2 and 3 will
have private balconies. A 395-square-foot shared balcony is proposed on the second floor
fronting Hope Avenue.
The ground floor will include an attached, one-story, 2,803 square-foot enclosed parking garage
with a trash and recycle area and utility room. The parking garage will contain four parking
spaces and two lift spaces – which allow for two vehicles each, one lifted above the other – for a
total of eight spaces. One off these parking spaces will be an American with Disabilities Act
(ADA)-compliant space and three will have electric vehicle chargers.
The developer is requesting a modification from the building massing standard of the Village
Center District (Section 2.7.1.H), which states no building façade visible from any public street –
excluding alleys – shall extend more than 40 feet in length without a 5-foot minimum variation in
the plane of the wall, as well as a change in roofline.
Section 2.6.7 of the Village & Barrio Master Plan states that a modification to a development
standard may be permitted by the decision-making authority – the Planning Commission or the
City Council – in all districts. The plan permits such a modification to be made to enable a
significant public benefit, as determined by the decision-making authority.
The parking garage building’s façade, which fronts Hope Avenue, is 66 feet long with only a 2-
foot wall plane variation at the stairway entrance at the northeast corner of the building, so this
section of the proposed building would not comply with the Village Center District’s building
massing standard, Section 2.7.1.H.
However, a modification from this standard would allow the applicant to provide additional
parking spaces above the minimum required parking spaces, thereby reducing the demand for
off-street parking. The additional on-site parking provided constitutes a significant public benefit
under Village & Barrio Master Plan Section 2.6.7.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission considered the project on Oct. 16, 2024. One speaker spoke in
opposition, raising concerns over the building design as it related to compatibility with the
surrounding development and impacts on community character. After questions and discussion,
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 2 of 23
the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the project to the City Council with
modifications to the number of EV parking spaces.
The following is a summary of the major issues of concern raised at the Planning Commission,
and staff’s response.
Parking
The main issue of concern raised at the hearing was parking. The commissioners expressed
concerns that the eight proposed parking spaces will not be enough to serve the medical offices
building, so patients would have to use street parking. They were also concerned that all eight
spaces were EV spaces, therefore limiting the parking further to only those customers and
employees with electric vehicles.
California Government Code Section 65863.2 (Assembly Bill 2097, which became effective in
2023) prohibits the city from imposing or enforcing any minimum automobile parking
requirements on a residential, commercial or other development project, except for hotel,
motel, short-term rentals or other transit lodging, if the project is located within one-half mile of
a major public transit stop.
Regardless of a project’s distance from public transit, this state law allows the city to continue to
apply its minimum parking standards for EV charging stations, as well as how many parking
spaces are accessible to people with disabilities.
This legislation was intended to provide flexibility for project design, in keeping with planning
studies that have shown that parking should be market driven. Developers can still voluntarily
provide onsite parking under the law, but any spaces provided beyond the minimum required EV
and ADA spaces are to be based on builder preference and market demand, not by city-
established minimum parking standards.
The Village & Barrio Master Plan requires parking for medical offices to be provided at a ratio of
one space per 355 square feet of gross floor area. Based on a gross square footage of 7,868
(building square footage, not including parking garage) a total of 23 parking spaces would be
required.
But since the site is within a half mile of the Carlsbad Village Station and is therefore not subject
to city-established minimum parking standards, a total of five parking spaces (one ADA space,
one EV-installed space and three EV-capable spaces) are required.
The developer originally proposed to provide a total of eight EV installed spaces, including one
ADA space and two single-stall car lift spaces, those that will allow vehicles to be parked one
above another, with two spaces per lift.
The commissioners asked whether underground parking or turntables were considered. The
applicant clarified their intention with the current design was to provide as much parking as
possible, citing the site constraints and size of the lot, which is flanked on two sides by existing
rights-of-way. Due to the high cost and the size of the lot, building underground parking was
determined to be unfeasible. The applicant stated that the current configuration of eight spaces
was the most efficient way to provide the most amount of parking on site.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 3 of 23
The commissioners determined that some spaces should be available to gas-powered vehicles
and that only the minimum number of EV spaces (four spaces) should be provided. They
determined that the project is providing a significant public benefit in accordance with the Village
& Barrio Master Plan Section 2.6.7.B - Standards Modification Purpose by providing additional
parking on site above the state-required minimum. They cited the tightly constrained parking in
the area and the need for a variety of parking options – EV, ADA and standard – as reasons to
support the modification, because having the on-site parking for employees and patients would
reduce the demand for street parking.
Lack of residential project component
One commissioner expressed concerns over the lack of a residential component of the project,
citing the housing crisis and need for additional housing in the village. The commissioners also
expressed concerns over the economic vitality of a medical office in this area.
Medical office uses are permitted within the Village Center District and a residential component
is not required. The applicant clarified that the property owner is a dentist and plans to run his
practice out of one of the suites. The owner has plans to rent the other two suites to other
medical professionals. The owner purchased this property with the intention of finding a location
for his dentist office and is not seeking to construct or manage housing.
The Planning Commission staff report provided as Exhibit 2 includes a full summary of the
proposed development, zoning and master plan requirements, and a summary of the analysis for
the project.
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are provided as Exhibit 3. The commission’s
resolution recommend approval of the project to the City Council is Exhibit 4.
Public notification
A public notice of this meeting, as well as for the Planning Commission hearing, was mailed to
property owners within 600 feet of the project site and posted consistent with the requirements
of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which resulted in 137 property owners being notified, including four
members of the public who had been in contact with staff and requested to be notified. Public
hearing notices were also posted in The San Diego Union-Tribune and on the website for the
Office of the City Clerk 10 days prior to the meeting.
The project is subject to City Council Policy No. 84 - Development Project Public Involvement
Policy. For this project, the “Notice of Project Application Process - Part A” was followed, which
included mailing notices to affected stakeholders and posting a notice on the project site. The
project did not meet the criteria that would require the more extensive Part B enhanced public
outreach under Policy 84. (City Council Policy 84 is provided as Exhibit 5.)
The applicant mailed the early public notices on Oct. 6, 2023, and on Oct. 3, 2023, the applicant
posted the “Notice of Project Application” sign at a conspicuous location on the site. All
comment letters received during the processing of this project have been compiled and are
included in Exhibit 6. Some comments are duplicated from the Planning Commission staff report,
but they are included separately to make sure a complete record of comments are accessible in
one place. Any comments received after the publishing of this report will be posted by the City
Clerk and distributed to the City Council.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 4 of 23
Public comments received raised concerns regarding foot and vehicle traffic, noise, parking,
building height, parking, and illegal dumping/loitering. A response to the concerns can be found
in the staff report presented to the Planning Commission, Exhibit 2.
