The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 99-30; Cannon Court; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (4)CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) • Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit • Planned Industrial Permit • Administrative Variance • Planning Commission Determination • Coastai Deveiopment Permit • Precise Development Pian Conditional Use Permit • Redevelopment Permit • Condominium Permit • Site Development Plan • Environmental Impact Assessment • Special Use Permit • Generai Pian Amendment • Specific Plan • Hillside Deveiopment Permit • Tcntotivo Porool Mop Obtain from Engineering Department • Local Coastal Plan Amendment • Tentative Tract Map • Master Plan • Variance • Non-Residential Planned Development • Zone Change • Planned Development Permit • List other appiications not specified 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 210-010-38 3) PROJECT NAME: CANNON COURT 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: A Coastdl Dev&lopmGn.fe—fermifc—aftd cenditional Use Permit.for a Commercial Project (lOOrm hotel, gas station/mini-mart and 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) West Development Inc. 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) J.A. Buza MAILING ADDRESS f. 0. Box 676066 MAILING ADDRESS 16085 San Diequito Rd.,#E7 CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE (619) Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 756-5338 CiTY AND STATE ZiP TELEPHONE (619)- Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Tsfi-S'^^R 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KN0m«K3E. 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE SiGi^ATURE DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Portion of lot H r^f R;.nr-ho Agn^ Hor^ir^nrq^^ in the city of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of California. NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 2 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT; N/A % ON THE BETWEEN north STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) 1-5 AND (NAME OF STREET) Cannon Road (NAME OF STREET) railroad (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING com 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM b rl SQUARE FOOTAGE 6 7,41 3 S . F 4,560 18) PROPOSED SEWER TO BE USAGE IN EDU DETE ^lyilNttD BY CITY ENG. I 20) EXISTING GENERAL 6 .5 f, p\j^f^ 23) PROPOSED ZONING TR/C 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION TR/C CT-Q :T-Q 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION iT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CiTY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMEBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. 1/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY EDR THIS PURPOSE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUiRED DEC 1 7 ^999 DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEiVED RECEIVED BY: DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. Form 1 6 PAGE 2 OF 2 City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: BUZA, JA Set Id: S000000283 7319 12/17/99 ^01^01 02 6390-00 Description CUP99G30 CUP99031 Total: Amount 3,710.00 2,680.00 6,390.00 Receipt Number: R00087 96 Transaction Date: 12/17/1999 Pay Type lyiethod Description Amount Payment Payment Payment Check Check Check 1122 1123 1124 1,030.00 2,680.00 2,680.00 Transaction Amount: 6,390.00 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Receipt Applicant: BUZA, JA Description Amount CUP9 9 0 3 0 6.12 5899 04/05/01 0002 01 02 CBP 6.12 Not valid unless validated by Cash Register PLEASE RETAIN RECEIPT FOR REFUNDS OR ADJUSTMENTS Receipt Number: R0019473 Transaction Date: 04/05/2001 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 7813 6.12 Transaction Amount: 6.12 i City of Carlsbad PIsnning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this infonnation is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fratemal organization, corporation, estate, tmst, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipaiity, 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 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 publiclv-owned corooration. include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person, Titie Corp/Part J.A. Buza Corp. Title Address Addressi 6085 San Diequito Rd. #E7 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide tbe COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the natiJrc of the leyal .>>'VMcr»;">p (^i.;., 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% ofthe 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_ Title Address Corp/Part Jie s t. Development Inc. Title Address P.O. Box 676066 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92Q67 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 1 NON-PROFIT ol^yVIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust_ Title Non Profit/Trust_ Title Address Address Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? [ I Yes 5j No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. wner/date Signature of applicant/date Print or type name of owner John Buza Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or n iriisi. list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profil orcanization or as trustee or beneficiarv of the. Non ProfiLTrusi Non Profil/Trust_ Title : Title Address Address, 4. Have you had more than S250 worth of business transacted with any member of Cit> stafl'. Boards. Commissions. Comminees and/or Council within the past rw.'elve (12) months? j I ^'es Q No If yes. please indicate person(s):. NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessan,-. . • • I cenify- that ail the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of ownen'date Sianature of applicant'date John Buza Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicani Signature of owner. applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's nccnt 7^ CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY OF J.A. BUZA CORPORATION I, Patricia C. Buza, duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of J.A. Buza Coiporation, a Califomia corporation, (the "Corporation), do hereby certify that thc follovving arc the shareholders of the Corporation: John A. Buza Patricia C. Buza Dated this 3"^ day of February 2000. Patricia C. Buza, Secretary 77 3.2000 1 1:59AM EEICKSON SEDERSTROM " No. 2643 P. 2/2 CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY OF WEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. 1 Maiy E. West, duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of West Development, Inc., a Nebraska corporation, (Uic "Corporation"), do hereby certify that thc foUowing arc thc shareholders ofthe Corporation: Gary West Mary E. West Dated this 2nd day of February 2000. Mary E. We^ Secretary 7? I I:\LKS\SW\\«,'ESTV\VDr«cccert2.wpd Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis MEMORANDUM DATE: December 17, 1999 TO: Eric Munoz CC: John Buza FROM: Marcy Andora SUBJECT: SUBMITTAL FOR TWO (2) CUP's FOR CANNON COURT This memo accompanies an application for two (2) CUP's and a TPM for the Cannon Court Project. One CUP is the gas station/mini-mart and the other CUP is for the remainder ofthe site. The following lists the items that are provided: ^ One (1) EIA part I One (1) Land Use Review Application One (1) Disclosure Statement One (1) Project Description One (1) Site Location Map One (1) Copy of Reduced Site Plan One (1) Copy ofthe Water Conservation Statement One (1) Copy of photographs taken of the proposed site Three (3) Copies ofthe Preliminary Title Report One (1) Copy the Hydrology Study Two (2) Copies of the Traffic Analysis Two (2) Copies of the Soils Report Ten (10) Copies ofthe Tentative Parcel Map for Cannon Court Ten (10) Copies ofthe Floor Plans and Elevations for Cannon Court Ten (10) Copies ofthe Landscape Plan for Cannon Court One (1) Color Materials Board Application Fees in the total Amount of $6,390.00. Please call me ifyou have any questions or would like any additional information regarding this application. 5900 Pasteur Court • Suite 150 Carlsbod • CA 92008 • (760) 438-1465 • Fax: (760) 438-2443 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION PROJECT NAME: Cannon Commercial APPLICANT NAME: J.A. Buza Corp. Please describe fully the proposed project. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: Backqround The Cannon Commercial property is located north of Cannon Road, west of Interstate 5, and east of the railroad. This project consists of one parcel approximately 6.607 acres in size and is proposing a 100 room hotel, a country store with service station facilities, and a restaurant. The zoning for this site is Commercial- Tourist- Qualified with a General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Designation of Travel Recreation-Commercial. The goal of the Cannon Commercial Project will be to provide support services to people visiting Legoland as well as other tourist oriented attractions in Carlsbad and San Diego. This project will be adequately designed to accommodate the significant number of visitor, tourist and shuttle bus/alternative transportation users who will utilize the facilities of this site. It is the desire of this project to provide a compatible, high quality development which represents the type of product the CommercialA/isitor-Serving Overlay Zone strives to achieve. CommerclalA/isitor-Servinq Overlay Zone This project has been designed in compliance with all development and design requirements of the CommercialA/isitor-Serving Overlay Zone, Section 21.208 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Per the requirements of Section 21.208.1 OOF, a Village architectural style will be utilized for the proposed buildings. The landscaping is devised to complement the proposed architectural style and follows the regulations of the City's Landscape Manual and the CommercialA/isitor-Serving Overlay Zone. Hotel The concept for the hotel is to provide mid-priced rooms for the visiting family. Rooms will be equipped with microwaves and refrigerators, allowing families to extend their stay in the City of Carlsbad. The goal of the hotel is to provide amenities for both children and adults such as a game room, workout room, sauna and a pool area which is unique in design and character. There will also be a cocktail lounge located adjacent to the lobby which will be utilized for a complimentary self serve breakfast. Guests staying at the hotel are also within convenient walking distance to the services offered by the gas station/market. Countrv Store/Service Station The objective of the country store/service station is to provide interior and exterior amenities which are distinctive from other conventional mini-marts to accommodate the needs of the families visiting Carlsbad. The following are potential interior amenities which may be provided by the service station/market: • groceries, vegetables and flowers • quality coffee, ice cream, deli, bakery, pizza and candy • financial services including ATM, limited banking kiosk and check cashing - gift shop, film developing, copy center, video rental and mini pharmacy The service station/market will also potentially provide the following exterior amenities: »• 16 fuel stations • propane 3 mechanical service bays to provide minor repairs, such as belts, hoses, windshield wipers and oil changes for traveling motorists. Restaurant This project will include a higher quality restaurant, approximately 8,000 square feet in size serving lunch and dinner. The type of restaurants which will be pursued will be of the quality similar to the Claim Jumper. Parking This project has been designed to comply with all of the parking requirements of Section 21.208.100 of the CommercialA/isitor-Serving Overlay Zone. In order to more effectively provide parking for visitors, the majority of the employee parking will be located in the subterranean parking garage located belowthe hotel. Buildinq Height All elevations show two building height measurements one to the mid-point of the roof and one to the peak of the roof. All buildings measure no more than 35 feet to the midpoint of the roof and no more than 45 feet to the peak of roof. Architectural protrusions that do not add usable floor area can protrude above the height limit established by the underlying C-T Zone. Conditional Use Permits In compliance with the requirements of the Commercial/Visitor Overlay Zone two Conditional Use Permits are being submitted for this project. One Conditional Use Permit will be for the Country Store, which includes a gas station, while the other Conditional Use Permit will cover the hotel and restaurant. This will provide greater flexibility for the City if they wish to add conditions to one use that would not be applicable to the other use. It would also allow the City to separately review and add conditions to one use without opening up the CUP for the service station while not having to open the other CUP. Parcel Map Parcel map exhibits have been submitted along with the architectural exhibits and landscape plans. We realize that parcel maps are administratively approved by the Engineering Department. An application for a parcel map has been submitted to the Engineering Department. The parcel map exhibits have been submitted with this application, because they contain information that is required by the City to allow for the review of the proposed project. City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 9200! Applicant: BUZA, JA Description CUP99030 Amount 6.12 5899 04/05/01 0002 01 02 CGF" 6-12 Receipt Number: R0019473 Transaction Date: 04/05/2001 Pay Type Method Payment Check Description Amount 7813 6.12 Transaction Amount: 6.12 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 9200! Applicant: BUZA, JA Description CUP99030 Amount 1,275.00 Receipt Number: R0020163 Transaction Date: 05/08/2001 8715 05/08/01 00O2 01 02 CGP 1275-00 Pay Type Method Payment Check Description Amount 7704 1,275.00 Transaction Amount: 1,275.00 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department July 8, 2004 John Buza 6185 Paseo Del Norte, Suite 170 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: PRE 04-30 - CANNON COURT CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION The Planning Director has completed a review of your application for PRE 04-30 - Cannon Court Consistency Determination, (APN: 209-011-04). After careful consideration of the circumstances surrounding this request, the Planning Director has determined that the application can be determined to be consistent with the approved permit and therefore, approves the changes to the project based on Planning Director Administrative Policy No. 35. Please submit a reproducible 24" X 36" mylar copy of the amended site plan received July 8, 2004. The mylar must be submitted, stamped "Consistency Determination", and signed by the Planning Director prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the project. CITY OF CARLSBAD MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH.-BK.-mh Team Leader, Gary Barberio Project Engineer, Frank Jimeno Ricardo Ferguson, Mc Ardle Associates Architects Data Entry 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us 0 1 04 1 7 Notice of Determination To: Office ofPlanning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812 County Clerk County of San Diego Mailstop 833, Attn: MIT/^^ POBox 121750 From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 9^08 "Si (760) 602-4600<^'«9oo'j.Ltt,,^^ San Diego, CA 92112-1750 ^^Ve^^^V^/ ' -""^ Project No: CUP 99-30 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 ofthe Public Resources Code. CANNON COURT Project Title SCH #2001021109 City of Carlsbad, Barbara Kennedy (760) 602-4626 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Northwest comer of Cannon Road and 1-5, Carlsbad, CA, San Diego County Project Locations (include County) Project Description: Gas station/mini-mart, two restaurants, and an 86-room hotel on a vacant, pre-graded 6.5 acre site. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on July 10, 2001, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the envirormient 2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were 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 CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. MICHAEL J. HODZMILtER, Planning Director natp^ FiljD IN mE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ClEit"^ Date received for filing at OPR: SAN Dmm COUNTY ON , Jill i 6 2091 PO^^TRfl. JUL 1 6 2001 REMOVFD AUG 1 & 2001 RETURIIED TO AGENCY OH — DEPUTY \KA ^ AUG 15 2001 P».„c»^ n..t,^W 108Q Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: Project Description: APN 210-010-38 That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office ofthe County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896. Development proposal for an 86 room hotel, two restaurants, and a gas station/food mart on a 6.51 acre site. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. Ifyou have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626. DATED: FEBRUARY 26, 2001 CASE NO: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 CASE NAME: PUBLISH DATE: CANNON COURT FEBRUARY 26, 2001 [ICHAEL J. BQlZMlttER MICHAEL Planning Director 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ^ DOCUMENT !i - ^ 01041? Cert f'-f 1 t5t£?5' ^• REG 07-16-01 10°04 AM K = HILLEfi' 'iMi '^Al FISH &_GflH!r"^%l25Q::0n Kesf'S^skes '4,,:.' -MS-.!f STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ^ 1 0 O 3 9 3 ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEEMSH RECEIPT^<2j\B16'7^\ W '^ji^ DFG 753.5a (6-91) \ y^V" ^^^S. LeadAgency: CJ.\^^ C^A-\f^VX>d ^ ^te: '^M ' \ Counfy/State Agency of Filing: tSqcument No.: Project Title: C a^^\^^0^^^ Ojnv^TV. Project Applicant Name: \sg *<lib*7. j3tf°"^ Number:_ Project Applicant Address: Project Applicant fchec* appropriate box): Local Public Agency rT^sT^^telpBlrt^wl I Other Special District j | State Agency Q Private Entity I I CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: ( 7 Environmental Impact Report $850.00 $ ('f Negative Declaration $1,250.00 $ \'7jr^D ( ) Application Fee Water Diversion (Sfate IVafer Resources Confro/Scare/On/y) $850.00 $ ( ) Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs $850.00 $ ( bounty Administrative Fee $25.00 $ ( ) Project that is exempt from fees . RECEIVED Signature and title of person receiving payment:_ ^^X\ ft r-S»TALR FIRST COPY-PROJECT APPUCANT - SECOND COPY-DFG/FASB THIRD COPY-LEAD AGENCY FOURTH COPY-COUNTY/STATE AGENCY OF FILING VENDOR NO. V002212 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-2430 CHECKNO. 070648 Invoice Dale Oepartment Refeiienca# Pro/ect # ps?c(ipWotr Itwolci Amoimt PiW 06/30/01 027187 0013210 7555 COUNTY FILING FEES 1,275.00 ^ 04 1 7 Total: 1,275.00 DETACH BEFORE DEPOSITING PROOF OF PUBLICATION (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 This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San Diego County; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published In each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: February 26, 2001 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at this San Marcos 26th ., California day of February, 2001 Proof of Publication of Mitigated Negative Declaration MmCMTEb NEGATIVE DECLARATION ProjectAddreSS/Loca<ion:APN210-010-38, . That portion of Lot "H",of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Cartsbad, County Of San Diego, State of Caiifomia, ac-cording to Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,1896. Project Description: Development proposal for an 86 room hotel, two restaurants and a gas station/foot mart on a 6.51 acre site. The City of Carisbad has conducted an environmental rs-view of the abova described pn>Ject pursuant to the Guide-lines for impiementation of the California Environmental Quaiib Act and the Environmental Pfotection Ordinanoe of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the protect pians or pro-posals made by, or agreed to by, the applicam before the proposed negattve declaration and initial study are released for pubiic review wot'd avoid the effects or mitigate the ef-fects to a point where clearty no significant effect on the en-vironment wouid ocoiiri and (2) there is no substantial evi-dence in iight of the Whole record before the City that the projeot "as revised* niay have a significant effect on the en-vironment. Therefore a MiflgatedNegative Declaration is hereby issued for the,subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of ihe MiUgatetl Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file irt the Pianning Department, 1635 Fara-day Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing in the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, piease call Barbara Kennedy iri the Pianning Department at (760) 602-4626. DATED: FEBRIJARY 26, 2001 CASE NO: SDP 00i09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT /s/MICHAELJ. HOLZMILLER Planning Director Legal 69344 February26, 2001 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising NOTICE OF COMPLETION^ Mail to: State Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 3^BBacramento, CA 95812 - (916) 445-0613 Project Title: Cannon Court - SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 Lead Agency: CITY OF CARLSBAD Contact Person: Barbara Kennedv Street Address: 1635 Faradav Avenue Phone: (760) 602-4626 City: CARLSBAD Zip: 92008 County: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FILE COP See NOTE Below: SCH# PROJECT LOCATION: County: San Diego City/Nearest Coinmunity: Carlsbad Cross Streets: North side of Cannon Road between 1-5 and the AT & SF Railroad r.o.w. Total Acres: 6.51 Assessor's Parcel No. 210-010-38 Section Twp. Range: Base: San Bernadino Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: 1-5 Waterways: Pacific Ocean. Agua Hedionda Lagoon Airports: McCLELLAN/PALOMAR Railways: AT& SF Schools: Carlsbad Unified School District DOCUMENT TYPE: CEQA: • • • • NOP Early Cons Neg Dec Draft EIR I I Supplement/Subsequent • EIR (Prior SCH No.) ^ Other: Mitigated Neg Dec NEPA: • NOI • EA • Draft EIS • FONSI OTHER: • Joint Document I I Final Document • Other: LOCAL ACTION TYPE: • General Plan Update • Specific Plan • Rezone • Annexation • General Plan Amendment • Master Plan • Prezone • Redevelopment • General Plan Element Non-residential Planned Unit IS Conditional Use Permit Coastal Permit (to be issued • Development by Coastal Commission) • Community Plan Site Plan Land Division (Subdivision, Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) • Other: DEVELOPMENT TYPE: • Residential: Units Acres • Water Facilities: Tvpe MGD • Office: Sq. Ft. Acres Employees • Transportation: Type Commercial: Sq. Ft Acres 6.51 Employees • Mining: Mineral • Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres Employees • Power: Tvpe Watts • Educational: • Waste Treatment: Type • Recreational: • Hazardous Water: Type • Other: PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT: Kl Aesthetic/Visual • Flood Plain/Flooding • Schools/Universities • Water Quality • Agricultural Land • Forest Land/Fire Hazard • Septic Systems • H2O Supply/Ground HjO Kl • Air Quality Geological/Seismic • Sewer Capacity • Wetland/Riparian Kl • Archaeological/Historical • Minerals • Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading • Wildlife Kl Coastal Zone Kl Noise • Solid Waste • Growth Inducing Kl Drainage/Absorption • Population/Hsg. Balance Toxic/Hazardous Kl Land Use • Economic/Jobs • Public Services/Facilities Kl Traffic/Circulation • Cumulative Effect • Fiscal • Recreation/Parks • Vegetation • Other: Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use Land Use - Vacant Zoning - C-T-Q (Commercial Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay Zone) General Plan Land Use Designation - T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) Project Description: The project proposal consists of a Minor Subdivision, Non-residential Plaimed Development, Site Development Plan and Conditional Use Permits to grade and construct two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/food mart on a previously graded site. NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers for all new projects. Preparation or previous draft document) please fill it in. If a SCH number already exists for a project (i.e., from a Notice of Revised October 1989 SITE CANNON COURT SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/ PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Address/Location: Project Description: APN 210-010-38 That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896. Development proposal for an 86 room hotel, two restaurants, and a gas station/food mart on a 6.51 acre site. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. Comments fi^om the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kermedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626. DATED: CASE NO: FEBRUARY 26, 2001 SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT PUBLISH DATE: FEBRUARY 26, 2001 MICHAEL J. HOL 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 CASE NO: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 DATE: Februarv 6. 2001 BACKGROUND 1. 2. 3. 4. CASE NAME: CANNON COURT APPLICANT: West Development. Inc. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: P. O. Box 676066 Rancho Santa Fe. CA 92067 (619) 756-5338 DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 17. 1999 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of a site development plan, conditional use permits, minor subdivision, and non-residential planned development permit to allow grading and construction of two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/food mart on a 6.51 acre lot located on the north side of Cannon Road between 1-5 and the AT & SF Railroad right-of-wav. (APN 210-010-3 8 V SUMMARY OF 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. I I Land Use and Plaiming I I Population and Housing I I Geological Problems • water Air Quality Transportation/Circulation Public Services I I Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Energy & Mineral Resources |^ Aesthetics Hazards Cultural Resources Noise Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 03/28/96 DETERMINATION. I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. X I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect I) 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I I 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 Master Environmental Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Impact Review (MEIR 93-01), including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. ^xi^^/ut. -^n^^^M ^jislol Planner Signature Date Planning Directort Sigriature Date Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Secfion 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" answ^er 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 adversely significant, 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 fi-om "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 significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant 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 measLires 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 enviroimiental document is required (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant 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 effect on the environment. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce 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. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant 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 impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the 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. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or pohcies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18 c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) e) Disrupt or divide the physical artangement of an established commtmity (including a low-income or minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impaci Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • m • m • m • s • • • s II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (#I:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an imdeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) • • • • • • • • • H III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal resuh in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.I-I - 5.1-I5; #4, Pgs 4-21) b) Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs 5.I-I - 5.1-5; #4, Pgs 4-21) c) Seismic groimd failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -5.1.-I5;#4, Pgs 4-21) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.I-I - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21) e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-215) g) Subsidence ofthe land?(#l:Pgs 5.I-I - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21) h) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21) i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21) IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- II; #5, Pgs 1-7) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (#I:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • X • • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11; #5, Pgs 1-7) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (#I:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groimdwater recharge capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (#I:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- 11; #5, Pgs 1-7) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • S • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X V. AIRQUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quahty violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- 1-5.3-12) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 -5.3-12) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) d) Create objectionable odors? (#1 :Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) X • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22; #6) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal resuh in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2) • • • • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#1 :Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.I2.I-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (#I:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13- 1-5.13-9 7) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents ofthe State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 -5.13-9) Potentially ^Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • S • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5; #3, Pgs 1-3) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.I0.I-5) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5;) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5; # 2, Pgs 1- 10) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable bmsh, grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) • • S • n • • X • • s • • • • • • • X NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9- I I 15) '—' b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9- I I 1-5.9-15; #7, Pgs. 1-7) ' • • • • XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any ofthe following areas: a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6) b) Police protection? (#I:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4) c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (#1, pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.8-7) e) Other govemmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X 7 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1-5.13-9) Commimications systems? (#1: pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) b) c) d) e) f) g) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) Sewer or septic tanks? (#I:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3) Local or regional water supplies? (#I:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5) b) Have a demonstrated negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5) c) Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1 -5.11-5) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) c) Affect historical resources? (#I:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1-5.8-10) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1-5.12.8-7) XVI. MANDATORY 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 wildhfe 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 Califomia history or prehistory? • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X 8 Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in coimection 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? Potentially Significant Impact • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • Kl • • S XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measvu^es which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Environmental Setting/Site Description The project site is a 6.51 acre lot designated T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) by the General Plan. The rectangular shaped site is generally flat and is bordered by Cannon Road on the south, the 1-5 Freeway to the east, the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way to the west with the Encinas Power Plant beyond, and the SDG&E storage yard, substation, and high tension power lines to the north. Eucalyptus trees border the perimeter of the site and the majority of the property is vacant and undeveloped. About 10% of the property was fonnerly developed with structures located near the southwest comer. Concrete foimdations and a concrete driveway currently remain at the southwest comer. The property was used for agricultural purposes until about 1967 and since that time has been used to store equipment and materials for SDG&E. For a short time, the property was also used to store new automobiles for a local dealership. Project Description The development proposal will result in the constmction of an 86 room hotel with 105 space underground parking garage located near the north end of the site, a 7,770 square foot restaurant located west of the hotel, a 4,800 square foot restaurant located near the center of the site, and a 16 pump gas station and with a 1,500 square foot food mart located at the south end ofthe site. The entrance to the project will be via a new signalized intersection at Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. The north extension of Avenida Encinas will be constmcted as a private road and the various uses will be accessed by three entrance points off this private street. The project is proposed as non-residential planned development with individual ownership of the buildings and joint use and ownership of on-grade and underground parking spaces. Associated landscape improvements are included as part of the development proposal. Grading for the project will consist of 28,800 cubic yards of cut, 1,800 cubic yards of fill, and 27,000 cubic yards of export. The proposed grades are within 0 to 3 feet of the existing grades. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1. Land Use and Planning The site's C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay) zone designation would allow the restaurant and hotel uses with approval ofa Site Development Plan. The gas station use requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, due to the site's inclusion in the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, approval of a Conditional Use Permit will be required for the project. The site is located in the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan Area and will require approval ofa Coastal Development Permit by the Califomia Coastal Commission. 2. Population and Housing The project will not impact or affect population pattems, projections, or affordable housing provisions. 10 Rev. 03/28/96 3. Geologic Problems A preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared by Constmction Testing & Engineering, Inc. for the project site. This study concluded that the project site is appropriate for the proposed development, subject to the recommendations included in the study. Since no fault crosses the subject site, the risk of ground mpture was considered remote. Due to the soils types present, the potential for liquefaction was found to be low. The site contains no known or suspected landslides. The site does not contain any unique geologic or physical features. Grading activities for the proposed project would be subject to the City's adopted grading regulations and the Landscape Guidelines Manual, which would include requirements for implementation for all necessary erosion control methods. In addition, because of the site's location within the Coastal Zone, a mitigation measure has been included which will prohibit grading activities during the winter months (October P' - April T*). 4. Water The project is located approximately 1,700 feet south of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and 1,800 feet east of the Pacific Ocean. The Geotechnical Report indicated that groundwater was discovered approximately 16 feet below grade in two locations. Groundwater is not expected to affect the proposed development if proper drainage controls are implemented and maintained. The project will result in increased surface ranoff due to the addition of impervious surfaces required for the development ofthe stractures and pavement areas. The fuel dispensing area will be designed to ensure clean storm water discharge fi-om fuel dispensing areas and will minimize the potential for gasoline ranoff Development of the site will be required to comply with all applicable City regulations regarding drainage and ranoff, including compliance with NPDES regulations/requirements and Best Management Practices. The site is not within a flood hazard area and will not result in exposure to water related hazards. The site currently receives drainage fi-om the parcel to the north and a 24" RCP drainage outlet pipe at the CalTrans r.o.w. The flow from the CalTrans pipe is conveyed across the property via a drainage swale and a shallow steel pipe. The entire site (and off-site contributing) drains to a 5' X 5' railroad tie culvert at the AT & SF railroad. The proposed drainage will be connected to the existing outlet via a series of pipes/inlets. The proposed development will not impact groundwater flow or quality; or change the flow of surface ran-off; or impact public water supplies. 5. Air Quality In 1994 the City prepared and certified an EIR which analyzed the impacts which will result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concludes that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts in the form of increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attaiiunent basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality ofthe region. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan build-out, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management sfrategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design ofthe project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning Department. 6. Transportation/Circulation A traffic report was submitted for the proposed development. The report addresses two circulation issues that need to be analyzed. First, the report analyzes the impact of the project fraffic on existing city sfreets. Additionally, the report analyzes the access requirements of the 45-acre parcel directly north of the project. When the vacant 45-acre parcel north of the project is developed, it will take access through the project site. Accordingly, the access road needs to be designed to handle the potential future traffic. In order to establish the ultimate width of this access road, and since uses are not currently planned for the 45 acres, two altemative land use assumptions were made. Altemative 1 assumed 15 acres for a high technology power plant plus 30 acres for the utility corporate headquarters. This altemative results in a traffic generation of 3,450 ADT. Altemative 2 assumed 15 acres for a high technology power plant, 17.5 acres for corporate headquarters, and 12.5 acres of visitor commercial use. This altemative resulted in a traffic generation of 7,200 ADT. To accommodate both altematives, the project proposes to build two lane improvements through the project, with widening to four lanes at the intersection with Caimon Road. These improvements would meet the requirements of altemative 1. To meet the requirements of altemative 2, additional right-of-way would be reserved for the potential widening of the street to a four-lane road. The project itself will generate a total of 4,793 ADT; including 308 AM peak-hour trips and 401 PM peak-hour trips. The fraffic analysis indicates that the additional traffic generated by the project does not significantly affect the levels of service of the existing sfreets. However, the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proximity of the 1-5 Cannon Road freeway ramps to the east and the railroad crossing to the west, some traffic operations measures need to be implemented. The following specific measures will be incorporated in the design of the intersection: 1. Interconnect the new Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing 12 Rev. 03/28/96 freeway ramp signals. 2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal. 3. Signing and striping with "KEEP CLEAR" notices to assure intersections are not blocked during raifroad signal preemption. 4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption. 5. Dual west to southbotmd left tums on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas. With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the fraffic analysis shows that the project traffic does not significantly affect the levels of service of the sfreets or intersections in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions. In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would result from the build-out of the City imder an updated General Plan. That document concluded that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in increased fraffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional confrol. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at build-out. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of fransportation such as frails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to confrol. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at build-out of the General Plan due to regional through-fraffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all projects covered by the General Plan's Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning Department. A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was 13 Rev. 03/28/96 certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later proj ects. 7. Biological Resources The site will not result in an impact to biological resources. The site does not contain any identified sensitive resources. It contains no designated natural communities or wetland habitat and does not serve as a migration corridor. 8. Energy and Mineral Resources The site contains no identified natural resources and will not conflict with any energy conservation plans. There are no known mineral resources on the site. 9. Hazards Compliance with the Califomia Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the constraction and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project. There will be no interference with emergency response or evacuation plans as the site will be developed in accordance with all applicable City regulations, including placement of the stractures on the site and public/private improvements sidewalks, drainage facilities). Therefore, the proposed development ofthe site will not result in the creation of any hazards. Since the property had previously been used for agricultural uses, a limited Phase II Environmental Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical residue in the soils. The analysis detected the presence of toxaphene, however, it is anticipated that grading activities (mixing and blending of the soil) will further reduce the levels of toxaphene to a level of insignificance. Once grading is completed, it was recommended that additional soil samples be collected an analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene. If additional actions are required, they can be implemented at that time. Examples of additional actions would include thicker concrete slabs or the placement of vapor barriers. 10. Noise The project is subject to the City of Carlsbad adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses which include the restaurants and food mart. The City does not have exterior noise standards which apply to these uses. The site is subject to noise impacts from 1-5 and the Amtrack, Coaster, and freight train operations on the AT & SF raifroad. An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from these noise sources on the proposed development. The report indicates that the building surfaces of the hotel will be exposed to worst case noise levels of 77.7 CNEL, and will therefore require at least a 32.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. The recommended mitigation measures include building upgrades for a number of units within the hotel. The area of most concem is the east end of the building that faces the freeway. The building upgrades consist of upgraded windows, attachment of an additional layer 14 Rev. 03/28/96 of gypsum board to walls of specified units, and baffled attic vents, and mechanical ventilation. Standard constmctions methods will provide adequate noise attenuation for the restaurants and food mart, with the condition that all buildings are required to have mechanical ventilation in order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve the required interior noise attenuation. The fiiture development of the site is not anticipated to increase noise levels or expose people to severe noise levels. When constraction is proposed, there will be temporary increases in noise as building occurs. However, these activities will be regulated by the City's constraction activity regulations and will be temporary in nature and not severe. 11. Public Services The eventual development of the subject site will not result in a need for new or altered govemment services beyond what was afready anticipated by the City's General plan. The project will be conditioned to comply with all applicable requirements of the Local FaciUties Management Plan for Zone 3 to ensure that all necessary facilities are provided prior to or concurrent with development. 12. Utilities and Service Systems The eventual development of the subject site will not result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations. The site is an infill site readily serviced by existing systems. The project will be conditioned to comply with all applicable requirements of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 to ensure that all necessary facilities/systems are provided prior to or concurrent with development. 13. Aesthetics The project site is located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone and is subject to standards which insure that the development will adhere to a high quality of architectural design. The project utilizes a "Village" architectural style, and is consistent with the overlay zone standards. The project observes a 30 foot landscape setback from Cannon Road and the setback area is landscaped consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines for Cannon Road. In addition, the Scenic Corridor Guidelines apply to the railroad corridor, and the project has been designed with pleasant building facades and landscaping which faces the raifroad right-of-way. The proposed hotel is the tallest building with a height of 45 feet to the peak of the roof The peak elevation will be approximately 28 feet above the elevation of the freeway. The height of the restaurants are approximately 26 feet to the roof peaks and the highest points of the food mart and gas station canopy, respectively, are 23.5 feet and 33.5 feet. Since no views ofthe coastline are present from the freeway in either a north or southbound direction, the primary aesthetic concems are in regard to any negative visual impacts of exposed roof equipment or utility areas. The roof equipment for the hotel will be ground mounted in an equipment room. The roof equipment on the restaurants will be located within a mechanical equipment well and screened with trellis screen panels painted to match the building. The food mart mechanical equipment will be ground mounted and screened by an enclosure to complement the building. Views of trash areas will also be screened from view with decorative enclosures and landscaping. Standard conditions of approval also require submittal of a lighting plan with future submittal of building plans. The lighting plans will be reviewed to insure that light fixtures are shielded so 15 Rev. 03/28/96 that there is no spillover of light or glare onto adjacent properties. The perimeter of the site is surrounded primarily by Eucalyptus trees, with additional species including Acacia, Pepper, Myopomm and Palm trees intermixed among the Eucalyptus. The trees were evaluated by a certified arborist and the majority of the trees were found to be suffering from either insect borer activity and damaged root systems, or were found to be hazardous due to prior praning activities. The majority of the trees will be removed due to the poor health of the frees or potentially hazardous condition. New landscaping around the perimeter of the site will consist of a more suitable mixture of frees and shrabs for screening or enhancing the appearance of the site. Therefore, no significant negative visual impacts will result from the proposed project. 14. Cultural Resources No cultural resources (paleontological, archaeological, or historical) have been identified on the project site. The site also does not serve as a site for religious or sacred uses. Therefore, there will be no impact to cultural resources. 15. Recreational The project will not affect existing recreational opportunities, as it does not currently serve as a recreation site. The project will also be conditioned to comply with the requirements of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 for park and recreation facilities. 16 Rev. 03/28/96 EARLIER ANALYSES USED 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, Califomia, 92008, (760) 602-4600. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 2. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for proposed Cannon Court Development, dated June 18,1998, Converse Consultants. 3. Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment for proposed Cannon Court Development, dated December 10,1999, Constraction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 4. Geotechnical Investigation for proposed Caimon Court Development, dated December 10, 1999, Constraction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 5. Hvdrologv and Hydrauhc Calculations Cannon Court # 210-010-38. dated December 8, 1999, O'Day Consultants, Inc. 6. Transportation Analvsis for Cannon Court, dated revised January 4, 2001 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. 7. Noise Analysis for Cannon Court, dated Febraary 11,2000, Mesfre Greve Associates. 8. Letter from Jim Thompson. Certified Arborist. dated January 29, 1999, Bufiers Mill, Inc. 17 Rev. 03/28/96 3^1 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) 1. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1 to October 1. The City Engineer may permit an extension of the grading season until November 15 if all precautionary measures regarding erosion, consistent with the City's grading ordinance, have been put into place by October 1. 2. Prior to completion of grading activities, additional soil samples shall be collected and analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene. If additional actions are required, implementation of these mitigation measures shall occur prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any stracture, the Developer shall submit a letter from the acoustical engineer attesting that the recommended noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the constraction documents. 4. Design and build a two-lane sfreet through the project site for access to the property to the north. Widen the sfreet to four lanes at its intersection with Cannon Road. 5. Reserve additional right-of-way for the potential widening of the street through the project to a four-lane road. 6. Design and build a traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. 7. Interconnect the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing 1-5 freeway ramp signals. Coordinate with Caltrans. 8. Incorporate and coordinate the railroad preemption for the new traffic signal. 9. Incorporate traffic signal phasing, signing and striping measures to assure the free flow of fraffic during signal preemption. ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE! See Attached. 18 Rev. 03/28/96 ^CE WITH MITIGATION MEASUR^ APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. /V^ Toot <^JL 4 — Date Signatu/e 19 Rev. 03/28/96 1 PROJECTNAME: CANNON COURT APPROVAL DATE: FILE NUMBERS: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 MS 99-16 MITIGATED NEG. DEC: The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). Mitigation {Measure Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks 1. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1 to October 1. The City Engineer may permit an extension of the grading season until November 15 if all precautionary measures regarding erosion, consistent with the City's grading ordinance, have been put into place by October 1. Prior to issuance of grading permit Planning/ Engineering 2. Prior to completion of grading activities, additional soil samples shall be collected and analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene. If additional actions are required, implementation of these mitigation measures shall occur priorto issuance ofa building permit. Prior to connpletion of grading Planning/ Engineering 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any structure, the Developer shall submit a letter from the acoustical engineer attesting that the recommended noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the construction documents Prior to issuance of building permit Planning/ Building m < O m i- # o o z o o I m o tu (Q (D Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be Initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be Initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. IVIitigation Measure Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks 4. Design and build a two-lane street through the project site for access to the property to the north. Widen the street to four lanes at its intersection with Cannon Road. Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering 5. Reserve additional right-of-way for the potential widening of the street through the project to a four- lane road. Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering 6. Design and build a traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering 7. Interconnect the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing 1-5 freeway ramp signals. Coordinate with Caltrans. Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering 8. Incorporate and coordinate the railroad preemption for the new traffic signal. Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering 9. Incorporate traffic signal phasing, signing and striping measures to assure the free flow of traffic during signal preemption. Prior to issuance of grading/ building permit Engineering m < 71 O m z >! o o o X m o r; c/) # (D Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be Initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development February 18 2002 Ms. Barbara Kennedy CityofCarlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Re: Cup 99-30, Cannon Court, Condition # 34, and "Solid Waste Management Plan" Sent via Federal Express, 2/18/02, tracking # 7924 8997 8800 Dear Barbara, Per condition # 34, we have been working with Steve Salatti of Waste Management. Steve has done a thorough review of our plans, and the condition, and prepared the attached response. Please let me know if you have any questions. As we have so many conditions to meet, I will consider this letter as meeting our obligation, unless I hear otherwise. Sincerely, John A. Buza Cc. Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems, via U.S. Mail P.O. Box 861 7 Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 'Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 IMUI WASTE MAIMAGEMEIMT OF NORTH COUNTY A WASTE MANAGEMENT COMPANY 2141 Oceanside Blvd. Oceanside, CA 92054-4405 02/12/02 (760) 439-2824 (760) 754-4109 Fax J.A. Buza Corp. Debbie A. Wall, Office Mgr. P.O. Box 8617 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Re: Cannon Court Solid Waste & Recycle Management Plan To Whom It May Concem: Per our previous telephraie conversation, I have reviewed the extensive site plans you forwarded to Waste Management as they pertain to waste and recycling flow analysis. The City of Carisbad is looking for responses to questicois A, B, C, D, & E found in sub-section 34 of their City Code requirements. Said re^cmses are enclosed herein. A. There are four trash/recycle enclosure areas in the site plan. They are placed adjacent to each restaurant and bdiind the hotel and next to the country store. The enclosures next to die restaurants and the hotel will each have two 3-yard bins for trash and a 4-yard bin for cardboard recycling. The enclosure next to the country store will have one 3-yard bin for trash and one 4-yard bin for cardboard recycling. B. The close proximity of the aiclosures to each use fecility will allow direct access from the facility to both trash and recycling caitainers. Waste Management/Coast Waste Management will collect both solid waste and recyclables using frcmt-end load commercial collection vehicles, lhe driving corridors of the site are sufficient to accommodate our vehicles. C. The size and scope of the facilities in the Cannon Court plan would not benefit enough from the use of balers/compactors to warrant the equipmait e3q)ense. D. Waste Management/Coast Waste Management will provide the solid waste removal, the cardboard removal (at a significant cost reducticm over trash removal) and provide 96-gallon waste-wheelers to aid in the recycling of glass/plastic/tin/altmiinum for the restaurants and newspaper for the hotel. E. The waste generated from the restaurants will range from 12 to 30 cubic yards per week dq)ending on the seasOTi and popularity of the facility. The hotel will produce a maximum of 40 cubic yards a week based upon 80% continuous occupancy. Since the hotel has no fonnal food service the average weekly yardage will probably be around 25. We will receive about 32 cubic yards a week of cardboard fi-om the four facilities and the commingled (glass/plastic/tin/alimiinum) commodities will be approximately 2 cubic yards a week. I hope that this information is clear and concise. If I can assist in the management plan further please contact me at (760) 754-4113. Sincerely, C Steven M. Salatti Sales Manager A Division of Waste Management of Califomia, Inc. ® STATE OF CAUFORNIA - TKE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, C<'vemor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO AREA 7575 MBTROPOLrrAN DRIVE, SUrTE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4402 (619) 767-2370 Date December 20. 2001 Application No. 6-01-120 Page 1 of 5 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE PERMIT On December 12. 2001 . the Califomia Coastal Commission approved the application of Ja Buza Corporation . subject to the attached standard and special conditions, for the development described below: Description: Subdivision of a vacant 6.51-acre lot into five lots and constraction of a 45-ft-high, 86-room 53,561 sq.ft. hotel, 333 subterranean and surface parking spaces, 4,800 sq.ft. restaurant, 7,700 sq.ft. restaurant, 16-pump gas station and 1,500-sq.ft-food mart. Off-site improvements include installation of a traffic signal and dual west to southbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. Site: Northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, Carlsbad (San Diego County) APN 210-010-38 The pennit will be held in the San Diego Disfrict Office of the Commission, pending fulflllment of Special Conditions 1.2.3.4.5 When these conditions have been satisfied, the permit will be issued. DEBORAH N. LEE DEPUTY DIRECTOR BY NOTICE OF INTEN^^O ISSUE PERMIT NO. 6-01-120 Page 2 of 5 STANDARD CONDFIIONS: 1. Notice of Receipt and Acknowledgment. The permit is not valid and development shall not commence until a copy of the permit, signed by the pennittee or authorized agent, acknowledging receipt of the permit and acceptance of the terms and conditions, is retumed to the Commission office. 2. Expiration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two years from the date on which the Coinmission voted on the application. Development shall be pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a reasonable period of time. Application for extension of the permit must be made prior to the expiration date. 3. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition will be resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission. 4. Assignment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided assignee files with the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the permit. 5. Terms and Conditions Run with the Land. These terms and conditions shall be perpetual, and it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to bind all future owners and possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions. SPECIAL CONDFTIONS: The pennit is subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Plans. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for review and written approval, final site, building and elevations plans as well as all off site improvements, approved by the City of Carlsbad, which shall be in substantial conformance with the preliminary plans submitted by the applicant, dated received July 31, 2001 by McArdle Associates and O'Day Consultants. The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved final plans. Any proposed changes to the approved final plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved fmal plans shall occur without an amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is required. 2. Landscaping Plan. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for review and written approval of the Executive Director, a detailed final landscape plan approved by the City of NOTICE OF INTErA^O ISSUE PERMn NO. 6-01-120 Page 3 of _5_ Carlsbad indicating the type, size, extent and location of all plant materials, the proposed irrigation system and other landscape features. The plan shall include: a. the use of drought-tolerant native or non-invasive plant materials to the maximum extent feasible. b. special emphasis on screening the entire site from Interstate 5. The number of canopy trees along the 1-5 frontage shall not be less than twenty, with additional trees located in the area where the majority of eucalyptus frees are being removed. c. all proposed canopy trees shall be a minimum 24-inch box size. d. a written commitment shall be made that all planted materials shall be maintained in good growing condition, and landscaping shall be installed concurrent with, or within 60 days of completion of grading. e. five years from the date of issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Director, a landscape monitoring report, prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect or qualified Resource Specialist, that certifies the on-site landscaping is in conformance with the landscape plan approved pursuant to this Special Condition. The monitoring report shall include photographic documentation of plant species and plant coverage. If the landscape monitoring report indicates the landscaping is not in conformance with or has failed to meet the performance standards specified in the landscaping plan approved pursuant to this perinit, the applicant, or successors in interest, shall submit a revised or supplemental landscape plan for the review and approval of the Executive Director. The revised landscaping plan must be prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect or a qualifled Resource Specialist and shall specify measures to remediate those portions of the original plan that have failed or are not in conformance with the original approved plan. The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved final landscaping plan. Any proposed changes to the approved landscaping plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved landscaping plans shall occur without an amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendment is required. 3. Runoff Control/BMP Plans. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall agree in writing to implement and maintain the pollution control practices and facilities identified in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, dated September 27, 2001, which was designed by a licensed engineer (Meg Carroll, O'Day Consultants) and which minimizes the volume, velocity and pollutant load of stormwater leaving the site and subsequently discharged into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The drainage and. flitration systems shall be maintained such that they are functional throughout the life of the approved development. Should repairs or restoration become necessary, prior to the commencement of such repair or restoration NOTICE OF INTEWirrO ISSUE PERMIT NO. 6-01-120 Page 4 of 5 work, the permittee shall submit a repair and restoration plan to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment or new coastal development pennit is required to authorize such work. In addition, regarding the fuel dispensing area and temporary erosion control, the plan shall include the following requirements: (a) The concrete fuel dispensing area shall extend 6.5 feet (2.0 meters) or more from the corner of each fuel dispenser, or the length at which the hose and nozzle assembly may be operated plus 1 foot (0.3 meter). (b) If dead-end sump is not used to collect spills, the applicant shall install an oil/water separator. (c) In order to prevent fuel spills and leaks, which can pollute stormwater, the applicant shall: 1. Install vapor recovery nozzles to help confrol drips as well as air pollution. 2. Install signage discouraging "topping-off of fuel tanks. 3. Use secondary containment when fransferring fuel from the tank truck to the fuel tank. 4. Use absorbent materials on small spills and general cleaning rather than hosing down the area. Remove the absorbent materials promptiy. 5. Carry out all federal and State requirements regarding underground storage tanks. 6. Not use mobile fueling of mobile indusfrial equipment around the facility. The applicant shall transport the equipment to the designated fueling areas. 7. Keep the Spill Prevention Confrol and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan up to date. 8. Train employees in proper fueling and cleanup procedures 9. Keep ample supplies of clean-up materials on site and readily available. (d) Temporary erosion control after the site is graded shall also be addressed in the plan The permittee shall undertake the development in accordance with the approved plan. NOTICE OF INTE^TO ISSUE PERMII NO. 6-01-120 Page 5 of 5 Any proposed changes to the approved plan shall be reported to the Executive Director. No change to the plan shall occur without a Commission-approved amendment to the permit unless the Executive Director determines that no such amendment is required. 4. Disposal of Graded Spoils. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall identify the location for the disposal of graded spoils. If the site is located within the coastal zone, a separate coastal development permit or permit amendment shall first be obtained from the Califomia Coastal Commission or its successors in interest. 5. Construction Access/Staging Area/Proiect Timing. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COAST.\L DEVELOPxMENT PERMII, the applicant shall submit plans showing all locations which will be used as staging and storage areas for materials and equipment during the constraction phase of this project. The staging/storage plan shall be subject to review and written approval of the Executive Director. Use of sandy beach, public walkways and public parking areas, including on-street parking for the interim storage of materials and equipment shall not be permitted. If offsite areas are designated as staging/storage areas, or if constraction will require any restrictions on traffic flow along Cannon Road or Carlsbad Boulevard (such as lane closures), the plan shall also indicate that no work may occur during the summer months (Memorial Day weekend to Labor Day) of any year. The permittee shall undertake the development in accordance with the approved plan. Any proposed changes to the approved plan shall be reported to the Executive Director. No change to the plan shall occur without a Commission-approved amendment to the permit unless the Executive Director determines that no such amendment is required. (6-01-120n.doc) J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development ' 4 ^ December 26, 2001 " Bit 2001 Barbara Kennedy > carts*** , ,7 City of Carlsbad ^0 V Planning Department ; : 5->-^ 1635 Faraday Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Cannon Court - Coastal Commission Approval Dear Barbara, Per Dennis Cunningham, I have enclosed a copy of the California Coastal Commission NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE PERMIT document for your records. Please call (858) 756-5338 if I can further assist. Happy Holidays! Sincerely Debbie Wall Office Manager Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Winston H. Hickox Secrelary for Environmenlai I'rotcclion State ipater Resources Conti# Board Division of Water Quality 1001 I Street • .Sacramento, California 95814 • (916) 341-5537 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1977 • Sacramento, California • 95812-1977 F'AX (916) 341-5543 ' Internet Address: htlp://www.swrcb.ca.gov Gray Davis Governor February 14, 2002 JOHN A BUZA WEST DEVELOPMENT INC POBOX 8617 RANCO SANTA FE, CA 92067 RECEIPT OF YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) has received and processed your NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. Accordingly, you are required to comply with the permit requirements. Your WDID identification number is: 9 37S317467. Please use this number in any future communications regarding this permit. SITE DESCRIPTION OWNER: WEST DEVELOPMENT INC DEVELOPER: WEST DEVELOPMENT INC COUNTY: SAN DIEGO SITE ADDRESS: NWC OF CANNON RD AND I 5 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 COMMENCEMENT DATE: 4/1/02 EST. COMPLETION DATE: 4/1/03 When construction is complete or ownership has been transferred, dischargers are required to notify the Regional Water Board by submitting a Notice of Termination (NOT). All State and local requirements must be met in accordance with Special Provision No. 7 of the General Permit. Enclosed is a NOT for your future use. If you do not notify the State Water Board that construction activity has been completed you will continue to be invoiced for the annual fee each January. Please contact your Regional Water Board at (858) 467-2952 if you have any questions regarding pennit requirements. To obtain storm water related information and forms, please visit the storm water web page at www.swrcb.ca.gov/stormwtr/index.html. Sincerely, Storm Water Section Division of Water Quality Enclosure California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper .MAII HI ( Ai.iiiiiiNiA nic ui.Sdi'Kc. rs A(;i.N< 'l' (iKAY DAVIS. i:mrn CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN nil.dO AUI;A 11 I I CAMIM) 1)1 I. l; 1(1 NOU 111. SIM 11 :.l>ii SAN DII.IIO. CA v:illS-l 7:.S 10191 .S2I-«(1.1() Dciiiii.s Ciiiininghani Planning Systein.s 1530 Faraday Ave, #100 Carisbad, CA 92008 NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE Dale: April 1 1. 2002 Applicant: J.A. Buza Corp. Documcnl or Plans: Final Plans. Open Space Deed Restriction. Landscaping Plan. RunolT Conlrol/BMP Plans, Di.sposal oF Graded Spoils, Construction Acccs.s/Slauiniz Arca/Projecl Timing Submitted in compliance with Special Condition(s) No(s).: 1-5 of Coastal Development Permit No. 6-01-120 Remaining Special Condilion(s): None Malerial submilled in compliance with said Special Condition(s) of your development pennil has been reviewed by the District Director and found to fulfill the requirements of .said condilion(.s). Your .submitted material and a copy of this letter have been made a pari of the permanent file. Sincerely, Deborah Lee Deputy Director By: SlAir or CAI.KORNIA - TIIR HCSOURCCS AGf MCY GRAY DAVIS, C*^vc^lO CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ' SAN DIEGO AREA 7575 METROPOUTAN DRIVE, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92I08-'1'I02 (619) 767-2370 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 6-01-120 Page 1 of 5 On December 12. 2001 . the California Coastal Commission granted to •la Buza Corporalion this permit for thc development described below, subject to the attached Siandard and Special Conditions. Description: Subdivision of a vacant 6.51-acre lot into five lots and construction of a 45-ft-high, 86-room 53,561 sq.ft. hotel, 333 subterranean and surface parking spaces, 4,800 sq.ft. restaurant, 7,700 sq.ft. restaurant, 16-punip gas station and 1,500-sq.ft-food mart. Off-site improvements include installation of a traffic signal and dual west to southbound left turn lanes at thc intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. Silc: Northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, Carlsbad (San Dicgo County) APN 210-010-38 Issued on behalf of the California Coastal Commission by PETER DOUGLAS Executive Director and IMPORTANT: THIS PERMIT IS NOT VALID UNLESS AND UNTIL A COPY OF THE PERMIT WITH THE SIGNED ACKNOWLEDGMENT HAS BEEN RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION OFFICE. