HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 90-02; Price Club; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (7)- ,- ..
PETE WILSON, Govsmor STATE Of CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY
CA Ll FORNl A COASTAL COMMISSION
3111 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH, SUITE 200 June 24, 1991 SAN DIEGO COAST AREA
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-1725
(619) 52218036
TO : COMMISSIONERS AND INTERESTED PERSONS
FROM: CHUCK DAMM, SOUTH COAST DISTRICT DIRECTOR DEBORAH LEE, ASSISTANT DISTRICT DIRECTOR, SAN DIEGO AREA OFFICE PAUL WEBB, COASTAL PROGRAM ANALYST, SAN DIEGO AREA OFFICE
SUBJECT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON MAJOR AMENDMENT 2-91 TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM MELLO I1 SEGMENT (For Public Hearing and Possible Commission Action at the Meeting of July 16-19, 1991)
SY NOPS I S
BACKGROUND
The Carlsbad Local Coastal Program consists of six geographic segments. Pursuant to Sections 30170(f) and 30171 of the Public Resources Code, the Coastal Commission prepared and approved two portions of the LCP, the Mello I and I1 segments in 1980 and 1981, respectively. However, the City of Carlsbad
found several provisions of the Hello I and I1 segments unacceptable and
declined to adopt the LCP implementing ordinances for the LCP. 1985, the Commission approved major amendments, related to steep slope protection and agricultural preservation, to the Mello I and I1 segments, which resolved the major differences between the City and the Coastal Commission. The City then adopted the Mello I and 11 segments and began working towards certification of all segments of its local coastal program. Since the 1985 action, the Commission has approved several major amendments to the City of Carlsbad LCP.
In October,
In addition, two new segments were annexed to the City, the West Batiquitos/ Sammis Properties Segment and the East Batiquitos/Hunt Properties Segment.
The subject amendment request would pertain only to the Mello I1 segment.
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT REQUEST
The subject LCP segment incorporates the major portion of the coastal zone in the City of Carlsbad, with uses ranging from intensive commercial, residential
and agricultural development to open space in the area's sensitive lands. The proposed amendment request would allow for a change in the land use plan (LUP) designation of a 23.6 acre site from PI (Planned Industrial) to RRE (Extensive Regional Retail) and a zone designation change from P-M--Q (Planned Industrial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone) to C-2 Q (General Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone). amendment request. No other changes are proposed as part of this
c - ..
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2 .91 Page 2
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval, as submitted, of the proposed land use plan and implementing ordinance amendments. The appropriate resolutions and motions may be found on Pages 4 - 5. The land use plan amendment findings begin on Page 5 and the findings for certification of the implementation plan amendment begin on Page 9.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Further information on the City of Carlsbad Mello I1 Segment LCP amendment may be obtained from Paul Webb at the San Diego Area Office of the Coastal Commission, 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, CA, 92108-1725,
(61 9) 521 -8036.
PART I. OVERVIEW
A. Local Coastal Program History-All Segments.
The City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program (LCP) consists of six geographic segments: the Aqua Hedionda Lagoon LCP segment comprised of approximately
1,100 acres; the Carlsbad Mello I LCP segment with 2,000 acres; the Carlsbad Mello I1 LCP segment which includes approximately 5,300 acres; the West Batiquitos Lagoon/Samis Properties segment with 200 acres; the subject East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment with 1,000 acres and the Village Area Redevelopment segment with approximately 100 acres.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 30170 and 30171, the Coastal Commission was required to prepare and approve an LCP for identified portions of the City. This resulted in the two Carlsbad LCP segments commonly referred to as the Mello I and Mello I1 segments. The Mello I and Mello I1 LCP segments were approved by the Coastal Commission in September 1980 and June
1981, respectively. The Aqua Hedionda segment Land Use Plan was prepared by the City and approved by the Coastal Commission on July 1, 1982.