Fiscal Analysis
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the proposed project.
Next Steps
If the City Council approves the project, the next steps for development would be completion of
grading, improvement plans and building plans before the city could authorize work to begin.
The specific schedule would be determined by the applicant. Grading permits, required before
any work may commence, typically take between six and twelve months to process. If approved,
the site development plan will expire in two years unless construction commences and could be
extended for up to six additional years.
Environmental Evaluation
The California Environmental Quality Act and its implementing regulations, the CEQA Guidelines,
adopted by the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency, list classes of projects that
have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and as a result are
exempt from further environmental review under CEQA.
The City Planner, through the process outlined in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 19.04.060,
completed a review of the project and potential environmental impacts associated with the
project in accordance with CEQA and determined that the project qualified for an exemption
under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill Development. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 is a
Class 32 exemption for projects under five acres, located within urbanized areas, and consistent
with the General Plan and zoning regulations for the site.
CEQA is established through state law and implemented through state guidelines on how to
disclose and address impacts related to a proposed discretionary action. Certain project types
are exempt from further environmental review in situations the state legislature and state
agencies (through publication of CEQA guidelines) have decided should be exempt. One of those
exemptions is for “In-Fill Development” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (a Class 32
Exemption) for projects that meet the following criteria:
• Project site is no larger than five acres in size
• Site is located within urbanized areas
• Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning regulations for the property
Therefore, the City Planner, as required under Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code,
completed a review of the project and potential environmental impacts associated with the
project in accordance with CEQA. Through this review, the City Planner was required to make a
determination consistent with state law and determined that the project qualified for an
exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill Development.
This notice was posted on Aug. 1, 2024, for a period of 10 days. No appeals from the public were
filed and no letters were received from the public on the CEQA determination. The determination
that the project is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill Development is final and
is not subject to consideration by the public or the City Council.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 5 of 23
Exhibits
1.City Council resolution
2.Planning Commission Oct. 16, 2024, staff report (on file with the Office of the City Clerk)
3.Planning Commission Oct. 16, 2024, minutes (on file with the Office of the City Clerk)
4.Planning Commission Resolution No. 7522 (on file with the Office of the City Clerk)
5.City Council Policy Statement No. 84 (on file with the Office of the City Clerk)
6.Correspondence received through 5 p.m. Monday, Nov. 26, 2024
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 6 of 23
Exhibit 1
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 7 of 23
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-272
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEMOLISH AN
EXISTING MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCT A 10,671-SQUARE-
FOOT, TWO STORY, 34-FOOT-TALL, 3-TENANT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
WITH PRIVATE BALCONIES, A 395-SQUARE-FOOT SHARED BALCONY ON THE
SECOND FLOOR AND A ONE-STORY, 2,803-SQUARE-FOOT ENCLOSED
PARKING GARAGE CONSISTING OF FOUR PARKING SPACES AND TWO LIFT
SPACES (TWO PARKING SPACES PER LIFT) FOR A TOTAL OF EIGHT SPACES
ON A 0.16-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2879 HOPE AVENUE IN THE
NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY, THE VILLAGE & BARRIO MASTER
PLAN AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.:
GRAND HOPE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
SDP 2023-0025 (DEV2023-0122)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, Californic! has determined that pursuant to
the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on Oct. 16, 2024, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Site Development Plan, SDP 2023-0025, as ,
• referenced in Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 7522 recommending to the City Council
that it be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed public hearing to consider
said site development plan; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if
any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to the site
development plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as
follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of Site
Development Plan, SDP 2023-0025, is adopted and approved, and that the findings and conditions of
the Planning Commission contained in the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 7522 on file
with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City
Council.
3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions
of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply:
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 8 of 23
"NOTICE"
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil
Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad
Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the
appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes
final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with
a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time
within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following
the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of
record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be
filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 3rd day of December, 2024, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
BLACKBURN, BHAT-PATEL, ACOSTA, BURKHOLDER, LUNA.
NONE.
NONE.
NONE.
KEITH BLACKBURN, Mayor
SHERRY FREISINGER, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Exhibit 2
Planning Commission Oct. 16, 2024, staff report
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 9 of 23
Exhibit 3
Planning Commission Oct. 16, 2024, minutes
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 10 of 23
Exhibit 4
Planning Commission Resolution No. 7522
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 11 of 23
Exhibit 5
City Council Policy Statement No. 84
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 12 of 23
From:Keith Valentine
To:Lauren Yzaguirre
Subject:Project # SDP2023-0025 — Grand Hope Medical
Date:Wednesday, October 11, 2023 2:19:20 PM
Hi Lauren,
I received a copy of the application notice for the project at 2879 Hope Avenue in Carlsbad.
It seems odd that the application is taking a 1,500 sq/ft office building at 1 story with 10 parking spots to a 10,594
sq/ft building at 2 stories and reducing the spots to 8 parking spots. How can this be effective or permissible? 7
times the size with a 20% reduction in on-site parking.
This poor parking situation will impact the Carlysle at 800 Grand as well as the surrounding homes and neighbors
on Hope Avenue. Shouldn’t they be required to construct underground parking?
Thank you.
KV
(Keith Valentine)
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Exhibit 6
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 13 of 23
From:7605058298@vzwpix.com
To:Lauren Yzaguirre
Date:Wednesday, August 14, 2024 1:15:37 PM
Attachments:image000000.jpgimage000001.jpgimage000002.jpgimage000003.jpgimage000004.jpgimage000005.jpgimage000006.jpg
Hello Lauren,
Please see the attached photos. They reveal an abandoned building in downtown Carlsbad. The area adjacent to the
building is a mess that attracts problems, even has an opening that animals or kids might climb below the building.
That area should be cleaned up and closed off.
Also, I wish to make a statement that 8 covered parking spaces isn't sufficient for a 10,000 square foot medical
building. The current building is one-fifth that size and has more parking.
This will cause parking issues in the neighborhood.
Please confirm you received this message.