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned permittee acknowledges receipt of this permit and agrees to abide by all terms and conditions thereof Signature of Permittde Date ' ' :i^^i COASTAL DBVBLOTMENT PERMIT NO. 6-01-101 Page 2 of^ STANDARD CONDITIONS: 1. Notice of Rcceipl and Acknowledgment. The permit is not valid and developmenl shall nol commence until a copy of the permit, signed by the permittee or authorized agenl, ;icknowlctlging receipt ofthe permit and acceptance oflhe terms and coiKliliuns, is relurned lo the Commission office. 2. Expiration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two years from the dale on which the Commission voted on the application. Development shall bc pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a reasonable period of time. Applicalion for extension ofthe permit must bc made prior to the expiralion dale. 3. Interpretation. Any questions of inteni or interpretation of any condition will be resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission. 4. Assignment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided assignee files with thc Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the permit. 5. Terms and Conditions Run with the Land. These terms and conditions shall be perpetual, and it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to bind all future owners and possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions. SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The permit is subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Plans. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMII, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for review and written approval, final site, building and elevations plans as well as all offsite improvements, approved by the City of Carlsbad, which shall bc in substantial conformance wilh the preliminary plans submitted by the applicant, dated received July 31, 2001 by McArdle Associaies and O'Day Consultants. The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved final plans. Any proposed changes to the approved fmal plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes lo the approved final plans shall occur without an amendment lo this coaslal developmenl permit unless the Executive Director determines lhat no amendment is required. 2. Landscaping Plan. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for review and written approval of the Executive Director, a detailed final landscape plan approved by thc City of Carlsbad COASTAL DEVLOTMENT PERMIT NO. 6-01-101 Pagc3of_5_ indicating thc type, size, extent and location of all plant materials, the proposed irrigation system and other land.scape features. Thc plan shall include: a. the use of droughl-tolcrant native or non-invasive plant materials lo the maximum extent feasible. b. special emphasis on screening thc entire silc from Interstate 5. 'Ihc number of canopy trees along the 1-5 frontage shall not be less than twenty, with additional trees located in the area where the majority of eucalyptus trees are being ic moved. c. all pioj^oscd canopy trees shall be a miniinum 24-inch box size. d. a wrillen commitment shall be made that all planted materials shall be rnainiained in good growing condition, and landscaping shall be installed concurrent wilh, or within 60 days of completion of grading. c. five years from thc dale of issuance of the coaslal development pennit, lhe applicani shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Director, a landscape monitoring report, prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect or qualified Resource Specialist, that certifies the on-site land.scaping is in conformance with thc landscape pian approved pursuani lo this Special Condiiion. Thc monitoring report shall include photographic documentaiion of planl species and planl coverage. If the landscape monitoring report indicates the landscaping is not in confonnance with or has failed to meet the performance slandards specified in the landscaping plan approved pursuani to this permit, the applicani, or successors in interest, shall submit a revised or supplemental landscape plan for lhe review and approval ofthe Executive Director. Thc revised landscaping plan must be prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect or a qualified Resource Specialist and shall specify measures to remediate those portions of the original plan that have failed or are nol in conformance with the original approved plan. The pcrmillce shall undertake development in accordance with the approved final landscaping plan. Any proposed changes to the approved landscaping plans shall bc reported to lhe Executive Director. No changes to the approved landscaping plans shall occur wilhoul an amendment lo this coaslal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no amendmenl is required. 3. Runoff Control/BMP Plans. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall agree in writing to implement and mainlain thc pollulion control practices and facilities identified in the Storm Water Pollution Prevenlion Plan, dated September 27, 2001, which was designed by a licensed engineer (Meg Carroll, O'Day Consultants) and which minimizes the volume, velocity and pollulani load of stormwater leaving the sile and subsequently discharged into Agua I ledionda Lagoon. Thc drainage and filtration systems shall be maintained such that lhey are functional throughout the life of the approved development. Should repairs or rcsloralion become necessary, prior lo the commencement of such repair or restoration COASTAL DEV12LWMENT PERMIT NO. 6-01-101 Page 4 of 5 work, Ihc permittee shall submit a repair and restoration plan to the Executive Director to delermine if an amendment or new coastal development permit is required to authorize such work. In addition, regarding the fuel dispensing area and temporaiy erosion control, the plan shall include Ihe following requirements: (a) The concrete fuel dispensing ai-ca shall extend 6.5 feet (2.0 meters) or moie from thc corner of each fuel dispenser, or the length at which the hose and nozzle assembly may bc operated plus 1 foot (0.3 meter). (b) If dead-end sump is not used to collect spills, the applicant shall install an oil/water separator. (c) In order lo prevent fuel spills and leaks, which can pollute stormwater, the applicani shall: 1. Install vapor recoveiy nozzles to help control drips as well as air pollulion. 2. histall signage discouraging "topping-off of fuel tanks. 3. Use secondary containment when transferring fuel from thc tank truck to thc fuel lank. 4. Use absorbent materials on small spills and general cleaning rather than hosing down the area. Remove the absorbent materials promptly. 5. Cany out all federal and State requirements regarding underground slorage tanks. 6. Not use mobile fueling of mobile industrial equipment around the facility. The applicant shall transport the equipment to the designated fueling areas. 7. Keep the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan up to date. 8. Train employees in proper fueling and cleanup procedures 9. Keep ample supplies of clean-up materials on site and readily available. (d) Temporary erosion control afler the site is graded shall also be addressed in the plan The permittee shall undertake the development in accordance with the approved plan. COASTAL DEVIZj^'MBNT PERMIT NO. (tOhWl Page 5 of -S Any proposed changes to lhe approved plan shall be reported to the Executive Director. No change lo thc plan shall occur without a Commission-approved amendment to thc permii unless the Executive Director determines that no such amendment is required. 4. Disposal of Graded Spoils. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall identify the location for the disposal of graded si)oils. If the site is locaied wilhin thc coastal zone, a separate coaslal development permit or permit amendment shall firsl be obtained from the California Coastal Commission or its successors in interest. 5. Conslruclion Access/Staging Area/Proiect Timing. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMII, the applicant shall submit plans showing all locations which will be used as staging and slorage areas for materials and cquijimenl during the consiruction phase of this project. Thc staging/storage plan shall be subject lo review and written approval of thc Executive Director. Use of sandy beach, public walkways and public parking areas, including on-street parking for the interim storage of materials and equipment shall not be permitted. If offsite areas are dcsignaled as staging/storage areas, or if construction will require any restrictions on traffic flow along Cannon Road or Carlsbad Boulevard (such as lane closures), the plan shall also indicale lhat no work may occur during the summer months (Memorial Day weekend lo Labor Day) of any year. The permittee shall undertake the development in accordance with the approved plan. Any proposed changes lo the approved plan shall be reported to thc Executive Director. No change to the plan shall occur wilhoul a Commission-approved amendment lo the permit unless the Executive Director determines lhat no such ainendment is required. (6-01-l20p.doc) A' f 0' DOC • 2002-0238473 MAR 2002 3:4^4- P OFFICIAL RECORDS m\ DIEGO COUNTV RECORDER'S OFFICF GREGORV J. SHITH, CQUNTV RECORDER FEES: .fy.GfJ RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 Space above this line for Recorder's use Parcel No. 210-010-38 NOTICE AND WAIVER CONCERNING PROXIMITY OF THE PLANNED OR EXISTING CANNON ROAD, INTERSTATE 5, AND SAN DIEGO NORTHERN RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR(S) CASE NO: CUP 99-30/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 - CANNON COURT '-A This Notice Conceming Environmental Impacts is made by West Development. Inc. a(n) Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "Owner" is developer of certain real property situated in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia. RECITALS A. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by all manner of vehicles including public and private vehicles which will generate noise and other environmental impacts. Purchaser acknowledges and accepts these existing and future impacts and forever waives any and all causes of action against the City of Carlsbad, and covenants not to sue the City of Carlsbad, its agents, servants or employees as to any damages or injuries resulting from said impacts. B. The Owner is the developer and/or holder of the title to certain real property in the City of Carlsbad, County of Sari Diego, Califomia, more fully described as: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,1896 C. The property is located adjacent to the Cannon Road, Interstate 5, and San Diego Northern Railroad Transportation Corridors (hereafter described as corridor) on which transportation vehicles such as automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and/or vehicies for rail and transit are proposed to travel. Noise Form #1 Rev. 02/02/99 FORM: NOISE 1: 2 OF 3 D. The property has been developed in compliance with City and State Noise criteria which may include mitigation in the form of setbacks, earthen berms, masonry walls and/or stracture upgrades. E. Owner has no control over the operations of the corridor including the types of vehicles, trips and traffic, nor the frequency of the trips. F. It is the desire of Owner to give notice to any potential purchaser of the real property of its proximity to the corridor and the fact that purchases may be subject to the impacts of said proposed transportation corridor. NOW, THEREFORE, in light of the above Recitals, owner does, for itself, and its successors and assigns, give the following notice and makes the following waiver: 1. Owner has and shall develop the property in accordance with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 99-30), Planned Development Permit (PUD 00-109), and Minor Subdivision (MS 99-16) approved by the City of Carlsbad, which approval includes the requirement of the City of Carlsbad, that the development of the property is consistent with the Land Use & Noise Element of the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad. 2. That Owner has no responsibility or control over the operation of the corridor, including without limitation, the types or number of vehicles operating on the corridor. 3. That the vehicle operations on the corridor may create significant impacts affecting the purchasers, tenants and occupants of the property and that purchasers, tenants and occupants of the property reside there subject to sight and sound of vehicle operation. 4. The property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, rented, used, occupied and improved subject to this Notice. This Notice shall ran with the property and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the property. 5. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by all manner of vehicles including public and private vehicles which will generate noise and other environmental impacts. Purchaser acknowledges and accepts these existing and future impacts and forever waives any and all causes of action against the City of Carlsbad, and covenants not to sue the City of Carlsbad, its agents, servants or employees as to any damages or injuries resulting from said impacts. Noise Form #1 Rev. 02/02/99 FORM: NOISE 1: 3 OF 3 Executed this ^7 day of 'feQ/^^fOl , 20 0 2^ *OWNER: iilk^i^ '2>%.t/yLo^mk*/T^ (Name of Owner) By: tl here) (sign hefe) (print name here) (title and organization of signatory) By^ (sign here) (print name here) (title and organization of signatory) (Proper notarial acl<nowledgment of execution by Contractor must be attached.) (Chairman, president or vice-president and secretary, assistant secretary, CFO or assistant treasurer must sign for corporations. Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officer(s) signing to bind the corporation.) (If signed by an individual partner, the partnership must attach a statement of partnership authorizing the partner to execute this instrument). APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney Bv: ^^'^f*^ eputy City Attorney Noise Form #1 Rev. 02/02/99 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On y5)oruOJrv| ^"1, 30t3^ before me, Notar)' Public, personally appeared ^C^^^^ f\.^^^lCK , ^ personally known to me - or [ ] prowd to ine on the basis uf satiafactoiy cvidonee to be thc por-Qon(s) whose name(^jfs^re subscribed to the within instrament and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/hor/thcir authorized capacity(i^, and that by his/hor/thcir signature^ on the instrament the person^ or the entity upon behalf of which the person^acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Signature of Notary) 3**"" -- J 1 i^®^ DEBBIE A. WALL I iS^^n^^ CofT7m{ssron# 1221500 I Notary PubUc-CGRfOmla | San Oiego Counly f MyComm. E3<piBsMay25,2003 • Noise Fonn #1 Rev. 02/02/99 Ei n n^M- n A A rt A n T n / r- / RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAI < 21> 2002 3:AA WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: OFFICIAL RECORDS City Clerk SAH WEGO GJONTV RECORDER'S OFFICE CITY OF CARLSBAD m.bM'f J, bniThj IOONTT KtbORUtR 1200 Carisbad Village Drive FiitS: 17. Ou Carlsbad, Califomia 92008-1989 Space above this line for Recorder's use Parcel No. 210-010-38 PH NOTICE AND WAIVER CONCERNING PROXIMITY OF PLANNED OR EXISTING UTILITY DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES CASE NO.: CUP99-30/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 - CANNON COURT This Notice Conceming Proximity of Planned or Existing Utility Distribution Facilities ("Notice") is made by WEST DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Nebraska corporation ("Owner") as developer of certain real property situated in the City of Carlsbad ("City"), County of San Diego, State of Califomia. RECITALS A. The purpose of this Notice is to disclose to the fullest extent possible present and future potential impacts of the planned use and development of adjacent property by its owner for high voltage generation, storage, maintenance, transmission or distribution facilities ("Encinas Power Plant"), which will generate noise and other environmental impacts ("Impacts"). Potential buyer acknowledges and accepts these existing and future Impacts and forever waives any and aU causes of action against the City, and covemmts not to sue the City, its agents, servants or employees as to any damages or injuries resulting from said Impacts. B. The Owner is the developer and/or holder of the title to certain real property (the "Cannon Court Property") in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, Califomia, more fully described as: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in tbe Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,1896 C. The Cannon Court Property is located in the immediate vicinity of real property owned or operated by San Diego Gas & Electric Company, a Califomia corporation, ("SDG&E") on which there is currently operated the Encinas Power Plant. D. The Cannon Court Property has been developed in compliance with City and State noise criteria which may include mitigation in the form of setbacks, earthen berms, masonry walls and/or stracture upgrades. 448091.2 E. Owner has no control over the operations, development, changes to or expansion of, or granting of access or rights of use of, the Encinas Power Plant. F. It is the desire of Owner to give notice to any potential buyer of the Cannon Court Property, or any portion thereof, of its proximity to the Encinas Power Plant and the fact that buyers of parcels of the Cannon Court Property may be subject to the impacts of the Encinas Power Plant. NOW, THEREFORE, in light of the above recitals, Owner does, for itself, and its successors and assigns, give the following notice and makes the following waiver: 1. Owner has and shall develop the Cannon Court Property in accordance with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 99-30), Planned Development Permit (PUD 00-109), and Minor Subdivision (MS 99-16) approved by the City of Carlsbad, which approval includes the requirement of the City that the development of the Cannon Court Property is consistent with the Land Use and Noise Element of the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad. 2. That Owner has no responsibility or control over the operation of SDG&E and the Encinas Power Plant, including without limitation, the types of chemicals, compoimds, materials, mixtures or substances present, released, used, generated, discharged, transmitted, stored or disposed of on or from the Encinas Power Plant, or any residual contamination affecting any natural resource or the environment. 3. That the present and future operations of the Encinas Power Plant or any expansion thereof may create significant impacts aflfecting potential buyer, its tenants, occupants, guests, invitees and agents and that potential buyer of the Cannon Court Property and its tenants, occupants, guests, invitees and agents, accept their interests in the Cannon Court Property subject to sight, soimd and other physical impacts of the Encinas Power Plant operation. 4. The Cannon Court Property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, rented, used, occupied and unproved subject to this Notice. This Notice shall ran v^ith the Cannon Court Property and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Cannon Court Property. 5. The purpose ofthis Notice is to disclose to the fiillest extent possible present and fiiture potential Impacts of noise, air quality, water quality and other environmental impacts generated by the Encinas Power Plant and any replacement or expansions thereof, the possibility of exposure to power lines, including usage or effects from high voltage transmission or storage, which will generate sound, visual or environmental Impacts. Potential buyer acknowledges and accepts these existing and fiature Impacts and forever waives any and all 448091.2 -2- causes of action against the City, and covenants not to sue the City, its agents, servants or employees, as to any damages or injuries resulting from said Impacts. Executed this ^1 day of feCnAJflOAj 20 OT^ OWNER: (Name of Owner By: (print name here) (title and organization of signatory) By: (sign here) (print name here) (title and organization of signatory) (Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution hy Contractor must be attached.) (Chairman, president or vice-president and secretary, assistant secretary, CFO or assistant treasurer must sign for corporations. Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officer(s) signing to bind the corporation.) (If signed by an individual partner, the partnership must attach a statement of partnership authorizing the partner to execute this instrument). APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL, City Attomey By: Jft^ d^/^fnuHn )eputy City Attomey 448091.2 -3- STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On FcbKU^ On,^oo^ before me. Ucfchtr A IOQH . NefeXtV RjlbltC Notui-y Public, personally appeared .JdNf^ fi. PjLiiZ.£!>t, , J^personally known to me - or [ ] proved to me on the baoio of-fititiijfnctorjf mdoncc to be the person(^ whose name^i^l^^c flubseribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that ([^Jfee/^iey executed the same iii(^her/their authorized capacity(|s^, and that by^^^r/thoir • signatureO^ on the instrument the person(!fi^, or the entity upon behalfof which the person(^ acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and oflBcial seal. (Signature of Notary) DEBBIE A. WALL I Commisston #1221500 i Notary PKMC - Cc^focrto San Diego County r My Ccmm. Expires May 25,2D03i 448091.2 -4- IOC f 2002-0238476 HAR 21=. 2002 3:44 OFFICIAL RECORDS S^N DIEGO COUNTV RECORDER'S OFFICE GREGORV SlilTH, COUNTV RECORDER .FEES^ 14.00 PH i RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 Space above this line for Recorder's use Assessor's Parcel Number Project Number and Name 210-010-38 CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court NOTICE OF RESTRICTION ON REAL PROPERTY The real property located in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California described as follows: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County ftecorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 is restricted by a Conditional Use Permit and Planned Development Permit No(s), CUP 99-30 and PUD 00-109 issued by the City of Carlsbad on June 26, 2001 and January 7, 2002, respectively. A copy is on file at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. The obligations and restrictions imposed are binding on all present or future interest holders or estate holders of the property. Rev. 06/04/96 OWNER: CITY OF CARLSBAD UJt^r «/£ Upm t^T iXifL. Owner's Name Print name and title Signature Print name and title MICHAEL J. FTOLZIVmfLER, Planning Director 3/1 tM 7^ Date ^ ' ATTESTi —LORRAINE/M. WOOD. City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney By Depurfy City Attorney Date (Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by Contractor must be attached.) (Chairman, president or vice-president and secretary, assistant secretary, CFO or assistant treasurer must sign for corporations. Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officer(s) signing to bind the corporation.) (If signed by an individual partner, the partnership must attach a statement of partnership authorizing the partner to execute this instrument). Rev. 06/04/96 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On ^^eitiruOJfyJ^Sll,^'^ before me, "CddoK^Ps.Vv^all, hie>fay\/ PbbiiC Notory Public, personally appeared Qolr^ A. T^TYjl , 1^ personally known to me - or proved to me on the basis uf satiaraotuiy evidence- to be the person(^ whose name(^ ^1s)jafe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that (^e^ho/they executed the same in ^his/hef/their authorized capacityfi^, and that by(^his/Kef/th€ir signature)^ on the instrument the personl^ or the entity upon behalf of which the personjjij acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Signature of Notary) i grw-rt_ DEBBIE A WALL | }£^!^^ Commission* 1221500 I Notary Public-Caeforma | iW^^^ Son Diego County | ^^w*- MyComm.Bq3»esMay25.2D03l Rev. 06/04/96 NOTE ADDITIONAL FEES. STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME Cities and Counties throughout California has been notified of legislation (AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990) which became effective on January 1, 1991. This law requires the State of California Department of Fish and Game to levy a fee to all project applicants (public and private) subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to defray the cost of managing and protecting fish and wildlife trust resources. Projects which are categorically exempt from CEQA and which have no adverse impact on fish and wildlife or projects which are denied, are not subject to the fee. All other projects are subject to the following fees: Projects with Negative Declarations Projects with EIRs $875. Due to State Law constraints the City of Carlsbad will collect the fee where applicable and pass it to the County of San Diego. After submission, the City of Carlsbad Planning Department will make an Environmental Assessment of your application. After this initial assessment the Planning Department will notify you if the fee is required. State Department of Fish and Game P.O. Box 944209 Sacramento CA 94244-2090 (916) 445-3531 (Ifj/OiOciO (Lou Ifi AMOUm-:. P.O. MO: APPROVED PV- ^- M*-rf* T«Mhla YJJ _____ SilM Tax On Invoioe .Yei. (If no, ««nd Invoica to Firanc*) .No City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 9200! Applicant: BUZA, JA Description Amount 1,275.00 Receipt Number: R0020163 Transaction Date: 05/08/2001 8715 05/08/01 00O2 01 02 CGP 1275.00 Pay Type Method Payment Check Description Amount 7704 1,275.00 Transaction Amount: 1,275.00 Citv of Carlsbad Office of the City Clerk Records Management Department NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council ofthe City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 26, 2001 to consider a request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q Zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and more particularly described as: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 210-010-38) 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 June 22, 2001. If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626. If you challenge the Conditional 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 99-30 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT PUBLISH: JUNE 9, 2001 City of Carlsbad Janice Breitenfeld, Deputy City Clerk 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive • Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 • (760) 434-2808 S/T£ CANNON COURT CUP 99-30 Smaoth Feed Sheets^"*" Use template for 5160® CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE 2730 LOKER AVE WEST CARLSBAD CA 92008 CA COASTAL COMMISSION STE 103 7575 METROPOLITAN DR SAN DIEGO CA 921 08-4402 LAFCO 1600 PACIFIC HWY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST 9150 CHESAPEAKE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SANDAG STE 800 401 B STREET SAN DIEGO CA 921 01 CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME 4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92123 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY STE B 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 SD COUNTY PLANNING STE B 5201 RUFFIN RD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 CATHERINE MILLER C/O TERRAMAR HOA 5299 ARBOL CARLSBAD CA 92008 CALTRANS - VAN HURST 2829 JUAN ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SANDIEGO CA 92182-4505 CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY SERVICES CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT CITY OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER BARBARA KENNEDY J A BUZA STEE 7 16085 SAN DIEGUITO RD RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 5/30/2001 i AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® 093S i9SBi CABRILLO POWER SUITE #5800 1000 LOUISIANA ST HOUSTON TX 77002 taqei ssajppv CANNON ROAD LLC 17 4 5 ROCKY RD FULLERTON CA 92831 INNS OF AMERICA SUITE #200 755 RAINTREE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE OCEANSIDE CA 92054 [TY OF CARLSB7 ,^635 FARADA^ CA 92008 Citv of Carlsbaa Planning Department 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, May 16, 2001, to consider a request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Oveday Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and more particularly described as: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 210- 010-38) 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 May 10, 2001. If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626. If you challenge the Conditional 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 Cadsbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CUP 99-30 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT PUBLISH: MAY 3, 2001 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us S/T£ CANNON COURT CUP 99-30 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (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 This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San Diego County; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire Issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: May 3, 2001 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct San Marcos Dated at this of 3rd _, California day May, 2001 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising Proof of Publication of Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE ,3 Hf commission ircii'^^taJ^^^^ffiL^^ California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, MVI6 200i to ^^S^^l^ '^"^ for a^Mitigated Negafi'ie Die aratton IW 9se PermTlnTgion^r^P"'*;"? and CondillonSi to? Il„ develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room ho- tel and two restaurants on a 6.51 :aore site located on the T o^^l^^ fhT?:"' Cannon Road Int^TitS^in the I^rt the CommercialWisitor Serving Over ay Zone ra?U deffi at' "^"^3^™"' ^ ^ more^p^rtSu: irrfrS y 9'i'3"S{» A9"a Hedionda, in the City of Carisbad, County of San D egoT State of California ac- 1896 °APfj2"lO~1^38) NovembeMe! Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cor-^^'1",,'"^^ '° public hearing. Coptes o the Siff hi?™"*,"'" available on and after iSay l5, 2001 If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedv in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626 '"^ mifv h« nmlS)?? Conditional Use f^ermit in court, you Ss%^p'±-s^%tH«i¥^^d^-.h%s^^^ CASE FILE: CUP 99-03 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT CiTY OF CARLSBAD PLANNiNG DEPARTMENT CANNON COURT CUP 99-30 Legai 69942. May 3,2001 y Citv of Carisbac Planning Department 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, Cadsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 2001, to consider a request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Pernnit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and more particularly described as: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carisbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 210- 010-38) 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 May 10, 2001. If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626. If you challenge the Conditional 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 Carisbad at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CUP 99-30 CASE NAME: CANNON COURT PUBLISH: MAY 3, 2001 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us "1 SITE CANNON COURT CUP 99-30 Smooth Feed Sheets^'^ Use template for 5160 CABRILLO POWER SUITE #5800 1000 LOUISIANA ST •HOUSTON TX 77002 CANNON ROAD LLC 17 4 5 ROCKY RD FULLERTON CA 92831 INNS OF AMERICA SUITE #200 755 RAINTREE DR CARLSBAD CA 92OOf NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CITY OF CARLSBAI 1635 FARAPAY-'AVE CARL5«??15CA 92008 rt notice hasbeen mailed to all property owners/occupants listed herein. Signature: Cannon Court -100 Foot F (adius Mailing List Map# APN# 1 1 210-010-10 North San Diego County Transit Development, 810 Mission Ave, Oceanside CA 92054 2 210-010-36 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 3 210-010-37 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 4 210-010-17 City of Carlsbad-Public Agency, 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad CA 92008 5 210-090-24 Cannon Road LLC, 1745 Rocky Rd, Fullerton CA 92531 6 210-090-52 Inns of America Cannon LLC, 755 Raintree Dr #200, Carlsbad CA 92008 * Denotes properties within 100 feet Page 1 Cannon Court -100 Foot Radius IVIaiiing List Map# APN# 1 210-010-10 North San Diego County Transit Development, 810 Mission Ave, Oceanside CA 92054 2 210-010-36 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 3 210-010-37 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 4 210-010-17 City of Carlsbad-Public Agency, 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad CA 92008 5 210-090-24 Cannon Road LLC, 1745 Rocky Rd, Fullerton CA 92531 6 210-090-52 Inns of America Cannon LLC, 755 Raintree Dr #200, Carlsbad CA 92008 Denotes properties within 100 feet Page 1 Mi. 09ZS jasBi sjaqn ssaippv ®AM3AV"j; jl CABRILLO POWER SUITE #5800 1000 LOUISIANA ST HOUSTON TX 77002 CANNON ROAD LLC 174 5 ROCKY RD FULLERTON CA 92831 INNS OF AMERICA SUITE #200 7 55 RAINTREE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 .Smooth Feed Sheets^" Use template for 5160'' CABRILLO POWER SUITE #5800 1000 LOUISIANA ST HOUSTON TX 77002 CANNON ROAD LLC 17 4 5 ROCKY RD FULLERTON CA 92831 INNS OF AMERICA SUITE #200 755 RAINTREE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 NORTH SCALE r = 200' N i> << o TJ 0 >> 0 Q. CD O CO O ^ CO CO CO ••^^ ^ CD §1 CO < Cannon Court - 600 Foot F tadius IVIaiiing List Map# APN# 1 * 210-010-10 North San Diego County Transit Development, 810 Mission Ave, Oceanside CA 92054 2 * 210-010-36 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 3 * 210-010-37 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 4 * 210-010-17 City of Carlsbad-Public Agency, 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad CA 92008 5 * 210-090-24 Cannon Road LLC, 1745 Rocky Rd, Fullerton CA 92531 6 * 210-090-52 Inns of America Cannon LLC, 755 Raintree Dr #200, Carlsbad CA 92008 Ada : ^e^rr^ M<>r HoA Z8:2^ ^c^^ Denotes properties within 100 feet Page 1 Cannon Court - 600 Foot F tadius IVIaiiing List Map# APN# 1 210-010-10 North San Diego County Transit Development, 810 Mission Ave, Oceanside CA 92054 2 * 210-010-36 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 3 * 210-010-37 Cabrillo Power 1, 1000 Louisiana St 5800, Houston TX 77002 4 * 210-010-17 City of Carlsbad-Public Agency, 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad CA 92008 5 * 210-090-24 Cannon Road LLC, 1745 Rocky Rd, Fullerton CA 92531 6 * 210-090-52 Inns of America Cannon LLC, 755 Raintree Dr #200, Carlsbad CA 92008 * Denotes properties within 100 feet Page 1 S r A r li O P C ALIFORNIA Gray Davi.s GOVl'R.VOR Governor's Office ofPlanning ancd Research State Clearinghouse March 28, 2001 .Steve Nis.sen BIRI CIOK Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Subject: Cannon Court-SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 SCH#: 2001021109 Dear Barbara Kennedy: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that reviewed your document. The review period closed on March 27, 2001, and the comments from the responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. If this comment package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten-digit State Clearinghouse number in future correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the Califomia Public Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final environmental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comments, we recommend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 ifyou have any questions regarding the environmental review process. Sincerely, Terry Roberts Senior Planner, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 lliNl H STREliT P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMLN I O, CALirORNIA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 WWW.OPR.CA.COV/CLEARINGHOUSE.HI ML Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2001021109 Project Title Cannon Court-SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 Lead Agency Carlsbad, City of Type Neg Negative Declaration Description The project proposal consists of a Minor Subdivision, Non-residential Planned Development, Site Development Plan and Conditional Use Pennits to grade and construct two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/food mart on a previously graded site. Lead Agency Contact Name Agency Phone email Address city Barbara Kennedy City of Carisbad 760/ 602-4626 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad Fax State CA Zip 92008 Project Location County San Diego City Carlsbad Region Cross Streets Parcel No. Township North side of Cannon Road between 1-5 & the AT & SF Railroad r.o.w. 210-010-38 Range Section Base San Bern Proximity to: Highways Airports Railways Waterways Schools Land Use 1-5 McClellan/Palomar AT&SF Pacific Ocean, Agua Hedionda Lagoon Carlsbad Unified School District Land Use-Vacant Zoning-C-T-Q (Commercial Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay Zone) General Plan Land Use Designation-T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual; Air Quality; Coastal Zone; Geologic/Seismic; Noise; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation; Landuse; Drainage/Absorption Reviewing Resources Agency; California Coastal Commission; Department of Conservation; Department of Fish Agencies and Game, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 11; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9; Department of Toxic Substances Control; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission; Public Utilities Commission Date /deceived 02/26/2001 Start of Revtew 02/26/2001 EndofReWew 03/27/2001 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. MAR-27-01'TUE 4:14 PM CALTRAN^UBLIC TRANS FAX NO. STATE OF CAUf=ORNIA • BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11 P.O. BOX 86406, M.S. 50 SAN DIEGO, CA 92186-5406 PHONE: (619) 688-6954 FAX: (619) 688-4299 619 8#4299 P. 2 GRAY DAVIS, Governor March 27, 2001 Mr. Scott Morgan State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 ll-SD-005 PM 47.8 (K.P. 76.5) Dear Mr. Morgan: Draft ND for Cannon Court - SCH 2001021109 CaUrans District 11 comments are as follows: General Comnients MAR 2 7 2001 • The Traffic Study should assess the cumulative impacts of all existing and future projects in the vicinity of the proposed project. • Caltrans requires Level of Service (LOS) C or better at State owned facilities, including intersections. If an intersection is currenlly below LOS C, any increase in delay from prpject generated traffic must be analyzed and mitigated. • If certain traffic mitigation projects are identified as appropriate, then Caltrans supports the concept of "fair share" contributions on the part ofthe developer. Specific Comments • Page 7-6 Table 7-2, Note 4; Dual right tum lanes WB to NB assumed. Please explain the basis of this assumption. • Page 8-2 Table 8-1; LOS for AM and PM Peak Hours differs from Table 7-2. Please explain. • Section 9 Conclusions and Recommendations; Mitigation measures must be included in lhe Traffic Study. If the impact is completely mitigated, please describe how. Our contact person for 1-5 is Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager, at (619) 688-6610. Sincerely, BILL FIGGE. Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch Department of Toxic Substances Control Edwin F. Lowry, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue , L, , Cypress, California 90630 ^ ^ . Winston H. Hickox Gray Davis Agency Secretary Governor Califomia Environmental Protection Agency March 19, 2001 I'J Ms. Barbara Kennedy \IL t---£2!!:ii^f"-vv' iiOUSH CityofCarlsbad " 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CANNON COURT - SDP 00-09/CUP 99- 31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16-2001021109 Dear Ms. Kennedy: The Departnnent of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Negative Declaration (ND) for the above-mentioned Project. Based on the review of the document, DTSC's comments are as follows: 1) The ND needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses at the Project site have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the Project area. 2) The ND needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated site within the proposed Project area. For all identified sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment. 3) The ND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation, and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. 5) The ND indicates that the property had previously been used for agricultural uses and the Phase II Environmental Assessment conducted at the site detected the presence of Toxaphene. The ND proposes the grading activities (mixing and blending ofthe soii), and if needed, additional actions such as thicker concrete slabs or the placement of vapor barriers. Pursuant to the Califomia Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66268.3, no generator, transporter, handler, or owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility shall in any way dilute a restricted waste or the residual from treatment of a restricted waste as a The energy challenge facing Califomia is real. Every Califomian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at www. dtsc. ca. gov. ® Printed on Recycled Paper Ms. Barbara Kennedy March 19,2001 Page Two substitute for adequate treatment to achieve acceptable standards. The treatment measure proposed at the site, mixing and blending of the soil, is a form of dilution and that it is not acceptable to DTSC. Therefore, DTSC recommends further assessment and a removal/remediation ofthe site. Further remedial action proposed such as capping or placement of vapor barriers shall be implemented after a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, which includes a Human and Environmental Health Risk Assessment After the Risk Assessment, if the proposed remedial measure is feasible, it can be implemented with the approval of a regulatory agency. Therefore, proper investigation and remedial actions should be conducted at the site before initiating grading activities. 6) If during construction ofthe project, soil contamination is suspected, stop construction in the area and appropriate Health and Safety procedures should be implemented. If it is determined that contaminated soil exists, the ND should identify how any required investigation and/or remediation will be conducted, and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). For additional infomnation on the VCP or to meet/discuss this matter further, please contact Ms. Rania A. Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479.. Sincerely, Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E. Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 STATE OF C A L I F O R N I A ^jj^ Governor's Office ofPlanning and Research State Clearingliouse Gray Davis GOVERNOR DATE: TO: Steve Nissen DIRhCTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT on.tu C'SrfvK..-; RE: March 6, 2001 Barbara Keimedy CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Cannon Court-SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 SCH#: 2001021109 This is to acknowledge that the State Clearinghouse has received your environmental document for state review. The review period assigned by the State Clearinghouse is: Review Start Date: February 26, 2001 Review End Date: March 27, 2001 We have distributed your document to the following agencies and departments: Califomia Coastal Commission Califomia Highway Patrol Caltrans, District 11 Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics Department of Conservation Department of Fish and Game, Region 5 Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Toxic Substances Control Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9 Resources Agency State Lands Commission The State Clearinghouse will provide a closing letter with any state agency comments to your attention on the date following the close ofthe review period. Thank you for your participation in the State Clearinghouse review process. 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 WWW.OPR.CA.GOV/CLEARINGHOUSE.HTML Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR FILLING OUT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I This Enviroimiental Impact Assessment (EIA) Form - Part I will be used to determine what type of environmental docimientation (i.e., Envirormiental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Negative Declaration or Exemption) will be required to be prepared for your application, per the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Title 19 of Carlsbad's Mtmicipal Code. The clarity and accuracy of the information you provide is critical for purposes of quickly determining the specific enviromnental effects of your project. Recent judicial decisions have held that a "naked checklist," that is checklist that is merely checked "yes" or "no," is insufficient to comply v^ith the requirements of the Califomia Environmental Quality act. Each "yes" or "no" answer must be accompanied by a written explanation justifying the "yes" or "no" answer. This is especially important when a Negative Declarations being sought. The more information provided in this form, the easier and quicker it will be for staff to complete the Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part II. 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-0894 ^ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) CASE NO: DATE RECEIVED: BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Cannon Court (Tobe complele by staff) APPLICANT: J. A. Buza 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 16085 San Diecruito Rd. ,E7 Rancho Santa Fe^ CA 92067 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Coastal Development Permit and a Cnnrjitinnal Use Permit for a commercial project consisting of a 100 room hotel,, gas station/mini-mart and a restaurant. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that would be potentially affected by this project. This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Planning |^ Transportation/Circulation Q Public Services I I Population and Housing Q Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Geological Problems Q Energy & Mineral Resources Q Aesthetics [ I Water Q Hazards Q Cultural Resources Air Quality Q Noise Q Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 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 himian factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with infonnation 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 adversely significant, 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 fi'om "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 significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant 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 (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant 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 effect on the environment. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce 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. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant 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 impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the 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. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents mc^ be r^erred to aruiat^ I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? ( ) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastrucnire)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact e) f) g) h) i) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) Subsidence of the land? ( ) Expansive soils? ( ) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) Potentially Significant Uniess Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact • • • X • • • X • • • E • • • E • • • X • • • X' • • • X • • • X • • • a • • • [x] • • • B • • • H • • • E • • • a • • • • • • E • • • [x] • • • • • • E Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperamre, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact • • • [1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • E V. AIRQUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) • • • • E E E E E E • E E E E VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle frips or traffic congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design feamres (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? ( ) E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E a E E E X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Infoimation Sources): (SupplemauiddmMmerm^ VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) c) 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? ( ) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing soufces of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Less Than No Significant Significan Impact Unless t Impaet Mitigation Incorporated ( ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) c) Schools? ( ) E E E X E E E E E E E a E E E a E E E a E E E a E E E a E E E a E E X CJ E E E a E E E a E E E a E E E m E E • a E E E E E E • E E E E E E E E E Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Si^lm^sMoM^a^ d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) e) Other govemmental services? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact E E Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated E E Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact a E a E XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) E E a a b) Communications systems? ( ) E E a a c) Local or regional water treatment facilities? ( ) or distribution E E a a d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) E E a a e) Storm water drainage? ( ) E E a a f> Solid waste disposal? ( ) E E a a g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) E E a a XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) E E E a E E E a E E • E XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) c) Affect historical resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) E E E E E X E E E X E E E y E E E a E a XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) E E E E E E X X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Infonnation Sources) >lemeraalMOCumerttmmayme XVI. MANDATORY 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 Califomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are 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 which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact E E E Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated E E E Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact E a a E E a XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, ptorsuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 EIA PART I FOR THE CANNON COURT PROJECT I. Land Use Planning a) No Impact: The project will be in compliance with its existing Local Coastal Plan designation, General Plan designation and zoning. The zoning for this site is Commercial-Tourist-Qualified with a General Plan designation of Travel-Recreation- Commercial. b) No Impact: The proposed project will conform with applicable environmental plans and policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. c) No Impact: The project site is adjacent to the SDG&E power plant and the future development of the project will only compliment the surroimding area. A business hotel is proposed to the vacant property to the south of the site. d) No Impact: The project will not affect agricultural resources or operations since this site has never been used for agricultural purposes and its development vdll not adversely impact access to any agricultural area. e) No Impact: Interstate-5, the San Diego Northem Railroad and vacant property surround the project. The project will not dismpt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. II. Population and Housing a) No Impact: The property is zoned for travel/recreation commercial. Since the proposed project is a commercial development, it will not altar the planned distribution or housing in the area. b) No Impact: The project will not induce substantial growlh in an area either directly or indirectly. c) No Impact: The project will not displace any existing housing since the site is ciurently vacant. III. Geologic Problems a) No Impact: This site is not located near active fault lines and no geologic conditions exist that could constrain development of the property or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards.(l) b) No Impact: The minor subdivision will not expose people to significant seismic ground shaking due to the distance of the known active faults firom the site.(l) c) No Impact: The project will not expose people to seismic groimd failure, including liquefaction, due to the distance of the known active faults from the site.(l) d) No Impact: The site is not located in an area of volcanic activity and does not have a history of seiche or tsunami hazards. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people to impacts involving seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazards.(l) e) No Impact: The proposed project will not result in exposing people to landslides or mudflows since the subject site and surrounding area is relatively flat and no land form associated with landslides or mudflows exist near the site. f) No Impact: The required grading will not create significant changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill. The site will be graded in such a manner to minimize geologic impacts. g) No Impact: The site is not located in an area known for subsidence of the land and is not expected to result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land as identified in the City's General Plan EIR.(1) h) No Impact: The minor subdivision vsdll not expose people to expansive soils, since the area is not located in an area known to contain expansive soils.(l) i) No Impact: No imique geologic or physical features are known to exist at the project site.(l) IV. Water a) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not significantly change absorption rates, drainage pattems or the rate and amount of surface runoff. These impacts will be less than significant due to storm water drainage facilities installed as part of the development of this site. b) No Impact: The project is not located in an area known to experience water hazards. Furthermore, the project will be engineered in a manner which will avoid exposure of people to water related hazards.(l) c) Less Than Significant Impact: Discharge into surface water will not be significantly altered and surface water quality will not be significantly affected by this project due to the implementation of the latest storm water management plan. d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not significantly affect the amount of surface water in any water body since no storm water will discharge directly into any water body. e) No Impact: The project will not change the course of direction of water movements or currents. f) Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not significantly affect the quantity of ground waters either through direct additions or withdraws or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of recharge capability. g) No Impact: The project wdll not use ground water, therefore it will not alter the direction or rate of flow of groundwater. h) No Impact: Groimd water quality will not be impacted since there will be no direct infiltration into any known ground water supply. i) No Impact: The project will not substantially reduce the amount of groundwater available for public water supplies since the project will not use ground water nor impact a significant area otherwise available for groimd water percolation. V. Air Ouality a) Potentially Significant Impact: Although the project will contribute to cumulative air quality impacts, as virtually any development within the San Diego Air Basin will, a statement of overriding consideration was adopted in the City of Carlsbad's Final Master EIR for this cumulative impact. (1) b) No Impact: The project vdll not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. c) No Impact: The project will not alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate. d) No Impact: The project will not create objectionable odors. VI. Transportation Circulation a) Potentially Significant Impact: Although the project will contribute to a cumulative increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion impacts, a statement of overriding consideration was adopted by the City of Carlsbad's Final Master EIR for the cumulative impact. (1) b) No Impact: The project vdll not create hazards to safety due to design features or incompatible uses. The circulation system will include standard provisions for transportation systems, so that there will be no increased fraffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclist or pedestrians. c) No Impact: The project vdll not create inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project's circulation system vdll be reviewed by all pertinent City departments to ensure that there vdll be no impacts to any emergency response procedures or evacuation plans. d) No Impact: The project vdll not create an insufficient parking capacity on or off site. Parking requirements for the site vdll comply vdth the Commercial Tourist zoning and parking standards of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. e) No Impact: The project vdll not create hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. The circulation system will include standard provisions for transportation systems so that there will be no increased traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. f) No Impact: The project vdll not conflict vdth adopted policies supporting altemative fransportation. A shuttle/bus stop has been provided on site. g) No Impact: The project vdll have no rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts. The site is outside of the railroad influence area, so no impacts to or from the railroad vdll result. No waterbome or airbome traffic occurs in this vicinity. VII. Biological Resources a) No Impact: The project vdll not impact any endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats. b) No Impact: This site does not contain locally designated species. c) No Impact: The project does not contain any locally designated species. d) No Impact: The project is not located on wetland habitat, so it vdll not impact wetland habitat. e) No Impact: The project vdll not impact vdldlife dispersal or mitigation corridors. Mitigation for any impacts to vdldlife dispersal or mitigation corridors has been implemented to its fiillest extent for the project site. VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources a) No Impact: The project vdll conform with the adopted energy conservation plans. b) No Impact: The project vdll not use non-renewable resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. c) No Impact: The project vdll not result in the loss of the availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region. IX. Hazards a) Less than significant: The project vdll store gasoline, however all govemmental regulations dealing vdth the storage of gasoline vdll be strictly followed and adhered to. b) No Impact: The project will not interfere vdth an emergency response or evacuation plan. c) No Impact: The project will not create health hazards. d) No Impact: There are no hazards known to exist on te project site. e) No Impact: The site is essentially devoid of vegetation. Therefore, the project vdll not result in increased fire hazards. X Noise a) Less Than Significant Impact: The project vdll not significantly increase existing noise levels beyond the short term constmction noise impacts. b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not expose people to severe noise levels beyond the short term constmction noise impacts. XI. Public Services a) Less Than Significant Impact: The project vdll not effect fire protection. It is located vdthin the five minute response time. b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not effect police protection. Demand for additional police services beyond the demand created by a typical commercial development of this site is not anticipated. c) No Impact: The project vdll not effect schools or result in a need for new schools since the proposed project is commercial. d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not effect the maintenance of public facilities. The proposed project will pay appropriate public facilities fees as dictated by the City. e) Less Than Significant Impact:: The project vdll not significantly effect other govemmental services. XII. Utilities and Services Svstems a) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will tie into power and gas utilities that are already in close proximity to the project site. b) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is not anticipated to created significant new demand for major facilities of communication or cable nor vdll it require substantial alteration to existing facilities. c) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in conformance vdth the City's General Plan EIR for the site and no potentially significant impacts are anticipated. d) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in conformance vdth the City's General Plan EIR for the site and no potentially significant impacts to the City's sewer or septic tanks are anticipated. e) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in conformance vdth the City's General Plan EIR for the site and no potentially significant impacts to the City's storm drainage system are anticipated. f) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in conformance vdth the City's General Plan EIR for the site and no potentially significant impacts to the City's solid waste disposal system are anticipated. g) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in conformance vdth the City's General Plan EIR for the site and no potentially significant impacts to the City's local or regional water supplies are anticipated. XIII. Aesthetics a) No Impact: The project vdll not affect a scenic highway or vista. The project site is currently vacant and the proposed building heights vdll be in conformance vdth the City's building height guidelines. b) No Impact: The project vdll not have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect. c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project vdll be designed in such a manner as to not create significant off-site light or glare. Lighting vdthin the project vdll be directed towards the ground in order to meet required City specifications. XIV. Cultural Resources a) No Impact: The project site is not known to contain paleontological resources, therefore no impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: The project site is not known to contain archeological resources, therefore no impacts are anticipated. c) No Impact: No historical resources are known to exist vdthin the project area. d) No Impact: The project vdll not affect any unique ethnic cultural values. e) No Impact: The project vdll not restrict existing religious or sacred uses vdthin the potential impact area. XV. Recreational a) No Impact: The proposed commercial project vdll not increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. b) No Impact: The project site is currently vacant and the proposed project vdll not effect existing recreational opportunities. XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) No Impact: This project will not degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or vdldlife species, cause a fish or vdldlife 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 Califomia history or prehistory. b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project vdll not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. c) No Impact: The proposed project vdll not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. XVII. Earlier Analvsis a) Source documents are on file in the Planning Department located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, Phone (760) 438-1161. 1. "Final Master EIR for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update", March 1994. Mitigation Measures V. Afr Quality a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation Although the project will contribute to cumulative air quality impacts, a statement of overriding considerations was adopted with the approval of the City of Carlsbad's Final master EIR for this cumulative impact (see p. 2.0-4). VI. Transportation/ Circulation a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion Although the project vdll contribute to a cumulative increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion impacts, a statement of overriding consideration was adopted by the City of Carlsbad's Final Master EIR for the cumulative impact. Mar' ^'0 02 00: 55a GARYW. CRBECK DIRECTOR Dept.. of Env. Ilealt^h SRM (G19) 330-2:315 p. 1 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONIVIENTAL HEALTH LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION P.O. BOX 129261, SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-92G1 (619) 338-2222 FAX (619) 338-2377 1-8Q0-253-99J3 RICHARD HAAS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Post-lf Fax Note 7671 Co./Dept.^_ ^ ^ ^ ^ Phona. 5:5^, 53i'i^ Fax* Sv55>-.7>5^-2^'9/ March 20, 2002 Mr. .John Buza J. A. Buza Corporation P.O. Box 8617 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Dear Mr. Buza: VOLUNTARY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CASE H39546-001 "CANNON COURT', NORTHWEST CORNER CANNON ROAD AND INTERSTATE 5 CARLSBAD. CA 92008 [APN#210-010-38-00] The site remediation information submitted to this agency by Converse Consultants and Conjitruction Testing and Engineering, Inc. consultants, summarizing the site characterization and mitigation activities at the above-referenced location, has been reviewed. With the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of existing conditions, it is the position of this office that no further action is required at this time. Pleaise be advised that this letter does not relieve you of any liability under the Caiifornia Health and Safety Code or the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act. If previously unidentified contamination is discovered which may affect public health, safety and/or water quality, additional site assessment and cleanup may be necessary. Changes in the proposed use ofthe above site may require reevaluation to determine ifthe change will pose a risk to public health. Thank you for your efforts in resolving this matter. Please contact Carol Spangenberg ofthe Site Assessment and Mitigation Program (SAM), at (619) 338-2257, ifyou require additional assistance. MICHAEL VERNETTI, Program Manager Supervising Environmental Health Specialist Site /assessment and Mitigation Program MV;CS:kd Enclosure cc: Regional Water Quality Control Board West Development, Inc. •Mar 20 02 00: 55a Dept. of Env. Health SRM IG19) 330-2315 p.2 Case Closure Summary Non-LOP or Voluntary Assistance Program 1. AGEiNCY INFORIVIATION Agency Namo: County of San Diego, Environtnental Health, SAM Cily/St.itG/ZIP: San Diego, CA 02112-9261 DATE: March 8, 2002 Address: P.O. Box 129261 DEH Staff Person: Carol Spangonborg II. CASE INFORIWATION Phono: (619)336-2222 FAX: (619) 336-2377 Title: Project Manager Caso No. H3SE46-001 Site Namo: Cannon Court SItH Addrcss: Morthwast Corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, Carlsbad, CA 92008 (APN#210-010-38-00) Property Owner: West Development, Inc. Address: c/o Mr. John Buza P.O. Box 676066, Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Phone: 858 756-5338 Responsible/Requesting Party : J. A. Buza Corporation Address: John Buza P.O. Box 8617 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Phone: 858-756-5338 Type of Case: D Non-LOP Tank Case ^ Non-Tank Case 1 RWQCB/DTSC notification of DEH Oversight: November S, 2001 .—. III. SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION Cause and Typo of Conlaminatlon (if any): residual pesticides from previous farming activities. Site Characterization complete? Yes Monitoring Wells Installed? No Total Number: 0 Proper Screened Interval? N/A Number of decommissioned wells: N/A Range of groundwater levels on the site? Estimated at 16' bg Groundwater Flow Direction: estimated to flow to the west | Most Sensitive (current Use: groundwater has no beneficial uses. j Are Drinking Wsiter Wells Affected? No RWQCB Basin Number: 904.1 Loma Alia HA of Carlsbad HU Is Surface Water Affected? No Nearest Surface Water name: Pacific Ocean Off-Site Beneficial Use impacts (addresses/locations): None TREATMENT AMD DISPOSAL OF AFFECTED MATERIAL Malerial Amount (Include Units) Action (Treatinent or Disposal w/Destina(ion) Date Soil Approximately 200 cubic yards Cuttings from soil borings were used to backflll the borings. December 10, 1999 Ngn-LOP - Underground Storage Tank Oversight handled outside the LOP Non-Tank - Voluntary Assistance Program Mar 20 02 00:55a DeaJ of Env. Health SRM ) 338-2315 p.3 111. Case Closure Summary Non-LOP or Voluntary Assistance Program SITIE CHARACTERIZATION AND/OR INFORMATION (Continued) H39546-001 MAXIMUM DOCUMENTED CONTAWINANT CONCENTRATIONS - r BEFORE AND AFTER CLEANUP Contaminant Organochlorine Pesticides EPA Method 8081 Soil (ppm) Detected ND except the following* Industrial EPA Region IX PRGs NA Water (ppm) Contaminant Before NA After NA Chlorinated Herbicides EPA Method 8150 Soil (ppm) Detected ND Industrial EPA Region IX PRGs NA Water (ppm) Before After NA NA Toxaphene 22.2* soo below [2.2] NA NA Metals (EPA Method 601 OB/EPA 7471 A) Less than off-site background Less than off-site background NA NA DDE 2.4 [12] NA NA Lead (EPA Method 601 OB) 6.56 [100] NA NA DDT .640 f12] NA NA DDD .170 [17] Comments: This 6.6-acre site was used as agricultural land before 1967. The consultant composited the soil samples following State of California DTSC Interim guidance for sampling agricultural soils. Throe composited samples collected in November 1999 detected Toxaphene at 4.540, 6.620 and 22.2 mg/kg. Eight soil samples were collected from thesame areas in May 2001, and all samples had less than detection level;; of Toxaphene. This decrease In soil concentration may have been the result of decomposition since the consultant observed disturbance of the ground surface in August 2001. DDT/DDE/DDD composited soil samples, are still under the EPA Region 9 Industrial Preliminary Remediation Coals (PRGs) even if tripled in concentration to account for dilution from compositing. The site will be capped with buildings or pavement and human exposure through contact and ingestion will not be present after construction. The contaminants present do not present a vapor migration risk to inhabitants of buildings. The mass of contaminants remaining are not expected to pose a risk to beneficial uses ofthe Pacific ocean which is 2000 foet to the west of the site. IV. CLOSURE Does completed corrective action protect existing beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes Docs completed corrective action protect potential beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yos Does corrective action protect public health for current land use? Yes Case review based on proposed use as: a hotel, market/service station restaurant and parking area. Are there other Issues DEH needs to follow up on: none Site Management Requirements: No, however, soli moved off site should be analyzed forthe contaminants found on sito to insure that proper disposal or reus e Is made of the excess soil. Should corrccthfe action be reviewed if land use changes? Yes List Enforcement Actions Taken; None List Enforcement Actions Rescinded: None Is this account up to date and current?: Yes V. LOCAL AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE DATA Name: Kevin Hc.iton y' y :' Title: Senior Hydrogeologist Land and Water Quality Division Signature: ^ /{/[y' Oate: S/Zo/7.001^ VI. RWQCB NOTIFICATION Date Submitted lo RWQCB: Not required. RWQCB Response: Not requjred RWQCB Staff Name: NA Title: NA Date: NA VII. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, DATA. ETC. [ This document and the related CASE CLOSURE LETTER, shall be retained by the lead agency as part of tho official site file. CASE NO: BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CUP 99-30 (PUD 00-109/MS 99-16) CASE NAME: Cannon Court APPLICANT: J. A. Buza. Corp. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow grading and construction of two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/mini-mart on a 6.51 acre lot located on the north side of Cannon Road between 1-5 and the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda. in the Citv of Carlsbad. County of San Diego. State of Califomia. according to Petition Map thereof No. 823. filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16. 1896 APN: 210-010-38 Acres: 6Sl Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A Existing Zone: C-T-0 - Commercial-Tourist/Oualified Development Overlay Zone Proposed Zone: N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) General Plan Zoning Current Land Use Site North South East West C-T-Q T-R Vacant P-U U SDGE Storage Yard/High Tension Lines/V acant P-M Pl Vacant/Agriculmre TC TC Interstate 5 TC & P-U TC&U AT & SF Railroad r.o.w. & SDGE Power Plant PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 154 EDU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ^ Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued February 26. 