The Mello I, Mello I1 and Aqua Hedionda segments of the Carlsbad LCP cover the majority of the City's coastal zone. They are also the segments of the LCP which involve the greatest number of coastal resource issues and have been the
subject of the most controversy over the past years. involved in the review of the land use plans of these segments were preservation of agricultural lands, protection of steep -sloping hillsides and wetland habitats and the provision of adequate visitor-serving facilities. Preservation of the scenic resources of the area was another issue raised in the review of these land use plans. As mentioned, the City had found the policies of the certified Mello I and I1 segments regarding preservation of agriculture and steep-sloping hillsides to be unacceptable. therefore did not apply these provisions in the review of local projects.
Among those issues
The City
In the summer of 1985, the City submitted two amendment requests to the Commission and, in October of 1985, the Commission certified amendments 1-85
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 3
and 2-85 to the Mello I and Mello I1 segments, respectively. These (major)
amendments to the LCP involved changes to the agricultural preservation, steep
slope protection and housing policies of the Mello I and I1 segments of the LCP. After certification of these amendments, the City adopted the Mello I
and I1 LCP segments and began the process of preparing documents for
"effectivet1 certification of the entire LCP and assumption of permit authority
for the City's coastal zone.
The West Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties segment was certified in 1985
along with a coastal development permit for a project comprising the majority
of the uplands within that plan segment (Batiquitos Lagoon Educational
Park-Samnis). The plan area of the Village Area Redevelopment segment was
formerly part of the Mello I1 segment of the LCP. In August of 1984, the
Commission approved the segmentation of this 100-acre area from the remainder
of the Mello I1 LCP segment and,'at the same time, approved the submitted land
use plan for the area. In March of 1988, the Commission approved the
Implementation Program for the Village Area Redevelopment segment of the LCP.
A review of the post-certification maps occurred in December and the City
assumed permit authority for this LCP segment on December 14, 1988.
The subject LCP amendment submittal is proposed for the Mello I1 segment. In
addition to the review process for the six LCP segments mentioned, the City
has also submitted at various times, packages of land use plan amendments to
the certified LUP segments, including this segment, in an effort to resolve
existing inconsistencies between the City's General Plan, Zoning Maps and the Local Coastal Program. After all such inconsistencies are resolved, the City
plans to submit, for the Commission's review, the various ordinances and
post-certification maps for implementation of the LCP. At that time, or
perhaps earlier, the City will also prepare and submit a single LCP document
that incorporates all of the LCP segments as certified by the Commission and
any subsequent LCP amendments. After review and approval of these documents
by the Commission, the City will gain 'effective certification" and will begin
reviewing coastal development permit applications for its coastal zone.
B. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The standard of review for land use plans, or their amendments, is found in
Section 30512 of the Coastal Act. This section requires the Commission to
certify an LUP or LUP amendment if it finds that it meets the requirements of
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Specifically, it states:
Section 3051 2
(c) The Commission shall certify a land use plan, or any amendments
thereto, if it finds that a land use plan meets the requirements of, and
is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section
30200). Except as provided in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), a
decision to certify shall require a majority vote of the appointed
membership of the Commission.
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 4
Pursuant to Sectlon 30513 of the Coastal Act, the Commission may only reject
zoning ordinances or other implementing actions, as well as their amendments,
on the grounds that they do not conform with, or are inadequate to carry out, the provisions of the certified land use plan. The Commission shall take
action by a majority vote of the Cornmissioners present.
C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City has held numerous Planning Commission and City Council meetings with regard to the two components of the subject amendment request.
local hearings were duly noticed to the public.
amendment has been distributed to all known interested parties.
All of those
Notice of the subject
PART 11. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM SUBMITTAL - RESOLUTIONS
Following a public hearing, staff recommends the Commission adopt the following resolutions and findings. The appropriate motion to introduce the
resolution and a staff recomnendation are provided just prior to each
resolution.
A. RESOLUTION I (Resolutlon to certify the Clty of Carlsbad Land Use Plan
Amendment 2-91, as submitted)
MOTION I
I move that the Commission certify the land use plan amendment, identified
as Resolution No. 91-152, to the City of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program,
as submitted.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a VES vote and the adoption of the following resolution
and findings.
