The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 258C; La Costa Resort & Spa Ballroom; Conditional Use Permit (CUP)CITY OF CARLSBAD • LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) USE ONLY) D Administrative Permit -2nd D Planned Industrial Permit Dwelling Unit D Administrative Variance D Planning Commission Determination D Coastal Development Permit D Precise Development Plan \ [I] Conditional Use Permit 256,~} D Redevelopment Permit (Amendment) D Condominium Permit (C~) D Site Development Plan D Environmental Impact '-[!] Special Use Permit 02-Q3 Assessment D General Plan Amendment D Specific Plan D Hillside Development Permit D i=ef!teti·o~e PeFeel Me13 Obtain from Engineering Department D Local Coastal Plan Amendment D Tentative Tract Map D Master Plan D Variance D Non-Residential Planned D Zone Change Development D Planned Development Permit D List other applications not specified ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 216-123-07, 216-210-04 and 216-123-05 PROJECT NAME: La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom 2) 3) 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Addition of Ballroom 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) KSL La Costa Resort Corporation MAILING ADDRESS c/o La Costa Resort and Spa 2100 Costa del Mar Road CITY AND STATE Carlsbad, CA ZIP TELEPHONE 92009 AL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY SIGNATURE DATE 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) KSL La Costa Resort Corporation MAILING ADDRESS c/o La Costa Resort and Spa 2100 Costa del Mar Road CITY AND STATE Carlsbad, CA SIGNATURE ZIP TELEPHONE 92009 REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND MY KNOWLEDGE. DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION see attached sheets NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00P.M. Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 2 • 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: STREET ADDRESS ON THE East SIDE OF El Camino Real (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) (NAME OF STREET) BETWEEN La Costa Avenue AND Arenal Road (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 6 1 0) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS El11) NUMBER OF EXISTING 812) PROPOSED NUMBER OF B RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION EJ14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ ~15) PROPOSED COMM 1 42 .44r SQUARE FOOTAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE 16) PERCENT AGE OF PROPOSED Q17) PROPOSEDINCREASEIN ~ 18) PROPOSED SEWER B PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE ADT tha 500 USAGE IN EDU 19)· GROSS SITE ACREAGE ~20) EXISTING GENERAL G.;] 21) PROPOSED GENERAL [;] ;) PLAN R PLAN DESIGNATION . 22) EXISTING ZONING ~23) PROPOSED ZONING [;] 2 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. 1/WE CONSENT Tom:;;;:u:! ~~bwl~ SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION TION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED DATE FEE PAID Form 16 RECEIVED OCT 1 6 2002 CITY OF CARLSBAD DATE Ps~~~~~TF.!ECEIVED RECEIVED BY: RECEIPT NO. PAGE 2 OF 2 Page 1 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 PARCEL 1: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 26 AND SECTION 35 BOTH IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 10 OF LA COSTA GREENS, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6708, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 6708 NORTH 12°12'00" EAST 204.77 FEET; THENCE, LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY ll NE NORTH 89 °01 '27" WEST 533. 50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43°01'27" WEST 479.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 5J035'48" WEST, 310.84 FEET; THENCE NORTH 32°24'12" WEST 428.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 57°35'48" EAST 78.43 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18°01'27" WEST 87.98 FEET; THENCE NORTH 48°01'27" WEST 30.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 132.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13°39'19" EAST 42.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 77.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°35'41" EAST 108.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 325.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°35'41" EAST 161.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62°58'33" EAST 123.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16°58'33" EAST 246.99 FEET; THENCE NORTH OJ001'27" WEST 294.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°58'33" EAST 296.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 06°01'27" WEST 668.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 20°58'33" EAST 262.99 FEET; THENCE NORTH 51°58'33" EAST 71.49 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 3 ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 5734 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 320.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 19°41'27" WEST; THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID 320.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°03'18" A DISTANCE OF 112.01 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 50°15'15" WEST 382.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 708.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°41'04" A DISTANCE OF 132.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 7J045'43" WEST 20.51 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60°07'09" WEST 37.00 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY ANGLE POINT OF SAID MAP NO. 5734, SAIDPOINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A CUL-DE-SAC OF ARENAL ROAD AS SHOWN ON LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 2 MAP NO. 5486 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF MAP NO. 5734 NORTH 70°17'18" WEST 48.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTER LINE OF ARENAL ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 5486, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 720.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 19°14'27" EAST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 5486 AND LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 1 MAP 5434 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°14'42" A DISTANCE OF 493.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT AND CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTER LINE NORTH 69°59'45" WEST 112.81 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTER LINE OF EL CAMINO REAL (ROAD SURVEY NO. 682 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER); THENCE ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID EL CAMINO REAL THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 20°00'15" WEST 1261.45 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1500 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°49'05" A DISTANCE OF 754.45 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 08°48'50" EAST 989.06 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 3400.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF OJ033'04" A DISTANCE OF 448.09 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF LA COSTA AVENUE AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 10283 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, A RADIAL LINE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED INTERSECTION BEARS SOUTH 73°38'06" W; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTER LINE OF EL CAMINO REAL AND ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF LA COSTA AVENUE Page 2 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 THE FOLLOWING COURSES: NORTH 84°45'43" EAST, 544.19 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 500.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46°59'16" A DISTANCE OF 410.04 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 37°46'27" EAST 413.49 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 700.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 64°25'33" A DISTANCE OF 787.11 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 77°48'00" EAST 40.80 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 10 OF MAP NO. 6708; THENCE LEAVING SA 10 CENTER Ll NE OF LA COSTA AVENUE NORTH 12 o 12' 00" EAST 42. 00 FEET TO THE PO I NT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF EL CAMINO REAL PER ROAD SURVEY NO. 682 AND ROAD SURVEY NO. 1800-1 AND VARIOUS DEEDS OF RECORD THAT LIES WITHIN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SITE AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1961 AS DOCUMENT NO. 138155 OFFICIAL RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS LYING WITHIN LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 1, PER MAP NO. 5434; LA COSTA VALLEY, UNIT NO. 2, PER MAP NO. 5486; LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 3, PER MAP NO. 6129 AND LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 4, PER MAP NO. 6520, ALL FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THAT CERTAIN LEASE TO ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, RECORDED MAY 26, 1966 AS DOCUMENT NO. 87636 OFFICIAL RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL A DESCRIBED BELOW: PARCEL A: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF LOT 14 IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, AND LOT 3 OF LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM NO. 4, AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 6520, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COSTA DEL MAR ROAD AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 6520, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 OF SAID MAP 6520 AND ON THE ARC OF A 801.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 18°57'04" EAST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°36'39" A DISTANCE OF 274.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°34'14" EAST 89.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 65°31'08" EAST 72.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°34'14" EAST 156.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 58°25'46" WEST 352.62 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF A 150.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT, RECORDED OCTOBER 16, 1956 AS DOCUMENT NO. 145345, IN BOOK 6301, PAGE 162, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 75°59'14" WEST 152.53 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID 150.00 FOOT EASEMENT; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 24°27'21" WEST 243.40 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 29°02'39" EAST 100.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID COSTA DEL MAR ROAD, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 801.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 1r55'57" Page 3 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 EAST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°01'07" A DISTANCE OF 70.16 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM PARCEL 1 ABOVE, THE LA COSTA SHOPPING CENTER, BEING THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 9, 14 AND 15 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT ENGINEER'S STATION 154 PLUS 19.97 IN THE CENTER LINE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROAD SURVEY NO. 1800-1 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTER LINE NORTH 08°45'46" WEST (RECORD = NORTH 08°47'11" WEST), 434.03 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES NORTH 81°14'14" EAST (RECORD =NORTH 81°12'49" EAST}, 63.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING IN THE EASTERLY SIDE LINE OF EL CAMINO REAL ROAD, 126.00 FEET WIDE; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 81°14'14" EAST, 212.85 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 405.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°25'46" A DISTANCE OF 109.06 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 83°20'00" EAST 207.67 FEET TO POINT 'A', BEING AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1961 AS DOCUMENT NO. 138155 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGATION AND SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 00°33'46" WEST (DEED = SOUTH 00°09'10" EAST) 806.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN 84.00 FOOT EASEMENT DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN DEED RECORDED MAY 29, 1968 AS DOCUMENT NO. 90113 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 84°47'23" WEST (DEED = SOUTH 84°47'00" WEST) 213.15 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE AT RIGHT ANGLES NORTH 05°12'37" WEST 8.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE LEASE TO ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY AND RECORDED MAY 26, 1966 AS DOCUMENT NO. 87636 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID LEASE BOUNDARY NORTH 15°39'26" WEST (LEASE= NORTH 15°31'03" WEST) 141.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED TO RANCHO LA COSTA, INC., RECORDED APRIL 17, 1967 AS DOCUMENT NO. 52816 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED IN SAID QUITCLAIM DEED SOUTH 84°47'23" WEST 149.83 FEET (DEED= SOUTH 84°45'46" WEST 150.28 FEET) TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A 2937.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 76°10'50" WEST (DEED= SOUTH 76°09'10" WEST), SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE AFOREMENTIONED QUITCLAIM DEED; THENCE LEAVING SAID 2937.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE ALONG THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE LAST MENTIONED RADIAL LINE SOUTH 76°10'50" WEST, 1.37 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY SIDELINE OF EL CAMINO REAL ROAD, 126.00 FEET WIDE, SAID POINT BEING IN THE ARC OF A 3337.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 76°47'10" WEST; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY SIDELINE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04°27'04", A DISTANCE OF 259.24 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 08°45'46" WEST (RECORD = NORTH 08°47'11" WEST) 434.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM PARCEL 1 ABOVE THAT PORTION OF LOT 9 IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 SOUTH 00°34'16" WEST 564.76 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1961 AS DOCUMENT NO. 138155 OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID CORNER ------------------------------ Page 4 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 00°34'16" WEST 16.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 458.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 51°56'36" EAST, SAID POINT BEING A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY SIDELINE OF LA COSTA AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 8379; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY SIDELINE THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 46°43'51" A DISTANCE OF 373.55 FEET; SOUTH 84°47'15" WEST 123.36 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID WATER DISTRICT PARCEL; THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGATION NORTH 00°34'16" EAST (DEED= NORTH 00°09'10" WEST) 206.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WATER DISTRICT PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID WATER DISTRICT PARCEL, SOUTH 89°25'44" EAST (DEED = NORTH 89°50'50"} 440.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM SAID PARCEL 1 ABOVE THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EASTERLY CORNER AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 6129, SAID MAP BEING FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; SAID CORNER FORMED BY THE INTERSECTION OF TWO COURSES: NORTH 58°23'59" EAST (DEED= NORTH 58°25'46" EAST} 326.77 FEET AND NORTH 13°46'01" EAST (DEED= NORTH 13°44'14" EAST) 28.70 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 6129 SOUTH 58°23'59" WEST (DEED =SOUTH 58°25'46" WEST) 95.60 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 31°36'01" EAST 61.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13°25'02" WEST 31.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 49°08'48" WEST 46.59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 69°53'42" WEST 55.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86°50'03" WEST 31.14 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31°36'01" WEST 62.98 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE NORTH 58°23'59" EAST (DEED = NORTH 58°25'46" EAST) 148.05 FEET. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL THAT PORTION OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE NORTH 00°33'42" EAST (NORTH 00°09'10" WEST), 35.12 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1961 AS FILE NO. 138155 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY PROLONGATION, SOUTH 89°26'18" EAST, 75.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24°01'11" EAST, 153.95 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND; THENCE NORTH 89°26'18" WEST (NORTH 89°50'50" EAST) ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, 139.07 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND; THENCE NORTH 00°33'42" (NORTH 00°09'10" WEST) EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND, 104.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH: THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 45 AND 46 OF LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 1, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 5434, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, AND THOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 25, 26, 35 AND 36, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF ALL BEING IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 45; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT NORTH 12°43'11" EAST, 25.45 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 44 OF Page 5 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 SAID LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 1; THENCE SOUTH 89°16'25" EAST, 197.43 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 46, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 148 OF LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 4, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 5781, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 4, AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 53°35'07" EAST, 48.08 FEET; SOUTH 61°45'15" EAST, 429.99 FEET; SOUTH 4J022'36" EAST, 386.01 FEET; SOUTH 1J037'22" WEST, 682.05 FEET; SOUTH 2J002'33" WEST, 810.00 FEET; SOUTH 46°56'33" WEST, 248.60 FEET; SOUTH 16°17'33" WEST, 275.00 FEET; SOUTH 03°53'33" WEST, 317.60 FEET; SOUTH OJ011'27" EAST, 100.20 FEET; SOUTH 18°23'27" EAST, 193.00 FEET; SOUTH 26°25'27" EAST, 322.50 FEET; SOUTH 18°48'27" EAST, 202.00 FEET; SOUTH 35°12'40" EAST, 77.67 FEET; NORTH 84°58'28" EAST, 752.17 FEET; SOUTH 76°01'37" EAST, 349.53 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 194 OF SAID LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 4; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF MAP NO. 7784 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 76°01'37" EAST, 101.47 FEET; SOUTH 69°19'47" EAST, 79.98 FEET; SOUTH 88°08'28" EAST, 851.93 FEET; NORTH 8J040'50" EAST, 300.64 FEET; SOUTH 75°21'30" EAST, 547.76 FEET; SOUTH 63°03'45" EAST, 578.25 FEET, SOUTH 84°01'27" EAST, 528.04 FEET; SOUTH 48°01'27" EAST, 511.03 FEET; AND SOUTH 35°01'27" EAST, 460.