2001 I I Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated • Other, ' 79 CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: Cannon Court - CUP 99-30 (PUD 00-109/MS 99-16) LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 3 GENERAL PLAN: T-R ZONING: C-T-Q DEVELOPER'S NAME: J. A. Buza Corp. ADDRESS: 16085 San Dieguito Rd. # E7 Rancho Santa Fe. CA 92067 PHONE NO.: 619-756-5338 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 210-010-38 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC, SQ. FT., DU): 6.51 acres ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 20 cfs B 4.793 ADT A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 154 EDU D. Park: Demand in Acreage = Not Applicable E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = Identify Drainage Basin = (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADT - (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = Station 1 & 4 H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = Not Applicable I. Schools: J. Sewer: Demands in EDU Identify Sub Basin = Not Applicable (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD = 33.880 GPD CUSD 154 EDU •80 4-24-01;3:55PM: 760434S36. Citv of Carlsbad City Attorney FAX TRANSMnTAL DATE: April 24,2001 TIME SENT: TO: GARY WAYNE, BOBBIE HODER, BARBARA KENNEDY, CHRISTER WESTMAN, ANNE HYSONG, BILL PLUMMER, BOB WOJCIK, FRANK JIMENO, DAVID RICK COMPANY: PHONE #: FAX #: 602-8559, 602-8562 Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): ^ lr FROM: JANE MOBALDI DEPT.: CITY ATTORNEY PHONE: (760)434-2891 FAX: (760)434-8367 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: DCC COMMENTS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 16, 2001 UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED OR OBVIOUS FROM THE NATURE OF THE TRANSMITTAL, THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMES ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER FT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION. DISTRIBUTION COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR OR ARE NOT SURE WHETHER IT IS PRIVILEGED, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY COLLECT TELEPHONE. AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE AT OUR EXPENSE. THANK YOU. 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carisbad, Caiifornia 92008 (760) 434-2891 rnS:55PM: ^ The Chy of Carklnd Planning Department /-/^Ti^ A REPORT TO THE PLANNING GOQfiinSSION Item No. Application complete date: January 3,2000 P.C. AGENDA OF: May 16,2001 Project Planner: Barbara Kennedy Project Engineer Frank Jimeno SUBJECT: L CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT - Request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on tbe northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate S, in the C-T-Q zone, the CommerciaWisitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Faciiities Management Zone 3. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commis»dn ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978, RECOMMENDING A1»PP"VA»- of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-30, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. IL INTRODUCTION The proposal consists of the development of a 16-pump gas station and mini-mart, an 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest comer of Camion Road and Interstate 5 in the C-T-Q zone. The project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for 1) the gas station, 2) to allow a building height of 45 feet for the hotel, and 3) because the project site is located m the City's Commercial'Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. The City Council has the final authority to approve projects wbich are located in the Commercial'Visitor Saving Overlay Zone. Therefore, the Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation of q)proval for the proj ect The property is located within the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Program, an area of deferred certification. The ^licant will be conditioned to obtain approval of a Coastal Development Pennit firom die Califomia Coastal Commission. The project also includes a minor subdivision 99-16), Nonresidaitial Planned Development Petmit (PUD 00-109), and Sign Program (PS 00-67) to be acted tq>on by the Planning Director and City Engines: following final action by the City Coimcil. The project will not have a significant impact on the environment widi the incorporation of the mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued for the project The project conforms to all applicable development standards, there are no unresolved project issues, and findings can be made for t^proval of the project. .-Z4-Ui; ^:65PM: :-6043483e CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT May 16,2001 Paee 12 2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general long-term well-being of the neighborhood and commtmity, in that the project consists of a gas station and mini mart, hotel, and two restaurants which will provide services for the surrounding residential and business communities, as well as the traveling public. 3. That such project will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or woiidng in the vicinity, or injurious to property or unprovements in fhe vicinity, in that tiie site plan includes all necessaiy features to adjust the development to the suirounding neigbboihood, including setbacks, enhanced architecture, and landsc^ing. 4. That the proposed nonresidential planned development.meets all of the minimum development standards of the underlying zone except for the lot area, in that no standards variances have been requested or required. 5. That the proposed Construction Phasing Plan has been reviewed and conditions are imposed to ensure that adequate paiking, circulation, and improvements will be provided as phased construction of tiie project occurs. E. Local Coastal Program CompUance The project is located within the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan which is an area of deferred certification. The project will receive its coastal development pomit fiom the California Coastal Commission. The pmject has been reviewed for consistmcy with the relevant coastal act polices as follows: Policy 1.1 The proposed use consisting of a gas station and mini-mart, restaurants, and hotel is consistmt with the TS (Travel Services) land use designation shown on the Land Use Map (Exhibit C of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan). Policy 1.9 The maximum building height in the coastal zone is 35 feet, as measured to the mid-point of tiie roof. The hotel, which is the tallest structure, complies with the maximum building height requirement All other structures are less than 35 feet Policy 2.1 The project site is not used as an agrictiltural site and does not require conversion to develop the property. The development of the site would not conflict with the agricultural economy. Policy 4.1 The project will be conditioned to comply with the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance and provisions ofthe Master Drainage Plan. Policy 4.2 Grading activities fbr the site will be restricted during the winto- season (October 1st - April 1st) and all grading operations will be subject to tiie City's adopted grading regulations and the Landsc^ Guidelines Manual which includes requironents for erosion control. "60-34836 ^ B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission 2 RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CANNON COURT - CUP 99-30, based on the following findings and subject to the foUowing conditions: 3 4 Findings: ^ 1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance with the Elements ofthe City's General Plan, based on the facts set forth in 6 I the staff rcpott dated May 16, 2001 and recognizing that the project will provide needed services for the surrounding residential and business conimunity, as well as 7 the traveling public. ^ 2. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local ^ Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 and all City public facility policies and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or 10 provide fimding to ensure ttiat all fecilities and improvements regarding: sewer collection and treatment; waten drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and otiier recreational 11 facilities; libraries; government administrative fecilities; and open space, related to the ^21 project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concunent witii need 13 A. The project has been conditioned to provide proof fiom the Carlsbad Unified School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities. 14 B. The Pubhc Facility fee is required to be paid by Coimcil PoUcy No. 17 and will bc 15 coUected prior to tiie issuance of building permit Niy , * . 1° CONDITIONAL USE PEJlMIT - (SECTION 21.42 anQLS^ /U^fc^^-t^^^^^Sf^ I ^ 3. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for tlie developmoit of tlKconmnmity, is essentiaUy in harmony with the various elemoits and objectives of the Goieral Plan, and IS is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in^e zone in which the, proposed use is located, in tiiat: ^j^^^d^^^^^^^ ^ • ^ ^Ji^ 19 The requested use is necessary and desirable for the development of the community in that the project is considered to be a Freeway Service Facility 2\ due to its proximity to the Ireeway interchange, and flie proposed gas station, mini-mart, hotel, and restaurant uses are appropriate uses for Freeway 22 I Service FacUities. B. The project is in harmony with various elements of the General Plan in that 2^ the underlying Travel Recreation (T-R) land use designation ensures that commercial uses will be available to the surrounding business and residential 25 I community as weU as the traveling public 26 C. The project is not detrimental to the existing and fiiture uses specifically permitted in the area in that the street and circulation improvements are designed to minimize potential traffic circulation confUcts; an access road 23 has been designed to serve existing and future uses for the parcel north ofthe project site; visnal impacts are reduced through landscaping, building PC RESO NO. 4978 -2- i vs I 4, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 placement, and screen walls; and the architectural style complies with the Commercial Visitor Serving Overlay Zone requirements. 4. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. in that the site design and other elements of the project have been designed in compUance witb appUcable development standards, including parking, circulation aisles, and setbacks. 5. That aU the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or pennitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained, in that all development standards required by the C-T zone and CommercialA/isitor Serving Overlay Zone have been provided, including special development standards for gas stations, and special conditions for buildings with heights over 35 feet. 6. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to. properly handle aU traffic generated by the proposed use, in that witb the incorporation of tiie required roadway and intersection improvements, the additional 4,793 ADT generated by the project wiU not s^nificanfly reduce the levels of service of the surrounding roadways and key intersections. AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION (SECTION 21.42.010(7)(A) and (B) 7. That tbe service station is to be developed as part of a fineeway-service facility, containing a minimum of two fiveway oriented uses, in that the site is located at the apex of a fi-eeway interchange quadrant and contains three freeway-oriented uses (hotel and two restaurants) in addition to the automobile service station use and that tiie required standards of development are either incorporated into the'plans or wiU be satisfied tiirough the conditions of approve. . , r?.* COMMIHRCIAL/VISITOR SERVING OVERLAY ZONE (SECTlbrf2l .208.110) That the proposed project is adequately designed to accommodate the high percentage of visitor, tourist and buttle bus/altemative transportation users anticipated given the proposed use and site location within the overlay zone in that the site design includes passenger drop-off zones, clear pedestrian pathways between uses, RV and bus parking, and an NCTD bus stop on Cannon Road. That the building forms, building colors and building materials combine to provide an architectural style of developmrait that wiU add to the objective of hi^ quality architecture and building design within the overlay zone in that the building compUes with the Village Architectural Style and features gabled roof elements, a variety of roof peaks, interesting buUding forms, and high quaUty surface and detatt elements. That tiie project compUes with all development and design criteria ofthe overlay zone in that the project compUes with the paridng requirements, sign aUowances, buUding height, buUding setback, architectural style, landscaping, and nse separation requirements of the overlay zone. ,^ ^ " y ' That the additional buUding height for the proposied hotel, to a maximum height of 45 feet, can be approved per Section 21.29.060 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code since 9. 10. 11. PC RESO NO. 4978 the building does not contain more than three levels; aU required setbacks bave 2 been increased at a ratio of one horizontal foot for every one foot of vertical constniction above 35 feet and the setbaclcs will be maintained as landscaped open 3 space; and the buUding is required to conform to the requirements of Section ^ 18.04.170 ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code 5 6 10 12. That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section IB). 12 General: 1. K any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and inaintained according to their teims, the City shaU have the right to 15 revoke or modify aU ^provals herein granted; deny or fiirther condition issuance of all fiiture buUding permits; deny, revoke or finther condition aU certificates of occupancy 16 issued under the authority of q>provals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel tiieir comphance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval of 2g this Conditional Use Permit 19 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, aU coirections and modifications to the Conditional Use Pennit documents, as necessaiy to make them 20 intemally consistent and in confonnity with the final action on the project Development shaU occur substantially as shown on tiie approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different fiom this approval, shall require an amendment to this s^roval. 22 3. The Developer shall coiaply with aU applicable provisions of federal, state, and local 23 laws and regulations m effect at tiie time ofbuilding permit issuance. 2^ 4. ff any condition for construction of any public improvements or facUities, or the payment 2j of any fees in-Ueu thereof, imposed by this approval or inq>osed by law on this Project are challenged, tbis approvai shall be suspended as provided in Govemment Code Section 26 66020. If any such condition is detenmned to be invaUd this approval shall be invalid unless the City CotmcU determines that the project without the condition complies with 27 aU requirements of law. 5. The Developer shaU implement, or cause the implementation of^ the Cannon Court - CUP 99-30 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Rq>orting Program. PC RESO NO. 4978 -4- 13. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer 7 I contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to initigate impacts caused by or reasond^ relatt^ Id the project, and the extent and the 8 ^ degre^f the exaction is in rough proportionaUty to the impact caused hy the project Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall oe satisfied prior to issuance of a \ \ I grading permit '60434836' V 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. The Developer/Operator shaU and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold hannless the City of Carlsbad, its Coimcil members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, fi'om and against any and all liabiUties, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attomey's fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectiy, fixim (a) City's pproval and issuance of tiiis Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's ^roval or issuance of any pCTinit or action, whether discretionaiy or non- discretionary, in connection with tiie use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator's instaUation and operation of tiie facility pennitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all habilities arising fiom the emission by the iaciUty of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives untU all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City's approval is not vaUdat^. 7. The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24" x 36", mylar copy of the Tentative Parcel Map and Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by fhe final decision making body. 8. The Developer shaU include, as part of tiie plans subnutted for any pennit plan check, a reduced legible version of all appmving resolution(s) in a 24" x 36" blueUne drawing fonnat (including any i^plicable Coastal Commission approvals). 9. Prior to the issuance of a bulding pennit, the Developer shall provide proof to the Director fixnn the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its obUgation to provide school facilities. 10. This project shall comply with aU conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 3 Local FaciUties Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of buUding pennits. 11. This approval is granted subject to tiie approval of PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 and is subject to aU conditions contained in PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 for the Nonresidential Planned Development Permit and Minor Subdivision. ' ime nuU and void if building pennits are not issued for this 'fiom^the date of Final Parcel Map approval.^. 14. Building peimits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providiz^ water and sew^ seivices to tiie project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer faciUties, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the sqjpUcation for the building peimit, and that water and sewer edacity and faciUties wiU continue to be available until the time of occupancy. A note to this efTect shaU be placed on the Final Parcel Map. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for tbe gas station/mlni-mart, the Developer shaU obtain and maintain in good standing aU Ucenses, permits, or approvals required by state law to operate as a gas station and food mart PC RESO NO. 4978 -5- 4-24-01: 3:5SPM: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v) Glass recycling in restaurants. 35. No outdoor storage of materials or display of materials or merchandise shall occur onsite unless required by tiie Fire Chief. When so required, the Developer shall submit and obtain approval of ttie Fire Chief and the Planning Director of an Outdoor Storage Plan, and thereafter conq)ly with the approved plan. 36. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director pproval of an exterior lighting plan includhig parking areas. AU Ughting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any unpacts on adjacent homes or property. The maximum height of the Ught poles shaU not exceed 20 feet A Ughting plan for the gas station canopy shall aiso be submitted for approval by the Planning Department 37. The hotel buUding shall be designed to compfy with Titie 18 - Buildhig Codes and Regulations, Section 18.04.170 (Special provisions for buildings between tiiirty-five and fifty-five feet in height) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 38. Development shaU occur in conformance with the proposed **Constmction Phasing Plan." The Developer shall constiuct instaU and stripe not less than the required number of paiking spaces for each phase of constmction, as shown on Attachment 8 - Construction Phasing Plan. Landscape and site improvements shown for each phase of construction shaU be completed prior to occupancy of the building in any given phase. Modifications to the Constmction Phasing Plan may be approved by the Planning Director provided that the required nnmber of parking spaces for each buUding are installed and accessible prior to occupancy ofany individual buUding. 39. AU roof ^purtenances, including air conditionals, shall be architecturally integrated and concealed fiom view and the sound buffered &om adjacoit properties and streets, in substance as provided in Building Department PoUcy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction ofthe Directors of Community Development and Planning. gpgine^riPg 40. Prior to hauling dirt or construction matea^als to or fixim any proposed construction site within this project Developer shall apply for and obtain approval fixim the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. 41. Prior to issuance of any building permit Developer shaU comply with the requtrements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and whoi such a program is formaUy estabUshed by tiie City. 42. Developo* shall provide to the City Engineer an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other recorded document for maintaining the private easements within tiie project and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, stteet Ughts, sewer and storm drain faciUties located therein and to distribute tiie costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of tiie properties within the project. PC RESO NO. 4978 -11- :-60434836 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fire 81. 82. Fees Four additional on-site fire hydrants must be provided. Consuh with the Fire Depanment to determine precise locations. Fire flow requirement is 3000 gallons per minute and may be deUvered &om 2 Rre hydrant sources. ^ 85. }val of the final )eveloper shaU pay the citywide PubUc Facilities Bee impos$!a by City Council PoUcy Lic^e Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFD #1 special tax (if plicable), subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any appUcable Local FaciUties Management Plan fee for Zone 3, pursuant to Chqiter 21.90. AU such taxes/fees shaU be paid at issuance ofbuilding permit. Ifthe taxes/fees are not paid, tiiis approval wiU not be consistent with the General Plan and shaU become void. The Developer shaU pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code. General ^ 86. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with aU ^Ucable sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other appUcable City ordinances in effect at time ofbuilding peimit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. The project shaU comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requirements pursuant to Titie 24 of tiie State Building Code. Pranise identification (addresses) shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 18.04.320. Any signs proposed for this development shaU at a minimum be designed in confonnance with the City's Sign Ordinance and Sign Program for Cannon Court PS 00-67 and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. Engineering Code Reminder The project is subject to all i^pUcable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 90. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to PC RESO NO. 4978 -17- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 prevent offsite siltation. Planting and with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chqit ofthe City Engineer. I control shall be provided in accordance le Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction 91. Some improvements shown on the site plan and/or required by these conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or interest to permit the inQirovemoits to be made without acquisition of title or interest. The Develop^- shall immediately initiate negotiations to acquire such property. The Developer shaU use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If unsuccessfiil. Developer shaU apply and obtoin an amendment ofthis approvaLpr modify the plans so improvements wiU not occur outside the project and tRitain a fhiding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. Fire Department Code Reminders 92. 93. 94. The hotel and restaurant B must be protected by automatic fire sprinkler systemsx2£k^ The sprinkler system protecting tiie hotel must be a combination type which provides 2 and one-half inch gated hose outiets at aU stair landings and at appropriate locations in the basement parking area^<2ig^ d/YC^, • o /7fOV, (p/0 Automatic fire sprinkler protection of restaurant A wiU be required if its area exceeds 5000squarefeet^Ai^^ C^Z/C?^ , ^ (1.0^, 0(0 NOTICE Please take NOTICE that pproval of your project includes the "imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively refeired to for convenience as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days fix>m date of pproval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions, ff you protest than, you must follow the protest procedure set fortii in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file tiie protest and any ottier required infoimation with ttie City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Faflure to tunely follow that procedure wiU bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED ttiat your right to protest ttie specified fces/«actions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and edacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading or other simUar appUcation processing or service fees in connection witii this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions ofwhich you have previously been givra a NOTICE sinular to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired. PC RESO NO. 4978 •18- E. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 his/her respective Lot for purposes of collecting such special assessment in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article _ of this Declaration. Landscape Maintenance Responsibilities. The Owners Association and individual lot owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set forth in Exhibit Notice 26. The Developer shall report, in writing, to the Planning Director within 30 days, any address change fi-om that which is shown on the permit application. 27. Prior to issuance ofthe grading permit. Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a(n) Conditional Use Permit by Resolution No. 4978 on the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. 28. Prior to the recordation of the Final Parcel Map or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property may be subject to noise impacts fi-om the proposed or existing Transportation Corridor, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and City Attomey (see Noise Form #1 on file in the Planning Department). Onsite Conditions - Specific 29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer, and submitted to the City and County Department of Environmental Health for review and approval. This report shall evaluatfi^e the potential for soil contamination due to historic uses, handling, or storage of agricultural chemicals restricted by the San Diego County Department of Health Services. The report shall also identify a range of possible mitigation measures designed to remediate any significant pubUc health impacts if hazardous chemicals are detected in the soils at concentrations which would have a significantly adverse effect on human health. The Developer shall implement one of the mitigation measures identified in the report prior to the issuance of building permits should mitigation be necessary so as to reduce the impact to below a level of significance. 30. Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map, a joint use parking agreement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The agreement shall provide for the following: PC RESO NO. 4978 MEMORANDUM April 16, 2001 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development CUP 99-30, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT MODIFICATIONS AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT CONDITIONS Please add or modify the previously transmitted engineering conditions as follows: Modify condition 11 (last word): Developer shall provide to the City Engineer an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other recorded document for maintaining the private easements within the project and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, sewer and storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the project. ^ Modify condition 22 (bold): Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project. Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the project into the existing City of Carisbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer. J After condition 24, add the following condition Upon completion of grading. Developer shall file an "as-graded" geologic plan with the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. The plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist, and shall be submitted on a 24" x 36" mylar or similar drafting film format suitable for a permanent record. Prior to condition 30 add the following two conditions: Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City for an easement for public access and public utility purposes for the prolongation of Avenida Encinas through the project site as shown on the site plan. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final parcel map for MS 99-16. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. ^ Developer shall cause adjacent Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City for an easement for public access and public utility purposes forthe portion of the prolongation of Avenida Encinas through the parcel westerly of the project site, as shown on the site plan. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. \/ Modify condition 30 to read as follows: Developer shall cause Owner to execute a covenant for easement for reciprocal access and maintenance over all driveway aisles and parking areas, including the hotel underground parking, all as shown on the site plan. The obligation to execute and record the covenant for easement shall be shown and recording information called out on the site plan. Developer shall provide City Engineer with proof of recordation prior to issuance of building permit. y Modify condition 31 to read as follows: Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City and/or other appropriate entities for all public easements as shown on the site plan and/or required after final design of the site plan. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final parcel map for MS 99-16. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated. Add to condition 34 the following item: C Improvements to Avenida Encinas southerly of its intersection with Cannon Road in order to ensure alignment with the proposed onsite street. Add the following conditions: 1 Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet with the Fire Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the District Engineer 2. 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 Carisbad. At the discretion of the Deputy City Engineer, wider easements may be required for adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes 3. 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 Countv Water Authoritv capacitv charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits. 4. The Developer shall prepare a colored recycled water use map and submit it to the Planning Department for processing and approval by the Deputy City Engineer. 5. The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. 6. The Developer shall install potable water and recycled water services and meters at a location approved by the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of said services shall be refiected on public improvement plans. 7. The Developer shall install sewer laterals and clean-outs at a location approved by the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 8. The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and recycled water facilities substantially as shown on the site plan to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 9. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the Deputy City Engineer has determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of occupancy. 10. Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever is first, the entire potable water, recycled water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer. 11. The Developer shall submit a detailed sewer study, prepared by a Registered Engineer, that identifies the peak flows of the project, required pipe sizes, depth of flow in pipe, velocity in the main lines, and the capacity of the existing infrastructure. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. 12. The Developer shall submit a detailed potable water study, prepared by a Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project (including fire flow demands). The study shall identify velocity in the main lines, pressure zones, and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. 13. The Developer shall submit a detailed recycled water study, prepared by a Registered Engineer that identifles the peak demands of the project. The study shall identify velocity in the main lines and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer C Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann MEMORANDUM March 21, 2001 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development SDP 00-09, CUP 99-30, CUP 99-31, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT PROJECT CONDITIONS The Engineering Department has completed its review of the project application. The Engineering Department recommends approval of the project subject to the following conditions: ENGINEERING CONDITIONS Genera/ 7. 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. 8. 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. 11. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other recorded document for maintaining the private easements within the project and all the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, sewer and storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the subdivision. 12. Prior to occupancy. Developer shall install rain gutters to convey roof drainage to an approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer. 16. Developer shali install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards. Fees/Agreemen ts 17. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation the City's standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless Agreement. 18. 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. 19. Developer shall cause property owner to execute, record and submit a recorded copy to the City Engineer, a deed restriction on the property which relates to the proposed cross lot drainage as shown on the site plan. The deed restriction document shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and shall: A. Clearly delineate the limits of the drainage course; B. State that the drainage course is to be maintained in perpetuity by the underlying property owner; and C. State that all future use of the property along the drainage course will not restrict, impede, divert or otherwise alter drainage flows in a manner that will result in damage to the underlying and adjacent properties or the creation of a public nuisance. 22. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer. Gradinq 24. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the start of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 26. This project requires off site grading. 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. 27. 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 forthe project. Coastal Conditions 28. All grading activities shall comply with all the conditions of the Coastal Development Permit. Dedications/Improvements 30. Developer shall cause Owner to execute a covenant of easement for reciprocal access and maintenance as shown on the site plan. The obligation to execute and record the covenant of easement shall be shown and recording information called out on the site plan. Developer shall provide City Engineer with proof of recordation prior to issuance of building permit. 31. Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City and/or other appropriate entities for all public access and other easements shown on the site plan. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final parcel map for MS 99-16. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated. 32. Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit. 33. Developer shall provide the design of all private streets and drainage systems to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the standard improvement plancheck and inspection fees. 34. Developer shall execute 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, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer, water, storm drain system, fire hydrants, street lights, signing and striping, retaining walls and reclaimed water, to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A. Half street improvements of Cannon Road to Major Arterial standards along the project frontage. B. Traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas, with an interconnect to the existing trafflc signal at Cannon Road and the 1-5 off and on-ramps. Work to be coordinated with Caltrans. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. 38. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall underground all existing overhead utilities along the project boundary. 39. Developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to and approved by the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from 10-year frequency storms of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed conditions, are equal to or less than the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing developed conditions. Both 6 hour and 24 hour storm durations shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results. 40. Developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. 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 priorto 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 ofthe 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. 41. Prior To Occupancy, Developer shall install street lights along all public and private street frontages abutting and/or within the project site in conformance with City of Carisbad Standards. 42. Prior to occupancy. Developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carisbad Standards. 43. Prior to occupancy. Developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public street corners abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards. 44. Prior to building permit or grading permit issuance, whichever occurs first Developer shall have design, apply for and obtain approval ofthe 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. Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 49. 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 ofthe City Engineer. 50. Some improvements shown on the site plan and/or required by these conditions are located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of title or interest. The Developer shall immediately initiate negotiations to acquire such property. The Developer shall use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If unsuccessful. Developer shall apply and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so improvements will not occur outside the project and obtain a flnding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer C Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECTNAME: CANNON COURT Date: 1-4-01 Project number: Planning CUP 99-30/SDP 00-09/PUD 00-109 Project conditions; (Note: This commentary identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) 1. Four additional on-site fire hydrants must be provided. Consult with the Fire Department to determine precise locations. 2. Fire flow requirement is 3000 gallons per minute and may be delivered from 2 fire hydrant sources. Code reminders: (Note: This commentary is provided to assist the applicant, and identifies minimum code requirements that are fi-equently overlooked. 3. The hotel and restaurant B must be protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems. 4. The sprinkler system protecting the hotel must be a combination type which provides 2 and one-half inch gated hose outlets at all stair landings and at appropriate locations in the basement parking areas. 5. Automatic fire sprinkler protection of restaurant A will be required if its area exceeds 5000 square feet. MEMORANDUM February 6, 2001 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development SDP 00-09, CUP 99-30, CUP 99-31, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT The following is the Transportation/Circulation analysis for the environmental and staff reports for the referenced project. Traffic A traffic report was submitted for the proposed development. The report addresses two circulation issues that need to be analyzed. First, the report analyzes the impact of the project traffic on existing city streets. Additionally, the report analyzes the access requirements of the 45-acre parcel directly north of the project. When the vacant 45-acre parcel north of the project is developed, it will take access through the project site. Accordingly, the access road needs to be designed to handle the potential future traffic. In order to establish the ultimate width of this access road, and since uses are not currently planned for the 45 acres, h/vo alternative land use assumptions were made. Alternative 1 assumed 15 acres for a high technology power plant plus 30 acres for the utility corporate headquarters. This alternative results in a traffic generation of 3,450 ADT. Alternative 2 assumed 15 acres for a high technology power plant, 17.5 acres for corporate headquarters, and 12.5 acres of visitor commercial use. This alternative resulted in a traffic generation of 7,200 ADT. To accommodate both alternatives, the project proposes to build two lane improvements through the project, with widening to four lanes at the intersection with Cannon Road. These improvements would meet the requirements of alternative 1. To meet the requirements of alternative 2, additional right-of-way would be reserved for the potential widening of the street to a four-lane road. The project itself will generate a total of 4,793 ADT; including 308 AM peak-hour /^fBT-V-pa and 401 PM peak-hou?^'ABT. The traffic analysis indicates that the additional traffic generated by the project does not significantly affect the levels of service of the existing streets. However, the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proximity of the 1-5 Cannon Road freeway ramps to the east and the railroad crossing to the west, some traffic operations measures need to be implemented. The following specific measures will be incorporated in the design ofthe intersection: 1. Interconnect the new Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing freeway ramp signals. 2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal. 3. Signing and striping with "KEEP CLEAR" notices to assure intersections are not blocked during railroad signal preemption. 4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption. 5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas. With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that the project traffic does not significantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions. LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES 1. Design and build a hwo-lane street through the project site for access to the property to the north. Widen the street to four lanes at its intersection with Cannon Road. 2. Reserve additional right-of-way for the potential widening of the street through the project to a four-lane road. 3. Design and build a traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. 4. Interconnect the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing 1-5 freeway ramp signals. Coordinate with Caltrans. 5. Incorporate and coordinate the railroad preemption for the new traffic signal. 6. Incorporate traffic signal phasing, signing and striping measures to assure the free flow of traffic during signal preemption. If you or the applicant has any questions, please contact me at (760) 602-2758. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann CITY OF CARLSBAD REQUEST FOR CONDITIONS FINAL REVISED DATE: December 18, 2000 PLANS INCLUDED TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT '^FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH WATER DISTRICT FROM: Planning Department PROJECT TITLE: Cannon Court APPLICANT: West Development PROPOSAL: Gas Station/food mart, hotel and h/vo restaurants REQUEST FOR CONDITIONS ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-09/PUD 00-109/CUP 99-30 /CUP 99-31 Please submit written conditions to Barbara Kennedy the Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by Januarv 15. 2001 . (If vou have "No Conditions", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no conditions and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact the Project Planner at 602-4626 Time is of the essence, since the staff report preparation has begun. THANK YOU COMMENTS: 2/07/00 MEMORANDUM November 16, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development SDP 00-09, CUP 99-30, CUP 99-31, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT The Development Services and Transportation Divisions have completed a review of the traffic report for the referenced project. The attached memo from David Stillman, the redlined traffic report and the redlined site plan identify all the items that need to be addressed. Please note that O'Day's drawings now show 5 lots. That means they have to apply for a major subdivision. Please forward them to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. Please make sure these prints are returned with the corrected plans to assist us in developing the final conditions for the project. If you or the applicant has any questions, please contact me at (760) 602-2758. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer Attachments C Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann November 13, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, JIMENO FROM: Associate Engineer, Stillman RE: CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT I have reviewed the third submittal of the traffic impact report dated October 24, 2000 for the aforementioned project. In addition to minor grammatical corrections noted within the body of the report, I have the following specific comments with respect to the report: 1. The Peak VPHPL for Carisbad Boulevard behween Tamarack Avenue and Cannon Road shown in Table 3-1 does not agree with the volumes shown in Figures 3-3 or 3-4. This volume should be verified. 2. Some turning movement volumes shown in Figures 3-3, 3-4, 4-2, 6-3 and 7-2 are either missing, incorrect or are not consistent with volumes approaching from adjacent intersections. These are noted in red within the body of the report. These should be revised as necessary. 3. Two of the average daily volumes for Cannon Road shown in Table 5-1 are incorrect. These should be corrected. 4. The 2005 Average Daily Traffic volumes shown in Figure 6-1 are not consistent with the 2005 peak-hour volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6- 3. Within the report on page 6-1 it is stated that, for the 2005 scenario, it is assumed that Cannon Road is complete from Lego Drive to El Camino Real in order to provide a worst-case condition for analysis. However, the 2005 volume on Cannon Road east of Lego Drive is 5,000 ADT (less than existing + project), the volume on Cannon behween Car Country Drive and Lego Drive is 12,000 ADT (again less than existing + project), and the volumes along the remainder of Cannon have only risen slightly over the existing + project scenario. The peak-hour volumes shown in Table 6-2 and Table 6-3, however, are significantly higher than existing + project. It appears that the average daily traffic volumes along Cannon Road shown in Figure 6-1 are too low given the assumption that Cannon is opened to El Camino Real and considering the peak-hour volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3. November 13, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT Page 2 5. The ramp meter evaluation needs to be explained and clarified further. The report states on page 8-3 that the ramp meter rate data shown in Figure 8-2 confirms that the traffic estimates and observed queuing are generally accurate; however, I do not know how to interpret the data in Figure 8-2 and I therefore cannot justify this conclusion. Table 8-2 needs to be interpreted, and the relationship of Table 8-2 to Table 8-3 needs to be explained. 6. The ICU calculations shown for the intersection of Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas assume that northbound-to-eastbound right turns overiap with westbound-to-southbound left turns. However, this overiap has not been shown in the traffic signal phase diagram for the intersection. Additionally, this right-turn movement may not develop the full 1800 vehicle/hour capacity of the lane during an overiap phase due to queuing at the Cannon Road/1-5 southbound ramp intersection. The Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas intersection should be evaluated assuming that this overiap does not exist unless it can be shown that these right turn movements are allowed to flow freely through the Cannon Road/1-5 southbound ramp intersection without delay. In addition, during a meeting with Andrew Schlaefli on October 16, 2000, and during a subsequent phone conversation with Mr. Schlaefli, I requested that Urban Systems Associates provide to the City documentation on how the 2020 turning movement volumes were derived. This documentation can be in the form of notes from previous working sessions and is intended to be kept on file with the City and not included within the body of the report. This information has not been provided to this date. Feel free to call me at x2745 if you have any questions. DAVID STILLMAN, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section C: Public Works Director Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Deputy City Engineer, Development Services Senior Civil Engineer, Land Development STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRAN'JiPRTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY - GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11 P.O. BOX 85406, MS-50 SAN DIEGO, CA 92186-5406 (619) 688-6954 FAX: (619) 688-4299 October 12, 2000 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Crty Of Carlsbad 11-SD-005 PM 48.0 (KP 77.2) SDP 00-09 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite "B" Carisbad, CA 92008-2389 Dear Ms. Kennedy: As you know, on September 19, 2000 we convened a meeting here at Caltrans with the traffic consultant representing the developer for the proposed Cannon Court project, a hotel, restaurant and service station development located adjacent west of Interstate 5 (1-5) and north of Cannon Road. At the meeting we discussed several issues, hA/o of which will be discussed in this letter: • We asked the consultant, Andrew Schlaefli, to provide SANDAG 2020 volumes. These numbers were provided and are to our satisfaction; • The other issue concerned the minimum recommended distance behA/een your projects' access road and the southbound off-ramp to Cannon Road from 1-5. It has been determined that a meeting took place on September 21, 1999 between Caltrans and the developer and that Caltrans recommended the access road be located where it is now shown on the project plans, although the recommended minimum distance is 125 meters (140 feet). In this particular circumstance only, we will allow the access road where it is shown on the project plans so it will connect directly with the recently completed Avenida Encinas connection to the south. OTHER ISSUES: • Another issue that has come to our attention is plans for another hotel complex on the south side of Cannon Road between 1-5 and Avenida Encinas. Caltrans has never reviewed this project. What is the status of this project? We may need a portion of the property for widening of 1-5, however we need to review the plans in order to make that determination. Ms. Barbara Kennedy October 12, 2000 Page 2 • It is understood that the project to the south of Cannon Road includes signalization of Gannon Road at Avenida Encinas, including the interiinking with the ramp signal system. We need to review the proposed signal plans including a revised traffic analysis that includes the new proposed hotel complex. Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. We will appreciate reviewing any discretionary project in the City of Carisbad as to its impact on our facilities. If you have any questions on the above comments, please contact Vann Hurst, Development Review Branch, at 619.688.6976. Sincerely, BILL FIGGE, c'hief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch STAra OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRAI TATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11 P.O. BOX 85406, MS-50 SAN DIEGO.CA 92186-5406 (619) 688-6954 FAX: (619) 688-4299 September 22, 2000 GRAY DAVIS, Governor ll-SD-005 PM 48.0 (KP 77.2) SDP 00-09 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite "B" Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 Dear Ms. Kennedy: As you know, on September 19, 2000 we convened a meeting here at Caltrans with the traffic consultant representing the developer for the proposed Cannon Court project, a hotel, restaurant and service station development located adjacent west of Interstate 5 (1-5) and north of Cannon Road. At the meeting we discussed several issues, two of which will be discussed in this letter: • We understand the traffic model used by the city is based on the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 9 but employs different land use assumptions than does the SANDAG regional model. We have asked the consultant, Andrew Schlaefli, to provide the SANDAG 2020 volumes, assuming their land use. We need this version as it is what our future plans are based on; • An issue that was not transmitted to you in our correspondence of July 21, 2000 concerned the minimum recommended distance between your projects' access road and the southbound off-ramp to Cannon Road from 1-5. The minimum distance is 125 meters (140 feet). In this particular circumstance only a right turn in - right turn out would be allowed. If the access road were moved further west (adjacent to the railroad) and the Avenida Encinas connection to the south were also moved to the east to be opposite, it would have a better chance of being approved. The result of our meeting dictates that in order to proceed with the project a meeting should be convened with the City of Carlsbad to discuss the above matters. Please let us know when a meeting would be convenient. We are willing to meet at your offices in Carlsbad if that is convenient with you. Ms. Barbara Kennedy September 21, 2000 Page 2 Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. We will appreciate reviewing any discretionary project in the City of Carlsbad as to its impact on our facilities. If you have any questions on the above comments, please contact Vann Hurst, Development Review Branch, at 619.688.6976. Sincerely, BILL FIGGE, Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch (5ity of Carlsbad Planning Department FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: TIME SENT: August 2, 2000 TO: DetTTiis^iynningham COMPANY: Planning Systems PHONE #: 931-0780 FAX#: 931-5744 Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 4 FROM: Barbara Kennedy DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760)602-4626 FAX: (760) 602-8559 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Comments from CalTrans and memo from Frank Jimeno regarding Cannon Court traffic study. Please contact Frank Jimeno to discuss the City's position in regard to the CalTrans comments. Copies will also be faxed to John Buza (FAX: 858-§CQ-&734) and Urban Systems, Andy Schaefli {FAX: 560-9734) • Return Fax 1635 FaradayAvenue Carisbad, California 92008-7314 » STATE-OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRAN^BRTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11 P.O. BOX 85406, MS-50 SAN DIEGO, CA 92186-5406 (619) 688-6954 FAX: (619) 688-4299 July 21, 2000 11-SD-005 PM 48.0 (KP 77.2) SDP 00-09 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite "B" Carisbad, CA 92008-2389 Dear Ms. Kennedy: We have reviewed the plans for the proposed Cannon Court, a hotel, restaurant and service station development located adjacent west of Interstate 5 (1-5) and north of Cannon Road. We have the following comments: • The existing -i- project AM peak hour numbers on pages 3-6 and 4-5 of the Transportation Analysis add to a greater number as shown in Figure 5-2 for the northbound off-ramp; Please review the 2020 peak hour volumes shown in Figure 7-3 in the northbound off and on-ramps to 1-5. The numbers shown are lower than existing and existing + project numbers. Other moves at the freeway show a marked increase; Please provide traffic striping plans and an Intersecting Lane Vehicle (ILV) analysis for the Canon Road/Avenida Encinas intersection; Page 4-1: An AM peak of 309 and PM peak of 402 is projected, however on page 10-3 the report projects a peak queue length of 225' for northbound on-ramp and a peak queue length of 125' for southbound on-ramp. 225' and 125' correspond to 11 and 6 vehicles, respectively. The projected impact to our facility of 11 and 6 vehicles is low when 309 (AM) and 402 (PM) trips are generated. We need a clarification of how you arrived at these numbers; Provide fair share contribution for ramp improvements at Cannon Road. We request mitigation measures of an additional lane on our on and off-ramps at the l-5/Cannon Road intersection. Some of the peak movements increase the existing traffic by over 100% and an average of over 40%; If the intersection of Cannon Rd. and Avenida Encinas is to be signalized the signal should be interlinked with the ramp signal; Ms. Barbara Kennedy July 21, 2000 Page 2 • Caltrans is not responsible for any noise impacts to this development. A noise study should be completed to analyze federal requirements and be based on 20-year traffic projections and the ultimate configuration of 1-5. If there is a noise impact, the developer has the responsibility to provide the mitigation; The "Conceptual Site Plan" indicates trees within Caltrans right of way (R/W) at the intersection of the southbound off-ramp and Cannon Road. This does not reflect the location and type of plant material existing within the R/W. The final planting design needs to correctly incorporate existing plant locations and type of plant materials; Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. We will appreciate reviewing any discretionary project in the City of Carisbad as to its impact on our facilities. If you have any questions on the above comments, please contact Vann Hurst, Development Review Branch, at 619.688.6976. Sincerely, BILL FIGGE, Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch From: To: Date: Subject: Barbara, Dave Stillman Barbara Kennedy 10/4/00 3:54PM Cannon Court Please direct Urban Systenns to perform a 24-hour volume count on Cannon Road east of Lego Drive for the Cannon Court traffic report. The latest City counts were performed 8/16/00 and indicate approximately 3200 ADT, significantly higher than the 2000 ADT assumed in the latest Urban Systems traffic report revision; in addition, volumes along Cannon have most likely increased further still within the 7 weeks since the City counts were performed. The Urban Systems traffic volume count should be conducted on a weekday, preferably mid-week. Current traffic volumes along Cannon are necessary in order to validate the existing scenario evaluation within the traffic report. Please call if you have any questions, x2745. David Stillman CC: Bob Johnson; Frank Jimeno City of Carlsbad Planning Department FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 5, 2000 TIME SENT: 7:5^ Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 2 TO: Dennis Cunningham COMPANY: Planning Systems PHONE #: 931-0780 FAX #: 931-5744 FROM: Barbara Kennedy DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760) 602- 4626 FAX: (760) 602-8559 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Regarding one ofthe outstanding issues identified at our meeting on October 3'"'^, a decision has been made for Urban Systems to perform a new volume count on Cannon Road for the Cannon Court traffic report. Please refer to the attached memo from Dave Stillman for the specific request. Ifthe traffic engineer has any questions, please have him contact Dave directly at 602-2745. I will also fax this memo to Andy Schlaefli. • Return Fax 1635 Faraday Avenue Carisbad, California 92008-7314 City of Carisbad Planning Department FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 5, 2000 TIME SENT: g'^'^w Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 2 TO: Andy Schlaefli COMPANY: Urban Systems PHONE #: 619-688-6954 FAX #: 619-688-2511 FROM: Barbara Kennedy DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760) 602- 4626 FAX: (760) 602-8559 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Regarding one ofthe outstanding issues identified at our meeting on October 3''^, a decision has been made for Urban Systems to perform a new volume count on Cannon Road for the Cannon Court traffic report. Please refer to the attached memo from Dave Stillman for the specific request. If you have any questions, please contact Dave directly at 602-2745. • Return Fax 1635 Faraday Avenue Carisbad, California 92008-7314 September 20, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, JIMENO FROM: Associate Engineer, Stillman RE: CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW I have reviewed the traffic impact report and improvement plans for the aforementioned project. In addition to minor comments and corrections noted within the body of the traffic impact report, I have the following specific comments with respect to the report: 1. Cannon Road between Lego Drive and Faraday Avenue has been open to through traffic since July 27, 2000. This is not reflected within the "Existing Conditions" portion of the traffic report and consequently traffic volumes along Cannon Road are significantly higher than those shown within this section of the report. The evaluation should be revised using actual volumes obtained after the opening of Cannon Road east of Lego Drive. 2. Some of the lane configurations shown in Figure 3-2 are incorrect. These should be revised accordingly. 3. How were the peak hour volumes shown in the "Peak VPHPL" column of Table 3-1 and subsequent similar tables derived? 4. The report states on page 4-4 that the directional distribution percentages shown in Figure 4-2 are based on "existing intersection traffic flow and engineering judgment." It should be described in detail how existing traffic flow and engineering judgment were used to develop the distribution percentages shown in Figure 4-2. 5. The project in/out volumes shown in Figure 4-2 are inconsistent with those shown in the Project Trip Generation Table 4-1. Figure 4-2 should be revised accordingly. September 20, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Page 2 6. Within the "Exisfing Plus Project Condifions" secfion, Figure 5-1 shows the secfion of Cannon Road east of Lego Drive to be open; however, the same 7000 ADT volume that was assumed to exist on Cannon Road before the opening of the section east of Lego Drive is used. In actuality, the traffic volume along Cannon Drive increases once the link east of Lego Drive is open. Figure 5-1 and the subsequent analysis should be revised accordingly. See comment #1 above. 7. Some of the turning movement volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3 shown no increase, and some show a decrease, from the volumes shown in Figures 5-2 and 5-3, respectively. These volumes should be verified. 8. The report states on page 7-1 that the SANDAG Cities/County 2020 Model was used to determine year 2020 volumes. However, the volumes shown in Figures 7-2 and 7-3 are not consistent with those from the SANDAG model. The derivation of these volumes should be explained and any inconsistencies with the SANDAG model justified. 9. On page 8-3 the report states that the project contribution to the ramp meter queue lengths is expected to be 225 feet at the northbound 1-5 ramp and 125 feet at the southbound 1-5 ramp. Can the ramps and adjacent roadways accommodate this? If not, mitigation measures should be suggested. 10. Table 8-2 predicts queue lengths of up to 9,525 feet (almost 2 miles) at the Cannon Road 1-5 ramps for the buildout (2020) condifion. This does not make sense intuifively. The soundness of the freeway ramp meter analysis methodology should be reviewed and an alternate analysis method used if necessary. I have also noted the following comments with respect to the improvement pians: 1. A signing and striping plan should be submitted for the Cannon Court access road, as well for the intersection of Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas. The proposed striping of the access road at the intersection shall be compatible with existing striping at the other legs of the intersecfion. September 20, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Page 3 2. The traffic impact study predicts 159 vehicles to make the left turning movement from the Cannon Court access road to eastbound Cannon Road during the PM peak hour. The left turn pocket length as shown is about 95 feet long. This length is insufficient to accommodate 159 vehicles during the peak hour. In addifion, the left turn pocket length and the north leg of the intersection in general should be sized to accommodate future traffic resulting from development of the SDG&E "back parcel" to the north of Cannon Court. As a result, peak hour traffic distributions and volumes from the "back parcel" need to be determined, added to Cannon Court volumes, and the turn pocket length increased accordingly. This may require relocating or combining driveway access to Cannon Court and lengthening the raised median island on the access road unless alternate solutions can be proposed. 3. The intersection of the emergency access road with the main access road should align with one of the driveways if possible. In addition, the plans do not show a gate at the north end of the emergency access road. Will a gate be provided at this location? 4. The Cannon Court access road intersects Cannon Road at an angle to Avenida Encinas. An access road alignment that results in a perpendicular intersection with Cannon Road is preferred to ensure the orderiy flow of traffic across Cannon Road between the north and south legs ofthe intersecfion. Feel free to call me at x2745 if you have any questions. DAVID STILLMAN, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section C: Public Works Director Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Deputy City Engineer, Development Services Senior Civil Engineer, Land Development From: Frank Jimeno To: Barbara Kennedy Date: 7/27/00 12:29PM Subject: Cannon Ct: Traffic Generation After consultation with SANDAG, and concurrence from management, the following is the decision regarding the ADT generation for the "high tech" power piant iand use component in the parcels north of the Cannon Court project. The information provided by the applicant regarding traffic generation from the proposed Otay Mesa power plant is not acceptable because it cannot be verified by actual traffic counts. The Engineering Department will accept either of the following options: 1. The applicant shall submit actual traffic counts from a similar, existing "high tech" power plant in operation elsewhere. A traffic generation rate can then be established for use in this project. 2. A traffic generation rate of 30 ADT/acre may be used in lieu of option 1. The traffic generation rate adopted from the options above shall be used to evaluate the land use alternatives as previously discussed. Frank CC: Bob Wojcik; Bob Johnson; Gary Wayne; Skip Hammann city of Carisbad Planning Department FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 10,2000 TIME SENT: ^-S^ HK Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 9 TO: Dennis Cunningham COMPANY: Planning Systems PHONE #: 931-0780 FAX #: 931-5744 FROM: Barbara Kennedy DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760) 602- 4626 FAX: (760) 602-8559 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Please see the attached comments from Frank Jimeno regarding Cannon Court traffic study. Cover sheet, 1-1, 2-2, 3-1, 3-2, 4-1, 4-3, 4-4 • Return Fax 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, California 92008-7314 TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS for CANNON COURT Prepared for WEST DEVELOPMENT AND J.A. BUZA CORPORATION k- Revised May 31, 2000 © URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC PLANNING & ENGINEERING, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT 4540 Keamy Villa Road, Suite 106 San Diego, California 92123-1573 (619) 560-4911 Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. May 31, 2000 1.0 INTRODUCTION rban Systems Associates, Inc. was retained by the J.A. Buza Corporation and West Development, to evaluate possible traffic impacts from the development of an approximately five acre parcel with travel services uses on the north side of Cannon Road directly west of Interstate 5. Figure 1-1 shows the project location. The project consists ofa service station/market, a hotel, and a restaurant. In order to evaluate possible project traffic impacts. Existing, Existing Plus Project, Short-Term Future (Year 2005) and Buildout (Year 2020) conditions were evaluated. Year 2005 and Buildout traffic volumes were estimated using the San Diego Area of Govemments (SANDAG) Regional Transportation Model. For the purposes of evaluation, the report is divided into the following sections: 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Methodology 3.0 Existing Conditions 4.0 The Project Trip Generation 5.0 Existing Plus Proj ect Conditions 6.0 Short-Term Fuhire (Year 2005) Conditions 7.0 Buildout (Year 2020) Conditions 8.0 Congestion Management Program 9.0 Conclusion and Recommendations 2598 cjd 1-1 2598-rpt-5.31.00 Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Mav 31. 2000 2.3 COMPUTER TRAVEL FORECASTS Computer travel forecasts used for the analysis of Year 2005 and buildout conditions were prepared by the City of Carlsbad and SANDAG. The 1994 Carlsbad Master EIR travel forecast, the FMZ 13/ Lego Travel/Forecast and the SANDAG Cities/County Year 2020 Transportation Forecast were referenced and the worst case used for evaluation. tJr^ /^^^ ^^^^ Me^;^ ^ i''^ C^^t^ 2.4 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE LOS PROCEDURES To determine an intersection peak hour Level of Service (LOS), as required by the City of Carlsbad u Growth Management Plan Guidelines, the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICM) method was used. Also, for Congestion Management Program evalution piuposes, intersection levels of service were calculated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) computer software methodology (the 1997 update to the 1994 HCM). 2598 cjd 2-2 2598-rpt-5.31.00 Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. May 31. 2000 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This section of the report evaluates existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on study area street segments (between intersections) and at intersections during AM and PM peak hours. Traffic volumes are based on recent daily roadway traffic coimts and peak period manual traffic counts at intersections. 3.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 3-1 shows existing average daily traffic volumes on street segments within the study area. These volumes were taken from recent traffic counts conduced for the City of Carlsbad 1999 Traffic Monitoring Program and recent traffic counts for project analysis. Figure 3-2 shows existing lane configurations for street segments and intersections within the study area. Table 3-1 includes existing street segment levels of service based on the highest peak hour flow per land and a per lane capacity of 1800 VPHPL. As shown, all street segments currently operate acceptably. W/U /fU^f /Js'-V^i^'^y^r///C fO^^////, 2598 cjd cjd 3-1 2598-rpt-5.31.00 / Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Mav 31, 2000 21,000 13,400 7.000 18,800 LE(gBND XXXXX - Sonne: CvUbtd 1999TnflEb Momtoifag Ptogcna XX.XXX - Somoe: SANDAO1999 TnfBc Vohnan Repoit XX|XXX ™p«iinft» FIGURE 3-1 Cannon Court Existing Average Daily TrafEic Volumes CO-H 258a-FIgJ-1.i*»g 2598 cjd 3-2 2598-rpt-5.31.00 Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Mav 31. 