Commissioners is needed to pass the motion.
An affirmative vote by the majority of the appointed
Resolution I
The Commission hereby certifies the amendment to the City of Carlsbad's
Local Coastal Program and adopts the findinqs stated below on the grounds
that the land use plan, as amended, meets the requirements of and is in
conformity with the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 30200)
of the California Coastal Act to the extent necessary to achieve the basic
state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act; the land use
plan, as amended, will be consistent with applicable decisions of the
Commission that shall guide local government actions pursuant to Section
30625(c); and certification of the land use plan amendment meets the requirements of Section 21080.5(d)(2)(i) of the California Environmental
Quality Act, as there would be no feasible mitigation measures or feasible
alternatives which would substantially lessen significant adverse impacts
on the environment.
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 5
8: RESOLIJTION IL (Resolutlon to certify the City of Carlsbad Implementation Plan Amendment 2 .91, as submitted)
MOTION XI
I move that the Commission reject the implementation plan amendment,
identified as Ordinance NS-149, to the City of Carlsbad Loca
Program, as submitted.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a NO vote and the adoption of the following and findings. An affirmative vote by a majority of the Comm
present is needed to pass the motion.
Resolution I1
Coastal
resolution
ss ioners
The Commission hereby certifies the amendment to the City of Carlsbad's
Local Coastal Program on the grounds that the amendment conforms with, and
is adequate to carry out, the provisions of the certified land use plan.
There are no feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures
available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts
which the approval would have on the environment.
PART 111. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE PLAN
AMENDMENT 2-91. AS SUBMITTED
A. AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Land Use Plan (LUP) amendment would allow the change in the land
use designation of a 23.6 acre parcel from PI (Planned Industrial) to RRE
(Extensive Regional Retail). This LUP designation change is proposed to accommodate the development of the site with a membership retail-warehouse
commercial operation.
B. CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 30001.5 OF THE COASTAL ACT
The Commission finds, pursuant to Section 30512.2b of the Coastal Act, that
the land use plan amendment, as set forth in the resolution for certification
as submitted, is consistent with the policies and requirements of Chapter 3 of
the Coastal Act and meets the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5
of the Coastal Act which states:
The Legislature further f
the state for the coastal zone
a) Protect, maintain and
overall quality of the coastal
manmade resources.
nds and declares that the basic goals of
are to:
where feasible, enhance and restore the zone environment and its natural and
A LI
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2 -91 Page 6
h) Assure orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal
zone resources taking into account the social and economical needs of the
people of the state.
c) Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with sound resource conservation principles and constitutionally protected rights of private property owners.
Q) Assure priority for coastal-dependent and coastal-related development over other developments on the coast.
e) Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in preparing procedures to implement coordinated planning and development for mutually beneficial uses, including educational uses, in the coastal zone.
C. CHAPTER 3 CONSISTENCY
1. New Development. Section 30250(a) of the Act states, in part:
(a) New residential, commercial, or industrial development, except as otherwise provided in this division, shall be located within, contiguous with, or in close proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where such areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate public services and where it will not have a significant adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on
coastal resources.
In addition, Section 30252 of the Act states, in part:
The location and amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the coast by (1) facilitating the provision or extension of transit service, [and] (2) providing commercial facilities within or adjoining residential development or in other areas that will minimize the use of coastal access roads ...
Finally, Section 30253(d) requires that new development "minimize energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled."
