No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA 55C; O'Hara; General Plan Amendment (GPA)ROSS BARBER 5392 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Date! l(W^^m(ajre)^the owper(sX^of Assessor Parcel(s) No. ^.J?<^ ^~ c^jj - l(We) hereby authorized Michael G. Zander of the Planning Practice to act as my(our) agent in the application of a General Plan Amendment being requested hy Michael O'Hara (Garlsbad 73) of Del Mar Financial. Owner(s): ^../^.^v-^. L lO^^^ 5B3t8iiber 29, 1980 "Planning Commission 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Attn: Charles D, Grimm Planning .Deaartment Gentlemen: lAle are the ouiners of Assessor Parcel No. 209-060-32 &37 As ouiners of aoove cited parcel, we hereby notify the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission of our agreement with the amendment of the General Plan Amendment being requested by i^ichael O'Hara (Carlsbad 73) of Del War Tinancial and are also in agreement with the rezoning Ctim and annexation to the city of Carlsbad. Please notify us any further notice is recuirsd. Jakob jyerschinq [J{AriiJrA/^^^^ maria Wersching X^>^C\\^QV^XvN.K\ Dated: Jakob ijJersching 30772 Via La Cresta R. Oalos yerdes, Ca 90274 (213) 377-8703 vv ••fh T P A TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Sept:ember 17, 1980 Mr. Michael C. Zander. AICP The Planning Practice P.O. Box 684 Cardiff-by-the-Sea. CA 92007 Dear Mr. Zander: This letter summarizes our review of the proposed deletion of two secondary arterials, Los Monos Way and San Francisco Peak Road from the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The study was based upon Infomation provided by you, the General Plan, information on other development in the area and standard reference data. The current General Plan of the City of Carlsbad shows two Secondary Arterials in the area northeasterly of the future intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard. Los Monos Way is indicated as an east-west arterial connecting College Boulevard and Melrose Avenue. The plan does not indicate the extension of this arterial beyond these streets. San Francisco Peak Road is shown as a north- south arterial extending northerly from Los Monos Way into the City of Oceanside. A General Plan Amendment has been proposed which would delete these two Secondary Arterials from the Circulation Element as well as modify land use in the area northeasterly of El Camino Real and future College .Boulevard. " PROPOSED LAND USE AMENDMENTS Since the circulation and land use elements are closely related, it is necessary to examine the proposed land use changes that are related to the proposed circu- lation changes. The following land use changes are proposed: 1. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future College Boulevard. 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON. CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714)871-2931 -2- 2. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a combination District including High Density Residential and Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the northslde of El Camino Real, east of future College Boulevard. 3. Change approximately 270 acres from low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of future College Boulevard and west of Squire's Dam. 4. Change approximately 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real approximately 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. Of these proposed land use changes, only number 3 would have a direct impact upon the proposed circulation changes. The commercial and office uses proposed along El Camino Real are separated from the streets under consideration by steep terrain. Due to the Special Treatment Area indicated by the General Plan for the properties along El Camino Real, a specific plan will be required. Access and circulation provisions will be addressed at that time for these areas. Table 1 provides a comparison of dwelling units and daily trip generation for the 270 acres that is proposed to be clianged from Low-Medium Density to Low Density Residential. The proposed land use change reduces the trip generation of the area by 6,750 daily trip ends. LAND USE Table 1 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON ACRES D.U.'s PER ACRE D.U.'s DAILY TRIP ENDS PER D.U. DAILY TRIP ENDS Low-Medivm Density Residential 270 1080 10 10,800 Low Density Residential 270 1.5 405 10 4,050 -3- ANALYSIS The Circulation Element of a General Plan provides the arterial road system required to serve the various land uses. This road system is to provide for the movement of people and goods within and through the area. In most cases the streets indicated oo a circulation plan are continuous or join other arterials to form a closed system. These factors have been utilized in analyzing the proposed Circulation Element Amendment. San Francisco Peak Road is indicated as a Secondary Arterial extending northerly from Los Monos Way Into the City of Oceanside. It is understood that the City of Oceanside has not provided for the extension of_jan Frfl"^1°^" Road into that City. This lack of continuity would raise a question as to the need and/or >-r- function of the street within the City of Carlsbad. As was discussed in the previous section of this report, the proposed land uses tributary to San Francisco Peak Road would generate a total of 4,050 daily trip ends. The daily volume on San Francisco Peak Road would thereby be a maximum of 4,050, if all these trips utilized this road. This volxime could be accommodated by a collector type roadway Indicating no need for a Secondary Arterial along the San Francisco Peak Road alignment. The lack of continuity and future traffic volume indicate that the deletion of San Francisco Peak Road as a Secondary Arterial from the Circulation Element would not have a negative impact. With no extension of the street to other areas, t he_jjax Imtnnvo lume of 4,050_daily trips can be accommodated by a collector. In addition, this volume will not be achieved as all of the residential area would not access to San Francisco Peak Road. As in the case of San Francisco Peak Road, the traffic volumes from the area being proposed for a reduction in land use density would not indicate the need for a Secondary Arterial along the Los Monos Way alignment. Consideration must also be given to the areawide need for Los Monos Way since it is planned as a continuous route. The current General Plan indicates Los Monos Way connection Melrose Avenue and College Boulevard. This provides a parallel route to Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real and serves as a connection between the east and west areas of the City. Studies of areas in the east (Carrillo Ranch, Carlsbad Oaks, etc.) have indicated a high vehicular demand on Palomar Airport Road. The Los Monos Way connection would provide an alternate route for some of this demand and im£rgye the future circulation system. Based upon this need for a link parallel to Palomar -4- Airport Road, we cannot recommend the deletion of Los Monos Way from the Circulation Element. Since the need for Los Monos Way is not generated