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52°35'53" EAST, 329.49 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 382 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 5, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6600 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY THEREOF AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 17°41'55" WEST, 208.88 FEET; SOUTH 27°11'20" WEST, 91.78 FEET; SOUTH 36°35'33" WEST, 94.13 FEET; SOUTH 46°06'56" WEST, 94.13 FEET; SOUTH 55°40'48" WEST, 120.24 FEET; SOUTH 68°34'25" WEST, 95.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 376 OF SAID LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 5; BEING THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO RANCHO LA COSTA, INC., RECORDED JANUARY 14, 1981 AS DOCUMENT NO. 12248 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LAND NORTH 21°25'35" WEST 89.46 FEET; AND NORTH 42°01'15" WEST 323.96 FEET TO THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 5; THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 01°55'21" WEST 34.09 FEET; NORTH 50°27'39" WEST 529.29 FEET; SOUTH 3J014'05" WEST 62.80 FEET; SOUTH 05°27'34" EAST 624.64 FEET SOUTH 14°55'28" EAST 235.00 FEET; SOUTH 33°10'03" EAST, 222.92 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A 380.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 49°22'46" WEST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42°20'40" A DISTANCE OF 280.84 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC THEREOF TO WHICH A RADIAL LINE BEARS SOUTH 88°16'34" WEST, THENCE LEAVING SAID CURVE ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID RADIAL LINE AND CONTINUING ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 5 AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 88°16'34" WEST, 89.56 FEET; NORTH 79°38'48" WEST, 105.72 FEET; NORTH 67°59'19" WEST, 101.39 FEET; NORTH 60°43'29" WEST 281.88 FEET; AND NORTH 49°07'43" WEST, 631.55 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 62 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 1, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6117; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 1 AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 55°37'00" WEST, 105.00 FEET; NORTH 34°23'00" EAST, 162.38 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 380.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°15'04" A DISTANCE OF Page 6 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 87.88 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC THEREOF TO WHICH A RADIAL LINE BEARS SOUTH 68°52'04" EAST, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 205 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 2, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6462, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID CURVE, ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 2 AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 52°44'59" EAST, 642.66 FEET; NORTH 60°31'27" EAST, 79.26 FEET; NORTH 00°41'38" WEST, 624.21 FEET; NORTH 15°10'48" EAST, 203.15 FEET; NORTH 00°03'46" WEST, 170.00 FEET; NORTH 59°48'23" WEST, 69.46 FEET; NORTH 83°16'49" WEST, 110.08 FEET; SOUTH 89°56'14" WEST, 350.00 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 59 OF THE AFOREMENTIONED LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 1; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 1 AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 89°56'14" WEST, 600.00 FEET; NORTH 65°05'55" WEST, 587.00; SOUTH 55°59'22" WEST, 454.39 FEET; SOUTH 64°39'14" EAST, 1316.78 FEET; NORTH 89°56'14" EAST, 117.32 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A 320.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 86°19'38" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°42'38" A DISTANCE OF 171.52 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 34°23'00" WEST, 174.00 FEET; NORTH 55°37'00" WEST, 116.00 FEET; NORTH 61°46'38" WEST, 196.08 FEET; NORTH 72°24'12" WEST, 186.31 FEET; NORTH 24°24'54" EAST, 5.80 FEET; NORTH 50°24'12" WEST, 65.27 FEET; SOUTH 39°35'48" WEST, 32.58 FEET; NORTH 72°24'12" WEST, 204.93 FEET; NORTH 61°42'02" WEST, 492.35 FEET; NORTH 76°25'45" WEST, 113.38 FEET, WEST, 114.00 FEET; SOUTH 85°50'25" WEST, 110.29 FEET; SOUTH 70°46'50" WEST, 115.43 FEET; SOUTH 63°15'05" WEST, 184.91 FEET; SOUTH 74°47'11" WEST, 389.41 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF LA COSTA GREENS, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6708, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE LEAVING THE BOUNDARY OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 1, ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF LA COSTA GREENS AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 00°22'36" WEST, 127.39 FEET; SOUTH 89°37'24" WEST, 352.01 FEET; NORTH 84°05'18" WEST, 262.44 FEET; NORTH 77°48'00" WEST, 338.00 FEET; SOUTH 12°12'00" WEST, 55.23 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF LA COSTA GREENS, DISTANCE NORTH 12°12'00" EAST 204.77 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 10 OF SAID MAP NO. 6708; THENCE, LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY LINE NORTH 89°01'27" WEST 533.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43°01'27" WEST 479.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 5J035'48" WEST 310.84 FEET; THENCE NORTH 32°24'12" WEST 428.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 5J035'48" EAST 78.43 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18°01'27" WEST 87.98 FEET; THENCE NORTH 48°01'27" WEST 30.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 132.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13°39'19" EAST 42.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 77.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°35'41" EAST 108.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°24'19" EAST 325.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°35'41" EAST 161.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62°58'33" EAST 123.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16°58'33" EAST 246.99 FEET; THENCE NORTH OJ001'27" WEST 294.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°58'33" EAST 296.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 06°01'27" WEST 668.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 20°58'33" EAST 262.99 FEET; THENCE NORTH 51°58'33" EAST 71.49 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 3, MAP NO. 5734, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 320.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 19°41'27" WEST; THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE THE FOLLOWING COURSES: NORTH 51°58'33" EAST, 141.49 FEET; NORTH 18°58'33" EAST, 297.96 FEET, NORTH 02°58'33" EAST, 456.21 FEET; NORTH 29°58'33" EAST, 258.86 FEET; NORTH 14°58'33" EAST, 195.00 FEET; NORTH 32°40'07" WEST 87.64 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 58 OF THE AFOREMENTIONED LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 1; THENCE LEAVING THE .-------------------------------------------- Page 7 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 BOUNDARY OF LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT NO. 3 AND ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 1 AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 7J024'34" EAST, 67.14 FEET; SOUTH 43°43'10" EAST, 7.21 FEET, SOUTH 7J024'34" EAST, 20.00 FEET; NORTH 12°35'26" EAST, 18.00 FEET; NORTH 77°24'34" WEST, 20.00 FEET; SOUTH 68°54'02" WEST, 7.21 FEET; NORTH 7J024'34" WEST, 65.76 FEET; NORTH 20°29'23" EAST, 186.99 FEET; NORTH 08°52'40" EAST, 200.26 FEET; NORTH 2J022'15" WEST, 101.38 FEET; NORTH 34°22'08" WEST, 182.50 FEET; NORTH 42°29'02" WEST, 66.00 FEET; NORTH 10°25'17" EAST, 40.00 FEET; NORTH 36°40'29" EAST, 166.22 FEET; NORTH 32°37'03" EAST, 102.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 3, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6129, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 4, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6520, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 54 OF SAID MAP NO. 5434; THENCE NORTH 69°07'20" EAST 138.00 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 54 BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, ALONG THE PROLONGATION THEREOF NORTH 69°07'20" EAST, 9.06 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27°20'48" EAST 88.09 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 08°54'07" WEST 15.22 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 54; THENCE NORTH 27°20'48" WEST 101.38 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP 11722 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 9, 1981 AT A POINT SOUTH 76°01'37" EAST, 69.24 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY SOUTHWEST CORNER; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 76°01'37" EAST, 32.23 FEET AND SOUTH 69°19'47" EAST, 79.98 FEET AND SOUTH 88°08'28" EAST, 414.97 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 68°04'56" WEST, 161.27 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 225.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°55'54" FOR A DISTANCE OF 93.98 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO THE LAST SAID CURVE SOUTH 44°09'02" WEST, 94.50 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 60.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°00'55" FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.82 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS NORTH 62°51'53" WEST FROM THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE; THENCE NORTH 53°02'46" WEST, 25.78 FOOT TO A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°48'36", A DISTANCE OF 37.82 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 30°14'10" WEST, 147.44 FEET TO A TANGENT 105.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41°20'56", A DISTANCE OF 75.78 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE WITH A 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°17'49", A DISTANCE OF 48.58 FEET TO A POINT THAT LIES SOUTH 47°42'43" WEST FROM THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Page 8 Order No. 23048851 DESCRIPTION BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 377 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 5, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6600, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY MARCH 10, 1970 FROM WHICH POINT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 377 BEARS NORTH 55°40'48" EAST, 12.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 377 SOUTH 55°40'48" WEST 108.24 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 376 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 6600; THENCE LEAVING SAID LOT 377 ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 376 SOUTH 68°34'25" WEST, 85.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE NORTH 21°25'35" WEST, 5.00 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE NORTH 68°34'25" EAST, 84.44 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55°40'48" EAST, 10.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02°34'00" WEST, 125.12 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68°36'00" EAST, 26.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3J045'51" EAST, 97.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33°35'41" EAST, 8.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH: ALL THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 374 OF LA COSTA SOUTH UNIT NO. 5, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 6600, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 5 NORTH 25°42'31" WEST, 133.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 01°55'21" WEST, 275.91 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 368 OF SAID MAP; THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY SOUTH 42°01'15" EAST 323.96 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 375 OF SAID UNIT NO. 5; THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGATION SOUTH 21°25'35" EAST 89.46 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID UNIT NO. 5, SOUTH 68°34'25" WEST, 196.14 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF MAP NO. 7784 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE CENTER LINE OF THE CERTAIN EASEMENT TO CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECORDED AUGUST 8, 1973, AS DOCUMENT NO. 73-220063, OFFICIAL RECORDS AND THE CENTER LINE OF THAT CERTAIN ACCESS EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 1973, AS DOCUMENT NO. 73-270063 OFFICIAL RECORDS, ALL AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 7784; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY AND ALONG SAID CENTER LINES THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 22°40'48" EAST, 447.87 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 750.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°28'38" A DISTANCE OF 307.32 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF MAP NO. 6600 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE ARC OF A 48.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL LINE FROM SAID 750.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEARS SOUTH 89°12'10" EAST, A RADIAL LINE FROM SAID 48.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEARS NORTH 02°37'50" EAST; THENCE Page 9 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID 48.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE 65.90 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 6600; THENCE NORTH 76°01'20" WEST 117.46 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 382 OF SAID MAP NO. 6600; THENCE NORTH 52°35'53" WEST 329.49 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID MAP NO. 7784; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7784 NORTH 54°58'33" EAST 170 FEET; NORTH 04°49'30" EAST 375 FEET; AND NORTH 25°03'28" EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EASTERLY 30 FEET, SAID EASTERLY 30 FEET TERMINATING ON THE NORTHWEST IN THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7784, AND ON THE SOUTH IN SAID 48 FOOT RADIUS CURVE IN THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF MAP NO. 6600. PARCEL 2: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 3A: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 3B: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 3C: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 3D: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 4: INTENTIONALLY OMITTED PARCEL 5: (APN: 216-123-05, 216-210-04) A PARCEL OF LAND, BEING A PORTION OF LOT 14 IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, AND LOT 3 OF LA COSTA CONDOMINIUM NO. 4, AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 6520, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COSTA DEL MAR ROAD AS SHOWN ON MAP 6520, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 OF SAID MAP 6520 AND ON THE ARC OF AN 801.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 18°57'04" EAST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°36'39" A DISTANCE OF 274.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°34'14" EAST 89.00 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 65°31'08" EAST 72.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°34'14" EAST 156.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 58°25'46" WEST 352.62 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF A 150.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 16, 1956 AS DOCUMENT NO. 145345, IN BOOK 6301, PAGE 162 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 75°59'14" WEST 152.53 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 24°27'21" WEST 243.40 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 29°02'30" EAST 100.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID COSTA DEL MAR ROAD, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 801.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 13°55'57" EAST; THENCE EASTERLY Page 10 DESCRIPTION Order No. 23048851 ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°01'07" A DISTANCE OF 70.16 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 6: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER COSTA DEL MAR ROAD AS DEDICATED AND REJECTED ON LA COSTA CONDOMINIUMS NO. 3 AND 4 ACCORDING TO MAPS 6129 AND 6520 RESPECTIVELY. '. e e PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION PROJECT NAME: La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom KSL La Costa Resort Corporation APPLICANTNAME: __________________________________________ _ Please describe tully the proposed proJect. Include any details necessary tc aae::~ate!y expla1n the scope and/or operat1on of the proposed proJect. You may a1so 1n:::~:Je anv background information and supporting statements regarding tne reasons tor. =~ appropnateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation. See attached. t. RECEIVED OCT 1 6 2002 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. ProjO..c.trm . f --------------------------------------- a . n . . e I>roJect escrtptton KSL LaCosta Resort Corporation ("KSL") is applying to amend the existing CUP for the La Costa Spa and Resort and for a special use permit ("SUP") to allow the addition of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom facility with associated improvements. This building would be located in the area to the north of the existing spa as generally depicted on the Site Plan submitted with this application. The ballroom facility will be used primarily as meeting space for on-site group guests and will also be used for evening functions such as parties, weddings or other events. This new ballroom facility is an important improvement that is necessary for the re-positioning of the resort. Compared to its peers in the high-end group hotel industry, La Costa has insufficient meeting space for the room count of the resort. This facility will help to better align the correct ratio of meeting space per guest room for the resort. The facility would be comprised of approximately 18,000 square feet of ballroom space, 8,300 square feet ofprefunction space and approximately 1,400 square feet of meeting space. The remaining square feet would be used for a warming kitchen, back of house and some office space. Off-street parking for the new facility will be provided in the existing parking lot to the north of the facility and in a new parking lot that will be constructed at the comer of Costa Del Mar Road and Estrella Drive where the existing spa is currently located. KSL is currently processing plans to construct a new spa and will demolish the existing spa after the new spa is opened for operations. In addition, KSL is currently processing plans pursuant to CUP 258(B) to construct a previously approved, approximately 513 space parking lot on its property at the southeast comer of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road. These 513 spaces will compensate for the spaces that will be used for the new ballroom in the existing parking lot and any spaces that will be lost in connection with construction of the new spa and the ballroom. As such, KSL will be providing new off-street parking on site as required by the City Code for the new ballroom facility. of ~arlsbad I :11 E I I I I I I It. I • J J . i= 1 ; I I I I J I\ I DISCLOSURE STATE1\1E~T · Apphcant' s statement or disclosure of cenam ownership mterests on all app!tcauons wh~h will requm: 1 discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appomted Board. CommiSSion or Commmee. · The following mforrnation MUST be disclosed at the time of apphcauon submmal. Your pro_1ect cannot be reviewed until this inforrnauon is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defmed as "Any individual, fum, co-partnership, joint venture, assoctauon. social club. fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate. in this and any other county. city and county. cay municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership. include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than I 0% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publiclv-owned corporation. include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person. ____ \.,.