Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP 78-03D; La Costa Towne Center; Site Development Plan (SDP) (6)* ^ Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 LAND USE REVIEW Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD APPLICATION P-1 Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 APPLICATION P-1 www,carlsbadca,gov APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPT USE ONLY) Legislative Permits Development Permits I I Administrative Permit I I Coastal Development Permit (*) [Uj Minor IM] Conditional Use Permit (*) fM] Minor \W\ Extension I 1 Environmental Impact Assessment 1 ] Habitat Management Permit |^ Minor I 1 Hillside Development Permit (*) [M] Planned Development Permit [M] Residential [II] Non-Residential I I Planned Industrial Permit n Planning Commission Determination [M| site Development Plan W\ Speclal Use Permit [M] Tentative Tract Map/Parcel Map I I Variance \W} Administrative (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) I I General Plan Amendment I I Local Coastal Program Amendment (*) 1 1 Master Plan [W\ Amendment I ] Specific Plan HI] Amendment I I Zone Change (*) I ] Zone Code Amendment Souf/> Carlsbad Coastal Review Area Permits I ] Review Permit I ] Administrative d] Minor [Wl Major Villaae Review Area Permits I 1 Review Permit 1 ] Administrative \W] Minor [I] Major (*) = eligible for 25% discount NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: PROJECT NAME: 216-124-16 & 17 La Costa Towne Village BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Re-development and modemization of existing commercial center. See P-1 (B) form for complete description. BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCELS "B" AND "D" OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10283, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED iN THE oPPlCE OF THE COUNTV ReCOftDER OF SAN DIE60 COUNTY,— nN,iiiiY:^n i9«n A.q FII F/PAC^F NO Rn-?4n7?i, OF OFFIOIAI RFr^npn.q LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE: BETWEEN East (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) La Costa Avenue (NAME OF STREET) 7710 thru 7770 El Camino Real SIDE OF AND STREET ADDRESS El Camino Real (NAME OF STREET) Levante St (NAME OF STREET) P-1 "DeN^ 13001 Paae 1 of 6 Revised 11/12 Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC OWNER NAME (Print): MAILING ADDRESS: 17140 Bemardo Center Dr#300 CITY, STATE, ZIP: TELEPHONE: EMAIL ADDRESS: San Diego, CA 92128 858-613-1800 gsherman@exceltrust.com (Geoffrey Sherman) APPLICANT NAME (Print): Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 17140 Bemardo Center Dr #300 CITY, STATE, ZIP: TELEPHONE: 858-613-1800 EMAIL ADDRESS: gsherman@exceltrust.eom San Diego. CA 92128 (Geoffrey Sherman) I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT JQ THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BES70F MY KNOVVl£DGE. APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE (Print): MAILING ADDRESS: CITY, STATE, ZIP: TELEPHONE: EMAIL ADDRESS: I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. mE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE. NOTICE OF RESTRICTION: PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO A NOTICE OF RESTRICTION BEING RECORDED ON THE TITLE TO HIS PROPERTY IF CONDITIONED FOR THE APPLICANT. NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS RUN WITH THE LAND AND BUJD ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. 3 AN^^D^ XITY USE ONLY RECEIVED MAR 1 2013 CITY OF GARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: p-1 Page 2 of 6 Reviseci 11/12 Richard Benson From: Shannon Werneke [Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 10:13 AM To: rbenson@bensonbohl.com Cc: Chris Sexton; Gina Ruiz Subject: FW: Fee Estimate, La Costa Towne Center Richard, With respect to the application that qualifies for 25% discount (CUP), I just wanted to clarify that the $4,325 is the current fee. The reduced fee with the discount should be $3,243.75. My preliminary total is $33,188.75 (excluding postage cost for labels) which wasn't what you stated over the phone. If at all possible, please bring a blank check, just in case my estimate is off. I've cc'd our front counter staff who will likely be taking in the application this week. Thanks, Shannon ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Division Shannon Werneke Associate Planner 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov P: 760-602-4621 Shannon.Werneke(S)ca rlsbadca.gov From: Shannon Werneke Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 9:23 AM To: rbensong)bensonbohl.com Subject: Fee Estimate, La Costa Towne Center Richard, in anticipation ofthe submittal later this week, please see the ESTIMATE ofthe fees below. The final fee will be determined at the planning counter when the application is submitted. SDP- for inclusionary housing ($10,930) SDP amendment- site plan for development ($7,404) /Non Residential PUD-for vertical parcel map ($2,908) /CUP- for residential in C-1 zone ($4,325, qualifies for 25% discount...to be determined at submittal) /SUP- for development adjacent to ECR ($3,366) /MS-for TPM ($3,670) Environmental Impact Assessment ($1,667) Cost for postage for labels Thanks, Shannon <^«"?' ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Division Shannon Werneke Associate Planner 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov P: 760-602-4621 Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov .J^ TIME LIMITS ON Development services ^JL DISCRETIONARY Planning Division \y CITY OF DDn IPr^TC 1535 FaradayAvenue CARLSBAD P.I(E) www.carlsbadca.gov PLEASE NOTE: Time limits on the processing of discretionary projects established by state law do not start until a project application is deemed complete by the City. The City has 30 calendar days from the date of application submittal to determine whether an application is complete or incomplete. Within 30 days of submittal of this application you will receive a letter stating whether this application is complete or incomplete. If it is incomplete, the letter will state what is needed to make this application complete. When the application is complete, the processing period will start upon the date of the completion letter. If you have any questions regarding application submittal requirements (i.e., clarification regarding a specific requirement or whether all requirements are necessary for your particular application) please call (760) 602-40^0. Applicant Signature: Staff Signature: Date: (3 To be stapled with receipt to the application P-1(E) Page 1 of 1 Revised 07/10 EIA INFORMATION Development Services FORM Planning Division CITY Of P-1(D) 1635 Faraday Avenue CARLSBAD P-1(D) (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR COMPLETING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT INFORMATION FORM This Environmental Information Form will be used to assist staff in determining what type of environmental documentation (i.e., Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Negative Declaration or Exemption) will be required to be prepared for your application, per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Title 19 of Carlsbad's Municipal Code. The clarity and accuracy of the information you provide is critical for purposes of quickly determining the specific environmental effects of your project. Any environmental studies (i.e., biological, cultural resource, traffic, noise) that are necessary to substantiate a "no impact" or "yes impact" determination should be submitted as an attachment to this Environmental Information Form. This is especially important when a Negative Declaration is being sought. The more information provided in this form, the easier and quicker it will be for staff to complete the Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Initial Study. P-1(D) Page 1 of 4 Revised 07/10 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM ^ IB*0 | (To be Completed by Applicant) S^XP ^ ^ Date Filed: t ^ ^ I O (To be completed by City) Application Numberfs^gjULP 1 f^-O^/PUlQ I ^^OaL|SQP 1 ^'(Sb CP) General Information 1, Name of project: La Costa Towne Village 2, Name of developer or project sponsor: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Address: 17140 Bernardo Center Dr., Suite 300 City, State, Zip Code: San Diego, CA 92128 Phone Number: 858-613-1800 3, Name of person to be contacted concerning this projecl: Geoffrey Sherman Address; 17140 Bernardo Center Dr., Suite 3QQ City, State, Zip Code: San Diego. CA 92128 Phone Number: 858-613-1800 4. Address of Proiect: ^710 thru 7770 El Camino Real Assessor's Parcel Number: 216-124-16 & 17 5. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by cily, regional, state and federal agencies; 6. Existing General Plan Land Use Designation: UOS 7, Existing zoning district; 8, Existing land use(s): C-1-Q 9. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed); Commercial & Residential Project Description 10. Site size: 15.2 AC 11. Proposed Building square footage; 191,480 SF 12; Number of floors of construction; 3 Floors plus Underground Garage 13. Amount of off-street parking provided; 0 14. Associated projects; P-1(D) Page 2 of 4 Revised 07/10 15. If residentiai, include the number of units and schedule of unit sizes; 60 Units consisting of 42 1-Bedroom Apartments, 14 2-Bedroom Apartments and 4 3-Bedroom Apartments 16. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities; Neighborhood Commercial, Two proposed commercial buildings shall provide 48,908 SF and 3,160 SF, Existing loading facilities shall be re-used for the larger commercial building. 17. If industrial, indicate lype, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities; N/A 18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to fae derived from the project; N/A 19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning applications, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required; Conditional Use Permit is required as the project proposes residential uses above the ground floor of a multi-story commercial building. p-1 (D) Page 3 of 4 Revised 07/10 Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). Yes No 20. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hills, or substantial Q ffl alteration of ground contours. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or Q El roads. 22. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. • Q] 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. Q Q] 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. Q Q] 25. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or Q Q] alteration of existing drainage patterns. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. D ffl 27. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. • ffl 28. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, D Bl flammables or explosives. 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, Q ffl etc.). 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). G ffl 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projecis. D S] Environmental Setting Attach sheets that include a response to the foltowing questions: 32. Describe the project site as il exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Descnbe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 33. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapslnots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge ar Ml Daie: I ' / / ' / Signature; For; ^^^/^^s^^/flc/f^. hhi^lf^htt^tr^f^ | P-1(D) Page 4 of 4 Revised 07/10 E\CEL ^TRUST 17140 Bernardo Center Drive Suite 300 San Diego, California 92128 858-613-1800 Transmittal Memo To: Randy Botii Benson & Bohl From: Sharon Filbig Date: January 11, 2013 Re: La Costa Towne Center TIVl/CUP Applications La Costa Towne Center, Carlsbad, CA: Redevelopment and modernization of existing commercial center. Enclosed please find the following: - P-1 Land Use Review Application - P-1 (A) Disclosure Statement - P-1(B) Project Description - P-1(C) Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement - P-1(E) Time Limits on Discretionary Projects 1 - P-1 (F) Tentative Parcel IVlap Waiver of Processing Limits Thank you. CITY OF CARLSBAD HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT P-1(C) Development Services Planning Division 1635 FaradayAvenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov Consultation of Lists of Sites Related to Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of California Government Code Section 65962.5, I have consulted the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): FT] The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 ofthe State Government Code. 1 ] The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. APPLICANT Name: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Address; 17140 Bernardo Center Dr #300 San Diego, CA 92128 Phone Number: 858-613-1800 PROPERTY OWNER Name: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Addresl:7140 Bernardo Center Dr #300 San Diego, CA 92128 Phone Number: 858-613-1800 Address of Site; 7710 thru 7770 El Camino Real Local Agency (City and Countv); Carlsbad, County of San Diego Assessor's book, page, and parcel number; 216-124-16 & 17 Specify list(s): Regulatory Identification Number;, Date of List; The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List) is used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. P-1(C) Page 1 of 2 Revised 07/10 County of San Diego: ^|^d Facility Inspection Search Page 1 of 1 Your County Government County of San Diego SEARCH Community Services Healthy Kids & Families Business Resources environment Public Safety New Search Page: 6 of 22 Total Records Found: 536 Establishment Details i« I << J , >>1 >H I REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 REAL CARLSBAD 92008 126 152732 DOCTORS CARE MEDICAL CENTER 127 203699 NORTH COAST PRIMARY CARE MED C 128 206982 PLAZA FAMILY DENTAL GROUP 129 153296 PLAZA FAMILY DENTAL GROUP 130 206162 BRIGHTON GARDENS OF CARLSBAD 131 138666 MARRIOTT BRIGHTON GARDENS 132 205053 STEVEN MERCHANT DDS 133 206237 WEST COAST CHIROPRACTIC 134 205113 CARLSBAD COASTAL DENTAL 135 205505 WEST COAST CHIROPRACTIC 136 199095 SANTANA FARM 137 199082 SANCHEZ FARM 138 199286 SAN DIEGO SPECIALTY PRODUCE 139 199089 YADA FARM 140 199153 VALDIVIA FARM 141 199160 STEINDORF PRODUCE 142 139129 CANTERBURY 143 134685 RANCHO CARLSBAD 144 138912 RANCHO CARLSBAD GOLF COURSE 145 201522 RANCHO CARLSBAD OWNERS ASSOCIA 146 133493 HEALTHY FAMILY CHIROPRACTIC 147 120075 EL CAMINO RENTAL 148 106321 DANIELS CABLEVISION INC 149 103278 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DIS 150 110634 COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT INC K< \ « I -I »l I County Departments I Accessibility Policy | Web & Privacy Policies j Help j Visiting San Dieao http ://www2. sdcounty.ca. go v/deh/permits/estUst.asp 12/4/2012 County of San Diego: ^j|^d Facility Inspection Search Page 1 of 1 County of San Diego SEARCH Your County Communitv Healthy Business envitonmcnt Government Services Kids 8< Families Resources Public Salety Jobs ^ . m ] New Search Page: 7 of 22 Total Records Found: 536 Establishment Details >> I ...... .. T.^.'^ 151 199157 RUEBEN LOPEZ 152 199156 TOM LOPEZ JR 153 199163 LOMA GRANDE FARMS 154 132265 LILLIAN WALKER 155 119855 AGUA HEDIONDA PUMP STATION 156 136484 INVITROGEN 157 204536 CITY OF CARLSBAD FARADAY CENTE 158 137837 THE IRIS GROUP 159 204301 FARADAY (UPPER) SEWER LIFT STA 160 138446 CALLAWAY GOLF CO 161 137907 TYCO ELECTRONICS POWER SYSTEMS 162 200504 GENVAULT CORPORATION 163 139036 CHICAGO BROTHERS PRINTING 164 202890 ARTIS OPTIMUS, INC 165 203465 CHURCHILL GRAPHICS LLC 166 132756 TYCO HEALTHCARE 167 201335 OPOTEK, INC 168 132927 RAY COOK GOLF COMPANY 169 203464 NO FEAR tNC 170 128700 PURITAN BENNETT 171 207644 ELECTRO SURFACE TECHNOLOGIES I 172 134191 ISIS PHARMACEUTICALS 173 129451 ISIS PHARMACEUTICALS 174 203192 CUMMINS-ALLISON CORP 175 135401 CPS PRINTING E EL CAMINO REAL E EL CAMINO REAL S EL FUERTE 417 ELM AV ENCINA POWER PLANT 1600 FARADAY AV 1635 FARADAY AV 1675 FARADAY AV 1711 FARADAY AV 2081 FARADAY AV 2101 FARADAY AV 2101 FARADAY AV 2195 FARADAY AV 2195 FARADAY AV 2195 FARADAY AV 2200 FARADAY AV 2233 FARADAY AV 2233 FARADAY AV 2251 FARADAY AV 2251 FARADAY AV 2280 FARADAY AV 2292 FARADAY AV 2292 FARADAY AV 2300 FARADAY AV 2304 FARADAY AV CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAO CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 92008 :tl$!y li^ ^fel http ://www2. sdcounty.ca. go v/deh/permits/estlist.asp 12/4/2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WAIVER OF PROCESSING TIME UMITS P-1(F) Development Services Planning Division 1635 FaradayAvenue 760-602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov Proposed Minor Subdivision No.:. Subdivision Map Act (SMA) Section 66452.1 sets a 50-day time limit for the City to process tentative parcel maps. Per SMA Section 66451.1, this time limit may be extended by mutual consent of the applicant and the city to allow for concurrent processing of related approvals or an environmental review of the project. By accepting applications for tentative parcel maps concurrently with applications for other approvals that are prerequisites to the map (e.g.. Environmental Information Form, Environmental Impact Report, Condominium Permit, Planned Unit Development), the 50-day time limit is often exceeded. For the city to process a tentative parcel map application concurrently, the property owner or applicant must sign this agreement, if this agreement is not signed, the city will accept the tentative parcel map application only after all prerequisites to the map have been processed and approved. The undersigned acknowledges the processing time required by the city is expected to exceed the 50- day time restriction and hereby waives such time restriction for city engineer action. m]Property Owner •Applicant Signature Print Name Date •Property Owner •Applicant P-1(F) Page 1 of 1 Revised 11/12 City of RECEIVED 2 5 2G14 APPEAL FORM _J I (We) appeal the decision of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission r- To the Carlsbad City Council. 