Thanks,
Stan Katz
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 14 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 15 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 16 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 17 of 23
NOTICE
OF PROJECT APPLICATION
• PROJECT !\'.AMF.: GRAND HOPE M EDICAL
PROJECT NUMBER: SDP2023-0025
SITE DEV.;:-E;--,Lo"'r""v-:c1El\;:;;. c:;,T~P;;;E:;;, ~=11,,;Tc;;l;;;.O-;-D~EM=o;;-LJSH AN
PROJECT EXISTING I-STORY MEDICALOFFlCE BUILDrNC AND
DESCRIPTION: EXJSTl:\'G SITE 1"1PROVEME"ITS Al\'D PERMITTfffi
COI\STRl:CTION OF A NEW 10,594-SQUARE FOOT,
2-STOHY. 34'-FOOT-I UGII J\U:DICAL OFFJCE BUTLDlNC
0"1 A .16-ACRE SITE. THE PROJECT WOULD INCLUDE 8
CO\'EHED ON-SITE PARKING SPACES.
CITY OF CARlSRAll
PL,\'.1/i'{l;,IG 011:i>11ssi·rco;Ji,.\· --------,P~R~OiJ~•:~C-TiliA}l'P~L~l~CA~N~T~l~R~E~l'~R~E~SE~·N~T~A~l~·•~V'!_E
L • .. KIRK MOELLER ARCIOTECTS, L'1C. AVRt:'I' YZAGUIRRE, ASSOCIATF; PLAN•~•n
'""' KIRK MOE LI.ER LAURE~.Y7..AGUIRRE(alC..\RI.SRADCA GOV
(442)3.19-2634 • KIRk(ii kMARCHITECTSINC COM
• (760) 80.l-8006 '
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 18 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 19 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 20 of 23
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 21 of 23
From:Kirk Moeller
To:Lauren Yzaguirre
Cc:Andy Champion
Subject:FW: Grand Hope Medical 2879 Hope Ave
Date:Thursday, November 2, 2023 3:36:57 PM
Hi Lauren,
Please see email below that we received from one of the neighbors for records purposes.
Thank you,
Kirk Moeller
Kirk Moeller Architects, Inc.
2888 Loker Avenue East, Suite 220
Carlsbad, CA 92010
Office: 760-814-8128
Mobile: 760-803-8006
kirk@kmarchitectsinc.com
kmarchitectsinc.com
From: Nicole Gautreau <nicole.gautreau@westernu.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2023 3:36 PM
To: Kirk Moeller <kirk@kmarchitectsinc.com>
Subject: Grand Hope Medical 2879 Hope Ave
Hello,
My name is Nicole Gautreau and I am an owner of 2820 Hope Ave Unit B. I would like to
express my disapproval with the Grand Hope Medical Building on 2879 Hope Ave. Hope
Ave is a quiet street where kids and dogs frequently play. The addition of the medical
building will not only increase noise, foot and car traffic but it will also greatly increase
the amount of parked cars. Only 8 parking spots is not enough for 2 story facility. This
will cause street parking to become very limited for current residents. If approved
despite the concerns a larger parking structure or garage will be needed. The tall
building will also be unsightly and could increase the amount of homeless/ squatters in
the area camping out in front of the medical building. For these reasons I do not
condone this current building plan. A 1 story building with ample parking would be a
much better option. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or
concerns.
Thank You,
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 22 of 23
Nicole Gautreau
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Dec. 3, 2024 Item #14 Page 23 of 23
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
City Council:
Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
Monday, December 2, 2024 2:48 AM
Keith Blackburn; Priya Bhat-Patel; Teresa Acosta; Melanie Burkholder; Carolyn Luna; City
Clerk
Public comment on 12/2/2024 Item #14 (Grand Hope Medical Office Building)
2025 Legislative Bill Proposals -Linke.pdf 11 R . A d Item# / '1 A eceIve -gen a _'T
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Datel;J}. '.) 'f CA v cc-=::::
CM ~ACM 1....--DCM (3) .~
Here are four observations about this proposed project for you to consider.
1. Two Planning Commissioners voted against recommending approval
It is not evident in the staff report, unless you click to read the Planning Commission meeting minutes,
but Chair Kamenjarin and Commissioner Lafferty voted against recommending approval of the project.
2. Proximity to the Carlsbad Village train station means no/few parking spaces can be required
under state law --please advocate for changes to the definition of "major transit stop"
Under current state law and interpretations by the Department of Housing and Community Development
and the courts, development projects within one-half mile of "major transit stops" (measured in a
straight line from the nearest corners of the lots) cannot be required to install any parking spaces with
the exception of a few EV/ADA spaces. Unfortunately, any transit stop with train service is considered a
"major transit stop" under state law. And this includes the Carlsbad Village and Poinsettia train stations,
even though the actual transit there is largely unusable by the vast majority of residents, employees, and
customers.
For example, it is not even a serious consideration that employees or customers of the dentist and two
other medical practices that will exist at the Grand Hope Medical Office Building would be willing and
able to use the infrequent train or bus service available at Carlsbad Village station, and then walk most of
the 0.4 miles back and forth. And, as has been pointed out by several planning commissioners and
public comments, the 8 proposed parking spaces are far under the 23 spaces that would have been
required by the city, if the state law did not exist.
I recently submitted some proposed legislative bill ideas to our state representatives for consideration
(attached), including a re-definition of "major transit stops" to exclude those with poor bus service.
Please have the Legislative Sub-committee and full City Council consider supporting these or similar bill
proposals, which could apply to future projects.
3. Mitigation for transportation/parking impacts not required under existing city rules --ask staff to
amend TOM rules
The Transportation Demand Management (TOM) program can require TOM plans with mitigation
measures that attempt to reduce vehicle trips and the need for parking. The current TOM program only
requires plans based on employee trips and with a threshold of 11 O average daily trips (ADT), and it does
1
not account for customer trips. Based on its square footage, the Grand Hope Medical Office Building will
generate 81 employee ADT, which is below the 11 O ADT threshold, so no TOM plan is required. However,
if customer trips were included, there would be a total of 394 ADT, which could far exceed the capacity of
the 8 parking spaces to be provided.
Please ask staff to revise the TOM program to reduce the AOTthreshold that requires a TOM plan and/or
to incorporate customer trips into the algorithm, which could apply to future projects.