~)'-i)...:A-~------Corp/Part. ____________ _ Title ___________ _ Title. ______________ _ Address. ___________ _ Address, _____________ _ 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly- owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person ___ ~Q""l~~t\-+-----Corp/Part ____________ _ Title ____________ _ Title ______________ _ Address. _________ _ Address _____________ _ 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 @ •city of ~arlsbad ----~----------l.~;JT!f~-1~.~~~.~~~~~.•J~ .... r:.,l~J~.f~:~,~;~i~.·.•t•J ... 1~1· HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATE1\1ENT Consultation Of Lists of Sites Related To Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of California Government Code Section 65962.5, I have consulted the Hazardous Wastes and Substances Sites List compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): ~ The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 ofthe State Government Code. 0 The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 ofthe State Government Code. APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name: KSL La Costa Resort Corp. Name: __ K_S_L_La __ c_os_t_a_Re_s_o_r_t_Co_r_p_. ___ _ Address: 2100 Costa Del Mar Rd. Address: __ 2_1o_o_c_o_s_t_a_D_e_l_Ma_r_Rd_. ____ _ Phone Number: -------------- 760 438 9111 760 438 9111 Phone Number: _____________ _ 7315 Estrella Del Mar Road Address of Site: ________________________________ _ Local Agency (City and County):__,C,.,a..._r""'ls~b~a""d"""',........,S=a=n:.....=D=i=eg""o==-------------------- Assessor's book, page, and parcel number:_..::;2..::.1..;;..6-_12_3;;_-_0;....;7 _________________ _ Specify Jist(s): __ Ha_za_r_d_o_u_s_W_a_s_t_e_a_n_d_S_u_b_s_t_an_c_e_s_s_1_· t_e_l_i_s_t _____ (_c_i_ty:...._l_1_· s_t_) ___ _ Regulatory Identification Number: __________________________ _ Date of List:_0_4_1_1_5_19_8 ___________________________ _ S.Chevis Hosea V.P. S.Chevis Hosea V.P. Admin/Counter/HazW astc 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 @ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM-PART 1 (TO BE COMPL~~8~\\~~ APPLICANT) CASE NO.: ____ _ DATE ------ BACKGROUND OCT 1 6 2002 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. 1. CASE NAME: La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: 760-602-8559 4. PROJECT LOCATION: La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: KSL Development Corporation La Costa Resort 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ..!:..T-"""'"R:::.....__ ___________ _ 7. ZONING: C2 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): Leucadia Water District 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: See attached. PI AILCBILCB-Cover-Fonn.doc 1 ' ' ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary. of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Air Quality D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils 0Noise D Hazards/Hazardous Materials D Population and Housing D Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use and Planning D Mineral Resources D Mandatory Findings of Significance 2 0 Public Services D Recreation 0 Transportation/Circulation . 0 Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS--Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 0 vista? 0 X 0 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, 0 0 X 0 including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 0 0 0 character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or 0 0 0 glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The project will not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with aesthetics. P/AILCB/LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -3- ' .. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In detennining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or 0 0 0 Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural 0 use, or a Williamson Act contract? 0 0 " c) Involve other changes in the existing 0 environment which, due to their location or 0 0 " nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. Nor will the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract, or involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with agricultural resources. P/AILCBILCB-Initiai-Study.doc -4- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact III. AIR QUALITY --Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 0 X applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 X 0 substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 0 0 0 increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial 0 0 X 0 pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 0 0 X 0 substantial number of people? Comment: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state nonattainment area for ozone (03), and a state nonattainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 1 0 microns in diameter (PM to). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California nonattainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resource Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 1Oth in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental P/A!LCB/LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -5- .. ,, Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following: • Is the regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one-hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal eight-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour site state standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. If there is grading associated with the project, the project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. An impact is assessed as less than significant. PI A/LCB/LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -6- c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a nonattainment zone for ozone and suspended fme particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions through the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA guidelines Section 15130 (a)(4), the proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. PI AILCB/l.CB-Initial-Study.doc -7- ~ . • Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either 0 0 0 directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any 0 0 D riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department ofFish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally D 0 D protected wetlands as defmed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of 0 0 0 any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted 0 Cl 0 Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally 0 0 0 sensitive? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and P/AILCBILCB-Initiai-Study.doc -8- Wildlife Service. The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department ofFish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service. The project will not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The project will not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. The project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan, nor will the project impact tributary areas that are environmentally sensitive. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with biological resources. PI A!LCBILCB-Initiai-Study.doc -9- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES--Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 significance of a historical resource as defmed in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 0 0 0 paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those 0 0 0 interred outside of formal cemeteries? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. The project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. The project will not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with cultural resources. PI AILCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -10- Issues (and Supporting Infonnation Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential 0 0 0 substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 0 0 0 delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 liquefaction? 0 0 X iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of 0 0 0 X topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 0 unstable, or that would become unstable as a 0 0 X result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defmed in 0 Table 18-1-B ofthe Uniform Building Code 0 0 (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting 0 the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water 0 0 disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Map 1 of the Public Safety Element of the City of P/NLCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -11- Carlsbad General Plan). The project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or Landslides. Implementation of the project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, nor will the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. The project will not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. The project will not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. Therefore, there are no significant impact associated with geology and soils. PI AILCB!LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -12- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS-Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous 0 0 0 or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list 0 0 0 of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use 0 0 0 plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0 0 0 airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically 0 0 0 interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant 0 0 0 risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. The proposed use on the site is a Ballroom to PI A!LCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -13- support the existing uses on La Costa Spa and Resort. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The project will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The project will not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. According to map four of the Public Safety Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan, the project does not lie within the Airport Influence Area. Therefore, the project will not result in any safety hazards for people working or residing within the project area. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. Therefore, there are no significant impact associated with hazards and hazardous materials. PI AILCB/LCB-Initial-Study.doc -14- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY --Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 0 0 0 X discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or 0 0 0 X interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 0 0 0 X of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 0 0 0 of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? f) Create or contribute runoff water which would 0 0 0 exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 0 X h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard 0 0 0 X area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? i) Place within a I 00-year flood hazard area 0 0 0 structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? P/ AILCB!LCB·Initial-Study.doc -15- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? I) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? o) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Impact X Comment: The proposed project will not violate any existing Federal, State, or local water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is designed to be a ballroom and, thus, will not utilize any groundwater supplies, interfere with groundwater recharge, or have any impacts on groundwater quality. The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. Nor will the project substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site or create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, otherwise substantially degrade water quality. The project is not planned to be located within a 1 00-year flood plain, nor place housing within a 1 00-year flood plain. The project will not be in danger of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or P/AILCB/LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -16- mudflow, and will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The project will not increase erosion (sediment) or pollutant discharges into receiving surface waters, nor make any other alterations of receiving surface water quality. The project will not make any changes to receiving water quality during or after construction or make increases of any pollutant to any already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list. The project will comply with all applicable storm water pollution prevention plan requirements. PI NLCB/LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -17- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, 0 0 0 X policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 0 0 0 conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not physically divide an established community, nor will the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, there are no significant impact associated with land use and planning. P/AILCBILCB-Initiai-Study.doc -18- Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES--Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known 0 0 0 mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-0 0 0 important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with mineral resources. PI NLCB/LCB-Initial-Study.doc -19- ,'. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XI. NOISE-Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise 0 0 0 levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of 0 0 excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient 0 D D noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in D D D ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use 0 0 0 plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0 0 D airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. According to map one of the noise element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan, the project site does not lie within any sensitive noise contours. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The project will not result in the exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels. The project will not create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, nor will it create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. According to Map Three of the Noise Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan, the proposed project will not be located within the Airport Influence Area. Therefore, the project would not expose people working or residing in the project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with noise. P/AILCB!LCB-Initiai-Study.doc -20- • Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING--Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an 0 0 0 area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing 0 0 0 housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 0 0 necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). The project will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, there are no significant impact associated with population and housing. PI NLCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -21- ,-. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? 0 0 " 0 Police protection? 0 0 " 0 Schools? 0 0 " 0 Parks? 0 0 " 0 Other public facilities? 0 0 " D Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, or any other public facilities. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with public services. P/AILCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -22- .. .. ,' . Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION-- a) Would the project increase the use of existing 0 0 0 neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities 0 0 D or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The project will not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with recreational resources. PI AJLCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -23- .. ~· ,•' • ~ Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XV. TRANSPORTATIONffRAFFIC --Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial 0 0 0 in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a 0 0 0 level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, 0 0 0 including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design 0 0 0 feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 X 0 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 X 0 g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or 0 programs supporting alternative transportation 0 X 0 (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. A focused traffic evaluation and analysis for La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom was conducted by Rick Engineering on Oct. 15, 2002. The analysis concluded that there were no significant traffic impacts. See attached report for further detail. Furthermore, implementation of the proposed project will not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. The project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses, result in inadequate emergency access, result in inadequate parking capacity, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. P/NLCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -24- ~ " .. ' • ~ Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of 0 0 0 the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new 0 0 0 water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new 0 0 0 storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to 0 0 0 serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater 0 0 0 treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 0 0 0 permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes 0 0 0 and regulations related to solid waste? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project will not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The project will not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project will make a determination that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitment. The project will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. P/AILCBILCB-Initiai-Study.doc -25- • ,.. • The project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs, and will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with utilities and services systems. PI AJLCB/LCB-Initial-Study.doc -26- # • ._.t, ~ r • Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially (Supplemental documents may be referred to Significant Potentially Unless Less Than and attached) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade 0 0 D the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 D individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects 0 0 D which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comment: The project site is currently developed and therefore the project constitutes the redevelopment of an existing disturbed site. Thus, implementation of the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, nor does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, there is no significant impact associated with the mandatory findings of significance. PI AILCBILCB-Initial-Study.doc -27- • City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: KSL LA COSTA RESORT CORP Description Amount SUP02008 191 . 