1 Date of Decision you are appealing; April 16, 2014 — Subject of Appeal: BE SPECIFIC Examples; if the action is a City Engineer's Decision, please say so. If a project V , has multiple elements, (such as a General Plan Amendment, Negative Declaration, Specific Plan, etc.) please list them all. If you oniy want to appeal a part ofthe whole action, please state that here. North County Advocates hereby appeals the Planning Commission's decision to Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7044 Approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program and Addendum; and to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No, 7045 approving a Site Development Plan Amendment (SDP 78-03(D)), Site Development Plan (SDP 13-03),, Special Use Permit (SUP 13-01), Nonresidental Planned Development Permit (PUD 13-02) and a Minor Subdivision (MS 13-01). Reasonfs^ for Appeal; • Please Note • Failure to specify a reason may result in denial of the appeal, and you will be limited to the grounds stated here when presenting your appeal, BE SPECIFIC How did the decision maker err? What about the decision is inconsistent with state or local laws, plans, or policy? Please see attacnments, tsiortn uounty Advocates reserves tne ngm to suomit additional materials prior to the City Council's consideration of the appeal. SIGNATURE Everett DeLano, on behalf of North County Advocates NAME (please print) April 25, 2014 DATE ^\()Wm PHONE NO. DeLano & DeLano, 220 W. Grand Ave ADDRESS: Street Name & Number Escondido, California 92025 City, State, Zip Code 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive • Carisbad, Califomia 92008-1989 • (760) 434-2808 Attachment 1: Reasons for Appeal 1. The Project is inconsistent with Growth .Management Plan standards, including standards for open space and parks. 2. The Project is inconsistent with applicable development standards, including standards for height, grading and setbacks required by the Municipal Code and Ll Camino Real Corridor Standards, 3. The Project is inconsistent with coastal resource protection requiremenis. 4. There is inadequate basis to support the fmdings. including findings required by the Municipal Code and HI Camino Real Corridor Standards. 5. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is insufficient and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be prepared. 6. The MND illegally defers mitigation. 7. The enclosed comment letters (dated 1/21/14 and 4/1 I/I4) provide additional reasons for appeal and are hereby incorporated by reference. Appellant's Protest of .\ppeal Fee The City's appeal fees violate Appellant's rights of due process and equal proieclion. arc an illegal tax. and are inconsistent with CEQA's public participation requiremenis. DELANO & DELANO January 21,2014 VIA E-MAIL & U.S. MAIL Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78-03fD)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13- 02/M$ 13-01 a m 2:d a. _ o — c '— I- Dear City of Carlsbad: This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). The Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq., requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a "fair argumenf that significant environmental impacts may occur. Pub. Res. Code § 21080(c}); A^o Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles {1975) 13 Cal.3d 68. If there is "substantial evidence that the project might have [a significant impact on the environment], but the agency failed to secure preparation of the required EIR, the agency's action is to be set aside because the agency abused its discretion by faiUng to proceed in a 'manner required by law.'" Friends of "B " Street v. City ofHaywardimQ) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1002. Here, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several significant impacts. The MND adopts an incorrect baseline for much of its discussion, reasoning that the "existing" environment includes occupancy of the vacant Vons store. See Traffic Report at 4-1. However, CEQA specifically provides that an agency must consider the existing conditions. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010)48 Cal.4''^3l0, 322 (describing analysis that used the maximum permitted operational levels as a baseline as "'illusory' comparisons that 'can only mislead the public as to the reality of the impacts and subvert the full consideration of the actual environmental impacts,' a result at direct odds with CEQA's intent"). As the MND acknowledges, the Vons store is vacant. See MND at 1. As such, the existing on-the-ground conditions do not include use of the store. This assumption invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. 2 > "5; z £; o > < 2; 2; Comments re La Costa i ovvTie Center Project and MND January 21,2014 Page 2 of 3 The Project will lead to significant impacts to community character, aesthetics, and land use. • The Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The Project violates applicable standards for building height and street setback. See MND at 26. • There is insufficient evidence to support a deviation from the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. • Additionally, deviations are not supported by the Municipal Code, Section 21.85,100 requires an affordable housing agreement, yet there is no indication of such agreement. Section 21.85.120 requires the Project to be in conformity with "adopted goals and policies of the city," yet the Project is inconsistent with the Ei Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. • The MND discusses "modifications ,.. to offset the cost of affordable housing," yet there is no evidence such modifications are necessary or what costs need to be offset. See Pacific Corp. v. City of Camarillo (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 168,178. • The MND fails to analyze applicable standards for park and recreation facilities. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and tlie General Plan Parks and Recreation Element each contain standards, yet, as the MND acknowledges, "the project does not include any public recreational facilities." MND at 33. The City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant. As such, the addition of the Project's population will only increase the burden on already failing park and recreation facilities. The Project will lead to significant impacts to air quality. • The MND attempts to separate air emissions into four phases. MND at 23. However, it fails to account for the fact that such phases can, indeed are likely to, overlap, thereby increasing the amounts of emissions at any given time. The Project will lead to significant impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. • The MND averages construction emissions over the life of the Project. MND at 20. Such emissions should be calculated as they will actually occur, not averaged over a longer period of time. See Taxpayers for Accountable School Bond Spending v. San Diego Unified School Dist. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4* 1013, 1049. The Project will lead to significant impacts to noise. • The analysis discusses potential impacts to nearby residences but fails to address the fact that the applicable noise standards apply to the property line. See Noise Report at 17. While the MND and Noise Report discuss Comments re La Costa i owne Center Project and MND January 21, 2014 Page 3 of3 construction noise, they fail to account for the fact that grading will occur within feet ofthe property line. The Project's Demolition Plan, for example, notes construction as close as 8.8 feet firom the property line, a location that includes a public sidewalk. The Noise Report acknowledges sound levels of "typical construction equipment" can be as high as 95 dBA "at 50 feet from the source." Noise Report at 13. Obviously, since the equipment will be considerably closer, the noise will be considerably greater. • Furthermore, noise mitigation is insufficient. See Citizens for Responsible and Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal.App.4'^ 1323, 1341 ("there is no evidence of any measures to be taken that would ensvire that the noise standards would be effectively monitored and vigorously enforced"). Additionally, the MND inappropriately defers mitigation. Sacramento Old City Assn. V. City Council (\99\) 229 Cal. App. 3d 1011, 1029. For example, the MND punts the preparation of an interior noise analysis. MND at 30. In Communities for a Better Environment v. City of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4"' 70, the court observed: Numerous cases illustrate that reliance on tentative plans for future mitigation after completion ofthe CEQA process significantly undermines CEQA's goals of full disclosure and infonned decisiormraking; and consequently, these mitigation plans have been overturned on judicial review as constituting improper deferral of environmental assessment. Id at 92 (citations omitted). Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, ' DeLano DELANO & DELANO April 11,2014 VL4 E-MAIL & U.S MAIL Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Planning Commission April 16. 2014 meeting, agenda item # 3: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78-03rDVSDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-Q2/MS 13-01 Dear Honorable Members of the Carlsbad Planning Commission: This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). As my January 21,2014 letter explained, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several significant impacts. A February 26, 2014 response fi-om the City to my letter attempts to justify the failure to prepare an EIR, but that response is both insufficient and misleading. For example, the City's response asserts that my January 21" letter incorrectly "implies that an adjustment was made to the existing conditions of the TIA ['Traffic Impact Analysis'] to include the vacant Vons store." The City's response also claims that "the existing baseline condition was indeed based on the existing counts as discussed on page 3-1 ofthe TIA." This is simply wrong. Page 3-1 ofthe TIA does discuss "existing conditions" on street segments; it does not, however, discuss existing traffic generated at the La Costa Towne Center site. Rather, page 4-1 of the TIA states that "existing uses are shown in the top portion of Table 4-1." And the top line of Table 4-1, found on page 4-3 ofthe TIA, attributes 3,728 Average Daily Trips ("ADT") to "Retail (7710 Bldg) - 1 story." This building is the vacant Vons store. Accordingly, contrary to the City's response, the TLA incorrectly attributes traffic generation to a vacant building. And because that assumption carries through into other analyses, it invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist (2010) 48 Cal.4* 310,322. My January 21 ^ letter also noted construction noise would be generated less than 10 feet from a public sidewalk, which could mean noise louder than the noise ofan £• < a. ^ 8.3 fe. _ ri — cs — s- 1-^ a z s- C 5: c ^ EI ^ o < 9 9 Conunents re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND April 11,2014 Page 2 of2 ambulance siren 100 feet away. Rather than acknowledging the significant noise impact to the public, the City's response claimed that it "does not limit construction noise levels ... as the impacts are temporary in nature." But the temporary nature ofa noise impact does not make it insignificant. See Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Comm. v. Boca-d of Port Commissioners (2001) 91 Cal.App.4* 1344,1380 - 81. And it would be no more appropriate to use the lack of a City standard as a basis to ignore significant effects than it would be to apply "a threshold of significance or regulatory standard 'in a way that forecloses the consideration of any other substantial evidence showing there may be a significant effect.'" Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4'^ 322, 342 (quoting Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4* 98,114). Also, a table on page 19 of the Plaiming Report to you claims that the Growth Management Plan Open Space standard is "n/a" and claims the City is meeting the Growth Management Plan Parks standard. These assertions are incorrect. Among other things, Municipal Code Sections 21.90.040 and 21.90.130 require consistency with the applicable Local Facilities Management Plan. These include requirements for both adequate open space and adequate parks. Yet evidence in the record indicates that the City is not complying with either standard in the applicable zone. Additionally, the Project is inconsistent with applicabie standards for height, grading and fix>nt yard setbacks. Municipal Code Sections 21.06.020 and 21.53.120 require fmdings of fact, which cannot be supported here. Furthermore, the El Camino Real Corridor Standards require additional fmdings for any deviation, which also cannot be supported. Indeed, one unsupporlable finding is that "compliance with a particular standard is infeasible for a particular project." There is no such evidence of infeasibility. Furthermore, Municipal Code Section 21.203 contains applicable coastal resource protection requirements, which have not been met here. Among these are requirements for drainage, erosion, sedimentation and habitat protections in Municipal Code Section 21.203.040(B)(3), yet no evidence of compliance with these requirements has been provided. Accordingly, North County Advocates requests that you reject the Project and MND. Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Sincei erett DeLano cc: Shannon Wemeke, Associate Planner ^ CITY CARLSBAD o f DISCLOSURE STATEMENT P- 1(A) Development Services Planning DMsion 1635 Faraday Aviinue (760) 602-4610 www.caHsbadca.gov Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interest on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part ofthe City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information IVIUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social dub, fratemal organization, corporation, estate, trast, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipaiity, district or other political subdiviston or any other group or combination acting as a unit.' Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the appiicant and property owner must be provided beloyv. 1. APPLICANT (Not the appilcanf s agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the appScant includes a corporation or partnership. inciude the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclvrowned corporation, inciude the names, titles, and addresses of ti^e corporate officets. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Title Address. ytofftf fhWi^ . Excel GIV La Costa Ovmer, LLC Corp/Part_ -jHlg Authorized Signatory- Address 17140 Bernardo Center Dr. #300 San Diego, CA 92128 OWNER (Not the Owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE LEGAL names aihd addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e., partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). if the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, inciude the names, titles, addresses of ali individuals owning more ttian 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include tiie names, tities, and addresses of the corporate ofRcers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person /IgHtHnflilllh Titie Address Corp/Part Excel GIV La Costa Owner, -pj^g Authorized Signatory Address LLC 17140 Bernardo Center Dr. #300 San Diego, CA 92128 p-1 (A) Page 1 of 2 Revised 07/10 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a bust list the names and addresses of AifiC person sen/ing as an officer or director ofthe non- profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary oftiie. Non Profit/Trust Non Profit/Tnjst Title Titie Address Address Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted witti any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes ^ No Ifyes, please Indicate person{s): . NOTE: Attach additionai sheets if necessary. certify that aii the ^pbove infomiation is true and correct to tiie best of my. knowledge. J Signature of owner/d«a Signature of applicant/( Nathan Hdlbig Nathan Hilbig Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicanf s agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicanf s agent P-i (A) Page 2 of 2 Revised 07/10 PROJECT Development Services <^^^ DESCRIPTION Planning Division ^ CITY OF P-1^R^ 1635 Faraday Avenue r"ARI ^RAD " (760)602 4610 ** r\ 1_ J LJ/\ www.carlsbadca.gov PROJECTNAME: La Costa Towne Village APPLICANT NAME- ^^ce\ GIV La Costa Owner, LLC - Geoffrey Sherman Please describe fully the proposed project by application type. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: Please refer to the attached for the Project Description. P-1(B) Pagelofi Revised 07/10 Project Description La Costa Towne Center is an existing commercial shopping center located at corer of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue in the City of Carlsbad. The shopping center, originally known as Plaza de la Costa Real, was designed and built in the early 1980's in accordance with City of Carlsbad Site Development Plan SDP-78-3 in a C-1 commercial zone. The center consists of five one and two story multi-tenant retail/office buildings anchored by a 30,800 SF Vons grocery store. The existing center provides approximately 123,000 SF of building area on a 10 acre net site area and 443 parking spaces are provided overall for a parking ratio of approximately 3.5 cars/1,000. Based on Excel GIV La Costa Owner LLC's desire to maintain and enhance the center while maintaining the viability of the existing tenants, the overall development is being updated and a new mixed use residential component is being added. The overall renovation and expansion of the center, will consist of two new mixed-use commercial/residential buildings being added to the project along with a single level of structured parking to provide a revitalized commercial center of approximately 126,990 SF served by 500 parking places (3.75 cars/1,000) and 60 for-rent apartment units provided with 103 secure and segregated parking spaces. We anticipate that the overall project could be completed by the fall of 2014. Development plans for the center consist of two components, the remodel and renovation of the existing shops and office buildings on site, and the construction of the new mixed use project. Existing buildings 7720, 7750, 7760 and 7770 are scheduled to be updated over the next few months to accept new tenants. These remodels and new tenant improvements are ongoing. As part of the existing center work, the single story 7740 Shops Building is scheduled to be demolished and the existing parking lot expanded out to El Camino Real to improve sightlines into the center and redistribute the parking spaces provided for the existing retail/office tenants. New work proposed includes demolition of the existing Vons building and the construction of two new mixed use buildings & structured parking on the northern third of the existing property. This new development will include a single level parking garage below grade to provide parking for both commercial and residential uses. Approximately 103 secure residential parking spaces and 105 commercial parking spaces will be included in this new basement level parking garage, with additional commercial parking on the deck above. Above this new garage level, a new three story mixed use building, designated Building 7710, will be constructed which will include a 40,000 SF first floor for commercial tenants and two levels of residential apartments above. Adjacent and to the east of this 7710 Building, a second new two story mixed use building will be constructed. This second building will provide approximately 9,500 SF of retail space on the first floor and 12 residential units on a second level above. These twelve units will be designated for below market rate rental units. The residential levels of the two buildings will be connected by an open air bridge spanning over the north entry drive to the center. ,A DISCLOSURE De^eloMmenLSeryices «i STATEIVIENT Planning Division ^ CITY OF P- I^A^ 1635 FaradayAvenue TAR I <;RAn (760)602-4610 y^r\f\i-^i->/-\LJ www.carlsbadca.gov Applicanf s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittai. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fratemal organization, corporation, estate, tmsL receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Part Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Title Title Authorized Signatory Address Address 17140 Bernardo Center Dr#300 San Diego, CA 92128 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e., partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, tities, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Part Excel GIV La Costa Owner. LLC Title Title Authorized Signatory Address Address ^ ^^"^^ Bernardo Center Dr #300 San Diego, CA 92128 p-1 (A) Page 1 of 2 Revised 07/10 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit orQani7ation or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director ofthe non- proflt organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Tmst Non Profit/Trust Title Title Address Address Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes 2^o If yes, pl ease indicate person(s);_ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. eoffrey Sherman ^ Geoffrey Sherman Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicanf s agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicanf s agent p-1 (A) Page 2 of 2 Revised 07/10 EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER LLC CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION The undersigned, being the managing member of Excel La Costa LLC ("Company") hereby certifies that the following Resolutions have been adopted by the Company: RESOLVED, that the Company is authorized and directed to submit grading plans to the City of La Costa for the La Costa Towne Center in La Costa, Califomia; RESOLVED, that Spencer G. Plumb, and Geoffrey Sherman as Officers of the Company, or any of them individually are, authorized, empowered and directed in the name and on behalf of the Company to execute any plans, certificates, pemiits, agreements or other instruments and documents as may be required by the City of Carlsbad, of any kind or nature in connection with the grading of the La Costa Towne Center located in La Costa, California; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this authorization shall continue in full force and effect until notified in writing that said authority is terminated. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all other past actions conceming the transaction are herby ratified, confirmed and adopted in every respect. The undersigned hereby certifies that he is, as Secretary of the Company, in its capacity as the managing member of the Company, is familiar with the records of the Company. He further certifies that the atwve and foregoing is a true, correct and exact copy of Resolutions and that said Resolutions are now in full force and effect and no action has been taken to rescind or revoke the foregoing resolutions. Dated as ofthe 28th day of March 2013. Name: S. Eric Ottesen Title: Secretary Order tonber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Bber: 1 Update 1 First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services 3281 E GuastI Road, Suite 440 Ontario, CA 91761 January 3, 2013 Geoffrey Sherman Excel Trust Inc. 17140 Bernardo Center Drive,, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 Phone:(858)613-1800 Title Officer: Kimberly Delpolito Phone: (909)510-6202 Fax No.: (877)461-2090 E-Mail: kdelpolito@firstam.com Owner: Excel Giv La Costa Owner LLC Property: 7710 & 7720 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA PRELIMINARY REPORT In response to the above referenced application for a policy of title insurance, this company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss w/hich may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception below or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of said Policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Exhibit A attached. Ttie policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When ttie Amount oflnsurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy ofthe parties. Umitations on Covered Risl<s applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner's Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Exhibit A. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Exhibit A of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms ofthe title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land. This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested. First American Title Insurance Company Order^riber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Blber: 2 Dated as of December 28, 2012 at 7:30 A.M. The form of Policy of title insurance contemplated by this report is: Subdivision Guarantee A specific request should be made if another form or additional coverage is desired. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Report is: Fee Simple The Land referred to herein is described as follows: (See attached Legal Description) At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in said policy form would be as follows: 1. General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2013-2014, a lien not yet due or payable. (Pursuant to Government Code 66493 ofthe State of California the Subdivision Map Act requires that during the period from January 1 through October 1 when real property taxes are an assessed lien not yet due and payable that a tax bond be filed with the clerk of the board of supervisors to secure payment of said taxes. A tax bond estimate should be requested from this office at least two months prior to the date scheduled for recordation ofthe map.) la. General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2012-2013. First Installment; $122,781.20, PAID Penalty: $0.00 Second Installment: $122,781.20, DUE Penalty: $0.00 Tax Rate Area: 09102 A. P. No.: 216-124-16-00 (Affects Parcel D) lb. General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2012-2013. First Installment: $16,612.83, PAID Penalty: $0.00 Second Installment: $16,612.83, DUE First American Title Insurance Company Order Page • I ber: NCS-581293-ONTl ber; 3 Penalty: Tax Rate Area: A. P. No.: $0.00 09045 216-124-17-00 lc. Supplemental taxes for the fiscal year 2012-2013 assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. First Installment: Penalty: Second Installment: Penalty: Tax Rate Area: A. P. No.: $13,777.47, DUE $0.00 $13,777,47, DUE $0.00 09045 819-650-14-32 (Affects Parcel B) 2. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. 3. The right to extend and maintain drainage structures and excavation and embankment slopes beyond the limits of the right of way granted therein where required for construction and maintenance. Granted to: County of San Diego Recorded: February 28, 1950 in Book 3518, Page 221 of Official Records The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. 4. An easement for aerial and underground public utilities and incidental purposes, recorded October 16, 1956 as Book 6301, Page 152 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company Affects: As described therein 5. An easement for poles, wires and anchors and incidental purposes, recorded October 17, 1961 as Instrument No. 180018 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company, a corporation Affects: As described therein The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. 6. An easement for road, public utilities, and sewer line purposes and incidental purposes, recorded January 29, 1962 as Instrument No. 16774 of Official Records. In Favor of: Frank Gonsalves and Ruth S. Gonsalves, Edward X. Madruga and Lucille F. Madruga, Anthony D. Madruga and Aurelia M. Madruga, Janous J. Marks and Sue Joan Marks, Sverre Jangaard and Lucille Jangaard Affects: As described therein The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. First American Title Insurance Company Order^jnber: IMCS-581293-ONTl Page^Hber: 4 7. An easement for a line or independent lines of poles and/or steel towers and wires and/or cables suspended thereon and supported thereby, for the transmission and distribution of electricity and for all other purposes connected therewith, and for telephone, signal and communication purposes, including guys, anchorage, crossarms, braces and all other appliances and fixtures for the use in connection therewith and incidental purposes, recorded June 20, 1962 as Instrument No. 104913 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company, a corporation Affects: As described therein 8. The right to extend and maintain drainage structures and excavation and embankment slopes beyond the limits of the right of way granted therein where required for construction and maintenance. Granted to: County of San Diego Recorded: May 29, 1968 as Instrument No. 90113 of Official Records The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. 9. The right to extend and maintain drainage structures and excavation and embankment slopes beyond the limits of the right of way granted therein where required for construction and maintenance. Granted to: County of San Diego Recorded: February 18, 1970 as Instrument No. 30220 of Official Records The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. 10. An easement for the transmission and distribution of gas and for all purposes connected therewith, a line or lines of pipe, together with all the fixtures, equipment and appurtenances necessary or convenient for the operation and maintenance thereof and incidental purposes, recorded June 14, 1972 as Instrument No. 150689 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company, a corporation Affects: As described therein 11. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Grant of Easement and Agreement" recorded July 30, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-240725 of Official Records. By and between William F. Burnett and Joyce H. Burnett, husband and wife and La Costa Land Company, an Illinois corporation. Covenants, conditions and restrictions as contained in the above referenced document, but deleting any covenant, condition, or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, disability, handicap, familial status, national origin or source of income (as defined in California Government Code §12955(p)), to the extent such covenants, conditions or restrictions violate 42 U.S.C. §3604(c) or California Government Code §12955. Lawful restrictions under state and federal law on the age of occupants in senior housing or housing for older persons shall not be construed as restrictions based on familial status. Document re-recorded September 03, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-282180 of Official Records . 12. Abutter's rights of ingress and egress to or from La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real, except at points of access have been dedicated or relinquished on the map of Parcel Map No. 10283 of Parcel Maps recorded July 30, 1980. First American Title Insurance Company Order Itoiber; NCS-581293-ONTl Page ^Bber: 5 13. An easement shown or dedicated on the map filed or recorded July 30, 1980 as Parcel Map No. 10283 of Parcel For: Proposed private road, utilities easement, access rights to parcel C and incidental purposes. 14. The Terms, Provisions and Easement(s) contained in the document entitled "Declaration and Grant of Easements" recorded September 03, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-282192 of Official Records. Covenants, conditions and restrictions as contained in the above referenced document, but deleting any covenant, condition, or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, disability, handicap, familial status, national origin or source of income (as defined in California Government Code §12955(p)), to the extent such covenants, conditions or restrictions violate 42 U.S.C. §3604(c) or California Government Code §12955. Lawful restrictions under state and federal law on the age of occupants in senior housing or housing for older persons shall not be construed as restrictions based on familial status. The terms and conditions of a document entitled "Assignment of Operator Rights and Other Rights and Obligations Under the Declaration" dated February 29, 2012 and recorded March 1,2012 as Instrument No. 0119988. The terms and conditions of a document entitled "Assignment of Operater Rights and Other Rights and Obligations under the Declaration" recorded September 10, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012-0544533 of Official Records. 15. A lease dated July 03, 1980, executed by William F. Burnett and Joyce H. Burnett, husband and wife as lessor and Vons Grocery Co., a Delaware corporation as lessee, recorded SEPTEMBER 03, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-282193 of Official Records. 16. An easement for aerial and underground public utilities and incidental purposes, recorded November 05, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-372863 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company Affects: As described therein The location ofthe easement cannot be determined from record information. 17. An easement for road and incidental purposes, recorded March 10, 1981 as Instrument No. 81- 072821 of Official Records. In Favor of: Rancho La Costa, Inc. Affects: As described therein 18. An easement for pipeline or pipelines and facilities for power transmission and communication and incidental purposes, recorded July 17, 1981 as Instrument No. 81-225063 of Official Records. In Favor of: Olivenhain Municipal Water District, a public corporation Affects: As described therein First American Title Insurance Company Order Itober: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Hber: 6 19. An easement for underground communication facilities and incidental purposes, recorded March 25, 1982 as Instrument No. 82-080974 of Official Records. In Favor of: The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, a corporation Affects: As described therein The location ofthe easement cannot be determined from record information. 