4. Village-Barrio development standard waiver based solely on making three of four additional
parking spaces "EV-installed" vs. "EV-capable"
The developer requested waivers of Village Center District building massing development standards on
boxiness and the roofline. It seems that virtually none of the proposed projects for the Village Barrio area
will comply with the newly established standards--instead being granted multiple concessions/waivers.
In the .o.riginal Planning Commission staff report, the resolution included Findings (#7 and #9) that the
building massing design waiver was justified, because the project was proposing to have all 8 parking
spaces (rather than just the required 1) be "EV-installed" vs. "EV-capable." However, tor the revised
resolution adopted by the commission, they reduced the number of "EV-installed" spaces to 4.
So, by approving the project, you are agreeing to the following revised Findings.: "[T]he project provides a
significant public benefit [(the conversion of 3 additional parking spaces from EV-capable to EV-
installed)] that warrants the granting of the standards modification ... That the applicant has provided
acceptable evidence to demonstrate the need for the standards modification and there is no other way
to reasonably achieve [the purposes in the Climate Action Plan] without the modification in ... [the] Village
Center District building massing standard."
Best regards,
Steve Linke
Carlsbad, CA
2
BACKGROUND
2025 LEGISLATIVE BILL PROPOSALS
11/19/2024
Example development project that raises several CEQA and local land use control issues under
existing state law/guidance
A development project was recently approved in Carlsbad that will demolish a vehicle miles
traveled (VMT)-reducing local-serving retail mall (Carlsbad Village Plaza) that includes the only
affordable grocery store, hardware store, and pharmacy within several miles, as well as about
ten other stores. This will force current customers to travel farther on average to do their critical
shopping/services. Many will have to start driving rather than walking/biking. The project
replaces the Plaza with 218 apartments of new residents and a few small stores, plus a five-
story parking garage for their cars with all of the associated new VMT.
Despite this, the project was exempted from doing a California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) transportation environmental impact study based, in part, on a claim that it will create a
net reduction in VMT. The net reduction was achieved by subtracting the VMT going to the
current stores and claiming that all of the substitute stores in the surrounding areas would
become responsible for the diverted VMT, even though there is no practical or legal way to
make the other stores accountable (and despite the fact that the existing stores are defined as
VMT reducers-not VMT-generating).
In addition, a corner of the project site is within 0.5 miles of a corner of the parking lot of a train
station (Carlsbad Village Station) "as the crow flies," so a transit-based screen also was cited to
avoid the CEQA VMT study. However, actual walking distance from the residences to the
boarding area is at least 0.7 miles, and overall transit service is poor at the station (it includes
only train service along the coast with 40-120 minute service intervals and a single, low-
utilization bus route with 30-60 minute service intervals and limited weekend service).
Further, while the project is claiming to be "transit-oriented" for the purpose of avoiding CEQA,
it includes the aforementioned five-story parking garage with more than the minimum number
of parking spaces required by the city--likely because the units would be impossible to market
without substantial parking, given the low quality of the available transit.
Finally, the apartment buildings are five stories high, and the maximum height is 69 feet, far
exceeding the city's four-story/45-foot development standard limits, and the buildings also
exceed the city's building mass limit. State Density Bonus Laws require waivers of these local
development standards based on the inclusion of 12.5% affordable units. However, there is a
single-story portion of the project that, if developed more vertically, likely could keep the
1
buildings within the city's development standards. But there seems to be ambiguity in state law,
state guidance, and case law regarding a local jurisdiction's ability to require such design
changes, even if they do not physically or financially make the project infeasible or reduce unit
numbers.
ISSUES/SOLUTIONS
Issue #1: Development projects that replace VMT-reducing retail uses with VMT-generating
residential uses inappropriately avoid CEQA transportation studies and, consequently, avoid
greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation.
California Code of Regulations (CCR)§ 15064.3 generally requires that local jurisdictions use
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to evaluate transportation impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to other state laws (e.g.,§ 21099), the Governor's
Office of Planning and Research (OPR)-now called the Office of Land Use and Climate
Innovation (LCl)-has prepared guidelines for VMT analyses. In order to be compliant with state
laws, those guidelines are generally adopted by local jurisdictions for evaluation of development
applications.
Solution #1: Loopholes that allow developers to avoid CEQA VMT studies need to be closed. If a
development project will eliminate local-serving retail, forcing diversion of VMT to other
local/regional stores, the development should not be able to subtract the diverted mileage from
its VMT calculation. VMT-related legislation and/or LCI guidance should close such loopholes,
and LCI could be empowered to provide guidance on analysis of individual projects, much like
HCD has been empowered to enforce housing laws on individual projects.
Issue #2: Under current state law, some limited-service transit stops are being considered
"major transit stops," which is exploited by developers to avoid CEQA VMT transportation
studies, while adding substantial vehicles/VMT and associated GHGs.
Various sections of state law restrict local development regulations (e .g., parking minimums)
and provide CEQA (e.g., VMT) screen-outs/exemptions for so-called "transit priority projects"
(or "transit-oriented projects," "infill opportunity zones," etc.)-i.e., projects "within one-half
mile" of a so-called "major transit stop" (or "high-quality transit corridor," etc.). For example,
see§ 15064.3, 21064.3, 21155, 65088.1, 65863.2, and 66005.1.
Most state laws seem to refer to § 20064.3 for the definition of "major transit stop," which
includes existing rail stations, bus rapid transit stations, or ferry terminals served by bus or rail;
or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15
minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. Other laws seem to
add transit stops that are "included in applicable regional transportation plans." Apparently, a
2
new law (AB 2553} is about to go into effect that will change§ 66005.1 (restricting CEQA VMT
study requirements} to include facilities to be constructed within one year and up to 20-minute
bus service intervals.
Solution #2: As described above, Carlsbad Village Station has a train route that makes it a
"major transit stop," but it is of very limited utility for most commuters, because it only includes
a few stops along the coast, and its single bus route with 30-60 minute service intervals does
not provide meaningful transit alternatives and is not well-utilized . The above-cited laws should
be changed to better define "major transit stop" to include only stops with transit service that is
actually usable by a majority of the future residents (e.g., multiple local routes with 20 minute
service intervals during peak commute times}, independent of whether a train stops there, or
whether it is included in a regional plan.
Issue #3: Under current state laws and HCD guidance, the measurement of the distance from
a transit stop does not reflect reality or the actual likelihood of usage.