The proposed LUP amendment would allow the land use designation of a 23.6 acre site to be changed from an industrial designation to Regional Retail. The site is located at the southeast quadrant of the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo
Del Norte intersection, approximately 100 yards east of the Palomar Airport Road/Interstate 5 interchange. The site is currently vacant, but has been cleared and graded under CDP #6-88-410-A (Ecke). The site is surrounded by
commercial development to the west, by the Canyon de las Encinas Creek to the south, with extensive residential development located on the mesa southerly of
the canyon, and by lands that are either vacant or in agricultural production
to the north and east. A number of large industrial/office developments are either already developed or are in the development process easterly of the
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 7
rilte along Palomar Alrport Road. three miles easterly of the site. Palomar FIcClellen Airport is located about
In this area, Palomar Airport Road has been widened to six lanes (three lanes
in either direction). The six lane configuration extends from about Paseo Del
Norte and continues to the east well past the project site. Westerly of Paseo
Del Norte, however, the road narrows to two lanes (one lane in either
direction) at the 1-5 overcrossing. The Comnission has recently approved the
widening of the 1-5 overcrossing (COP #6-90-270), but construction is not
anticipated to be completed for two to three years.
In reviewing the proposed LUP designation change for this site, the Commission is mindful of the relatively limited issues associated with such a change.
The Commission has previously certified the Land Use designation of the site
for industrial development and, through that action, has clearly anticipated
that intense development of the site would occur. The Commission has made a
further commitment to the development of the site through its approval of the
grading and site preparation proposed in CDP #6--88-410-A.
The proposed LUP amendment does raise the potential for traffic impacts
associated with the proposed retail comnercial use. The San Diego Association
of Governments (SANDAG), in its Traffic Generators manual, estimates the
average trip generation for industrial/business parks in the San Diego region
as 201 weekday trips per acre. At this rate, the site would be expected to
generate 4,744 trips per day.
generate about 500 average weekday trips per acre, for a total of 11,800
trips. Discount stores are estimated to generate 700 trips per acre, for a
total of 16,520 weekday trips.
would result in a significant increase in traffic over that which would be
anticipated to occur if the site were developed under its present land use
designation. The number of trips would at least double, all other factors
being equal.
Regional shopping centers are estimated to
Clearly, the proposed new land use designation
In order to determine if the proposed land use change is consistent with relevant Coastal Act policies, however, the increase in traffic resulting from
the proposed land use change must have significant adverse impacts on coastal
access, through, among other things impeding coastal visitors through
increased traffic congestion on coastal access routes.
Palomar Airport Road is a major east-west street in the City of Carlsbad.
Generally speaking, coastal access in north San Diego County is impeded by the
relative absence of east-west traffic arteries capable of accommodating large
numbers of coastal visitors from inland communities. At present, the only
major highway serving as an east-west connector in North County is Highway
78. All other east-west traffic occurs on surface streets such as Palomar
Airport Road.
to the south of Highway 78.
access routes in the North County area, the additional increment of traffic on Palomar Airport Road resulting from the land use designation change could
result in significant impacts on coastal access, particularly given the current status of the 1-5 overcrossing of Palomar Airport Road.
The next nearest freeway is Highway 52, located over 20 miles
Given this relative paucity of east-west coastal
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 8
Although the proposed change In the land use designation could accommodate a
number of different types of commercial development, the proposed LCP
amendment is being driven by a specific development proposal for the
construction of a membership discount warehouse. In response to this
proposal, the City of Carlsbad has required that the project applicants
prepare a project specific traffic study. This traffic study has projected that an industrial/business park development at this site would generate an
average daily traffic (ADT) of 4,800 vehicles. Estimates of the projected
traffic of the discount warehouse development, based upon a comparison with
other developments of the same type, would result in an ADT of 8,410 vehicles
into and out of the site.
Currently, the City adopted performance standard for intersections (LOS t8D8t)
is not met at the intersections of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real and
Palomar Airport Road/I-5. In addition, development of the site pursuant to
the proposed land use change would cause the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del
Norte intersection to fall short of the adopted performance standard.
However, at present, the peak period for traffic occurs on weekdays between
4:OO PM and 6:OO PM. At other periods, the identified critical intersections
meet the adopted performance standard for intersections in Carlsbad. In other words, at those times when beach visitor traffic is of concern, both traffic
along Palomar Airport Road and traffic resulting from the proposed land use change appear not to be of concern.