2000 4.0 THE PROJECT TRIP GENERATION The project on 5.13 acres will consist of a 7,770 square foot quality restaurant, a 4,800 square foot sit down high tumover restaurant, an 86 room resort hotel, and a gas station with sixteen fueling stations and mini mart. Project access will be by way of a private sfreet at the north leg of the Cannon Road/ Avenida Encinas intersection. Figure 4-1 shows the proposed project site plan as Table 4-1 includes the driveway trip generation expected from the site. As shown, the project is expected to generate 4,813 average daily trips (ADT) with 309 trips occurring in the AM peak hour (split 159 inbound and 151 outbound) and 402 occurring in the PM peak hour (split 216 inbound and 187 outbound). Also shown in this table are two options for possible trip generation from the SDG&E parcel north ofthe project site, owned by NRG and zoned for public utility, uses. The project driveway through the site has been designed to accommodate possible additional traffic in the future from the NRG parcel. Since uses are not currently plarmed for the NRG site, visitor commercial uses were assumed. Also not presently known is the size of potential development, so two options were evaluated. ^oToption^^ assumes 2 acres of visitor commercial use, an average daily traffic volume of 800 ADT and peak hour volumes of 24 AM trips and 80 PM trips was assumed for the powerplant site. ^oroption2^ maximum development parcel of 12.5 acres was assumed. Again, visitor commercial land uses were used, which franslates to fraffic generation of 5,000 ADT with 150 and 500 AM and PM peak trips respectively. 2598 cjd 4-1 2598-rpt-5.31.00 Cannon Court Revised Submittal ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Mav 31, 2000 TABLE 4-1 Project Trip Generation Use Amount Trip Rate* ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Use Amount Trip Rate* ADT %* # In/Out* In Out %* # In/Out* In Out Restaurant A 4,800 SF 160 /KSF 768 8 61 5 : 5 31 31 8 61 6 : 4 37 25 (Sit down, high tumover) Restaurant B 7,770 SF 100 SF 777 1 8 6 : 4 5 3 8 62 7 : 3 44 18 (Quality Sit dcwn) Gas Station 16 STA 160 /STA 2,560 8 205 5 : 5 102 102 9 230 5 : 5 115 115 (With Mini-Mart) Resort 86 RMS 8 /RM 888 8 34 6 : 4 21 14 7 48 4 : 6 19 29 Hotel rotate 4,813 309 159 151 409 216 187 SANDAG, July 1998, Traffic Generation Rati Remaining SDG&E Property Use Amount Trip Rate* ADT AM Peak Hour PMPeak Hour Use Amount Trip Rate* ADT %* In/Out* In Out %* In/Out* In Out /y Option 1 \ ( Option 2 J 2 Acres 12.5 Acres 400 /Acre 400 /Acre 3 3 24 150 5 : 5 5 : 5 12 75 12 75 10 10 80 500 5 : 5 5 : 5 40 250 40 250 Total Project + SDG&E AM PM ADT In Ont In Out Option 1 171 163 256 227 Option 2 234 226 466 437 2598 cjd 4-3 2598-rpt-5.31.00 Cannon Court ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Revised Submittal Mav 31. 2000 Figure 4-2 shows the project only average daily and peak hour fraffic assigned to the adjacent street system based on the directional distribution percentages also shown in this figure. The dfrectional distribution percentages are based on existing intersection fraffic flow and engineering judgement. The volumes shown in these figures , which includes the project and option 1 trip generation, are used in the following sections ofthis report for the identification of possible project only fraffic impacts. 2598 cjd 4-4 2598-rpt-5.31.00 City of Carisbad Planning Department FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 11, 2000 TIME SENT: 7 = Yf at^ Number of Pages Being Transmitted (Including Cover Sheet): 3 TO: Dennis Cunningham COMPANY: Planning Systems PHONE #: 931-0780 FAX #: 931-5744 FROM: Barbara Kennedy DEPT.: PLANNING PHONE: (760)602-4626 FAX: (760) 602-8559 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: NCTD comments for Cannon Court. • Return Fax 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carisbad, California 92008-7314 July 7, 2000 NCTD City of Carisbad Project Planner Barbara Keimedy 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92054 RE: Cannon Court (SDP00-09/CUP99-30/CUP00-31/PUD00-109) The North County Transit District (NCTD) reviewed the above referenced project and has the following comments: Existing Service Currently NCTD's bus route 301 provides daily bus service along Avenida Encinas and on the westem end of Cannon Rd, west of 1-5. The service is provided bi-directional, twice in the A.M. and once in the P.M. The purpose if these three trips are to service the existing business park along Avenida Encinas. Future Service NCTD is currently in the process of obtaining funds to support a reverse commute Coaster Connection shuttle bus (Routes 401/402). This service would include two shuttle buses. One shuttle would service the Business Park off of Armada Dr, located northwest of Lego Land. The other shuttle would service the business parks along the Palomar Airport Rd corridor. These two shuttles would be timed specifically to meet with connecting reverse commute Coaster trains during weekday momings and evenings. NCTD's strategic business plan, Fast Forward, is proposing to provide fixed route bus service along Cannon Rd. This conceptual route would provide access to Poinsettia Coaster Station, Carlsbad Village Transit Station, Encinitas Transit Station and to Coast Hwy 101 (Carlsbad Boulevard). This route would run on a 60 minutes frequency in both directions. Bus Stop Improvements NCTD recommends that minimum bus stop improvements be implemented westbound farside of Avenida Encinas, just west of the private street associated with this project. These improvements need to include cormecting sidewalks and an 8-foot deep by 5-foot wide ADA compliant boarding pad. NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 0 Mission Avenue, Oceanside, CA 92054 76096 7-2828 Pedestrian Circulation It is advisable that this development continues to provide the ability for pedestrians to walk to and from Cannon Road by walkway or pedestrian dedicated pathway. Providing a pedestrian friendly environment will help to reduce the potential of automobile pedestrian conflicts and promote the use of public transit. Thank you for providing NCTD the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me at (760) 967-2859 or email me at mdanev(5),nctd.org Sincerely, Michael B Daney Transportation Planner MBD:plng 5 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO 7/7/ DATE: June 21, 2000 REVISED PLAN TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY *FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH *BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY *COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT *PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - HEIDI HEISTERMAN * WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT *NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC - BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN Caltrans *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/ NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 PROJECT TITLE: CANNON COURT APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: BUZA J.A. 86 ROOM HOTEL, 16-PUMP CAS STATION W/FOOD MART, i|800. SF RESTAURANT, AND 7770 SF RESTAURANT LOCATED Please review and sub^rffit^w%eTcS?n^fffe'-ntr t^o^ ^'A^&M°'i^i^lSN^yQ^ '^^tf^^ '• Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by ,»Jtily 30. 2QOO. (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY at 602- 4626 . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: y7 ^/rjdH^ c: File iiU— PLANS ATTACHED FRM0020 2/00 From: Debbie Fountain To: Barbara Kennedy Date: 7/28/00 3:48PM Subject: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 Hi Barbara. Because the subject Cannon Court project is located in the second redevelopment area, the project plans were forwarded to the Housing and Redevelopment Office for review and comment. Since the project must comply with all existing City standards and no separate standards have yet been established for the 2nd redevelopment area, I have no specific comments on matters related to standards. I have simply a general comment that I think the project is impressive in terms of the uses proposed and the design of the buildings. 1 always think architects can do even more to break up roof lines, and step back buildings (specifically the hotel). As currently designed, however, 1 do think the project will be visually appealing. Do we have any idea who the operator will be for the hotel, or types of restaurants? Based on the results of the Tourism Impact Assessment, the recommendation is to encourage more upscale and full-service hotels (rather than limited or business-oriented) and more upscale restaurants especially near the coast. We should encourage the developer to consider these needs in their project. There is obviously a need for additional gas stations in the City and this seems like the perfect location for one. However, the project does seem very intense in terms of uses. I am wondering whether or not circulation will ultimately be a problem for the site. With 2 restaurants, a hotel and a gas station and mini-mart, it seems like the project has great potential to generate a lot of traffic into and around the site. I am sure Engineering will be addressing these circulation and traffic issue. I just thought 1 would put my "2 cents worth" into the discussion! Thanks for the opportunity to review and comment on the project. Ifyou have any questions or comments for me, give me a call. Thanks! GC: Lori Rosenstein jl r CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: June 21, 2000 REVISED PLAN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY *FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH *BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYAE *PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - HEIDI HEISTERMAN * WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT *NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC < BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN Caltrans *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/ NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 PROJECT TITLE: CANNON COURT APPLICANT: BUZA J.A. PROPOSAL: 86 ROOM HOTEL, 16-PUMP GAS STATION W/FOOD MART, '*800SF RESTAURANT, AND 7770 SF RESTAURANT LOCATED sub%\l/rSte^cS?n^^?fe'•ntl^S^^ ^"^^-^^^ '"^ Please review and submit wrmeh"comments' to"" ^'/l^iP^feyt^'fei^iiN^'y^^^ ^'^tf^^ Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by July 30. 2000. (If vou have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY at 602- t626 . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: File PLANS ATTACHED FRM0020 2/00 Date: July 11, 2000 To: Planning Department From: Carisbad Police Department's, Crime Prevention Unit Subject: Plan Review-SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/ PUD 00-109 Plan Review Recommendations Carisbad Police Department's Crime Prevention Unit has provided the following optimal security recommendations. The purpose of this document is to safeguard property and public welfare by regulating and reviewing the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures. The standards used in this document represent model statewide standards. The recommendations are presented in two sections, site considerations and building recommendations. Part One • Areas of Concern ' Hotel Rear Parking Concerns are caused by the lack of surveillance into the area. Hotel patrons wouid provide the only surveillance. There is no natural surveillance from the street or other businesses and the area is remote. The vehicles would be vulnerable to burglary at night while the patrons sleep. ' Parking Garage. Parking garages are usually areas of security concern. A lack of sun/eillance coupled with a secluded area make a garage a good target for vehicle related crimes. Adding to this, the entrance to the garage is in the back of the hotel and away form areas of activity and natural surveillance. . Security cameras, controlled access, good sight lines and adequate lighting can help to alleviate these issues. Security cameras, controlled access, good sight lines and adequate lighting can help to alleviate these issues. • Food Mart Research shows that good cash handling procedures, visibility and inaccessibility are keys to the security of this type of business. The fact that the entrance and surrounding streets provide quick access to and from the mart increases the robbery risk. Further, surveillance is limited as the access is from a side street and not the main street. Enhancing surveillance through effective landscaping on the Cannon Street side of the building and adequate lighting can aide security efforts. Finally, good cash handling policies are the most effective deterrence to robbery. • Site Issues ' Building Placement Piace structures on the land with consideration to surveillance. Identify burms and other areas of land that might deter vision into important areas. Place the important entrance or security areas with clear vision to the main street. Do not hide areas with solid fencing or landscaping. Use landscaping, fencing and ground cover to create territoriality for the individual properties. Symbolic lines can be drawn deterring public activity. The amount of territory definition can increase as the public gets closer to the building, making the area uncomfortable for loitering and tampering. • Lighting Illuminate aisles, passageways, and recesses related to and within the building complex with a maintained minimum of twenty-five one hundredths (.25) of a foot-candle at the ground level during the hours of darkness. Protect lighting devices with weather and vandalism-resistant covers. Protect open parking lots with a maintained minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light on the parking surface during the hours of darkness. White lights provide better vision and surveillance capabilities than do yellow lights. Yellow lights prevent loitering because they are monochromatic. Protect lighting devices with weather and vandalism covers. Ensure landscape and building design does not take away from minimum standards of lighting. Give the main entry and rear dock areas additional lighting during hours of darkness. ' Light Sources Incandescent or Halogen lamps are short-lived and fairly expensive to operate. They put out a bright light and are easy to control. They are compact. Fluorescent lamps are less expensive to operate than Incandescent or Halogen and have a longer life. They put out a good light but are a little more difficult to direct. They are larger than the previous two. Mercury Vapor lamps are less expensive to operate than incandescent or halogen and have a long life. Their color is not as good as fluorescent but they are easier to direct and control. They are compact. Metal Halide iamps require fewer fixtures to illuminate an area but have a shorter life than Mercury Vapor. They provide an excellent light and are easy to direct and control. They are compact. High Pressure Sodium Vapor lamps require few fixtures and have a low operating cost. The fixtures are expensive to purchase. They put out an excellent light and are easy to direct and control. They are compact. Low Pressure Sodium Lamps have the lowest operating cost of all the lamps. The fixtures are expensive but few are required. They put out a yellow light and the clarity is not good. They are easy to direct and control. They are longer in size. ' Landscaping The police department recommends that the exterior landscaping be kept at a minimal height and fullness, giving police, security services and the general public surveillance capabilities of the area. Plant low-profile bushes and shrubs, not exceeding three feet in height. Create space behA/een the bottom of trees and the tops of bushes or shrubs. Make sure tree canopies are not lower than five feet. Do not plant landscaping higher than three feet in front of windows or in parking areas. Landscaping should not detract from lighting. Keep entranceways clear of clutter. Design perimeter landscaping and burms to allow vision into the property, particularly parking areas and building access doors. Apply security plants where necessary to prevent loitering and tampering. For further information on security landscaping, contact the police department's Crime Prevention Unit at (760) 931-2105. ' Addressing Display street numbers prominently on the street side of the building. Place the number in a position that is easily visible to emergency vehicles, hasting their approach. Make sure the numbers are no less than four (4) inches in height and are a contrasting color to the building to which they are attached. Illuminate the numbers at night. Part Two • Building Reconnmendations • Doors The police department recommends that hollow steel doors be a minimum sixteen (16) U.S. gauge and have sufficient reinforcement to maintain the designed thickness ofthe door when any locking device is installed. Only use glass doors with fully tempered glass or rated burglary resistant glazing. Protect all exterior doors with security hardware. Equip all doors with an astragal constructed of steel. Ensure the astragal is a minimum of .125 inch thick. The astragal covers and protects the opening between the door and doorframe or other door at the locking device. The purpose of the astragal is to protect the locking device from a cutting or prying attack. Attach the astragal to the outside by welding or with non-removable bolts spaced apart on not more than ten-inch centers. Construct the jamb of all aluminum frame-swinging doors to withstand 1600 pounds of pressure in both a vertical distance of three inches and horizontal distance of one inch each side of the strike, to prevent violation of the strike. Equip hotel room doors with a viewer and deadbolt lock. Equip hotel room sliding glass doors with a security pin. Equip rear doors used for shipping and receiving and employee entrances with a viewer. Place gas station cashier counters with a clear vision of the door as well as allowing surveillance of the store and area outside the store. ' Windows Equip movable windows with security hardware and burglar resistant glazing. Cover other vulnerable non-movable windows with burglar resistant glazing. Windows of commercial buildings are vulnerable to breakage during the hours of darkness, when the business is non-operational. ' Roofs Secure all roof openings. ' Trash Enclosures Position the trash enclosures away from areas of shipping and receiving. • Alarms The police department recommends a robbery/panic alarm for the gas station, especially if it will be in h/venty-four hour operation. This information is a representation of information gathered on a statewide level. The purpose is to provide effective and consistent information throughout California and at times the Nation. If you would like additional assistance concerning building security or employee security issues, please contact the Crime Prevention Unit at (760) 931-2105. Reviewed by: Jodeene R. Sasway Crime Prevention Specialist Carlsbad Police Department (619) 931-2195 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: Z\ JqA-e. ItQJ) REVISED PLAN X TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY *FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH *BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY •COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT *PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - HEIDI HEISTERMAN * WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT — *NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC - BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN^ *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS 2si^siofe•^ ^• FROM: Planning Department 'S..D. 'TI ll o REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-0^ / Au9 ^-So/ NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. CA)P ^^""ht j (ib' l(fi{ PROJECTTITLE: C^W>tOA CbUfH" APPLICANT: X iSu'Z/w PROPOSAL: Please review and submit written comments tl5 "[fi!^rfa^'^A. the Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by -Jy^ii (If vou have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact at 602- . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: . c: File PLANS ATTACHED FRM0020 2/00 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: June 21, 2000 REVISED PLAN TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY *FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH *BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY •COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYA •PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - HEIDI HEISTERMAN * WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT •NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC - BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN Caltrans •ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/ NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 PROJECT TITLE: CANNON COURT APPLICANT: BUZA J.A. PROPOSAL: 86 ROOM HOTEL, 16-PUMP GAS STATION W/FOOD MART, 4800 SF RESTAURANT, AND 7770 SF RESTAURANT LOCATED PK. TH5. NW_co_rner..of .the ^^<g|S;^^t^o'j^f^N^y'QN RD D 1-5 subrhit writeh" coTfihfients" to" Please review and Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by July 30. 2000. (If vou have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY at 602- 4626 . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: '6 c: File PLANS ATTACHED FRMOO2O 2/00 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: June 21, 2000 REVISED PLAN TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT •POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY •FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH •BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY •COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT •PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - HEIDI HEISTERMAN • WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC - BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN Caltrans •ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/ NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. CUP 99-31 / PUD 00-109 PROJECT TITLE: CANNON COURT APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: BUZA J.A. 86 ROOM HOTEL, 16-PUMP GAS STATION W/FOOD MART, 4800 SF RESTAURANT, AND 7770 SF RESTAURANT LOCATED Please review and sub^rat\l/riteTcS?n^f?i¥ntf tS^" i^^fe^M^'fe^f^N^'^Q^ '^'^tf^^^ Project Planner in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, by July 30. 2000. (If vou have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY at 602- 4626 . The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS c: File PLANS ATTACHED FRM0020 2/00 To: BariDara Kennedy From: Principal Building Inspecti Date: 6/22/2000 Re: Cannon Court Application Comments There are a few comments I have regarding this site Barbara. I have relayed them veriDally to Kurt @ McArdle Associates on June 22, 2000. Most of them relate to disabled access requirements on the site. I'll try to summarize them here for you as well. Because the parcel is being subdivided into separate lots, each lot must be provided with accessible pari<ing on its own. For instance, the hotel has 119 spaces and needs a minimum of four accessible spaces. Lot 3 needs 6 accessible spaces. In total, the site will need twice as much accessible pari<ing. The parking spaces have to be dispersed to all the primary entrances for each building, including the underground partying structure. They don't show any accessible pari<ing underground, and they have to provide some in the garage. This presents a waterfall architectural challenge for some parking garages and three story buildings. Van accessible parking stnjctures have to be a net clear 8'2". When they figure out where the fire sprinkler and plumbing piping hang and the ventilation ducting is routed, they frequently njn out of height. This could directly affect the eventual building height, which looks like ifs stretched to the maximum allowable. I suggested to the architect they review this very carefully. There is little latitude after the fact when they cut it that close height-wise. The paridng spaces also have to the closest paricing spaces on an accessible route to the building entrances. Their architect should review this as well. I see there is a freeway sign on site. I don't know how the cun'ent sign moratorium affects the entitlement process, but they cannot currently get a sign permit for a sign that tall. Lastly, there is some wood trim on the service station canopy. That will have to be fire-retardant treated lumber or non-combustible materials (something that looks like wood). Cun-ent code prohibits combustible wood on fuel dispensing canopies. As I mentioned, I relayed this already to the architect's representative. Hopefully they clear it up priorto building pennit. CHAP. 11B, DIV. II 1127B 1127B.S 1998 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE D;V/s/on II—SITE ACCESSIBILITY SECTION 1127B — EXTERIOR ROUTES OF TRAVEL 1127B.1 General Site development and grading shall be de- signed to provide access to all entrance.^ and exterior ground- floor exits, and access to normal paths of travel, and where necessary to provide access, shall incorporate pedestrian ramps, • curb ramps, etc. When more than one building or facility is located • on a site, accessible routes of travel shall be provided between- buildings and accessible site facilities. The accessible route of travel shall be the most practical direct route betiveen accessible building entrances, accessible site facilities and the accessible en- trance to the site. EXCEPTIONS: I. Where the enforcing agency determines that compHance with these regulations would create an unreasonable hard- ship because of topography, natural barriers, etc., an exception may be granted when equivalent facilitation is provided through the use of other methods and materials. 2. In existing buildings, this section shall not apply in those condi- tions where, due to legal or physical constraints, the site of the project would not allow compliance with these regulations or equivalent faci- litation without creating an unreasonable hardship. NOTE: See Section 101.17.11. Item 4. 1127B.2 Design and Construction. When accessibility is re- quired by this section, it shall be designed and constructed in accordance with this Building Code. See Section 1114B.} fora list of applicable sections. 1I27B.3 Signs. At every primary public entrance and at every major junction along or leading to an accessible route of travel, there shall be a sign displaying the intemational symbol of acces- sibility. Signs shall indicate the direction to accessible building entrances and facilities and shall comply with the requirements found in Sections 1I17B.5 through 1U7B.5.10. 1127B.4 Outside Stairways. Where stairways occur outside a building, refer to Sections 1006.17 of the 1995 California Build- ing Code, 1120A.4.3 and 1133B.4.4. 1127B.S Curb Ramps. 1. General. Curb ramps shall be constructed at each comer of street intersections and where a pedestrian way crosses a curb. The preferred and recommended location for curb ramps is in the center of the crosswalk of each street comer Where it is necessary to locate a curb ramp in the center of the curb retum and the street surfaces are marked to identify pedestrian crosswalks, the lower end of the curb ramp shall terminate within such crosswalk areas. See Figure 11B-20C, Case E. 2. Width of curb ramps. Curb ramps shall be a minimum of 4 feet (1219 mm) in width and shall lie, generally, in a single sloped plane, with a minimum of surface warping and cross slope. 3. Slope of curb ramps. The slope of curb ramps shall not ex- ceed 1 unit vertical to 12 units horizontal (8.33% slope). Transi- tions from ramps to walks, gutters, or streets shall be flush and free of abmpt changes, except that curb ramps shall comply with Item 5 below. Maximum slopes of adjoining gutters, road surface im- mediately adjacent to the curb ramp, or accessible route shall not exceed 1 unit vertical to 20 units horizontal (5% slope) within 4 feet (1219 mm) of the top and bottom of the curb ramp. The slope of the fanned or flared sides of curb ramps shall not exceed 1 unit vertical to 10 units horizontal (10% slope). 4. Level landing. A level landing 4 feet (1219 mm) deep shall be provided at the upper end of each curb ramp over its full width to permit safe egress from the ramp sutface, or the slope of the fanned or flared sides of the curb ramp shall not exceed 1 unit ver- tical to 12 units horizontal (8.33% slope). 5. Beveled lip. The lower end of each curb ramp shall have a V2 inch (13 mm) lip beveled at 45 degrees as a detectable way- finding edge for persons with visual impairment. 6. Finish. The surface of each curb ramp and its flared sides _ shall be stable, firm and slip-resistant and shall be of contrasting finish from that ofthe adjacent sidewalk. 7. Border. All curb ramps shall have a grooved border 12 inches (305 mm) wide at the level surface of the sidewalk along the top and each side approximately inch (19 mm) on center All curb ramps constructed berween the face ofthe curb and the street shall have a grooved border at the level surface ofthe sidewalk. See Figures 11B-19A and 11B-19B. 8. Detectable warnings. A curb ramp shall have a detectable waming that extends the full width arul depth of the curb ramp in- side the grooved border when the ramp slope is less than 1 unit vertical to 15 units horizontal (6.7% slope). Detectable wamings shall consist of raised truncated domes with a diameter of nomiruil 0.9 inch (22.9 mm) at the base tapering to 0.45 inch (11.4 mm) at the top, a height of nominal 0.2 inch (5.1 mm) and a center-to-cen- ter spacing of nominal 2.35 inches (59.7 mm) in compliance with Figure 11B-23A. "Nominal" here shall be in accordance with Section 12-31-102, State Referenced Standards Code. The detect- able waming shall contrast visually with adjoining surfaces, either light-on-dark or dark-on-light. The material used to pro- vide contrast shall be an integral part ofthe walking surface. The domes may be constmcted in a variety of methods, including cast in place or stamped, or may be part of a prefabricated surface treatment. 9. Obstructions. Curb ramps shall be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked cars. 10. Diagonal curb ramps. If diagonal (or comer-type) curb ramps have retumed curbs or other well-defined edges, such edges shall be parallel to the direction of pedestrian flow. The bot- tom of diagonal curb ramps shall have 48 inches (1219 mm) mini- mum clear space as shown in Figure 11 B-22 (c) arul (d). If diagonal curb ramps are provided at marked crossings, the 48-inch (1219 mm) clear space shall be within the markings (see Figure 11B-20B, Cases C arul D). If diagorutl curb ramps have flared sides, they shall also have at least a 24-inch-long (610 mm) segment of straight curb located on each side of the curb ramp and within the marked crossing [see Figure llB-22 (c)]. NOTES: 1. For additional curb details, see Figures 11B-19A and 11B-19B. 2. If distance from curb to back of sidewalk is too short to accommo- date ramp and a 4-foot (1219 mm) platform as in Figure IIB-20A, Case A, the sidewalk may be depressed longitudinally as in Figure IIB-20A, Case B, or Figure 11B-20B, Case C, or may be widened as in Figure IIB-20B, Case D. 3. If sidewalk is less than 5 feet (1524 mm) wide, the full width ofthe sidewalk shall be depressed as shown in Figure I1B-20B, Case C. 4. As an altemate to Figure 11B-20A, Case A, one ramp may be placed in the center ofthe curb retum as in Figure 11B-20C, Case E. 5. When ramp is located in center of curb retum, crosswalk configu- ration musl be similar to that shown on the plan to accommodate wheelchairs. (See Figure IIB-22.) 6. If planting area widlh is equal to or greater than ramp length, ramp side slope dislance equals 3 feet (914 mm). (See Figure IIB-20D, Case G.) 7. For Figure I1B-20C, Case F and Figuit IIB.20D, Case G. the longitudinal portion of the sidewalk may need lo be depressed as shown in Figure IIB-20A, Case B. 8. If locaied on a curve, the sides of the ramp need not be parallel, bul the minimum widlh ofthe ramp shall be 4 feet (1219 mm). 1-134.34 1898 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE^ CHAP. 11B, DIV. II 1127B.S 1129B.4 9. The ramp shall have a 12 inch-wide (305 mm) border with inch (6 mm) grooves approximately % inch (19 mm) on center. See grooving delail. Figure 11B-20D, Case H. SECTION 11288 — PEDESTRIAN GRADE SEPARATIONS (OVERPASSES AND UNDERPASSES) Pedestrian ramps on pedestrian grade separations shall comply with the reguirements of Section 1133B.5 for ramps. Cross slopes of walking surfaces shall be the minimum possible and shall not exceed ^/^ inch (6 mm) per foot (2.083% gradient). The slope of any appreciably warped walking surface shall not ex- ceed 1 unit vertical in 12 units horizontal (8.33% slope) in any di- rection. Where pedestrian grade separations cross streets or other vehicular traffic ways, and where a street level crossing can rea- sonably and safely be used by persons with physical disabilities, there shall be provided conforming curb ramps arul a usable path- way. EXCEPTIONS: I. When the grade differential of the walking sur- face ofa pedestrian grade separation exceeds 14 feet (4267 mm) due to required height clearance and grade condilions, and the enforcing agency finds that because of right-of-way restrictions, topography or natural barriers, wheelchair accessibility or equivalent facilitation would create an unreasoruible hardship, such accessibility need not be provided. However, the requirements in these regulations relating 10 other types of mobility shall be complied with. 2. For existing facilities, this section shall not apply where, due to legal or physical constraints, the sile of the projecl will not allow com- pliance with these regulations or equivalent facilitation without creat- ing an unreasonable hardship. NOTE: See Section 101.17.11, Item 4. SECTION 1129B — ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED 1129B.1 General. Each lot or parking stmcture where parking is provided for the public as clients, guests or employees, shall provide accessible parking as required by this section. Accessible parking spaces serving a particular building shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible entrance. In parking facilities that do not serve a par- ticular building, accessible parking shall be located on the short- est accessible route of travel to an accessible pedestrian entrance of the parking facility. In buildings with multiple accessible en- trances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located closest to the accessible entrances. Table llB-6 establishes the number of accessible parking spaces re- quired. EXCEPTION: This subsection shall not apply 10 existing facilities where compliance with local ordinances precludes satisfying the above requirements or of providing equivalent facilitation unless a change of occupancy occurs. 1I29B.2 Less Than Five Spaces. When less than five parking spaces are provided at buildings and facilities subject to these reg- ulations, one shall be 14 feet (4267 mm) wide and lined to provide a 9-foot (2743 mm) parking area and a 5-foot (1524 mm) loading and unloading area. However, there is no requirement that the space be reserved exclusively or identified for use by persons with disabilities only. 1129B.3 Medical Care Outpatient Facilities. At facilities pro- viding medical care and other services for persons with mobility impairments, parking spaces complying with this section shall be provided in accordance with Table 11 B-6 except asfollows: 1. Outpatient units and facilities. Ten percent of the total number of parking spaces provided serve each such outpatient unit or facility. 2. Units and facilities tliat specialize in treatment or services for persons with mobility impairments. Twenty percent of the to- tal number of parking spaces provided serve each such unit or facility.. TABLE 11 B-6—SPACES REQUIRED Establishes the numt>er of accessible parking spaces required. TOTAL NUUBEfl OF PARKING SPACES IN LOT OR GAflAGE M/N/MUM REOUIHED NUMBER OF SPACES 1-25 1 26-50 2 51-75 3 76-100 4 101-150 5 151-200 6 201-300 7 301-400 8 401-500 9 501-1,000 * 1,001 and over ** *Two percent of total. **Twenty plus one for each 100, or fraction thereof over 1,001. 1129B.4 Parking Space Size. Accessible parking spaces shall be located as near as practical to a primary entrance and shall be sized asfollows: 1. Dimensions. Where single spaces are provided, they shall be 14 feet (4267 mm) wide arul outlined to provide a 9-foot (2743 mm) parking area and a 5-foot (1524 mm) loading and unloading access aisle on the passenger side of the vehicle. When more than one space is provided in lieu of providing a 14-foot-wide (4267 mm) space for each parking space, nvo spaces can be provided within a 23-foot-wide (7010 mm) area lined to provide a 9-foot (2743 mm) parking area on each side ofa 5-foot (1524 mm) load- ing and unloading access aisle in the center The minimum length of each parking space shall be 18 feet (5486 mm). See Figure 11B-18A. 2. Van space(s). One in every eight accessible spaces, but not less than one, shall be served by an access aisle 96 inches (2438 mm) wide minimum arul shall be designated van accessible as re- quired by Section 1129B.5. All such spaces may be grouped on one level ofa parking structure. C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A ^ C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C c A C A C A C A I I A C A C C A ^ C A C A C A C 1-134.35 CHAP. 11B, DIV. 11 1129B.4 1132B:1 1998 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C ^ A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C $ A C A C A C A C A C A C A _ C t ^ . A : ^ c It c A C A C A C A C _ A t X C A C t i 3. Arrangement of parking space. In each parking area, a bumper or curb shall be provided and located to prevent en- croachment of cars over the required width of walkways. Also, the space shall be so located that persons with disabilities are not compelled to wheel or walk behind parked cars other than their own. Pedestrian ways which are accessible to persons with dis- abilities shall be provided from each such parking space to related facilities, including curb cuts or ramps as needed. Ramps shall not encroach into any parking space. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Ramps located at the front of accessible parking spaces may encroach into the length of such spaces when such en- croachment does not limit the capability ofa person with a disability to leave or enter a vehicle, thus providing equivalent facilitation. See Figures 11B-18A through 11B-18C. 2. Where the enforcing agency determines that compliance with any regulation of this section would create an unreasonable hardship, a variance or waiver may be granted when equivalent facilitation is pro- vided. 3. Parking spaces may be provided which would require a person with a disability to wheel or walk behind oiher than accessible parking spaces when the enforcing agency determines that compliance wilh these regulations or providing equivalent facilitation would create an unreasoruible hardship. NOTE: See Section 101.17.11, Item 4. 4. Slope of parking space. Surface slopes of accessible park- ing spaces shall be the minimum possible and shall not exceed 1 unit vertical to 50 units horizontal (2% slope) in any direction. 1I29B.5 Identification of Parking Spaces for Off-Street Park- ing Facilities. Each parking space reserved for persons with dis- abilities shall be identified by a reflectorized sign permanently posted immediately adjacent to and visible from each stall or space, consisting ofa profile view ofa wheelchair with occupant in white on dark blue background. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches (4516 mm^) in area arul, when in a path of travel, shall be posted at a minimum height of 80 inches (2032 mm) from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade. Signs may also be centered on the wall at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 36 inches (914 mm) from the parking space finished grade, ground or sidewalk Spaces complying with Section 1129B.4, Item 2 shall have an additional sign stating "Van-Accessible" mounted below the symbol of ac- cessibility. An additional sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place at each entrance to off-street parking facilities, or immediately adja- cent to and visible from each stall or space. The sign shall not be less than 17 inches by 22 inches (432 mm by 559 mm) in size with lettering not less than 1 inch (25 mm) in height, which clearly arul conspicuously states thefollowing: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates is- sued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephoning Blank spaces are to be filled in with appropriate information as a perrrument part ofthe sign. ^ In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each ac- ^ cessible parking space or stall shall have a sutface identification ^ duplicating either ofthe following schemes: c ^ 1. By outlining or painting the stall or space in blue and outlin- g ing on the ground in the stall or space in white or suitable contrast- A ing color a profile view depicting a wheelchair with occupant; or 2. By outlining a profile view ofa wheelchair with occupant in white on blue background. The profile view shall be located so that it is visible to a traffic enforcement officer when a vehicle is prop- erly parked in the space and shall be 36 inches high by 36 inches wide (914 mm by 914 mm). See Figures 11B-18A through 11B-18C. SECTION 1130B — PARKING STRUCTURES All entrances to and vertical clearances within parking structures shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 8 feet 2 inches (2489 mm) where required for accessibility to accessible parking spaces. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Where the enforcing agency determines lhal compliance with Seclion 1130B would create an unreasonable hard- ship, an exception may be granted when equivalent facilitation is pro- vided. 2. This section shall nol apply lo existing buildings where the enforc- ing agency determines that, due to legal or physical constraints, com- pliance with these regulations or equivalent facilitation would create an unreasonable hardship. See Section 101.17.11, Item 4. SECTION 1131B — PASSENGER DROP-OFF AND LOADING ZONES 1131B.1 Location. When provided, passenger drop-off and loading zones shall be located on accessible route of travel. 1131B.2 Passenger Loading Zones. 1. GeneraL Where provided, one passenger drop-off and loading zone shall provide an access aisle at least 60 inches (1524 mm) wide and 20 feet (6096 mm) long adjacent arul parallel to the vehicle pull-up space. Such zones shall be located on a sutface with a slope not exceeding 1 unit vertical in 50 units horizontal (2% slope). If there are curbs between the access aisle and the ve- hicle pull-up space, a curb ramp shall be provided. 2. Vertical Clearance. Provide minimum vertical clearance of 114 inches (2896 mm) at accessible passenger loading zones and along at least one vehicle access route to such areas from site en- trances and exits. 11318.3 Valet Parking. Valet parking facilities shall provide a passenger loading zone complying with Section 1131B.2 above and shall be located on an accessible route to the entrance ofthe facility. The parking space requirements of Sections 1129B through 1130B apply to facilities with valet parking. 1131B.4 Bus Stop Pads and Shelters. Where provided, provide bus stop pads 96 inches (2438 mm) long (measured parallel to curb or road edge) to the maximum extent allowed by legal or site constraints. Bus stop pads shall connect to an accessible route. Newly constructed bus stop pads must provide a square curb sur- face between the pad and road or other detectable waming. Bus stop pads shall be at same slope as roadway in the direction parallel to roadway, arul maximum 2 percent slope perpendicular to roadway. Where provided, provide bus stop shelters installed so as to per- mit a wheelchair user to enter the shelter and access a clear floor area of 30 by 48 inches (762 mm by 1219 mm), completely within the shelter. Bus stop shelters shall connect to an accessible route and to bus stop pads. SECTION 1132B — OUTDOOR OCCUPANCIES I132B.1 General. Outdoor occupancies shall be accessible as required in this chapter See also the general requirements listed in Section 1114B.1.1. 1-134.36 f998 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE^ CHAP. IIB, DIV. I 1125B.1 1126B by Section 101.17.11, at least one of each type shall comply with this section. Additional storage may be provided outside of the reach ranges shown in Figure 11 BSD. 1125B.2 Clear Floor Space. A clear floor space at least 30 inch- es by 48 inches (762 mm by 1219 mm) complying with Section 1118B.4 that allows either a forward or parallel approach by a person using a wheelchair shall be provided at accessible storage C facilities. A 1125B.3 Height. Accessible storage spaces shall be within at A least one of the reach ranges specified in Sections 1118B.5 arul A 1118B.6. Clothes rods shall be a maximum of 54 inches (1372 mm) A from the floor for a side approach (See Figure 11B-5D). Where the distance from the wheelchair to the clothes rod or shelf exceeds 10 inches (254 mm), as in closets without accessible doors, the height arul depth to the rod or shelf shall comply with Figure 11B-5D. 1125B.4 Hardware. Hardware for accessible storage facilities shall comply with Section 1117B.6. Touch latches and V-shaped pulls are acceptable. SECTION 1126B — VENDING MACHINES Install vending machines in compliance with Section 1117B.6, "Controls and Operating Mechanisms." 9 1-134.33 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services INITIAL PLAN REVIEW REPORT PROJECTNAME: CANNON COURT Date: 5-4-2000 Project number: CUP 9^30/31 Iiutial review: (Note: Tins coimneataiy identifies fire protectioii issues assodated v^ the project, and/or prescribes pecific corrections needed to adiieve Fire Departtnent approvaL) 1. Four additional fire hydrants must be provided 2. Fire flow requirement is 3000 gallons per minute and may be delivered from 2 fire hydrant sources. 3. The hotd and restaurant B must be protected by automatic fire ^rinUer systems. 4. Automatic fire sprinlder protection of restaurant A will be required if its area exceeds 5000 square feet CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services INITIAL PLAN REVIEW REPORT PROJECT NAME: CANNON COURT Date: 2-4-00 Project number: CUP 99-30/99-31 Initial review: (Note: This commentary identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) 1. Secondary access provided by means ofthe easement to the West ofthe property is acceptable. If gates are provided to restrict access from Cannon Road, they should be located 30 to 40 feet North from the edge of roadway and no parking signs provided. Road surface must be serviceable in all weather conditions and at least 20 feet in width. Road must be linked to hotel parcel by an all weather surface. 2. All buildings on the sites must be protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems. 3. Four fire hydrants will be required to serve the sites. Water system must be capable of delivering 3000 gallons per minute from two fire hydrants. t Carlsbad Municipal Water District 5950 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 438-3367 Memo TO: Barbara Kennedy, Planning FROM: Mikhail Ogawa, CMWD ^7*^ ^^tiCf^^ DATE: January 17, 2000 \ RE: Cannon Court-CDP 99030 and 99031 CMWD 99-224 ^^^C The following are repeat comments that were sent to Eric Munoz on December 3, 1999 regarding a preliminary review application by the owner: 1) The developer shall show all existing water, sewer and recycled water pipelines in Cannon Road on the Site Development Plan. 2) Any on-site public water pipeline(s) and fire hydrants shall be contained within a 20-foot wide easement dedicated to CMWD. No dead-end fire hydrant runs longer than 150 feet will be allowed, a "looped" water line system may be required. Developer shall coordinate with 3) Any landscaping shall be designed to be irrigated with recycled water in accordance with CMWD requirements. 4) Sewer service to this location shall be coordinated with CMWD, an interceptor sewer is located along the westem property boundary and within Cannon Road, odor will be an issue for connection to these facilities. The proposed sewer lateral(s) shall be shown on the Site Development Plan. 5) Water lateral(s) shall be shown on the Site Development Plan. 6) All public facilities shall be shown on public water improvement plans, if required. 7) The development shall be required to utilize recycled water in accordance with City Ordinances. The irrigation meter shall be located along Cannon Road and shown on the Site Development Plan and public improvement plans, as applicable. With regards to easements, see the attached drawing and please pass along to the developer. In addition, it appears from the landscaping plans that there are trees and bushes proposed in the public utility easements. No trees or bushes are allowed in CMWD easements. An example is the easement bisecting the property for which landscaping is planned, the trees or bushes will need to be relocated outside of the easement. Thank you. If you have any questions please call me at extension 7127. MCUP ^UP ANNUAL REVitiW SHEET FILE t 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 CASENAME: Cannon Court CASE NUMBER(S): CUP 99-30 APPROVING RESO NO(S). PC Reso. 4977,4978 CC Reso. # 2001-2009 PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: Barbara Kennedy PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? Q Yes If yes, check those that apply and explain below. I I Code Enforcement Q Police Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): None Conditions: M No I I Fire Prevention No alcohol sales in mini-mart w/o an amendment to the CUP. Q:\CED\PLANNlNG\ADMiN\TEMPLATES\MCUPANNUALREVlEWSHEET 02/1 1 REVIEW INFORMATION Has the permit expired? Q Yes |^ No Permit expires: Approved in Perpetuity Date of review: 7/10/2013 (Previous expiration date: 5/16/2011) Name: Debbie Vought, Business Manager Q Applicant Q Owner ^ Other If other, state title: *CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Debbie Vought (vote) Phone: 760-431-9190 Contact name (if different): Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: davough@westdevIlc.com (optional) *CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: West Development Phone: 760-431-9190 Contact name (if different): Debbie Vought Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: (optional) Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? ^ Yes Q 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: None Date planner completed follow-up review and conjfir^fed prbject compliance Planner Sisriature ^ Planner Signature Senior Planner Signature *Applicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. Q:\CED\PLANNING\ADMIN\TEMPLATES\MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 03/1 3 r MCUP & qgF ANNUAL REVIEj|^ 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 FROJECT FILE (ADMIN WILL FILE). PROJECT INFORMATION CASENAME: Cannon Court CASE NUMBER(S): CUP 99-30 APPROVING RESO NO(S). FC Reso. #^s 4977,4978 CC Reso. # 2001-2009 PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: Barbara Kennedv PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? Q Yes If yes, check those that apply and explain below. I I Code Enforcement Q Police Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): None Conditions: No alcohol sales in mini-mart w/o an amendment to the CUP. M No I I Fire Prevention Q:\CED\PLANNING\ADMIN\TEMPLATES\MCLIPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/1 1 REVIEW INFORMATIO Has the permit expired? Q Yes Dateof review: 5/29/2012 Name: Debbie Vought, Business Manager If other, state title: ^ No Permit expires: Approved in Perpetuity (Previous expiration date: 5/16/2011) • Applicant • Owner ^ Other •CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Debbie Vought (vote) Phone: 760-431-9190 Contact name (if different): Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: davough@westdevllc.com (optional) •CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: West Development Contact name (if different): Debbie Vought Phone: 760-431-9190 Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: (optional) Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? ^ Yes O 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: None Date planner completed follow-up review and confirmed project compliance: Planner Signatuife ' * Principal Planner Signature *AppIicant and owner information must be updated for annual review to be complete. Q:\CED\PLANNING\ADM1N\TEMPL-ATES\MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 02/1 1 MCUP & <||JP ANNUAL REVIE||f SHEET Pjj^p Qf)' 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 CASENAME: Cannon Court CASE NUMBER(S): CUP 99-30 APPROVING RESO NO(S). FC Reso. #'s 4977,4978 CC Reso. # 2001-2009 PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: Barbara Kennedy PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? Yes ^ No If yes, check those that apply and explain below. I I Code Enforcement Q Police Q Fire Prevention Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): None Conditions: No alcohol sales in mini-mart w/o an amendment to the CUP. H/ADMIN/TEMPLATE/MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 03/09 REVIEW INFORMATION Has the permit expired? Q Yes IXI Date of review: 5/27/2011 Name: Debbie Vought, Business Manager If other, state title: No Permit expires: Approved in Perpetuity (Previous expiration date: 5/16/2011) • Applicant • Owner ^ Other •CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Debbie Vought (vote) Phone: 760-431-9190 Contact name (if different): Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: davough@westdevIlc.com (optional) •CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: West Development Contact name (if different): Debbie Vought Phone: 760-431-9190 Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Ste 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mailing (if different): E-mail: (optional) Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? ^ Yes n 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: Please update owner address and add e-mail for applicant. Date planner completed follow-up review and confirmed project compliance: Plarmer Signattire I Principal Planner Signature * Applicant and owner information must be updated for armual review to be complete. H/ADMIN/TEMPLATE 03/09 • • PILE copv CITY OF ViCARLSBAD Planning Division www.carlsbadca.gov NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT EXTENSION April 13, 2011 West Development, LLC Attn: Debbie Vought 5796 Armada Drive, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - GANNON COURT - 4960 - 4990 AVENIDA ENCINAS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS NO. 4977 & 4978, CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2001-2009 This notice is to inform you that CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT located at 4960 - 4980 Avenida Encinas and originally conditioned to expire on May 16, 2011 is hereby extended without an expiration date by the Planning Director pursuant to Section 21.42.110(D) of the Cadsbad Municipal Code. While your Conditional Use Permit (CUP) no longer has an expiration date, the CUP will continue to be reviewed by the Planning Department on an annual basis to ensure continued compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. If at any time the department 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 Barbara Kennedy at (760) 602-4626. Sincerely, 2L?C DON NEU, AlCP Planning Director DN:BK:sm c: Dave DeCordova, Principal Planner File Copy - Data Entry/DMS 1535 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® MCUP & epp ANNUAL REVIE^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 CASENAME: Cannon Court CASE NUMBER(S): CUF 99-30 APPROVING RESO NO(S). PC Reso. #^s 4977,4978 CC Reso. # 2001-2009 PLANNER COMPLETING REVIEW: Barbara Kennedv PROJECT HISTORY Does project have a code complaint history? Q Yes If yes, check those that apply and explain below. I I Code Ertforcement Q Police Comments (include corrective actions taken and date compliance obtained): None M No I I Fire Prevention Conditions: No alcohol sales in mini-mart w/o an amendment to the CUF. H/ADMIN/TEMPLATE/MCUPANNUALREVIEWSHEET 03/09 EVIEVS^ INFORMATION Has the permit expired? Q Yes IXI Dateof review: 5/12/2010 Name: Debbie Vought, Business Manager If other, state title: No Permit expires: 5/16/2011 • Applicant • Owner ^ Other •CURRENT APPLICANT INFORMATION: Name: Debbie Vought Contact name (if different): Address: 5796 Armada Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: 760-431-9190 Mailing (if different): E-mail: (optional) •CURRENT OWNER INFORMATION: Name: West Development Phone: Contact name (if different): c/o Debbie Wall Address: 6005 Hidden Vallev Rd, Ste 290 Carlsbad, CA 92001 Mailing (if different): E-mail: (optional) Does project comply with conditions of resolution(s) and approved plans? ^ Yes n 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: None PERMIT EXPIRES NEXT YEAR, REVIEW IN MARCH 2011 AND SEND LETTER FOR APPROVAL IN FERFETUTITY OR EXTENSIONS REOUEST. Date planner corapleted follow-up review and confirmed project compliance: Planner SignatVre / Principal Fla Planner Signatiire / ' Principal Plarmer Signature *Applicant and owner iriformation must be updated for aimual review to be complete. H/ADMIN/TEMPU\TE 03/09 PROJECT REVIEW On May 8, 2007, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. Signed: c: File Copy Data Entry PROJECT REVIEW On May 3, 2006, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. ACTIONS/COMMENTS: \1^0<A '^a.\L Iv/ut^ -^Ack^ 2^ lisk^^ '^'^'^ ci^d^t-h'-^^ Signed: ^^^kM^^i^ -^^^l^^fuJj^ File Copy Data Entry PROJECT REVIEW On May 9, 2005, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. Signed: c: File Copy Data Entry PROJECT REVIEW On May 5, 2004, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. A CTIONS/COMMENTS: VAlA t^S^]flLcfi Signed: c: File Copy Data Entry PROJECT REVIEW On June 3, 2003, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. A CTIONS/COMMENTS: Signed: 'ParJM/^<^j[^'''^^ File Copy Data Entry PROJECT REVIEW On June 3, 2002, CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court was reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. 1. The project was found to be in compliance with all of the conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977, 4978 and City Council Resolution 2001-209 and no further action was taken. A CTIONS/COMMENTS: W <f.tur>^ Signed: _^ ^^j^rl^'p^^^J^ir^ c: File Copy Data Entry PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LA3900 FOUCY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM Hand Delivered June 26, 2001 To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Plaiming Department From: Dermis Cunningham, Planning Systems RE: Cannon Court Project Phasing Condition John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation Please review the wording that the Cannon Court project team proposes as it relates to the phasing of the project. We believe that the wording meets both the City's objectives as well as the Developer's objective. Please call with any questions. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • EAX (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@nctimes.net STATE OF tJALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPOfl ION AND HOUSING AGENCY GFtAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11, P.O. BOX 85406, MAIL STATION 50, SAN DIEGO, 92186-5406 Telephone: (619)688-6954 Fax: (619)688-4299 May 23, 2001 D-005 48.0 K.P. 77.2 SCH 2001021109 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 Dear Ms. Kennedy: We have reviewed the traffic consultant's response to our Freeway Operations Branch comments for Cannon Court - CUP 99-30. We continue to have concems regarding the proposed project and have provided our review comments below: • It has not been shown as stated on Page 7-1, 7.1 Street Segments (third paragraph) that".. .no significant project traffic impacts are expected at any intersection." • Page 2-2, Section 2-4, Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Procedures used is not adequate. Caltrans requires that all State owned signalized intersections be analyzed using the Intersecting Lane Vehicle (ILV) Procedures described in Topic 406 of the Caltrans 1995 Highway Design Manual. Using this method, the following results were obtained: Southbound 1-5 Ramps/Cannon Road Intersection Existing 2020 AM < 1200 1200-1500 (Unstable) PM < 1200 1200-1500 (Unstable) Northbound 1-5 Ramps/Cannon Road Intersection Existing 2020 AM < 1200 > 1500 (Overcapacity) PM < 1200 > 1500 (Over Capacity) As stated in the 1995 Highway Design Manual Table 406, <1200: Stable flow with slight, but acceptable delay 1200-1500: Unstable flow with considerable delays possible >1500: Stop-and-go operation with severe delay Ms. Barbara Kennedy May 23,2001 Page 2 • The following mitigation measures were stated in the Traffic Study: 1. The Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas intersection be signalized 2. Proposes two lane improvements with widening to four lanes at the signalized intersection of Cannon for the SDG&E back parcel 3. Should consider implementing an interconnect of the new project access traffic signal at Avenida Encinas and the freeway ramp 4. Should consider implementing a railroad preemption for the Avenida Encinas traffic signal 5. Should consider signing and striping with "KEEP CLEAR" pavement legends 6. Should consider special preemption phasing for the Avenida Encinas traffic signal 7. Should consider dual west to southbound left tums on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas None of the above measures mitigate the impacts at the Northbound 1-5 Ramps intersection with Cannon Road. • Mitigation measures for this intersection must be included in the Traffic Study. If certain traffic mitigation projects are identified as appropriate, then Caltrans supports the concept of "fair share" contributions on the part of the developer. Our contact person for 1-5 is Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager, at (619) 688-6610. Sincerely, A^BILL FIGGE, Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch City of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION May 21, 2001 J. A. Buza 16085 San Dieguito Rd., Ste. E 7 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT At the Planning Commission meeting of May 16, 2001, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 (Nielsen Absent) to RECOMMENDED APPROVAL (AS AMENDEDV The decision of the Planning Commission is advisory and will be forwarded to the City Council. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (760) 602-4600. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:BK:mh Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4977,4978 c: West Development, P. O. Box 8617, Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development June 13, 2001 Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad - Planning Dept. 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Fax (760) 602-8559 Re: Cannon Court- Cal trans. May 23,2001 letter Dear Barljara, I thought it would be a good idea to give you an update. Andy Schlaefli of Urban Systems (our traffic engineer) is doing everything possible to finalize any outstanding issues with Cal Trans, and is currently working on arranging a meeting with Cal Trans, which will be very helpful. As the Developer, I felt explaining my position would be beneficial. I can't pretend to understand all the complexities with traffic, but the intent of the letter is feirly clear. Cal Trans appears to have a iMig-term plan to improve the north bound on ramp, and wants our Development to contribute monies, for as they put it, our "Fair Share ". We want, and need to cooperate with Cal Trans. We all realize our Developmoit can only open after our trafBc signal is installed, and " Interconnected " with the Cal Trans signal at the bottom of the south bound off ramp. This connection will be the driving force for concluding an agreement with Cal Trans. We are prepared to contribute our " Fair Share ", but will need Cal Trans to establish an amount of money, and how this amount was established. Although we are going to contribute to additional trafiBc, it will be interesting to see what overall percentage our project will be, at" Build Out", considering all the other generators, such as Lego Land, Car Coimtry, Cannon Road East, etc. To establish our percentage, or dollar amount, I wonder if Cal Trans would share the amount of money, which the Inns of America (new hotel, south west comer. Cannon and Route 5) is contributing. With that information, we could easily establish our "Fair Share ". In conclusion, we will make every effort to finalize this issue as quickly as Cal Trans will allow, but the timing will be under their control. We wdll keep you informed of any communication or meetings we have with Cal Trans. Please call Andy (858) 560-4911, or me should you have any questions. Sincerely, John Buza cc: Andy Sdilaefli, Urlian Systems Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 June 12, 2000 City of Cadsbad Planning Department, ' 1635 Faraday Ave. . '\ - Carisbad, CA 92008-7314 \. Attention: Barbara Kennedy The Cannon Court Development group recently presented our neighbortiood, Tenramar, with their proposal. They proposed a 16-pump gas station, 2 restaurants, convenience store and a 80+ room hotel. I, along with my neighbors, have some concems regarding this project. The city has vowed not to let Carisbad tum into another Anaheim. However, I feel this project points us in that direction. The developer proposes a 16-pump gas station. Within one mile of Cannon Road, there are 11 existing gas stations and one already approved. The westem side of Carisbad is saturated with gas stations. Mike Howes stated they intended 2084 daHy trips to the gas station. However, based on the City's own traffic statistics show 9100-10000 cars travel in that area a day. I would highly doubt that 25% ofthe cars will stop and get gas within 11 other gas stations nearby. The developer stated that since the property was adjacent to the freeway, they are required to install a 60 foot sign and intend to stay open 24 hours a day. I fully understand progress, but I feel that a gas station would be better served in eastem Carisbad where there is a lack of gas stations. I am also concemed about the traffic flow in front of the property, the northwestem intersection of Cannon Road and Avenkta Encinas. Cunently there is a significant amount of traffic onto Cannon Road from Avenida Encinas with the large number of businesses and restaurants located there. In addition, the freeway off ramp feeds onto Cannon Road in front of the proposed develofvnent. Even if a stop light was installed at the off ramp and another one at Avenida Encinas, it would be extremely difflcult for motorists to enter or e}dt that property, especially forthe number of businesses proposed. Most ofthe people attending this meeting opposed the gas station adamantly. We are sunounded by gas stations now. Adding another one would not improve the quality of life in Carisbad. What I would propose as a better use of this property is building a fire station to serve westem Carisbad. Wtth the large number of homes built off Poinsettia, most of the houses from Tenramar south are out of an acceptable response time. Since this area is part ofthe Redevelopment Area, I would highly recommend that the City analyze the need for a fire station In this area. j/nnie Johnson 5400 El AtM Dr. Carisbad, CA 92008 4^ June 6, 2000 Robert & Debra Melendez 5520 El Arbol Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Barbara Kennedy, Associate Planner CityofCarlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Dear Barbara: We understand that you have asked for comments from the Terramar residents, specifically regarding the Cannon Court project proposed for development on the SDG&E property. We heard at our last Terramar Board meeting that the developers, designers and architects of this proposed development claimed that we were in full support of their entire project. We were in attendance at the March 15* presentation given to Terramar residents by proponents of the project, and were very surprised to hear this claim. In fact, there was overwhelming opposition to the project, specifically with regards to the development of a gas station/garage and mini-mart. We understand that eventually something will be developed on this property, however, a gas station and mini-mart are the last thing we need in our neighborhood. New construction of homes and businesses surrounding our little community has already made it difficult for us to get in and out of Tertamar due to the increase in vehicular traffic. We agree that a quality hotel and/or restaurant might be appropriate for this site. However, it is well known that the number of trips per day for gas stations and mini-marts is extremely high, and if allowed to be constructed on this parcel, will significantly impact Tenamar and it's residents. We know that developers are trying to get their piece of the Legoland pie, however this is not Legoland Drive. Although Cannon Drive is becoming a major arterial, it is also the entrance and exit to and from a little residential island we call "home". Mayor Lewis is always telling the city that he wants to preserve Carlsbad residents' quality of life. Right now Terramar's quality of life as well as the safety of its residents and children are being threatened. We have enough gas stations and grocery stores directly to the north and south of us (Tamarack, Palomar Airport Road and soon Poinsettia). Please work with us so that the area surrounding Terramar retains it "village" ambiance and doesn't end up looking and feeling like Anaheim. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter Robert & Debra Melendez m m May 13,2000 PUNNING DEP.6RTMEMT City Of Cadsbsd Dear Planning Department ^iiy Ol ^^arisudu, I am a resident at 5199 Los Robles Drive (closest cross street is Cannon). Our TeiTamar neighborhood had a community meeting on March 15, 2000 and the developers of the Cannon Court project gave a presentation. We saw the plans for the hotel, restaraunts, mini mart, and gas station. Many neighbors vocaUzed opposition to the gas station part of the development. I wanted to write to let you know why I, for one, oppose the gas station. 1. A gas station would greatly increase traffic at the intersection of Cannon and Avenida Encinas. 2. There are multiple gas stations on both sides of the freeway at Tamarack, and Palomar Airport Road (both are adjoining off ramps). 3. A gas station would increase the commercial development (with it's accompanying signage) near our residential area. I was hoping the City was trying to avoid the "Disneyland" clausti'ophobia thimtening the ai'ea surrounding Legoland. 4. Since the development is greatest on the East side ofthe freeway at Cannon Road, place gas stations on the East side of the freeway. 5. The Cannon Court property is near prime beach area property and I feel a gas station would unfavorably im.pact beach area properties. Sincerely, Marcia Stults (760) 43B-0363 Council Internet Email - CITY OF CAR'^AD I CONTACT US B Page 1 From: <scstults@aol.com> To: <Council@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> Date: Sun, Apr 2, 2000 9:53 PM Subject: CITY OF CARLSBAD | CONTACT US A visitor to the City of Carisbad Web site has completed and posted the "Contact Us" form to department, City Council. Below, please find the information that was submitted: first_name: Marcia last_name: Stults address: 5199 Los Robles Drive city: Carlsbad state: California zip: 92008 Country: usa ' email: scstults@aol.com comments: I (and many other neighbors) have seen the plans for a hotel, restaurant.and gas station proposed to be built on old SDG&E property west of 1-5 on Cannon. We are opposed to the gas station part as we feel this would create more traffic around our neighborhood (Terramar) than is necessary. The developers gave a figure of 2,000 plus trips a day into and out of their new development (accessed at the Cannon and Avenida Encinas intersection). There are at least 7 gas stations one exit away in either direction on 1-5. What can we do? User details: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; AOL 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt) / web browser spider-tl071 .proxy.aol.com / hostname 152.163.207.206 / ip address Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department May 3, 2001 Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30/PUD 00-109 - CANNON COURT Dear Mr. Cunningham: Pursuant to the recently adopted Assembly Bill 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, it has been determined that your project is subject to filing fees of $1,275.00 levied by the State Department of Fish and Game. This fee is payable to the County on approval of your project. Please submit a check for the above amount (payable to the City of Carlsbad) to the City of Carlsbad, Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Please note the application will not be scheduled for a hearing until the fee has been received by the Planning Department. If you have any questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4626. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP Associate Planner BKmh 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us NOTE ADDITIONAL FEES. STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME Cities and Counties throughout California has been notified of legislation (AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990) which became effective on January 1, 1991. This law requires the State of California Department of Fish and Game to levy a fee to all project applicants (public and private) subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to defray the cost of managing and protecting fish and wildlife trust resources. Projects which are categorically exempt from CEQA and which have no adverse impact on fish and wildlife or projects which are denied, are not subject to the fee. All other projects are subject to the following fees: Projects with Negative Declarations $1,275. Projects with EIRs $875. Due to State Law constraints the City of Carlsbad will collect the fee where applicable and pass it to the County of San Diego. After submission, the City of Carlsbad Planning Department will make an Environmental Assessment of your appiication. After this initial assessment the Planning Department will notify you if the fee is required. State Department of Fish and Game P.O. Box 944209 Sacramento CA 94244-2090 (916) 445-3531 j.