Regarding the method of determining whether a project is "within one-half mile" of transit, the
logical measurement would be walking distance from the residences to the boarding area (and
even a one-half mile walk is pushing the limits of usable transit}. However, the Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) has provided guidance that it should be measured
as "a straight, direct line from the nearest edge of the parcel containing the project site to any
point on the parcel(s} that make up the property upon which a major transit stop is located."
HCD's guidance cites some supporting evidence in other laws and case law for their
interpretation of the straight-line measurement from the nearest points of the sites, but they
ignore common sense and other laws with different interpretations of such measurements. For
example, § 21155 specifies:
A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-
quality transit corridor if all parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent of
their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor and if not more than 10
percent of the residential units or 100 units, whichever is less, in the project are farther
than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.
In the example development project, the residential buildings are set well back from the nearest
edge of the project site-in fact, there is a commercial lot between the residential portion and
the transit stop. And the nearest point at the transit stop is the parking lot. Further, people
cannot fly to the transit stop, they must navigate on the streets (and there may even be cases
where there is a barrier, such as a canyon). Using the definition in § 21155, the distance would
be about 0.7 miles.
3
Solution #3: The laws should be changed to specify average walking distance to the boarding
area of the transit stop and use the definition of the residential site in§ 21155, which would
account for potential physical barriers and the actual distance for residents-rather than the
over-simplistic one-half mile radius "as the crow flies" from the nearest points of the lots.
Issue #4: There seems to be ambiguity in state law, state guidance, and case law regarding a
local jurisdiction's ability to require design changes, even if they do not physically or financially
make the project infeasible or reduce unit numbers.
Solution #4: Make it clear in state law that cities can require such design changes to make
projects compliant with local rules/development standards, so that HCD guidance and the
courts will not create contrary rules.
Issue #5: The example project will demolish the only affordable grocery store and the only
hardware store and pharmacy within several miles, creating a food and pharmacy "desert"
without any consequences .
Solution #5: Allow local jurisdictions to require additional mitigation measures when proposed
projects will create food or pharmacy deserts and to reward projects that reduce deserts. Code
§ 66005.1 includes an opportunity for a special traffic impact fee carve-out when a project is in
proximity to " ... [c]onvenience retail uses, including a store that sells food ... " And there may be
other enacted or proposed food/pharmacy desert related laws that could set some sort of
precedent.
Note: None of the above solutions are intended to preclude project approval-just prevent
inappropriate avoidance of CEQA transportation-based mitigation and/or unintended creation
of food/pharmacy/retail deserts.
Steve Linke
splinke@gmail.com
Carlsbad, CA
4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City
of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2024, to consider a Site Development Plan to demolish an existing
medical office building and construct a 10,671-square-foot, two story, 34-foot-tall, 3-tenant medical office
building with private balconies, a 395-square-foot common egress balcony on the second floor and a one-
story, 2,803-square-foot enclosed parking garage consisting of four parking spaces and two lift spaces
(two parking spaces per lift) for a total of 8 spaces on a 0.16-acre property located at 2879 Hope Avenue
in the northwest quadrant of the City, the Village & Barrio Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management
Zone 1.
Lot 26 of Schell and Sites Addition to Carlsbad, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California, according to map thereof no. 2145, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County on February 20, 1929.
Whereas, on Oct. 16, 2024, the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5/2 (Lafferty, Kamenjarin -
No} to recommend the City Council approve a Site Development Plan to demolish an existing medical
office building and construct a 10,671-square-foot, two story, 34-foot-tall, 3-tenant medical office building
with private balconies, a 395-square-foot common egress balcony on the second floor and a one-story,
2,803-square-foot enclosed parking garage consisting of four parking spaces and two lift spaces (two
parking spaces per lift) for a total of 8 spaces on a 0.16-acre property located at 2879 Hope Avenue in the
northwest quadrant of the City, the Village & Barrio Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management Zone
1.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies
of the staff report will be available on and after Nov. 27, 2024. If you have any questions, please contact
Lauren Yzaguirre in the Planning Division at (442) 339 -2634 or lauren.yzaguirre@carlsbadca.gov. The
meeting can be viewed online at https://www.carlsbadca.gov/city-hall/meetings-agendas or on the city's
cable channel. In addition, written comments may be submitted to the City Council at or prior to the
hearing via U.S. Mairto the attention of Office of the City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA
92008, or via email to clerk@carlsbadca.gov.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you
or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008,
at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE:
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH:
SDP 2023-0025
GRAND HOPE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
NOV. 22, 2024
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
SITE MAP
• N
NOT TO SCALE
Grand Hope Medical Office Building
SDP2023-0025 (DEV2023-0122)
TO: CITY CLERK
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LOCATION: GJ-'1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008
D Other: _________________ _
• DATE POSTED TO CITY WEBSITE /;/'-II~ c/
DATE NOTICES MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS: _ _,_JL-.J/'-'J'-""'"""~=l'--":J"-"-'-oe<..io;l.<-..:::.L-{ __
NUMBER MAILED:
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am employed by
the City of Carlsbad and the foregoing is true and correct.
DEPARTMENT: ~TY CLERK'S OFFICE □OTHER _______ _
1. me~ uQ:J./.;lo:z,;
Signature Date
SENT TO FOR PUBLICATION VIA E-MAIL TO: □ Union Tribune on ___ _
~ Coast News on / o/;?s?/ ;;Jt/
PUBLICATION DATE: Union Tribune --------------
Coast News / / h ;;;i/d--w V
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am employed by
the City of Carlsbad and the foregoing is true and correct.
DEPARTMENT: [B-cfry CLERK'S OFFICE □ OTHER _______ _
Signature Date
Attachments: 1) Mailing Labels
2) Notice w/ attachments
CTIY OF CARISJIAJJ
NQTTCEOFPJIBTTCHEABING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN" to you, because your interest maybe affected. that the City Coun-
cil of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Vil-
lage Drive, Carlsbad. California, at 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2024, to consider a Site Develop-
ment Plan to demolish an existing medical office building and construct a 10,671-square-foot,
two story, 34-foot-tall, 3-tenant medical office building with private balconies, a 395-square-
foot common egress balcony on the second floor and a one-story, 2,803-square.-foot enclosed
parking garage consisting of four parking spaces and two lift spaces (two parking spaces per
lift) for a total of 8 spaces on a 0.16-acre property located at 2879 Hope Avenue in the north-
west quadrant of the City, the Village & Barrio Master Plan, and Loca] Facilities Management
Zone 1.