by the area Immediately east of College Boulevard, an jiternatlve alignment_could^erve the_lndlcated need. It Is understood that the presently proposed alignment of Los Monos Way crosses an environmentally sensitive area. This is one reason for the desire to remove it from the Clrciilation Element. As an alternative, a realignment of Los Monos Way is proposed as indicated In Figure 1. The alternate alignment would extend Los ^inog_W^^ wes ter ly^jfrom_^elrose^Avenue in a more or less direct line to~ El Camino Real. It is understood that this alignment Is physically feasible and does not encounter the same environmental concerns. The alternate alignment would serve the traffic needs of the area and could intersect El Camino Real at a location currently proposed for an intersection. This connection would provide an alternate to the use of Palomar Airport Road for traffic destined to central Carlsbad, the regional shopping center, and, with the construction of Cannon Road, 1-5. SUMMARY This study has examined the potential for the deletion of San Francisco Peak Road and Los Monos Way as Secondary Arterials from the Circulation Element of the City of Carlsbad. Consideration luis been given.to proposed General Plan Land U.se Amendoentfl and current planning in adjacent areas. The analysis has indicated that San Francisco Peak Road could be eliminated as a Secondary Arterial; Iwwever, there is a need for Los Monos Road. An alternative alignment has been recommended for Los Monos Road. Principal findings of the study are the following: 1. The proposed land use changes for the area east of College Boulevard will reduce daily trip generation from 10,800 to 4,050 trip ends. 2. The proposed uses along El Camino Real will require the preparation of Specific Plans which will Include circulation and access provisions. 3. San Francisco Road would not be required due to reduced traffic generation and lack of provisions for extension to the north. PROPOSED DELETION PROPOSED ALTERNATE AUGNMENT MRPORT_ ~7—— I IF \^ WESTON PRINCLI AND fiSSOCIflTES FIOURE 1 1 -5- 4. Los Monos Road is not required by the land use easterly of College Boulevard but is required by areawide circulation needs. 5. An alternative alignment of Los Monos Road is proposed which would serve the circulation needs and avoid an environmentally sensitive area. We trust that this analysis will be of assistance to you and the City of Carlsbad. If you have any questions or require additional Information, please contact me. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 and TR565 cc: Mr. Mike O'Hara WSP:cd #0490 1200 ELM AVENUE Kf M TELEPHONE: CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 wL^lWlriM (714)438-5621 Citp of CarljJbab September 12, 1980 Mike Zander The Planning Practice P.O. Box 682 Cardiff, CA 92007 Dear Mike: The Planning Department has considered your Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA #754) for GPA-55(c) and it has been determined that further inforaation is required. The pro- posed deletion of two secondary arterials will require a traffic study to be completed for the area between El Camino Real and the eastern city boundary and between future College Boulevard and Palomar Airport Road. The study shall also consider the proposed changes in the Land Use Element that you are proposing. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at (714) 438-5591. CITY OF CARLSBAD Charles D. Grimm Associate Planner CDG:j t Receipt No. /i^Z^'y APPLICATION NO. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-55(G) (Please Print) 1. REQUEST: General Plan Amendment for Bew-Hediupjensity Residential, (Present land use designation) Non-Residential Reserve, Special Treatment Area and two (2) Secondary Arterials (Los Monos Way and San Francisco Peak Roaxi) to Low Density Residential, Professional & Related Commercial, Combination Districts (Proposed l?.nd use designation) including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional & Related Comm., Special Treatment Area and one (l) arterial realigned. See next page for detailed description. 2. LOCATION: The subject property is generally located on whe See next page side of between and 3. ASSESSOR'S NUMBER: Book 209 Page 0^ Parcels 02,15.23,2^,27-30 Book 209 Page 060 Parcels 14,23,25,26,32,37,^3. (If more, ~ 44,50,55-57 please list on bottom of this page) . 209-070-01-02 4 . OWNER (S) : Name Address City Zip Phone Garlsbad 73, c/o Mike O'Hara, 635I Yarrow Dr., Suite A, Garlsbad 92008 438-4313 Also, see enclosed authorization forms. 5. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: I hereby declare that .all information contained v/ithin this application is true. \ .'CA^I A-^3*->*-<J-:-' Address Cardiff-by-the-Sea, GA 9200? 942-0218 City Zip Phone Explain why present land use designation is not vaMd: See next page. 7. Explain why the proposed land use des:lgnation is more appropriate: See next page. FORM 1 PLANNING .• ^/Lyipattment If after the information you have submitted has been reviewed, it is determined that further information is required, yo\i will be so advi.sed. APPLICANT: AGENT; MEMBERS; Carlsbad 73 (Gerald Frankel) Attn: Mike O'Hara Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) 6351 Yarrow Drive, Suite A, Garlsbad, GA 92008 Business Address (714) 438-4313 Telephone Number The Planning Practice Attn: Michael C. Zander, AICP Name P.O. Box 684, Cardiff-by-the-Sea, GA 9200? Business Address (714) 942-0218 Telephone Number Also, see enclosed authorization forms. Name (individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Home Address Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Nuinber . Name Home Address Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number . (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be relied upon as being true and correct until amended. V Applicant GPA - 55(G) 1. O^Jr first request is to Eunend the Circulation Element of the General Plan by deleting one secondary arterial, Sam Francisco Peak Road, and realigning another, Los Monos Way. San Francisco Peak Road is no longer needed because of the low density development to occur in that area. Also, a recently approved project in the City of Oceanside did not provide am extension of that road into that City. We are proposing a realignment to Los Monos Way to avoid running that arterial through the proposed low density estate residential area and having to cross the environmentally sensitive Agua Hedionda Greek. See the attached Traffic Study by Wes Pringle and Associates for details on this matter. 2. Our second request is to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plajti to do the following: a. Ghajige approx. 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located at the northeast and southeaist corners of El Camino Real and the futmre extension of College Blvd. b. Change approx. 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Pro- fessional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future extension of College Blvd. c. Change approx. 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the south- west side of El Camino Real, approx. 