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development April 25, 2001 Barbara Kennedy City of Carisbad Planning Dept. Re: "Cannon Court" - Color Board CUP 99-30 Sent-Hand Delivered Dear Barbara, Let me know if this is adequate, or If you have any questions. I like the roof material, but as the photos of the building depict, I wanted to see how a lighter color roof might look. I am still looking, but so far the only roof materials in that range are actual wood or asphalt shingles, which we need to avoid. As we discussed, I want to use a shingle look on the siding, but avoid the maintenance and fire issues that an actual wood shingle would present. The Hardie product Is noncombustible. and pre-finished as shown by the sample. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, John Buza Cc: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Citv of Carlsba(d Planning Departnnent April 24, 2001 J.A. Buza Ste E7 16085 San Dieguito Rd Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be mailed to you on Friday, April 27, 2001. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on May 7, 2001. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 10:00. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring your required unmounted colored exhiblt(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 proiect 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, Barbara Kennedy at (760) 602-4626. CITY OF CARLSBAD GARY E. WAYNE ^ Assistant Planning Director GEW:BK:cs West Development, P 0 Box 8617, Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 File Copy 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 I ilaa Im J J :^ Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department April 19, 2001 Department of Toxic Substances Control Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E. 5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress, CA 90630 RE: DRAFT ND FOR CANNON COURT - SCH 2001021109 Dear Mr. Cojuangco: Thank you for your comments regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Cannon Court. I asked the consultant to address your comments and their response is included as an attachment to this letter. Regarding comments #3, 5, and 6, the project will be conditioned to submit a detailed soils testing and analysis report to the City and County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The condition will read as follows: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer, and submitted to the City and County Department of Environmental Health for review and approval. This report shall evaluate the potential for soil contamination due to historic uses, handling, or storage of agricultural chemicals restricted by the San Diego County Department of Health Services. The report shall also identify a range of possible mitigation measures designed to remediate any significant public health impacts if hazardous chemicals are detected in the soils at concentrations which would have a significantly adverse effect on human health. The Developer shall implement one of the mitigation measures identified in the report prior to the issuance of building permits should mitigation be necessary so as to reduce the impact to below a level of significance. The City and County Department of Health Services will provide the appropriate regulatory oversite to monitor the required soil remediation for the project. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me at 760-602-4626. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP Associate Planner BKxs Attachment: Responses from Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. dated 4/12/Oland 4/18/01. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us •PSSSrS^wT^fiNNING SYSTEMS 760 931 5744 _ 04/12 '01 17:25 IptCySCONDIDO FAX:760-74^^06 10:6828559 r-. c -) PAGE CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ENGINEERING. INC. SAN OIECO, CA UUMimftiMt. SutkC |1W>74M»SS Aprin2,200l . iavrR.s)M:,CA 4NE.Priatd««a taittT C)ii«Di,an7i» • VENTUKAiCA lH»rMBeA«c. Sate MS 0<ainl,CAUIIU TRACY.CA )4JW.LuA (ii»)CMnsiiu LANCASTFJUCA tWlK LooMiCAniM WIMtfimAR. SiduU liili^ihaai CAMMO CTEJobNo. 10.3715 Mr, Den&if CuoDin^iam PlMming Systems 1S30 Fanday Avoiue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CaMmiia 92008 Subject: Additkinal Infimxiatlon Requested by DTSC Prqtosed Caottoa Court Deveiopment APN 223-OS 1.12 Carisbad, California Reftreooe: Rewiew by State of Califoniia, Dqwitmett of Toxic SubstaiKcs Negative £>ecIantion for the Canncm Court SDP-<00^>CUP 99*31/mJC 00.I09/M5 99-16 • 2001021109 Dated Mareh 19.2001 At your request, we bave reviewed tbe DTSC letter reviewing tbe Negative Decliration (ND) for this sits issued by the City of Catlsbad. To clarif our req>o&se to dwir ooncenis we bave letaJned ti^ numberfavg gyttaa used by tfie DTSC b their review. 1. The DTSC wrote: "The ND needs to identily and determine whettier conoit or histttfic uses at tbe Pioject site bave rasultsd in any releaae of hazaidous wastes/substances at the Project area." Our response: We heve reviewed the Phase I Environmental Site Aaaessmeat fer this site (Convene Consultants, 1998). Based on dds document, it appoan that the stte was used for agrictthural puiposes from an undetemdned date in thc jwst thtoo^ the 1970s. HistoricaUjy agricutoiral uses of situ have resuhed in accumulations of Oiganoddorine pesticides m other tpicultural chemicals. 2. Ibe DTSC wrote: *^ ND needs to identify any know or polentiBlly contaminated she widi tbe proposed Project area. Por all idendfied shes, die ND needs to evaluate whether oonditions at the site pose a dueat to human healdi or the envinrnmeat" Our response: Regjon 9 of the United States EnWronmeotat Protection AgMoy has issued PreUminaiy Remediaticm Goals ^RGs) as tools fx evahiating and GEOTECHNICAl. AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINCERlMjq[ TESTING ANO INSPECTION -^^^2001 07:50fl FROM:PLmNING SYSTEMS 760 931 5^^tax.7«>-746-JS6^^ PAGE 2 6^06 Additional Infonnation Requested by DTSC Page 2 Proposed Cannon Court Developmenl Carisbad, California April 12,2001 CTE Job No. 10-3715 cleaning up cmtaminated sites. The PRGs are risic-based oonoentrations derived fh>m standardized equations, combining expocure mfonnation assumptions and EPA toxicity data. PRQs are tegulatocy guidelines. The PRG for toxaphene concentrations in soil Ibr industrial sites is 2.2 mg/kg. From our previous woik at tbis site toxqibene coocentrations langed ftom 4.54 to 22.2 mg/kg. However, our woik was conducted solely for sneening purposes, RecM^ the DTSC has issued (June 28,2000) an interim guidance for sampling of agricuhural soils. We recommend that a sampling of die site be conducted using the newly issued DTSC guidelines. 3. No comment by CTE. 4. There is no cominent 4. 5. DTSC (parajilirased) wrote: (3rading activities are |n<q>o$ed as a lemediation mediodology and diis is unacceptable to die DTSC. The DTSC also reMMnmended conducting fiirdier assessments of die site. Our reqtonse: CTE did not recommend g^ing as a means of dilutmg the site soils. It is our experience duit soils contaminated with agricultural chemicals arc gennally restricted to tbe upper foot to dnee feet of die soil cohmm. During die construction process, these upper soil inaterials are generally removed (they often contain topsoil which is unaccqjtable hi building foundations) and hauled fiom dieshe. It was our eiqxctation that dw upper foot to duree ftet ofsf^ls would be removed. CTE can provide adidonal assessments as requested by die DTSC. We are currendy woiking with the DTSC on similar projects m die site area. 6. No comment by CTE. If you bave any questions regardmg this tnuismittal, please do not hesitate to contM» diis office. The oi^ottunity to bc of service is appreciated, Respectftd^ subnittad, CONSTRUCTION TESTINO ft ENOINEERING, INC. Goodmacher, RG, REA II <i»20137 eologist 04/19 '01 14:39 ID:CTE ESCONDIDO FAX-.760-746-9806 PAGE CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ENGINEERING, INC. SANWEGO,CA 2414 Vlneytrd Ave. Suite EKoodldi>,CA 92029 Kiv(:ksioE,rA 4«t.Priaceiuda SulK 7 C'.oionii,CAyi7iv (imi371.t«!W VENll'RA,CA IMSPacllltAvt. Suitt IQS Qxmni,CA«.W.Vi <R»MtM47S («i;i4l6-90Ut*x TRACY.CA 242W.Urch !i«lltF Tr»ty,CA 95364 <2ft9l|l.'W.2g95MX LANCASTEII,CA 42lS4IOchSt.W. Ltrt(i!it<r.CA»5.M («61) 716-9674 • SACRAMKMO.CA MHMtdiwiaAn. ScHeZi N.Hif^lmd8CA9$6i(l (9161 mMXl (91*1 })I-60J7 ft,\ AprillS. 2001 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008 ViflFff?ffN^?;76Q.p3i,5744 Subject: ResponsetoMmoof April 17,2001 From Dennis Cunningham Pressed Camion Court Development APN 223-051-12 Carlsbad, Califomia Mr. Cunningham: ItemS; To clarify, oi]ganic-containlng soils are anticipated to be removed. However, based on our observations organic-containing soils are not present throughout die site. As explained previously, die depth of diese soils is variable across die site. Locally, some areas may require only blading off. However, other areas may require removals of up to three feet. I anticipate that an average of sbc inches of soil needs to removed, If you have any questions regarding diis transmittal, please do not hesitate to contact diis oflice. The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. lan Goodmacher, RG, REA II #20137 GEOTECHNICAl. AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERimq TESTING AND INSPECTION ^5SSSSr07:50P FROM:PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 931 5744 TO;6028559 • 04/12 '01 17:25 ID^ ESCOhJDIDO FflX:760-7'©806 PAGE 1 ENGINEERING, INC. CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. SAN OIECO, CA 2414 ViKjwd Ave SuHcC bcnWii,CA«»29 (mi*tmtM April 12,2001 . RIVF.R.qMi.CA 4MK.PiteKlnaa $aitr7 Cnr«iii,CA9l7I9 ' VENTURA, CA I6tSIMneA>t. soitties <mm*m itO»4)MIHtrAI • mcy.cA MW.URII 5lrflc> 1^(^CA»M (2»)0».»» (309)GM»Smx LANCASTER, CA 42156 lOUi St«. UnlK UooKliriCAnSM («(it7i«4i4»m SACRAMENTO, CA SiriUl2 liUilUwhCAStfMe lUMW-MlTflU CTEJobNo. 10.3715 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Phumitig Systems 1530 Fatadsy Avenue, Suite 100 Carbbad, California 92008 Subject: Addidonal bifonnatlott Requested by DTSC Proposed Cansott Court Development APN 223-051-12 Oarisbad, Califomia Reftrnioe; Review by State ofCMifornia,Dq)artmem of Toxic Substances Ckmtiol Neg^ve Dedaration fix- the Clannon Court SDP^KM)9yCUP 99'31/PUC 00'109AiS 99-16 - 2001021109 Dated Match 19,2001 Mr. Cumdn^iam: At your request, we bave reviewed tbe DTSC letter reviewing the N^ative Dedaration Q>4D) for this site issued by die City of C:atlsbad. To ctarii^ our response to dieir concems we have iMamed die numberhig qrstem used by die DTSC in their review. 1. The DTSC wrote: "The ND needs to idendl^ and determine whedier cunent or hiatodc uses at the Ptoject ate have resulted in any releaae of hazardous wastes/substances at die Project area." Our reqwnse: We have reviewed die Phase I Envbonmental Site Assessment for this site (Converse Consultants, 1998), Based on this document, h appeals dwt die she was used for ^cultural purposes from an undetermined date in die past duoogh die 1970s. Historically agricultural uses of sites have resuhed in accumulations of Oiganocbkirine pesticides or odier agriculhiral chemicab. 2. The DTSC wrote: 'The ND needs to identify tsy know oi potentiaUy contammated site widi die proposed Project area. Por all idendfied shes, die ND needs to evahiate whedier condidons at the site pose a dueat to human healdi or the enviromnent" Our response: Region 9 of die United States Envlroomental Ftotectioo Agency has usued PreUminaiy Remediation Goab (PRGs) as toob for evahiating and GEOTECHNICAl. AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERIN!^ TESTING ANO INSPECTION Addidonal InfHinadon Requested by DTSC Page 2 Proposed Cannon Court Development Carisbad, Califonua April 12,2001 CTB Job No. 10-3715 cleaning up contaminated sites. The PRGs are risk>based conoentiadons derived firom standardized equations, combhung eiqiotnirB mformadon assumptions and EPA toxiciQr data. PRGs are regulatoiy Adelines. Hie PRG for toxaphene concentrations in soil for industrial sites ts 22 mg/kg. From our previous work at this site toxtfihene concentrations ranged ftom 4.54 to 22.2 mg/kg. However, our wMk was conducted solely for screening puiposM, Recoitfy the DTSC has issued (June 28,2000) an interim guidance for sampling of a^ricuiturBl soib. We recommend that a sampling of the site be oonducted using die newly issued DTSC guidelhies. 3. No comment by CTE. 4. Thcrei8nocomiii«it4. 5. DTSC (parai^msed) wrote: Grading acthdties are proposed as a remediadon metiiodology and tiiis is unaccqitable to die DTSC. The DTSC also reuxmnended conducting further assessments of the site. Our response: CTE did not reconunend grading as a means of diluting the site soils. It is our experience dut soils contaminated with agricuitiiral dmnicals arc generally restricted to the upper foot to duiee foet of die soil cohimn. During dw construction process, these upper soil materiab are generally removed (di^ often contam topsoil v^ich is unaccqytable in building foundations) and hauled tnm die site. It was our expectation that the upper foot to duee feet of soib would be removed. CTE can provide additional assessments as requested by die DTSC. We are currendy woiking with die DTSC on shnilar projects m die site area. 6. No comment by CTE. If you have any questions regarding this transmittal, please do not hesitate to contact dus office. Ibe oppoitunity tobe of service bai^mcbted. Req>ectflil|y sutmitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Goodmacher, RG, REA II #20137 eologist I 04/19 '01 14:39 ID:CTE ESCONDIDO FAX=760-746-9806 PAGE CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. SANWE{;0,CA • RIVKRSIDE,CA ENGINEERING, INC. 2414 VIntyirl Ave. £«mdid9,CA 92429 l7<0)746-4»« (7M)746-»II06H^ Sult(7 (:(»rMa,CA 91719 (949)371.tt!ID VENn'RA,CA 1645 Pwfflc Ave. Sulu U» OxRU<ll,CA«.Wil3 (Wll 41(4475 (XDJI486-9016 MX TRACy,CA 142W.UKII TrK}r.CA 95304 (2(l»)«J9-2890 U09I KI9.289f FAX UNCASTI:K,CA 42lHI0ibS<.W. UoHK UiKist<r,CA9JSM (Mill 726-9676 (661) 726.0246 ux • SAC»AMf3VTO.CA 96»M(tdimoAn. StUe 22 N.Hi(|MMyd>CA9S66« (9161 Sil.im (916)JJI-6»J7FAS April 18,2001 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Paraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carbbad, CaliftMnia 92008 VbFficsmiile: 760.931.5744 Subject: Response to Memo of April 17,2001 From Dennis Cunning;h(un Proposed Camion Court Development APN 223-051-12 Carbbad, Califomia Mr. Curniingham: ItemS: To clariiy, oiganiC'Containing soils are anticipated to be removed. However, based on our observations organic-containing soib are not ixesent tiuougbout lhe site. As explained previously, dte depth of these soils is variable across the site. Locally, some areas may require only blading oif. However, other areas may require r»novals of up to duee feet. I anticipate that an average of six inches of soil needs to removed, Ifyou have any questions regarding this transmittal, please do not hesitate to contact diis ofGce. The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfolly submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Goodmacher, RG, REA II #20137 GEOTECHNICAl. AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERl]$ff TESTING AND INSPECTION Departnnent of Toxic Substances Control Edwin F. Lowry, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue , L, u- , Cypress, California 90630 ^ . Winston H. Hickox Gray Davis Agency Secretary Governor California Environmental Protection Agency March 19, 2001 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbacl 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CANNON COURT - SDP 00-09/CUP 99- 31/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 - 2001021109 Dear Ms. Kennedy: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has receiveci your Negative Declaration (ND) forthe above-mentioned Project. Based on the review of the document, DTSC's comments are as follows: 1) The ND needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses at the Project site have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the Project area. 2) The ND needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated site within the proposed Project area. For ali identified sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment. 3) The ND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation, and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. 5) The ND indicates that the property had previously been used for agricultural uses and the Phase II Environmental Assessment conducted at the site detected the presence of Toxaphene. The ND proposes the grading activities (mixing and blending ofthe soil), and if needed, additional actions such as thicker concrete slabs or the placement of vapor barriers. Pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66268.3, no generator, transporter, handler, or owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility shall in any way dilute a restricted waste or the residual from treatment of a restricted waste as a The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Califomian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at www. dtsc. ca. gov. ® Printed on Recycled Paper Ms. Barbara Kennedy March 19, 2001 Page Two substitute for adequate treatment to achieve acceptable standards. The treatment measure proposed at the site, mixing and blending ofthe soil, is a form of dilution and that it is not acceptable to DTSC. Therefore, DTSC recommends further assessment and a removal/remediation of the site. Further remedial action proposed such as capping or placement of vapor barriers shall be implemented after a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, which includes a Human and Environmental Health Risk Assessment. After the Risk Assessment, ifthe proposed remedial measure is feasible, it can be implemented with the approval of a regulatory agency. Therefore, proper investigation and remedial actions should be conducted at the site before initiating grading activities. 6) If during construction ofthe project, soil contamination is suspected, stop construction in the area and appropriate Health and Safety procedures should be implemented. If it is determined that contaminated soil exists, the ND should identify how any required investigation and/or remediation will be conducted, and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). For additional information on the VCP or to meet/discuss this matter further, please contact Ms. Rania A. Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479. Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E. Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 City of Carlsba(d Planning Department April 10, 2001 Caltrans, District 11 Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager P. O. Box 85406, M.S. 50 SanDiego, CA 92186-5406 RE: DRAFT ND FOR CANNON COURT - SCH 2001021109 Dear Mr. Gojuangco: Thank you for your comments regarding the traffic study for Cannon Court - CUP 99-30. I asked the traffic consultant to address your comments and their response is included as an attachment to this letter. In addition, David Stilhnan, City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineering Department, reviewed the response from USA and feels that it adequately responds to your concems. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me at 760-602- 4626. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP Associate Planner BK-.cs Attachment: Response from Urban Systems Associates dated 4/6/01 c: Bill Figge, Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us Apr OG 01 02:00p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (858)5G0-9734 8^ p. 1 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC PLJUimelTMFFKBiotmeimm,MAmcemotPi(ajecTSuPFatr COHSULTAKTS TO iNDUSTKYAND OOUERNMEWT ATTN: Barbara Kennedy COMPANY: CityofCarlsbad FROM: Jim Lundquist, Senior Project Managl DATE: April 6, 2001 TIME WHTTE TO ADDKESSU; YtiLOW TO «LC; MAflf TO MAmeCR phone: ^ fax: ^ (760) 602-4626 (760) 602-8559 TOTAL PAGES: 21 1:56 pm TRANSMITTED VIA: Fax SUBJECT: CALTRANS COMMENT LETTER - CANNON COURT Wc are sending you the following information foryour: W use o for submittal ^ as requested O approval O review Sc comment '• Of PAGES -TYPE •DESCRIPTION 1 ILetter jLetter from Caltrans dated March 27. 2001 Barbara: We have reviewed the Caltrans comment letter and offer the following comments: 1. See Page 1-1. The report examines Existing, Short Term and Buildout scenarios. The SANDAG traffic forecast model was used for the Short Term and Buildout scenarios which account for all future projects in the vicinity of the proposed project. 2. See pages 3-8, 5-6, 6-7, 7-1 and 7-6. The City of Carlsbad follows the procedures outlined in the "SANTEC/^ITE Guidelines for Trafific ImpactStudies (TIS) in the San Diego Region", dated March 2, 2000. That report, reviewed by Bill Figge of Caltrans, states: "In general, thc region wide goal for an acceptable level of service (LOS) on all freeways, roadway segments and intersections is D". The project does not significantly increase the delays at any intersection examined. 3. See pages 5-1, 5-7, 5-8, 6-4 and 6-8. The project proposes to install a traffic signal at Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas, thc widening of Avenida Encinas at Cannon Road to four lanes, signal inter-connect with Caltrans ramp signal, railroad preemption, keep clear signing and striping, preemption phasing and dual west to south bound left turn lanes on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas. *2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 1 C:\OmCE.2000\2598-4Oe01-aps/disk 4540 KEASNY VEU ROAD. SWTE J06 • SAN Dmo, CA 92123-1573 • ffl5« SIUUOII . it,v /p«oi t^n^*. Rpr OG 01 02:00p ^an Systems Hssoc. Inc. (^)5G0-9734 p.2 Barbara Kennedy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. April 6, 2001 4. See Page 7-6. This improvement is required as traffic volumes approach buildout forecasts. The project adds zero additional trips for this movement. Without the improvement, the LOS is F with or without the project. The improvement is planned to be done with development of the SDG£rE property located to the northeast ofthe ramp signal. 5. See Page 2-2, Section 2-4; Intersection Level of Service Los Procedures. To determine an intersection peak hour level of service (LOS) as required bythe City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan Guidelines, the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method was used (summarized in Table 7-2). For Congestion Management Program evaluation purposes, intersection levels of service were calculated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) computer software methodology (the 1997 update to the 1994 HCM) as summarized in Table 8-1. The two different analysis methods vaty in assumptions and do not always yield exactly the same results; acceptable levels of service are achieved however. 6. See responses to question/comment #3 above. The project does fully mitigate thc significant traffic impacts with these mitigation measures. Please let us know ifyou have any questions or need any other information. Cc: John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation (858) 756-2891 Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems (760) 931-5744 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 02598 2 C:\OfFICe.20a)\2598-4060l-aps/disk npr 06 01 02:Glp / 1IAH7-01 TOB 4:14 PM CALTMS loslc TRAMS Urban Systems Assoc. Inc. (838)560-9734 STATC OF CMlWRNiA . SUSINCSS. TltANSf«RTMIO«MID HOUSINS AQENCV immc 1 ^) p.s PAI MO. 6IS 688 4299 P. 2 QUAY PAVg, aomnat DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTi DISTRICT 11 P.O. BOX «640e. M.S. SO SANDIEGO.CA 92186-S406 PHONE: (6191988-6954 FAX: (619)688-4299 Much 27.2001 Mr. Scott Morgan St^ Clearinghouse 1400 Tendi Stieet Sacramento, CA 95814 ll-SD-005 PM47.8 (KP. 76.5) Dear Mr. Mocgan: Draft ND for Cannon Court - SCM 2001021169 Callrans District 11 comments aie as follows: Gtrnmi Commente 2 7 200f i • '.'The Traffic Study sheuld^ a$sess-.the eumutotiye impacts of all eusiing and fonne 'projects in lhe vicinity Af the fioposedim^ecL .v..-> s- 2^!^ « Caltrans requb^Uvd of S«mce(U:>S>C or .! . intersections. If, an intersection .is cunently helWiM>5'C. any inciease in ^clay ifrom pnoiect genentfed traBtc iniict be analysed «nd nriti ' • Hf certain tea^lic^mitieatinn projects, atse idr,ntifigd.i>s i^|HX>priat»>tfiep Cahraps^jippofts, 3 Hhe conieept of "Tair share" contiibbtiOAsdn the . t u.. ' Spedfic Comments . . 1 .. . . . • • • •Page 7-6-TablB 7-2, Note 4; Dual tight turn lanes WB \o NB assumed. Pfease^lgiln di^-r • 4 Sasisof this assumption. " ^ - • Page 8-2 Table 8-1; LOS fbr AMand^PM^Fealc Hmvs differs firom Table 7-2. Please^ J explain. • Section 9 Conclusions and Recommendations: lifiti^ation measutes must be included in 6 the Traffic Stndr- ff fee impact is compleiety iMii8aied„|>lease describe how. Our contact penon for 1-5 is Erwin Gojuangco. Route Manage, at (619) 688H66I0. Sincerely. BILL FIGGE. I Apr 06 01 02:01p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.4 m ' 9 • TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS for CANNON COURT Prepared for WEST DEVELOPMENT AND J. A. BUZA CORPORATION Fn-st Submittal: May 31,2000 Second Submittal: August 30,2000 Third Submittal: October 24,2000 Final Report: January 4,2001 © URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC, TRAFFIC PLANNING &. ENGINEERING, MARKETING * PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AJ© GOVERNMENT 4540 Keamy Villa Road, Suite 106 San Diego, California 92123-1573 (858) 560-4911 Rpr 06 01 02:01p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.5 1' Carmon Court OUrban Systems Associates, Inc. Final Report January 4. 2001 1.0 INTRODUCTION rban Systems Associates, Inc. was retained by the J.A. Buza Corporation and West Development, to evaluate possible traffic unpacts from the desvelopment of an approximately five acre parcel with visitor travel services uses on the north side of Caimon Road directly west of Interstate 5. Figure 1-1 shows the project location. The project consists of a service station/market, a hotel, and two restaurants. In order to evaluate possible project traffic impacts. Existing, Existing Plus Project, Short-Term Future (Year 2005) and Buildout (Year 2020) conditions were evaluated. Year 2005 and Buildout trafEc volumes are based on the San Diego Area of Govcnunents (SAJ©AG), Carlsbad City/County Regional Transportation Model and Carlsbad's latest 1999 traffic monitoring figures. For the purposes of evaluation, the report is divided into the following sections: 1.0 Introduction 2.0 • Methodology 3.0 Existing Conditions 4.0 The Project Trip Generation 5.0 Existing Plus Project Conditions 6.0 Short-Tenn Future (Year 2005) ConditiorB 7.0 Buildout (Year 2020) Conditions 8.0 Congestion Management Program 9.0 Conclusion and Reconunendations 2598 1-1 2S98-rpt.010401 Rpr 06 01 02:01p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.6 Cannon Court ®Urban Systems Associates, Inc. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Janimi^4^2001 Peak Hour Inte: d of Service Summary LOS ICU (fal Percent) A 0.00-0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 E 0.91-1.00 F l.OO & Over ^ ICU * Intersection Cdspwsky Utilization ^ LOS = Level of Service ' HCS - HCS Calcuktions &r stop agnal control, delsy in seconds. 2598 3-8 2S98-rpt-Q1040I Rpr 06 01 02:02p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.7 Cannon Court Final Report ©Urban ifystems Associates, Inc. January 4. 2001 TABLE S-2 [Existing + Proii Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary Int^rsectioa Litersection Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Int^rsectioa Litersection Control ICU* LOS* ICU LOS Litersection Control ICU LOS Cannon Road / Carlsbad Boulevard Signal 0.40 0.74 / ^ Cannon Road / Avenida Encinas Signal 0.42 / A 1 0.47 1 A Cannon Road /1-5 SB Ranqis Signal 0.45 1 A f 0.40 1 A Cannon Road /1-5 NB Ramps Signal 0.49 1 A f 0.58 1 A Cannon Road / Paseo Del Norte Signal 0.58 I A 1 0.62 V ® Cannon Road / Lego Drive Signal 0.41 y A/ 0.30 \A Jl LOS ICU (In Percent) A 0.00-0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 £ 0.91-1.00 F 1.00 & Over 2S08-TaM-2C.I«!pd>COK/ * ICU - Intersection Capaaty Utilizatian ' LOS « Levd of Service 2598 5-6 2598-rpt-0}0401 TABLE 6-2 ON I Kl Year 2005 Peak Hour IntersKtioii Ltn il gTService Summary btcraectioB Intersection Control Without Project With Project AM Peak ICU* LOS* PMPeak AM Peak ICU LOS I ICU LOS PMPeak ICU LOS Canmm Road / Cariabad BonlevaFd Cannon Road / Avenida Enranas Cannon Road /1-5 SB Ramps Cannon Road /1-5 NB Ramps Cannon Road / Paseo Del Norte Ciwmon Road/C!ar Countiy Drive Car Country Drive / Lego Drive Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal 0.52 0.52 0.66 0.62 0.77 0.52 0.46 B B 0.76 / 0.53 0.55 0.68 0.65 0.78 0.53 0.47 B B 0.77 0.50 0.59 0.81 0.78 0.51 0.55 ^08-raii6-2B.i«pc(CO^ LOS ICU (In Percent) A 0.00-0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 E 0.91-1.00 P 1.00 & Over ' ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization * LOS = Level of Service 1 J Q> K, Apr OG 01 02:02p Ui^an Sastems Rssoc. Inc. )560-9734 P-9 Cannon Court OUrban Systems Associates, Inc. Final Report January 4, 2001 7.0 BUILDOUT (YEAR 202Q> CONDITIONS The SANDAG/Carlsbad Cities- County 2020 Transportation Forecast (8-27-99) was used to detenmne Year 2020 (buildout assumed in th.e City of Carlsbad) tiraffic volumes. The buildout model peak traffic volumes were refined to account for some volumes which were lower than existing or existing plus project and 2005 volimies. 7.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 7-1 shows Year 2020 average daily traffic volumes for study area street segments. Table 7-1 shows stireet segment levels of service for Year 2020. As shown, all segments evaluated are expected to meet the Growth Management Program criteria of at least level of service "D" during peak hours, so no significant project tiraffic impacts are expected in Year 2020. F^ures 7-2 and 7-3 show die AM and PM peak hour volumes, at study area intersections, expected in Year 2020 and at bmldout of the City of Carlsbad. As shown in Table 7-2, ^^vg^^d intersections are expected to operate at least at level of service "D" daring peak hours as required by^CityjsQrow&Man^^OTt]^ hour at buildout, the westboundmovesOTto_fcengr&bou^^ project trips are expected for &ismovgJQlliiOQflaiM|^ no significant project traffic impacts are expected at any intersection. Appendix C includes intersection peak hour LOS worksheets for Year 2020 conditions. 2598 7-1 259a-rpt-010401 Apr OG 01 02:02p Urban Sastems Assoc. Inc. (a5E)560-9734 p. 10 SANTEC / ITE GUIDEUNES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES [TIS] IN THE SAN DiEGO REGION MARCH 2, 2000 FINAL DRAFT PREFACE These guidcilicee are subject to ccntimial iqidate, as fiituie tedmology and documeDtatiaa become available. Always dbeck with local jurisdic- tions far their piefbrred or ^Ucable procedures. Committee CompUaUon by Kent A. Whitson Reviewed by committee memlMri: Hank Morris (co-ehair), Tom Parry {co-chair), Arnold Torma (co-chair), Susan O'Rourfce, Bill Darnell, L^b Qasem, John Boanman. Ralph Leyva, and Erilc Ruehr Additional review by: Ann French Gonsalv Bob Goralka, and Gary Halbert Apr 06 01 02:03p Urban Sastems Assoc. Inc- (8^)560-9734 p.11 SANTEC / ITE GUIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUOIES [TIS] IN THE SAN DiEGO REGION I. BACKGROUND In September 1998, the San Dl^o Regional TrafSc Standards Task Force gathered for the first time to promote "cooperation among ih& Cities, Caltrans, and the County of San Diego to create a region-wide standard for determining traffic impacts in environmental reports." Uhimately the San Diego TrafiSc Engineers' Council (SANTEC) and the Insti- tute of Transportation Engineers (TTE - Califomia Bordor Section) were requested to prepare guiddines for trafBc intact studies fllS] that could be reviewed by the Task Force and other appropriate groups. The primary documents used to hdp prepare these guidehnes were SANDAG's Congestion Man^pymftnt Prop-am and Tniffif QfPffTfl^P'".? manual. City of San Diego's Traffic Impact Sfaidv Manual and Trip Generation ManuaL and Caltrans' Draft Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Stodies. II. PURPOSE OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES [HSI Traffic ms^xX studies forecast, desaibe, and analyze the traffic and transit ^ects a devdopment will have on the existing and fiiture drculation infiastructure. Tbe purpose ofthe TIS b to asast engineers in both the development community and public agencies when making land w» and other devdopment dedaons. A TIS quantifies the changes in traffic levels and translates these chmges into tran^KUtation system impacts in the vidnity of a project. TIS requirements are usually outlined as part of any enviromnental (CEQA) project review process; and, in order to monitor efifects by th^ requirements. Notices of Prepa- iation must be submitted to all afi^ed ^endes. III. OBJECTIVES OF TIS GUIDEUNES The fi}llowing guiddmes were prq)ared to asast local agencies dn-oughout the San Diego Region- m promotii^ conastency and umfonnity m traffic impact studies. All Circula- tion/Coinnuinity Element roadways, aU State routes and fi:eewEys Ondudmg metered and unmetered ranqps), and all tranmt fitdlitiM that are impacted should be included m eadi «t"dv, In general, the region-wide goal for an accq>tdjeJevd::^jCTv^e-£LOS) on all freeways, jgadway s^ments, andmtdrsectionais*T3.']^^^SSv3ope?^ra5rfeBB^i9B8g8f iS^S^S^W^SllSSSSSB^^ the goal may be to achieve a levd-of- service of X." Indhndual lodil jurisdictiona, as wdl as Caltrans, have slightly dif&roit Apr 06 01 02:03p Urjaan Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (8^8)560-9734 p.12 / • • LOS objectives. For example, the Regional Growth Management Strat<^ fbr San Diego (tas a ievd-of-service objective of T);" while the Congestion Management Program has estabUshed a minimum levd-of-service of *1E", or "F" if that Is the existing 1990 base vear LOS. In other words, ifthe ejastina LOS is 'T>" or worse, oreservation oftiie exist- ing LOS must be maintained or acc^jtable mitigatton must be identified. These guiddines do not estabUsh a legal standard for these functions, but are intended to supplement any individual TIS manuals or level-ot-service objectives for the various jurisdictions. These guidelines attempt to consoUdate re^onal efforts to identify when a TIS is needed, what professional procedures should be followed, and what constitutes a sigmficant traffic impact. The mstmctions outtined in th^ guidelines are subject to update as fiiture conditions and experience become available. Special situations may call for variation fi^om these guideUnes. Caltrans and lead agencies should agree on the spedfic methods used in traffic impact studies involving any State Route &ciUties, induding metered and vm- metered fireeway ramps. IV. NEED FOR A STUDY A TIS should be prepared for all project which generate traffic greater than 1,000 total average daily trips (ADT) or 100 peak-hour trips. If a proposed project is not in confor- mance witii the land use and/or transportation elemem oftiie g^ieral or community plan, use threshold rates of 500 ADT or 50 peak-hour trips. Early consultation with any afifected jurisdictions is strongly encouraged since a "focused" OT "abbreviated'' TIS may StiU be required - even if the above threshold rates are not met. Currentiy, a Congestion Management Program (CMP) andysis is required for aU large projects, which are defined as g^ierating 2,400 or more average dai^ trq>s or 200 or more peak-hour tiips. This size of study would usually include computerized long-range forecasts and sdect zone assignments. Please refer to the fottowing flow chart (Figure 1) for TIS requirements. The geographic area examined in the TIS must indude the followii^. • AU loed roadway segments (mcluding dl State surface routes), mtersections, and mainUiK fi-eeway locations where the proposed prqject witt add 50 or more peak-hour trips in dtlMT direction to the existing roadway traffic. « All fi'eeway oitrance and exit ramps where the proposed project will add a dgmficant number of peak-hour trips to cause any traffic queues to exceed ramp storage txp^- ties (see Figure 1). (NOTE: Care must be taken to indude other ramps and inter- sections that may receive prqject trafBc diverted as a resuh of already existii^ or project causmg congestitm at fi-eeway entrances and exits.) / A Rpr 06 01 02:03p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (8^)560-9734 p. 13 Cannon Court CUrban Systems Associates, Inc. Final Report January 4. 2001 5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS This section of the report evaluates traffic conditions with project only AM/PM peak hour and average daily traffic added to existing conditions. 5.1 STREET SEGMENTS Figure 5-1 shows existing average daily traffic volumes with prqject only traffic added. Table 5-1 includes the street segment level of service tabulation, which shows that with project traffic added to existing daily traffic, all segments evaluated comply with the City's Growth Management Program level of service criteria of at least level of service "D" in tiie AM and PM peak hours. Therefore, no direct significant project impacts to street segments are expected. 5.2 INTERSECTIONS Figures 5-2 and 5-3 show existing AM and PM peak hour traffic at the study area intersections with project traffic added. Table 5-2 shows existing plus project intersection peak hour levels of service conq;ared to existing conditions. The Cannon Road/ Avenida Encinas intersection is recommended for 2598 5-1 2598-rpt-010401 Apr 06 01 02:03p UrJa^an Sastems Assoc. Inc. (8^6)560-9734 p.14 i^j^n Sastems Assoc. Inc. (8^^) Cannon Court ®Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Final Report January 4. 2001 signalization with project traffic added for this evaluation since traffic signal warrants will be 1^ f\ satisfied (see Appendix B for the warrant worksheet). n As shown in tiiis table, the study area intersections are expected to be at least at level of service "D" during the peak hours, as required by the City's Growth Management Program, so no significant project impact is identified, acc^tfortiienee^oj^^^ Avenida Encinas intersection. if- As previously discussed in Section 2.6 of this report, a spedal evaluation was prepared for the SG&E back parcel. For the complete evaluation see Technical Memorandum firom Urban Systems Associates, Inc. to the City of Carlsbad dated August 30,2000. Following is a suminary of the results ofthat analysis. Two altemative land use assumptions for the 45 acre back parcel were developed jointiy with City staff. Altemative 1 assumed 15 acres of High Technology power plant plus 30 acres of Corporate Headquarters. This altemative results in a traffic generation of 3,450 daily trips. Altemative 2 assumed 15 acres ofHigJi Technology power plant., 17.5 acres ofCorporate Headquarters and 12.5 acres 9f Visitor Commercial. This alternative resulted in a traffic generation of7,200 daiiy trips. Traffic generation firom the back parcel when added to proj ect traffic of4,793 daily tirips results in the need for a two lane collector street if Altemative 1 were built and a four lane collector street ^^mm if Alternative 2 were built. ^lepr^ec^pi^ios^twoM 2598 5-7 2598-rpt-010401 lif Apr 06 01 02:04p Urban Sastems Assoc- Inc. (858)560-9734 p.15 Cannon Court OUrban Systems Associates, Inc. Final Report . January 4,2001 lanes at the.signalized intersection with Cannon Road. The project also reserves right of way for full four lane collector (84 feet) in the event that the back parcel is developed to higher intensity uses such as assumed for Alternative 2 described above. Appendix A includes peak hour intersection LOS worksheets for existing plus project traffic. Appendix B also includes the proposed lane configuration at the intersection and for the private project access street. Also, a traffic signal design concept may be found in the Appendix. Aa noted on the signd desiga concept sheet, a traffic signal interconnect between the new signal and the CALTRANS ramp signal is also proposed. 2598 5-8 2598-rpt-01Q4Ql Apr 06 01 02:04p UrJaan Sastems Assoc. Inc. (8^B) 560-9734 p. 16 1! Cannon Court ©Urban Systems Associates. Inc. 6.2 INTERSECTIONS Figures 6-2 and 6-3 show Year 2005 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with project traffic included. Table 6-2 shows intersection peak hour levels of service with and without project traffic. As shown, all intersections evaluated are expected to operate vrithin the Growth Management Program Criteria of LOS "D" during peak hours with project traffic added, so no significant project traffic unpacts are expected. As discussed in Section 2.5 ofthis report, the railroad and close proximity of intersections and the 1-5 Cannon Road fireeway ramps create the need for special traffic operations measures as traffic growtii occurs hi the area. By the Year 2005, with build out of the proposed project and other projects in the area, specific traffic operations measures which should be considered for implementation are: 1. Intercoimect of the new project access traffic signal at Avenida Encinas and flie freeway ramp. 2. Railroad preemption for the Avenida Encinas traffic signal - this should be piovided with the installation of the traffic signal. 2598 6-4 2598-rpt-01040I Apr 06 01 02:04p Urban Sastems Assoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.17 ^|) Cannon Court ©Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Fmal Report January 4, 2001 3. Signing and striping with "KEEP CXEAR"pavement legends to assure intersections are not blocked during railroad preenqition - tiiis should be provided with the installation ofthe Avenida Encinas traffic signal. 4. Specid preemption phasing for the Avenida Encinas tiraffic signal to peimit south to east, west to south and north to east movements during preemption. To be ' incorporated into the traffic signal design. 5. Dual west to southbound left tums on Cannon Road at Avenida Enemas, subj ect to City and Caltrans approvaL Appendix A mcludes intersection peak hour LOS worksheets for Year 2005 conditions. Appendix B includes conceptual striping and traffic signal layouts which mcoiporate many ofthe concepts discussed above. 2598 6-8 2598-rpt-OJ040l TABLE 7-2 Ol to Os Buildout (Year 2020) Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary I r I Intersection Intersection. Control " ————•—• Without Project With Project Intersection Intersection. Control " AM Peak PMPeak AM Peak PMPeak Intersection Intersection. Control " ICU' LOS* ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU 1 LOS Cannon Road / Carlsbad Boulevard^ Signal 0.56 A 0,60 A 0.58 A 0.61 B (Gannon Boad / Averada Endnas Signd 0.64 B 0.56 A 0.69 B 0.63 B Cannon Road /1-5 SB Ramps^ Signal 0.74 C 0.75 C 0.78 C 0.77 C Cannon Road 11-5 NB Rani£) Signd 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.75 C 0.74 C Cannon Road / Paseo Dd Norte Signd 0.71 C 0.86 D 0.72 C 0.88 D CamMMt Road / Car Country Drive Signd 0.48 A 0.52 A 0.49 A 0.53 A Car Countiy Drive / Lego Drive Signd 0.68 B 0.79 0.68 B 0.81 D LOS ICIT On Percent) A 0.0(M).60 B 0.61^.70 C 0.71-0.80 ft fi 0.91-1.00 F 1.00 A Over 250S-rab7-2a.M^pi»C(>J ' ICU=Intersection Capacity Utilization * LOS = Levd of Service ^ Carlsbad Boulevard widened to 4-lanes by dty C.I.P. right tum lanes WB to HB assumed. a i r t 28 3) -0 -I • • <n o ro o Ul TJ « (£ W {t ID 3 Ut 33 VI Ul 0 0 3 0 OD yi 0) D C0 -0 u .1^ •0 GD r I h KU AILA ICU Alt ft^ . Kai Alt c UOVB cAPAcrrv iCU UOVB cAPAcmr ICU uavB CAPACffY ICU .6«f "%> r .U -+ LO* MMapth • LXLS. - C UOVB CAPACm ICU UOVE CAPACITV ICU UOVG sAPAcrrr tcu ^/ .33 .^3 rr -4 /I / UOA. > e TJ -J o 0) o PO o Ul w (C Ul f* ID 3 Ul 39 Ul Ul o o 3 o 0) o (C -J Cl) IMBAA/SYSTIEMS^ Rpr 06 01 02:05p Urban Sastems Assoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p. 20 Cannon Court Final Report <OUrban Systems Associates, ITU:. ^^^^^^^^^^^mua^j^QOl 2.3 COMPUTER TRAVEL FORECASTS Computer travel forecasts used forthe analysis ofYear2005 and buildout conditions were prepared by the City of Carlsbad and SANDAG. The latest SANDAG Cities/County Year 2020 Travel Forecast were evaluated aud the inost recent City updated peak hour data, i.e, the Carlsbad Model, was used for this evaluation. 2.4 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE LOS PROCEDURES To detennine an intersection peak hour Level of Service (LOS), as required by the City of Carlsbad Growtii Management Plan Guidelines, flie Intersection Cs^adLty Utilization (ICU) method was used. Also, for Congestion Management Program evaluationpuiposes, intersection levels of service were calculated usmg the latest Highway Opacity Manual (HCM) computer software methodology (the 2.5 INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AND PROXEMCriY In addition to the nonnaUy required evaluations discussed above, there is a spedal requirement to evaluate intersections in tiie vicinity of the proposed project access. This requirement is due to the close proximity of a raikoad crossing and fireeway ramps near the project access. 2598 2598..rpt-010401 Apr 06 01 02:06p Urban Sastems Assoc. Inc. (858)560-9734 p.21 Cannon Court Final Report ©Urban Systems Associates, Im. January 4, 2001 TABLE 8-1 Bufldout (Year 2020) CMP Analysis Peak Hour Intex^section Level of Service Summary Intersection Lrtersection Control AM Peak Hour PMPeakHour Intersection Lrtersection Control Dday LOS' Dday LOS Cannon Road / Carlsbad Boulevard Signd 8.0 A 10.3 B Caimon Road / Avenida Endnas Signd 30.8 C 31.9 C Cannon Road /1-5 SB Raiiq>s Signd 46.9 D 43.6 D Cannon Road /1-5 NB Ramps Signd 36.0 D 44.6 D Cannon Road / Paseo Dd Norte Signd 24.0 C 51.5 D Caimon Road / L«^o Drive Signd 17.9 B 38.5 D LOS TotdContnd Dday Seconds) A 0 - 10.0 B 10.1 - 20.0 C 20.1-35.0 D 35.1 -55.0 E 55.1 - 80.0 F Over 80.0 Source: 1997 Update of 1994 Ifighwsy Capadty Manud LOS Levd of Service 2598 8-2 2598-rpt-OmOl 1^ PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LA391X» POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM Hand Delivered March 30, 2001 To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Planning Department From: Dermis Cunningham, Planning Systems RE: Cannon Court Final Re-Submittal c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Coiporation Barbara, please find enclosed the items that were recently requested. We are also looking forw^ard to a draft set of conditions next w^eek. Enclosed are the original red lines of the landscape plan, site plan, architecture, and parcel map. Also enclosed are 10 copies of the: - Landscape plan - Site plan - Architecture - Parcel map - Phasing map w^ith attached correspondence from J.A. Buza Corporation - Mailing labels, 600' radius map, etc. Please call if you have any questions. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@nctimes.net MARCH 29, 2001 CANNON COURT TREE COUNT A. SETBACK AREAS 1. ONE TREE FOR EVERY ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. TREES ARE TO BE 50% 24" BOX SIZES AND MINIMUM OF 15 GALLON SIZE. (PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.) 2. FRONT SETBACK OF 40'= 13,750 S.F. FREEWAY SETBACK OF 10' = 3,020 S.F. FREEWAY SETBACK OF 20' = 3,533 S.F. FREEWAY SETBACK OF 22' = 3,569 S.F. REAR SETBACK OF 20' = 10,800 S.F. RAILROAD SETBACK OF 10' = 6,520 S.F. TOTAL SQUARE FEET IN SETBACK AREAS 41,242 S.F. ONE TREE PER THOUSAND S.F. 41 3. TOTAL TREE COMPLIANCE IN SETBACK 125 (g 24" BOXES SIZES PER LANDSCAPE DRAWING B. SITE TREES DATED 03-28-01 1. ONE TREE PER SIX (6) PARKING STALLS OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. 50% SHALL BE 24" BOXES AND MINIMUM OF 15 GALLON SIZE. (PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.) 2. SITE PARKE^G STALLS 333 PARKING STALLS IN SETBACK <77> TOTAL SITE PARKING STALLS 256 1 TREE PER 6 STALLS 6 TOTAL SITE TREES REQUIRED 42 TOTAL SITE COMPLIANCE 299 @ 24" BOXES SIZES PER LANDSCAPE DRAWING C. STREET TREES DATED 03-28-01 24 TREES (^ 24" BOXES SIZES D. FREESTANDING SIGN - LANDSCAPE THEME AT ENTRY 1. REQUIRED PER CITY REQUIREMENTS a) 6 - 5 GALLON STRELITZIA REGINAE (BIRD OF PARADISE) IN CLUSTERS. b) 1 - 15 GALLON PHOENIX ROEBELENII AMIDST (BIRD OF PARADISE) c) 36-1 GALLON AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS (LILY OF THE NILE) AS GROUNDCOVER. d) MINIMUM PLANTING AREA - 80 SQUARE FEET. 2. COMPLIANCE a) 6 - 5 GALLON STRELITZIA REGINAE (BIRD OF PARADISE) IN CLUSTERS. b) 1 - 15 GALLON PHOENIX ROEBELENII AMIDST (BIRD OF PARADISE) c) 36-1 GALLON AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS (LILY OF THE NILE) AS GROUNDCOVER. d) MINIMUM PLANTING AREA - 80 SQUARE FEET. J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development March 28. 2001 Barbara Kennedy City of Carisbad - Planning Department 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad. CA 92008 Re: CUP 99-30 / Cannon Court "Phasing" Dear Barbara, Per your March 22, 2001 memo to Dennis Cunningham, here is the phasing infonnation you requested: Phase 1 - Infrastructure 1. Preparation of the parcel map, grading plans, and improvement plans. 2. Rough grading for the entire project, except for the underground pari<ing garage of the hotel. This earthworic and the necessary export will be done as part ofthe building pennit for Phase 5. 3. Cannon Road: traffic signal, interconnect, and utility tie-ins for water, sewer, storm drain, and dry utilities. 4. Private street: both surface and underground improvements, from Cannon Road to the northerly subdivision boundary. 5. Onsite utilities: public sewer, public water, public fire, and public storm drain. Private utility stubs for future tie-ins will be constructed. Maintenance roads to access utilities will also be constructed. 6. Fencing: perimeter fencing, entry monuments, 42" high screen wall at south and east of gas station with landscaping. 7. Erosion control. 8. Landscape complete between private road and railroad right of way, along Cannon Road, to north end of 42" high screen wall at east end of gas station. Phase 2 - Gas Station and Country Store: 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, stomi drain) to sen/e the gas station. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2. 3. Construction of Gas Station and Country Store. 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2. Phase 3 - Restaurant A Infrastructure 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, stomn drain) to serve Restaurant A. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. 3. Grading for pad (to be hydro-seeded with native, non-irrigated mix). 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. Phase 4 - Restaurant A 1. Construction of Restaurant A Page 1 of 2 Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 PO. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Phase 5 - Hotel 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer stomri drain) to serve Hotel. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5. 3. Construction of Hotel and underground parking garage. 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5. Phase 6 - Restaurant 8 1. Construction of Restaurant B Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, John A. Buza Page 2 of 2 PHASE PARKING RAWS PHASE PARim: REQUIRED PARKINC PROVDED PHASE lOtOAD) 0 0 PHASE 2 (Km MART) B SPACES 81 SPACES PHASE 3 BtESTAmNT A PARtaNO 0 0 PHASE4aiESTAUItANTAJ 76 SPACES 81*59 =140SPACES PHASE 5IW07H AND PAimC STRUCIVRE) m SPACES 81*59*193 » 333SPACES PHASE6(lltSTAUItANTB} m SPACES 333 SPACES TOTAI m SPACES 333 SPACES DEVELOPMENT PHASE PIAN WWWM McAnSe Associates Architects WgSS 6965 0 Camlno Real *105A72 wmmm u oxa, ciUoim mm no^nm CANNON COURT MEMO March 22, 2001 To: Dennis Cunningham From: Barbara Kennedy, Associate Planner RE: CUP 99-30 - Cannon Court 1. After further review of the project, it has been determined that the SDP issues (building height increase for hotel and "Q" overlay) can be reviewed under the CUP per Section 21.208.080 (C) ofthe Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. Additionally, only one CUP application is required for the project. Therefore, you may process a request for refiind of application fees for SDP 00-09 ($2,670) and CUP 99-31 ($2,680). 2. Landscape Plan: a. Please show compliance with the all ofthe Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone landscape requirements. See pages 814-48 g-h. A table showing the requirement and compliance would be helpful. If this won't fit on the L/S plan, include it as an 8 Vi x 11 sheet so that I can use the information for the staff report. b. The Freestanding Sign Landscape Theme only needs to apply to the entry signs facing Cannon Road. I know the required pygmy date palms and bird of paradise don't really complement the landscape theme. You can request a modification to use another species of palm if you want. Otherwise, just try to make the best of it. Please show 80 sq. ft. of landscape area around the signs that complies with the overlay zone landscape guidelines. c. Include a list of shrubs, groundcover, and turf (sod) and the proposed sizes. d. Add bike racks within the project near the mini-mart, hotel, restaurants, and at least one rack within the park area. e. Add benches and tables within the park area for hotel guests, customers, and employee eating areas. 3. The Phasing Plan needs to be modified to include a table showing the number of parking spaces that will be provided and the number required for each phase of the development. Also, in Phase I, show the installation of landscape along the entire length of the area between the Railroad r.o.w. and the private street. Please try to keep it to a one or two page 8 xll" exhibit that can be used as an attachment to the staff report. 4. What would you think about adding a few parking spaces for electric vehicles? Maybe some could be located near the gas station. 5. Please modify the sign program as follows: Freestanding signs may not exceed 100 sq. ft. total aggregate area. Please show calculations for all monument signs. Just use the area around the lettering for the signs located on fi-ont entry walls. The entire sign area will need to be calculated for the smaller freestanding signs in fi-ont of individual buildings. An additional 16 sf of pricing sign area (in addition to the 100 sf total aggregate for all monument signs) is allowed for the gas station monument sign. Please dimension the 16 sq. ft. area. It might be helpftil to add a table similar to this format: MONUMENT SIGNS AREA Entry Signs (2) 17.5 sf 35 sf Gas station HT X WIDTH (less 16 s.f fuel pricing area) sf - 16 sf pricing area Restaurant "A" HT X WIDTH Restaurant "B" HT X WIDTH Hotel HT X WIDTH Total Monument Sign Area 100 sf 5. Please submit the following items: c. d. Materials board/colored elevations for all buildings. The roof color on the 11x17 color copies that I have looks too dark. I though the roof and building colors on the Xerox copies that John sent over showing the Hardie products looked great. Will you be using similar colors? Submit materials/color board for the proposed sign materials and colors. Colored Landscape Plan - A larger scale exhibit would be great. Submit draft copy for the Project Site Notification sign for the public hearing on May 16, 2001. Install sign upon approval of draft. Could you please give me a general idea of what types of restaurants you are tying to get for Restaurant A and B? Also, do you know what type of hotel and gas station will be going in? Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department March 22, 2001 Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite ICQ Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT Your application has been tentatively scheduled for a hearing by the Planning Commission on May 16, 2001. However, for this to occur, you must submit the additional Items listed below. If the required Items are not received by April 2, 2001, 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) 10 copies of your site plans, landscape plans, sign program plans, building elevation plans, and floor plans on 24" x 36" sheets of paper, stapled In complete sets folded Into SVi' x ^^" size. B) One SYz" xll" copy of your reduced site plan, building elevations, floor plans, and landscape plans. These copies must be of a quality which is photographically reproducible. Oniy essential data should be included on plans. C) Please incorporate the minor revisions shown on the redline set and attached memo. Return the redline siet with your resubmittal. 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) 600' Owners List - a typewritten list of names and addresses of all property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property, Including the applicant and/or owner. The list shall Include the San Diego County Assessor's parcel number from the latest equalized assessment rolls. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us CUP 99-30 - CANNON^IuRT March 22, 2001 Paqe 2 B) Mailing Labels - two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the PROPERTY OWNERS within a 600 foot radius of the subject property. The list must be typed In all CAPITAL LETTERS, left justified, void of any punctuation. For any address other than a single family residence, an apartment or suite number must be Included but the Apartment, Suite and/or Building Number must NOT appear In the street address line. DO NOT type assessor's parcel number on labels. DO NOT provide addressed envelopes - PROVIDE LABELS ONLY. Acceptable fonts are: Arial 11 pt, Arlai Rounded MT Bold 9 pt. Courier 14 pt. Courier New 11 pt, and MS Line Draw 11 pt. Sample labels are as follows: UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith Mrs. Jane Smith MRS JANE SMITH 1 23 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 123 Magnolia Ave. APT 3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Apt. #3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE Carlsbad, CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 C) Radius Map - a map to scale, not less than 1" = 200', showing all lots entirely and partially within 600 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots should be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owner's list. The scale of the map may be reduced to a scale acceptable to the Planning Director if the required scale Is Impractical. D) 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. Sincerely, BARBARA KENNEDY, AlCP Associate Planner BKmh Attachment I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE LATEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE BY: DATE: RECEIVED BY DATE: Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department November 22, 2000 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 - CANNON COURT Dear Mr. Cunningham: Attached, is a copy of the memorandum from our engineering and traffic divisions, a redlined traffic report and redlined drawings. There are still several issues that need to be revised or addressed. The environmental review for the project will resume once the traffic and engineering divisions have accepted the traffic report as complete. There are also some outstanding issues that were not fully addressed in the plans which were resubmitted August 21, 2000. The following issues will need to be addressed/revised prior to your next submittal. Tentative Map 1. Since the project now proposes five lots, a Tentative Tract Map application and fee is required. You may request a refund for the minor subdivision application. 2. Please submit a phasing plan and include an analysis which shows that adequate parking can be provided for each phase of development. Indicate what type of temporary landscape treatment is proposed for vacant pads (i.e. lawn, irrigated hydroseed mix, etc.). Also discuss how shared parking, access, and maintenance will be managed. 3. Show the conceptual location for future medians in the private road in the event that future road widening is required. 4. The sidewalk on the west side of the driveway should be shown as a "future walkway" and it should be designed with a tree-lined parkway between the curb and sidewalk. The sidewalk may either be lineal or meandering. Staff is concerned that if the sidewalk is installed now, it may cause confusion to pedestrians since it leads to nowhere. In addition, engineering has requested that you eliminate the decorative paving across the private street since it may encourage pedestrians to cross mid-block. 5. Omit the reference to "basement" on Lots 2 and 3, Sheet 2 of 4. 6. The 3.5 foot high screen wall shown along the west property line is shown as chain link fencing on the Architect's site plan. Please show consistent information on all plans. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/P^00-109 - CANNON COURT November 22, 2000 Page 2 7. Sheet 3 labels the private driveway as a "publicroad and public utility easement". Is this correct? Site Plan 8. Measure the front setback from the property line. Label the 30 foot building setback line along the east edge of the hotel. 9. The loading zone spaces may not count towards the required parking. You will probably need to omit the basement on the food mart so that an adequate number of parking spaces can be provided. 10. Show the width of the sidewalks, including those adjacent to parking stalls. The car overhang may not reduce the width of the sidewalk to less than the minimum distance required for ADA accessibility. 11. Typical standard parking spaces need to be dimensioned as 20' iong, or 17 Vz' feet long with a 2 Vz' overhang. Include a typical detail for parking spaces including the overhang into either planting or sidewalk areas. 12. A minimum of 5 feet of landscape area needs to be provided between the back of sidewalk and any adjacent building wall, not including any area designated as a car overhang area. In addition, a minimum of 4 feet of landscape needs to be provided in landscape islands between rows of parked cars, exclusive of overhang areas. You may want to delete some of the sidewalk areas to achieve more landscaping. Restaurant "A" may need to be slightly adjusted on the pad so that adequate landscaping can be provided around the perimeter of the buiiding. 13. Indicate if a guard rail will be used above the retaining wall at the entrance to the underground parking area or if a safety rail will be constructed as a solid wall element. Indicate the height of the safety rail or wall. Please provide sections/details as necessary for clarification. 14. Dimension the distance from property line to the emergency access gates and identify the type of material for the gates. Align the emergency access road with the primary driveway entrance for the hotel. 15. The chainlink fence should be an upgraded material. At a minimum, use a black vinyl- coated chainlink fence with black posts. Please be sure that all fencing shown is consistent with the landscape plans. 16. Restaurant "B" parking should be 20 -I- 116. Architectural Plans 17. Staff is recommending that you consider replacing the cedar shingle siding material with an exterior siding that is more consistent with the village architectural style. There are only one or two residential projects in Carlsbad which have shingle siding and in most instances it has been painted. It appears that the aesthetic appearance of the cedar shingle siding may be more appropriate for smaller scale bungalow or residential projects. There is also a concern regarding the long term maintenance and appearance due to the natural aging process of the cedar shingles. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/P13WD0-109 - CANNON COURT November 22, 2000 Paqe 3 18. The design of the gas station canopy cannot be supported. The canopy needs to be significantly lowered and should be designed more in keeping with the scale of the hotel porte cochere. The cupola element is much too large and needs to be scaled back. 19. Show the underground parking structure on the hotel elevations. Show the slope of the driveway, the height of the basement, and note the exterior finish of the supporting wall for the hotel which will be visible from the driveway. 20. Please show the handicap parking spaces on the underground parking garage floor plan. Either number the spaces 1-105 or number them to correspond with the site plan. Also, please indicate if a raised curb will be used around the perimeter of the parking garage as a wheel stop. 21. The size of the dining/kitchen area within the hotel has been substantially reduced from the previous submittal. Please be aware that any increase in square footage of this area will require additional parking spaces. 22. Please dimension the width of the arcades at the hotel. 23. Please provide additional information on the mini-mart floor plan (or provide an enlarged detail) showing the dimensions between the columns and building wall/edge of sidewalk. Please be sure that an adequate width for the walkway (ADA accessible) is be provided. 24. Show the interior layout for the mini-mart or provide notes on the plans that indicate no preparation of fast food and no seating areas will be permitted within the mini-mart. 25. The covered entrance on restaurant A and the rear entrance of the hotel is mislabeled as porte cochere. 26. On the hotel elevations, the siding symbol is still missing on portions of the third-floor around the windows (south elevation, right side). 27. Please include a reference to the cornerboards, window trim, and the detailing on the gable ends in the Building Color/Materials Legend. 28. The building floor plans and elevations need to show the delivery entrances. Signs 29. The sign program will be used as a basis for approving future signs for the project. Therefore, more detailed information needs to be included on the plans. Please clarify the following items: a. Since any amendments to the sign program wili require City Councii approvai, it is recommended that you show the maximum allowable sign area on the buildings. More thought should be given to the placement of the signs. For example, consider placing signs on the north and south facing walls of the hotel (closest to the freeway) for the best visibility from the freeway. b. The sign notes are too vague. Please specify the allowable colors (4 maximum) for wall and individual monument signs. Specify the type of wall signs proposed (i.e. internally illuminated channel letters, depth of letters, returns, etc.). A corporate typestyle is ok for individual buildings. Logos should be limited to 25% of the allowable sign area. /PI^C SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/PW00-109 - CANNON COURT November 22, 2000 Paqe 4 c. Under notes, there are no Master Plan Guidelines applicable to this project. d. Include in the notes: 1) Wall signs shall not exceed a height of 35 feet; 2) No signs shall be permitted above the roof line of the building or on the cupolas; and, 3) Sign locations and sizes are conceptual. Sign locations and sizes may be modified, subject to approval by the Planning Department, provided that the proposed signage does not exceed the maximum allowable signage for any individual building. e. Show the design and details of the fuel pricing sign. Consider relocating the sign to a more visually prominent location. f. Show the design and details of the typical monument signs. If monument signs are double faced, the sign area calculation must be doubled. Include an area for the building address on the monument sign. g. Specify the type style, letter height, and color of metal letters for the entrance signs to ensure that the tenant names and project name are uniform in appearance. Include an area for the addresses. Show the sign area for the entrance signs (100 sq. ft. maximum). h. Show the location of the proposed wall sign for restaurant "B" on the reference site plan. i. The reference legend is incorrect - "A" should be the hotel and "B" should be the Gas station/food mart. Also, for clarity, revise the reference legend to identify the building signs as Hotel, Restaurant "A", Restaurant "B" and Gas Station/Mini Mart (not A, B, C, D) and label the buildings on the site plan accordingly. j. Dimension the building frontages (on the reference site plan) which were used for the purposes of calculating allowable sign area. k. Provide details of the "special landscape treatment" required for monument signs per the Visitor Serving/Commercial Overlay Zone. Landscape Plans 30. Please provide a plan showing the sizes and species of the existing trees and indicate which trees will be removed. The arborist report indicated that the trees along the northern boundary of the project were in good condition. Is it possible to save these trees and supplement them with addition plant materials? 31. You will need to contact Doug Duncanson in the Public Works general Services Division to obtain approval for removal of any trees within the public right-of-way. Please submit a copy of the permit authorizing removal of the trees with your next submittal. 32. Please include a typical detail showing the car overhang area and low growing groundcover under the 2 Yi' overhang. 33. Landscape plans were not included with the resubmittal. Please address all previous comments inciuded in the June 30'*" correspondence and any issues in this correspondence which relate to the landscape plans. Additional comments may be generated based on review of the revised landscape plans. /PI^C SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/PW00-109 - CANNON COURT November 22, 2000 Page 5 34. Please address the following Caltrans comment dated 7/21/2000: "The Conceptual Site Plan indicates trees within Caltrans right of way (R/W) at the intersection of the southbound off-ramp and Cannon Road. This does not reflect the location and type of plant material existing in the R/W. The final planting design needs to correctly incorporate existing plant locations and type of plant materials." Miscellaneous 35. Please group the plans so that all of the hotel floor plans are on consecutive sheets. The elevations for each building should also be on consecutive sheets. Please call me at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions. I would like to meet with you prior to resubmittal of the plans to ensure that all the revisions/issues have been resolved. Sincerely, BARBARA KENNEDY, AlCP * Associate Planner c: Adrienne Landers, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry MEMORANDUM November 16, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development SDP 00-09, CUP 99-30, CUP 99-31, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT The Development Services and Transportation Divisions have completed a review of the traffic report for the referenced project. The attached memo from David Stillman, the redlined traffic report and the redlined site plan identify all the items that need to be addressed. Please note that O'Day's drawings now show 5 lots. That means they have to apply for a major subdivision. Please forward them to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. Please make sure these prints are returned with the corrected plans to assist us in developing the final conditions for the project. If you or the applicant has any questions, please contact me at (760) 602-2758. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer Attachments C Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann November 13, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, JIMENO FROM: Associate Engineer, Stillman RE: CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT I have reviewed the third submittal of the traffic impact report dated October 24, 2000 for the aforementioned project. In addition to minor grammatical corrections noted within the body of the report, I have the following specific comments with respect to the report: 1. The Peak VPHPL for Carlsbad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Cannon Road shown in Table 3-1 does not agree with the volumes shown in Figures 3-3 or 3-4. This volume should be verified. 2. Some turning movement volumes shown in Figures 3-3, 3-4, 4-2, 6-3 and 7-2 are either missing, incorrect or are not consistent with volumes approaching from adjacent intersections. These are noted in red within the body of the report. These should be revised as necessary. 3. Two of the average daily volumes for Cannon Road shown in Table 5-1 are incorrect. These should be corrected. 4. The 2005 Average Daily Traffic volumes shown in Figure 6-1 are not consistent with the 2005 peak-hour volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6- 3. Within the report on page 6-1 it is stated that, for the 2005 scenario, It is assumed that Cannon Road is complete from Lego Drive to El Camino Real in order to provide a worst-case condition for analysis. However, the 2005 volume on Cannon Road east of Lego Drive is 5,000 ADT (less than existing + project), the volume on Cannon between Car Country Drive and Lego Drive is 12,000 ADT (again less than existing + project), and the volumes along the remainder of Cannon have only risen slightly over the existing + project scenario. The peak-hour volumes shown in Table 6-2 and Table 6-3, however, are significantly higher than existing -•- project. It appears that the average daily traffic volumes along Cannon Road shown in Figure 6-1 are too low given the assumption that Cannon is opened to El Camino Real and considering the peak-hour volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3. November 13, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT Page 2 5. The ramp meter evaluation needs to be explained and clarified further. The report states on page 8-3 that the ramp meter rate data shown in Figure 8-2 confirms that the traffic estimates and observed queuing are generally accurate; however, I do not know how to interpret the data in Figure 8-2 and I therefore cannot justify this conclusion. Table 8-2 needs to be interpreted, and the relationship of Table 8-2 to Table 8-3 needs to be explained. 