Lot 26 ofSchell and Siles Addi lion to Carlsbad, in the City of Carlsbad, County
ofSan Diego, State of California., according to map thereofno. 2145, filed in
the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on February 20, 1929.
' Whereas, on OcL 16, 2024, the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5/2 (Lafferty,
Kamenjarin -No) to recommend the City Council approve a Site Development Plan to demol-
ish an existing medical office building and construct a. 10,671-square-foo~ two story, 34-foot-
tall, 3-tenant medical office building with private balconies, a 395-square-foot common egress
balcony on the second floor and a one-story, 2,803-square-foot enclosed parking garage con-
sisting of four parking spaces and two lift spaces (two parking spaces per lift) for a total of 8
spaces on a 0.16-acre property located at 2879 Hope Avenue in the northwest quadrant of the
City, the Village & Barrio Master Plan, and Loca] Facilities Management Zone l.
I
'niose persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hear-
ing. Copies oflhe staff report will be available on and aJ\er Nov. 27, 2.024. If you have any ques-
tions, please contact Lauren Yzaguirre in the Planning Division at (442) 339 -2634 or lauren.
yzaguirre@carlsbadca.gov. The meeting can be viewed online atbttps·/!wwwcarlsbadca gov/
cit;y-ba11/meetings-agendas or on the city's cable channel. In addition, written comments may
be submitted to the City Council at or prior to the hearing via U.S. Mail to the attention of Of-
fice oflhe City C1e:rk. 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, or via email to clerk.@
caclsbadca gov
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City CJerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Vil-
lage Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE:
CASE NAME,
PUBLISH,
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
SOP 2023-0025
GRAND HOPE MEDICAL OFFICE BmLDING
NOV.22,2024
Grand Hope Medical Office Building
SDP2023-0025 (DEV2023-0122)
11/22/2024 CN 29728
3 col x 9,25"
27,75"x $15
$416,25
BUTLER ANDREW RAND REITZ
ERIN A
990 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
. JEFFERSON ST PROPERTIES LLC
3424 AVENIDA DE LOYOLA
OCEANSIDE CA 92056
AMERICAN ADOPTIONS OF
CALIFORNIA
1120 TULLY RD
MODESTO CA 95350
JEANENE ENTERPRISES INC
PO BOX 1219
CARLSBAD CA 92018
GALER VINCENT AND SAMANTHA
1025 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
f AMUNDSON JASON I 1055 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WATSON CAROLYN S LIVING
TRUST 03-19-19
984 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CALABRESE DALE C
TRUST 03-1~-15
1012 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ES AP PORTFOLIO LLC
POB 49550 PROP TAX
CHARLOTTE NC 28277
JUSKIE LORI L
3110 AZAHAR ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
1.,
(
TUPPER FAMILY LIVING
TRUST 01-24-74
2785 JEFFERSON ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
• TSAI PROPERTIES LLC
I
1 I , .
1368 SAPPHIRE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92011
L H H INVESTMENTS LLC
PO BOX 2466
CARLSBAD CA 92018
MATSUI RICHARD KAND VERA B
TRUST 06-10-04
1005 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MARUKI ANAAM
1035 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PIERGEORGE ROBERT AND
ROSENDA P
1312 TORCH KEY WAY
JUPITER FL 33458
SCHAEFFER FAMILY
TRUST 02-05-04
994 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DAILEY PATRICK
1011 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
AB 3 LLC
20 W 64TH ST
APT 9V
NEW YORK NY 10023
AMAPOLO LL C
3117 WILDFLOWER SMT
ENCINITAS CA 92024
i I
l
2801 JEFFERSON STREET LL C
7232 EL FUERTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
/ DUDZIK DUO LLC
2815 JEFFERSON ST
STE 300
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LS G NABER INVESTMENTS LLC
6704 LONICERA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92011
MATYN THOMAS A AND KELLY K
1015 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
I VIVIEN DIEGO TRUST 03-08-24
1045 LAGUNA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PHILLIPS ALLAN SAND TANYA K
974 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LOUGH MICHAEL J
1010 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
I i
BALDWIN BLAKE AND THUMAR ARTI
965 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RODRIQUEZ FAMILY TRUST
1010 GRAND AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BROOKS LIVING TRUST 09-12-23
2860 HOPE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LAMPE SUSAN G
3609 SEASHORE DR
APT 8
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663
BROTZMAN STEPHANIE L LIVING
TRUST 05-15-13
5242 SAPPHIRE ST
ALTA LOMA CA 91701
I
BRISCOE SUSAN FAMILY
TRUST 05-01-15
2820 HOPE AVE
I APT C
CARLSBAD CA 92008
i_
KURISU FAMILY TRUST 01-06-09
2820 HOPE AVE
APT F
I CARLSBAD CA 92008
JEWEL DEVELOPMENT LLC
807 EMISSION RD
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
KM LIVING TRUST 04-09-18
833 ASH ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LOPEZ DANIEL AND IRENE
REVOCABLE TRUST 11-08-07
928 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GOLDMAN GLENN L
TRUST 08-10-01
2653 ROOSEVELT ST
STE D
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HOGAN HILARY M
PO BOX 1065
CARLSBAD CA 92018
LILLESTRAND GREGORY AND
CHARMAINE
880 HOME AVE
I UNIT D
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BURTON ROBERT AND LINDA
840 GROVE VIEW RD
OCEANSIDE CA 92057
MAIMON ROEI AND ZIV NETTA
2820 HOPE AVE
APT A i CARLSBAD CA 92008
\
: NORA RAVECA LIVING
TRUST 01-16-09
2820 HOPE AVE
APT D
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KRICHBAUM SCOTT AND DEBORAH
REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST
2820 HOPE AVE
APT G I CARLSBAD CA 92008
SCARPELLI FAMILY
TRUST 02-25-04
929 ORCHID WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92011
RASOOL LIVING TRUST 06-14-21
2993 MASSASOIT AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92117
WITTENBERG STEVEN AND
RHONDA 1996 LIVING TRUST
2259 MONTGOMERY AVE
CARDIFF CA 92007
MORTLAND BRUCE E TR
2297 DUNSTAN ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