2 9 5029 01/07/03 0002 0.1. CGP O? ... 191,.29 Receipt Number: R0031808 Transaction Date: 01/07/2003 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1999 191.29 Transaction Amount: 191.29 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: KSL LA COSTA RESORT CORP Set Id: S000000934 Description Amount CUP0258C 2,720.00 SUP02008 2,300.00 Total: 5,020.00 Receipt Number: R0030300 Transaction Date: 10/16/2002 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1565 5,020.00 Transaction Amount: 5,020.00 • City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: KSL LA COSTA RESORT CORP Set Id: S000000933 Description Amount ·CUP92928 cu~~t5g~ 2' 72 0 . Q@92 10/16/02 0002 01. 02 SUP02008 2,300.00 CGP 5020.00 Total: 5,020.00 Receipt Number: R0030297 Transaction Date: 10/16/2002 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1565 5,020.00 Transaction Amount: 5,020.00 .. . . PlEASE NOTE: Time limits on the processing of discretionary projects established by state law do not start until a project application is deemed complete by the City. The City has 30 calendar days from the date of application submittal to determine whether an application is complete or incomplete. Within 30 days of submittal of this application you will receive a letter stating whether this application is complete or incomplete. If it is incomplete, the letter will state what is needed to make this application complete. When the application is complete, the processing period will start upon the da~f the completion letter. Applicant Signature:/,.....-..... -.--,-. ___ . ---,j;b-~1-...__ __________ _ ,..-./7. . " .. / /'~-Staff Signature: . //~:,.,::;, !/{ .. ~' (? ' \ _ _.....~- Date: \ D \It a \0 7.....- .f• To be stapled with receipt to application Copy for file .... CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: ( ) Environmental Impact Report ( ) Negative Declaration Local Public Agency D State Agency ( ) Application Fee Water Diversion (State Water Resources Control ( ) Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs ( ) County Administrative Fee ~reject that is exempt from fees 214894 Dale ~~~B ~0 3 Document No.:O tS) f $ h"' Signature and title of person receiving payment: __.."""'-___._,~::...-,r-:Q/1::.:...--=dNJ::...::..--=..:....:...__=---=-~=--7+----------- wHITE-PROJECT APPLICANT PINK-LEAD AGENCY , Notice ofDeterlination To: D Office of Planning and Resear P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812 ~ County Clerk County of San Diego BY.-~.:.L.L---r;~iiV Mailstop 833, Attn: Wendy DEP0T7 PO Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92112-1750 0 1 1 5 1 7 (760) 602-4600 Project No: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom Project Title City of Carlsbad, Michael Grim (760) 602-4623 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number East of El Camino Real, between Arenal Road and Costa del Mar Road, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: KSL Development Corp. Applicant's Address: 2100 Costa del Mar Rd, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Applicant's Telephone Number: 760-438-9111 Project Description: Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit-Scenic Corridor > to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,477 square foot ballroom and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas on the western portion of the La Costa Resort and Spa. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on January 15. 2003, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQ A. 3. Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 5. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQ A. This is to certify that the final Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of project app val is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. MICHAEL J. HOLZMIL Date Date received for filing at OPR: Revised December 200 l • Cit of NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: East of El Camino Real, between Arenal Road and Costa del Mar Road, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit- Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom facility and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas within the La Costa Resort. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Michael Grim in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4623. DATED: DECEMBER 27, 2002 CASE NO: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 CASE NAME: LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM PUBLISH DATE: DECEMBER 27, 2002 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK SAN DIEGO COUNTY ON JAN 2 3 2003 i ;;.OSTED JAN 2 3 2003 REMOVED FEB 2 4 2003 i i,Cf li. F:NED T~ AGENCY ON FEB 2 4 2003 .... J?lanning Director l I t ;rpr l"f'-' 0 I I .. ·-. .. I - ~--·-··---" ... -.. .. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us (!) CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME PO BOX 944209 SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2090 CERTIFICATION OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Project Title/Location (Include County): La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom-CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-East ofEl Camino Real, between Arenal Road and Costa del Mar Road, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego N arne and Address of Applicant: KSL Development Corp., 2100 Costa del Mar Rd, Carlsbad CA 92008 Project Description: Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit-Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas on the western portion of the La Costa Resort and Spa Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary): 1. The City of Carlsbad Planning Department has completed an Environmental Initial Study for the above referenced property, including evaluation of the proposed project's potential for adverse environmental impacts on fish and wildlife resources. 2. Based on the complete Environmental Initial Study, the City of Carlsbad Planning Department finds that the proposed project will not encroach upon wildlife habitat area, will have no potential adverse individual or cumulative effects on wildlife resources, and requires no mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project which would affect fish or wildlife. Certification: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game ~de. ~·~; MG:mh Section 711.4, Fish and Game Code DFG. 1/91 -M-1-CH_A_E_L __ J._H_O_L_Z_M_~~.~E~R~--------- Planning Director Lead Agency: CITY OF CARLSBAD Date: ----=./_·-__:.~--.::(;::::;...-__;03=-=----- c>{P-<~75~ l""\(7 PROOF OF PUBLI~ION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) This space is -he County Clerk's Filing Stamp STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of Proof of Publication of North County Ti NOTICEOFPUBUCHEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Plannlnl! Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearinl! at the Council Chambers. 120'0 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad. California. at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 15. 2003. to consider a request for a Negative Declaration. F 1 kn h Bl d C. . Condttional Use Permit Amendment, and Special Use Permit-Scenic Corridor to allow the con-orrner y OWn as t e a e-ltlZei struction and occupation of an approximately 42.447 S(juare foot ballroom facility and a recon-struction of the surrounding parKing areas m the La Costa Resort and Spa, l!enerally located Times-Advocate and which newspapers east of El Camino Real, between Arena! Road and Costa del Mar, in Local Facillfies Management Zone 6 and more particularly descnbed as: d. d' d f . A portion of Section 26 and 35 both in Township 12 South, Ranl!e 4 West, San Bernardino a ;1U lCate newspaperS 0 general Clr< Meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. State of CaJiiornia. according to the Of-:! ficlal Plat thereof the Superior Court of the County of . . Those_ persons wlshinl! to speak on this proP.OSal are cordially invited to attend the public hear-State of Cahfomia for the County of ing. ~oples of the staff _report will be available on and after January 8. 2003. If you have any ' questions. please call Mtcliael Gnm In the Planrung Departtnent at (760) 602-4623. that the notice of which the annexed · COpy (set in type not smaller than non If you challenl!e the Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing de- b bl . h d · h 1 d t scribed in this notice or in Written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior een pu IS e m eac regu ar an en to the public hearing. · said newspaper and not in any supplerr CASE FILE: CUP 258!C)/SUP 02-08 On the following dateS, tO-Wit: CASE NAME: LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM PUBLISH: JANUARY 3, 2003 JANUARY 3, 2003 I certify (or declare) under penalty of • the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at ___ SAN MARCOS, __ this 5TH ------------------------------1 of _____ JANUARY, 2003 Signature NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROOF OF PUBLI~ION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: DECEMBER 27, 2002 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at ___ SAN MARCOS, California this _____ 30TH ________ day of _____ DECEMBER, 2002 ___ _ Si gnature NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is 4tthe County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT . NEGATIVE DECLARATION ProJect Address/location· East of El Camino Real be tween Arena! Road and ·costa del Mar Road Cliy oi Cparlsbad, Co'!nty of San Diego, State of California .rOJect Descnpt1on: A Conditional Use PermH and Spe-Cial Use Permn -. Scemc Corridor to allow the construe- lion and occupation of an approximately 42,447 s uare foot ballroom fac1ilty and. a reconstruction of th~ sur-roundl~g park1ng areas within the La Costa Resort. Th~ C1ty of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental reV!eW Of the above described rroject pursuant to the Gwdellnes for Implementation o the California Environ- ;pental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Or- mance of th~ C1ty of Carlsbad. As a result of said re-VI~,W· a Negat1veD eclarat1'?n {declaration that the project WI not have a s1gn1f1cant Impact on the environment) is rherebyt· ISSUed for the SUbject project. Justification for IS ac 10n 1s on f1le 1n the Plannmg Department. A copy of the.Negat1ve Declaration with supr.ortive docu-ments 1s on f1le 1n the Planning Departmen 1635 Fara- day Avenue,. Carlsbad, California 92008. 'Comments from the public are 1nv1ted. Please submit comments in wntmg to the Plannmg Department within 20 days of date of 1ss~an~e. If you have any questions, please call ~~~~el Gnm 1n the Planning Department at (760) 602- DATED: DECEMBER 27 2002 CASE NO: CUP 258(C'vSUP 02-08 CASE NAME: LA COStA RESORT AND SPA BALL ROOM - PUBLISH DATE: DECEMBER 27 2002 Is/MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER ' Planning Director NCT1441221 . December 27, 2002 The Coai1News Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County. Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to The Coast News, P.O. Box 232-550, Encinitas, CA 92023 (760) 436-9737 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of The Coast News, a newspaper printed and published weekly and which news- paper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation for the cities of Del Mar, Solana Beach, Encinitas/Cardiff, Carlsbad, Oceanside, San MarcosNista and the County Judicial District by the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego (8/4/94, #677114, B2393, P396); and that the notice, of which the annexed is a print- ed copy, has been published in, each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: January 2. 2003 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California on the~ 2nd day of January, 2003. as Instrument .No. 1998-08451 , <>f Til . Official Records in the office of the County YC (i ReCorder of San Diego County, State of No California. Execllled . by Rudolph Joseph Se1 Silva, and Diana C. Silva, husband and wife to 1 as cQmmunity property Will Sell at Public ST , ·. Auc. lion to Highest Bidder for Cash, 10/ · ] Cashier's check/Cash equivalcm. or other Ins form of payment authorized by 2924h(b), Pa1 (payable at time of.sale in lawful money of or I the United States) At the South entrance to Co . . d' the County Courthouse, 220· West 011 Negatrve Declaratron, Broadway, San Diego, CA All right. title EN Corridor to allow the and interest conveyed to and now bcld by it HC room facility and a r under~.Deed ofTrust in.thepro~rty sit-Oil S · 11· 1 t d uated JR sa1d County and State descnbed as: est pa, gen~~E! y oca e A$ more fully described in the above men-bel Local Facrlitres Mana tioned Deed of Trust. APN #160-662,22 rig! . A portion of The street address and other common_ desig-no• 4 West San nalion,ifany,oftherealpropertydescribed the of San bi above is purported ·to be: 4045 lvey Vista Sta Th . Way 'Oceanside California 92057 The aiK ose persons _w1s undersi~ Trustee disclaims any liability ad< proposal are cordrally for any incorreciness of the street address 3I1J public hearing. Copies and other common designation, if any, p01 be available on and aft shown herein. Sllid sale will be made, but VI ha t' widlout covenant or warranty, expressed or Tn YO!J . ve any ques. ron i111plied, regarcling title, possession, or inc Gnm In the .Piannrng encumbrances. to pay the remaining princi-c01 602-4623. pal sum of the riote(s) secured by said Deed Th If you challenge t ?f Ttust, with in~t ~-as provided int Permit Amendment an 1n said note_(s), advances, 1f any, under the the • • \CtDJS of sa1d Deed of Trust fees, charges rna . tn cou~, you may. be h aDd expenses of the Trustee and of the trusts tin those rssues you or so created by said Deed ·of Trust. The total · of the public hearing desc ~of the unpaid balance of the obliga-the in written corresponde non secured b~ the property to be sold and thli C'ty f C r1 b d reasonable estimated costs, expenses .and to 1 . O a S a at 0 advances at the time of the Initial publica-cbt hearrng. lion of the Notice of Sale is: $162,096.42. cl• The beneficiary under said Deed of Trust un: beretofote executed· aDd delivered to the al undersigned a -written . Declaration of , as! C Default and Demand for Sale, al\(1 a written SC< ASE NAME: LA COS Notice of Default and Election to Sell. The au1 . AND SP. lf!ldersigned caused said Notice of Default sal and Election to Sell to be recorded in the bu CN: 6360 112103 county wht;re the~ propeity is located. or Date: December 17, 2002 Firit American eJJt Lenders Advantage, LoanStar Mortgagee se< Services, L.I,.C., 3 .First American Way, the Santa An;t. CA 92707 Ricard Juarez, the Authorized Signature LoanStar Mortgagee sai Services, L.L.C. · 15000 Surveyor pn Boulevard, Suite 250, Addison, Texas an1 75001. For Truslech Sale information en please call 916-387-7728 LoanStar 12 e Cit NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING •.. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 15, 2003, to consider a request for a Negative Declaration, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Special Use Permit -Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom facility and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas in the La Costa Resort and Spa, generally located east of El Camino Real, between Arenal Road and Costa del Mar, in Local Facilities Management Zone 6 and more particularly described as: A portion of Section 26 and 35 both in Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to the Official Plat thereof 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 January 8, 2003. If you have any questions, please call Michael Grim in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4623. If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit 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 at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 CASE NAME: LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM PUBLISH: JANUARY 3, 2003 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • {760) 602-4600 • FAX {760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us (i} BATIQUJTOS LAGOON SITE 0 <> LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 . e City e of Carlsbad IQFI;t.n.t.i•J§.flll,,t§.il NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: East of El Camino Real, between Arenal Road and Costa del Mar Road, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit- Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom facility and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas within the La Costa Resort. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Michael Grim in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4623. DATED: DECEMBER 27, 2002 CASE NO: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 CASE NAME: LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM PUBLISH DATE: DECEMBER 27, 2002 MICHAEiiH Planning Director 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM-PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE}'LANNING DEPARTMENT) BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom CASE NO: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 DATE: December 23.2002 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: ~C;!.!;ity.;...=of~C~a:!!.rl~s.!::!ba~d~---------- 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Michael Grim (760) 602-4623 4. PROJECT LOCATION: East ofEl Camino Real, between Arena! Road and Costa del Mar Road, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: ...:.K=S=L'------------- 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Travel Recreational Commercial (TR) 7. ZONING: General Commercial (C-2) 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): =no=n=e;......._ ___________ _ 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: A Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit-Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42,447 square foot ballroom and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking area, within the developed portion of the La Costa Resort and Spa, located east of El Camino Real. between Arena! Road and Costa del Mar Road. 1 Rev. 07/03/02 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially SigTI.ificant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. D Aesthetics D Agricultural Resources D Air Quality D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils 0Noise D Hazards/Hazardous Materials D Population and Housing D Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use and Planning D Mineral Resources D Mandatory Findings of Significance 2 D Public Services D Recreation D Transportation/Circulation D Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 07/03/02 DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) IZJ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT is required. D I find that the proposed project MAY have "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required. Planner Signature Date Date 3 Rev. 07/03/02 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Part II'', if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but all potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required. • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. 