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. d. Change approx. 270 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam. Refer to the attached exhibit for specific request. The first two Lamd Use requests, a. & b. above, are being made because of the existing amd future impacts created by El Gaimino Real and College Blvd. amd the Industrial/Commercial uses to be developed across El Camino Real in the Koll Business Pairk. There is good topographic separ- ation from this area to the estate residential area to the northeast. Offices and High Density Residential will provide a good transition between the industrial area and the estate area. The Commercial request in a. above is to provide for a restaurant and other commercial activi- ties needed to serve the proposed office park and surroimding area. The third Land Use request, c. above, is consistent with the existing Non-Residential Reserve and the approved Specific Plan for the Koll Business Park. The foru:th Land Use request, d. above, is consistent with the desires of the existing residents and land owners in the area. Carlsbad 73 Date: September 1?, 1980 l(We) am(are) the owner(s) of Assessor Parcel(s) No. 209-060-26 & 50 I (We) hereby authorized Michael C. Zander of the Planning Practice to act as my( our) agent in the application of a General Plan Amendment being requested by Michael O'Hara (Carlsbad 73) of Del Mar Financial. Owner(s): Gerald Frankel (dba Carlsbad 73) hy Mike O'Hara Cantarini Date: ^//-/^ l(We) am(are) the owner(s) of Assessor Parcel(s) No. 209-070-01 & 02 _ ^ _ _ • I(We) hereby authorized Michael G. Zander of the Planning Practice to act as my(our) agent in the application of a General Plan Amendment being requested by Michael O'Hara (Carlsbad 73) of Del Mar Financial. Owner(s): ^^^^^^f I '^f^^jC^^^ Banning T. ^Ijuitarini 4 Wrisley Date: l(We) am(are) the owner(s) of Assessor Parcel(s) No. 209-040-23 l(We) hereby authorized Michael G. Zamder of the Planning Practice to act as my(our) agent in the application of a General Plan Amendment being requested by Michael O'Hara (CarlaM- 73) of Del Mar Financial. Owner(s): t # MEMORANDUM DATE: December 30, 1980 TO: Frank Aleshire, City Manager FROM: James Hagaman, Director of Planning SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN GPA 55(B-E) AND GPA 57(A-E) General Plan Amendments GPA-55(B-E) and GPA-57(A-E) include nine separate applications. The important aspects of each application, and a recommendation is given below. Location maps are attached. If more information is desired by the Council they may refer to the Planning Commission staff reports attached to the agenda bill. GPA-55(B), Ukegawa, This is a request to amend the Land Use Element from Non-Residential Reserve to Planned Industrial (PI) on property located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road southwest of Palomar Airport. The developer has indi- cated that the Planned Industrial designation is appropriate for the site because the property is flat, it abutts exist- ing PI areas, and is located in an area designated for non- residential uses. Staff concurs with this analysis. The only issue on this amendment is whether or not a change to Planned Industrial is premature. Staff does not feel a change from the Non-Residential Reserve is premature because the property to the east is already designated Industrial and the Signal Landmark Property, on the other side of Palomar Airport Road, may be redesignated Industrial (see GPA 57-E). The Planning Commission is recommending approval. A Specific Plan will be required before development can occur. GPA-55(C), O'Hara, This is a request to amend the Circu- lation Element of the General Plan to delete future San Francisco Peak Road. The applicant is also requesting an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to change 50 acres along El Camino Real (Sunny Creek Road area) from Residential Low-Medium Density (0-4 du/acre) to a Combination District comprised of Community Commercial, High Density Residential and Professional and Related Commercial. A traffic study has shown that there is little need for San Francisco Peak Road as there are no plans for its extension into Oceanside. Major issues regarding the combination district include the visual impacts to El Camino Real, the appropriateness of this land use for the proposed location (noise impacts, circulation) and the. affect on the sur- rounding area. Staff feels this use is appropriate because of the need for more commercial and office uses in this area created by the close proximity of the airport, and the Koll t Research Center. AlsO/ noise generated from El Camino Real would be a nuisance to single family development. Other problems such as aesthetic impacts can be mitigated through the specific plan required for this site. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the above requests. The Commission denied without prejudice several other proposed changes to the Land Use and Circulation Elements (see Exhibit B to PC Resolution No. 1730) and they were not appealed. Staff supports the recommendation of the Planning Commission. GPA-55(D), Mola, A request to change approximately 10 acres from Residential Medium Density (RM) to Community Coiranercial (C) for property located on the northwest corner of El Camino Real and Alga Road. The property meets the criteria outlined in the General Plan for the Community Commercial designation. The only substantial issue was the effect on the Seaport Development to the south as there was some opposition from the Seaport Homeowner's Association. Staff does not see a major impact on this area as most of the ingress and egress will be from El Camino Real. Staff does feel that the Q-Overlay zone should be utilized for this property to ensure access from Dove Lane and minimize other potential problems. The Planning Commission felt this was a good location for commercial property because it is located on the corner of a prime and a major arterial. The commission recommends approval, and staff supports this recommendation. GPA-55(E), Whitney, A request to amend the Land Use Element from Planned Industrial (PI) to Travel Service (TS) for approximately 2h acres on the west side of Paseo del Norte, just south of Hadley's Orchards. Staff felt that the site was appropriate for the proposed use (hotel), based on location and surrounding uses, but recoimnended denial at the Planning Commission meeting because of a past Council reso- lution No. 5014. The resolution stated that the subject property is not suitable for Travel Service activities because of past odor problems at the Encina treatment plant. The Planning Commission felt that the treatment plant is no longer a major problem and recommended approval. The appli- cant has submitted an odor study (attached) which indicates that the chances of the treatment plant being a nuisance in the future are minimal. Staff supports approval of the General Plan Amendment. GPA-57(A), Sandy, A request to amend the Land Use Element from Residential Medium Density (RM-4-10 du/ac) to Profes- sional and Related Coimnercial (RC) for 7.9 acres located on the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Elm