JONES ROBERT A II
215 SE 8TH AVE
FT LAUDERDALE FL 33301
DILL FAMILY TRUST 07-26-04
880 HOME AVE
UNITE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
STEINBERG KARLE
2044 S HORNE ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
GAUTREAU NICOLE L
2820 HOPE AVE
APT B
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ASHTON RICHARD
2820 HOPE AVE
APT E
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WHEELER FAMILY LIVING
TRUST 09-08-12
2820 HOPE AVE
APT H
CARLSBAD CA 92008
I CORRELL FAMILY TRUST 06-05-20
PO BOX 293
I l
CARLSBAD CA 92018
PG P CARLSBAD LL C
10951 SORRENTO VALLEY RD
STE 2A
SAN DIEGO CA 92121
VANWIEREN WOOD J
TRUST 10-24-12
P O BOX 232131
ENCINITAS CA 92023
COAST VILLAGE APARTMENT
HOMES LP
1322 SCOTT ST
STE 204
SAN DIEGO CA 92106
LANPHEAR WILLIAM P IV
REVOCABLE TRUST 06-20-95
PO BOX 817
CARLSBAD CA 92018
I BURKE JASON AND TINA M
I 880 HOME AVE
i UNIT F
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ZIELKE ERIC A AND AYDEE B
6572 RED KNOT ST
CARLSBAD CA 92011
GB-LDC FAMILY
TRUST 07-31-20
603 SEAGAZE DR
BOX 513
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
STEENSTRA TRUST 02-04-14
853 HOtJ.IE AVE
. CARLSBAD CA 92008
CHOSEN WISE PROPERTIES LLC
3144 EL CAMINO REAL
STE 104
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HEKMAT FAMILY TRUST 02-24-06
17234 SILVER GUM WAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92127
KROENER REVOCABLE
TRUST 11-30-83
2516 MONTGOMERY AVE
CARDIFF CA 92007
.SAFFO DR AND MRS KARL S
TRUST 09-14-20
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 107
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LOPEZ-PANAMA MIGUEL A AND
LOPEZ MARIVIC T
2308 MENDOTA WAY
ROSEVILLE CA 95747
NELSON REVOCABLE
TRUST 01-19-87
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 202
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MAKATURA FAMILY
TRUST 10-25-01
2052 KIRKLAND CIR
THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
I
CONDE STEPHANIE
882 HOME AVE
APT A
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MIRICH FAMILY SURVIVORS
TRUST 05-07-04
1752 CAPE MAY PL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FORBES-HAGAN TRUST 12-03-21
1187 HUMMINGBIRD CIR
LONGMONT CO 80501
PEEWEE BEACHHOUSE LLC
2882 MONROE AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92116
UCKER FAMILY LIVING
TRUST 11-01-02
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 102
CARLSBAD CA 92008
OBRIEN FAMILY 2018
TRUST 05-15-18
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 105
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BROSNAN JAMES J AND PAMELA A
BROSNAN TRUST 03-03-20
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 108
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JOHNSON LISA K FAMILY
TRUST 01-10-03
3306 E KACHINA DR
PHOENIX AZ 85044
MAURO MELANIE
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 203
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BERGAMASCHI RICHARD J AND
MARCHELE A FAMILY TRUST
1379 CYNTHIA LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008
i HEIDRICH LIVING
TRUST 02-24-16
882 HOME AVE
l
APT B
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HACKETT LIZANNE V
855 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FIVE COASTAL GEM
PROPERTIES LL C
158 CAVE
CORONADO CA 92118
I TURNER TERESA M
TRUST 11-10-03
26803 WESTVALE RD
PLS VRDS PNSL CA 90274
I HAVILUK BARBARA D REVOCABLE
, LIVING TRUST 11-26-84
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 103
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MOTZKUS FAMILY LLC
52 LONE HOLW
SANDY UT 84092
GARCIA-ROSS FAITH M 2019
TRUST 05-20-19
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 109
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BUCKMASTER CHAD AND AMANDA
FAMILY TRUST 02-01-12
3119 CIRCA DE TIERRA
ENCINITAS CA 92024
REED CALVIN LAND LINDA E
REVOCABLE LIVING SURVIVORS
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 204
CARLSBAD CA 92008
THUM FAMILY TRUST 07-18-12
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 207
CARLSBAD CA 92008
i
QUINCE JOSEPHS AND JOYCE M
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 208
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ZARNOW FAMILY TRUST 02-14-03
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 211
CARLSBAD CA 92008
VALENTINE KEITH C
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 303
CARLSBAD CA 92008
. KING TRUST 12-22-10 I 61341 TRIPLE KNOT RD
BEND OR 97702
1 SHEW STEVEN AND TIFFANY
FAMILY TRUST 04-04-20
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 309
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PGP CARLSBAD SENIORS LTD II
PO BOX 16429
SAN DIEGO CA 92176
HANSEN SCOTTI L
4188 W VERMILLION DR
SOUTH JORDAN UT 84009
RR E G INVESTMENTS SERIES
LLC SERIES I033
3005 S EL CAMINO REAL
SAN CLEMENTE CA 92672
! FLAMMER FAMILY TRUST
2943 JEFFERSON ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DENNYS INC
PO BOX 260888
PLANO TX 75026
BUBB FAMILY 2012
TRUST 04-23-12
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 209
1. CARLSBAD CA 92008
1 BUTCHKO MARK A AND JULIA G
7534 SEDGE MEADOW DR
INDIANAPOLIS IN 46278
JANSSON JANE AND MARGARETA
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 304
CARLSBAD CA 92008
' JONES HERBERT LEE AND BEVERLY
ANN
800 GRAND AVE
UNIT 307
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GABRIELE COURT LLC
328 VISTA VILLAGE DR
STE D
; VISTA CA 92083
l_
CARLYLE RESIDENCES COMMUNITY
ASSN
5075 SHOREHAM PL
STE 280
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
HACKETT MICHAEL
786 GRAND AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
792 GRAND AVE CARLSBAD LLC
81922 THOROUGHBRED TRL
LA QUINTA CA 92253
SEVEN8FIVE GRAND LLC
PO BOX 231594
~NCINITAS CA 92023
CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC
6700 TOWER CIR
STE 1000
FRANKLIN TN 37067
BERGER SUSAN M
4441 PROVIDENCE POINT PL SE
ISSAQUAH WA 98029
HAVER FAMILY 2011
TRUST 05-18-11
16520 SENTERRA DR -
DELRAY BEACH FL 33484
STADNICK FAMILY
TRUST 07-03-00
27684 N 71ST WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85266
FORD WARWICK SAND NOLA M
142 WEND AVE
APT 26N
NEW YORK NY 10023