4 Rev. 07/03/02 • • • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). I. AESTHETICS· Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES -(In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 5 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D Less Than No Significant Impact Impact D D D D Rev. 07/03/02 . e Issues (and Supporting InformatiOn Sources). c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY -(Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? 6 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D .. tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D No Impact D D D D D Rev. 07/03/02 . e Issues (and Supporting InformatiOn Sources). d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally sensitive? 7 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D -tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES-Would the project:· a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologi- cal resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? IV. GEOLOGY AND SOILS-Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? a) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? b) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? c) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? d) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 8 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than No Significant Impact Impact D D D D D D D D D D D D Rev. 07/03/02 . e Issues (and Supporting Informatwn Sources). IV. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY-Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 9 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D .tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D 0 D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (~nd Supporting Informal Sources). b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies· or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Impacts to groundwater quality? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off- site? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off- site? t) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? I) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. 10 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D 'tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 . e Issues (and Supporting InformatiOn Sources). m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? o) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING-Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applica}?le land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES-Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? X. NOISE-Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? 11 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D -tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (~nd Supporting Informal Sources). c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X. POPULATION AND HOUSING-Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? 12 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D D e .a! Potent! ly Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (~d Supporting Informal Sources). XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project neighborhood and recreational facilities deterioration of the accelerated? increase the use of existing regional parks or other such that substantial physical facility would occur or be b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION!fRAFFIC-Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn- outs, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS-Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? 13 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D .tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 I Issues (and Supporting Informal Sources). c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula- tively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 14 Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D ..tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D D No Impact Rev. 07/03/02 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION KSL Development Corp. is requesting approval of a Negative Declaration, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Special Use Permit-Scenic Corridor to allow the construction and occupation of an approximately 42. 477 square foot ballroom facility and a reconstruction of the surrounding parking areas. The project site is designated Travel Recreational Commercial (TR) in the City's General Plan and is zoned General Commercial (C-2). The proposed site for the ballroom is on the west side of the existing resort development and is currently occupied by parking, landscaping, the Chopra Center (formerly known as the Lifestyle Center), and a portion of the main spa building. To the north of the site are the residential units along Arena! Road, to the west is El Camino Real and the Batiquitos Lagoon. East of the site are the existing hotel buildings and the new spa building (currently under construction). South of the site and across Costa del Mar are residential condominium units. The proposed ballroom would total approximately 42,447 square feet and would include the main ballroom area, supporting areas such as a prep kitchen, storage, small meeting rooms, a pre-function area and restrooms. The proposed development would also include a porte cochere and driveway entry, along with a reconstruction of the existing parking lot to the north of the proposed building. As shown on Exhibits "A"-"D", dated January 15, 2003, the ballroom building would be located on the western portion of the site, adjacent to the existing spa building. The building would measure 35 feet to the top of the roof and would include a non-habitable tower element that extends up to 43.5 feet. The architecture would follow the Mediterranean theme of the existing resort, with tile roof, wood rafter tails and window/door treatments, and an exterior plaster finish. Approximately 29,000 cubic yards of grading is proposed, including 4,000 cubic yards of import and 1,000 cubic yards of remedial grading. The maximum cut .or fill depth is approximately six (6) feet. All grading will be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the project-specific geotechnical report and is required to conform to the City's Grading Ordinance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit requirements. In addition, an all-weather access road would be provided throughout construction and Fire Marshal approval would be required prior to the storage of any hazardous materials on site. The project would take access off of Estrella del Mar and Costa del Mar, private roads serving the resort. These roads have direct access to Arena! Road, a local street, and El Camino Real, a prime arterial. According to the project-specific traffic report, the surrounding circulation system is adequate to accommodate the expected 476 average daily trips generated by the proposed ballroom. All facilities needed to serve the site would be provided prior to, or concurrent with, construction of the project. Several mature trees would be removed from the property, however these trees are not native and represent a small proportion of the existing tree canopy on the resort campus. In addition, the landscaping along the eastern frontage of El Camino Real would be enhanced with large shrubs and trees to screen the proposed building from public views from El Camino Real, thereby reducing any potential aesthetic impacts. There are no existing cultural or historical resources on the developed site. Also, due to the developed nature of the site, there are no agricultural operations or sensitive flora or fauna within the project area. No significant mineral resources or other energy sources exist within the resort property. Since the proposed ballroom would be located within the existing resort site, no disruption of existing communities or neighborhoods would occur. Therefore, the proposed La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom proposal would not create any significant adverse environmental impacts as designed and conditioned. AIR QUALITY-Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-attainment area for ozone (03), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PM10). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 15 Rev. 07/03/02 A plan ~o meet the federal stanld for ozone was developed in 1994 during th~cess of updating the 1991 state- mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through lOth in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. (Add the following text addressing short-term emissions, if there is grading associated with the project.) The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 (a)(4), the proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact. As noted above, the proposed project would not result in substantial pollutant emiSSIOns or concentrations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. No impact is assessed. 16 Rev. 07/03/02 • d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such_ transient impacts is not considered substantial. TRANSPORTATIONfi'RAFFIC-Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate 476 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This traffic will utilize the following roadways: Estrella del Mar, Arena! Road, Costa del Mar, and El Camino Real. The design capacities of the arterial roads effected by the proposed project are 1,200 and 40,000 vehicles per day. While the increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed project would not, therefore, cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the proposed project are, therefore, Jess than significant. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The Existing and Buildout average daily traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS on these designated roads and highways in Carlsbad is: Existing ADT* LOS Buildout ADT* Rancho Santa Fe Road 15-32 "A-C" 28-43 El Camino Real 21-50 "A-C" 32-65 Palomar Airport Road 10-52 "A-B" 29-77 SR 78 120 "F' 144 1-5 183-198 "D" 219-249 *The numbers are in thousands of daily trips. The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F' if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F' in 1990). Accordingly, all designated roads and highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS. Note that the buildout ADT projections are based on the full implementation of the region's general and community plans. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan and, therefore, its traffic was used in modeling the buildout projections. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacity(ies) of the designated roads and highways and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short- term and at buildout. a) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. No impact assessed. b) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses? 17 Rev. 07/03/02 No Impact. All project circul. improvements will be designed and construclto City standards; and, therefore. would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City's general plan and zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact assessed. c) Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. No impact assessed. d) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The proposed project is not requesting a parking variance. Additionally, the project would comply with the City's parking requirements to ensure an adequate parking supply. No impact assessed. e) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks, etc.)? No Impact. (Note whether the project is near public transportation. If not, then state that the project is not served by or not located in an area conducive to public transportation.) (Note bike racks are not necessary for a single- family residential project. Otherwise, condition the project to install bike racks and note here that the project has been so conditioned.) EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994. 2. Geotechnical Investigation -Proposed New Spa and Ballroom Buildings -La Costa Resort and Spa - Costa del Mar Road. Carlsbad. Sladden Engineering. June, 2002 3. Focused Traffic Evaluation and Analysis for La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom. Rick Engineering. October, 2002. 4. Storm Water Management Plan for La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom Facility. Rick Engineering. October, 2002. 18 Rev. 07/03/02 City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM December 23, 2002 TO: Mike Grim, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: PROJECT REPORT AND CONDITIONS, LA COSTA RESORT BALLROOM, CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08 The Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject project. The Engineering Department is recommending that the project be approved, subject to the following conditions: General 1. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. Fees/Agreements 3. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation the City's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement regarding drainage across the adjacent property. Grading 4. No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. 5. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the site plan, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. 5. Developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge H:\WORDIENG_CONDIENG CONDITIONS DRAFf (REVISED 3·01-00).doc REV. 12/23/02 Page: 1 .... Elimination System (NPDES) permit, latest version. Developer shall provide improvements constructed pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of the following: A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste products. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. 6. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer shall submit for City approval a "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)". The SWPPP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carlsbad Requirements. The SWPPP shall address measures to reduce, to the maximum extent possible, storm water pollutant runoff at both construction and post-construction stages of the project. Among other criteria, the SWPPP shall: 1) Identify the drainage basin and whether the projects discharges to an impaired water body. 2) Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants. 3) Recommend source control and treatment control measures to be implemented to avoid pollution contact or treat pollutants from storm water before being discharged from the site. 4) Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee, customer or resident education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants. 5) Ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in perpetuity. Dedications/Improvements 7. Prior to building occupancy, Developer must apply for and obtain approval of a quitclaim for the existing water easement traversing the property. Easement shall not be quitclaimed until the new waterline that replaces the facility is installed, tested and accepted by the City Engineer. 8. Developer shall provide for or install the necessary drainage infrastructure as shown on the site plan prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit. 9. Developer shall revise the project to relocate the existing private storm drain and pollution control unit serving the proposed spa per drawing 402-2B. Developer shall incorporate design of this related facility into the grading plans for this project. Developer is responsible H:\WORD\ENG_COND\ENG CONDITIONS DRAFf (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 12/23/02 Page: 2 to ensure drainage from offsite areas is intercepted, conveyed and discharged across the project. 10. Developer shall execute and record a City standard Development Improvement Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements shown on the site plan and the following improvements including, but not limited to paving, base, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, signing and striping, traffic control, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer, water, fire hydrants, street lights, retaining walls and reclaimed water, all constructed to City Standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Developer shall: a. Relocate the existing 12-inch ACP waterline traversing the site that conflicts with the proposed building footprint. The existing line shall be relocated, as shown on the preliminary grading plan, within paved areas to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. b. Install fire hydrants, fire services, and water meters as required to serve the project. c. Relocate all necessary appurtenances. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. 11. Developer shall perform all necessary maintenance on the pollution control unit(s) as proposed on the site plan. The pollution control unit shall be maintained to ensure its effectiveness at removing pollutants-of-concern from the site. 12. Prior to building permit or grading permit issuance, whichever occurs first Developer shall have design, apply for and obtain approval of the City Engineer, for the structural section for the access aisles with a traffic index of 5.0 in accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by the City Engineer as part of the building or grading plan review whichever occurs first. Carlsbad Municipal Water District 13. Prior to approval of improvement plans, Developer shall meet with the Fire Marshal to determine if additional fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if required, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. 14. The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public right-of-way or within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad. At the discretion of the District Engineer, wider easements may be required for adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits. 16. The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. H:\WORDIENG_CONDIENG CONDITIONS DRAFf (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 12123/02 Page: 3 17. The Developer shall install potable water and recycled water services and meters at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 18. The Developer shall design and construct public water facilities substantially as shown on the Site Plan to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 19. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the District Engineer has determined that adequate water facilities are available at the time of occupancy. 20. The Developer shall meet with and obtain approval from the Leucadia County Water District, Vallecitos Water District regarding sewer infrastructure available or required to serve this project. Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 21. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. H:IWORD\ENG_COND\ENG CONDITIONS DRAFf (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 12123/02 Page: 4 LAND USE REVIEW DIVISION PROJECT REPORT PROJECT 10: CUP 258{c) PREPARED BY: Jeremy Riddle PROJECT NAME: La Costa Resort Ballroom LOCATION: Property at southwest corner of El Camino Real and Arenal Road. BRIEF DESCRIPTION: Proposed Ballroom structure and parking lot improvements. ENGINEERING ISSUES AND DISCUSSION TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 476ADT The project is served by Estrella De Mar Road, and has direct access to public streets. SEWER Sewer District: Leucadia County Water District Sewer EDU's required: district to analyze WATER Water District: Carlsbad Municipal Water District GPO required: 1,500 gpd The property is currently served by existing water mains located across the property and in Estrella De Mar Road. The existing mains are being relocated to facilitate the new structure. GRADING Quantities: Cut: 25,000cy Fill: 25,000cy Export: Ocy Remedial: 6,400cy Permit required: Yes Offsite approval required: No Hillside grading requirements met: n/a Preliminary geotechnical investigation performed by: Sladden Engineering, June 28, 2002. H:IWORDIENG_CONDIENG CONDITIONS DRAFf (REVISED 3·01-00).doc REV. 12123102 Page: 5 The geotechnical report indicates that there are no significant grading or soils related issues with the proposed project that would preclude deyelopment. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL Drainage basin: Batiquitos Watershed Erosion potential: High Surface runoff from the development is collected and conveyed by a proposed private storm drain system, which is discharged to the south of the project within the existing drainage course. LAND TITLE Conflicts with existing easements: No Public easement dedication required: Yes Site boundary coincides with Land Title: Yes IMPROVEMENTS Offsite improvements: No Standard Waivers required: No Public waterline improvements are required to relocate the existing waterline to avoid conflicts with the new ballroom structure .. STORM WATER QUALITY This project qualifies as a "priority projecf' as described by Order No. 2001-01 issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pursuant to the Order, the applicant is required to submit a detailed Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that identifies pollutants of concern as it relates to the project. The SWPPP shall identify what measures will be implemented to ensure that no additional pollutants-of-concern are contributed to the watershed to the maximum extent practical. The project is conditioned to complete the SWPPP and implement the measures required to ensure storm water quality is not impacted as a result of the project. H:IWORDIENG_CONDIENG CONDmONS DRAFT (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 12123102 Page: 6 From: To: Subject: Mike, Gregory Ryan Grim, Mike CUP-258(C) This memo is for informational purposes only. I have spoken with Raun Connely of Rick Engineering regrading the following requirement. CFD shall require the installation of one (1) additional Fire Hydrant in the area of the receiving dock on the 'bullnose' island facing west. This F.H. shall be in the vicinity of the spot identified as a private catch basin (type B inlet). And CFD shall require that the Fire Hydrant located on the island north of the building be moved to the curside adjacent to the Detector Check Valve Assy. at a distance no closer than 30 linear feet and no further away than 90 linear feet. all else appears to be compliant. Page 1 j • ... La Costa Ballroom CUP(A)/SUP Processing Timeline October 16, 2002 October 28, 2002 November 11, 2002 November 13 -14, 2002 November 14, 2002 November 26, 2002 - December 3, 2002 November 27, 2002 Presently CUP(A) and SUP submitted to City City e-mail containing Planning and Fire Department issues sent to applicant (12 calendar day turnaround). Engineering issues received (26 calendar day turnaround). Completeness letter prepared and signed by Planning Director. Letter faxed to applicant. Applicant resubmittal to address eight of the nine Planning issues sent via e-mail on October 28, 2002 (17 calendar day turnaround). E-mails between applicant's architect and Planning staff explaining why they feel more building articulation on the scenic corridor (west) side is not necessary. Staff explained that a photosimulation would be needed to prove their assertion that the building would be completely screened by landscaping. Applicant resubmittal to address Fire and Engineering Department issues (30 calendar day turnaround for Fire issues, 13 calendar day turnaround for Engineering issues). Engineering and Fire Department staff reviewing resubmittal. Comments due by December 23, 2002. Staff expects that issues will be resolved or will be incorporated as conditions of approval to be satisfied. Important dates for the January 15, 2003 Planning Commission date: Last day to send environmental notice to the newspaper for 20-day review is December 24, 2002. Draft staff reports distributed to City Attorney's office and other commenting departments on December 26, 2002. li]fljliiJIIDI•DPiiilht:Jiil FAX TRANSMITTAL 1'1 NovemberK2002 DATE: TIME SENT: __ CJ_< Z_O_a_JtA. ____ _ TO: Kari Desgalier-Allen Markins Forrest Haag-F.K.H. Architecture PHONE#: 619-233-1155 FAX#: 949-376-9066 619-233-1158 949-376-9067 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 5 FROM: Mike Grim DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760) 602-4623 FAX: (760) 602-8559 Please find attached the completeness letter for the La Costa Resort and Spa Ballroom. As we discussed and in the interest of efficient collaboration between yourselves and staff, I gave the Planning Department and Fire Department comments to you less than two weeks after project submittal so that they could be resolved prior to receiving Engineering comments and would not end up in the 30-day completeness letter to Chevis Hosea. Please note that, in order to make the tentatively scheduled Planning Commission hearing date of December 18, 2002, all issues must resolved to staff's satisfaction before December 6, 2002. Please also note that, as stated in our September 30, 2002 pre-application meeting, it was agreed that staff may take up to two weeks (i.e. ten working days) to respond. You should also be advised that, given this expedited schedule, the staff report (including approving resolutions and environmental review) are being prepared by staff in a good faith expectation that the stated issues will be completely resolved in a timely manner. Should the issues listed in the attached letter not be resolved, your project would be scheduled for the January 15, 2002 Planning Commission hearing. Thank you, Mike t~ ~VV\ ~ttl-f~fy-R,J:-6.u.-b(c;<2?1f-l.f{b~ D Return Fax 1635 Faraday Avenue •!• Carlsbad, California 92008-7314 Estimated Permit Processing Timeframes CUP(A) and SUP La Costa Resort and Spa 9/30/02 Established timeframes: City review of initial submittal for completeness and issues of concern with letter to applicant: 4 weeks City staff review and comment for subsequent project submittals: 2 weeks Preparation of staff report, resolutions, environmental documents; draft report review by City Attorney's office and applicant; public noticing: 5 weeks Unknown timeframes/information: Project applicant response time to initial City application completeness and issues review: Number of project resubmittals required to resolve Issue of concern: Estimated permit processing timeframe: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- December 2, 2002 TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: Senior Planner STATUS OF LA COSTA SPA AND RESORT BALLROOM CUP/SUP The above-referenced project was submitted on October 16, 2002. On November 14, 2002, the Planning Department sent a correspondence to the applicant for the La Costa Spa and Resort Ballroom application (KSL Development Corp) that stated the application was complete and listed the issues of concern to staff. In that letter, staff informed the applicant that the project was tentatively scheduled for the December 18, 2002 Planning Commission, however, all issues would need to be resolved by December 6, 2002 in order to stay on the agenda. The December 6, 2002 deadline was three working days prior to the distribution of staff reports to the Planning Commission and would still necessitate a three-day expedited review of the documents by Planning Management and the City Attorney's office (as opposed to the standard eight day period). The letter also reminded the applicant of the agreements reached at our September 30, 2002 meeting, namely that staff committed to a two-week (ten working day) turn around rather than the standard four-week response time. Therefore, provided that their resubmittal satisfactorily addressed all of the issues and was received on of before November 21, 2002, staff could keep the project on the agenda. The applicant resubmitted the project on the afternoon of November 27, 2002, less than ten calendar days from the December 6, 2002 deadline. Had the project been resubmitted in enough time to accommodate the review times agreed to by both parties at the September 30, 2002 meeting, there would have been enough time to process the staff report and notice the environmental review documents. Since this resubmittal was not received, the environmental review documents were not noticed and the item was pulled from the tentative agenda. The application is now scheduled for the January 15, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, which is three months from the time of project submittal. I would be happy to discuss this issue with you at your convenience. Thank you. /1{/~ MICHAEL GRi~L 7 C: Planning Director Assistant Planning Director . Principal Planner City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM November 7, 2002 TO: Mike Grim, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineerin SUBJECT: FIRST REVIEW OF LA COSTA BALLROOM (CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08, APN 216-123-07 & 05, 216-21 0-04) Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the application submittal documents for application completeness. The application and plans are considered complete. However, we have identified the following items that must be clarified or addressed prior to approval of this project: 1. Add the application numbers (CUP 258(c) & SUP 02-08) to the upper right- hand corners of the exhibits. 2. Revise the plans to clarify how a fire truck (using 407E turning-template) can access the proposed fire hydrant in the southerly parking lot. If the fire hydrant is not accessible, the hydrant serves no benefit during a fire or emergency. Will a truck have to perform a 3-point turn at the end of the drive aisle to exit the parking lot? 3. Revise site plans so the proposed waterlines are located in the center of drive aisles, not through parking stalls (typical). Refer to redlines for clarification on this matter. 4. Revise the site plan to clarify how the storm water collected by the inlet near the southern parking lot will be filtered of pollutants before being discharged to Costa Del Mar Place. Add a note to the plans to clarify this issue. 5. Revise the plans to identify the anticipated remedial earthwork quantities. 6. Revise the site plan to clarify the size of the potable water service (currently listed as 2 1/2 -inch). Carlsbad Municipal Water District only permits 1-inch and 2-inch copper services. If more than 2-inch is required, consider multiple services (possible and 2-inch and a 1-inch potable service). 7. Consider installing an irrigation service off the long fire hydrant line in the southern parking lot. This will encourage flow in the dead-end pipe and address water quality of the potable water system that serves this project. 8. Add CMWD water easements along all fire hydrant laterals (typical). Refer to La Costa Ballroom November 8, 2002 Page 2 of2 the red lines for clarification on this issue. 9. Meet with the Fire Marshal to ensure that all fire protection devices are incorporated and that fire access/circulation has been adequately addressed. If more fire hydrants are required, more access issues may arise on next submittal. 10. Clarify the size and type of the existing water main where the storm drain crosses near the southwest corner of the project. 11. Clarify the size and type of existing sewer near the southwest corner of the project. Callout the record data that created the easement (per document ___ , dated . Is the easement public or private? 12. Revise the parking lot layout to incorporate 5' x 5' clearances at each corner parking stall (typical). Refer to the redlines and schematic noted on the returned plans. 13. Clarify how the trash service company will serve the project. Will trash enclosures be used? If so, refer to Carlsbad Standard drawing GS-16. 14. Clarify if a sump pump will be required to drain the low point in the truck loading bay, or if the grate inlet connects to the storm drain by gravity. 15. Relocate the irrigation and fire service check valves just outside the CMWD easement line. The check valves are typically located at this position per CMWD standards. 16. Clarify if the driveway entrance at the front of the ballroom will be one-way. If it will be two-way, the minimum width shall be 24-feet. 17. Add the inside and outside turning tracks of a 42-foot vehicle per 407E. These tracks must be shown at each 90-degree turn that must be accomplished to ensure trash trucks and fire trucks can maneuver throughout the site. 18. Identify the hydraulic grade line (pressure zone) of the existing and proposed waterline for reference. 19. Include pedestrian ramps along Estrella Del Mar Road as noted on the redlines. Clarify if a mid-block pedestrian ramp is required to help compliment the other pedestrian ramp across the street. 20. Revise the site plan to demonstrate the terminus of the proposed storm drain. Will it connect to an existing facility or surface drain? The current plans do not Enclosed is a redlined check-print of the project. This check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at telephone (760) 602-2737. Attachment c: file October 17, 2002 Fire Department Comments La Costa Resort and Spa Proposed Ballroom From: Fire Marshal Karyn Vaudreuil • 1. Submit plans showing point of connection in street, including detector check assembly, for lateral service which will serve ballroom fire sprinkler system. (Recommend Febco 876 Nor equivalent.) 2. Fire hydrants are required at 300ft. intervals around entire proposed building. A minimum 1,000 gpm per hydrant at 20 psi with 2 hydrants flowing for 2 hr. duration is required. Please submit calculations for said fire flow. If hydrants are proposed off private fire service to building, please show. 3. Eliminate hydrant shown out in parking lot. Hydrants shall be around the building at the 300 ft. spacing and a minimum of 40 feet from the building. Blue dots reflectors are required in parking to identify hydrants. Key valves serving hydrants shall not be placed where they would be located under parked cars. All locations of trre appurtenances shall be approved by the Carlsbad Fire Department. Please provide mylar plans to Fire Department with signature block for Fire Marshal approval. . m~IU/i) 9/\l 1, d. e ~CARLSBAD Planning Division . NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT EXTENSION September 1 0, 2012 KSL La Costa Resort Attn: Doug Yvanian 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad CA 92009 FILE COPY www.carlsbadca.gov SUBJECT: CUP 02-58{C) -LA COSTA RESORT BALLROOM, 2101 COSTA DEL MAR ROAD RESOLUTION NOS. 5353 AND 5354 This notice is to inform you that CUP 02-58{C)-LA COSTA RESORT BALLROOM located at, 2101 Costa Del Mar Road (APN 216-590-01 ), and originally conditioned to expire on January 14, 2013 is hereby extended without an expiration date by the City Planner pursuant to Section 21.42.11 0(0) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. While your Conditional Use Permit (CUP) no longer has an expiration date, the CUP will continue to be reviewed by the Planning Division on an annual basis to ensure continued compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. If at any time the division determines that the use may be out of compliance with the terms and conditions of the CUP, it retains the right to review this action and recommend that the approval be reconsidered. Should you have any questions, please contact Shannon Warneke at (760) 602-4621. [e7t DON NEU, AICP City Planner DN:SW:sm c: LC Investment 2010, LLC, Attn: Chevis Hosea, 100 Fillmore Street, Denver, CO 80206 Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner File Copy Senior Office Specialist Data Entry/OMS T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 MCUP & c!w ANNUAL REvimfsHEET FILE COPY INSTRUCTIONS 1. COMPLETE PROJECT INFORMATION BELOW AND PRINT COPY. 2. DOWNLOAD (DMS) RESOLUTIONS· AND REVIEW ALL CONDITIONS AND APPROVED PLANS (COORDINATE WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS). 3. REVIEW CODE COMPLAINT HISTORY (CODE ENFORCEMENT, POLICE, FIRE, ETC.). 4. CONTACT APPLICANT (OR OWNER) AND SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR TilE REVIEW. 5. COMPLETE REVIEW INFORMATION SECTION DURING REVIEW. 6. HAVE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEW AND SIGN. 7. PLACE COMPLETED REVIEW SHEET IN ADMIN IN-BOX FOR PROJECT FILE (ADMIN WILL FILE). PROJECT INFORMATION CASE NAME: La Costa Resort Ballroom CASE NUMBER(S): CUP 258C (APN: 216-590-01,2101 Costa Del Mar) APPROVlNG RESO NO(S). =53=5=3 -=-53=54;..:...._ _____________ _ PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: S::::h~a~nn=o=nc:...W~em=e=ke:::__ ___ '------ PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? ~ Yes 0 No If yes, check th~se that apply and explain below. [gJ Code Enforcement 0 Police 0 Fire Prevention Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): CV 08-0594, no business license for Chopra Center, open 7/7/08, closed 7/17/08 Q:'\CED'\PLANNING'\ADMIN'\ TEMPLATES'\MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/11 INFORMATION Has the permit expired? D Yes [gl No Permit expires: .~.:Ian=u=acy~1~4~, :::20~1~3 _____ _ Date of review: April 26, 2011 Name: [gl Applicant D Owner D Other If other, state title: :,:nt..;.a!:!....-------------------------- *CURRENT APPUCANT INFORMATION: Name: Chevis Hosea or Doug Yavanian Phone: (760) 438-9111 Contact name (if different): ------------------------ Address: 2100 Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Mailing (if different): ~n~a=------------------------- E-mail: dyavanian@lacosta.com (optional) *CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: . Name: LC Investment 2010 LLC Phone: {760)438-9111 Contact name (if different): .::::C::.:h::.;ev~is:::..H~o~se~a'------------------- Address: 100 Fillmore Street, Denver, CO 80206 Mailing (if different): :.:nt..;.a~---------------------- E-mail: Does project comply with conditions·of resolution(s) and approved plans? IZJ Yes D No If no, list below the condition(s) and/ or plan aspects the project is not in compliance with per resolution number or exhibit. nLa Corrective action(s) to be taken: n/a leted follow-up review and ~ed pr/~ch compliance: -t--~~~---~ fl>uJA e Signature Principal Planner Signature *Applicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. 0:\CED\PLANNING\ADMIN\ TEMPLATES\MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/11 MCUP & ~p ANNUAL REVIJSHEET FILE COPY INSTRUCTIONS 1. COMPLETE PROJECT INFORMATION BELOW AND PR.INT COPY. 2. DOWNLOAD (OMS) RESOLUTIONS AND REVIEW ALL CONDITIONS AND APPROVED PLANS (COORDINATE WITH OTIIER DEPARTMENTS). 3. REVIEW CODE COMPLAINT HISTORY (CODE ENFORCEMENT, POLICE, FIRE, ETC.). 4. CONTACT APPLICANT (OR OWNER) AND SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE REVIEW. 5. COMPLETE REVIEW INFORMATION SECTION DURING REVIEW. 6. HAVE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEW AND SIGN. 7. PLACE COMPLETED REVIEW SHEET IN ADMIN IN-BOX FOR PROJECT FILE (ADMIN WILL FILE). PROJECT INFORMATION CASE NAME: La Costa Resort Ballroom CASE NUMBER(S): -CUP 258C (APN: 216-590~01,2101 Costa Del Mar) APPROVING RESO NO(S). ~53=5::::.l3 ~53=54:::...::......