Avenue. Staff feels that the "0" designation, which is primarily office uses, is the best use for the site. The physical nature of the site orients it toward existing office use to -2- t the north. It is separated from surrounding residential uses by a steep bank to the east. The site is heavily impacted from noise -generated from El Camino Real. Office uses on this site would also act as a transition area between El Camino Real and residential uses to the east. A traffic study was completed for this site and indicated that office uses would not be detrimental to circulation on El Camino Real if properly mitigated. The only major issue regarding the proposed change in land use is whether office uses would be an extension of the strip commercial to the north along El Camino Real. During the hearings for the Plaza South development (Handyman, Carl's Jr. etc.) it was indicated that office use may be appropriate as a buffer to the south. Staff concurs and feels that the subject property should utilize the Q-Overlay zone. This would allow the city to keep access on El Camino Real to a minimum for the subject property and would allow special setbacks and landscaping to avoid any appearance of strip commercial. The Planning Commission recommended approval. Staff is in agreement. GPA 57(B), La Costa Land Company, Request to amend the Land Use Element from Neighborhood Commercial (N) to Resi- dential Medium High Density (RMH, 10-20 du/acre) on 1.5 acres between Centella Street and Rancho Santa Fe Road, just south of Levante Street. The site is physically suitable for the RMH designation because the site abutts other areas with this designation. A project with similar density has been constructed on adjacent property. The uses (apartments or condominiums) allowed by this designation would also act as a transition between the commercial area to the north and the single family residences to the south. The reduction in size of the existing commercial (N) area from 6.08 acres to 4.58 acres should not affect its vi- ability as a commercial site.- The Land Use Element states that areas designated Neighborhood Commercial may range in size from 2 to 10 acres. The Planning Commission recommends approval and staff concurs. GPA-57(C), Kevane (APPEAL) Request to amend the Land Use Element from Residential Low- Medium Density (RLM 0-4 du/acre) to Residential Medium Density (RM 4-10 du/acre) for 2.3 acres located on the east side of El Camino Real between Chestnut Avenue and Tamarack Avenue. Staff has a number of concerns about increasing the density on the proposed site. The topography of the site limits the building area to the flat portion on the east end of the property. This is the area that abutts existing single family•residences. An increase in density would also increase noise and traffic. -3- Access to the site is also very poor. There is no access on to local streets. Access occurs directly onto El Camino Real. Existing city policy would allow no median break at this property which creates a right-turn-in, right-turn-out situation. The Planning Commission recommended denial of this amendment for the above reasons. The applicant is appealing because he feels that a specific plan approved by the Council in 1973 is still valid. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed Specific Plan No. 137 and has determined that it has expired. Staff is recommending denial of GPA-57(C). GPA-57(D), Vallas, Request to change the Land Use Element from Governmental Facilities (G) to Recreation Commercial (RC) for property located on the southwest corner of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. The General Plan contains very little discussion regarding the Recreation Commercial (RC) category. The designation is intended for those com- mercial activities which are primarily recreational in nature. Uses include golf, tennis, horse and boating faci- lities; motels and restaurants. The General Plan provides no guidelines for site size or location, however. The appli- cant is proposing a small motel and an Olympic golf course (similar to a driving range) to be developed on this site. The site is located under a clear zone for Palomar Airport. The airport manager has indicated that the proposed use is a good use for the property because there will be no structures in the clear zone area, only grass. Staff feels that the designation proposed is appropriate for the site because it would allow uses compatible with the clear zone and because other possible problems, such as traffic impacts, can be mitigated in the specific plan v/hich is required for the site. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this amendment and staff concurs. GPA-57(E), Signal Landmark, Request to amend the Land Use Element from Non-Residential Reserve (NRR) to Planned In- dustrial (PI) on 333 acres located on the west and south sides of Palomar Alport. The Non-Residential Reserve classification holds areas of land in reserve for future non-residential uses. The Land Use Element states that the burden of proof to reclassify these areas rests with the developer or owner. The developer is indicating that a light industrial park is the most appropriate use for this site because other uses are less compatible with the airport than industrial uses. The applicant has indicated that the property is adjacent to other industrial uses and therefore compatible. Also, the NRR indicates that future land use for this area will be -4- non-residential for which industrial use qualifies. Staff concurs with the applicant's justification. The proposed industrial park would be consistent with existing and future uses in the area and would be less impacted by the airport than other non-residential uses. It is anticipated that the specific plan required for this property will ensure proper access to the site, standards for development, and an overall high quality industrial park. The Planning Commission and staff recommend approval. Attachments Location Maps, all sites. Planning Commission Staff Reports (Memo to City Manager on GPA-55(C)). Odor Study (GPA-55(E) Legal Determination (GPA-57(C) JCH:CG:ar 1/12/81 -5- MEMORANDUM DATE: November 26, 1980 TO: City Manager FROM: Planning Director SUBJECT: GPA-55(C) - O'HARA - Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from RLM to a Combination District, and delete a secondary arterial from the Circulation Element. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan by deleting future San Francisco Peak Road. The proposed arterial is located east of El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and future College Boule- vard. A request is also included to amend the Land Use Element from Residential Low-Medium Density (0-4 du/ac) to a Com- bination District comprised of Residential High Density, Community Commercial and Professional and Related Commercial for 50 acres located on the east side of El Camino Real just south of future College Boulevard. The above requests are what the Council will be hearing on December 16. The applicant's original proposal, prior to the Planning Commission hearing, was as follows: 1. To amend the Circulation Element by deleting future Los Manos Way and San Francisco Peak Road as secondary arterials. 