Because a retail commercial type development would be more likely to result in traffic on weekends, however, there still remains a potential for beach
visitor traffic impacts resulting from the proposed land use change. In
response to concerns raised by Commission staff, a supplementary traffic study
specifically addressing weekend traffic impacts has been prepared. Trip
generation data taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual for "discount club" uses (similar to that proposed for
the site) indicates that the trip generation for Saturdays would be 5% higher
than for weekdays (about 8,830 ADT), while for Sundays it would be 23% lower
than for weekdays (about 6,475 ADT).
While the increase in Saturday ADT is of concern, the majority of traffic on Palomar Airport Road at this time appears to be traffic generated by the
extensive industrial/business park areas along Palomar Airport Road and along
El Camino Real. Generally, this traffic would be expected to be limited to
weekdays, and total weekend approach volumes at the I-5/ Palomar Airport Road
interchange, even with the proposed land use changes, are anticipated to be considerably lower than on weekdays.
In addition, the typical peak hour for "discount club" uses has been
determined to be 2:OO PM to 3:OO PM.
Generators manual identifies the peak hour for inbound trip generation for
Silver Strand State Beach is 1:OO PM for Saturday and 12:OO PM for Sunday.
Even earlier inbound peak hours were identified for Crown Point Shores and
South Mission Beach Park, where inbound peaks occurred at 11:OO AM.
By comparison, the SANDAC Traffic
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 9
Glven that the proposed Increases in traffic resulting from the land use change would be off-day and off-peak from typical beach visitor travel days
and times, it is not anticipated that the proposed land use changes would result in any impacts upon the ability of the public to gain access to coastal
areas. Therefore, the Commission finds that the subject LUP amendment, as
submitted, is consistent with Sections 30250(a), 30252 and 30253 of the
Coastal Act.
This determination should not be extended to indicate that there are not other
impacts associated with physical development of the site, however. Although
the LUP amendment has been driven by a specific development, the impacts of
that development will be determined in a future Commission action on a permit
application for that project. As with any development, the applicable
policies of the certified LCP would still remain in force, including the
policies concerning the provision of suitable buffers around wetland areas,
floodplain development, development on steep slopes, protection against visual impacts of new development, etc. Issues that have not been raised or discussed in the context of this action, including but not limited to those
listed above, may be raised in the context of an application for a specific
development.
PART IV. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
AMENDMENT 2-91, AS SUBMITTED
A. AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION
The City of Carlsbad LCP Implementation Program (IP) takes the form of the City's Zoning Code. The proposed IP amendment has been submitted in the form
of an ordinance, Ordinance NS-149 of the City's Municipal Code, which would change the zoning of the site from P-M-Q (Planned Industrial, Qualified
Development Overlay Zone) to C-2-9 (General Commercial, Qualified Development
Overlay Zone). No other changes to the Implementation Program are proposed.
8. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION
a) The purpose and intent of the amendment is to allow a change from industrial to commercial uses on a 23.6
acre parcel near the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Paseo Del
Norte.
Purpose and Intent of the Ordinance.
b) Major Provisions of the Ordinance. Ordinance NS-149 provides for the
change of zoning of the identified parcel from P-M-Q (Planned Industrial,
Qualified Development Overlay Zone) to C-2-Q (General Commercial, Qualified
Development Overlay Zone.
commercial uses.
This would allow development of the site with
c) Adequacy of Ordinance to Implement the Certified LUP. The standard of
In the
In the City's
review for LCP implementation submittals or amendments is their consistency
with and ability to carry out the provisions of the certified LUP.
case of the subject LCP amendment, the City's Zoning Code serves as the
Implementation Program for the Mello 11 segment of the LCP.
City of Carlsbad LCPA 2-91 Page 10
Zonln$j Code, the C-2-Q Is the speclflc zoning designation that implements the Extensive Regional Retail land use designation. Therefore, given that the
proposed zoning designation is the specific implementing zone of the LUP designation approved above and that the proposed amendment to the Implementation Program contains a sufficient level of detail and specificity
the Commission finds that the subject amendment to the Implementation Program
is consistent with and adequate to carry out the policies of the certified
LUP.