----"----------- PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: ~Sh:.:::a:::.;nn=on~W:..;:e=tn=e=ke.;:...._ ________ _ PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? IZJ Yes 0 No If yes, check those that apply and explain below. IZJ Code Enforcement 0 Police 0 Fire Prevention Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): CV 08-0594, no business license for Chopra Center, open 7/7/08, closed 7/17/08 Q:\.CED\.PLANNING\.ADMIN\. TEMPLATES\.MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/11 Has the permit expired? 0 .Yes Date of review: Ianuazy 5, 2012 INFORMATION ~ No Permit expires: J.!Jan~u~a~zyt:...1~4~,.=2~01~3:.__ ____ _ Nrune: --------------------------~ Applicant 0 Owner 0 Other If other, state title: !.!n-J-!;!.a _______________________________ _ *CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Chevis Hosea or Doug Yavanian Phone: (760)438-9111 Contact nrune (if different): ------------------------- Address: 2100 Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Mailing (if different): !.!n-J-:.a~----------------------- E-mail: dyavanian@lacosta.com (optional) *CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: LC Investment 2010 LLC Phone: (760) 438-9111 Contact name (if different): ~Ch~eVIS!..!':2_,:.H~o~se=.!a:!..------------------- Address: 100 Fillmore Street, Denver, CO 80206 Mailing (if different): ~n~...a~------------------------- E-mail: Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? [8J Yes 0 No If no, list below the condition(s) and/ or plan aspects the project is not in compliance with per resolution number or exhibit. n/a Corrective action(s) to be taken: n/a ~Mhv>~1C> < ~~~~~~~---~------~.at lanner c!fpleted follow-up review an a r Signature Princip Planner Signature *Applicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. Q:'\CED'\PLANN!NG'\ADMIN'\ TEMPLATES'\MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/11 ------~---------------------, MCUP & ~p ANNUAL REVIE .. SHEET INSTRUCTIONS _1. COMPLETE PROJECT INFORMATION BELOW AND PRINT COPY. 2. DOWNLOAD (OMS) RESOLUTIONS AND REVIEW ALL CONDITIONS AND APPROVED PLANS (COORDINATE WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS). 3. REVIEW CODE COMPLAINT HISTORY (CODE ENFORCEMENT, POLIC~, FIRE, ETC.). 4. CONTACT APPLICANT (OR OWNER) AND SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE REVIEW. 5. COMPLETE REVIEW INFORMATION SECTION DURING REVIEW .. 6. HAVE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEW AND SIGN. 7. PLACE COMPLETED REVIEW SHEET IN ADMIN IN-BOX FOR PROJECT FILE (ADMIN WILL FILE). PROJECT INFORMATION CASE NAME: La Costa Ballroom CASE NUMBER(S): =C=U=-P=25:;..;::;8...>..:(C=)---------------- APPROVING RESO NO(S). =53=5=3'-"'5=35~4'---------------- PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: =M=ik=e~G=r=im:;:.:._ ___________ _ PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? If yes, check those that apply and explain below. 0 Code Enforcement 0 Police DYes Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): H/ ADMIN/TEMPLATE/MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET [8J No 0 Fire Prevention 03/09 " .. ~' ~-.. _: .,·~ '_)) ·:o REVIEW INFORMATION Has the permit expired? D Yes Date of review: 1/6/10 [8] No Permit expires: -=-1/'-'1::..:4::.<../..::.13=----------- Name: ----------------~ Applicant D Owner D Other 1£ other, state title: ---------------------------- *CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: '""~ Name: KSL La Costa Resort Phone: 800-854-5000 Contact name (if different): .:::D..:;::o..::.uo.g~Y....:.v.=an~i=an:..:...._ __________________ _ Address: 2100 Costa del Mar Rd, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Mailing (if different): ::::Sa::.:;m:,!;e=--------------------------- E-mail: (optional) *CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: KSL La Costa Resort Corp Phone: ,_760-"'-"-'5~64::..=....:-8~0:..:::0.!!..0 _______ _ Contact name (if different): .:D..:::o..::.uo.g-=Y_,_v=an~i=an:..:...._ __________________ _ Address: 50-905 A venida Bermuda, La Quinta, CA 92253 Mailing (if different): ~sa::.:m:.:;e=------------------------- E-mail: Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? IZJ Yes 0 No If no, list below the condition(s) and/ or plan aspects the project is not in compliance with per resolution number or exhibit. Corrective action(s) to be taken: 1 ed follow-up review and con irmed project compliance: ~~ Ia ner Signa ure Principal Planner Signature *Applicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. H/ ADMIN/TEMPLATE 03/09 _4f~.A_ C I T Y 0 F VcARLSBAD Planning Division September 4, 2012 KSL La Costa Resort Attn: Doug Yvanian 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 DFILE www.carlsbadca.gov NOTICE OF PENDING PERMIT EXPIRATION SUBJECT: CUP 02-58(C)-LA COSTA RESORT BALLROOM; RESOLUTIONS NO. 5353 & 5354 This is a courtesy notice to inform you that the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for CUP 02-58(C) -La Costa Resort Ballroom, located at 2101 Costa Del Mar Road, will expire on January 14, 2013. Should you, the property owner, wish to extend this permit, you will need to submit a complete application (applications and forms may be obtained at http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/departments/planning/Pages/applications.aspx or our front counter) consisting of the following: ./ Written request for an extension; ./ Completed Disclosure Statement; ./ Land Use Review Application; ./ Development Permits form; ./ A check in the amount of totaling all application fees; and ./ One complete set of plans (may be copies of those already approved). Once we receive and review your application, we may request more information to complete the application. Please submit the required documents and fees to: City of Carlsbad Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Your request for an extension must be submitted before the permit expiration date of January 14, 2013; otherwise the permit will be considered invalid and to continue operating, you will be required to submit an application for a new permit, along with a check for all fees associated with initiating a new permit. Please be advised that in the event your permit expires and you subsequently apply for a new permit, the application would again be subject to the full discretionary review process of the designated decision-making authority (Planning Commission and/or City Council). This means the application may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on the review process and findings of the decision-making authority. If you need any assistance, please contact our front counter at (760) 602-4610. Sincerely, ,o/~>1~ SABRINA MICHELSON Senior Office Specialist c: LC Investment 2010, LLC, Attn: Chevis Hosea, 100 Fillmore Street, Denver, CO 80206 Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner File Copy Senior Office Specialist 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 MCUP & ceJP ANNUAL REVI. SHEET INSTRUCTIONS 1. COMPLETE PROJECT INFORMATION BELOW AND PRINT COPY. 2. DOWNLOAD (DMS) RESOLUTIONS AND REVIEW ALL CONDITIONS AND APPROVED PLANS (COORDINATE WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS). 3. REVIEW CODE COMPLAINT HISTORY (CODE ENFORCEMENT, POLICE, FIRE, ETC.). 4. CONTACT APPLICANT (OR OWNER) AND SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE REVIEW. 5. COMPLETE REVIEW INFORMATION SECTION DURING REVIEW. 6. HAVE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEW AND SIGN. 7. PLACE COMPLETED REVIEW SHEET IN ADMIN IN-BOX FOR PROJECT FILE (ADMIN WILL FILE). PROJECT INFORMATION CASE NAME: La Costa Ballroom CASE NUMBER(S): -=C-=U-=-P-=25"'""8'-'-'(C:;:...<) ________________ _ APPROVING RESO NO(S). =53=5=3'--"'5=35::....::4=------------------ PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: ::..:..M=ik=e::....G=r=im=-=------------- PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? If yes, check those that apply and explain below. D Code Enforcement D Police DYes Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): H/ ADMIN/TEMPLATE/MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET [8J No D Fire Prevention 03/09 • REVIEW INFORMATION e Has the permit expired? D Yes Date of review: 6/2/09 [gl No Permit expires: .:!:.l~..-/l=-.4:::..t./....:1~3~--------- [gj Applicant D Owner D Other ·' Name: ~ If other,-s-ta_t_e-ti_tl_e_: ------------ ) *CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: KSL La Costa Resort Phone: 800-854-5000 Contact name (if different): ::::D~o~u~g-=Y,_,vc.::a:;o.;n~ia~n.:-___________________ _ Address: 2100 Costa del Mar Rd, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Mailing (if different): =sa=m=e=---------------------------- E-mail: ----------------(optional) *CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: KSL La Costa Resort Corp Phone: ;....:76~0~-5:::.::64"-"'-'-8~0'-!;:0~0 _______ _ Contact name (if different): =D'-"o'-"u""g'--'Y=-v;_;:a=n=ia=n'-=---------------------- Address: 50-905 A venida Bermuda, La Quinta, CA 92253 Mailing (if different): ""sa~m=e--------------------------- E-mail: (optional) Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? ~ Yes D No If no, list below the condition(s) and/or plan aspects the project is not in compliance with per resolution number or exhibit. 6/2/09-Condition No. 24 of PC Reso No. 5354 states no outdoor storage unless required by the Fire Chief. On 6/2/09, there were two large storage containers and over 10 patio heaters stored behind ballroom building. Corrective action(s) to be taken: 6/2/09-Contacted applicant/owner to remove the outdoor storage. 7-8-09-Conducted site inspection and all storage containers and patio heaters have been removed from behind ballroom building. Project is in compliance with conditions of approval and approved plans. follow-up review and confirmed project compliance: 1/LC~ Principal Planner Signature *Applicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. H/ ADMIN/TEMPLATE 03/09 RNL ,.,,,'"~' A ProfessiOnal Corporation zoo Baker StrePt SUI It-' 201 Costa Mrsa. Cul1fornia <}2626 Dilvid Kliiges. FAIA [an Vail, AlA Philip Goedert. AlA R1chard von Luhrte. FAlA Oenver Phoenix Costa Mrsu Los Angeles • Via Facsimile/ U.S. Mail (760) 602-8559 July 29, 2003 Mr. Mike Grim City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 • RECEIVED JUL 2 9 2003 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Subject: La Costa Spa & Resort -Ballroom RNL Reference No. 6383-1365-04 Mike, Arch11Pclurt' E !1'2.1 n•.'P!·t ng l.andsct1pt> Arrh1tecture At the request of our Client, KSL Recreational Corp., the proposed electronic chiming system for the bell towers at La Costa Resort and Spa have been removed from this project. Each bell tower for the Ballroom and Spa will have hard-shell foam bells (false bells) and they will not have any audible impact to surrounding area. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. enclosures cc: Chevis Hosea, Jim Waples H~~ o3-12-7 ~ity of • • Carlsbad I:;JFJ,J,Jiei•i•J§•filleei§bl January 23, 2003 KSL La Costa Resort Corp. c/o La Costa Resort & Spa 2100 Costa Del Mar Carlsbad, CA 92009 PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION SUBJECT: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM At the Planning Commission meeting of January 15, 2003, your application was considered. The Commission voted 5-0 (Commissioner Dominguez Absent) to APPROVE your request. The decision of the Planning Commission became final on January 15, 2003. 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 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of 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 Planning Director, Michael J. Holzmiller, Secretary of the Planning Commission, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (760) 602-4600. Sincerely, \ Planning Director MJH:MG:mh Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5353, 5354, 5355 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @ ---------------------------------• • From: Mike Grim To: chosea@kslmail.com; dyavanian@lacosta.com; forrest@fkhmail.com; jwaples@ lacosta.com; kdesgalier@ allenmarkins.com; rconnely@ rickeng.com Subject: DCC meeting for La Costa Ballroom (CUP 258(C)) Hello and Happy New Year: The DCC meeting for the La Costa Ballroom CUP was scheduled today from 11 :OOam to 11 :30am at the City Faraday Building. No representatives attended the meeting and no communication requesting rescheduling was received. The purpose of the DCC meeting is to discuss the draft staff report and resolutions prior to finalizing the documents for the Planning Commission hearing. Should you have any comments or questions on the staff report or resolutions, please forward those to me prior to the 3:00pm today. If no comments are received by that time, it will be deduced that you have no comments or issues with the report. There are also several outstanding items that will be needed prior to the close of business on Tuesday (i.e. 5:30pm on January 7, 2003) -these items were listed in the December 30, 2002 letter from the Planning Department. In addition to these items, a completed disclosuer statement form is needed (the one submitted with the application was found to be incomplete as it does not list the applicant and owners name, etc.). Blank copies of these forms are available at the Planning Department front counter-please obtain a form, complete it, and return it to my attention prior to close of business tomorrow (i.e. 5:30pm on January 7, 2003). Thank you for your cooperation in the processing of your CUP application. As stated in the December 30, 2002 letter, should these items not be received by the above referenced deadline, the project will be rescheduled for the next available Planning Commission hearing. Thanks again, Mike CC: Don Rideout; Jeremy Riddle December 30, 2002 S. Chevis Hovea KSL La Costa Resort Corp. 21 00 Costa del Mar Road Carlsbad CA 92009 SUBJECT: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM Your application has been tentatively scheduled for a hearing by the Planning Commission on January 15, 2002. However, for this to occur, you must submit the additional items listed below. If the required items are not received by January 7, 2002, your project will be rescheduled for a later hearing. In the event the scheduled hearing date is the last available date for the City to comply with the Permit Streamlining Act, and the required items listed below have not been submitted, the project will be scheduled for denial. 1. Please submit the following plans: A) Ten (10) copies of your site plans, landscape plans, building elevation plans, floor plans on 24" x 36" sheets of paper, stapled in complete sets folded into BW x 11" size. B) One 8%" x 11" copy of your reduced site plan, building elevation and floor plans. These copies must be of a quality which is photographically reproducible. Only essential data should be included on plans. 2. As required by Section 65091 of the California Government Code, please submit the following information needed for noticing and sign the enclosed form: A) Fee - a fee shall be paid for covering the cost of mailing notices. Such fee shall equal the current postage rate times the total number of labels. Cash check (payable to the City of Carlsbad) and credit cards are accepted. B) Completed mailing label certification form attached. Senior Planner MG:sn Attachment 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us (i) December 24~ 2002-- KSL La Costa Resort Corp C/o La Costa Resort & Spa 21 00 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-La Costa Resort & Spa Ballroom The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be available for you to pick up on Friday, December 27, after 8:00 a.m. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on January 6, 2003. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 11 :00 am. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring your required unmounted colored exhibit(s) with you to this meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission. Your colored exhibits must be submitted at this time to ensure review by the Planning Commission at their briefings. If the colored exhibits are not available for their review, your project could be rescheduled to a later time. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) here by the scheduled time above. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Mike Grim at (760) 602-4623. r:e~ DON NEU Assistant Planning Director DN:MG:sn c: File Copy 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 920.08-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 692-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us (!} •• December 16, 2002 Mr. Michael Grim Senior Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Ballroom CUP Process Dear Mike; This correspondence is relative to the upcoming Ballroom CUP hearing and our outreach efforts. Please note that labels, assessor's rolls and maps will be coming under separate cover within the next several days. As to our community outreach efforts, we have carried out the following: A: Discussions with a number of our neighboring members B: Discussions with a number ofHOA representatives C: Discussions with representatives of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce D: Briefings at a number of area service clubs E: Briefings with selected community leaders These discussions serve several purposes. First, we are able to outline our plans for the Resort and second, we are able to quantify and deal with concerns that have been raised. Clearly, we have not reached each and every "neighbor" within the 600-foot radius requirement. As such, we will continue to carry out an on going outreach effort and continue to address areas of concern as each may arise beyond the completion of the permitting process. In the long-term, we believe community outreach is in the best interest ofthe Resort, it's neighbors and the City of Carlsbad. 55,920 PGA Boulevard • La Quinta, CA 92253 • (760) 564,8000 • Fax (760) 564,7131 • Please feel free to contact us directly should you have questions or comments. Thank you for your continued attention and assistance. Sincerely, Chevis Hosea, Vice President KSL Development Corporation CC: Ted Axe, General Manager La Costa Resort and Spa Forrest K. Haag Forrest K. Haag, ASLA, Inc. Doug Y avanian Community Affairs KSL Development Corporation TRANSMITTAL ________________________ _ DhTt T9 rR9M Rr SrNT Vlh November 27,2002 Michael Grimm, Sr. Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Forrest K. Haag La Costa Ballroom CUP National Courier Attached are 5 sets of updated sheets, as requested. Please replace previous sheets with these. Also included is a color illustrative. Forrest Ref: #101/011.151 r 0 R R t 5 T K. t1 A A <i. A 5l A. IN C. lAND 5 CAPt ARC Ml T t C T U R t -lAND PlAN N IN <i 125~ N. COA:>T Ml<iMWAY LA<iUNA BtACM. CA ~2G51 P: (~~~) ~1(,-~0" f, (~~~) ~1(,-~0Gi' t: fKM@tORRt5TKMM<iA5LA.COM MtMBtR A5LA am November 14, 2002 Mr. Michael W. Grim Senior Planner City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Allen Matkins Leek ca~e & Mallory LLP attorneys at law 501 West Broadway 9th Floor San Diego California 92101-3577 telephone_ 619 233 1155 facsimile. 