6. The ICU calculations shown for the intersection of Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas assume that northbound-to-eastbound right turns overlap with westbound-to-southbound left turns. However, this overlap has not been shown in the traffic signal phase diagram forthe intersection. Additionally, this right-turn movement may not develop the full 1800 vehicle/hour capacity of the lane during an overlap phase due to queuing at the Cannon Road/1-5 southbound ramp intersection. The Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas intersection should be evaluated assuming that this overlap does not exist unless it can be shown that these right turn movements are allowed to flow freely through the Cannon Road/1-5 southbound ramp intersection without delay. In addition, during a meeting with Andrew Schlaefli on October 16, 2000, and during a subsequent phone conversation with Mr. Schlaefli, I requested that Urban Systems Associates provide to the City documentation on how the 2020 turning movement volumes were derived. This documentation can be In the form of notes from previous working sessions and is intended to be kept on file with the City and not included within the body of the report. This information has not been provided to this date. Feel free to call me at x2745 if you have any questions. DAVID STILLMAN, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section C: Public Works Director Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Deputy City Engineer, Development Services Senior Civil Engineer, Land Development URBAN SYSTEMS 9fSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGINEERINQ, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ATTN: Barbara Kennedy i COMPANY: City of Carlsbadj FROM: Andrew P. SchH DATE: January 16, 200»1 mmm$mffm WHITE TO ADDRESSEE; YELLOW TO FILE; PINK TO MANAGER phone: ^ fax: ^ 760 602 4626 760 602 8559 TOTAL PAGES: l-l- Attachment TIME: 10:26 am TRANSMITTED VIA: Messenger SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS FOR CANNON COURT We are sending you the following information foryour: W use O for submittal ^ as requested O approval O review £r comment # OF COPIES TYPE DESCRIPTION 3 Report Final Transportation Analysis for Cannon Court Enclosed are three replacement copies of our final traffic study, edited as requested by David Stillman. Please let us know ifyou need any other information. cc: David Stillman, City of Carlsbad (with enclosure) John Buza, J. A. Buza Corporation (with enclosure) Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems (with enclosure) #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 1 C:\OFFICE.2000\2598-011601 -aps/disk 4540 KEARNY VILLA ROAD, SUITE 106 • SAN DiEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 From: To: Date: Subject: Barbara, Dave Stillman Barbara Kennedy 12/13/00 5:37PM Re: Cannon Court The traffic report revisions that were submitted looked OK, so they can submit a complete revised report now without further comment from me. I do have some comments on the intersection striping and signal plan, but Frank indicated that I should wait before commenting on that. Dave »> Barbara Kennedy 12/13/00 05:29PM »> Dave: Hadn't heard from you in awhile and I was wondering how the review of the Cannon Court Traffic study is coming along. Let me know. I'm hoping they will be about done so that we can continue with environmental review. Thanks. BK URBAN SYSTEMS MsOCMTES, INC. nANNma & TRAFFIC EN&NEERUIO, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT mmm$mffm WHITE TO ADDRESSEE; YELLOW TO FILE; PINK TO MANAGER ATTN: Barbara Kennedy, AlCP RECEIVED phone: ^ fax: ^ COMPANY: City of Carlsbad ^rr n r onnn (760) 602-46 2 6 (760) 602-85 5 9 tl i ^jj. ^ JJ g 2000 FROM: Andrew P. ^^^y^jf^Qfjy Qp TOTAL PAGES : 2 + Enclosures DATE: December 4, 2000 PLANI^fi'Kfe'lJ^^ TRANSMITTED VIA: ^^as&M^^^^ SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO TRAFFIC COMMENTS - CANNON COURT PROJECT We are sending you the following information foryour: O use O for submittal ^ as requested O approval ^ review £r comment Thank you for forwarding the City's comments on the Cannon Court traffic study. Following is a discussion of our replies along with revised report pages, figures, tables and appendices. Please forward the revisions for final review. Upon acceptance ofthe replies, we will finalize and publish a final report for your use on preparing for hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. The following comments are in the order of David Stillman's November 13, 2000 memo to Frank Jimeno. Also enclosed is the red lined mark up of our October 24, 2000 submittal. Comment 1: Verify and edit as required volumes shown in Table 3-1 and Figures 3-3 and 3-4. Re: Table 3-1, no change is necessary. The 1216 VPHPL is derived as follows: The highest peak is PM, so from Figure 3-4, the highest volume is northbound for the segment north of Cannon Road. The total volume is 910 (i.e. the northbound through) plus the west to north turn which is 306. The total of 910 -i- 306 is 1216 which was entered in Table 3-1 and used for determining the level of service. The other edits on Figures 3-3 and 3-4 were made as suggested. Also attached are the revised capacity calculations as needed based on the edits to the figures. Please note, no changes resulted in any levels of service. Table 3-2 was also updated to reflect the ICU changes due to the recalculation. Comment 2: Verify volumes shown in Fugures 4-2, 6-3 and 7-2. As requested the volumes, figures and tables plus calculations were edited and updated. Where If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. #002598 1 C:\OFFICE.2000\2598-120W0-aps/disk 4540 KEARNY VlUA ROAD, SUITE 106 • SAN DiEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 Barbara Kennedy ^ Unj^n Systems Associates, Inc. Decen^iber 4, 2000 ^ necessary LOS changes were noted in the summary tables. No new impacts were identified. Comment 3: Edit Table 5-1. Edits made as requested. Comment 4: We agree the volumes shown on Figure 6-1 are to low to represent 2005 with Cannon connected through to El Camino Real. We added 6,000 through trips to Cannon Road to correct the problem. The 6,000 ADT adjustment was based on the March 23, 2000 Carlsbad forecast with Cannon Road connected to El Camino Real. The volume on Cannon Road east of Faraday Ave. from that forecast is 11,000 ADT. The adjustment was therefore determined to be 11,000-5,000 (shown on the report) or 6,000ADT. Figure 6-1 and Table 6-1 have been revised to reflect this adjustment. Also, the adjustment suggested for Figure 6-3 was also made. Levels of service were recalculated. Delays changed slightly however, there was no change in level of service because the peak hour volumes already included higher peaks. Comment 5: A revised ramp meter section is attached as requested. Comment 6: As requested, the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas intersection capacities and level of service were recalculated WITHOUT the overlap parse. See attached calculations. The delay changed slightly however the lead of service does not change. Table 8-1 was updated to reflect the change. General Comment: Re: 2020 peak hour turn movement development. A separate Technical Memo to David Stillman has been prepared and is attached for your use. Also, the requested changes were made to the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas signal to eliminate overlap. Appendix B exhibits were updated to reflect these changes. Copies are attached foryour review. If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. #002598 2 C:\OFFICE_2000\2598-120W0-aps/^disk CONSULT A/>sl T S Transmittal Letter To: Carisbad, City of 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Date; 10/27/00 Project: Cannon Court Re; Plan Submittal Job No: 99-1004 Attention: Barbra Kennedy TM: DWG: Transmitted Email: Deiivery Phone No: (760) 602-2774 Fax No: (760) 602-8558 Ext: RECEIVED Enclosed, piease find the foilowing: Four sets - Sheets 1 thru 4 ofthe revised tentative map One blueline - redline markup by traffic Remarl(s: Barabra- CITY OF CARLSSAD PLANNING CEPT. This is the revised Cannon Court tentative map with revisions to the medians and lane configurations for the private drive. Feel free to call if you have questions or comments. By: John P. Strohminger Project Manager CC; John Buza - J.A. Buza Corp with enclosure Andy Schlaefli - Urban Systems Associates with enclosure Dennis Cunningham - Planning Systems with enclosures G:\jobs\jps.com\961008\t001027a.doc 5900 Pasteur Court Civil Engineering Suite IOO Planning Carlsbad, California 92008-7317 Processing (760) 931-7700 Surveying Fax: (760) 931-8680 E-mail: oday@odayconsultants.com URBAN SYSTEMS f^OCIATES, INC PLANNUG & TRAFFIC ENGmEERmo, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ATTN: Barbara Kennedy COMPANY: City of Carlsbad FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS CANNON COURT fmmm$mffm WHTTE TO ADDRESSEE; YELLOW TO FILE; HNK TO MANAGER phone: ^ fax: ^ 760 602 4626 760 602 8559 TOTAL PAGES: 1+ Attachment Andrew P. Schlaefli October 25, 2000 TIME: 10:50 am TRANSMITTED VIA: Messenger We are sending you the following information foryour: Ouse O for submittal O as requested O approval w review £r comment # OF COPIES TYPE DESCRIPTION 3 Report Transportation Analysis for Cannon Court Enclosed are three copies of our revised traffic study. Please let us know ifyou have any questions regarding the analysis or you need any other information. cc: David Stillman, City of Carlsbad John Buza, J. A. Buza Corporation Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 1 C:\OFFICE_2000\2598-102500-aps/d\sk 4540 KEARNY VlUA ROAD, SUITE 106 SAN DIEGO. CA 92123-1573 (858) 560-4911 FAX (858) 560-9734 From: Dave Stillman To: Frank Jimeno Date: 10/16/00 5:28PM Subject: Cannon Court meeting with Urban Systems Frank, Here is a summary of what transpired during my meeting with Urban Systems this afternoon: * Urban Systems has not yet received the letter from Bill Figge (Caltrans) stating that Caltrans' concerns are no longer an issue. Andy will follow up. * The split phase signal at the Cannon/Avenida Encinas intersection is no longer being proposed. Andy provided me with an intersection diagram showing dual left turn lanes, a single through lane and a single right-turn-only lane out of the project, with a double-yellow centeriine. I informed him that the City recommends a raised median with a minimum 4-foot wide nose, both between Cannon and the first driveway and between the first and second driveways. Consequently, the western curb line will be moved 4 feet to the west to accomodate the median. I also indicated that the City would accept dual left-turn lanes with a single through-right combo lane out of the project. * Urban Systems recommended dual left turn lanes from w/b Cannon Road to s/b Avenida Encinas. I will follow up on this recommendation. * The proposed crosswalks across Avenida Encinas within the project area will be eliminated. * The traffic report will be updated using their new Cannon Road counts (5150 ADT east of Lego Drive) for the "existing" scenario. They will also adjust the 2005 volumes down to eliminate inconsistencies within the report and to better reflect acual trends. The 2020 volumes will not be modified. * The ramp meter queueing analysis will be revised using a better methodology to obtain more accurate predictions. * The cover sheet of the report will be revised to reflect 3, rather than 5, submittals. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at x2745. David Stillman CC: Bob Johnson City of Carlsbad Planning Department September 29, 2000 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 ~ CANNON COURT Dear Mr. Cunningham: The revised traffic report which was submitted August 30, 2000 has been reviewed by the City's Traffic and Engineering Departments. The traffic report still does not contain all of the information which was previously requested. However, based on the information provided in the most recent traffic study, it appears that the traffic impacts are much greater than originally anticipated and there are several major circulation issues which need to be addressed. These issues are outlined in detail in the attached comments. Additionally, the initial environmental impact assessment cannot be completed until the traffic study has been determined to be adequate by our Engineering Department. Without an acceptable traffic study it is impossible to determine if the traffic impacts are significant or if they can be mitigated to a level of "less than significant". Therefore, the "timeline" for this project has essentially stopped until your traffic engineer addresses all of the Engineering Department's comments. Please call me at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss these issues. Sincerely, BARBARA KENNEDY, AlCP Associate Planner BKxs Adrienne Landers, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us MEMORANDUM September 29, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER - BARBARA KENNEDY FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development SDP 00-09, CUP 99-30, CUP 99-31, PUD 00-109: CANNON COURT The Development Services and Transportation Divisions have completed a review of the traffic report for the referenced project. The report, in its present form, does not provide the information needed to make a determination regarding a resolution of the traffic impacts on the circulation elements. The attached redlined report identifies all the items that need to be addressed in order to have the required information. Following are some of the outstanding items and concerns that need to be addressed in a revised traffic report. 1. The opening of Cannon Road to Faraday Avenue impacts the traffic analysis. The traffic report needs to include this circulation element. 2. The traffic volumes need to reflect the current year 2020 model. 3. The traffic volumes shown in the report point to an issue that needs to be addressed. The left turning movement from the project site to eastbound Cannon Road poses a potential problem to the traffic circulation on-site. There are several potential solutions that need to be explored. 4. The Caltrans issues identified in Urban System's September 21, 2000 letter and Caltrans' September 22, 2000 letter, both to Barbara Kennedy, need to be resolved. City staff will be meeting with Caltrans staff to attempt to facilitate a solution. We will keep you informed of the potential resolution and the applicant's role in implementing them. Attached herewith are redlined traffic report and site plan check prints from the Transportation Division. Please forward them to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. Please make sure these prints are returned with the corrected plans to assist us in developing the final conditions for the project. If you or the applicant has any questions, please contact me at extension (760) 602-2758. FRANK J. JIMENO, P.E. Associate Engineer Attachments C Deputy City Engineer Wojcik Senior Civil Engineer Hammann September 20, 2000 TO: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER. JIMENO FROM: Associate Engineer, Stillman RE: CANNON COURT TRAFFIC REPORT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW I have reviewed the traffic impact report and improvement plans for the aforementioned project. In addition to minor comments and corrections noted within the body of the traffic impact report, I have the following specific comments with respect to the report: 1. Cannon Road between Lego Drive and Faraday Avenue has been open to through traffic since July 27, 2000. This is not reflected within the "Existing Conditions" portion of the traffic report and consequently traffic volumes along Cannon Road are significantly higher than those shown within this section of the report. The evaluation should be revised using actual volumes obtained after the opening of Cannon Road east of Lego Drive. 2. Some of the lane configurations shown in Figure 3-2 are Incorrect. These should be revised accordingly. 3. How were the peak hour volumes shown in the "Peak VPHPL" column of Table 3-1 and subsequent similar tables derived? 4. The report states on page 4-4 that the directional distribution percentages shown in Figure 4-2 are based on "existing intersection traffic flow and engineering judgment." It should be described in detail how existing traffic flow and engineering judgment were used to develop the distribution percentages shown in Figure 4-2. 5. The project in/out volumes shown in Figure 4-2 are Inconsistent with those shown in the Project Trip Generation Table 4-1. Figure 4-2 should be revised accordingly. September 20, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Page 2 6. Within the "Existing Plus Project Conditions" section, Figure 5-1 shows the section of Cannon Road east of Lego Drive to be open; however, the same 7000 ADT volume that was assumed to exist pn Cannon Road before the opening of the section east of Lego Drive is used. In actuality, the traffic volume along Cannon Drive increases once the link east of Lego Drive is open. Figure 5-1 and the subsequent analysis should be revised accordingly. See comment #1 above. 7. Some of the turning movement volumes shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3 shown no increase, and some show a decrease, from the volumes shown In Figures 5-2 and 5-3, respectively. These volumes should be verified. 8. The report states on page 7-1 that the SANDAG Cities/County 2020 Model was used to determine year 2020 volumes. However, the volumes shown in Figures 7-2 and 7-3 are not consistent with those from the SANDAG model. The derivation of these volumes should be explained and any inconsistencies with the SANDAG model justified. 9. On page 8-3 the report states that the project contribution to the ramp meter queue lengths is expected to be 225 feet at the northbound 1-5 ramp and 125 feet at the southbound 1-5 ramp. Can the ramps and adjacent roadways accommodate this? If not, mitigation measures should be suggested. 10. Table 8-2 predicts queue lengths of up to 9,525 feet (almost 2 miles) at the Cannon Road 1-5 ramps for the buildout (2020) condition. This does not make sense intuitively. The soundness of the freeway ramp meter analysis methodology should be reviewed and an alternate analysis method used If necessary. I have also noted the following comments with respect to the improvement plans: 1. A signing and striping plan should be submitted for the Cannon Court access road, as well for the intersection of Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas. The proposed striping of the access road at the intersection shall be compatible with existing striping at the other legs of the intersection. September 20, 2000 CANNON COURT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN REVIEW Page 3 2. The traffic impact study predicts 159 vehicles to make the left turning movement from the Cannon Court access road to eastbound Cannon Road during the PM peak hour. The left turn pocket length as shown is about 95 feet long. This length is insufficient to accommodate 159 vehicles during the peak hour. In addition, the left turn pocket length and the north leg of the Intersection in general should be sized to accommodate future traffic resulting from development of the SDG&E "back parcel" to the north of Cannon Court. As a result, peak hour traffic distributions and volumes from the "back parcel" need to be determined, added to Cannon Court volumes, and the turn pocket length increased accordingly. This may require relocating or combining driveway access to Cannon Court and lengthening the raised median island on the access road unless alternate solutions can be proposed. 3. The intersection of the emergency access road with the main access road should align with one of the driveways if possible. In addition, the plans do not show a gate at the north end of the emergency access road. Will a gate be provided at this location? 4. The Cannon Court access road intersects Cannon Road at an angle to Avenida Encinas. An access road alignment that results in a perpendicular intersection with Cannon Road is preferred to ensure the orderly flow of traffic across Cannon Road between the north and south legs ofthe intersecfion. Feel free to call me at x2745 if you have any questions. DAVID STILLMAN, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section C: Public Works Director Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Deputy City Engineer, Development Services Senior Civil Engineer, Land Development URBAN SYSTEMS mSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING i TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, MARKETINQ S, PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ATTN: Mr. FrankJimeno phone: ^ fax: ^ COMPANY: CityofCarlsbad/)/^ (760) 602-2758 (760) 602-8562 FROM: Andrew P. Schl^^M^l^^ TOTAL PAGES : _6 DATE: August 30, 2000 ' / TIME: 1:09 pm r/?/4A/5MJTTED VIA; Messenger SUBJECT: ANALYSIS OF SDCSrE BACK PARCEL IMPACTS ON THE ACCESS ROAD FOR THE CANNON COURT PROJECT The purpose of this evaluation is to address alternative e future traffic generation for the SDG£rE Back Parcel and resulting impacts to the Cannon Court project access road. Background: There is approximately a 45 acre SDG&E parcel of land located north ofthe proposed Cannon Court project. Access to the parcel is only via a roadway through the Cannon Court project. To accommodate project plus the SDGErE "Back Parcel" this evaluation was requested by City staff. To complete the analysis, land uses, acerages and appropriate traffic generation factors had to be developed. Based on a series of discussions with City staff, it was decided that for purposes of this analysis two alternatives would be evaluated. The alternatives are described in the table below: ALTERNATIVE ACREAGE LAND USE TRIP RATE ADT 1 15 High Technology Power Plant 30/ac 450 1 30 Corporate Headquarters lOO/ac 3,000 Total 45 3,450 2 15 High Technology Power Plant 30/ac 450 2 17.5 Corporate Headquarters lOO/ac 1,750 2 12.5 Visitor Commercial 400/ac 5,000 Total 45 7,200 #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 1 C:\OFFICE.2000\2598-83lOO-apsfdisk 4540 KEARNY VILLA ROAD, SUITE 106 • SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 FrankJimeno |^ U|^n Systems Associates, Inc. August 30, 2000 As shown in the table above, traffic generation from the back parcel may range from 3,450 daily trips to 7,200 daily trips. Traffic from the Cannon Court project is estimated to generate 4,793 daily trips. Analysis: The Cannon Court project proposes an access road which is designed as a 64/84 secondary arterial with widening atthe Cannon Road intersection as shown on Attachments 1 and 2. As shown on the attachments full improvements are proposed at the southerly end. The improvements then taper to a pavement width of 42 feet at the northerly property boundary which abuts the SDGErE Back Parcel. Based on City of Carlsbad Street Standards, see Attachments 3 and 4, a secondary arterial street has a capacity of up to 20,000 average daily trips. The Cannon Court project traffic generation is 4,793 daily trips, therefore a two lane collector street is all that is necessary because the City street standards allow up to 10,000 daily trips on such a street. Since the project access is at a signalized intersection, a turn lane is also needed for the proposed Cannon Court project. Traffic on the access road with Alternative 1 and Cannon Court traffic would total 8,243 (3,450 plus 4,793). If this land use option were to develop on the back parcel, a two lane collector street with intersection widening would still be sufficient because less than 10,0000 total daily trips would be expected to use the street. With back parcel land use Alternative 2 however, total traffic on the access road would be 11,993 (7,200 plus 4,793) daily trips. For this alternative, a secondary arterial street would be necessary to meet City of Carlsbad street standards. Conclusion: Based on the analysis described above, the proposed Cannon Court project access road improvements are expected to be sufficient for both the project and possible future development ofthe SDG&E "Back Parcel". If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. #2598 2 C:\OFFICE.2000\2598-83100-aps/disk FrankJimeno August 30, 2000 L||^n Systi ems Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENT 1 T CANNON ROAD CD-J 2598-Arr-1.d««l #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 3 C:\OFFICE.2000\2593-83100-aps/disk FrankJimeno August 30, 2000 U||pn Systems Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENT 2 ^^^;f^:•ft^i3^ ^/iijj.!':'^ "I*""— jj>^» •«> ^1 1 aMTTi'TnTT CD-J 2598-ATr-2.dwg #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 4 C:\OFFICE_2000\2598-83100-aps/d\sk Oo I > CITY OF CARLSBAD I o o o, Oo Co UJ O O Q t3 TO o_ O c TO TO 3 O 3 O r+ TO SI- TO £5 Vl TO 3 O c in Q r+ O 3 n TO XSltM CUStlFIDITieN Mt^iAL: ..r :«IHII«g|..J3s^ ABT umtBt (tmiTS) •••isc 1,200 MKi ' -•TsaS:MM Duign Speed <OMPM SO NPH 40 HMI 30 MPM 3D KPH 25 WH 25 NPH 20 HP* Hiniiiui Spacing of Intersectlcrtt Clncluotina right-turn In/out) (in fMt) 600 300 300 150 T's other! 2t» 150 T»« othere 200 ISO (Ight-of-Mr Uidth (in tntt 126 IQi B4 £0 or M 72 £0 i6 » 46-S6 Acctss to Ad^Dining Prnperty NONE WWE Miere n» ether •CECH t* p«*«ifa(e Lleitod tU>)Kt to •ppreyal limited subiect ta epprovel O.K. O.E. O.K. Ltaitid «i»r«v«t Curb to-Curb Diitanc* (in fe«0 tu <»• ndtui] <t<' Mdion) «4 40 Of (8 S2 40 U 24 Mininjn Traffic fndH 9 a.5 •.0 6.0 7.0 J.O 4.S 4.0 s.o Nlril«un Structunt Settion'" (In (nchu) 6 AC ( AB 5 AC 6 M 4 AC » AS 4 AC 6 AB 4 AC 6 AB 4 AC 4 M 4 AC 4 M 4 AC 4AB Stopping Sight DUtance'^' <in fc<t> HO 430 300 I 200 200 tso 150 125«> Hlnlinun Cant«rlfn« aadlw (in 1«C) 1MB'*' 300 300 ZOO 200 .... 200 NaNioua Ccptrrlln* Crodo (not thru Intorsoc.r*' TX n m ax .12X IZX .... I5X NiniM riowl ine Grade'*' I.QX 1.0X 1.0X 1.0V t.ox I.OX I.OX I.OX I.ra (t>, (2), Parking I lie! ted to ene side, 'keductian to 100> wfth approval of City Ensinear. (S) (6J. Cradee greater (h«i IDX uitl require apecific epprevat, tttip aeal, etc. te exceed t% thru Interaectlont. Leeal, eut-de>(ae ant hltUlda any Inereaia wade through intenectfone up (e SX, priwIiM that GAITMNS guideline* for sight distance and vartlcal eurvag era e<aplled with. REVISEO 11/VQ This Is based upon less then 2X grades. Intersection sight distance pcr CAiriAKS guidalfnea end taction fl i 'Aaguses no stiperetevailoni: Includes atanobrd e/aasfal '''niniauii grade of 2.0X is aneota'aaad. If t.OX ainlai special eonatructlan sar be laad Hitfc City Emlnecr line of cul-ds-aec bulbs and Vnucklea shall have «inla Typicai centeriine grades at tiia ifiper reach of cut-de be 2X atintam. stofiping SI Page S. I. ia net poaalbla, M»t. auttar grade af I.OX. ahall (B>, At ley sectlwis slutl confons to SMISO a>2l. Si: FrankJimeno August 30, 2000 U||ppn Systems Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENT 4 ^i/W= 126 PRJWe ARTERIAL STRE£T. P./Wt - QS- 1 f--6'"YP MAJOR ARTERIAL SIFEET. 6*- 2222S25SSS SECONDARY ARTERIAL STREET a . 40' ' T ' 1 1 1 2T» COLLECTOR STREET K/ir/sijo-' gAT a£ i;riK[|> TO LOCAL STREEI CITY' OF CARLSBAD STANDARD STREET WIDTHS :}/.n STUNDARC HO. VJD ! I CD-J 259a-ATT-4.dwg #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. 6 a\OFFICE.2000\2598-83100-aps/d\sk URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCUTES, INC. PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGMEERING, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ATTN: Barbara Kennedy COMPANY: CityofCarlsbad FROM: Andrew P. Schlaefli IVHITE TO ADDRESSEE; YELLOW TO FILE; PINK TO MANAGER phone : »• fax: " (760) 602-4626 (619) 602-8559 TOTAL PAGES : 2 Attachments + Traffic Report DATE: October 3, 2000 TIME: 2:11 PM SUBJECT: CANNON COURT TRAFFIC STUDY FIFTH REVISION OCTOBER 3, 2000 .1 Thank you foryour September 29, 2000 letter and comments on the Cannon Court Traffic Report, Fourth Submittal, dated August 30, 2000. Enclosed is a revised study which addresses to the extent possible prior to our meeting the comments you forwarded to us. Following is a discussion of each ofthe comments forwarded to us in the September 20, 2000 memo to FrankJimeno from Oavid Stillman. Since we have not yet received the "minor comments and corrections" noted in the memo, this submittal has not yet incorporated these items. We will revise the report to reflect these minor edits as soon as we receive the comments. Comment 1- Cannon Road (Lego to Faraday) recently opened on July 27. Obtain new counts and incorporate the new data in the existing conditions section ofthe report. Discussion: Counts will have to be obtained since the data to our knowledge does not exist unless the City or another project has obtained the data. Since this information relates to existing conditions and is provided for information only, we would ask that acceptance of the traffic study not be deferred while the data is being gathered. Pending the availability of count data we revised the report based on an estimated count of 2000 ADT. Comment 2- Update existing lane configurations on Figure 3-2. The graphic will be updated based on the report mark up when provided. Comment 3- How were segment peak volumes of Table 3-1 determined? The procedure used is identical to the City's Annual Traffic Monitoring Program. The Monitonng Program uses the maximum one hour traffic flow in one direction as the basis for determining segment levels of service. For example in Table 3-1, Avenida Encinas shows a Peak VPHPL of 250. The number is based on the highest per lane one direction volume found in figures 3-3 and 3-4. The highest is found as the PM peak #002598 4540 KEARNY VlUA ROAD, SVTTE 106 • SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 2598-100200-aps/OfRce.2000 • FAX (858) 560-9734 Barbara Kennedy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October 3, 2000 which is 360+ 135 or 495 during the PM peak on Figure 3-4. On a per lane basis for 2 lanes the VPHPL would be 495/ 2= 247.5 which rounds to 250 as shown in Table 3-1. The Volume is then divided by the lane capacity of 1800. For example, 250/ 1800= 0.14 which is a segment level of service A. An updated graphic is included with the revised report which reflects the procedure described above. Also please note that for Cannon Road east of Lego Drive we used an estimated 2000 ADT to account for the recent opening of Cannon to Faraday pending the availability of actual count data. Comment 4- Explain the rationale for distribution of project traffic. The proposed project is expected to serve visitor, local business and office uses because of the restaurants, hotel and service station. Generally, about forty percent of patrons were estimated to be on Interstate 5 to the north and south, thirty percent east on Cannon Road, fifteen percent south on Avenida Encinas, and fifteen percent west on Cannon Road. The percentage distributions are based on the approximate number of opportunities and distance to the opportunities based on our experience and years of study in the Carlsbad area. A Select Zone traffic model run was not used for determining the distribution because the model typically does not realistically distribute traffic for the visitor commercial types of uses in this project. Also, the Traffic Analysis Zone for this area includes other uses and is rather large with a connection to Carlsbad Boulevard. A Select Zone model run would therefore not provide reliable results from a technical perspective. Comment 5- The project AM and PM peak hour volumes shown on Figure 4-2 are slightly higher that the revised project and therefore more conservative. The higher volumes came from an earlier submittal when an analysis ofthe SDGfrE back parcel was also included in the analysis. The exhibits can be revised to exactly match the trip generation table, however, the volumes would be reduced. We would not expect changes to any ofthe levels of service since most of them are already "A". That is why the more conservative approach was taken. The segment volumes all exactly match the trip generation table, it is only the peak hour that was left with the more conservative numbers. Cominent 6- As requested, the figure and analysis has been revised based on an estimated count for Cannon Road east. Also, the intersections were balanced to #002598 2 2598-100200-aps/Offic&.2000 Barbara Kennedy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October 3, 2000 remove inconsistencies in existing traffic data that comes from the use of three different sources for existing traffic data, namely: New Counts City Monitoring Counts Caltrans Counts The ICU calculations still need to be recalculated for Table 5-2. Comment 7- In some cases the Year 2005 traffic model peak hour turns are lower than existing plus project. This is because the model is based on cumulative traffic and in some cases centroid distortions due to large traffic analysis zones which yield results that are different than manual analysis process of adding project traffic to existing. In three earlier submittals ofthe traffic report, these differences were adjusted out so that there always would be same or higher traffic. During the review of our third submittal we were asked to remove these manually adjusted volumes and to replace them with city 2005 and 2020 model results. This request by the city resulted in some lower volumes. We would request a technical working session with city technical traffic and planning staff to address and resolve manual adjustments ofthe traffic model results so that reasonable and realistic results are reported. This is the same process the city has been conducting with O'Rourke Engineering for the 2020 buildout model. Comment 8- See reply to comment 7 above. The same problem exists with the 2020 model for the same reasons and a technical working session with city staff is needed to resolve the issue. Comment 9- Can the freeway ramps accommodate project traffic at ramp meters. See thc atlached letter to Caltrans date 9/14/2000, Items 4 and 5. Based on field observation, project trafific can be accommodated on the newly widened ramps unless the ramp meter flow rates are restricted by Caltrans or an incident on the freeway at nearby interchanges result in the diversion of traffic to the Cannon Road ramps. Comment 10- Theoretical queue lengths of almost two miles at buildout does not make sense intuitively. We agree. See the SANDAG comments regarding queuing estimates in the attached excerpts from the Regional Traffic Impact Study Manual. In #002598 3 2598-100200-aps/Office.2000 Barbara Kennedy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. October 3, 2000 our experience and based on numerous other studies, the theoretical queuing reported in traffic studies typically does not occur. Ifnecessary, this section ofthe report could be revised to incorporate actual AM and PM queuing data. Comments regardmg improvement plans: 1. A signing and striping plan should be submitted for Cannon Court. See Attachment 1 of the enclosed letter to Caltrans. The signal and Cannon Court intersection striping is shown. A plan for the balance of Cannon Court could be prepared ifnecessary. Preparation ofthese plans, however, should not delay traffic analysis report acceptance. 2. The traffic study shows 159 left turning vehicles which will require additional left tum storage. As shown on Attachment 1, dual left turn lanes will provide sufficient storage for the proposed project. With future development ofthe back parcel power plant, traffic can also be accommodated because the second turn lane provides additional left turn storage. 3. Align emergency access road if possible. Not a traffic study issue. To be answered by others. 4. Angle intersection of Cannon Court with Cannon Road. Not a traffic study issue. To be answered by others. #002598 4 2598-100200-aps/omc&.2000 SANTEC / ITE GUIDEUNES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES [TIS] IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION MARCH 2,2000 FINAL DRAFT PREFACE These guidelines are subject to (OTtinual update, as fiiture technology and documentation become avaiiable. Mways check with local juris<3ic- tions for their preferred or applicable procedures. Committee Compilation by Kent A. Whitson Reviewed by committee members: Hank Morris (co-chair), Tom Parry (co-chair), Arnold Torma (co-chair), Susan O'Rourke, Bill Damell, Labib Qasem, John Boarman, Ralph Leyva, and Erik Ruehr Additional review by: Ann French Gonsalves, Bill Figge, Bob Goralka, and Gary Halbert ATTACHMENT B RAMP METERING ANALYSIS Ramp metering analysis should be performed for each horizon year scenario in which ramp metering is expected. The following table shows relevant information that should be included in the ramp meter analysis "Summary of Freeway Ramp Metering Impacts." LOCATiON DEMAND (veh/hr)^ METER RATE (veh/hr)^ EXCESS DEMAND (veh/hrf DELAY (min)"* QUEUE (feet)^ NOTES: ^ DEMAND is the peak hour demand expected to use the on-ramp. ^ METER RATE is tbe peak hour capacity expected to be processed through the ramp meter. This value should be obtained from Caltrans. Contact Carolyn Rumsey at (619) 467-3029. ^ EXCESS DEMAND = (DEMAND) - (METER RATE) or zero, whichever is greater. EXCESS DEMAND ''DELfltY= X 60 MINUTES/HOUR METER RATE = QUEUE = (EXCESS DEMAND) X 29 feet/vehicle NOTE: Delay will b« less at the beginning of metering. However, since peaks will almost always be more than one hour, delay will be greater after the first hour of metering. (See discussion on next page.) SUMMARY OF FREEWAY RAMP METERING IMPACTS (Lengthen as necessary to include ail impacted meter locations) LOCATIONCS) PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR DEMAND D FLOW (METER RATE) F EXCESS DEMAND E DELAY (MINUTES) QUEUE Q (feet) AM PM AlW PM AM PM 15 DISCUSSION OF RAMP METER ANALYSIS B. CAUTION: The ramp metering analysis shown in Attadiment B may lead to grossly understated results for delay and queue length, since important aspects of queue growth are ignored. Also, the draft guidelines method derives average values instead of maximum values for delay and queue length. Utilizing average values Instead of maximum values can lead to obscuring important effects, particulariy in regard to queue length. Predicting ramp meter delays and queues requires a storage-discharge type of analysis, where a pattem of anriving traffic at the meter is estimated by the analyst, and the discfiarge, or meter rate, is a somewhat fixed value set by Caltrans for each individual metered ramp. Since a ramp meter queue continues to grow longer during all times that the anival rate exceeds the discharge rate, the maximum queue length (and hence, the maximum delay) usually occurs after the end of the peak (or highest) one hour. This leads to the need for an analysis for the entire time period during v^*iich the anival rate exceeds the meter rate, not just the peak hour. For a similar reason, the analysis needs to consider that a substantial queue may have already fomied by the beginning of the "peak hour." Traffic aniving during the peak hour is then stad^ed onto an existing queue, not just starting fnom zero as the draft analysis suggests. Experience shows that the theoretical queue tength derived by this analysis often does not material- ize. Motorists, after a brief time of adjustment, seek altemate travet paths or alternate times of anival at the meter. The effect is to approximately minimize totai trip time by seeking out the best combina- tions of route and departure time at the tieginning of the trip. This causes at least two important changes in the pattern or arriving trafiic at ramp meters. First, the peak period is spread out, with some traffic amving eariier and some traffic aniving later than predicted. Second, a significant pro- portion of the predicted arriving traffic will use another ramp, use another freeway, or stay on surface streets. it is acceptable to make reasonable estimates of these temporal and spatial (time and occupying space) diversions as long as atl assumptions are stated and that the unmodified, or theoretical values are shown for comparison. Additional areas for study include being able to define acceptable levels of service (LOS) and "significant" thresholds (e.g., a maximum ramp meter delay Of 15 minutes) for metered freeway entrance ramps. Cunently there are no acceptable software programs for measuring projecf impacts on metered freeway ramps nor does the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) adequately address this issue. Hopefully In the near future a regionwide study will be initiated to determine what metering rate (at each metered ramp) would be required in order to guarantee that traffic witl flow (even at LOS "E") on the entire freeway system during peak-hour conditions. From this, the ramp delays and resultant queue lengths might then be calculated. Overali, this is a very complex issue that needs considerable research and refinement in cooperation with Caltrans. 16 }.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development September 27, 2000 Ms, Barbara Kennedy City of Carisbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carisbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 602-4626 Fax: (760) 602-8559 VIA FACSIMILE AND FEDERAL EXPRESS 9/27/00 Re: Cancellation of September 28, 2000 Meeting Dear Barbara, I understand from Dennis Cunningham that our September 28, 2000 meeting was cancelled due to comments from Caltrans regarding our project. As you are aware, after resolving numerous issues, we received our "Application Deemed Complete" letter on June 30, 2000. As it has been explained to me, this letter starts a very well defined process, and we are very close to obtaining a date to present our project to the Planning Commission. I certainly understand the City wanting to review Caltrans' comments, even though, to date, no correspondence has been received detailing items discussed in Andy Schlaefli's (Urban Systems - traffic engineering) meeting with Caltrans on September 19, 2000 (see enclosed attendance sheet). I have been informed that the following major items were raised: 1. Move Avenida Encinas to run along train tracks 2. Move our project entrance to align with Avenida Encinas 3. No traffic light at our intersection 4. Our project to be limited to right-in, right-out only For reasons too numerous to list, adopting ttiese suggestions will destroy our development plan, and will materially adversely affect the value of our land. As you and other individuals in the City discuss this, I feel it is very important to keep certain facts in mind. I received a copy of a September 10,1999 letter to Michael Holzmiller (see enclosed letter) from Caltrans. Upon receiving this letter, I immediately organized a meeting on September 21, 1999 at the Caltrans office (see enclosed attendance sheet). At this meeting, Caltrans began by showing our group the plans for the future widening of Route 5. We then reviewed our plans for Cannon Court, and found two major areas that would be helpful to Caltrans. The first change was to move our hotel complex to the west approximately 8 feet, which we moved approximately 12 feet to ensure Caltrans would have adequate space. The second change was to relocate some ofthe Country Store parking spaces, which we completed. No other issues were raised at that meeting. During the next year, we proceeded to work with the City on necessary plans and processing, which cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars. Phone: 858.756.5338 'Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Ms. Barbara Kennedy Page 2 September 27, 2000 We proceeded with the following consultants: Planning Architecture Civil Engineering Traffic Engineering Acoustic Engineering Soils Engineering Structural Engineering Petroleum Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture Legal During that same period, while processing was proceeding, we also expended a tremendous amount of time and expense working with and studying hotel, restaurant and petroleum companies to review all options. This work was also completed with another group of very expensive consultants. On July 21, 2000, Caltrans after reviewing the plans for Cannon Court sent a comment letter to Barbara Kennedy. The comments did not include any of the recently raised suggestions. Indeed, the letter assumes that Avenida Encinas will be at its present location and merely suggests an interiinked ramp signal. On September 14, 2000, our traffic consultant responded by letter to all the Caltrans July 21, 2000 comments. To date we have addressed all of Caltrans' suggestions and we have met all of the City's requests, and as I stated eariier, have received our "Application Deemed Complete" status. It is very important for everyone to realize that Caltrans' new comments are very late, and acceding to them will have disastrous consequences. We have cooperated with everyone in the past and will continue to do so, but be we will not passively allow new suggestions to delay the progress of our project. Sincerely, John A. Buza President JAB/dw Enclosures (3) Cc: Bill Figge Chief Development Services Caltrans, Division 11 2829 Juan Street San Diego, CA 92110 Phone: (619)688-6954 Fax: (619)688-2511 VIA FACSIMILE AND FEDERAL EXPRESS 9/27/00 09/1^/1999 09:21 76043824 HOFMAN PLANNING' PAGE &2 P, 02 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DlSTRtCT 11 282BJVJAI1S1BEEJ P. O. 00X 85406 M.S. es SANOIEQO.CA 92186-5406 t>HOH£ (01B)QM-W54 FAX (619) M8-42eS X Septennber 10,19 Mike Holzmiller PUnning Director City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad VilUge Drive Carlabad, CA 92008-1949 Dear Mr. Holzmiller: As part of the San Diego Assodation of Governments' (SANDAG's) North Coast Corridor Study, Caltrans is studying improvements to the 1-5 corridor. Among other alternatives, the study is cunently looking at widening 1-5, and is focusing on options for doing so within the existing right of way as much as possible- it' In t^ij^i interests of good planning, it would prove helpful to Caltrans staff to receive proposed actions related lo developmenls within the 1-5 corridor for review for their compatibility with die 1-5 plans. Early review of Tentative Maps, Specific Plans, site plans, requests for variances, etc. woidd allow the property owners and developers to Ije aware of current Caltrans plans and Incorporate diem into their design. It would also allow our staff to work together with your dty staff to toy to accommodate everyone's needs. Your city may already send Caltrarw some prpjects for review, and/or notices of public hearings on them. If you are sending proposed actions, please check to see that we are recetvlng all of those praposed along the 1-5 corridor. If you are only sending notices, we would prefer to receive the documents, plans, maps, etc. themselves, prior to the public hearing. Thank you for your time and assistance In this effort. Ail proposed actions should be sent to me at the above address. Please call me with any questions at the above number about this process. Any questions regarding thc study can be directed to Chris Thomas, Caltrans North Coast Corridor Study Project Manager, at 688-3671. Sincerely, BILL FI^GE, Chief Planning Shidies Branch Sep 21 OQ 10:27a Urbar^P|bstems Rssoc. Inc. (058^^0-3734 p.3 0 ^/^/^ o ^-ii-y^ 0])^ G^^l-UU3 ?5I 77oo 9-21-200 1 1 - ddm FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 931574.4 P. 2 PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USB / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • L>OW) POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM VIA FACSIMILE September 21,2000 To; Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Plaiming Department Frank Jimeno, Carlsbad Engineering Department From: Dennis Cuzmingham, Planning Sjrstems RE: Cannon Schedule c John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation Tom Hageman, Plaiming Systems I received your voice mail in regards to scheduling a meeting next week to discuss the Cannon Court project - we are in agreement with next week. The primary reason for calling the meeting is to determine when the Plaiming Commission Hearing will be scheduled for the project At this time the project has been deemed complete and all issues have been addressed with either staff or other agendes. I will phone in order to schedule a meeting date. Thank you. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • pl3noins»ystcms@nctimcs.nct ijep dl 00 10: 19a Urban Sastems Rssoc. inc. IB58J560-9734 p. 1 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNUIG a 7)umc EwoMfCMm, MAWEmo t PROJSCTSUPPORT CONSULTANTS rolNOUsnYAND GOVOUOMBIT September 21. 2000 Ms. Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad lbi5 FaradayAvenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (7fiO) 602-4626 Fax: (760) 605-8559 Dear Barbara: As requested, we met with Caltrans to respond to their July 21, 2000 letter of comment on our Cannon Court project. Attached for your information is a meeting attendance list. During the meeting several new issues were identified as descnbed below. First. Caltrans is concerned that the Carlsbad build out model does not represent the actual 1-5 corridor build out traffic volumes because the City has not incorporated all ofthe regional growth estimated by SANDAG to be allocated to the City. Since this issue is an interagency policy matter not a project related issue, we requested that Caltrans discuss the issue directly with you. Second. Caltrans requested that we provide additional information regarding levels of service at Cannon and Avenida Encinas based on the maximum ADT (7,200) from thc SDG&E back parcel. Since this is a future project not being evaluated as a part of our project and we already addressed the issue of sizing the access through our project to accommodate the possible future development, we feel no further analysis by our project is necessary. Third. Caltrans noted their new Metric Design Manual requirement for a separation of access from a freeway ramp of at least 125 meters (410 feet). This is a new issue which has not been previously identified to our knowledge. Caltrans indicated that since we cannot meet the requirement, a Design Exception would have to be prepared. The chances of success in getting a design exception approved however, will in their opinion, bc very small. This means that: A. The project access will be limited to right in and out only. B. Avenida Encinas would have to be relocated as far west as possible, adjacent to the railroad. We all know that right in/out only access means no gas station i.e. no project. Relocation of the roadway to get closer to the standard is also problematic because ofthe cost, property ownership, thc possible inducement of "U" tums to the west i.e. at El Arbol in Tierra Mar. tf00259S Page 1 of 2 'cv/j fcpw Vnu nmn. SUITE 106 * SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1573 C:\OFFICB.2O00\259S-92100-2-aps (858) 56(^-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 i u: 1aa Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc 1858J 5BD-9734 P- H Ms. Barbara Kennedy September 21, 2000 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Avenida Encinas is a Circulation Element road, secondary arterial, which was incorporated into the City general plan long before the new Metric Design Manual spacing requirements were approved for use. Perhaps an exception can be provided because ofthe reliance by the City on the present location ofthe road and the fact that projects have been approved based on the Circulation Element and not the new Design Manual requirements. Also the new requirement may not apply to our project since neither a major interchange modification nor a road relocation is being proposed. Since this issue i.«; also more of a policy and procedural matter and it could if not resolved render a service sation on this site infeasible, we would suggest immediate discussions between the City and Caltrans at a policy level in an attempt to reach a conclusion. Please advise Dennis Cunningham of Planning Systems of your approach to resolving these Caltranb policy issues to keep our project moving forward. Sincerely, Andrew P. Schlaefl APS/lw Enclosure: (1) cc: Bill Figge, Caltrans FrankJimeno, City of Carlsbad John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems W0O259S Page 2 of 2 C:\OFFICE^2000\2598-921 Oa-2-aps Sep 21 00 10:lSa Urban Sastems Hssoc. Inc. [858J5B0-S734 p.3 Ho..u^ VCUc^tv ^^^^^ 6&&.-bl3-'^ Sep 14 00 02:31p Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc. 18581560-9734 p.l • URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCUTES, INC PiANNmo < nume BiemesRHe, MARKermo i PROXCT SUPPORT C6NSULTAHn TOlNMSTRYANO OOWBlWMrafr September 14. 2000 Mr. Bill Figge, Chief Development Services Phone: (619) 688-6954 Caltrans, Division 11 Fax: (619) 688-2511 2829 Juan Street San Diego, CA 92110 Dear Bill: Thank you for your July 21, 2000 letter of comment to the City of Carlsbad regarding our Cannon Court project (SDP-00-09). The City of Carlsbad, Barbara Kennedy and Frank Jimeno, have asked that we work directly with you and your staff to respond to the questions and information requested In your letrter. A copy of your comment letter is attached with paragraphs identified by number in the margin. Following is a discussion of each ofthese items. 1. Figures 3-3,4-2 and 5-2 ofthe revised report have been revised. A copy ofthe August 30, 2000 revised report is enclosed foryour use. 2. The volumes for 2020 have all been revised and updated to reflect the C\\y of Carlsbad's approved Traffic Impact Fee study by O'Rourke Engineering Ouly 18,2000) » 3. See Attachment 1 for a lane and signal conceptual layout which includes interconnect and railroad preemption phasing. Attachment 2 are the iLV's requested for lhe Cannon/Avenida Encinas intersection for existing plus project. 4. Project only peak hour volumes are shown on Figure 4-2 of the report. For the northbound on-ramp in the P.M, peak, 34 vehicles are added to the ramp. There are three lanes on the ramp as shown on Attachment 3. This translates to about 11 vehicles per lane. At 20 feet per vehicle a que lengthening of 220 feet is estimated due to project traffic. For the southbound on-ramp, the P.M. peak project traffic is 24 vehicles across three lanes, that translates to an 8 vehicle addition to the queue. At 20 feet per vehicle a lengthening ofthe queue of about 160 feet is estimated. 5. The ramps at I-5/Cannon Road have just been widened to three lanes with ramp meters. The ramps presently have available capacity due to the widening and they can accommodate project traffic without further improvement unless flow rates are restncted to improve main lane operations. The project contribution to improved M002593 Paga 1 of 2 C:\OFFlCe_20CXJi\259B.91aOO-aps~3 4540 KEARNY VILLA ROAD. SUITE 106 * SAN DiEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-49J1 • FAX (858) 560-9734 Sep 14 02331p Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc. (8581560-9734 p.2 Mr. BiU Figge Urban Systems Associates, Inc. September U, 2000 operations through the interchange area is recommended to be traffic signal interconnect ofthe new signal at Avenida Encinas and the project access with the ramp signals. 6. The project will signalize the Avenida Encinas intersection as requested. Interconnect will also be provided as shown on Attachment 1. 7. Not a traffic item. Others will respond. 8. Not a traffic item. Others will respond, After review ofthe information provided, please let us know ifyou have further questions or need any other information. When all your questions have been addressed, the City of Carlsbad would like your written acceptance of our impact analysis and the mitigation we are suggesting, Sincerely, f] ]44 Andrew P. Schlaefli APS/lw cc; Barbara Kennedy, City of Carlsbad Frank Jimeno, City of Carlsbad John Buza, J, A. Buza Corporation Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems *002598 Page 2 of 2 C:\0FF1CE.200Q\2598-91400-aps''.^ Sep 14 00 02:31p Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc. (8581560-9734 p.3 'Au|-0Z>OD (ia:4U<i Proffl-jA BUZA I siemzBoi T-7H P (4/BS F-M! P.O. BOX 85408, MS-SO FAX: (fri 9) 688-4299^ Ms. SartTara- Kennady Cily of Carlsbad 29BS"Roo$«velt Strset, Stiite "B" Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 CRAY DAVIS. Ccvw^, fifj*a-0<KP 77.25 §DP 00-09 Dear Ms. Ktnnedy: We have reviewed the plans for the arra\ station developmtnl located adiacenLwS*^ Court, a holel. restaurant * . have the fellowfng commentsT^^^"'^ ^ 5 (^5) and noi,TSn So«^ - J'^®, existing + project AM peak hour niimK* • P'eaw review tha2020peakh«Hirvofc-««^~ ^'- "'^•ramp; canon R=«</Avenlda fn^SIrS;^ ^'^"^ Uro Vshrcf, (icy) .^j^i. ,„ ^ report proiects a peak qLe^ ^^1^1^^^^ Is projected, however on pane in , lenfith of 125' for southbound SSmf ^S^.'^^ ^^^^^^^^ on.ramp and a ' Provide fair share contrfbubon for ramr, \ miiigatlon mea«ures of an addltfonan*?i^„!T**^®^* C&nnon ftiaad Wo . Intersection,. Soma^ot the ^^i^Z^,'"''^cl off-rampa at th7(,^ca^«?S'*^ an averaoe of over 40%; ^ '^^'•'^ fr«re»5e the exJeting tramo by ov^^^^l ff ths Ihteraection of Cannon RH »nw A to InterSntadwi* -al^^^Jj^ """" ^ ^ * '*>"«1'^ «» ./goal aho„i. Sep M 00 02!31p urban Systems Assoc. inc. t 8581560-9734 SISTSSSSII T-TSB P.05/05 F-lfl5 Ms. Barbara Kennedy July 21.2000 Page 2 "7 • Caltrans is not responsible for any notes impacts to mte development. A notee stuciy should be compteted to analyza federal requirement? and- be based- on 20-year traffic projections and the ultimate configuration of 1-5. If there is a noise impact. ih« developer has the responsibility taprowide-the mitigation; 8 * The "Conceptual Site Plan" Indicates ttees xattbln Caltrans riflht of yjay (R/W) at the intersection of tha southbound off-ramp and Cannon Road. This does not reflect the location and type of plant material esdsttng wlthtitth* R/W; The trnal planting design needs to correctly incorporate exisfing plant locations and type of plant materials; Close coordination with Caltrans 1$ encouraged. We will apprftciale reviewing any discfetlonary project in- the City of Carlsbad as to Its impact on our facilities. If you have .any quoBtions on the above comments, please contact Vann Hurst, Devriepmeot Review Branch, at-et9'.6a8.6S7&. Sincerely, BH.L neee, c«ief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch ATTACHMENT 1 cn TJ 5 -t II-j-!4|J 3] 1-6 SB OFF RAMP R 13 (UOD.) O Q O ro TJ fi> 3 tf) IL l/» rl D 3 U> 33 o o 3 o 00 cn 00 Ul 0) o CO -J CO T5 c;i Sep 14 00 02:32p Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc. (858J560-9734 p.6 ATTAdQufENT 2 Signalized iDtersecticii CAPACITY ANALYSIS P«eBiof2 lifTiaisEcnnia Cannon ftoad ft Avenida Enclnae Existing + Prpject Plegiwn and Tnrfllc Plows: Lara Volumes (Il-V/hr): Overlcm 235 160" 160" LdneVoiuines(1LV/lir): 430 Pti8ae2 150 TC3TAL OPERATING I.6VEL (ILV/ hr): 720 REMARKS: Di8T. CO. RTE. P.M. H'SD-QS PM48 BY APS DKtE 08 / 31 / 00 TIME (Si(im 10 10 V N Ol «^ Wl 3— 120 120 430 CM 114 V Phew 4 t 26 PhM»3 114 26 IK < 1200 ILV/lv. • > 1200 but x ISOO lUV/hr. • > 1600 ILV/hr. (Capedty) Sep 14 00 02:32p Urban Systems Hssoc. Inc. (8581560-9734 p.7 ATTACRMENT 2 2 of 2 Sigofllized IntersectLOii CAPACITY ANALYSIS B™Mtf>TinM Cannon Roed ® AvenMa Endnae D«T.eQ.RrE.Pjyi.__11"SP-06 PM48 BY AP8 DATE 08 / 31 / 00 Existing + Project TIME AM(^ Dtegram and TratTto Ftowa: lane Volumes OLV/hr): 38-^ •330 '330 PflSNS ISd r 380 LaneVoiumeeOLV/hr): 38 PhM*2 330 158 PhMi4 360 TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/ hr): le: 887 <1200 ILV/hr. • >^ 1200 bot <iaOOILV/hr. • > 1800 ILV/hr.(Capecl^) REIMARKS: Sep 14 00 02:32p Urban Systems Hssoc, Inc. (8581560-9734 p.8 ATTACHMENT 3 URBAN SYSTEMS JSSSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING i TRAFFIC ENOMEERMO, MARKETMO S, PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNUENT Sub (kei ^/ ATTN: Mr. FrankJimeno COMPANY: City of Carlsbad FROM: Andrew P. Sch DATE: August 30, 200 SUBJECT: phone: ^ fax: ^ (760) 602-2758 (760) 602-8562 TOTAL PAGES : _6 TIME: 1:09 pm rRAA/SM/TTED VIA; Messenger ANALYSIS OF SDG£rE BACK PARCEL IMPACTS ON THE ACCESS ROAD FOR THE CANNON COURT PROJECT The purpose of this evaluation is to address alternative e future traffic generation for the SDG&E Back Parcel and resulting impacts to the Cannon Court project access road. Background: There is approximately a 45 acre SDG&E parcel of land located north ofthe proposed Cannon Court project. Access to the parcel is only via a roadway through the Cannon Court project. To accommodate project plus the SDG£rE "Back Parcel" this evaluation was requested by City staff. To complete the analysis, land uses, acerages and appropriate traffic generation factors had to be developed. Based on a series of discussions with City staff, it was decided that for purposes of this analysis two alternatives would be evaluated. The alternatives are described in the table below: ALTERNATIVE ACREAGE LAND USE TRIP RATE ADT 1 15 High Technology Power Plant 30/ac 450 1 30 Corporate Headquarters 100/ac 3,000 Total 45 3,450 2 15 High Technology Power Plant SOfac 450 2 17.5 Corporate Headquarters 100/ac 1,750 2 12.5 visitor Commercial 400/ac 5,000 Total 45 7,200 #2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notiiy us at once. 1 C:\OfnCE.2000\2598-83lOO-apsfdisk 4540 KEARNY VILU ROAD, SUITE 106 • SAN DiEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 Frank Jimeno ^ UAn Systems Associates, Inc. August 30, 2000 As shown in the table above, traffic generation from the back parcel may range from 3,450 daily trips to 7,200 daily trips. Traffic from the Cannon Court project is estimated to generate 4,793 daily trips. Analysis: The Cannon Court project proposes an access road which is designed as a 64/84 secondary arterial with widening atthe Cannon Road intersection as shown on Attachments 1 and 2. As shown on the attachments full improvements are proposed at the southerly end. The improvements then taper to a pavement width of 42 feet at the northerly property boundary which abuts the SDGErE Back Parcel. Based on City of Carlsbad Street Standards, see Attachments 3 and 4, a secondary arterial street has a capacity of up to 20,000 average daily trips. The Cannon Court project traffic generation is 4,793 daily trips, therefore a two lane collector street is all that is necessary because the City street standards allow up to 10,000 daily trips on such a street. Since the project access is at a signalized intersection, a turn lane is also needed for the proposed Cannon Court project. Traffic on the access road with Alternative 1 and Cannon Court traffic would total 8,243 (3,450 plus 4,793). If this land use option were to develop on the back parcel, a two lane collector street with intersection widening would still be sufficient because less than 10,0000 total daily trips would be expected to use the street. With back parcel land use Alternative 2 however, total traffic on the access road would be 11,993 (7,200 plus 4,793) daily trips. For this alternative, a secondary arterial street would be necessary to meet City of Carlsbad street standards. Conclusion: Based on the analysis described above, the proposed Cannon Court project access road improvements are expected to bc sufficient for both the project and possible future development ofthe SDG&E "Back Parcel". If enclosures are not as noted, please notiiy us at once. #2598 2 C:\OFFICE.2000\2598-83100-aps/disk 9-15-200 11 :04AM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 9315744 P. 1 PLANNING SYSTEMS THT LAND USE / COASTAL PLANMNO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE - i.A.w)n POUCY AND PROCESSING EMVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM VIA FACSIMILE August 21,2000 To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Plannmg Department From: Detxnis Ctmningham, Planning Systems RE: Caimon Court c John Bu2a/ J.A. Buza Corporation Tom Hageman, Planning Systems I received your voice xx\ail today about the update on traffic and that it was being reviewed by Bob Johnson's department. As it relates to yotir recent voice mail about CALTRANS, Urban S3^tems has provided them with an updated traffic report as well as a thorough response to the items requested in their July 21, 2000 letter. In response to the information provided to CALTRANS, there is a meeting scheduled for Tuesday, Sept. 19 at 9:00 at CALTRANS to finalize any issues they may have. In regards to a meeting with you, Frank, and myself, this is to review the project timeline and discuss any outstanding items that may be needed. I would Uke to schedule something next week so we may finalize any remaining items- Thank you. \530 FARADAY AVENOE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@iKtimes.net PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LAym POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM August 21, 2000 To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Planning Department From: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems RE: Carmon Court Re-Submittal c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation Tom Hageman, Planning Systems Please find enclosed 15 copies of the RE-SUBMITTAL package for the Cannon Court project. The only item that we believe to be missing is the Final Traffic Report. We have scheduled a meeting with CALTRANS this week and believe that the Traffic Report will be finalized next week. As you know, traffic counts, land use options on the back parcels and final discussions with CALTRANS has kept this report from being finished. Please call with any questions. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@nctime.s.net Dec-U-00 1 2:08pm From-JA BUZA ^ 6197562891 T-l21 P.02/02 F-8 J.A. BUZA CORP. Construciion • Development December 14, 2000 Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Ave Carisbad, CA 92008 VIA FACSIMILE (760)602-8559 Re: Cannon Court - Existing Eucalyptus Trees Dear Barbara, I met with Jim Thompson (arborist) of Butlers Mill, Inc.. at the site this morning. We began by walking each tree along the 1-5 off ramp. Jim marked six trees, which he feels should be removed, mainly due to trunk damage, whioh appears to be several years old. 1 explained to Jim we would like to consider keeping the majority of the eucalyptus trees. Jim had several comments, none of which made me feel that keeping these trees was a good idea. The most serious of the problems is the infestation by the "Red Gum Lerp Psyilid". This Lerp. which was found on our site, has been primarily found on the Red Gum, but Jim told me it is starting to spread to other varieties of eucalyptus. I personally had approximately thirty full size eucalyptus trees in my yard, which became infested with the above mentioned Lerp, and were completely brown within six to nine months of infestation. As 1 stated, l onty plan to remove six trees at this time, but would like to remove all of these trees at an appropriate time. The cost to remove these trees, prior to partying lots, new landscaping and buildings, is approximately 1/3 ofthe cost compared to after construction. Jim also is concemed that Eucalyptus tends to have branches that shear, and are very dangerous when over pari<ing lots. Jim also mentioned that during our grading operation, we have a substantial likelihood of damaging the root structure, as it is relatively shallow. Our best approach may be to remove the six trees now, and eliminate others in phases, as we build our projecL This way we could remove and replant in smaller areas, and avoid shocking anyone. Since I am sure this tree issue will be ongoing, I had our landscape architect leave the eucalyptus trees on his drawings, for tiie time being. To leam more about the infestation, please go to; www.cnr.berkeloy.edu/bloconydahlsten/rglp/ Sincerely, John A. Buza President Cc: Jim Thompson, Butler's Mill, Inc. / Fax (619) 262-3659 Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems / Fax (760) 931-5744 Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 D8C-14-00 12:08pm From-JA BUZA 6197562891 T-121 P.01/02 F-8 J.A. BUZA CORPORATION P.O. 80X8617 Rancho Santa Fe,CA 92067 Phone: (858)756-5338 Fax: (858)756-2891 To: Barbara Kennedy Cc Jim Thompson Oc Dennis Cunningham To: To: To: Company: City of Carisbad, Planning Dept. Fax: (760)602-85^ Company: Butler's Mill, Inc Fax: (619)262-^59 Conqjany: Planning Systems Company: Company: Company: Fax: (760)931-5744 Fax: Fax: Fax: From; John Buza #Page5 2 (Including Cover Sheet) Pate: December 14,2000 Re; Cannon Court - Existing Eucalyptus Trees Message: I I (fix In Phinui-irvi' m-f.-'ii"\' i<'i ii^-fi-h —llUIIIHhI'l 'IIIII' .^^L-l |IU^ • h .V^JLhll L^F r llllli I-ivvtH-."-'-' h M*-Tt-"- •! I CANNON HOAD CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN 11 2P< AO Aui-16-0(J 11:291111 Froffl-JA BUZA E1975S2891 T-780 P.02/04 F-9 J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development August 16,2000 Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Ave.. Ste 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 VIA FACSIMILE (760) 931-5744 Re: Cannon Court - Existing Eucalyptus Trees Dear Dennis. I'm responding to your voice message regarding these trees. As I understand it, the City of Carisbad needs information as to our plans for the ©xisting eucalyptus trees along Cannon Road and the freeway off ramp. My original plan, when allowable, was to remove all these trees at the beginning of construction. Since we now feel our first phase will be our road and the Country Store, I feel we would start by removing trees along Cannon Road and the easteriy property line of the Country Store. The remaining trees along the eastern property line would be removed when either the Restaurant or Hotel grading commence. Our reasoning behind the removal is based on numerous factors: 1. Many conversations with Cal-Trans based on their concem the trees are dangerous since they are so dose to the freeway off ramp. 2. As described in the attached report by Jim Thompson of Butlers Mill, these trees have numerous problems. 3. Removal, or even trimming after construction, will not only be ftir more expensive, but more dangerous. 4. The majority of the existing trees are not allowed in the new planting list fbr the Carlsbad Ranch Overlay Zone. 5. Certain trees need to be removed to allow our road (intersection) alignment with Avenida Encinas. I would appreciate you discussing this wiih Barbara Kennedy so I am clear on how and when we can remove these trees. Sincerely, John Buza President Phone: 858.756.5338 •Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., ttl7 -Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Aug-16-00 ll:29aiii From-JA BUZA 6197562891 T-780 P. 03/04 F-990 SINCE 1892 WHOLESALE LANOSCAPF & NURSERY SUPPLiE.S January 29,1999 Mr. Richard K. Chambers Pacific Estates Management POBox 675587 j Rancho Santa Fc, CA 92067 Dear Mr. Chambers; This letter is in regards to the trees on the private property located at thc northwest corner of Hwy. 5 and Cannon Road. This area is approximately sbc and one half (6V^) acres surrounded on the perimeter by various trees. The westem property perimeter is composed of approximately thirty-three (33) shrubs and trees that are Eucalyptus, Acacia, Pepper, Myoporum or Pahn. They are located just inside the fenced property. The majority of these trees are suffering from insect borer activity and/or root systems that have been infringed upon by herbicide sterilant use in the railroad right-of-way area. I recommend the removal of all these trees due to their poor canopy stracture and extremely weakened root systems. The trees on the southem property are on the outside ofthe fence. There are twenty-two (22) shrubs or trees that are Eucalyptus, Myoporum or Rhaphiolepis. Four (4) of the five (5) Eucalyptus trees to the west of the gate enlrance are hazardous. Prior topping cuts and/or large sheared off limb loss is evident. The mature wooded limbs near these topping cuts are not well attached. If they should come off, they could severely damage passing motor vehicle traffic and even injure and/or kill someone. The one (1) remaining tree is okay, but should have its canopy addressed with pruning. The remaining two (2) Eucalyplus trees to the east of the gate entrance have been heavily pruned. They appear in satisfactory condition. Noting the grade changes around all these rootballs in the past and sub-surface soil street construction in their rooting area is a stress to these trees. I would raost assuredly remove the four (4) poor Eucalyptus trees because of their known hazards and would consider the removal of the other three (3) due to major soil disturbance in their rooting area. As to the rest, I would either consider pruning or removal with a new landscaping done later. The eastem property has many large, mature and beautiful Eucalyptus trees on the inside of thc fence. Unfortunately, half of the tree have had major trenching done near the trunks by tbe freeway off-ramp improvements and then several feet of backfilled soils piaccd over their existing root area. The otber half of the trees have at one time had major trenching done right next to their trunks for drainage control causing severe root damage. S180 NARANJA STREET P.O. BOX 740069 « AM me An /^A a9,tT^jinRO (800) 233-6933 ($19) 263-6181 fFAX)619-26Z-3659 Aug-16-00 11:30am From-JA BUZA 6197562891 T-780 P 04/04 F-990 Mr. Richard K. Chambers Page 2 Pacific Estate Management January 29.1999 The trees show some insect borer activity and die-back, but most of all have continuously been stressed by damaging construction nearby. I would recommend thc removal of thc vast majority ofthese trees to reduce such possible negligent hazards. The trees ofthe northem property boundary are in good condition. Fortunately, man and nature have yet to ancmpt to take a toll on these trees of Myoporum and Eucalyptus. If any construction should be done within these rooting areas, then problems oftrees and tree loss will occur. I would not recommend any development near these trees. If parking, building or streets are to bc near, then consider the altemative of removal. In conclusion, a large majority of trees should be removed. There has not been any irrigation of these trees in the past many years. Many are extremdy hazardous. Soil compaction in their rooting area is intolerable. Only by grace have they perfonned as well as they have. Ifl may be of further assistance, please do not hesiute to call me. arson Rrtified Arborist, #WC0740 atemational Sodety of Arboriculture Certified Crop Advisor, #3809 American Society of Agronomy Pest Control Advisor, HAA6610 JT/jhb State of Califomia 8-09-200 5:22PM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 93157d4 P. 1 PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHrrECTURE • LAJSW POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION WAK TmAMBMWrAlL TO: ^A&t^ Ijlhrr^r^wiO^ FROM:-^ .COMKVV.S..