2. To amend the Land Use Element in the following manner: Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential (RLM) to a Combination Dis- trict including High Density Residential (RH), Community Commercial (C) and Professional and Related Commercial (0) for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Profes- sional and Related Commercial for property gen- erally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real, approximately 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. Change approximately 270 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam. The Planning Commission denied a number of these requests without prejudice (see P.C. Res. #1730) because it was felt that further land use and traffic analysis was necessary before these amendments could be approved. Staff concurs with this position. The Planning Commission has since passed a Resolution of Intention to consider a General Plan Amendment for this area following a detailed traffic study. The proposed combination district being considered by the Council will require the processing of a specific plan before development can occur. The specific plan is a result of that area being part of the airport influence area defined by the General Plan. DISCUSSION Circulation: The City's Engineering Department has indicated that San Francisco Peak Road can be deleted from the Circula- tion Element for two reasons. The first reason is that the Oceanside General Plan shows no extension of San Francisco Peak Road into that City. The second reason is that general plan densities proposed for that area do not provide enough units for a secondary arterial to be needed. The Planning Staff concurs with this recommendation. Land Use: The area on the east side of El Camino Real just south of College Boulevard is probably more appropriate for higher density, office and commercial uses than it is for low density residential. This area is heavily influenced by the airport and by surrounding industrial uses. Heavy noise generated by high traffic volumes anticipated for El Camino Real and College would make office and commercial uses more appropriate for abutting these prime arterials. Higher density residential uses would be appropriate near commercial and office uses. A specific plan, required for the site would ensure the precise and proper locations of the various land uses. Staff does not feel that this amendment will encourage a "strip-commercial" type of development because no access will be allowed on El Camino Real. The developer is pro- posing a frontage road to connect College Boulevard to the Beckman, Koll area to the south. -2- staff also feels that the Koll "Research Center" and the airport industrial base are creating a peripheral effect on adjacent areas. Property in this area along El Camino Real is receiving pressure to develop as higher value uses such as office and commercial. The peripheral pressure doesn't necessitate strip commercial for El Camino Real. The Council will have to decide the ultimate boundaries of uses related to the industry around the airport, however. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the proposed amendments to the Land Use and Circulation Elements as recommended by the Planning Commission. JCH:CG:j t att3.chments: 1) Existing (General Plan 2) General Plan as requested by applicant 3) General Plan as recotmsnded by P.C. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN GPA-55(C) GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AS PROPOSED BY APPLICANT TO P.C. GPA-55(C) I - Corbination District oorprised of PH/O/C GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AS RECOMMENDED BY P.C. RLAA P.C. RECOMMENDED * DELETION / MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: VIA: DATE: SUBJECT: RICHARD ALLEN TERRY LUTZ« LES EVANS ^ NOVEMBER 3, 1980 REALIGNMENT OF LOS MANOS WAY CIRCULATION ELEMENT Los Manos Way is shown on the Circulation Element as a secondary arterial connecting College Boulevard, a major arterial, with Melrose Drive, a prime arterial. The alignment of Los Manos provides a parallel facility to both Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. This in turn provides additional capacity for these two corridors. If Los Manos is realigned to intersect El Camino Real south of College Boulevard, the level of service for El Camino Real will be reduced on El Camino Real between College Boulevard and the new Los Manos intersection. Therefore, the present alignment of Los Manos Way should be retained with connections to College Boulevard and Melrose Drive. TL;mnit 1200 ELM AVENUE ^ Wk TELEPHONE: CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 M^lfll/ r^S (714)438-5621 Citp of Carljfbab September 12, 1980 Mike Zander The Planning Practice P.O. Box Cardiff, CA 92007 Dear Mike: The Planning Department has considered your Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA #754) for GPA-55(c) and it has been determined that further information is required. The pro- posed deletion of two secondary arterials will require a traffic study to be completed for the area between El Camino Real and the eastern city boundary and between future College Boulevard and Palomar Airport Road. The study shall also consider the proposed changes in the Land Use Element that you are proposing. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at (714) 438-5591. CITY OF CARLSBAD Charles D. Grimm Associate Planner CDG:jt NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Coimassion of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Comcil Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, Deceiriber 16, 1980, to consider approval of the following amendments to the General Plan: GPA-55 (C): A request to amend the Circiilation Element of the General Plan by deleting San Francisco Peak Road. These proposed arterials are shown east of El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and future College Boulevard. A request is also included to amend the Land Use Elen^t as follows: Tb Change approximately 50 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Gorribination District including High Density Residential and Professional and Related Comiercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, southeast of the future extension of College Blvd. The above properties are more particvilarly described as: Portion of Lot B, portion of Lot E, . of Map 823, Rancho Agua Hedionda (see map below) Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Plauining Department at 438-5591. CASE FILE: GPA-55(C) APPLICANT: O'HARA PUBLISH DATE: December 6, 1980 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF CORRECTION TO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN "A" FROM .25 ACRES TO 25 ACRES AND CHANGES TO MAP. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, November 5, 1980, to consider approval of the following amendments to the General Plan: GPA-55(C): A request to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan by deleting San Francisco Peak Road and deleting or realigning Los Manos Way. These proposed arterials are shown east of El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and future College Boulevard. A request is also included to amend the Land Use Element as follows: Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real, approximately 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road, Change approximately 270 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd, west of Squire's Dam. The above properties are more particularly described as: Portion of Lot B, portion of Lot E, portion Lot F, and portion of Lot G of Map 823, Rancho Agua Hedionda (see map below) Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-5591. ' ' APPLICANT: O'HARA PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 25, I98O CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION t 1 r 1 i r 7/ -7 /T^ ^ Decreed A l egcil Newspaper by tiie Superior Courf of San Diego Cour.ty 3088 PIO PICO AVENUE » P.O. BOX 240 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 © 729-2345 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, js. 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, ond not a party to or interested in tho above entitled matter, i am principal clerk of the printer of the Car'sbad Join-nal a newspaper of generol circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Corlsbad, County of San Diego, Stcie of California, and which newspaper is published forthe dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general choracter, and which newspaper at all times herein meni-ior.ed had and srill has a bono fide subscription liit of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has bean established and published af regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the dote of publication of ths notice hereinafter referred to; and that tha notice of which the ann-axed is a printed copy, has been published in each r-^gu!ar and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the foliowing dates, to-wit: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HESSBY GIVEN th-Jl th>^ Pltmnins Cnrpmis.iuiii (r. the Cit..v;.tC ifisbati wiUhcilcl i pub- iic hfi.iri.-i/, al t.h« City Council chiiinuers, liOU Kliti'Aven.u-;. Cafl.^- hsd. CA at 7:0(1 P M. on WedneiJ-i) r-;ovf>s!!ber .3. 1980, to coniidsr ap;>i-ivar'oi ilvs'faHo.wing amend- jrtienta So the General Plan: GPA-55(B): A reqn.ist for aniHnd- ^nent to the Ljywi-tFss Element to clij''K^^he"."a?signaiion from Mmi- _ lesidsntial Reserv? to I'lanri^d ti chistriai on proi/erty luciti-.l IMI smith side of Faloinar A^rpo; Road, fa:^t of Laurel Tr..-a L:ia tnort: particuUrly de.scrihed aj: A portion of Lot G of Map S2 , RanolioiVgua Ileriiond-i (,^ee :na bel&w? N /Applii:-""''- ')if'u':r>va lorA-.- .'",'• r-:quest to amenu thi Ciraa-.'ation Element of tf fewtSlPlan by deleting San Fra Cisco Peilir Road and deletins; i realiiinin.a Lo.i Manos Way. Thc^e propo.sed arterials are shown east of El Camino Real between Palo- m.'.r ,\irpart Road and future Col- ICfie Boulevard. A request i;; also included to amend the Land Use Element as follow.s; Change approximately .25 acres from Low-.M«dium Density Resi- dential to a Combination Distritt including High Density Vtesiden- tial, Comm-.inity Comrae^-eial and Professional and Related Commer- cial for properry ;!ener.i|ly located at tlie northe:.ist :in'i so\it.hf a:;t cor- ners of El Camino ileal and the fu- tur.-; oxC'nsioft of College Sllvd Cn.;r!.-:e appro<ir.i'-.rely 2a acres :ro.-i La'.v-Meiliun'. D-;;.i;y Resi- deutial to a Combination Uistrict incladinisHiSh Density Residential and Professional & Related Com- niercial for properly senerally lo- cated along- the north side of V.\. Camino Real, ea.t .iftiw futurs OctotK 25 Portion of Section 2d. Township 12 South. Ranife 4 west - north (sttB'map b'fiftrw* ' AppUcant: Molt CP.-\-;)atF.'i; .\A'quest to imend h^Li..^.ija.iL-i''"'e [ e ent f r o m tanned ::\Ju:.fr) il Travel Ser- vice on property locatea on the v>HS,tsideof Pas..'0 del Norte. .ippro- xiniately 1000 feel south '.'f P.i'oniar Airport ftoad, more particularly described as: Part of .Map 82;i. Rancho A;iua Hedionda P-jrtion of I.at H. Lots 2 and 3 of Parcel Map f)023 ;-ee inuo below) Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially in- vited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Planning Department a! 4;i8-ri59i. CiTY O:-" CAHLSBAD PL A N .N1N" G C r ULM 1 :i S I<) N Applicant: V.-UTN"r \- 19 80 19 19. 19 19 1 certify under penalty of p.^rjury that ths foregoing Is true and correct. Executfid at Carlsbad, County of San Diepo, State of California on ^^.i;i-:!L_~ ^^'^^ day of Ootxn^r.v^^^:'XT --t — Clerk of th? Printer V'. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTiCE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, November 5, 1980, to consider approval of the following amendments to the General Plan: GPA-55(C): A request to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan by deleting San Francisco Peak Road and deleting or realigning Los Manos Way. These proposed arterials are shown east of El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and future Co 11ege Bou1eva rd. A request is also included to amend the Land Use Element as follows: Change approximately ^25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future extension of Col 1ege Blvd. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 53 acres from No-Residential Reserve to Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real, approximately 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport road. Change approximately 270 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam. The above properties are more particularly described as: Portion of Lot B, portion of Lot E, portion Lot F, and portion of Lot G of Map 823, Rancho Agua Hedionda (see map below) App1i cant: 0'Ha ra Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-5591. CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLISH DATE: October 25, I98O 4/\ cr^r; ^^^^^^ ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM Receipt No. 1^63 ' . EIA NO. 7^4- • • • • Date: September 10, I98O : ' Name of Applicant: Carlsbad 73. c/o'Mike O'Kara Address: 635I Yarrow Drive, Suite A,- Carlsbad, CA 9200& Perrnit Applied For: General Plan Amendment Case Nos.: GPA-55(C) ' Location of Proposed Activity: Northeast and southwest of El Camino Real, northeast and soiftheast corners"of El Camino Real amd College Blvd., east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam. B A C KG R 0 U fl D INFO RH ATION • ' * •• l.v Give a brief description of the proposed activity (attach any preliminary development plans). .. - * • ' - • See .next page. , , -• ' 2.. Describe the activity area, including distinguishing natural and manmade characteristics; also provide precise • slope analysis when appropriate. • . . ^ • ' • See next page. . • ' . '• •• 3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design and/or operation of the project., None in particular at this General Plan Amendment stage. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (cont'd.) 1. A. Amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to delete one secondary arterial, San Frajicisco Peak Road, and realign another, Los Monos Way. B. Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to: 1) change approx. 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential, Community Commercial and Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future extension of College Blvd.; 2) change approx. 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future ex- tension of College Blvd.; 3) change approx. 270 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam; and 4) chsmge approx. 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional & Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real, approx. 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. 2. A. Steep topograjJiy separates the residential-estate area from the office area along El Camino Real. B. Los Monos Way, to be deleted, would cross environmentally sensitive Agua Hedionda Creek. C. No a.gricultural production on the property. D. No environmentally sensitive considerations (biology, etc.) along El Camino Real. E. Noise along El Camino Real not appropriate for existing residential designation. P. Traffic from proposed uses along El Camino Real can be adeqtiately handled by a frontage roa.d running between Beckmaji ajid College. G. Grading along El Camino Real needed to correct ajid improve existing human-altered topography. H. Oceanside's development approval does not provide for the extension of San Francisco Peak Road. I. Special Treatment Area of the General PlaJi because of the airport influence area requires approval of a specific plan prior to develop- ment in the office and combination district areas. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM II. Environmental Impact Analysis . Answer the follov/ing questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. . Iii No 1. Could the project significantly change present land uses • . in the vicinity of the activity? . 2. Could the activity affect the use of a recreational • X . area, or area of important aesthetic value? ^ 5. Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity .area unique, that is, not found in other parts of the County, State, or nation? • 6. .Could the activity significantly affect a historical or . archaelogical site or its setting? ^* Could the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural res- ource? • ... 8. Does the activity area serve as a habitat, food source nesting place, source of water, etc. for rare or endangered wildlife or» fish species? 9. Could the activity significantly affect fish,,wildlife br plant life? • 10. Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the activity area? n. Could the activity change existing features of any.of the city's lagoons, bays, or tidelands?- 12. Could the activity change existing features of any of the City's beaches? 13. Could the activity result in the erosion or elimination of .agricultural lands? 14. Could the activity serve to encourage development of ^jresently undeveloped areas or intensify development of already developed areas? * • FORM 44, Page 2 of 4. * . ' 3. Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood? 4. Could the activity result in the displacement of Y community residents? es No 15., Will the activity require, a variance from established environmental standards (air, water, noise, etc)? . , 16. Will the activity require certification, authorization or issuance of a pennit by any. local. State or Federal environmental control agency? 17. Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditional use permit by the City? 18. Will the activity involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? 19. Will the activity involve construction of facilities in a flood •plain? 20. Will the activity involve construction of facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater? 21. V/ill the activity involve construction of facilities in the area of an active fault? 22. Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of noise? 23. Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of dust? 24. Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials? • . • .25. Could the activity result in a significant change in the ouaiity of any portion of the region's air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground water, off-shore). 26. Will there be a significant change to existing land form? , __ (a) indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic yards. 2,^00,000 , (b) percentage of alteration to the present land form. ^5% (c) maximum height of cut or fill slopes. • 50' .27, Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? III. State of No Significant Environmental Effects If you have ansv/ered yes to one or more of the questions in Section II but you think the activity will have no significant environmental effects, indicate your reasons below: See attached she^t. X FORM £4, Page 3 of 4 5. Agua Hedionda Creek is an environmentally unique and sensitive area. This project proposes to reduce the potential intensity of development along the creek. This project also proposes to delete the designation of a secondary arterial that would have to cross this creek. S.i Agua Hedionda Creek contains perennial springs and a unique ripsirian habitat. Again, this project proposes to reduce the potential impacts on the creek then the existing General Plan designations would allow. 10. Although no survey has been conducted, there is likely to be at least some Mission MsmzaJiita smd/or Coastal Sage Scrub on some of the back-country area. Again, this project proposes to reduce the potential impact of development on these environmental resources by decreasing the potential intensity of development. 14. Almost any type of development would require a yes answer to this question. The office combination district request is a logical transitional land use from the more intense industrial land uses occurring to the south and west. The low density residential request is consistent with existing development along Sunny Creek Road. 16. Additional local approvals required prior to final development will include Pre-annexational Zone Change, Annexation, Subdivision ajid Site Development Plan (if required by Q-Zone overlay). Also, Specific Plan for office area. 20. Slopes separating office combination district from low density residential area will exceed 2^. Some development may occur along the top of these manufactured slopes. Naturally occurring slopes exceeding 25^ will be protected by zoning limitations (R-E Zone). IV: Comments or Elaborations to Any of the Questions in Section II. (If additional space is needed for answering any questions, attach additional sheets as may be needed.) Signature/^/^j; ,.fAf <^y>^i^Au^ Michael C. Zander, AICP Date Signed; August 6, I98O « Conclusions (To be completed by the Planning Director). Place a check in the appropriate box. ( ) Further information is required. ( ) It has been determined that the project will not have significant environmental effects. ( ) You must submit a preliminary environmental impact statement by the following date. ( ) You should make an appointment with the Planning Director to discuss further processing of your project, in accordance with Chapter 19.04 of the Municipal Code. DATE RECEIVED: BY Planning Director, or, Revised December 22, 1978 STAFF REPORT DATE: November 5, 1980 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department <2.