619 233 1158 www.allenmatkins.com writer. KariM. Desgalier t. 619 235 1548 file number. K6018-003/SD568277.01 e. kdesgalier@allenmatkins.com RECEIVED NOV 1 4 2002 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. Re: Application for CUP/SUP #258(C) Amendment Dear Mike: In connection with the above application, we are providing you with two exhibits -- Sheets 4A and 4B. These plans and the information in this letter address Items 1-8 in your October 28 email and letter from Mr. Holzmiller dated November 13, 2002. Exhibit 4A is a Pedestrian Esplanade Plan illustrating the connection between the parking facilities south of Costa del Mar Road (pursuant to existing CUP 258(B)) and the ballroom, spa and other campus facilities. The Master Plan will include a pedestrian system; the palm lined esplanades will provide an identifiable pathway from the new parking lot south of Costa del Mar Road to provide easy and direct access from that lot to the ballroom and other areas of the Resort. Although we are providing this pedestrian connection, as noted in the parking analysis submitted with the application, required parking for the ballroom is provided in the area immediately surrounding the ballroom. This plan also shows the existing track along the west side of the project area that will be removed and the location where it will be reconstructed as an interim facility until the pedestrian esplanade system in the Master Plan is implemented. Although the current track is used only to a limited extent, we anticipate that the Master Plan will provide for numerous pedestrian paths and areas available for recreational/exercise use and to serve the guests within the context of the resort campus as a whole experience. Exhibit 4B is a Plant Material Demolition, Relocation and Preservation Plan. This Plan identifies the location, size, type and disposition of all matures trees located in the area of work identified in the application. This exhibit also locates and identifies plant material in the vicinity ofthe improvements that will be protected and will remain after completion of the improvements. Additionally, the plant identifies the landscaping that will be preserved along El Mr. Michael W. Grim November 14, 2002 Page2 Allen Matkins Leek oantlae & Mallory LLP attorneys at law improvements. Additionally, the plant identifies the landscaping that will be preserved along El Camino Real that will help screen the ballroom building and redesigned parking area from sight along El Camino Real. The existing Spa Hotel Units have been extensively remodeled by KSL and will be used during and after the construction of the ballroom. The personnel and laundry buildings adjacent to the spa hotel units will be removed at the completion of ballroom construction and may be used during the construction process. The removal and disposition of these outdated structures will be illustrated in the plan graphics to be provided prior to the public hearing. The approximately 388 parking spaces shown on the originally approved CUP exhibit include the existing parking spaces north of the Chopra Center (which is identified on the original CUP exhibit as a lifestyle center). Although the original CUP exhibit identifies the 388 spaces in a smaller area, only approximately 211 of the 388 spaces could actually fit in the highlighted area when scaled at 8.5' x 20' on the shown exhibit-the balance of the 388 were constructed in the area north of the Chopra Center building outside of the "highlighted" area on the exhibit. The loss of these spaces was already taken into account in the calculation on sheet 3 showing 70 places displaced by the new ballroom. With respect to the status of the Master Plan, on October 13th, a letter was submitted to the Planning Director requesting a pre-application meeting to scope the requirements of the process within the guidelines of the City of Carlsbad. The meeting is scheduled for November 21 at 9:30am. We hope that you will attend so we can benefit from your participation in that process. We will be addressing the other issues in the November 13 letter separately. If you need any additional information regarding the above issues, please let us know. As you know, it is imperative that we stay on schedule for the December planning commission hearing and we appreciate your efforts in keeping us on schedule. KMD:kap cc: Mr. Chevis Hosea Mr. Forrest Haag Very truly yours, ~~liecr~~~~ , • • • e e City of Carlsbad I@Ft;t;llei.MaJ§.fhlleei§ell November 13, 2002 S. Chevis Hosea KSL La Costa Resort Corporation C/0 La Costa Resort and Spa 2100 Costa del Mar Carlsbad CA 92009 SUBJECT: CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad.. The Planning Department has reviewed your Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Special Use Permit, application no. CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08, as to its completeness for processing. The application is complete, as submitted. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. The City may, in the course of processing the application, request that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. In addition, you should also be aware that various design issues exist. These issues are listed below and must be resolved for staff to set a firm Planning Commission hearing date. The Planning Department has tentatively scheduled the above-referenced project for the Planning Commission hearing of December 18, 2002. In order to be heard at that Planning Commission hearing, the issues referenced below must be resolved prior to December 6, 2002. Please also remember that, as discussed at the September 30, 2002 meeting between City staff and the project applicant's team, staff review of project resubmittals can take up to ten working days. Please contact your staff planner, Michael Grim, at (760) 602-4623, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:MG:mg c: Don Rideout Jeremy Riddle File Copy Data Entry 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us (i) ISSUES OF CONCERN •. No. CUP 258(C)/SUP 02-08-LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA BALLROOM Planning: • • In order to expedite processing of the application, the following Planning Department comments were sent to your team via e-mail on October 28, 2002 and have not been resolved as of the date of this correspondence: 1. There are a large amount of mature trees on the site that will likely need to be removed. Please provide a plan indicating the location, size, type, and disposition of all mature trees within the project area. 2. There is currently landscaping along El Camino Real that may serve to assist in screening the redesigned parking area and future ballroom building. Since this landscaping is outside of the •area of work", it was not shown on the submitted exhibits. Please add an accurate depiction of this landscaping to the project plans, indicating type, height and coverage to assist staff in determining what additional landscaping or other screening materials will be needed to provide an aesthetically positive view from the adjacent scenic corridor, El Camino Real. 3. 4. It appears from site visits and plan review that the exercise track on the west side of the site will be eliminated by the parking lot redesign. Please provide background information on this recreational feature (e.g. how much usage it gets, will there be any replacement recreational opportunities, etc.) Please provide information on the project plans indicating the ultimate disposition of the personnel and laundry buildings, the nearby hotel rooms to the south, and the associated parking to the west. Please also indicate on the project plans the proposed condition for the area vacated by the spa building demolition. This area will need to be landscaped in ·accordance with the City's Landscape Manual and, depending on the information on the mature tree exhibit, may require additional landscaping. 5. Please indicate how many parking spaces currently exist north of the Chopra Center. The submitted plans only include those spaces in the northernmost portion of the parking lot but do not include the parking directly north of the Chopra Center building. 6. In order to consider the new parking area south of Costa del Mar as serving the ballroom facility, a direct pedestrian link between the parking area and the ballroom facility is needed. This will necessitate a crosswalk across Costa del Mar and a pedestrian path connecting the street to the buildings to the north (rather than having pedestrians travel the more circuitous route on the existing sidewalk). Please indicate these features on the project plans. 8. The landscaping adjacent to the proposed parking area at the intersection of Costa del Mar and Estrella del Mar is rather sparse. Please enhance the proposed landscaping to the extent feasible without creating safe sight-distance traffic corridor issues. 9 . Staff has indicated on several previous occasions that the westerly elevations for the ballroom are unacceptable as proposed. This elevation contains the least amount of articulation and yet is the elevation facing towards the scenic corridor of El Camino Real. Please enhance these elevations to include more building articulation as previously requested. • • • Engineering: 1. Add the application numbers (CUP 258(c) & SUP 02-08) to the upper right-hand corners of the exhibits. 2. Revise the plans to clarity how a fire truck (using 407E turning-template) can access the proposed fire hydrant in the southerly parking lot. If the fire hydrant is not accessible, the hydrant serves no benefit during a fire or emergency. Will a truck have to perform a 3-point turn at the end of the drive aisle to exit the parking lot? 3. Revise site plans so the proposed waterlines are located in the center of drive aisles, not through parking stalls (typical). Refer to redlines for clarification on this matter. 4. Revise the site plan to clarify how the storm water collected by the inlet near the southern parking lot will be filtered of pollutants before being discharged to Costa Del Mar Place. Add a note to the plans to clarity this issue. 5. Revise the plans to identify the anticipated remedial earthwork quantities. 6. Revise the site plan to clarity the size of the potable water service (currently listed as 2 1/2 -inch). Carlsbad Municipal Water District only permits 1-inch and 2-inch copper services. If more than 2-inch is required, consider multiple services (possible and 2-inch and a 1-inch potable service). 7. Consider installing an irrigation service off the long fire hydrant line in the southern parking lot. This will encourage flow in the dead-end pipe and address water quality of the potable water system that serves this project. 8. 9. 10. Add CMWD water easements along all fire hydrant laterals (typical). Refer to the redlines for clarification on this issue . Meet with the Fire Marshal to ensure that all fire protection devices are incorporated and that fire access/circulation has been adequately addressed. If more fire hydrants are required, more access issues may arise on next submittal. Clarify the size and type of the existing water main where the storm drain crosses near the southwest corner of the project. 11. Clarify the size and type of existing sewer near the southwest corner of the project. Callout the record data that created the easement (per document , dated ____ ). Is the easement public or private? 12. Revise the parking lot layout to incorporate 5' x 5' clearances at each corner parking stall (typical). Refer to the redlines and schematic noted on the returned plans. 13. Clarify how the trash service company will serve the project. Will trash enclosures be used? If so, refer to Carlsbad Standard drawing GS-16. 14. Clarify if a sump pump will be required to drain the low point in the truck loading bay, or if the grate inlet connects to the storm drain by gravity. 15. Relocate the irrigation and fire service check valves just outside the CMWD easement line. The check valves are typically located at this position per CMWD standards. 16. Clarify if the driveway entrance at the front of the ballroom will be one-way. If it will be two-way, the minimum width shall be 24-feet. 17. Add the inside and outside turning tracks of a 42-foot vehicle per 407E. These tracks must be shown at each 90-degree turn that must be accomplished to ensure trash trucks and fire trucks can maneuver throughout the site. • • • .. 18. 19. ----·---------------------------------------------------- Identify the hydraulic grade line (pressure zone) of the existing and proposed waterline for reference . Include pedestrian ramps along Estrella Del Mar Road as noted on the redlines. Clarify if a mid-block pedestrian ramp is required to help compliment the other pedestrian ramp across the street. 20. Revise the site plan to demonstrate the terminus of the proposed storm drain. Will it connect to an existing facility or surface drain? The current plans do not Enclosed is a redlined check-print of the project. This check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. Fire Department: The following comments were previously forwarded to your team and remain unresolved as of the date of this correspondence: 1. Please submit plans showing the point of connection in the street, including detector check assembly, for lateral service which will serve the ballroom fire sprinkler system (recommended Febco 876N or equivalent). 2. Fire hydrants are required at 300 foot intervals around the entire proposed building. A minimum of 1 ,000 gpm per hydrant at 20 psi with two hydrants flowing for two hour duration is required. Please submit calculations for said fire flow. If hydrants are proposed off private fire service to building, please show. 3 . Please eliminate the hydrant shown out in the parking lot. Hydrants shall be around the building at 300 foot spacing and a minimum of 40 feet from the building. Blue dot reflectors are required in the parking area to identify hydrant locations. Key valves serving the hydrants shall not be placed where they would be located under parked cars. 4. Please note that all locations of fire appurtenances shall be approved by the Carlsbad Fire Department. Upon final determination of the discretionary permits, mylar plans must be submitted to the Fire Department with a signature block for Fire marshal approval. ------------------------------------d/\c:ut_a_# e Cit e toh6fi;r of Carlsbad --------~------~~.-~ October 25, 2002 H.E.R.E c/o Nancy Browning 3737 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 300 San Diego CA 92108 RE: LA COSTA RESORT AND SPA Dear Ms. Browning: The La Costa Resort and Spa is presently remodeling the facility located at 2100 Costa Del Mar in Carlsbad CA. Since the site is zoned as Commercial, much of the work is being done by right, which means that no discretionary approvals are needed from the City of Carlsbad. For a review of the improvements proposed or already received, please contact the Building Department at (760) 602-2719. I cannot copy the building plans as they are copyrighted information and approval would need to be secured from the plan owners. RLN Design, 200 Baker Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626, (714) 641-0191 is processing the improvements. There is also proposed a new ballroom addition. This application does require an amendment to their Conditional Use Permit. Please find attached copies of the past approvals, the current project description, summary of all the uses on site, and plans of the new building. The plans are not the complete set, but probably the most useful information. The project will be going to public hearing in the next few months. You can subscribe, for free, to the City of Carlsbad to receive the public notices, agendas, and minutes of the Planning Commission. Please see the City's website at www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us and find the planning department and follow the subscription procedures. Please contact Mike Grim in our office at (760) 602-4623 for more specific information, as he is the project planner. Please remit a check payable to the City of Carlsbad in the amount of $37.60 to cover the cost of copies and postage. Please call me at (760) 602-4613 if you have additional questions, or visit our office to view the public records. Sincerely, c;)L~ Senior Planner VL:sn attachments c: Mike Grim 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us {!) Environmental Sciences and DUDEK lneering, Planning, & ASSOCIATES, INC. Professional Teams for Complex Projects Management Services October 16, 2002 Corporate Office: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 RECEIVED 760.942.5147 Fax 760.632.0164 3180-301 Mike Cusick KSL Development Corporation/La Costa Resort and Spa 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 OCT 1 6 2002 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. Re: Leucadia County Water District Sewer Availability Letter for The Ballroom Building at La Costa Resort and Spa Dear Mr. Cusick: The subject property is currently within the Leucadia County Water District's (LCWD) sewer service boundary and the existing facility is served by LCWD. We understand that the proposed Ballroom Building will include seating for as many as 1,000. This translates to an increase of 143 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) to the existing La Costa Resort & Spa. Our analysis of the existing system indicates sewer is available for this use with no new regional facility upgrades required. Prior to obtaining sewer permits for the additional level of sewer service, LCWD requirements must be met and are outlined below in the LCWD Standard Specifications including: • • • • Payment of plan check fees paid to LCWD Complete Plan Check process Development Agreement with LCWD prior to start of construction Pay all other LCWD applicable fees and deposits Connection fees for any additional EDUs must be paid to the District not later than when pulling building permits from the City of Carlsbad. The District assesses connection fees of $3,950 for each additional Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) as defined in the LCWD Standard Specifications. The District also assesses an annual sewer service fee of $176 per EDU per year. Connection fees and sewer service fees are subject to change from time to time by action of the LCWD Board of Directors. If you have any questions please call myself at Dudek & Associates, Inc. at (760) 942-0366 x 101. Very truly yours, Dudek & Associates, Inc. -~~- Steve Deeri~¥ LCWD District Engineer cc: Mike Bardin, LCWD General Manager Frank Reynaga, LCWD Joe Currie, Dudek & Associates, Inc. • Fall 2002 Dear Resort Guest and Member, Thank you for choosing La Costa Resort and Spa for your resort experience. On behalf of our entire staff, we are pleased that you are here and excited to share our plans for our 50 million dollar renovation. As you can see on the display board in our lobby we are building a brand new 28,000 square foot spa that will be spectacular. La Costa is famous for its dedication to spa and wellness programs and we will have a fabulous facility opening the summer of 2003. A brand new 42,000 square foot conference center is also being constructed which will provide outstanding meeting facilities. Additionally, each guest room at the resort will be renovated and re-furbished and will be complete by winter of2003. Our clubhouse and restaurant facilities will also be remodeled this fall and a new state of the art fitness center will open in October. Additional improvements in our public spaces and landscaping will combine with our commitment to excellence through our Five Star Service program to provide one of the best resort experiences in the United States. Thank you for your support, and I hope that you return again soon to experience our exciting improvements. Sincerely, Ted Axe Vice President and General Manager