PART V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
Section 21080.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exempts local government from the requirement of preparing an environmental impact
report (EIR) in connection with its local coastal program. Instead, the CEQA
responsibilities are assigned to the Coastal Commission and the Commission's
LCP review and approval program has been found by the Resources Agency to be
functionally equivalent to the EIR process.
the Commission is relieved of the responsibility to prepare an EIR for each
LCP.
Thus, under CEQA Section 21080.5,
MevePthele%s, the Commlsslon 1s required in an LCP submittal or, as in this
6a8el an LCP amendment suhmlttal, to find that the LCP, or LCP, as amended,
does conform with CEQA provisions. In the case of the subject LCP amendment
request, the Commission finds that approval of the subject LCP amendment, as
submitted, would not result in potentially significant environmental impacts
under the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. Although the
proposed land use change would result in increases in traffic generation over
that anticipated to occur under the present designation, those incremental
increases are not anticipated to have any impacts on coastal access or upon
any coastal resources. In addition, the City of Carlsbad has applied traffic
impact mitigation measures that will reduce the level of impacts upon traffic,
other than coastal visitor traffic, below the threshold of significance.
Therefore, the Commission finds that no significant, unmitigable environmental
impacts under the meaning of CEQA will result from the approval of the
proposed amendment.
(6568A)
IEXHIBIT NO. / I I
I
RM I
OPERAL PLAN/ 7YEF COASTALPLAN Pl
.
PRICE CLUB GPA 90-1/LCPA 90-2
I/ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
PLAN" G COMMISS ION REsoLUn ON NO. 3205
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, LOCAL COASTAL
PLAN AMENDMENTl ZONE CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND MINOR SUBDMSION TO DEVELOP A 121,388 SQUARE FOOT PRICE CLUB DISCOUNT
STORE.
CASE NAME: PRICE CLUB
CASE NO.: GPA 90-1/LCPA 90-2/ZC 90-1/SDP 90-5/CUP 90-3/HDP 90-
9/MS 837
9 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of April, 1991,
lo ,, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all 11 I*
I1 12 :
I: tesrimony and arguments; examining the initial study, analyzing the information 13 '
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning 14
15 I: Commission considered all factors relating to the Conditional Negative Declaration.
I
16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
1' as follows:
18
19
20 !I '
21 :
22 on the following findings:
8
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are tme and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Cornmission hereby recommends WPRO V& of the Conditional Negative
Declaration according to Exhibit "ND', dated February 28, 1991, "PII", dated
January 8,1991, and Appendix "PI', attached heteto and made a pan hereof, based i
23 Find&: It
24 ' 1.
25 I! 11
26 1; the project.
27 I
The initial study shows that the proPoad project could have a sigmficant impact
on the environment, however, there will not be a significant impact in this case
I because the mitigation measures descrii in the initial study have been added to
20 II
/I I/
!
I
I i !
! I I
I
!
I
i
I
I
I I
! I
I i
i i
i
I
/i 2.
3.
The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental ana\\ sIs.
The sueets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed pro;t.::
according to the traffic report provided that mitigating conditions of approval are complied with.
There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significan:!:;
impacted by this project provided that mitigating conditions of approval are
1'
2
3
4 4.
5 complied with. I
I
20
:' Conditions: I!
I I
7 I1
I This project is subject to the following mitigating conditions:
03
9
10
11 11 2. I
12
13
14
15
16
1. All parking and driving areas shall be swept and vacuumed on an established
weekly schedule to prevent the accumulaaon of dirc/oil/grease which could be
washed into the storm drain system
Urban pollutants such as oils that are deposited on thc parking lot surface by
automobiles shall be rcmoycd from waters leaving the site by directing drainage
through an oil trap subject to the approval of thc City Engineer. The oil trap shall
be shown on the gradin%improvemcnt plans for the project and be operational
prior to occupancy of any -t building on the site.