20. An easement for road and incidental purposes, recorded July 01, 1986 as Instrument No. 86- 271802 of Oflicial Records. In Favor of: Allard Roer, et al Affects: As described therein Document re-recorded AUGUST 11, 1986 as Instrument No. 86-341965 of Oflicial Records . 21. An easement for underground electrical facilities and incidental purposes, recorded September 26, 2000 as Instrument No, 2000-0513088 of Official Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas and Electric Company Affects: As described therein Document(s) declaring modifications thereof recorded August 16, 2001 as Instrument No. 2001- 0583299 of Oflicial Records. 22. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Memorandum of PCS Site Agreement" recorded February 26, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-0161556 of Oflicial Records. 23. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Restriction on Real Property" recorded August 02, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-0654147 of Oflicial Records. 24. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Restriction on Real Property" recorded August 02, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-0654148 of Oflicial Records. 25. An easement for underground electric facilities, and appurtenances for the transmission and distribution of electricity, and underground facilities, and appurtenances, together with the right of ingress and egress therefrom and incidental purposes, recorded November 13, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-1013907 of Oflicial Records. In Favor of: San Diego Gas & Electric Company, a Corporation Affects: As described therein The location ofthe easement cannot be determined from record information. 26. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Olivenhain Municipal Water District, Private Encroachment Permit No. 235" recorded November 19, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-1036480 of Oflicial Records. 27. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Encroachment Agreement" recorded November 27, 2002 as Instrument No. 2002-1076951 of Oflicial Records. First American Title Insurance Company Order Itajiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page IHrier: 7 28. A Deed of Trust to secure an original indebtedness of $13,395,000.00 recorded September 10, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012-0544534 of Oflicial Records. Dated: September 6, 2012 Trustor: EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Trustee: First American Title Insurance Company Beneficiary: Mesa West Real Estate Income Fund II (CORE INV), LLC, a Delaware limited liability company The above referenced Deed of Trust was re-recorded November 13, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012-0705844 of Official Records. 29. A financing statement recorded September 24, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012-0575355 of Oflicial Records. Debtor: EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Secured party: Mesa West Real Estate Income Fund II (CORE INV), LLC 30. Rights of parties in possession. 31. This report is preparatory to the issuance of a subdivision guarantee and is intended solely for the use of those parties directly involved in the preparation and checking of said map. Note: Prior to issuing a subdivision guarantee, we require that a copy of the final map be provided to our oflice for review at least one month prior to scheduled approval by the governing body. First American Title Insurance Company Order Itaiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Pfber: 8 INFORMATIONAL NOTES 1. Should this report be used to facilitate your transaction, we must be provided with the following prior to the issuance of the policy: A. WITH RESPECT TO A CORPORATION: 1. A certificate of good standing of recent date issued by the Secretary of State of the corporation's state of domicile. 2. A certificate copy of a resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing the contemplated transaction and designating which corporate oflicers shall have the power to execute on behalf of the corporation. 3. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require. B. WITH RESPECT TO A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: 1. A certified copy ofthe certificate of limited partnership (form LP-1) and any amendments thereto (form LP-2) to be recorded in the public records; 2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendments; 3. Satisfactory evidence of the consent of a majority in interest of the limited partners to the contemplated transaction; 4. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require. C. WITH RESPECT TO A FOREIGN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: 1. A certified copy ofthe application for registration, foreign limited partnership (form LP-5) and any amendments thereto (form LP-6) to be recorded in the public records; 2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendment; 3. Satisfactory evidence of the consent of a majority in interest of the limited partners to the contemplated transaction; 4. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require. D. WITH RESPECT TO A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP: 1. A certified copy of a statement of partnership authority pursuant to Section 16303 of the California Corporation Code (form GP-I), executed by at least two partners, and a certified copy of any amendments to such statement (form GP-7), to be recorded in the public records; 2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendments; 3. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material required herein and other information which the Company may require. E. WITH RESPECT TO A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY: 1. A copy of its operating agreement and any amendments thereto; 2. If it is a California limited liability company, a certified copy of its articles of organization (LLC-1) and any certificate of correction (LLC-U), certificate of amendment (LLC-2), or restatement of articles of organization (LLC-10) to be recorded in the public records; 3. If it is a foreign limited liability company, a certified copy of its application for registration (LLC-5) to be recorded in the public records; 4. With respect to any deed, deed of trust, lease, subordination agreement or other document or instrument executed by such limited liability company and presented for recordation by the First American Title Insurance Company Order Itoiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page IH^Der: 9 Company or upon which the Company is asked to rely, such document or instrument must be executed in accordance with one of the following, as appropriate: (i) If the limited liability company properiy operates through officers appointed or elected pursuant to the terms of a written operating agreement, such documents must be executed by at least two duly elected or appointed officers, as follows: the chairman of the board, the president or any vice president, and any secretary, assistant secretary, the chief financial ofllcer or any assistant treasurer; (ii) Ifthe limited liability company properly operates through a manager or managers identified in the articles of organization and/or duly elected pursuant to the terms of a written operating agreement, such document must be executed by at least two such managers or by one manager if the limited liability company properly operates with the existence of only one manager. 5. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require. F. WITH RESPECT TO A TRUST: 1. A certification pursuant to Section 18100.5 of the Califomia Probate Code in a form satisfactory to the Company. 2. Copies of those excerpts from the original trust documents and amendments thereto which designate the trustee and confer upon the trustee the power to act in the pending transaction. 