^ SUBJECT: GPA-55(C) - O'HARA - Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from RLM to RL, RLM to a Combination District, NRR to 0 and an amendment to delete 2 secondary arterials from the Circulation Elem.ent. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan by deleting San Francisco Peak Road and deleting or realigning Los Manos Way. These proposed arterials are shown east of El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and future College Boulevard. A request is also included to amend the Land Use Element as follows: Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential (RLM) to a Combination District including High Density Residential (RH), Community Commercial (C) and Professional and Related Commercial (0) for property generally located at the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 25 acres from Low-Medium Density Residential to a Combination District including High Density Residential and Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the north side of El Camino Real, east of the future extension of College Blvd. Change approximately 53 acres from Non-Residential Reserve to Professional and Related Commercial for property generally located along the southwest side of El Camino Real, approximately 4,000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. Change approximately 270 acres from Low-Meditmi Density Residential to Low Density Residential for property generally located east of the future extension of College Blvd., west of Squire's Dam. A specific plan will be required for the majority of the area included in the land use amendment as it is located in the Palomar Airport influence area. A traffic study was required as a condition of the negative declaration for this application. Much of the proposed amendment is currently in the county. The only discretionary acts by the city in this area have been a parcel map and a zone change (66-12) which created an area of 2h acre minimum lot sizes (see attached map #3). II. ANALYSIS Major Planning Considerations 1) Circulation: - What effect will the deletion of Los Manos Way and San Francisco Peak Road have on surrounding areas? 2) Land Use: - Are the proposed land use designations appropriate for their proposed locations? Is the Professional and Related Commercial (0) applicable to the Non-Residential Reserve (NRR) area? Discussion Circulation: A traffic study (attached) was required as part of the negative declaration for this project. The traffic study indicated that if land use densities were lowered as proposed (see attached map #1 and #2, RL areas) that Los Manos Way and San Francisco Peak Road were no longer needed for the area north of Sunny Creek Road. The study indicated, however, that total elimination of Los Manos could create problems for the Carlsbad Oaks area (see map #3 attached). The consultant felt that a 4 lane "bleeder" was necessary from Carlsbad Oaks to El Camino Real. The study also indicates that Los Manos, if built as shown on the existing plan, would be passing through an environmentally sensitive area. It is the feeling of the Engineering Department that San Francisco Peak Road can be deleted because no extension is shown in Oceanside. The Engineers' felt that there is not enough justification for the deletion of Los Manos Way in the traffic study and that a larger traffic study is needed (engineers' have begun coordinating). There has been no comprehensive environmental impact report done for the -2- entire area which indicates that Los Manos would be environ- mentally damaging. The City Traffic Engineer also feels it would be difficult to run a bleeder from Carlsbad Oaks to El Camino Real because of the existing agreements with Beckman Instruments, Koll Company and others east of El Camino Real. There are three options staff has identified for the Planning Commission as follows: 1) Leave Los Manos Way as shown on the existing general plan until further studies (traffic and environmental) provide logical answers. 2) Delete Los Manos Way completely and let the subdivision process indicate the location of collector streets to take the place of Los Manos. 3) Realign Los Manos Way to meet the industrial street proposed for the industrial area on the east side of El Camino Real. Staff would advise against alternative 2 because a collector street might not be adequate to handle the traffic between Carlsbad Oaks and El Camino Real. Staff also advises against number 3 because if a four lane arterial is shown it may not match the two lane alignment proposed for the industrial area. Staff feels that the Commission should use alternative number 1 and deny this part of the application without prejudice until further studies can be completed. Land Use Staff has little problem with the land use changes proposed for the east side of El Camino Real. Because of the high traffic voliames anticipated for El Camino Real; high density residential, office and commercial uses would probably be more appropriate abutting this prime arterial than low density. Most of this area will require a specific plan ^required in airport influence area) which will give the city adequate opportunity to ensure safe and orderly development of this area (parallel lines on maps 1 & 2 indicates specific plan area). The Residential Low Medium (RL) density areas (0-1J5 du/acre) is a low density/large lot land use which could develop adequately under standard zoning. Staff has more concern with the proposed Office and Related Commercial (0) proposed for the west side of El Camino Real. -3- This area is currently Non-Residential Reserve (NRR) which normally suggests uses compatible with the airport, particularly industrial and commercial uses. The use is compatible with the NRR. There is no language in that section of the General Plan which prohibits large areas of office use. Some office use was allowed on the Koll property which surrounds the subject site on three sides. The subject property will be very difficult to develop because of the terrain, only a portion can be utilized. If heavy grading is done and access is provided on El Camino Real, office type uses may be the best use. The significance of grading and access can only be determined at the time of environmental review and a specific plan is completed for the site. Because of the difficulty in determining the best use for the site upfront, staff feels that an amendment from NRR to 0 would be acceptable to the city. III. RECOmENDATION Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. , recommending to Council that they approve the deletion of San Francisco Peak Road, deny without prejudice the proposed deletion of Los Manos Way in the Circulation Element, and that all proposed changes in the Land Use Element be approved. ATTACHMENTS Map #1 - Existing General Plan Map #2 - Proposed Amendments Map #3 - Location Map Traffic Study CG:ar 10/31/80 -4- 9y