The developer shdl provide conclusive proof that the proposed pollutant aap will
be effective in removing storm water baed pollutants. In lieu of providing the
required supporting documentation, a three year monitoring program to evaluate
the edfectivmess of the proposed pollutant txap shall be atablished to the
satisfaction of the City F.ngincer and paid for by the developer.
The following traffic mitigation mcasuhs shall be implemented for this project:
a)
17 a
3. 18
19
20
21 :
22
23 I
Widen and recotl~tr~ct the improvemmts at the intersection of Palomar
Airport Rood iLILd Paseo Del Norre in order to provide dual left turns on the
north, south usd east klp of tk intersection including appropriate of tk City Enghcer. Mude modifications transitions to tbe saw
of tbe traffic signal at tbe intascction of Pakmar Airport Road and Paseo
Del Norte including appropriate traffic signing and Striping.
All improvancnts and work shall be coordinated with the improvements to
*
I
I:
24 j,
b) Consaua an appropriate acderatiodddmtion he along Palomar ji
26 i; I Airport Road for the propod right-in/right-out driveway. 25 I
I
I
i
I PC RES0 NO. 3205 27 jl -2- I
h
c) cloa the QICC(?SS to Pa~o Del None to automobile dc until the I
impro-~ to I-S/Palomu Airport Road interchange are complered to
the satisfaction of the city Engines.
Construct full signalid intersdon on Palomar Airport Road at the east
entrance of the Price Club sire including the addition of an added eastbound
right turn lane on Palomar Airport Road into the project.
ll
I
1'
2
3 d)
I
4,
5 4.
E
7
8
9 outdoor tirr storage will be permitted. I
To mitigate any aesthetic impacts that development on this site could mate, the
following mtasures are required as part of this project:
a) The truck loading, txash compactor and pallet yard area shall be screened 1'
4 by tiu use of waIls, fmdng and landscaping as shown on the project plans.
b) Old tires remod at the tire center shall be stod inside the building. No
c) 10
11 li
12
13 d)
14
15
16 .....
I
No roof quipmart 0th- than swats shall be pamined as is shown on '
the pmjm phns because of the dif3idty in screaring equipment from
residences to the south and from view of travelers on Palomar Airport \
Road. 1
The exterior of the Price Club building shall have a rough aggregate finish
in those veas indicated on the project plans in addition to the proposed
accent rweals to provide an aesthetically pleasing building in the Palomar
Airport Road scenic corridor.
1
..... 17
18 .....
19
20 I: , .....
2111 *.'..
22;: .....
23il ..... I'
24 li I
[ ....*
25
26
, .....
'I PC RES0 NO. 3205 27 j
. I'
-3-
I
!
I
!
I, I1 1 I'
2
3
4
5
6
7 ;,
0
9
10 "
i
11 ij
12
13 ::
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22.
1
23 11
25 i! 24 '1
26 !I
27 )I 1,
28 ii
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carisbad, California, held on the 3rd day of April, 1991, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, McFadden, Marcxs 8
Hall.
NOES: Chairman Holmes, Commissioner Erwin.
ABSENT: None.
_-.-
-. * $1 .. In
.-
, I;
,. .-. *
\.& ROBERT HOMES, Chairperson
ATEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3205
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION I
I
4-
I
CITY c-, CARLSBAD - AGENDA E-.L
DOCUMENTATION FOR LAND USE APPROVUS DEPT, Horn- 1- NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THE PRICE \ t-rj
~TQ. 5/21/91
EPT. CA CITY MGR.
CLUB PROJECT
GPA 90-1/LCPA 90-2/ZC 90-1/SDP 90-5/
HDP 90-9/MS 837
3ECOMMENDED ACTION:
If Council concurs, your actions are as follows:
1. Adopt Resolution No. qr-f5b approving a Conditional
Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment GPA 90-1 and Local Coastal Plan Amendment LCPA 90-2.
2. Introduce Ordinance No. 7- I L\q approving a zone change from
3. Adopt Resolution No. L) I- Is 7 approving the Site Development Plan SDP 90-5, Conditional Use Permit CUP 90-3, Hillside
Development Permit HDP 90-9 and a Minor Subdivision MS 837.