-SKA^ COMPANY: d^A ^ ^^>*KJt^r^ y PROTECT; CJ^i^*^ FAX #: DATE/TIMEi_ S| *( Number of pages including cover sheet:_ Remarks: Qj^.^^v [^f^ "u) ^ SbiAcW/^. n^M^'t^^.-s ^ PlcasG call (760) 931-0780 if Hie number of pages indicated are not received or if you liave any otiier questions. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 - CAJRLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planningijystems@nctimes.net 8-09-200 5:22PM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 7S0 931574.4. Aut-03-00 IZUrpn Frgn-iA BUZA 619T562tg] P. 2 r-m P.02/DS F<il6 HiGGs, FLETCHER & MACK Ltp FacsimUe Cover Sheet DATE: NAME August 3,2000 COMPANY JOHN BUZA W£STPEVELflW>ffiMT JNCORPOKATED FAX NUMBEK (402)»80'2844 niOM; UNDA M. WOOLCOTT CUENT-M4TTCRN0.t a79-09S29MO0Ol ^ Comments: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED. PAGES SENT: UiAw ofl>grot«g IwUcjMfl or oBv<«M ftow the gawix: af the lansaiBal. iK wfonacrion oaanfoefl in ihla faotfili wtaatt: is ntwcacy priVJiydwActngifcwrWiwfaiWiiOBii^^ tfdwffMtrorftttiMSMBeitnoiitw aisfnataiiioivdiialMiMorcopjrjiiSflr^caani^^ Jfy<ta)imffMi««ailM««nimuweaiioamfnw«rm 3M20«I 8-09-200 5:23PM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 7G0 93157d4 p.3 Au,-a3-0« 12-.4Tp« Fr<M-JABWA ^ 819TS6t691 A-Ul P 03/05 F-915 HIGGS, FLETCHER & MACK LIP uNe»iii.MQ(xfiOTr August 3,2000 VIA FACSIMILE ANO UJL MAD. West Dev«bi|piacm Cffiiifniv P.O.BOXS617 Rancho Sarna Fe, C A 92067 a£: OJP WS^CU? 9»31 Cmtaaa Cwj Our Fil* No, 09S298-00Qin DearJohn: Tlus wiU suix»iari» our omvemaou yesienfaqr fi>r approqidies 10 xhe Ci^ legardist nttimcam Tojec^. iSie City has iafi»med you tbat if the lemmivepBzcd nq^ is de^ptedtoaeiiescpBEase lots^ eacb bufl4ii)« induding pvking otas. tbcn caeh sepai^ TontwTbepdrkingTequiieroems&rTbf useon^lcKl. tltf Cily lttSSa8B«siediiiat you rtdttsignyovsrm«p to create sepaiaiw lots for eadi bttilding padani imd access wras. Tbe Cx^requ^ Uuu: yoa denionstrate how duucd paddng, access and PcefenedPlaa: J ttcommen4 tbat you te-piopose your if^lwR 10 design ea^ parkins areas even itUMgh eadh loc will nol conn^ sii£5siem requitaineQis fbr dMuseoaduR particular lot. In ecn^uncikn^ ihat pioposal, you Aould assuK d)e City that parlSag needs vviU be niet because tbe dcvuiqper proJeei wid) ft recoiled Dcclma^tioa of Easamsms and Resoto^^ Tlw OnteationwiU indude iruipwjcal e&senuents fcr access, ingress ood egitss so ^ no lots ««landlocked totd so ibat d>e lots that leqidieniasc paddng ^Mces'v^ get diem Atooi^ an cis^^ ZtwiUaJso include requirement fiy maimenanceofttecQxnnw areas in a All areas winch arc not buading aieaa Witt be wnanon ateas and Witt be wwinnriiw^ dedaiation. One eftbc lot ownets wiU be ddegaied the responsOnliq'of naaim^^ lot owner WiU eoUmstassessmenit fiom tbe other lot owaeis. Thai lot owner would bave the z^t 10 re^ a lien on any definihing lot owner's praperQr. 1)3201.2 8-09-200 5:23PM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 9315744 P.4 A»I-03-00 12:47P» Frwi-JA BUZA ^ eiflTWWt A WSZ P .04/05 M16 j^Qw^ HlQOS, FLETCHER & MACK LLP West Dsvelopbiem Company August 3,2000 Page 2 There Kt sevend actvaoniges to tbis proposal. First, ^nce die loc size wiU be Ivger dm dte acnial buildine, it iiiaU aUow sinne ftodibilicy 10 inctes over lOT boundary Uiws. Scvttnd, diere wiU be no nsquiremem for fbmiing an assodation. Jfan assodadoD muse be fbnaaed, dien a ootpoxatian num be fomied, officera annual meeiingshd^ notioe provisions abidid by and UIX fomis fi^ Since tbis dcvaU^meot is reladvdy amdl, die inermaed eosc and liuM; leqi^ied fin* an assodfiion In my eiq>«ieBce, ddes wiU agree widi die DecUration of EascM^ncs a^ wtatocetttofparidng and uniforoniaimcnanoe concerns. Ahainanve2: If die Civ wiU tioT agnx widi lhe preSsmd plan oudined above. ^ requires thai die parcai rnap con»n scpariie loM ftir ench building pa^ of die paricine aad access areas. I iteoninaeod diat you propotie 10 die Ci^ mainteoBBce of die conunm area ioi bc patfimned by one of die lm a«ners and not an associanon. As you and I hava ^scussed. Civil Co^ Secdon 1363(a} provides diax if die pn^ is defined as a common inieteat devdopment, an assodadon anm ba fonned. However, die City's local reguUdms may pennit die common area lot 10 ba managed by one of die odier lot ownors. Odier Issues wConsidgr 1. You should decide wiicdiar you as die devdoper iwugm handte die mm loid opezanon obligaoons fia'the cCMoaon area or wbadier you wa^ dioserfsponiibiltngj Your mainieoancecrtdigfliiomi findude hiring and st^ervfa^ irminTftiflnr^ woxk, conpUing ^ invoices for diat work, sod invoidng etdi of tbe sqiaraxtt loc owners. BasicaUy, you will be acting ase property manager. You nuy charge a fee fiir dun service under the Declarminn. 2. You (««ld decide mrnaoaga die common area initially, and then, ifyou sdl die country store lor «7 pari of die propeity. Ihr dua inaaei}, ddegaoB die reqionsi^ hold The bold couid agree wacct^dwie^ponabiUiies, if ddqtaied, in die 3. Once we have decided how to saucnnedw transaction, you wiU need wdiink about issues sudi as die fbUnwirig: (») The percentage sban; of maiomnance coses dun each lol will bear and what approvd ri(^ will you want Ibr design of iwildings. signage, eic Ibj The hd|^ and use nmriedans you want H> place OB die devdapmam. 3)32012 8-09-200 5:24PM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 9315744 p. 5 jetoBua H(GGS,FLETCHER&MACKUP West Devdopmam Company Am»si3,20(K) Pa^3 (c) The design rsquiicnwnis you will wam cadi owiiBr/tesseew abide by. (d) ^ yow cup dlow only lestaaiam uses for die TWO anas currendy dc^igoatfd as restaurants? If noi. and you mqr change dir uses fiom zesnwamm anodier use, ressicdims do you wam TO put in the Dedamdon regarding use for dwse spaces? (e) Tbetign^tewiUytwhawcmdieckweiqpBmtbedesiBnafdiesigB^ and wbedm you WiU wam any tdnanis or owiiers m perfimn amr maiwanance on die panels en any ltf dw dgns or you WiU warn die conunon area manager 10 pnfimn ail mdntenance, inebidbig sign maitauaace. There are many mote issues vMtii we cm discuss as we go, but diis can hdp you get ds piocess started. 1 look foniwd to wori(hig widi you to bring dss devdo^^ Shieeidy, UNOA M, WOOLCOTT^^ of HIGGS. FLETCKEk ft MACK LLP LMW/bmb cc: RonSantoniCVIAFAX) 3W012 PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LA39(XI POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM HAND DELIVERED July 20, 2000 To: Barbara Keni\edy, City of Carlsbad From: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems RE: Cannon Court • Updated Noise Analysis c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Tom Hageman, Planning Systems Barbara, we have submitted two revised Noise Analysis based on the new site plan. Please call if you have any questions. I will be out of town for a couple weeks, so please leave any message on Voice Mail - I will be checking in - in order to keep the Cannon Court project moving ahead. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • R^X (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@nctime.s.net PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LA39(K) POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEMORANDUM HAND DELIVERED July 18, 2000 To: Frank Jimeno, City of Carlsbad Barbara Kennedy, City of Carlsbad From: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems RE: Cannon Court Traffic c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Tom Hageman, Planning Systems Thank you for meeting and discussing the traffic issues Tuesday at the City building. The discussion ranged from the ADT counts utilized in our study to discussing the alternatives on the back 45 acre parcel zone Public Utility which is under separate ownership. Please review the following information. The project applicant's traffic consultant is waiting for the City final "green light" before proceeding. Carmon Court Project Traffic Comments 1. Utilize the latest Carlsbad Forecast on trips. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planningsystems@nctimes.net i 2. Address the Close Proximity of the Freeway Ramps, Avenida Encinas, Rail Road Crossing as it relates to the project entrance, etc. 3. Staff has asked that Freeway Ramp counts be shown. 4. Back Parcel Comments see below. Back Parcel Analysis The City has requested that the Cannon Court applicant analyze two alternatives on the back parcel owned by Cabrillo Power. Based on the City request, we gathered traffic data on a newly proposed power generating facility in Otay Mesa in order to show traffic counts on the "back parcel" based on site size and its power generating capacity. The Otay Mesa power plant has a capacity to generate 1000 megawatts on 15 acres under new technology. The phase I proposed project capacity is 500 megawatt facility. Currently, Encina Power Plant generates 965 megawatts. It is assumed that on 15 acres on alternative 1 that Encinas could generate 1000 megawatts. The Average Daily Trip on the Otay Mesa facility at 500 megawatts is 50 ADT on 15 acres (25 employees) which is 3.33 ADT per acres (50 ADT / 15 acres - 3,3). If we assume that to generate 1000 megawatt capacity that the ADT / staff people at Otay Mesa will double to 100 ADT on 15 acres with a capacity • of 1000 megawatt (100 ADT / 15 acres = 6.67). Note that the Otay Mesa site is a total of 45 acres with the project on 15 acres. Altemative 1 3.100 ADT on 45 acres • 15 acres of new technology power plant facility at 1000 megawatt capacity generating 100 ADTs (6.67 per acre) • the remaining 30 acres 3,000 ADT's as Corporate Headquarters (100 ADT per acre - for Corporate Office). PLANNING SYSTEMS Alternative 2 - 6.850 ADT on 45 acres • 15 acres of new technology power plant facility at 1000 megawatt capacity generating 100 ADT's (6.67 per acre) • Of the 12.5 acres, 5.5 acres of commercial tourist land use that would not be constrained under the Growth Management Ordinance with 7.0 acres under transmission line easements. • 12.5acresat400 ADT per acre 5,000 ADT- WORST CASE SCENARIO. • the remaining 17.5 acres 1,750 ADT's as Corporate Headquarters (100 ADT per acre - for Corporate Office). We have included a conceptual map showing the areas of analysis. Also attached is the traffic information from the Otay Mesa Generating Project and the Staff Report from the California Energy Commission dated May 2000 in order to apply traffic counts from a recent "high tech power generating facility". In addition, there is a letter from Sempra Energy stating the power capadty of the two facilities along with megawatt data. PLANNING SYSTEMS a limAgui Hedionda Lagoon ^-7.0 SKeiMi^ J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development July 10, 2000 Robert & Debra Melendez 5520 El Arbol Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Cannon Court Development, Carlsbad Dear Mr. & Mrs. Melendez, To Introduce myself, I am the developer of the property at the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Route 5. I received a copy of a letter you wrote, dated June 6, 2000, to Barbara Kennedy of the City Planning Department. The purpose of my letter is not to discuss or attempt to change your opinion of our project, but to clarify a statement you made in your letter. I, nor anyone on my staff, stated or implied to anyone that your group was in full support of our project. Although we are developing a gas station, we have responded to some of the concerns from our March 15, 2000 meeting with your association, by reducing the Country Store from 6,000 to 1,500 square feet, and eliminating the three service bays. Please call should you have any additional questions. Sincerely, John Buza President cc: Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad - Planning Department 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 bc: Catherine Miller 5299 El Arbol Carlsbad, CA 92008 P.O. Box 861 7 Phone: 858.756.5338 'Fax: 858.756.2891 1 6085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 •Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department June 30, 2000 Mr. Dennis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: SDP 00.09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 - CANNON COURT The items requested from you earlier to make your Site Development Plan, Conditional Use Permits, and Planned Development Permit, application no. SDP 00-09/CUP 99- 30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 602-4626, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:BK:mh c: Adrienne Landers, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ No. SDP 00-09/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31/PUD 00-109 - CANNON COURT ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. The proposed sign program needs to be revised to meet the guidelines of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan, the Sign Ordinance, and the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. In addition, the sign ordinance is under revision and new regulations will likely be implemented prior to scheduling your project for a public hearing. Therefore, It is strongly suggested that you design your sign program to comply with the proposed regulations. The following items should be addressed: A. Wall Signs 1) Only building frontage facing a pubic street or freeway can be included in the allowable sign area. The foliowing building faces may be used for the purposed of calculating allowable sign area: a. East hotel elevation (freeway facing) 76-7" @ 1 sf of sign area per If of frontage; b. East elevation of restaurant A (freeway facing) 56 '@ 1 sf of sign area per If of frontage; c. South elevation of restaurant B (facing Cannon Road) 70' @ 1 sf of sign area per If of frontage; and d. Country Store east and south elevations (corner facing freeway and Cannon Road) 84' @ .9 sf of sign area per If of frontage. 2) Wall signs shall not exceed a height of 35 feet. 3) Wall signs may be located on any exterior building wall. Signs may not be located above the roof line of a building or on the cupola elements above the gas station canopy or porte cochere. B. Monument Signs 1) Since the project is a freeway service facility of less than 8 acres, 100 sf of freestanding (monument) sign area is allowed 2) If a monument sign includes more than one sign face, the total area of all faces or panels shall be included as sign area. 3) The maximum height for a monument sign is 6 feet, except within the front setback where the maximum wall height is 42 inches or within the sight distance triangle where the maximum height is 30 inches. 4) Please show the required sight distance triangles at all corners where monument signs will be located. 5) Please include an area for the building addresses on the monument signs. 6) Include details for the small monument signs proposed near the restaurants and hotel. Monument signs shall be compatible with the building architecture and other project signage through the use of similar materials, colors, and typestyles. 7) Include directional signs if they are part of your sign program proposal. The maximum sign area for directional signs shall not exceed 6 feet, and a height of 4 feet above grade. C. Service station price signs are permitted pursuant to Chapter 21.41.074 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Please show service station price signs as part of your proposal. D. Please clearly identify all proposed sign locations and the maximum allowable sign area in each location. Also include specifications for the type, color, letter height, and materials of the proposed signs. Indicate if logos will be permitted as part ofthe sign program. E. The freeway pole sign is not permitted per the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan. F. In accordance with the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, special landscape treatment is required around any monument sign. Please include an enlarged detail of the typical landscape treatment as part of your sign program proposal. The tentative parcel map needs to be revised to address the following issues: A. Staff is not supportive of the Non-residential Planned Development Permit/Minor Subdivision as proposed. If your intent is to create separate lots for each building which include parking areas, then each lot must contain enough parking spaces to meet the parking requirement for the use on that particular lot. In order for staff to support the PUD proposal, it is suggested that you explored one of the following alternatives: 1) create an airspace condominium subdivision with all of the ground as one common lot, or 2) create a lot for each building pad (postage stamp lot) and a common lot for all the parking and access areas. You will need to demonstrate how shared parking, access, and maintenance will be managed. In addition, if construction of the non-residential PUD is proposed in phases, please state so and include a proposed phasing schedule. B. On sheet 1 of the Tentative Parcel Map., please correct the General Plan Designation (existing and proposed) to Travel/Recreation Commercial. C. The emergency access road is shown as turf block on the landscape plan and DG on the Engineer's plan. DG is generally not considered an all- weather surface. Please contact the Fire Department to determine what type of surface material is acceptable and revise the plans accordingly. Please revise the traffic study to include an evaluation ofthe two alternatives that were discussed in previous correspondence dated March 22, 2000. A. The first alternative should assume that approximately 32 acres of the 45.5 acre P-U zoned lot north of the site will remain as a public utility with about 12.5 acres immediately north of your site potentially developed with a new power plant using current technology. B. The second alternative should assume that the most northerly 32 acres ofthe P-U zoned parcel will remain as a public utility which may be expanded to include a new power plant using current technology. The ADT for the remaining 12.5 acres immediately north of your site should be based on rezoning the property to a commercial/tourist land use designation. Please include the following information on the site plan: A. Dimension the setback from the east property line to the edge of the hotel arcade wall. B. Show the setback from the edge of restaurant "B" to the curb of the private street. In order to make the compatibility fmdings required by the CUP, the setback from face of curb to the building should be no less than 20 feet. C. In addition to the one RV bus parking space near the hotel, at least one bus space should be provided near each restaurant in order to comply with the goals ofthe Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. D. Show the location ofthe underground gas tanks. E. Identify the location ofthe loading area for the hotel. F. Dimension the typical depth of parking spaces for all rows of parking. G. Label the 30 foot building setback line from the freeway r.o.w.; the 10 foot minimum landscape setback on the south half of the east property line; the minimum 10 foot landscape setback along the private road; and the 20 foot minimum landscape setback north and east ofthe hotel. H. j Maintain at least 5 feet of landscape between the building and any adjacent paved surface. I. Omit the reference to the freeway sign. J. Revise the site information to show the zoning as CT-Q; add the application numbers; and change the parcel summary information based on the outcome of the PUD application. Contact me and we can coordinate how this information should be shown. K. Delete the reference to propane area from the Site Legend. Show the location ofthe Air and Water, or delete it from the legend if it is not proposed. Label the gas pumps to correspond with the numbering shown on the Site Legend. Delete the shuttle bus stop reference at restaurant A, since it is really more of a drop-off zone. L. The cover sheet indicates the project will generate 4,793 ADT and the Traffic Report indicates the project generates 4,813 ADT. Please clarify and be consistent between documents. The parking calculations shall be revised as follows: A. Three employee spaces are required for the mini-mart. B. Round up the restaurant "B" parking requirement to 136 spaces. C. The proposed basements may not be parked at a 1 space/1,000 sf ratio. The basement area in the restaurants require 1 space/50 sf and the mini mart requires 1 space/300 sf of basement area. D. Delete the "parking provided" column and instead, include "total parking required" and "total parking provided" at the bottom ofthe summary. E. Summarize the number of standard, compact, rv/bus spaces, and handicap spaces provided. Please revise the landscape plan as follows: A. Specify the type of paving proposed at the restaurants. Be sure to indicate if it is colored concrete, stamped and colored, etc. Please clarify if the stone paving is stamped or natural stone. The project approval is based on the materials shown on these plans. B. Provide conceptual details for the fountains and seat walls. C. There is some concern about the viability of the trees proposed in the pots on the north side of the hotel. Can a raised planter be installed in lieu of the pots? D. Show planting in the landscape island on the east side ofthe hotel. E. Is the depth of the landscape island northeast of the hotel sufficient to support a tree or is it a raised planter? F. Parking lot trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree for every six parking spaces. These trees shall be located outside of required setback areas. In order to meet this requirement, additional landscape islands should be provided within the rows of parking bordering the north and east edges of the property. G. Delete the decorate paving shown in the Cannon Road r.o.w. H. At restaurant A, continue the decorative paving into the drop-off zone so that it defines the drop-off area. I. Identify the type of wall or fence proposed along the west property line. Is any fencing proposed along the north or east property lines? What type of fencing is proposed around the pool area? Please include conceptual details for all proposed fencing types. J. Please show the special landscape treatment required around monument signs per the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. K. Use screen walls, landscaped berms and/or shrubs to screen parking areas along the private street. L. Use narrow shrubs or vines in the landscape strips adjacent to the trash enclosures to help screen the enclosures. M. The trees and picnic area on the west side of the project entrance is a nice amenity for the site. Is it your intention to keep it this way or will this area be used for development at some future point in time? If it will be developed, I would suggest eliminating the trees in the "buildable pad area" and only locating trees around the perimeter ofthe lot. Please revise the building plans as follows: A. Delete the reference to the "through-wall mechanical system" which has recently been added to the building elevations. If individual "through-wall" units are proposed, they must be screened in a method that is architecturally compatible with the building (painting to match building is unacceptable). B. Provide drawings of the hotel mechanical equipment enclosure. C. On the hotel elevations, please dimension the roof and its mid-point, and show the building height at the midpoint. D. Show the square footage of the dining room and kitchen area for the hotel on the floor plan. E. The siding symbol is missing on some of the third floor windows of the hotel elevations. F. What type of siding/finish is proposed for the wall on the front elevation, beyond the porte cochere? G. What the type of finish is proposed for the wall adjacenf to the underground parking area? What type of guard rail or fencing will be used on the wall? H. Identify the use within the dashed area in the upper right-hand side of the underground parking area. I. Provide a detail for the trash and mechanical equipment enclosure near the county store. The enclosure should be designed so that it is architecturally compatible with the building. Also specify the finish and design of other trash enclosures on the site. J. ^The height of the gas station canopy needs to be reduced to the greatest extent possible and should be more in keeping with the height of the porte cochere on the hotel. Additionally, can the cupola be designed so that it is more similar in scale to the cupolas at the hotel? K. The Planning Commission has had some concern in the past about the intensity of use for mini-marts. Please include the interior layout for the country store to determine if seating and/or the preparation of hot food/fast food will occur on the site. Unless proposed and illustrated otherwise, the food mart will be restricted to only allow the sale of ready-to-eat food (pre- cooked or prepared at another location), and canned or bottled beverages. If a more intense use is proposed, additional parking requirements will apply. L. Please include a reference to cornerboards, window trim, and the detailing on the gable ends in the Building Color/Material Legend. M. Please indicate the roof pitch on the roof plans. N. How are deliveries made to the restaurants? Do they all come in the front door or will there be a rear door? Do the restaurants meet exiting requirements? ' O. Does restaurant A really have a porte cochere? It doesn't look like you can drive through it (see floor plan A2.1C). P. The elevations for restaurant B are mis-labeled. 8. Please include the project numbers for the various discretionary applications on your next submittal. In addition, provide a sheet index on the first sheet. 9. When the preliminary review was submitted for this project, it was mentioned that further review would be required for the proposed architectural design. Please submit 10 copies of reduced colored exterior elevations or a perspective rendering, and site plans which will be routed through the City Manager's Office to the City Council for their information/comment. It is staffs opinion that the building design and form generally conforms to the Village Architectural style outlined in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. However, the exterior building materials (roof material and wood shake siding) may need to be upgraded to comply with the quality aspects of the overlay zone. I will notify you when I receive comments back from the City Council. 10. Please submit an amended acoustical analysis that reflects the current site configuration and updated mitigation measures forall ofthe proposed uses. 11. The project has been routed for review and comment to various departments and agencies. There may be additional items that require revision or modification based on this review. I will forward these comments to you when I receive them, hopefully within the next 2-3 weeks. Engineering: 12. Engineering issues will be sent under separate cover. Fire: 13. Please contact the Fire Department to determine an acceptable surfacing material for the emergency access road. Building: 14. Because the parcel is being subdivided into separate lots, each lot must be provided with accessible parking on its own. For instance, the hotel has 119 spaces and needs a minimum of four accessible spaces. Lot 3 needs 6 accessible spaces. In total, the site will need twice as much accessible parking. (This item will not apply if subdivided into an air space condo or postage stamp lots with all parking as one common lot). 15. The parking spaces have to be dispersed to all the primary entrances for each building, including the underground parking structure. They don't show any accessible parking underground, and they have to provide some in the garage. This presents a waterfall architectural challenge for some parking garages and three story buildings. Van accessible parking structures have to be a net clear 8'2". When they figure out where the fire sprinkler and plumbing piping hang and the ventilation ducting is routed, they frequently run out of height. This could directly affect the eventual building height, which looks like it's stretched to the maximum allowable. 1 suggested to the architect they review this very carefully. There is little latitude after the fact when they cut it that close height-wise. The parking spaces also have to be the closest parking spaces on an accessible route to the building entrances. Their architect should review this as well. 16. There is some wood trim on the service station canopy. That will have to be fire- retardant treated lumber or non-combustible materials (something that looks like wood). Current code prohibits combustible wood on fuel dispensing canopies. Ms URBAN SYSTEMS SSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING A TRAFFIC ENGINEBVNG. MARKETINQ & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT ATTN: Barbara Kennedy COMPANY: Gty of Carlsbad FROM: Andrew P. SchI DATE: June 5, 2000 WHm TO ADDRESSEE; YEUOW TO FILE; PINK TO MANAGER phone : »• fax: r 760 602 4626 760 602 8559 TOTAL PAGES: 1+ Attachment 77ME: 4:16 PM TRANSMUTED VIA: MctsSanger SUBJECT: Cannon Court TrafTic Study We are sending you the following information foryclvtr: Q use Q for submittal Q as requested Q approval #rew€w S^orft^ti^t # OF PAGES -TYPE iReport DESCRIPTION Cannon Court Traffic Study (3 copies) Enclosed foryour use in reviewing the Cannon Court Project, is a revised traffic study. The traffic study has been revised to match last week's final site plan submittal. The study has also been updated to incorporate 1999 City Monitoring Traffic Counts and the latest SANDAG Traffic Data. In addition, as you requested, we have incorporated a new analysis for two options on the SDGSrE parcel which would be accessed in the Cannon Courtproject. The land uses assumed for the offsite SDG&E parcel is visitor commercial. Two options for parcel size, i.e. 2 acres and 12.5 acres were used and impacts were determined. Traffic generation for these options may be found on page 4-1 of the report. The traffic generation rates and results are summarized in Table 4-1 found on paee 4-2 ofthe report. Section 8 ofthe report contains the analysis of impacts for the 12.5 acre Option 2. Please distribute the report for staff review. If you have any questions or need additional information, please let us know. cc: John Buza, with enclosure Dennis Cunningham, with enclosure 2598 If enclosures are not as noted, please notiiy us at once. 1 C:\Office.2000\Trans.fax.2000\Z598-6.2.00/disk 4540 KEARNY VILLA ROAD, SUITE 106 • SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1573 • (858) 560-4911 • FAX (858) 560-9734 e-20-200 11:33AM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 931574.d abJ^a/jLow IB:I/ biy-t-btj^Jl SIGN A RAMA CLMT PASE OJ ^* CUSK3MB?: JA CORI? CONWa: p. 2 W8®9l!(lillJWi^ TKLEPHONE-.gSS'TS®' 8338 DThte Copy Pk « fe. aPte««, mate corrwttons wn<« another proof. aOk »yJth ^iff^^f^.-"^ fsccepted b^t _j Date: I oomections noted. €4F €Sm$2Si^ 9SAL poo Oo-fO^ - (^^^n6/i t 1 box; 5« Qndtell)ddivrr:__§^ Spell chk. mrk. special Instructions: REV WEED 2ND MMI VIICJIO HOU« 29PSD OUANIUYi 1 HTXLT: 4^X36" COLOR: WHIE VWVl; SMl, c**y COLOfh aLAdK-' COLOR: 06 YBIDW COLOR: Mj^ COLOR: N/A FONT SWISS 7» BOLO BT Post-it" Fax Note 7671 Co./Dept. ^ Phone # Phone* '^o:i-%^(^ Fax# G-20-200 11:32AM FROM PLANNING SYSTEMS 760 93157dd P. 1 PLANNING SYSTEMS n LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • U3W POLICY AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGAnbN TIRANiMITTAIL COMPANY: PROTECT: C A yaNJQ M C V FAX #: DATE/TIME: tojo^ Number of pages including cover sheet: ^ Remarks: ^\ '-> 1[?6i^Ugv^ ^oj ^Q/OOAI Please call (760) 931-0780 if the number of pages indicated afe not received or if you Iw VG any other questions. 1530 FARADAY AVENUE • SUITB100 • CARLSBAD. CA 92008 • (760) 931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 • planning^stems@nctimes.n« J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development May 4, 2000 A: I Ci I '0 m 2000 PUNNING DEPftRlWE'" Ms. Barbara Kennedy C'^l^d Planning Department City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY BY JOHN BUZA Re: CUP 99-30 / CUP 99-31 - Cannon Court: Dear Barbara, I'm writing to ask for any possible assistance you might be able to offer to move our project along. Even though we have been working with the City for quite some time, we have made very little progress. In an effort to move our project fonward, and for many other reasons, we have decided to move from Hofman Planning to Planning Systems, Tom Hageman. It certainly is not Hofman's responsibility for our lack of progress, but we feel with the tremendous delays and costs, we were compelled to try anything that might assist our project. On April 20, 2000 you met with Ed McArdle and Kirk Moeller of McArdle Associates Architects. As relayed to me by Ed McArdle, you suggested that we consider withdrawing, redesigning and resubmitting, basing your suggestion on the multitude of revisions our project had undergone. No one can disagree with the fact the project has been redesigned, but as the attached history shows, these changes have all been reactions to the City's requests/demands. On April 28, 2000 I received a very encouraging call from Bill Hofman. Bill indicated he had a conversation with Ms. Landers during which she told him she thought we were close, and that she had some ideas on as he put it "tweaking", that should be beneficial to our project, and with these improvements, resubmittal, withdrawal or redesign would not be necessary. Although we have been unable to attain a meeting with you or Ms. Landers this week, we again tried to listen to your concerns and modified the plan (PLAN #7), and dropped off at your office Wednesday, ft/lay 3, 2000. As the "Project History" shows, we have reacted to each and every mandate/suggestion the City has requested. These changes and delays have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and are starting to place our project in jeopardy. We are requesting your prompt attention to help us finalize our application in the next 3 to 4 weeks, so we can present to the Planning Commission by mid June. Our application was submitted on approximately December 23, 1999, and we feel with the City's cooperation we should have no problem completing our application by June 23, 2000, thus complying with the "six-month" application deadline. We certainly hope the time does not cause any problem, but should we have time issues, we intend to request an extension. As has been explained to us, by individuals both inside and outside the City, a 90-day extension is allowed. We feel with the modifications mandated by the City, especially moving the road into the 60' easement after we had been told not to enter the easement, we are entitled to such an extension, but hopefully this will not be necessary. Page 1 of 12 Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 'Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 As I stated earlier, our project is certainly in jeopardy, and we are asking you and everyone else in the City to give us any possible help. We feel our project is going to be the highest quality project the City could ever have developed on this parcel, and that we will be a great addition to the Carlsbad business community, so please help where possible. We feel the following Project History is helpful in understanding the various modifications the project has undergone. PROJECT HISTORY We purchased the property in September of 1998. Prior to, and after our purchase, all our conversations with the City have been, that since our plan was to develop a hotel, restaurants, and a gas station, and since these are allowed uses for the existing Commercial Tourism zoning, our project should be easier than most projects in Carlsbad. Especially in light of the fact our property is located between a freeway off ramp and the railroad tracks, and over 1,000 feet from the nearest residence. When the contiguous SDG&E property to the north was discussed with City staff, staff told us that the mayor dislikes projects with only one access road, and should that land be developed, that developer would need to construct an additional access over to Carlsbad Boulevard. We were then told about the research the City was doing on the possibility of a new Carlsbad Ranch Overlay Zone being adopted in the summer of 1999. We met with Eric Munoz to understand the possible impact such an Overlay Zone might have on our project. We were very pleased, since our intentions were to build a quality project. In light of the fact our project would be so impacted by the new zone, especially with our proposed plans, it was recommended we not attempt to submit any plans or applications, until the Overlay Zone was adopted, which we agreed to do to allow the City to establish it's standards. During our preliminary discussions with the City and our Planners, Hofman Planning, everyone agreed that the use of the 60' panhandle along the railroad tracks zoned PU, would make our processing more difficult, but still encouraged us to proceed. In early August 1999, we submitted our plans per the "Preliminary Review" required by the City (PLAN #1). We realize that such a review is not final or binding, but we were informed that if we complied with these issues, and remedied the City's concerns, this plan would be the basis of our design and would be used to complete all engineering and architectural drawings, and applications for our Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. SEE PLAN #1 NEXT PAGE Page 2 of 12 PLAN #1 TiniMTlllUTMinilTfl CANNON ROAD The City's Preliminary Review was dated August 16, 1999. The largest issue was the use of the 60' panhandle that was zoned PU. We immediately realized the use of this land created many issues for the City. Hofman Planning had various conversations with the City, and relayed to me that we could not utilize this property until a Precise Development Pian was prepared for the entire Encina Power Plant site. Since we could not prepare such a plan we had to eliminate the panhandle from our plans. It was explained to me that the City had many outstanding issues with SDG&E and their property, and our project would proceed much smoother, if we simply developed our 6 acres, avoiding that complex situation. This was a significant financial matter for us, since we had to eliminate one restaurant, but we wanted the process to move along, so we agreed. Page 3 of 12 We complied with the removal of the use of 60' (PLAN #2), and all other requests in the August 16, 1999 letter, and began all our drawings, engineering, landscape plans, and applications which are required for the actuai submittal. Between 11/8/99 and 11/19/99 we met with each individual City Council Member, and had very positive reviews of our project. All the City Council Members commented on the importance of having gas services at this interchange, to benefit not only visitors to Lego Land, but also more importantly, eliminate some traffic at Palomar Airport and Route 5. Also, note that Cannon Road will very shortly connect to the airport industrial area. In all these meetings with the City Council Members, the quality of our design depicted in landscaping, site plan, and renderings, was discussed and greeted with great enthusiasm. Ail work to complete PLAN #2, and applications, was finalized over the next four months, and submitted on approximately December 23,1999. PLAN #2 Page 4 of 12 We received a letter from the City dated January 13, 2000 with a detailed list of concerns and items that we had to address for the City to consider our application complete. We met on February 4, 2000 with Barbara Kennedy, Frank Jimeno, and a representative of the Carlsbad Fire Department. We reviewed each item, and discussed the best solutions to solve the City's issues. Frank Jimeno told us that Engineering would not be providing their review until we obtained a letter from Mr. Holzmiller of the Planning Department stating he would not support the development of any offices on the property to the north. As we proceeded to make all plan modifications requested/suggested by Barbara Kennedy, Frank Jimeno, and the Fire Department, Mike Howes and Bill Hofman of Hofman Planning attempted to secure the above-mentioned letter from Mr. Holzmiller, so we could then get the final corrections from Engineering. Approximately two weeks after our February 4, 2000 meeting, I received a call from IVlike Howes and Bill Hofman indicating they had spoken with Mr. Holzmiller and that now the City wanted our road to curve over to, and enter the 60' easement. This meant that the majority of the time and money, spent from August until then, had been wasted. This also meant the restaurant that we had designed to avoid the 60' easement was completely useless. In my conversation with Bill Hofman and Mike Howes, they said their impression was that the City understood that we had been treated unfairly, and they felt the City might be helpful in getting our project back on track. At this point, it was explained to me by Bill Hofman and Mike Howes of Hofman Planning that in light of what the City had done to our project, by twice moving our road, it was imperative that we arrange a meeting with Mr. Holzmiller, to get everyone in agreement, since this change by the City cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Hofman attempted to set this meeting for well over two weeks, but was informed such a meeting was not possible, and that we had to work through our Planner. We again started modifications (PLAN #3), showing a smaller restaurant as future development, to the left of our entrance (west). At that point, we acknowledged that this was just for illustrative purposes and we realized that it would require a complete amendment to the plan including a public hearing, to ever develop this restaurant. Again, we were just trying to be up front and let everyone know what could possibly occur on the site at some future date, subject to City review and approval. With everything we had been put through, and the fact the City was now mandating the road be in the easement, everyone felt a restaurant might be agreeable. Please keep in mind that we have a recorded document, "Access Easement Agreement" between West Development, Inc. and SDG&E which states in section 7.2 that at such time West Development completes the road, the 60' strip is to become a part of West Development's property. We finalized our revised plan, which shows a restaurant at the rear of the property near the hotel, and submitted for another Preliminary Review. SEE PLAN #3 NEXT PAGE Page 5 of 12 PLAN #3 CANNON ROAD We received a letter dated March 22, 2000 from Barbara Kennedy. In this letter, we are instructed (item #2) not to show any future parking or future development in the easement (panhandle). We revised the exhibits to show no parking or development in the panhandle. If at some future date we do decide to develop this area we wili apply for a formal amendment to our discretionary permits. The next issue in Barbara Kennedy's letter is item #4, regarding ADT's, and the request to again redo our traffic study, assuming the City would allow the 12.5 acres to the north be re-zoned from PU to CT, with all this traffic becoming our responsibility. In rough calculation, we were told these 12.5 acres would generate approximately 8800 ADT's. Our project was designed with a 36' road, which as we understand it, will accommodate 10,000 ADT's, of which our agreement with SDG&E limits us to no more than 5,000 ADT's, 50% of the 10,000. Page 6 of 12 This lead us to designing a wider road (secondary) (PLAN #4), which I am told can handle up to 20,000 ADT's. This road all but eliminates the opportunity to develop the site west of our entrance, another significant and material financial loss. PLAN #4 a CANNON ROAD After creating PLAN #4, Mike Howes (of Hofman Planning) and I met with Barbara Kennedy on March 31, 2000 to review the revised plan and further discuss issues contained in her March 22, 2000 letter. At this time, over four months after our submittal, Barbara Kennedy informed us that she did not believe our Country Store could be classified as a Gas Station with a Mini-Mart, but should really be classified as a Convenience store despite its freeway orientation. This change would greatly increase the traffic generated and make it beyond the capacity of our driveway. Although our traffic engineer disagreed with the classification of this building as a Convenience Store, we wanted to cooperate with the City and redesigned the plan again. Page 7 of 12 To accomplish this, we again compieted modifications (PLAN #5), reducing the Country Store (which was intended to have food service) to a Mini-Mart, and creating a separate restaurant to allow the traffic calcuiations to be within standards, and allowing us to keep a financially viable project. PLAN #5 In our March 31, 2000 meeting with Barbara Kennedy, we also discussed our road, and the impact of potential development of the PU zoned property to the north. We discussed the idea of creating an expandable road plan, which would have us constructing a 42' wide road surface, and leaving adequate area for a future developer of the northerly SDG&E parcel to widen the road to 64', if this ever proved to be necessary. Barbara Kennedy felt this would be an agreeable solution. Page 8 of 12 We then began discussing the traffic possibilities should the zoning of the land to the north be changed. As I stated earlier, we had always been assured that as long as we developed our project independently from the power company's land, our project would be unaffected by future plans, and that for anyone to develop anything to the north, another road would be mandated, to connect to the coast. With that said, we agreed to the following: Traffic Studies 1. Complete a study that shows traffic generation should the power lines and substation remain, and approximately 2 acres be zoned Commercial Tourism. 2. Complete a study that shows that all the 12.5 acres would be zoned Commercial Tourism, showing the possible traffic generation. Then take the number of ADT's allowed at the intersection of Route 5 and Cannon Road, the traffic allowed on our road, less "Cannon Court's" traffic generation, to show any future developer their limit of ADT's. This would also allow the City to limit the ADT's allowed on the property to the north, or give the developer an option of constructing another road to the coast. We also discussed the idea of engaging a professional in the Power Generation and Transmission Field to show the City the likelihood of anyone in the future relocating the transmission lines and substation. This report is nearly complete, and should be very helpful to the City. It shows that it is highly unlikely that the substation on the property to the north of our site will ever be moved even if a new power plant was constructed on the property owned by NRG between the railroad and Interstate 5. On April 10, 2000 Ed McArdle and Kirk Moeller of McArdle Associates Architects, met with Barbara Kennedy and Frank Jimeno of Engineering, to review PLAN #5. Although I wasn't present at that meeting, the feedback I received was very positive. Ed McArdle faxed me a copy of his notes as follows: A) Plan good B) Can we add bus parking somewhere? C) Can we fix dead end parking to the left (west) of Restaurant A? D) Show fire access (as original plans submitted) to west of our entrance E) Lose two parking spaces at parking garage exit (per Frank) F) Last - can we move Mini-Mart to be constructed along Cannon to shield pumps? At that meeting it was agreed to modify plans where possible, and then get Barbara Kennedy multiple copies so she could "run around" to various departments to get input, so we could get our plans complete and re-submitted. A modified plan was completed (PLAN #6). SEE PLAN #6 NEXT PAGE Page 9 of 12 PLAN #6 The majority of the items discussed in the April 10, 2000 meeting, were included in PLAN #6. The dead end parking to the left (west) of Restaurant A was improved (eliminated) by moving the restaurant to the east. It was explained to me that although the parking as a dead end was not illegal, Frank felt it would be better to eliminate. We agreed, and also felt it would allow a "drop off' area, which would be better. The revised plans were dropped off to Barbara Kennedy on Monday, April 17, 2000, to be shown to the various departments for comments, at which point we believed our project back on track. Page 10 of 12 Ed McArdle and Kirk Moeller met with Barbara Kennedy on Thursday, April 20, 2000 at 10:30 am. I again must state that I was not present at the meeting, and rely on Ed and Kirk's impressions. Several comments were made; one was that since we were getting close to the six-month deadline from the time our application was submitted, we might be forced to start the process all over. Possibly Barbara was unaware of our submittal date of approximately December 23, 1999, which still allowed neariy 60 days for us to meet our deadline. Although no additional meetings have taken place since the April 20, 2000 meeting, we elected to attempt to create an additional plan (PLAN #7), which we feel answers the most recent concerns expressed by Barbara Kennedy and Ms. Landers. PLAN #7 I CANNO/N ROAD Page 11 of 12 As I stated in my introduction, we are asking for your cooperation and response on PLAN #7, as quickly as possible. Sincerely, John A. Buza President Cc: Adrienne Landers Frank Jimeno Gary Wayne Michael Holzmiller Page 12 of 12 //A A /. . I / . //, • ISSI >t I I I I s ARCHITECTS McArdle Associates Architects Architecture * Plannmg * Interiors * Urban Design 6965 El Camino Real #105-472 La Costa, California 92009 760-431-7775 Transmittal Date: May 3, 2000 To: Barbara Kennedy From: Ed McArdle Re: Cannon Court Project Message: Barbara, Enclosed please find a refined Site Plan based on the preliminary concept sketch I brought to your office on Monday for review. The revised plan has addressed several of your concems which we understood were: a. Can the traffic flows between the Mini Mart Service Station and Restaurant be rearranged to achieve a separation of some kind. b. Study the feasibility of relocating the Mini Mart to another area of the site. c. Study the possibility of minimizing the relationship of restaurant required parking from the Mini Mart. The above ideas were evaluated and the result is illustrated on the Site Plan. The parking around the restaurant was increased while paiking aroimd the mini Mart was decreased. The net result was that the overall parking coimt was increased by eleven additional spaces, all aroimd the restaurant. Please review the plan and let me know your thoughts at your earliest convience, as you are aware we wish to proceed as soon as possible with our formal resubmittal. Thank you, Ed RECEIVEr (/"^ 0 3 20' CITY OF CARL PLANNING D C A hJ hj a M fl O ^ o A /' - //V //< (.S.S( I I / / s y4 K CMITECTS McArdle Associates Architects Architecture * Planning * Interiors * Urban Design PMB-472 6965 El Camino Real, Suite 105 La Costa, California 92009-4195 760-431-7775 Transmittal Date: April 17, 2000 To: Barbara Kennedy CityofCarlsbad Planning Department Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 From: Edward McArdle Re: Cannon Court We are sending you: Revised Site Plans for your review prior to re submittal of complete project drawings. Remarks: Barbara: Pursuant to our meeting of last week enclosed please fmd six copies of our final revised site plan. We attempted to incorporate some of the items discussed. John has reviewed the plan and is comfortable with our latest version. Please review and let me know when we can make our submittal as we are anxious to get the project moving foreword. Thank You, Ed RECEIVED / ;^R 1 7 2000 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT. Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department March 22, 2000 Mr. Mike Howes Hofman Planning Associates 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 1 50 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31 - CANNON COURT Dear Mr. Howes: Thank you for submitting the revised site plan, dated March 15, 2000, for the Cannon Court project. The site plan was reviewed by planning and engineering staff in regard to the alignment of the proposed access road and the projected ADT for the road. The following comments were made in regard to the current proposal: 1. The proposed lot lines may not include any portion of the 60 foot easement road. The easement property is zoned P-U and cannot be consolidated with the Cannon Court property at this time. Use of a portion of the easement road for access, as shown on your plan, is supported by staff. 2. Do not show future parking or future development in the 60 foot easement or the remainder lot located west of the primary access road. You may show a fire department emergency access road in the easement area. 3. The number of driveways from the access road needs to be decreased. The two most northerly driveways and the two driveways north of the gas station entrance should each be consolidated into one access point. The design of the access road will be based on the ADT generated by the Cannon Court project and the NRG parcel north of the site. Two alternatives should be evaluated in the traffic study. a) The first alternative should assume that approximately 32 acres of the 45.5 acre P- U zoned lot north of the site will remain as a public utility with about 12.5 acres immediately north of your site potentially developed with a new power plant using current technology. b) The second alternative should assume that the most northerly 32 acres of the P-U zoned parcel will remain as a public utility which may be expanded to include a new power plant using current technology. The ADT for the remaining 12.5 acres immediately north of your site should be based on rezoning the property to a commercial/tourist land use designation. I realize that you currently have a private 1635 Faraday Avenue- • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ CUP 99-30/CUP 99-3W CANNON COURT MARCH 22, 2000 PAGE 2 development agreement which limits the ADT for the adjacent parcel to no more ADT than will be generated by the Cannon Court project. Your request to calculate ADT based on this private development agreement is unacceptable to the City for two reasons: 1) the private agreement limiting ADT is unenforceable by the City, and 2) it would be unlawful for the City to impose a development restriction which would limit the ADT on the adjacent parcel as part of the approval for your project. Therefore, ADT for the project needs to be calculated using a worst case scenario. 5. The ADT for the convenience market w/gasoline pumps should be calculated at 850 ADT/1,000 square, feet per SANDAG traffic generation rates. The current traffic study accounts for a gas station with food mart/car wash at 155 ADT/fueling station. Given that the convenience market does not function as a small accessory use to the gas station, the use of the higher traffic generation rate is warranted. 6. The traffic study indicates that the ADT for the restaurant was calculated at 160 ADT/ 1,000 sf., however, your new site plan shows the restaurant as generating 100 ADT/1,000 sf. Please clarify which information is accurate. If the lower rate is used, then a condition may be imposed on the project which would restrict the restaurant to use as a "quality" restaurant, rather than a sit-down, high turnover establishment. 7. Some of the parking areas adjacent to the driveway entrances need to be eliminated so that adequate vehicle stacking/queuing areas can be provided, per engineering standards. 8. Please revise the parking calculations as follows: a) Round up the required parking spaces to 38 for the convenience market and indicate the use as retail/office/storage. b) Parking for the dining/kitchen area for the hotel needs to be calculated at 1/100 sf. If you have any questions, please contact me at 760-602-4626. Sincerely, Barbara Kennedy, AlCP Associate Planner BK:mh c: Michael Holzmiller Adrienne Landers Bob Wojcik Frank Jimeno Mike Smith Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Managemenr Fiacai Analysis March 15, 2000 Michael Holzmiller Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 RE: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT Dear Michael: Accompanying this letter is a revised site plan for the proposed Cannon Court project, CUP 99- 30. It has been revised based on the latest direction we have received from staff to: 1. Keep the access to Cannon Road at its existing location so that it lines up with Avenida Encinas. 2. Move the access road into the 60' panhandle adjacent to the railroad as quickly as possible. 3. Design the road in conformance with, applicable City standards. The proposed road is 40' wide with 300' curve radius in accordance with the City's Engineering standards. Restaurant B is shown as fiature development since most of the parking for this building would be located in the panhandle that currently has a P-U Zoning. It would be our preference to be able to develop Restaurant B as a part of this approval if staff could support the proposed parking in the panhandle. However, if it would create problems or in any way delay the processing of this application, our client is Avilling to show it as future development, with the understanding that a formal Amendment to the Site Development Plan would have to be submitted to allow for the development of this portion of the site. Please review these plans as soon as possible and give us your input. We believe that this is the only outstanding issue remaining on this project and our client is anxious to revise all exhibits and resubmit. However, before he directs the design team to revise all of the exhibits he needs 5900 Pasteur Court • Suite 150 • Corlsbad • CA 92008 • (760) 438^1465 • Fox: (760) 438-2443 a firm commitment fi'om staff that this design is acceptable. Please give me a call if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, Mike Howes cc Bob Wojcik Barbara Kennedy Frank Jimeno John Buza Mar 13 03 02:55p Kirk Moe11er 760-431-7585 3 —I- -t h Jun 18 01 04:16p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (8^1 560-9734 p.l ^1 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNMB S TRAFFIO ENGmeeivNO, UAHKBTINO » Pnaxcr SUPPOKT CONSULTANTS ro ImuSTwr AND GoveRNMen/r June 18, 2001 Mr. Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager Phone: (619) 688-6610 Caltrans District 11 Fax: (619) 688-2587 2829 Juan Street San Diego, CA Dear Erwin: As we recently discussed, foUowing are replies to your letter of March 27, 2001 as addressed in our series of meetings with Caltrans or in our report. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance in addressing and resolving your concerns. GENERAL COMMENTS Assess All Cumulative Impacts - The City of Carisbad has developed a comprehensive traffic forecast model (Series 9) which represents buildout ofthe City general plan. The City build out model was used for the analysis included in the traffic report. Caltrans Requires LOS "C" or Better - The City of Carlsbad requires that regional CMP procedures be followed. These procedures are described in the "SANTEC/ITE Guidelines for Traffic Impacts Studies in the San Diego Region" dated March 2, 2000, which specifies that Level of Service (LOS) "D" is the region-wide goal for an acceptable LOS. For Mitigation. Caltrans Suggests Fair Share Contribution - We agree for the Cannon Court project, actual improvements are proposed to mitigate impacts. If fiirther improvements are identified by Caltrans, a fair share contribution will be made. SPECIFIC COMMENTS Page 7-6. Dual Right Turn Lanes Explain - The City has plans for future widening to provide an additional right tun lane when the SDG£rE parcel is developed and access to that parcel is known. Page 8-2. Explain the Difference from Table 7-2 - Two different analysis procedures were used which sometimes yield different results. For Table 7-2, the City uses the ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) method and for Table 8-1 CMP procedures were used which #002598 Page 1 C:\OFFICE.2001\2598'61801-aps 4'>4n KhiUNV Villi R/lAn ^llni.- W/i • VAKI ritu/^/-, C A 07 I'> 7 ;T77 . IS>^0\ KAn l - T?... /oro\ sr^n n-t-,.4 Jun 18 01 04:16p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. (8^81560-9734 p.2 Mr. Erwin Gojuangco Urban Systems Associates, Inc. June 18, 2001 require the use of HCS (Highway Capacity Software) procedures. In both cases acceptable levels of service are shown. Section 9 Should Include a Mitigation Summary - Attached is the City staff summary ofthe traffic analysis and mitigation measures. This summary is the basis for City approval ofthe project. As shown, five major improvements by the project are required to mitigate its impacts, namely: 1. Interconnect the new Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing freeway ramp signals. 2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal. 3. Signing and striping with "ICEEP CLEAR" notices to assure intersections are not blocked during railroad signal preemption. 4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption. 5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas. As previously mentioned, if additional mitigation is identified by Caltrans, we are committed to a fair share contribution based on direct project impacts. Please let us know ifyou have any further questions, or you need any additional information. Sjjaeerely, Andrew P. Schlaefli CC: Barbara Kennedy, City of Carlsbad (760) 602 8559 John Buza,J.A. Buza Corporation (858) 756-2891 Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems (760) 931-5744 Attachment: 1 #002598 Page 2 C:\OFFICE.2001\2598-61801-aps Jun 18 01 04:16p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. C8581560-9734 p.3 Transportation/Ciiculation A tra£Gc z^Ktrt was submitted for tbe proposed devektpmeat The rqpoit addresses two circulation issues tbat need to be analyzed. First, tbe report^analyzes the intact of the project trafSc on ousting city streets. Additionally, fiie iqjort analyzes die access regubnnents of the 45-acte parcel directly north of die project When Qie vacant 45-acre parcel norlh of tbe project is developed, it will take access dirougb the project site. Accordingt^, the access road needs to bc desijgned to handle tfie potential fitture traffic. In order to establish ttie ultimate width of this access road, and since uses are not cuirently planrcd for flie 45 acres, two alteiiiative land use assumptions were made. Alternative I assumed 15 acres fia: a high technology power plant plus 30 acres fbr the utihty coiporate headquaiteis. Tbis alternative results in a traffic generation of3,450 ADT. Alternative 2 assumed 15 acres a high technology power phait, 115 acres for coiporate headquartos, and 12.5 acres of visitor commercial use. This altemative resulted in a traffic generation of 7,200 ADT. To accommodate both altematives, the project proposes to buUd two lane impiovements through the project, witb widening to fbur lanes at the intersection with Camion Road. These improvonents wouid meet die requirements of alternative 1. To meet the requiremoits of altemative 2, additional right-of-way would be reserved for the potentia] widening of the street to a fbur-lane road. The project itself will generate a total of4,793 ADT; including 308 AM peak-hour trips and 401 PM peak-hour trips. The trafiic analysis indicates that fibe additional tiafSc generated by die project does not significantly afifect the levels of service of the existing streets. However, the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proxhoity oftiie 1-5 Cannon Road fteeway ramps to the east and the railroad crossing to thc west, some trafSc operations measures need to bc in^lemnited. Thc foUowing specific measures wilt be incoiporated in the destgn of the inteisection: 1. Interconnect (he new Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas ttaffic signa] with tbe exisdng fcwwsi ramp signals. 2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas trafiic signal. 3. Signing and striping with "ECEBP CLEAR" notices to assure intersections are not blocked during railroad signal preemption. 4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to pemiit soudi to east, west to sonth, and north to east movements during preeoqition. 5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas. With all fhe above measures incoiporated into tbe project design, the traffic analysis shows that die project traffic does not significantly aSect the levels of service ofthe stieets or intersections in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-oot (year 2020) conditions. Jun 18 01 04:17p Urban Sastems Rssoc. Inc. C8?81560-9734 p.4 In 1994 dw City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed thc in^ts which would result from the build-out of the City under an i^datcd General Plan. That document conchided that continued development to build-out as proposed m the updated Genraal Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments wiU be adequate to accommodate build-out traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by r^onal dnou^-traffic ova- which die City has no jurisdictional control. Tbese generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Cadsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvonents, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Managonent performance standards at build-out. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out, numerous mitigation measures have bem recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) measures to ensure the provision of ciiculati<Hi GaciMcs concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additionai sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systons; and 3) partieipi^on in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regicxial dirougb-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within die jurisdiction of the City to control. The appUcable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incoiporated into die design of the project or arc included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the frdlure of intersections at build-out of die General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checkhst is marked "Poteolially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Pko, therefore, die preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution Np. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Coosidoations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overnding Considerations" apphes to all projects covered by ihe General Plan's Mast«- EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR This document is available at the Planning Department. A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than, five years prior to the filing of an apphcation for a later project. The City is currCTtly reviewing the 1994 MEIR lo detennine whetha- it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantia] changes have occuned widi reject to die drcumstances under whidi the MEIR was certified. The only potential changed ciroumstance, the intersection £ulure at Palomar Aiiport Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is oo new available infonnation, which was not known and could not have been known at tiie time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. Hofman Planning leWer of Transmittal Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis Date: March 15,2000 Project: Cannon Court Delivered by: HPA Attention: Barbara Kennedy Message: Barbara, The following contains a revised Site Plan for Cannon Court and letter to Michael Holzmiller explaining the revisions. Please review these items and call me if you have any questions. cc: Bob Wojcik Frank Jimeno John Buza Fronn: Mike Howes (MA) 5900 Pasteur Court • StelSO • Carlsbad • CA • 92008 • 760-438-1465 • Fax 760-438-2443 • Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department January 13, 2000 Mr. Mike Howes Hofman Planning Associates 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 1 50 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31 - Cannon Court Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Conditional Use Permits, application nos. CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, December 16, 1999, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4455, jf you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:BK:mh Gary Wayne Adrienne Landers, Team Leader Frank Jimeno, Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 ^ LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31 Planning: ^ P 1. The project requires submittal of an application for a Non-Residential Planned Development Permit. A Parcel Map application for the proposed 3-lot subdivision shall be submitted to the Engineering Department. 2. The building height may not exceed 45 feet, with approval of a Site Development Plan (per section 21.29.060) and allowed height proti-usions described in Section 21.46.020 may not exceed 45 feet. For structures over 35 feet in height, the required setback must be increased by 1 foot for every foot of vertical height up to a maximum of 45 feet. The additional setback area must be maintained as landscaped open space. Therefore, the required 10 foot landscape setback will need to be increased accordingly if a height increase is requested. Please indicate the setback from the existing and proposed property lines to the various structures, and show the increased landscape setbacks. Please revise the building elevation so that it does not exceed 45 feet. You will also need to submit a $2,670 fee for a Site Development Plan review. 3. Please submit a comprehensive sign program application and fee of $650 for the project, pursuant to Chapter 21.208.100 B.l. Please include a summary indicating the proposed and allowable square footage of the proposed walls signs and freestanding signs. Include the length of building frontages and submit sign colors/materials as part of your proposal. 4. Please submit a noise study consistent with the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. 5. Please verify the number of hotel rooms proposed. Sheet 1 trip generation rates show 100 rooms, the site plan shows 86 rooms, the project description states 100 rooms, the parking calculations show 86 rooms, and a count of the rooms on the floor plans shows 94 or 95 rooms. Please be consistent with your plans. 6. Please submit a constraints map showing the location of the existing foundations and existing types, sizes and locations of trees. 7. Please provide lot coverage calculations for each individual lot. 8. Please provide an addendum to the disclosure statement indicating the names of any individuals owning 10% or more of the shares in the J.A. Buza Corporation and in West Development, Inc. 9. Pursuant to Chapter 21.208090 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, a project notification sign must be posted upon the City's determination of completeness of the application. Please refer to the above referenced ordinance section for the specific requirements for the sign. Submit a draft of the copy, size and color of the proposed sign and the proposed sign location for staff approval prior to posting the sign. A subsequent sign will be required at the time the project is scheduled for public hearing. Please contact me if you have any questions. Please Note: Engineering, Fire, and Water Department comments wiil be sent under separate cover. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: Major Issues: 1. The proposed primary and emergency access to the site is a major issue. The proposed private road will be serving not only the proposed development, but the P-U zoned property north of the site. Engineering and Fire Departments have major concerns about emergency access, the number of openings that will be permitted on Cannon Road, and if the road should be public or private. The Planning Department is supportive of use of the 60' easement for emergency access, however, road improvements and access agreements will be required. 2. The traffic study does not adequately evaluate the anticipated uses of the P-U zoned property located to the north of the site. It is possible that the site may be continued to be used as storage, however, it may developed as an expansion of the power plant or as a new power plant. Please evaluate the alternative scenarios in the traffic study. 3. The parking spaces proposed around the "U" shaped portion of the gas station should be relocated in an area which is more convenient to the market. As placed now, there would be a great deal of conflict between the pedestrian movement to the market and vehicular access to the pump station. 4. The proposal differs from the preliminary review submittal in that it now includes a car wash. The location of the car wash impedes access to the market from the shuttle/bus stop and eliminates the direct connection from the hotel to the market. A better solution would be to eliminate the car wash, and relocate the parking south of the pumps (see item # 3) to the north end of the market. Gradinq: 5. The proposed 27,000 cubic yards of export proposed seems excessive. Can a plan be developed to minimize the amount of export proposed? Site Plan: 6. Indicate the depth of the front setback from 1) property line to the front of the restaurant and 2) property line to the edge of pavement in front of the gas station. Regardless of where the property line is located, a minimum distance of 40' from the face of curb to any improvements should be maintained along the Cannon Road frontage (as would be required with a typjcal 10' r.o.w. and 30' setback). 