·1 WILSON CORY A AND SUSAN J I TRUST 12-06-18
• 1330 LONG LAKE RD
FLORENCE WI 54121
WELCH JOHN E AND SUZANNE S
FAMILY TRUST 11-18-97
782 GRAND AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HILKE LAWRENCE AND CAROL
LIVING 2008 TRUST 05-03-08
788 GRAND AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GRAND·JEFFE~SON OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
5315 AVENIDA ENCINAS
STE 200
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC
9191 TOWNE CENTRE DR
STE 180
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
·1 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC
5120 SHOREHAM PL
STE 150
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
WERMERS CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC
5120 SHOREHAM PL
STE 150
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
EZRA MINISTRIES INC <DBA
MISSION CHURCH>
825 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
3740 LP
PO BOX 33628
SAN DIEGO CA 92163
ORANGE LAND HOLDINGS LLC
264 PACIFIC AVE
SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
UEBER HAUN I LLC
43650 LA CRUZ DR
TEMECULA CA 92590
2952 HARDING LLC
4899 CASALS PL
SAN DIEGO CA 92124
G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC
i 9191 TOWNE CENTRE DR
STE 180
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
JACK IN THE BOX INC
PO BOX 7099
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658
) CARLSBAD68 LLC
68 PORTUGUESE BEND RD
ROLLING HILLS CA 90274
i SJM CARLSBAD LLC
11955 SAN DIEGO AVE I SAN DIEGO CA 92110
STARDUST HOMES LL C
P O BOX 2100
COLTON CA 92324
G AND M GAPCO LLC
16868 A LN
HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92647
GR T CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC
2001 WILSHIRE BLVD
STE 420
SANTA MONICA CA 90403
DAVIES KENNETH J
1576 PRIMERA ST
LEMON GROVE CA 91945
SCANLON FAMILY TRUST 05-16-16
3410 CAMINO ALEGRE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HELIX REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT
TRUST
PO BOX 15453
SAN DIEGO CA 92175
JACKSON FAMILY TRUST 09-14-05
2504 MANCHESTER AVE
CARDIFF CA 92007
-137 PRINTED -
* DUPLICATE OWNERS COMBINED.
INTO A SINGLE LABEL
Lauren Yzaguirre, Associate Planner
Community Development
December 3, 2024
GRAND HOPE MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDING
SDP 2023-0025
1 1
C cityof
Carlsbad
PROJECT LOCATION
2879 Hope Ave.
•0.16 acres
•V-B
•Village Center (VC) District
2
RD-MR-3
VC
FC
Grand Hope Medical Office Building
SDP2023-09V2023-0122)
0 10 20 40 60
Feet
{cityof
Carlsbad
PROJECT FEATURES
•Two -story medical
office
•3 tenant spaces
•Ground floor unit 1
(2,051 SF)
•Second floor unit 2
(2,073 SF) & 3 (2,084
SF)
•Common egress
balcony (395 SF)
•Parking Garage
3
{cityof
Carlsbad
PROJECT ANALYSIS
General Plan (V-B)
Zoning Ordinance (V-B)
Village & Barrio Master
Plan
4
STANDARDS MODIFICATION
VBMP Section 2.6.7.B – PURPOSE
Standards modifications are permitted only for the following purposes:
1.To provide housing affordable to low and/or moderate income households; or
2.To construct residential development at densities at the minimum set forth for the applicable land use district; or
3.To enable a significant public benefit as determined by the decision-making authority. A significant public benefit may
include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following:
a.Exceeding minimum Climate Action Plan (CAP) consistency requirements;
b.Exceeding local energy efficiency requirements and/or renewable energy requirements;
c.Exceeding local electric vehicle parking requirements;
d.Reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT);
e.Implementing programs that encourage employees to carpool or ride transit;
f.Implementing an important public amenity or infrastructure component of the Master Plan; and
g.Advancing other benefits as determined by the decision-making authority; or
4.To protect or accommodate a designated or potential historic resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines Section 15064.5; or
5.To recognize an established building or site character that is unique and desirable to maintain.5
STANDARDS MODIFICATION
6
Village and Barrio Master
Plan Section 2.7.1.H -
Building Massing
“Maximum wall plane and roofline:
No building façade visible from any
public street (excluding alleys) shall
extend more than 40 feet in length
without a 5-foot minimum variation
in the wall plane, as well as, a change
in roofline.”
• Wall Plane Maximum
ft minimum -m 5 • 40 ft. max1mu
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Unit 1
Parking Garage
7
66’
I~ L_
I
' , r.Nl::LFT &:JIIU& TOeE U!EDCR.r / / ~
',, B't flW'EDnPO'l'H:!l 'Mlil
'-000.Fl ltE lllJUlNll / ' / •! ',-. PAR~l14GLJFT7t8 ,,✓ ..
'"' ---..., I I \ r1-J .--·1:.._ _________ ~-
STAl~I
• E.Y.C.S. (l-;sTIIL.lEDj
FlRCRl&rR\
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I 1
I.I' -,-
----------t--------:-:-t------t--I--
I
---
I I I I I I
I
I
I lh========±::::::====~~~~I
ii-~ -------------~ C1ty-o-~
Carlsbad
PARKING
ASSEMBLY BILL 2097
8
City Requirements
•1 space per 355 square feet
•23 total spaces required (minimum)
•1 ADA and 4 EV spaces (of total)
PARKING
ASSEMBLY BILL 2097
9
City Requirements
•1 space per 355 square feet
•23 total spaces required (minimum)
•1 ADA and 4 EV spaces (of total)
AB 2097
•Cannot apply parking standards for
properties within ½ of transit station
•Minimum ADA and EV standards apply
PLANNING COMMISSION RECCOMENDATION
10
•Provides a public benefit by providing
additional parking above the state
minimum
•Provide a variety of parking options (EV,
ADA and standard)
•Reduce demand for street parking
•Revise EV parking spaces from all 8 EV to 4
EV installed.C cityof
Carlsbad
RECOMMENDED ACTION
ITEM 14: GRAND HOPE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
11
Adopt the resolution approving the site
development plan as described in the staff
report.
C cityof
Carlsbad
Mike Strong, Assistant Director
Lauren Yzaguirre, Associate Planner
Community Development
December 3, 2024
GRAND HOPE MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDING
SDP 2023-0025
12
C cityof
Carlsbad