P-M-Q to C-2-Q.
ITEH EXPLANATION
The City Council at your meeting of May 7, 1991 directed this
office to prepare the documents listed in the above referenced
recommended action necessary to approve the Price Club on the south side of Palomar Airport Road, - east of Paseo Del Norte. The
documents are attached incorporating the Planning Commission conditions of approval, revised as necessary to accommodate the Council's deletion of the Paseo Del Norte access and the redesign of the building elevations. The Planning Director has reviewed the
conditions and in a memorandum dated 5/10/91 recommended a number of changes necessary to carry out the Council's direction. Please
review all the documents and satisfy ydurselves that we have
properly incorporated your intentions in the matter. If the
Council is satisfied, you should take the above recommended
actions.
EXHIBITS
Resolution No. 'If 19 2-
Resolution No. &I I - 1-7 3 Ordinance No. 5 '(i.ci
8
EXHfBlT NO. r APPLICATION NO.
h ;
I
RESOLUTION NO. 91-152
7
9
10
11
12
13 I
i
14
15 I.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AMENDMENTS .TO THE MELLO I1 SEGMENT OF THE
LOCAL COASTAL PLAN AND LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL TO EXTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL ON APPROXIMATELY 26 ACRES OF PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PALDMAR AIRPORT ROAD EAST OF PASEO DEL NORTE FOR THE PRICE CLUB PROJECT CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: LCPA 90-2/GPA 90-1
WHEREAS, on April 3, 1991 the Carlsbad Planning
Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider a
proposed Conditional Negative Declaration, Local Coastal Plan
Amendment (LCPA 90-2) and General Plan Amendment (GPA 90-1)
for development of a 121,388 square foot Price Club discount store
on approximately 26 acres of land generally located on the south
side of Palomar Airport Road east of Paseo Del Norte. At thc
conclusion of the hearing the Commission adopted Resolutions Nos.
l6 3205, 3207 and 3206 recommending to the City Council that the
l7 Conditional Negative Declaration, Local Coastal ' Plan Amendment
* (LCPA 90-2) and General Plan Amendment (GPA 90-1) be approved: and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on May 19 *' 7, 1991 held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
21 ' Commission's recommendations and heard all persons interested in or ** ,I opposed to the Negative Declaration, LCPA 90-2 and GPA 90-1; and
23
24
25
WHEREAS , a conditional Negative Declaration was issued on
February 28, 1991 and submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30
day review period. All comments received from that review period
26
27
28 "
1
are fully incorporated into the conditions of approval for the
project. These conditions will be reviewed through a monitorinq
9
,-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 .
23
24
I
25 ij
26
27
28
program set up for the project and the Council is satisfied that
the project is in full compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the conditional negative declaration on the
above referenced project is approved and that the findings and
conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No.
3205 marked Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof are
the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3. That the amendment to the land use element of the
General Plan (GPA 90-1) from Planned Industrial to Extensive
Regional Retail is approved as shown on the map dated April 3, 1991
the "Price Club" marked Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part
hereof and that the findings and conditions of the Planning
Commission contained, in Resolution No. 3206 marked Exhibit C
attached hereto and made a part hereof are the findings and
conditions of the City Council.
4. That the amendment to the Mello I1 segment of the
Carlsbad Local Coastal Plan (LCPA 90-2) from Planned Industrial to
Extensive Regional Retail is approved as shown on the map dated
April 3, 1991 the "Price Clubtg marked Exhibit B attached hereto and
made a part hereof and that the findings and conditions of the
Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 3207 marked Exhibit
D attached hereto and made a part hereof are the findings and
conditions of the City Council.
5. That the amendment to the Land Use Element of the
General Plan GPA 90-1 shall be effective 30 days after the day this
II
I/
1 I'
I'
I
'1 -
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 I
21
.I3 LL
23 i;
24
25 I'
resolution is adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meetinq of the
City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the day of
1990, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
26
27
28 ij
I: i.
3