7. The decorative paving within the front entrance driveway needs to be increased to 30 feet in width, consistent with the overlay zone requirements. 8. If possible, please incorporate an additional drop off-area for the restaurant. 9. The circulation at the north end of the site presents some conflicts with ingress and egress into the aboveground and underground parking areas. Please resolve these conflicts. 10. The propane tank area needs to be screened from Cannon Road views into the site. 11. The trash enclosures shall be designed to meet City standards. Parkinq: 12. Please revise the parking calculations as follows: a. Hotel: include parking for the dining/kitchen area at 1 space per 200 sf. Which rooms do you consider to be the meeting rooms? b. Countrv Store: Calculate the entire building office/storage/carwash (except for the work bays) at 1:300 and include 4 spaces per bay and 3 employee parking spaces for the gas station. 13. Standard parking spaces require an area of 170 square feet with a minimum width of 8.5 feet. You have proposed 8.5' x 18' spaces, however, a depth of 20 feet is required in this instance. A 2 foot overhang can be permitted, however, it may not extend into the required 10 foot landscape setback. Please adjust the plan by either increasing the width or depth of the parking spaces. It is strongly suggested that you increase the stall width to allow better maneuverability for guests. 14. Please include parking stalls for guest with RVs and stalls for tour bus parking. 15. The underground parking detail p.4 of the Tentative Map shows a column on the west end, however it is not shown on the floor plan p. A1.2. There may be a conflict with the required parking space dimensions if there is a column in this location. Please verify. Also, please indicate the dimension of the columns. 16. Please check ADA requirements to determine if handicap parking spaces are required within the underground parking garage. 17. Delete compact space #159. Compact spaces shall be located in aisles separate from standard spaces. 18. It appears that a corner of the underground parking structure encroaches into the required 30 foot freeway setback. Please adjust the plan as necessary. Architecture: 19. The cupola located on the front elevation of the hotel seems to be an element who's sole purpose is for the provision of signage. In no instance will wall signs be permitted above 35' in height. The wall sign proposed for the cupola is over 35' from grade and therefore will not be permitted. If you still want to retain this element, a smaller scale cupola, similar to the octagonal tower element used on the left side of the entrance would be more in keeping with the architectural theme of the building. However, it is suggested that the cupola be eliminated altogether, and instead add a second tower element to the right side of the entrance to frame the building entrance (as shown on the 2"" and 3'" floor hotel floor plans). A wall sign could be located on the blank wall between these two elements. 20. In order to provide architectural consistency, the windows on the upper floors of the hotel should be revised to include a similar "craftsman" style divided lite window as used on the lower portion of the hotel and mini-mart. 21. Please identify the color and material of the window trim, corner boards, and other decorative trim elements (as shown on the mini-market). Landscape: 22. The landscaping plan should be revised to incorporate trees within all of the landscape islands between the parking stalls. Trees should also be located on the east side of the restaurant for screening. 23.1s the fence located along the east property line 42" high? If the fence is not located on the property line, please provide landscaping on the east side. In addition, please provide trees for screening on the east side of the restaurant. Misc: 24. Please indicate the proposed hours of operation for the service bays. No overnight outdoor storage of vehicles will be permitted. Engineering, Fire and Water Department issues to be sent under separate cover. August 4, 2000 TO: CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM; ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Pre-filing Submittal, Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay-Cannon Court This project unden/vent preliminary review before the overlay zone was adopted. As such it did not receive Council, City Manager or Community Development Director review. The project is proposing several large buildings designed in a "village" architectural style that is allowed by the zone. Each building is proposed to have a composition asphalt shake roof, cedar shake siding and a stone wainscot first story element. Staff is concerned about the long term maintenance requirements for the cedar shake siding, however, the siding could be treated to reduce the maintenance problems. Please review and provide staff with your input on the proposal and the architecture. At this stage, the design could be easily modified. Please contact Barbara Kennedy or me ifyou have questions regarding the proposal. Gary E. Wayne Attachments August 1,2000 To: Gary Wayne, Assistant Planning Director From: Barbara Kennedy, Associate Planner '^t^ RE: Cannon Court (SDP 00- 09/PUD 00-109/CUP 99-30/CUP 99-31 Enclosed are copies of the exterior building elevations for the Cannon Court project. The project is located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone which allows two primary types of architectural styles: "Village" and "Contemporary Southwest". A third "Alternative Architectural" style may be proposed if supported by the "Enforcement Official" (aka Community Development Director). Final approval of the architectural style is by the City Council through the CUP process. The applicant is proposing a hotel, two restaurants, and a gas station/mini mart as shown on the attached site plan. The architectural design as proposed is considered to be "Village". Design elements such as a variety of roof forms, dormers, variety of building wall planes, multi-paned windows with wood window surrounds, and stone wainscot have been incorporated into the building architecture to break up the building mass and add interest. Therefore, I feel that the building designs comply with what we are looking for in the overlay zone. However, I have some concerns about the proposed exterior building materials and am looking for some input. Each building would have a composition asphalt shake roof, cedar shake shingle siding, and stone as a wainscot or first story element. I am most concerned about the cedar shake siding material. Although it could be considered a material suitable for the village architectural style, it is typically used on residential-scaled structures rather than larger commercial buildings. I also have concerns over the long term maintenance and visual appearance of the cedar shingles. At this stage, the design could easily be modified to replace the cedar shingles with another wall surface material, such as horizontal wood siding. I would appreciate it if you could forward the attached drawings to the Community Development Director, City Manager, and City Council for their input and direction on the architectural issues so that I can relay it to the applicant. The Council's input on the project does not constitute an endorsement for the project. c: Adrienne Landers, Principal Planner Barbara Kennedy - Cannon Court Con|^-it Page 1 From; Eric Munoz To: Barbara Kennedy Date: 12/29/99 2:10PM Subject: Cannon Court Comment I remembered another comment for you re: Cannon Court. It involves building height: the citywide height limit for the CT zone is 35 feet with an aiiowance to 45 feet; but the governing Agua Hedionda Lagoon LCP has a height limit of 35 feet as measured to the mid-point (old style definition). The applicant is aware of this and rather than amend the LCP, they feel they can comply with both standards. Bottom line for the problem is that the ZCA that changed some height limits and the method for measurement (peak vs. mid-point) did not process a companion LCPA. It was the direction of the times (early 90's) when fears of CCC control was high... GW knows ofthis issue as well but I don't know about Dee or the rest of your team. Gary may want to discuss with Principals or consider some overall solution/approach for future projects. EM 12/29/99 CC: Don Rideout Tlie City of Carlsbad Planning DepartmenT /^^P^ A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. (1 P.C. AGENDA OF: May 16, 2001 Application complete date: January 3, 2000 Project Planner: Barbara Kermedy Project Engineer: Frank Jimeno SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT - Request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest comer of Caimon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Plaiming Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-30, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. IL INTRODUCTION The proposal consists ofthe development ofa 16-pump gas station and mini-mart, an 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate 5 in the C-T-Q zone. The project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for: 1) the gas station, 2) to allow a building height of 45 feet for the hotel, and 3) because the project site is located in the City's Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. The City Council has the final authority to approve projects which are located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. Therefore, the Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation of approval for the project. The property is located within the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Program, an area of deferred certification. The applicant will be conditioned to obtain approval of a Coastal Development Permit from the Califomia Coastal Commission. The project also includes a minor subdivision (MS 99-16), Nonresidential Planned Development Permit (PUD 00-109), and Sign Program (PS 00-67) to be acted upon by the Planning Director and City Engineer following fmal action by the City Council. The project will not have a significant impact on the environment with the incorporation of the mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued for the project. The project conforms to all applicable development standards, there are no unresolved project issues, and findings can be made for approval of the project. CUP 99-30 - CANNON CCJURT ^ May 16, 2001 Page 2 IIL PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The vacant 6.51 acre site is located on the northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate 5. The AT&SF Railroad r.o.w. is located west of the site with the Encinas Power Plant beyond. A 60 foot wide road easement is located adjacent to the west property line and provides access to the SDG&E storage yard, substation, and high tension power lines to the north. South of the site, a new Inns of America hotel is currently under construction on the southeast comer of Avenida Encinas and Carmon Road. The project site is relatively flat and currently drains to a 5' x 5' railroad tie culvert in the AT&SF Railroad r.o.w. The pad area is devoid of any significant vegetation. Mature Eucalyptus trees along with other varieties of trees and slirubs surround the property either on-site or within the adjacent CalTrans r.o.w. The majority of this vegetation is in poor condition and most of the on-site trees and shrubs will be removed and replaced with new landscaping. The site is zoned C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist-Qualified Development Overlay Zone) with a General Plan Land Use Designation of T-R (Travel-Recreation/Commercial). The development proposal consists of the phased construction ofa 16-pump gas station with a 1,500 square foot mini-mart; a three-story 86 room hotel (53,651 square feet) with a subterranean parking garage; a 7,700 square foot restaurant (Restaurant "B") located west of the hotel; and, a 4,800 square foot restaurant (Restaurant "A") located near the center of the site. Access to the site is via a private road which will tie into a new signalized intersection at Avenida Encinas and Caimon Road. The road will also provide access for existing and future uses north ofthe project site. The roadway has been designed to allow for future widening, if necessary, depending on fiiture development proposals for the property north of the site. Three driveway entrances provide access to the development area from the private road. Continuous circulation is provided between the shared parking areas so that it is not necessary to exit and re-enter the site to access the various parking areas. The circulation system has also been designed to provide adequate tuming radius for trash service vehicles, delivery trucks and fueling delivery vehicles. A secondary emergency egress road is located within the adjacent 60 foot wide strip of property owned by SDG&E (See Attachment 7). The property owner (West Development) has obtained an easement from SDG&E for the right to grade and construct improvements over the 60 foot wide easement in exchange for giving SDG&E access rights on the new private road. SDG&E's use of this property will be abandoned when the new private road is installed. Staff is supportive of the joint use ofthe new road and abandonment of the access road within the 60 foot SDG&E property. The new road configuration will allow for signalized access into the site for the Caimon Court project and for current and future uses on the SDG&E property. It also eliminates the potential for a second vehicular access point on Cannon road (within the 60 foot easement) which would be undesirable because of its close proximity to the railroad crossing. The private agreement also allows for transfer of ownership of the 60 foot wide easement to West Development. Transfer of ownership is not required as a condition of approval since West Development has an exclusive use easement over the property. The proposed use of the easement as a landscaped "park" area and emergency egress road will not create any inconsistencies with the current zoning or general plan land use designations. Furthermore, the project is conditioned so that no future development will occur within the "park" area. However, because the property has a General Plan and zoning designation of P-U (Public Utility), if transfer of ownership is proposed in the future, it would need to occur in conjunction CUP 99-30 - CANNON C May 16, 2001 Page 3 with a boundary adjustment, Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan Amendment to SP 144 (SDG&E Encina Power Plant). These actions are necessary to ensure that the property will have consistent zoning and General Plan land use designations if it is consolidated (by boundary adjustment) with the Cannon Court project. The 60 foot easement would also need to be de-annexed from the boundaries of SP 144. An application for a comprehensive amendment to SP 144 is in process with the City now, and these actions could take place in conjunction with that review. The site is relatively level and grading for the project will consist primarily of excavation for the imderground parking structure and finish grading for the building pads and parking areas. The proposed building pads are within 0 to 3 feet of natural grade and the grading of the site is necessary to provide positive drainage for the site. The estimated project grading quantities will consist of 28,000 cubic yards of cut, 1,800 cubic yards of fill, and 27,000 cubic yards of export. Because the project site is located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone it is subject to standards which ensure that the development will adhere to a high quality of architectural design. The project features a "Village" architectural style, and is consistent with the overlay zone standards. The architectural design features buildings with steeply pitched shake single roofs (7:12); accent elements such as dormers, cupolas, and porte cocheres; shingle siding above a stacked stone base element; multi-paned windows; and white wood trim and omamentation elements. Since the project will be visible from 1-5 and the railroad r.o.w. as well as from Cannon Road, special attention has been given to ensure high quality design and detailing on all sides of the structures. The three-story hotel is the tallest building with a height of 45 feet to the peak of the roof The peak elevation will be approximately 28 feet above the elevation of the freeway. The height of the single-story restaurants are approximately 26 feet to the roof peaks and the highest points of the mini-mart and gas station canopy, respectively, are 23.5 feet and 29 feet. Since no views of the coastline are present from the freeway in either a north or southbound direction, the primary aesthetic concems are in regard to any negative visual impacts of exposed mechanical equipment or utility areas. The mechanical equipment for the hotel will be ground mounted and screened. The roof equipment for the restaurants will be located within a mechanical equipment well and will be screened with horizontal panels painted to match the roof Mechanical equipment for the mini-mart will be groimd-mounted and screened by an enclosure to complement the building. Views of trash areas will also be screened from view with decorative enclosures and landscaping. The project observes a 30 foot landscape setback from Camion Road and the setback area is landscaped consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines for Cannon Road. Additionally, the project has been designed so that the mini-mart is located between Cannon Road and the gas station pump islands so that views ofthe pumps are obscured by the building mass as well as the low walls, berms and landscaping. New landscaping around the perimeter of the site includes a combination of trees and shrubs for screening and enhancing the appearance of the site. The interior landscaping theme complements the building design with informal groupings of pines, deciduous trees, and evergreen frees. Shrub masses are used as foimdation plantings and to screen vehicles. Swaths of turf are used as accents along the roadways. The landscaped area at the southwest comer of the site will be developed as a park-like amenity to accentuate the entrance of the site. The park will include a variety of seating opportunities for guests, customers, and employees. An NCTD bus stop will also be located adjacent to the park for bus service on Cannon Road. CUP 99-30 - CANNON C' May 16, 2001 Page 4 URT The applicant is proposing a phased construction ofthe site as shown on Attachment 8. Phase I includes grading (except underground parking), infrastructure improvements (including the Cannon Road traffic signal), and perimeter fencing and landscaping (including the "park" site); Phase II includes constmction of the gas station and mini-mart; Phases III and IV will result in development of Restaurant "A" and the surroimding parking and landscape areas; Phase V includes construction of the hotel, 105 space subterranean parking garage, and remaining surface parking spaces and landscaping except for around the pad area of Restaurant "B". Restaurant "B' and associated landscape would be included in the final Phase VI constmction. Each phase has been evaluated to ensure that adequate parking and circulation can be provided for the proposed uses. The proposed project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. General Plan - T-R (Travel-Recreation) B. CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone/C-T-Q Zone (Commercial-Tourist Zone-Qualified Development Overlay) (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapters 21.208, 21.29, and 21.06) C. Conditional Uses (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.42) D. Nonresidential Planned Developments (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.47) E. Local Coastal Program Compliance; and F. Growth Management (Local Facilities Management Zone 3) IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis section discusses compliance with each of the regulations/policies utilizing both text and tables. A. General Plan The following Table 1 identifies General Plan goals and objectives relevant to the proposed project and indicates the compliance of the proposal. TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Land Use Provide for commercial uses which serve the travel and recreation needs of tourists, residents, and employees of business centers and industrial centers. The gas station/mini mart, hotel and restaurants will provide needed services for the surrounding residential and business community and the traveling public. Yes CUP 99-30 - CANNON C' May 16, 2001 Page 5 :^R1 ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Circulation Provide safe, adequately and attractively landscaped parking areas. Provide an adequate circulation infrastructure concurrent with or prior to the actual demand for such facilities Parking areas meet the code requirements for parking, circulation, and landscape. The project has been conditioned to construct all road improvements needed to serve the proposed development and to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. Yes Housing Achieve a balance between jobs and cost of housing relative to wages. Project is conditioned to pay non-residential housing impact fee, if adopted. Yes Noise Review all development proposals for consistency with the policies of this element. Sound attenuation meas- ures will be incorporated for the hotel to ensure that the interior noise levels do not exceed the 45 dBA CNEL noise standard. Yes Open Space & Conservation Utilize Best Management Practices for control of storm water and to protect water quality. The project will conform to all NPDES requirements and Best Management Practices. Yes Public Safety Design all stmctures in accordance with the seismic design standards of the UBC and State building requirements. The project will be designed in conformance with all seismic design standards. Yes B. CommercialA/isitor Serving Overlay Zone / C-T-Q Zone The project site is located in the C-T-Q (Commercial Tourist Zone with a Qualified Development Overlay) and the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. The Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone development standards are more restrictive than the C-T development standards and parking regulations. The project has been evaluated using the most restrictive standards. Compliance with these standards is summarized in the table below. CUP 99-30 - CANNON C May 16, 2001 Page 6 ^JRl TABLE 2 - COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE COMPLIANCE SUMMARY TABLE STANDARD REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE PARKING • Hotels: 103 spaces (1.2 spaces per unit plus dining/ kitchen area @ 1 space/100) • Gas Station/Mini-Mart: 8 spaces (1 space/300 s.f plus 3 additional employee spaces) • Restaurant A: 76 spaces • Restaurant B: 136 spaces (20 spaces, plus 1 /50 s.f. in excess of 2,000 s.f ) • Total spaces required: 332 • Required to enter into a joint parking and joint access agreements • Surface parking: 228 spaces • Subterranean parking: 105 spaces • Total spaces provided: 333 SIGNS PS 00-67 • 1 s.f of signage per lineal foot ofbuilding frontage • .9 s.f of signage per lineal foot of frontage for buildings with two or more frontages • 100 s.f maximum freestanding monument signs • 16 s.f additional pricing signs for service stations • Freestanding sign: 6' max. ht. • Hotel: 76 s.f of wall sign area • Restaurant A: 55 s.f wall sign • Restaurant B: 70 s.f. wall sign • Mini-mart: 74 s.f wall sign area • Aggregate area of freestanding signs is 100 s.f maximum • 16 s.f. fiiel pricing sign proposed. • Freestanding sign: 4' max. ht. BUILDING HEIGHT • Max. 35 foot building height • May be increased to 45 feet with City Council approval of SDP. • Hotel: 45' • Gas Station Canopy: 22'-6" (29' at top of cupolas) • Mini-mart: 23'-6" • Restaurant A: 25'-9" • Restaurants: 25'-ll" BUILDING SETBACKS • 30' foot public street setback • 10' side and rear setback • 20' side and rear setback required for hotel due to increased building height • 30' setback to mini-mart from Carmon Road • Greaterthan 10'to all structures from side and rear property lines; all setbacks are landscaped. • Greater than 20' side and rear setback to hotel, 20' setback is completely landscaped 9J CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT May 16, 2001 Page 7 STANDARD REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE BLDG. MATERIALS/COLORS High quality materials Primary colors caimot dominate building Gray simulated shake shingle roof, simulated cedar shingle siding, stack stone wainscot at base ofbuilding, painted wood trim, multi-paned windows. Building colors are gray roofing, natural color cedar siding, multi-colored brown stack stone, and white trim elements. The colors are compatible with the Village Architectural Style. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE Village Architectural Style All building have a similar architectural style and include elements such as steeply pitched roofs; a variety of roof forms including dormers, gables and hip roof elements; high-quality surface and detail omamentation, and a variety ofbuilding forms. LANDSCAPESTG Freestanding sign landscaping Parking lot trees at 1 tree per 6 spaces w/minimum of 50% at 24 inch box sizes. Provide landscaped islands between rows of cars Setback trees at 1 tree per 1000 SF of calculated setback area w/minimum of 50% at 24 inch box sizes Screening of parking spaces, trash enclosures, loading/ delivery spaces, and maintenance of landscape Landscaping around entry signs on Cannon Road is designed to comply with the Overlay Zone All parking lot trees are 24 inch box sizes (min.) (not required for subterranean parking spaces) (required: 42; proposed: 299). Landscaped planting islands comply with landscape guidelines manual All setback trees are 24 " box (required: 41; proposed: 125) Parking areas are screened by low walls or landscaping; trash areas are screened by decorative walls; loading/delivery areas are located to minimize visibility; maintenance of landscaped areas is required as a condition of approval. 9J CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT May 16, 2001 Page 8 STANDARD REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE USE SEPARATION STANDARDS FOR GAS STATIONS Permitted only on intersections or "T's" where streets are classified as prime, major, or secondary Site may not adjoin any residentially zoned property Only one station pennitted at a "T" intersection. Minimum lot size or area designated for the use must be 15,000 square feet minimimi Street frontage along the non- arterial roadway shall be at least 150 feet No access permitted on a prime or major arterial No driveway access permitted within 100 feet ofthe intersection Fuel delivery circulation system must be reviewed on a case-by- case basis • Cannon Road is a major arterial and Avenida Encinas is classified as secondary arterial • Site does not adjoin any residential property • One station proposed at the "T" intersection • Area for Lot 1 is 29,185 s.f Frontage along private street is over 200 feet. No access proposed or permitted on Cannon Road Driveway access is located approximately 200 feet from the intersection. Fuel delivery circulation system has been reviewed by Engineering and Fire Departments USE SEPARATION STANDARDS FOR HOTELS Hotel uses shall maintain a minimum 600 foot separation, except that hotels in the P-M zone are not subject to the separation standard Irms of America is located in the P-M Zone therefore the separation requirements are not applicable. However, the hotels are located over 600 feet apart. The applicant is also requesting a height of 45 feet for the hotel building. The C-T zone allows a maximum building height of 35 feet, however, additional building height up to 45 feet can be approved by the City Council under certain conditions. The building and site design have been designed to comply with the provisions necessary to approve the requested height increase. These provisions include: 1) the building does not contain more than three stories, 2) all required setbacks have been increased at a ratio of one horizontal foot for each vertical foot of constmction beyond 35 feet and the additional setbacks are maintained as landscaped open space, 3) the building conforms to Section 18.04.170 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (requires high- rise provisions such as fire sprinklers, and smoke detection, smoke control, and fire alarm systems), and; 4) the allowed height protmsions do not exceed 45 feet. Additional features which do not function to provide usable floor space (such as flagpoles and steeples) may be permitted up to 55 feet under certain conditions, however, no protmsions above 45 feet are proposed. C. Conditional Uses A service station is permitted in the C-T-Q zone with approval of a conditional use permit. City Council approval of a conditional use permit is also required for commercial projects located within the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. Although a site development plan is typically required for projects within the Qualified Development Overlay Zone, the Commercial/ 9m CUP 99-30 - CANNON C May 16, 2001 Page 9 Visitor Serving Overlay Zone allows the application for and approval of the conditional use permit to satisfy all requirements for a site development plan. The "Q" Overlay does not contain any specific development standards but does allow the Planning Commission to increase any standards or impose special conditions that may be deemed necessary. The required findings for approval of a conditional use permit with justification for each are summarized below. 1. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is located. Automobile service stations are permitted in the C-T zone if developed as part of a freeway service facility containing a minimum of two freeway uses such as a hotel or restaurant. The project is consistent with the General Plan designation in that the Travel Recreation land use designation ensures that commercial service uses will serve the travel and recreational needs of tourists and residents, as well as employees of surrounding business and industrial centers. The project will not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in that the site and street improvements are designed to minimize potential fraffic circulation system conflicts; an access road servicing the parcel north of the site is provided; visual impacts are reduced through landscaping, building placement, and screen walls; and, the architectural style complies with the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone requirements. 2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. The 6.51 acre site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses in that the site circulation plan allows for on-site access between parking areas, adequate fuel delivery circulation, and a secondary emergency egress point. Shared parking spaces are conveniently provided in close proximity to the uses they serve, and all required landscaped setbacks, circulation aisles, and parking spaces have been provided. The primary access point for the gas station is located over 200 feet from the intersection of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road and provides a safe point of ingress and egress in accordance with City standards. 3. That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained. The gas station is located behind the mini-mart so that additional screening for the station is provided. The additional building height for the hotel, allowing an increase from 35 to 45 feet, can be approved since the building contains no more than three stories, the required setbacks have been increased at a ratio of 1 horizontal foot for every vertical foot of height above 35 feet, the increased setbacks have been designated as landscaped areas, and the building will be required to conform to Section 18.04.170 of the Carlsbad Mimicipal Code. Separation standard requirements between hotel uses do not apply to the project since the nearest hotel is located in the PM zone. However, the proposed hotel is located over 620 feet from the nearest hotel (Inns of America) and the project complies with all of the development standards and parking requirements ofthe Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and C-T zone. CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT May 16, 2001 Page 10 4. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. The project will generate a total of 4,793 ADT and the traffic analysis indicates that the additional traffic generated by the project does not significantly reduce the levels of service of the existing streets. The project will be required to constmct a traffic signal and dual west to southbound left tum lanes at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. Traffic operations measures are also required in order to coordinate the signal timing with the freeway ramp signals and railroad crossing. The private road has been designed to accommodate existing fraffic to the north of the site and easements will be dedicated so that the road can be widened if warranted by future development. In addition to the four conditional use permit findings above, the following additional findings are required for projects located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone: 5. The project is adequately designed to accommodate the high percentage of visitor, tourist, and shuttle/bus alternative transportation users anticipated given the proposed use and site location within the overlay zone. The project has been designed to incorporate passenger drop-off zones and clear pedestrian pathways between the hotel and surrounding restaurants. Adequate parking has been provided for all uses on the site, including several oversize parking spaces for RVs or buses. In addition, a bus stop required by NCTD will be located on Cannon Road. 6. That the building forms, building colors and building materials combine to provide an architectural style of development that will add to the objective of high quality architecture and building design within the overlay zone. The building design complies with the Village Architectural Style allowed in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and features gabled roof elements, a variety of roof peaks, interesting building forms, and high quality surface and detail elements. 7. That the project complies with all development and design criteria ofthe overlay zone. As noted above in Table 2, the project complies with all development standards and design criteria of the overlay zone, including parking requirements, sign allowances, building height, building setback, architectural style, landscaping, and use separation requirements of the overlay zone. Along with the required findings, specific development standards required by Chapter 21.42 (Conditional Uses) apply specifically to service stations. Compliance with these standards is summarized in the following table. CUP 99-30 - CANNON C May 16, 2001 Page 11 :^JR1 TABLE 3 - SERVICE STATION STANDARDS COMPLIANCE STANDARD COMPLIANCE Developed as part of a freeway-service facility Yes Architecture harmonizes with the neighborhood Complies with Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone standards and is compatible with the other proposed buildings. Minimum 6-foot perimeter planters and planters adjacent to stmcture Yes 6-inch concrete curb bounding planters Yes Combination of flowers, shmbs and trees Yes Sprinkler system which covers all landscaped areas Required with Landscape Plan submittal. Delineate maintenance schedule and responsibility for landscape areas Required with Landscape Plan submittal. 6 foot masonry wall separating residentially zoned property Not applicable Shielded Lighting Lighting Plan required No Outdoor Storage Conditioned to prohibit outdoor storage Min 6 foot high frash enclosure Yes Signage Conforms to Sign Ordinance Standards Sign Program complies with Commercial/ Visitor Serving Overlay Zone Public improvements as required for public convenience and necessity Yes D. Non-Residential Planned Development Regulations The proposal includes subdivision of the property into four "postage stamp" lots and one common lot which contains the private driveway, and much of the parking and landscape area. The subdivision and associated nonresidential planned development permit will enable the project to be developed with a private street, will allow for reciprocal parking and access between properties, and will allow each building pad area to be owned separately. The Nonresidential Planned Development (PUD 00-109) will be processed concurrently with a minor subdivision appUcation (MS 99-16) per Section 66426 (c) and (f) of the Subdivision Map Act. These applications will be acted upon by the Planning Director and City Engineer pending approval of the Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission and City Council. Approval of PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 will be subject to all conditions of approval contained in the resolution for CUP 99-30. The findings required for the Plaiming Director to approve the Nonresidential Planned Unit Development are as follows: 1. That the granting of this pennit will allow the subdivision of a commercial development on one parcel into four postage stamp lots and one remainder lot to enable separate ownership of each building and will not adversely affect and will be consistent with the Municipal Code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all adopted plans of the City and other govemmental agencies, in that the subdivision of the project is consistent with the T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) General Plan land use designation and the C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist-Qualified Development Overlay Zone) zone regulations. 9m CUP 99-30 - CANNON C May 16, 2001 Page 12 2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general long-term well-being of the neighborhood and community, in that the project consists of a gas station and mini mart, hotel, and two restaurants which will provide services for the surrounding residential and business communities, as well as the traveling public. 3. That such project will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, in that the site plan includes all necessary features to adjust the development to the surrounding neighborhood, including setbacks, enhanced architecture, and landscaping. 4. That the proposed nomesidential planned development meets all of the minimum development standards of the underlying zone except for the lot area, in that no standards variances have been requested or required. 5. That the proposed Constmction Phasing Plan has been reviewed and conditions are imposed to ensure that adequate parking, circulation, and improvements will be provided as phased constmction of the project occurs. E. Local Coastal Program Compliance The project is located within the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan which is an area of deferred certification. The project will receive its coastal development permit from the Califomia Coastal Commission. The project has been reviewed for consistency with the relevant coastal act polices as follows: Policy 1.1 The proposed use consisting of a gas station and mini-mart, restaurants, and hotel is consistent with the TS (Travel Services) land use designation shown on the Land Use Map (Exhibit C of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan). Policy 1.9 The maximum building height in the coastal zone is 35 feet, as measured to the mid-point of the roof The hotel, which is the tallest stmcture, compUes with the maximum building height requirement. All other stmctures are less than 35 feet high. Policy 2.1 The project site is not used as an agricultural site and does not require conversion to develop the property. The development of the site would not conflict with the agricultural economy. Policy 4.1 The project will be conditioned to comply with the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance and provisions of the Master Drainage Plan. Policy 4.2 Grading activities for the site will be restricted during the winter season (October 1st - April 1st) and all grading operations will be subject to the City's adopted grading regulations and the Landscape Guidelines Manual which includes requirements for erosion control. CUP 99-30 - CANNON C^RT May 16,2001 Page 13 Policy 4.3 The fuel dispensing area has been designed to ensure clean storm water discharge from fuel dispensing areas and development of the site will be required to comply with all applicable City regulations regarding drainage and runoff, including compliance with NPDES regulations/requirements and Best Management Practices. The project will not impact groundwater flow or quaUty, change the flow of surface mn-off, or impact public water supplies. Policy 5.1 Utilities serving the site will be placed underground. Policy 5.2 The project complies with all parking standards of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. PoUcy 7.1 A bike route currently exists along Cannon Road and additional amenities such as bike racks and benches are included in the development proposal. Policy 8.4 Cannon Road and Interstate 5, areas are designated as Community Scenic Corridors and have been designed to comply with the Streetscape Themes designated by the Landscape Guidelines Manual. F. Growth Management The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 3 in the northwest quadrant of the City. Since no residential uses are proposed within the project, many of the facilities regulated by the Growth Management Ordinance are not applicable. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in Table 4 below. TABLE 4 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE? City Adminisfration Not Applicable N/A Library Not Applicable N/A Waste Water Treatment 154 EDU Yes Parks Not Applicable N/A Drainage Agua Hedionda Yes Circulation 4793 ADT Yes Fire Station No. 1 and 4 Yes Open Space Not Applicable N/A Schools CUSD Yes Sewer Collection System 154 EDU Yes Water 33,880 GPD Yes CUP 99-30 - CANNON C^RT ^ May 16, 2001 Page 14 V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA guidelines and the Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The General Plan land use designation and zoning remain the same. The project falls within the scope of the City's MEIR for the City of Carlsbad General Plan update (EIR 93-01) certified in September, 1994, in which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for cumulative impacts to air quality and traffic. MEIR's may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project except under certain circumstances. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. All feasible mitigation measures identified by the MEIR which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project. An additional 4,793 ADT would be generated by the project, including 308 AM peak-hour trips and 401 PM peak-hour trips. The traffic analysis indicates that the additional fraffic generated by the project does not significantly affect the levels of service of the existing streets. However, the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proximity of the I-5/Cannon Road freeway ramps to the east and the railroad crossing to the west, some traffic operations measures need to be implemented. These specific mitigation measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. Compliance with the Califomia Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the constmction and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project. The site was used at one time for agricultural uses and a limited Phase II Environmental Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical residue in the soil. A presence of toxaphene was detected, however, it is anticipated that grading activities (mixing and blending of soil) will reduce the chemical residues to a level of insignificance. Additional soil samples will be collected and analyzed once grading is completed, and if additional actions are required, they can be implemented at that time. An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from 1-5 and the Amfrack, Coaster and freight train operations on the AT&SF railroad on the proposed development. The project is subject to the adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses. In order to mitigate the noise impacts to a level CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT May 16, 2001 Page 15 of insignificance, building upgrades will be required for a number of units within the hotel, particularly on the east end of the hotel facing the freeway. In consideration of the foregoing, on Febmary 26, 2001, the Planning Director issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project. The environmental document was noticed in the newspaper. Comments were received from CalTrans and the Department of Toxic Substances Control. The response to comments is included as an attachment to the EIA Part II. ATTACHMENTS; 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977 (Mitigated Neg. Dec.) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4978 (CUP) 3. Location Map 4. Disclosure Form 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Local Facilities Impact Form 7. Circulation Plan 8. Constmction Phasing Plan 9. Reduced Exhibits 10. Full Size Exhibits "A" - "CC", dated May 16, 2001 BKxsimh SITE CANNON COURT CUP 99-30/PUD 00-109/MS 99-16 City of Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT .Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications wiiich will require discretionap.' action on the pan ofthe Cir\' Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Comminee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application subminal. ^'our project cannoi bc rex iewed until this information is completed. Please prinl. .Note: Person is defined as '"Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venmre, associaiion, social club, fratemal organizaiion. corporation, estate, trust, receiver, sxTidicate, in this and any olher county', cir.' and count)', cits municipality, district or other poiiticai subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entii}' of the applicant and propert)' owner must be provided below. 1. .APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEG.AL names and addresses of .ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a cort^oration or pnnnership. include the names, tille. addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIN'IDUALS OWTs' MORE TRAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a nuhlicix-ou-ned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. {.\ separate page ma> be anached if necessar*.) Person_ Title Corp.Tart J.A. Buza Corp. Title Address Address 1 6085 San Dieauito Rd. gE7 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 OU'NER (Not the ow ner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ow'nership interesl in tlie propertv' involved. .^Iso. nrovidc tiie iiitcrc of the iegal .iwi.r;r="'p pannership. tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a cornoration or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OVv^ 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 anached if necessan,'.) Person_ Title Address Corp/Part Wpqf noyglnpmont- Tnc. Title Address P.O. Box 67 606 6 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If an> person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or n irtisi. list thc names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit orcanization or as tmstee or beneficiarv of the. Non ProfiL'Trust_ Title Non Profit/Trust_ Title Address Address Have you had more than S250 worth of business transacted with any member of Citv staff. Boards. Commissions. Comminees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) monlhs'!' Ves Q No If yes. please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I cenifv that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. wner.'date Sia^ure of applicant-'date 9f Print or type name of owner John Buza Print or type name of applicant Signature of ow ner. applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's .nccnt CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY OF J.A. BUZA CORPORATION I, Patricia C. Buza, duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of J.A Buza Corporalion, a Califomia coiporation, (the "Corporation), do hereby certify that the follovving arc the shareholders of the Corporation: John A. Buza Patricia C. Buza Dated this 3"" day of February 2000. Patricia C. Buza, Secretary ret. 3.2000 li:59AM ERICKSON SEDERSTROM ' No. 2643 P. 2/2 CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY OF WEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. I, Mary E. West, duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of West Development, Inc., a Nebraska corporation, (Uic "Corporation"), do hereby certify that thc following arc the shareholders ofthe Corporation: Gary West Mary E. West Dated this 2nd day of Febmary 2000. I. We^ ! Mary E. Weitj Secretary I I:\LKS\SJN\WESTV\VDr\sccccrt2.wpd CASE NO: BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CUP 99-30 (PUD 00-109/MS 99-16) CASE NAME: Cannon Court APPLICANT: J. A. Buza. Corp. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow grading and constmction of two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/mini-mart on a 6.51 acre lot located on the north side of Cannon Road between 1-5 and the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Lot "H" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the Citv of Carlsbad, Countv of San Diego. State of Califomia, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego Countv, November 16, 1896 APN: 210-010-38 Acres: 6.51 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A Existing Zone: C-T-Q - Commercial-Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay Zone Proposed Zone: N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) General Plan Zoning Current Land Use Site North South East West C-T-Q T-R Vacant P-U U SDGE Storage Yard/High Tension Lines/Vacant P-M PI Vacant/Agriculture TC TC Interstate 5 TC & P-U TC&U AT & SF Railroad r.o.w. & SDGE Power Plant PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 154 EDU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT IXI Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued Febmary 26, 2001 I I Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated • Other, CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: Cannon Court - CUP 99-30 (PUD 0Q-109/MS 99-16) LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 3 GENERAL PLAN: T-R ZONING: C-T-0 DEVELOPER'S NAME: J. A. Buza Corp. ADDRESS: 16085 San Dieguito Rd. # E7 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 PHONE NO.: 619-756-5338 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 210-010-38 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC, SQ. FT., DU): 6.51 acres ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 20 cfs B A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = Not AppUcable B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 154 EDU D. Park: Demand in Acreage = Not AppUcable E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = Identify Drainage Basin = (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADT = 4,793 ADT (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = Station 1 & 4 H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = Not Applicable I. Schools: J. Sewer: Demands in EDU Identify Sub Basin = Not Applicable (Identify tmnk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD = 33.880 GPD CUSD 154 EDU FUTURE ROAD EXPANSION CANNON ROAD CIRCULATION PLAN McArdk Associates Architects 6965 B Camho Real *105-472 UComOlhim 92009 76M3m5 CANNON COURT PHASE PmiNC RATIOS PHASC PARKING REQUIRED PARKINC PROVIDED PHASE 1 (ROAD) 0 0 PHASE 2 MNI MARV (B SPAaS] B SPACES 81 SPACES PHASE 3 (RESTAURANT A PARKING 8 SPACES 81 SPACES PHASE 4 (RESTAURANT A) (76 SPACES) 84 SPACES 8US9 =140SPAaS PHASE 5 (HOTEL AND PARKINC STRUCTURE) (TI2 SPJ 796 SPACES UO * 193 = 333 SPACES PHASE 6 (RESTAURANT B) (136 SPAOS) 332 SPAaS 333 SPACES TOTM 332 SPACES 333 SPACES DEVELOPMENT PHASE PIAN McArdk Associates Architects 6965 B Camino Real *105-472 LaCosnQIfonia 92009 JtMnJTJS CANNON COURT J.A. BUZA CORP. Construction • Development March 28, 2001 Barbara Kennedy City of Carlsbad - Planning Department 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: CUP 99-30 / Cannon Court "Phasing" Dear Barbara, Per your March 22, 2001 memo to Dennis Cunningham, here is the phasing information you requested: Phase 1 - Infrastructure 1. Preparation of the parcel map, grading plans, and Improvement plans. 2. Rough grading for the entire project, except for the underground parking garage of the hotel. This earthwork and the necessary export will be done as part of the building pemiit for Phase 5. 3. Cannon Road: traffic signal, interconnect, and utility tie-ins for water, sewer, storm drain, and dry utilities. 4. Private street: both surface and underground improvements, from Cannon Road to the northerly subdivision boundary. 5. Onsite utilities: public sewer, public water, public fire, and public storm drain. Private utility stubs for future tie-ins will be constmcted. Maintenance roads to access utilities will also be constructed. 6. Fencing: perimeter fencing, entry monuments, 42" high screen wall at south and east of gas station with landscaping. 7. Erosion control. 8. Landscape complete between private road and railroad right of way, along Cannon Road, to north end of 42" high screen wall at east end of gas station. Phase 2 - Gas Station and Country Store: 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve the gas station. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2. 3. Constmction of Gas Station and Country Store. 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2. Phase 3 - Restaurant A Infrastructure 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, stomri drain) to serve Restaurant A. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. 3. Grading for pad (to be hydro-seeded with native, non-irrigated mix). 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. Phase 4 - Restaurant A 1. Construction of Restaurant A Page 1 of 2 Phone: 858.756.5338 -Fax: 858.756.2891 PO. Box 8617 • 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 -Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Phase 5 - Hotel 1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer storm drain) to serve Hotel. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5. 3. Constmction of Hotel and underground paridng garage. 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5. Phase 6 - Restaurant B 1. Constmction of Restaurant B Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, John A. Buza Page 2 of 2 SITE PLAN UNDEkCROUND PARKINC CARAa i lyesr. VIONnYMAP SITEIiaND nusNffdosuif ftOMW/KH MWWAia cAsiurs BKJiKCMrMCK BMmM nVfTKaoBiAiieniiAmanM MXSTHALFMKUSe. PROlEaOATA MtU MM MMJ UTAMjma/staua Bmorm SIMTOTM HAHxyrsr/aTOT/ia Hom ajBTtoous surrOTM. HwaovsrAaJOTAisl RCSTMJKANTA maarsnaicmM HESTAUUNTB HAmarsi'Aaioaiia mm TOMir/UMNCntOVnED son: \500Sf. ISOOSI. SltSISf. UTU SI. • tmcsf.isi .nopsr.M SITE LEGEND II »^-XfTv»- Hra^-OH WAT. o-a umTtTAtoMn fvmt um - see ovu. m McAide Associates MitKts d\NNON COURT OWNR/APPUCm: i60U SAHOSSUTO HP. <r7 >«cHnTa MeAxie AaeaoATa MSMTKR^ MS. LAOXTA^CA 0334 COHTACT, CTHCMCtf Tmr FOKnoH cr LOT fr or KAMoo AeuA teaoNDA. rnne CITY OF cAnsBAPcouoY ar SAM aao. STATC or cMjrontA, Acccmom TonwrmcNMVTWwr nsccKoet OF BAM oeeo couurr. ASSSSOR'S PARCEL APPUCATION NUMBBtS: coMDmoNALmerwtT- OF^MO wcitwejcww. rw»€Poemarmn, nooo-ion moKSUBPtmioN, MSW-M OKTWCTSaVTCES WTBCi (^WLSeMP KMP. SCHOOL. CmJBADUSD. BiMDINC CODE DATA agvewMWii gooc. mjuAc. ex»Tm sne xone, cr-a 6CMKM. n>M ceStfMnCN TR cnsTMvusr VitMNrior PROwaDtee MTTO,Kesr,A(itwr,STORE tfdwmeneN nm vw 5Taw9< t.z*y AUJOHAOZ tetOHT, X'-O' PRO^ SUMMARY: MOM anc AREA 2M/HBSr. . 3JI AC. INMXOFDMWNCS ( COV« SfTE CMTA 2 r/wnw5TWsnJV HMHHWrn^VRFLM HUHWcritoorruM HMHtWrafVATKMS HmHtwrsLfVArKM M7TB. nR5rfL£l0R ALAN MTTS. sectfw nZKK n.AN nom. Ttmo noon fiAM nom.i^ornJH Hcna. BJVATlOe «7IH. fl*/ATlCTe RcsrAuwwA nooKruM RCSrAUWHTA *W fl>W RESrAUUfT A EUVAnCW RCSrAUUNf A OfVATIMS RCsrAUwrs nocm PLAN nsjAmAMTB Hocr riAM RSTAMW 0 OfVATWNS RBTAUUNT 0 OfVATVNS CAWSrrWWFffLAW £AN0n'B£VATI0NS m McAnjIe Assodates Arditects JIS'-IO o i Oi z § < CJ UNDERGROUND PARKINC PLAN 38^ Sf. SCALE, r « \6--0-ii UNDERGRND. PARKINC PLAN staNAae AREA 13 »r. roTBKnAL SI0NA4e AREA la 5P. MINI-MART EimVON MINI-MART ELEVATION POieKTlAL 9l«NAae ARCA-H SF. HOTFt ELEVATION - NORTH FommAL HaHAOC AREA H 9F. HOTEL ELEVATION - SOUTH HOTEL ELEVATION LOCATION-»F. DRIVE ENTRY PLAN McArdle Assodites Aidiitects CJ § oi < Data. Il/aw - FUW WWJO • won RfST/IUMNT 8 ELEVATION RESTAURANT A ELEVATION REFERENa STTE PLAN SIGNAGE CALCULATIONS RomAa ALLOWABLE V/ALL SIGNAaAREA MINI-MART HOTEL RESTAURANT A RESrAl/liANTB 84'-0' LE 76'-r LE 56'-0'LE yff-O' Lf. .90 LF. X84'-Qr = m Sf. ILl X76'-r = 76'-rSJF. 1X 56'-0'= 56'-0'SE. 1X70'-<r = 70'-O'Sf. WALL SICNAa PROVIDED 74 SF. 76 SF. 55 SF. 70 S.F. MONUMENT SICNAa PROVIDED 24 SF. FUEL SIGN 19 Sf. 19 sr 19 Sf. SIGNAGE PLAN IO" HALO LIT t-KTAi. umws STONE ON MASONAKT VB«» TO HATCH BUILPINS STONE VEtSR IO* HALO LIT RAISED BRUSHED BRONZE METAL LET7BRS STONE ON MASONART VEN»C TO MATCH BUILDINtf SrotC VETCER A MONUMENT SIGN DETAIL W HALO LIT nAiSB? BRUS)^ BRONZE h«TAL LCTTBRS STONE ON MMONART VOeOR TO MATCH BUILDINa STONE^S^^ A ENTRANCE SIGN DETAILS SieNAgE NOTES i ALL SI©NS SHALL COtJPORM MITH CITT OF CARLSBAP SIfiN ORPINANCES. (CORPORATE LOOO tN PLACE OP PUU. TB4AKT NAf<C B«::OlJRASeD. FUTURE TTOANT "CORPORATE- TYPE STYLE AND / OR COLORS DCVIATINd FROM TK •PTFE STYLE AND COLORS SPECIFICALLY ALLO»« BY THESE SiaNAtfE SUIDEUICS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OP CARLSBAO FOR PLANHINS DEPART>«*T APPROVAL. LOSOS SHOULO BE LIMTB? TO 35% OF TW ALLOKAOLE SISN AREA. COLOR. ALL COLORS MUST BE SELBCTBD FROM A TENANT COLOR PALETTE. SI«N COLORS HUO. BE COMPATIBLf MILL BUILDINS FINISICS. SIAN COLORS MILL PROSrtDE VARIETY AND EXCtTEMOfT. FINISH MATERIALS MUX MATCH THOSE OP T>e BUILDIN0S ON 1>e SITE. MOMII'Dtr SISNS ARE TO HAVE A 9TO»C BAae TO MATCH BUILDINS BASE. ENTRY MOt**«*T SISNS TO CONTAIN HALO LIT BRUSHED Sf^ONZC RA)SB7 hCTAL LETTERS. eULDMO MOMJMBff SISNS TO INCLUDE CORPORATE LETKINS ANP A CORPORATE LOSO IF rCCESSARY. MCMJMDn- SISNS TO CONTAIN BUILDINS ADDK^S IN &AME FONT AND MATBUAL STYLE. MOMA'Sfr SISNS TO BE SINSLE FACED. LOSO StSN COLORS TO INCLLDE DARK STCSl. DARK BROMVTAN. MAROON, OR SUe/SRmL ALL OTWtS TO BE BRUSHK* BRONZE hCTAL. S1SN COLORS AND MATWIALS AWE PART OF THE DtSCWJTlONARY REVIEW PROCESS. SISN COLORS SHALL COMPUMB*T T>e OVCTALL BUILDINS STYLE MrfHOUT DOMIHATI»0 TW BUILDINS DEStSN. WALL SISNASE TO FOLLOW SAhC SIDELINES AS BUILDINS MOfUWNT SISNASE. TYPE STYLE. ALL TYPESTYLES SHALL BE TRAOmCH*L SERIF STYLE. TBiANTB MAY REOUIRE AN ESTAaLISHBD CORPORATE LOSO OR ICON. IMASES MUST BE ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE AND APPROVE? BY THE OMNER AtO TW CITY OP CARLSBAD SISN ORDINANCES. MALL SISNS McAide Assodates ArdAects MALL SISNS SHALL EXCm? INTERCHANSABLE TTVANSLUCBfT nEX W/ RgCESeB? LISHT BOX 16 SF OP PRtCINS AREA STOW CM MASONARY VEHttR TO MATCH BUILDINS STOW VBCER a FUEL PRICE SIGN DETAIL MOMJMENT SISN TO BE DOUBLE WACeD STOW CAfi HALO UT 6" RAIsro LCI lENS MTTH COLORS FACK PER CORPORATE LOSO STOW ON MASONAJtt' VEtOR TO MATCH BUILDINS STOW VEr«R END ELEVATION MONUKCHT SISNS TOTAL MONJMPfT SISN AREA 34 aF-«* tPMWMft A C MONUMENT SIGN DETAILS END ELEVATION A WISHT OF S5'-0'. ABOVE TW ROOF UW OF TW BUILDINS 5. SISN LOCATIONS AND SIZES ARE COt«:EPTUAL. SISN LOCATIONS AND SIZES T-tAY BE MODIFIED, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY TW PLAM4INS DEPAJn>e4r, PROVIDED THAT TW PROPOSED SISNAM DOES NOT EXCEED TW MAXTMUM ALLOWABLE SISNAK POR ANY INDrwIDUAL BUILDINS. LANDSCAPE TREATMO*r= (RCPm TO LANDSCAPE PLAN) LANDSCAPtNS SHALL BE DESISNED TO CCMPLIMDrr TW PRO.ECT^ PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL BE CONSISTBIT MITH TW CtTTS LAMPSCAPE MANS.. TW POLLOMINS LANDSCAPE RESULATIONS SHALL APPLY TO DEvaoPMefT PROPOSALS. I. FROSTAWINS SISN LANDSCAPE THBW. EVERY PREESTANDINS SISN SHALL PROVtDC AOJACOn- LANDSCAPtNS kMCH PROMOTES A COMMON THE« THROUSHOUT TW OVCTLAY 20W. TW FRttSTANDINS StSN ANO RELATQ7 LAhC>SCAPINS T>e« SHALL BE SHOM4 ON PROJECT LANDSCAPE EXHIBITS AND MLL CONSIST OP. AT A I^NII^JM. A. SIX BIRDS OF PARADISE PLANTS MITH A MINIIHUM CONTAINER SIZE OF FIVE SALLONS. TWSE PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED IN CLUSTERS AROUO TW SISN. B. OW PHEOHIX ROQ9BJ^I PALM TRK MITH A MINIMUM CONTAIWR SIZE OF Pll' IIUW SALLONS TO BE LOCATfi? TO OW SIDE OF TW FfCTSTAHDINS SISN AMIDST TW BIRDS OF PAKADtSC PLANT CLUSTSIS. TW ROOELBUI PALM MAY BE REPLACS? BY AWTHCR PALM TRS SPECIES IP SUPPORTED BY STAFF TO BE CONSISTANT WITH TW OVERLAY ZOWS COt^^OH LANDSCAPB7 SISN TNBW AND APPROVE? WTTH TW CONDmONAL USE PERMIT BY TW CrTY COWttlL. C. APPROPRIATE SROUND COVW SUCH AS ASAPANTWS SHRUBS, OR OTHER SIMILAR SUBSTRATE SUBJKT TO DISCI«IONARy l«VIBi BAKK. AW/OR TURF IN A VISUALLY PLEASINS COMBINATION. D. TW MINIMJM AREA POR TW PROVISION OF TW FRttSTAMSINS SISN AND CORRESPONDINS LANDSCAPED THEI>C SHALL BE bO SF. DKI0NED TO B'ICOMPASS TW MINIMIW PBtlMCTER OF TW SISNS BASE OR POUNDATION AREA. ID o z O z z < i 5 FVaJt. CM-CM CCUKt SIGNAGE PLAN SIGNAGE DETAILS McAde Asoddes Aidtects :• :• 4^ • • • • rv" 1 ' ® © WW .7 • : Oi z i Z 5 < CJ MimiAKT FLOOR PLAN 0 2' 8' MINI-MART FLOOR PLAN McAldeAssodleAldllKts I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I ( 1 I I CJ i Oi z s z 5 < ROOf PLAN MINI-MART ROOf PLAN n n n n n n n n n .nnnn. n.„.iL 1 i CM —®—1 McAde Assodates MHteds VfPKAL TRASH ENOOSURE ElIVATIONS EAST ElEVATION BUILDINC CaOR/MATERIAl UGENP 0 DIWNSIONAL SHtNSLE © HARDIE SWHaLEWOe SIDINS NATIIRAL TAH 0 CCCORATIVE STACK STOW BLBCCD TAN MIX 0 VtNTL CLAD wnC70W9 WTTE © HARDIE PLANK OWLT UF COLUMNS 1*ITE 0 DECORATIVE COmt CAP 0 BUILT UP HARDIE FLANK FAC4A/CORNERBaARDSA«>C>OW TRIM kHTTE © aCCTIC^M. MOOD DOOR HHITE 0 HARDIE PLANK SOPFIT • AJtCADC NATURAL MOOD STRIPItW Oi CJ § < < CJ MINI-MART ELEVATIONS NORTH BEVATION 9CALE> SM- • 7 McArJe Assodates ArcNteds WEST ELEVATION SCALE. M*' • BUIIDING COLOR/MATERIAl LEGEND 0 DIMENSIONAL SMNSLE 0 HARDIE 9HINSLE5IDe SIDINS © DECORATIVE STACK STOW 0 VINYL CLAD WIIOOWS © HARDIE FLANK BUILT LP COLUMNS 0 DCCORATTVE COFFER CAF 0 BUILT UP HARDC PLAIK FACIAkKORNeRBOARDftMINDOM TRIM HHITE © SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR MHITE 0 HARDIE PLAMK SOPFIT • ARCAITC HATURAL MOOD STRIPIHS NATURAL TAN BLETOED TAN MIX MHITE miTE ZD o CJ z QD i3 < CJ ShHtTH» MINI-MART ELEVATIONS SOUTH ELEVATION 8 o HOTEL EKST flOOR PLAN 31 IW acMJt aoa- • i-- ig m McMe Assodates Mteds Oi CJ i Oi z s Z 5 < HOTEL FIRST FLOOR PLAN m McAide Assoddes Ardiects 8i §1 Z i Z 5 < CJ Pato. ll/WW-^»fci HOTE SECOND ROOR PLAN 33 moo* n3V»r. ii HOTEL 2ND FLOOR PLAN 10 McArdle Assodates Arditeds UTJ LTLJ njuij Ull ^ i 8| z i z s < CJ H07H THRD fLOOR PLAN 3ft MOM »a ifi HOTEL 3RD FLOOR PLAN 11 McAide Assodties Arditects ^ i Oi CJ S Oi z i Z 5 < CJ ROOf PLAN •MA 9»3- - r-e- ifi HOTEL ROOF PLAN 12 McAdeAssodaesAiditeds BUIUVNC CaOR/MATBllAL LEGEND I— 0 DIWeiONAL SHINSLC SRCY/SRCSN © HARDie SHtHauesiDe SIDIN« ttATURAL TAN © DECORATIVE STACK STOW BLBCED TAN MIX ZD 0 VINYL CLAD »W?OMS 1.«TE o © HARDIE PLANK BULT UP COLUMNS t^TE o 0 DECORATIVE COFFER CAP CJ © OWLT UP HARDIE PLANK FA.CIA/CORNERBOARE?a*«NDOW TRIM MHITE CJ © SECTIONAL WOOD DOOR IPMTE © HARDIE PLANK SOPPIT « ARCADE NATURAL MOOO STRIPINS CANNON < z o SOUTH ElEVAVON . CMUMCaUKT HOTEL ELEVATIONS 13 McAnle Associates Ardtects Vmr BEVATION BURDING COLOR/MATERIAL LEGEND 0 DIWNSIONAL SHINSLC © HARDIE SHMSLESIDE SIDINS © DKCRATIve STACK STOW 0 VINYL CLAD MIHDOMS © HARDffi PLA»«C BUILT UP COUJhtS © DECORATIVE COPPBR CAP 0 BULT UF HWDIE FLANK © SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR © HARDIE PLAMC SOPFTf • ARCAOE NATURAL TAN TAN MIX l-WTE I^UTE •I MHITE 1*«TE NATURAL MOOD STRIPMS Si CJ I §1 < CJ NORTH OEVATION SCALE. SW • r-O" HOTEL ELEVATIONS 14 McAnle Assodates Arditeds oi CJ i Oi < CJ ifi REST. A FLOOR PUN 15 «£SrAUMNr/l flOOR PLM ifl McArdk Assodates Mitects O CJ < < CJ ROOF PLAN SCALE. 3A»- • I'-O- ifi REST A ROOF PLAN 16 McAfdle Assodates Aiditeds SOUm ElEVATION BUIIDING COLOR/MATERIAL LEGEND © D»eiSIOHAL SHINSLE © HARDIE SHINSLBMDe SIDINS 0 DECORATIVE STACK STOW 0 VINTL CLAD MINOOMS 0 HARDIE PLANC BUILT UP COU»te 0 DECORATIVE COPPER CAP © BULT UP HARDIE PLAMC PAClA/CORNBVSOARDS/HnOOM TRIM © SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR l*ITE © HARDIE PLANK SOPPTf • ARCADE NATURAL WOOD STRIPINS NATURAL TAN BLS43ED TAN MIX MHITE MHTE MHITE oi CJ i oi < CJ REST A ELEVATIONS WEST BEVATION KALEi • 1'^ 17 /// McAflIk Assodates AidMeds NORTH BEVATION BUILDINC COLOROMTERIAL LEGEND E> am- • r-O-Q 0 HARDIC SHMSLSSIDE SIDINS NATWAL TAN © DECORATIVE STACK STOW eLB«7ED TAN MIX © VTNrt. CLAD MINEX3MS HWTE © HARDIE PLANK BULT UP COLUMNS rMTE © DECORATIVE COPPER CAP © BWLT UP HARDIE PLANK PACIAttOWrCRaOARPaVaNPOM TRIM )*ITE 0 SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR MHTE © HARDtE PLAMC SOPPTf • ARCADE NAlUtAL MOOD STRIPINS o CJ z i ^ r< ^ 1 KU 1 < CJ Onto. -1 REST A ELEVATIONS £4SrH£V/47?ON 18 RESTAURANT B BOOR PLAN McAnleAssKiatesMiteas CJ § Oi < CJ REST B FLOOR PLAN •OUI SW - 1^ 19 m McArde Assodates Arditects ZD o CJ Oi z I z S < CJ Onto. ua*m-i •»»>Wfc KWOO - Ffrtii ROOF PLAN SCALE. SAf • r-O* REST B ROOF PLAN 20 m McAtdeAssDoaEsMteccs WEST BEVATION BURDING COlOR/MATBtlAL tfCENP 0 DIWNSIONAL SHINSLE © H*RDIE SHmSLESIDE SONS NATURAL TAN 0 DECORATIVE STACK STOW BLENDBD TAN MIX © VIKrL CLAO HINDOM5 l^TE © HARDIE FLANK BUILT UP COLUMNS kMTE © DECORATIVE COPPK CAP © BULT UP HARDIE PLANK FACIAAI^aRlTOOAffD&MmOOM TRIM kHTE 0 SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR I^TE © KARDIE n-MC SOPFIT • MCADE NATURiN. MOOD STRIPINS Cki. o CJ z P Of < CJ REST. B ELEVATIONS SOUTH BEVATION KMX. SM* - r-O" 21 /// McAnle Assodates Ardiects EAST BEVATION BUIIDING COLOR/MATERIAL LEGEND 0 DIWNSIONAL SHmOLE 0 HARDC SHINSLESlOE SONS NATURAL TAN © DECORATIVE STACK STOW BLENDED TAN MIX © VINTL CLAD MmPOWS kMTE © HARDE PLAMK BULT UP COLU-MS kMTE © DECORATIVE COPPBR CAP 0 BULT UP HARDC PLAMK FACJAllCORWRBOARDSiMNOOM TRIM MUTE 0 SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR WHITE © HARDIE PLANK SOPPIT • ARCADE NATURAL MOOD STRIPINS oi CJ 1 §1 < CJ RESTB ELEVATIONS NORTH BEVATION •CM.E. SM- • r-9* 22 McAnle Assodates Arditects UCOFRCXIF UfCOFKOOF LOeoFHOOF 1W'-9' oi < CJ COUNTRY STORE CANOPY ROOF PLAN •CME. IM* • I'-O- COUNTRY STORE ROOF CANOPY PLAN 23 McAnle Assodates Miteds SOUTH BEVAVON BUmNG COIOR/MATBUAL tfCEND © DIMENSIONAL SHIN0LE 0 HARDIE SHINSLESIDe SIDINS NATURAL TAN © DECORATIVE STACK STOW BLBC«i TAN MIX © 'VINYL CLAD HIIOOMS HMTE © HARDIE n-AMC BUILT UP COLUMNS )*«TE © DECORATIVE COPPER CAP © BULT UP HARDIB PLAMK PACtA/CORWOARDSA«NDOM TRIM WHITE 0 SECTIONAL MOOD DOOR WHITE © HARDtE PLANK SOPPIT • ARCADE NATURAL WOOD STIWPINS CJ I §1 < CJ IJAOO-frOii STORE CANOPY ELEVATIONS EAST BEVATION 24 TREE PLANTING LEGEND Drou^ Tolerant 7^ tnaoi """"^ ABB INB iWBunStMOO tDI taa iiuuntMniu HiAXB mMSKonai/tmraxB QCBcx qiBmaxxircA OLUN CMlSIBMCMUMCSaDmi ONCM OHMMMIMCMCHOSA iUXS nXDHSiVBIIHlU uaim ncBBSiBCtttAMwa luwna scAuiraut Bomsmn CAMHKIBS LacCNFLMIlH SEMMRD IDKWID BWCiWD MUI M W SDNMD 13- r SUMUHD IW W SnNMKMMKKinB HV 4^ UQSIY NNiat map KDOH rancMguBaucuoR IMCEK IVONAaNIiaA arar exniNaEucM.'vmBainocM IT BCK K-BCR ITBOR s«r IMJ- var ua.r loaj* IMJ" •NmiMuiBmiKiuHrnxfliwr NDiE oimicrvTDHmycMaiiMUOFSiiaiiimriiMiEf^^ inxmoNiiarcunnnar CAR OVERHANG DETAIL SECTIONOF FOUNTAIN CANNON COURT CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN (SEEASCBITECTUSAL SITE PLAN FOR SETBACKS A DIMENSIONS) CITYOFCARLSBAD, CAUFORNIA 1MB Mmuu Ml I _ „ h rmai stam . oumM HUB Ml JDV 10' nvuar SBL litis - mtr Msoke fescsii/isKss w FUMC jfffvnx) f fjf*(fwuBEi 2r 'I' 1 •AC BOO/ SSI a*v - I7*J0 (Loaae imiHf mxtu CUP 99-30 CDP (COASTAL COMMISSION) PUD 00-109 MS. 99-16 REVISED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP m CANNON COURT A.P.N. 210-010-38 GBtaUl NOTSS: simrAOBROS ewnw now jissEssofsmm m iio-aio-M EWSBW KHHS c-r-4 mposED Bums C-T-O otmeeBrntHMBESKHaiai ma/KosiRwii CCMGKN pfmsBs SOEM. HM oaemBCN nwvftnamwi COUUEUCM. Dssme tAMUSE wKiwr fWOSEPUrnVSE OMDRMf niNsr mm. ACX5 tfiAC ffmsa} mm HumcFiars j r sithiodtm wnen; rumt-x-it scHOd asnKT MUM? UHV SCHOOL BBUKT mmr osmcr owismo MMOW man BSHKT smireamj OKSBIV imam, mmoBtaa ss jKCHntcmt sin fOiH m mim^ iMosapc PUMS FOR mumv: I. AumranoMaf I BULBiK samt fmner J AOKBir IMtSOIFIff 3. xaaaom. »CF K OKMFaaWMSI 7 ixtmi/Ve^imK tceczmi pjiaacr tap GENauimtnau mm stmn Am use-AUXMfff -IOI:-ior 1 axtm sKH^/oa mnoN itsa * STOK tsto IOT I jKsaumi 4SO0SF iM/imsF TSS WTJ tcsmjRW 77?0SF 10^000 SF m IOT 4 mm. moe. ut am Bmmi{/um smmmR: ow cOHSVLnm K. I. tinuna Aie pnonsa uuss uma Bosim I. mmt/semi uimcs AK PiMC MISS lABOis je pmrn J smm emu e /mwr ams amamsi nom 4. AU mFOSBJ smw am MPS mim/wms AKAi lamBooatsi AW ntf ma vBKVuiiAKAs, SHAU Hoenast nw> amaxcs m SKHSFY KP.O.C.S KOUmBffS. coman lor FOP JSOFfeai ACCESS AHDPAime msr eemoFmir, tc p.ot BOetTtOU /mwsvmm mu m JoufA aat Aa axe MIJ MWMiswn/C mnr/ OBAi Dssaupimi! top tiiei(trir^ CUT: maa. cr mMTY UAP msenu ©20O0 O'Doy Consultonts, Inc. BENCHMARK: IXSCnFtlON: nKPamoHOFur y muM ACUI MOMH U II€ arr er cmsae cottar OF sm MEiq mr or auvFm Accmitc n PMnmi IIAP nritor la m FUD H ne otnce OF mr camre lecoaxit or SAM Bttso couHTf. wwuer /« im BcsaaecD AS miMS: cmKMBMB AT pe irm or KBisecm CFA nemtcHomua mnAwosm-looaoo FEcr AT miff AioLEs soaietr fiuii lie sotimiLr ae OF aixit Yermsiats m lAecmue m MAP neKor m mi Fia u K omce or nt coMrr stcexoi or mxsoeoMir, AHOJST^ i$t4, neaevm or mKMmuia ueBxcaaaAS Houm irisw EAST OH 9» MAP CF SAC fiAusABcs m. z mm lie KsiBiir UNE BF mr HGHT or mr or ne AKHSOK lopooi * SAMU re mmr cotewmts SAB nexr or mar ms EsaeusKD on sEProKW a IM. nencrsoonenr ALOK SMI KsmriM or wc mnr or mr er we WHsan mrcia * sina FE mtmr comm A oismx er imia FEBi mEKEnmia. mm A Poum cf ne sBuaesLY miHur/OF ne jKoesBi lAim le/BwoF oEscmo mrm tFS4'ie'Bisr. saa/[erm ne cttm ue er sm Mimy aotr ar mui WEKE MMB SAO cona ue soum TJOSW EAST, moo fm m AM AHBiE Pom M ne souneiir BouHom or ne u/e oesaeio » oimA»ei> OEEB/mn/m foe: ET tn m enomt c seeosm CTAL. KccK&Ama im AS oooMMtm iit^mrnxM tm, M PABE sti OF oF/m. naxms: nenccAUMBsm soimeKr BouHB/trr er se> IAMBS so oesamB nom tn*-iD'EAST, n&eo rm m ne mte POUT OF BEmmR SAC POUT ams ALSO A POMT on A ue nm e mma mm AMD taoo/EET Btsmtr OF ne asear ue or SMD mtsoK mrtxA t sum/r numr eoMPAMTHKHT or mn neiKe ntai SAC mt Pote or BEsnme AMB noPnenYAtonG SAC pwcca ue AMD ne loiAwtr ue or ne IAMB conxta n snt eeeo MS M ii£cm: cmm IIF eoB leoopBBi jAMo^f ll, tM m BOOK 4m PACE xo or orrm Kcacs, moeFEET: MKT tam SAC mmm ue AMD camM€ AIOK SAC aovnoAimie oarrn irii'S4'BST, SI9.07/EET or Kcomiio lie Kswiir ue or cAirtmA saiE mmr II-SB-SPM V.4, AS snami on sim w LO. jm or ne IBSHT or mr HIP X sm HKmr on FIE mm ne saiE or cujFom BMsoH or HKmis, SAOinkm auvm nencE ALCNB ne msmr ue OF sm noNmr AS FoucKs^ saum ffivriT'cisr, ji.ie rcn-soum irH'jf EASI isuirsi soume^JB'ie'EAST. miB/msom oexv EAST. X0.43/m soum trjvir WEST, v.u nu; soim orxv test, atv/msoum irxvt'ear, 4ooo'FEH m A pomr mm B&WS naim trst'ie'E^ mor tm erm neme POUT or tBBtmt meee seum m^'io'BEST, lator IO »e ime rm OFBEOmK, Ejgxpim nesmm imr pomm OEsamEB m BEUI m ne cnr or cAosma moaxB KKHBER n lan AS Boanem no. 3OSS4$ or orrm. iea»as OF sm couirr OF sin oesa XHSBt MABCHIS XOI KKBlr XmBBta KOB PEKED: SEPeteonZ KOO SWHT / or 4 SH€£TS ^ ooes HOT SET FOim ExicnociiioH mo omoT BE noma use STAtlPEO oc 191 190B (S.D. CO. CONTROI. PT. OC OISI) 0.3 U. e. OF INTERSECTION OF CARLSBU BLVD. ft CMNON MMD 150 FT. N, OF Rfl CROSSING 8 FT. W OF PROPEBTT FENCE 4 n. S, OF PP 42 FT. L OF CA OF TRKS AT WITW BOX NORTH COUNTr CONTHOL DATA 43,143 t'K R s tl 1 T kiti t 4 DESONEO on TJ, PJ, UTE! HfflgT JOB DROWN OT:m..llX,.l*LT.gom: « SMH PROJECT l«R.Umt HO. JfcJSfiL- 1< Ll " a t; L 1 PiT* 1 » FarTM-tll-tM ENGMEER OF lORKi 71^1 C «Tt Vu-oi HHQIKI H. GtMU. ICC im» mm UMK Hwit CUP 99-30 CDP (COASTAL ofiaasaoffj PUD 00-109 M.S. 99-16 REVISED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP rm CANNON COURT A.P.N. 210-010-38 SS SMBT J fOKiar ue am sm (V -. AumeoBmnBm AS acmi on nts smi (t}msmuaim fmajm. USE awt sat OK 0B€f etecr oBolrABnE we aiET too. mr BE puea m PEmtntB m oaatai mm ne net V on Assua seam or B" ot BENCHMARK! DESCRtPTION: OBC STMPED OC 151 im (S.D. CO CONTWX. PT. X 01S1) LOCATION: 0.3 Ml. L OF INTERSECTION OF CARLSaW BLVD. k CANNON ROAD l» FT. N. OF Rlt CROSSING 8 n. W. Of PROPERTY FENCE 4 FT. S. X PP 42 FT, E. OF CA OF AT SWITCH BOX RCCOROEIk ElfVATON: «ia» iMMyJI BBBf BEHSEVt ocioea ir, BOOB aewsat s^wnaan toot NORTH COUNTf OWntOL DATA 43.143 SH££T 2 or 4 SH€nS ) O'Doy Consultants, Inc. oesxwED Wl TJ, P.f onEi JUBfflJBB- Mi«».Ht-IILJIf,TJJ,I.t&iLfc l'-4ir MKWEET UCR^JULL JOB MP.. M-ICa4 V V 1 J U L 1 ATI 1 3 DKMCCH OF KMti maoffB H. cwnu. ncEt 4at3s REVISED cvp 99-30 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SSS" FOB CANNON COURT A.P.N. 210-010-38 PUD 00-109 M.S. 99-16 LOCATKM 0 3 M. E. OT MTtHSECTKM OF CMLMN} ILVD. - * CWMM ROMI IM n. N. QF Mt CnOtWNQ • n. «. or pROPOTy FINCC 4 FT . S or PP 41 n. C. OF CA OF TWS AT SWTCK HK •eCONDCD. HOffTH COUHFT CONTROL DiATA CUVAIION: 41143 ©2000 O'Oay Consutlonlt. Inc. BENCHMARK; .^=5?^ fSD CO. CONTROL PT. OC 0131) /fif* lOCATUN; 0.9 M. C. DF NTrRSCCtKM OF CANtSSMI 81VD. IbiS n^l ft CMMON ROAD ISt FT. N. OF RR CROSSMO (ufl ^§1 • n. ». OF PROPCRTf F£**-£ 4 FT S OF PP \"Viff *SSii/*/ 41 n. E. or CA OF TRKS AT SWTCM KM VfiSf '•'"'y V RCCOR0C0-. NORTH COUNTV CONTROL 0*TA ^^^^^^S' ELEVATION: 43.143 " ' jTMSff Bcwaa tr. JBBB BOtSOc BPtma » tOBB SWTf r 4 or 4 5Ht£TS f"B U * l] TT AJff T 8 tjiwMsa 91. JAJEIA. HAIL ff-TI r™ Mouccr MOM L-MJUl JO* MO JI:HM ,, L O H S U L 1 A'H 1 a piCMIR or TCM: L O H S U L 1 A'H 1 a