3. Other requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the material require herein and other information which the Company may require. G. WITH RESPECT TO INDIVIDUALS: 1. A statement of information. The map attached, if any, may or may not be a survey of the land depicted hereon. First American Title Insurance Company expressly disclaims any liability for loss or damage which may result from reliance on this map except to the extent coverage for such loss or damage is expressly provided by the terms and provisions of the title insurance policy, if any, to which this map is attached. First American Title Insurance Company Order ^jiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page fHRber: 10 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, described as follows: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. (TO FOLLOW), BEING A DIVISION OF THE FOLLOWING: PARCELS "B" AND "D" OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10283, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ON JULY 30, 1980 AS FILE/PAGE NO. 80-240721, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. APN: 216-124-16 and 216-124-17 First American Title Insurance Company Order Itaiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Hber: 11 The First American Corporation First American Title Company Privacy Policy We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information - particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability Tliis Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. First American Title Insurance Company Order tanber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Hber: 12 CLTA/ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POUCY OF TITLE INSURANCE (02-03-10) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of those portions of any law or government regulation concerning: (a) building; (d) improvements on the Land; (b) zoning; (e) land division; and (c) land use; (f) environmental protection. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 8.a., 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23 or 27. 2. The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14 or 15. 3. The right to take the Land by condemning it. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 17. 4. Risks: (a) that are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they are recorded in the Public Records; (b) that are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless they are recorded in the Public Records at the Policy Date; (c) that result in no loss to You; or (d) that first occur after the Policy Date - this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.e., 25, 26, 27 or 28. 5. Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6. Lack of a right: (a) to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and (b) in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 21. 7. The transfer of the Title to You is invalid as a preferential transfer or as a fraudulent transfer or conveyance under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws. LII^IITATIONS ON COVEREP RISKS Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner's Coverage Statement as follows: For Covered Risk 16, 18, 19, and 21 Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Uability shown in Schedule A. Your Peductible Amount Our Maximum Pollar Limit of Liabilitv Covered Risk 16: 1% of Policy Amount or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $10,000.00 Covered Risk 18: 1% of Policy Amount or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 19: 1% of Policy Amount or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 21: 1% of Policy Amount or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $5,000.00 ALTA RESIPENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY (6-1-87) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, you are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning: (a) and use (b) improvements on the land (c) and division (d) environmental protection This exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters which appear in the public records at Policy Date. This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. 2. The right to take the land by condemning it, unless: (a) a notice of exercising the right appears in the public records on the Policy Date (b) the taking happened prior to the Policy Date and is binding on you if you bought the land without knowing of the taking First American Title Insurance Company Order^riber: NCS-581293-ONTl PageVPber: 13 3. Title Risks: (a) that are created, allowed, or agreed to by you (b) that are known to you, but not to us, on the Policy Date ~ unless they appeared in the public records (c) that result in no loss to you (d) that first affect your title after the Policy Date - this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks 4. Failure to pay value for your title. 5. Lack of a right: (a) to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A OR (b) in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch your land This exclusion does not limit the access coverage in Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. 2006 ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; li. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; lii. the subdivision of land; or iv. environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. b. Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modif/ or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage, 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. 6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is a. a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or b. a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) ofthis policy. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b). The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: First American Title Insurance Company Order tojber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Hber: 14 1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records. 2006 ALTA OWNER'S POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or iv. environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. b.Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. 6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is a. a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or b. a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b). The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also Include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: First American Title Insurance Company Order^Tiber: NCS-581293-ONTl Page^Plber: 15 1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records. ALTA EXPANPEP COVERAGE RESIPENTIAL LOAN POLICY (07-26-10) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or iv. environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6,13(c), 13(d), 14 or 16. b. Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6, 13(c), 13(d), 14 or 16. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 or 28); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws ofthe state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 26. 6. Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to Advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This Exclusion does not modif/ or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching subsequent to Date of Policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11(b) or 25. 8. The failure of the residential structure, or any portion of it, to have been constructed before, on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not modif/ or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 5 or 6. 9. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is a. a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or b. a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 27(b) of this policy. First American Title Insurance Company 'sTEVENS. CRESTO ENG 9665 Chesapeake Drive Suite 320 SanDiego, CA 92123-1352 Phone 858-694-5660 Fax 858-694-5661 ERING, INC. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: BENSON & BOHL ARCHITECTS 3861 Front Street San Diego, CA 92103 ATTN: Randall Bohl WE ARE SENDING: • COPY OF LETTER • COPIES OF COST OPINIONS VIA: DATE: PROJECT NO.: PROJECT NAME: • SET(S) OF BLUEPRINTS • SUBMITTAL/SHOP DRAWING January 14, 2013 12003.03 La Costa Towne Village TPM / CUP Package • SET(S) OF SPECS • AS NOTED • MAIL • HAND CARRIED COURIER • SEPARATE COVER • COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION / REMARKS 1 01/14/13 CD with PDF Files of Plans, Reports & Public Notice Package 1 12/08/12 Public Notice Package - for Submittal 3 01/03/13 Title Report (2 for Submittal, 1 for File) 3 01/07/13 Preliminary Hydrology Study (2 for Submittal, 1 for File) 3 01/07/13 Storm Water Management Plan (2 for Submittal, 1 for File) Note: Signed Applications and Storm Water Standards Questionnaire are coming to you directly from Excel's office. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED FOR YOUR: • INFORMATION • USE • ACTION • AS REQUESTED • REVIEW/COMMENT • AS NOTED • APPROVAL • COPIES TO: EXCEL Trust - Geoffrey Sherman ENCLOSURES With Without • • • • • • Kristopher W. Eckert, RCE STEVENS CRESTO ENGINEERING, INC. /STEVENS • CRESTO ENd||kEERING, INC. ' 9665 Chesapeake Drive Suite 320 San Diego, CA 92123 -1352 Phone 858-694-5660 Fax 858-694-5661 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: EXCEL TRUST DATE: January 14, 2013 17140 Bernardo Center Dr., Suite 300 PROJECT NO.: 12003.03 San Diego, CA 92128 PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Village TPM / CUP Applications ATTN: Geoffrey Sherman WE ARE SENDING: • COPY OF LETTER • SET(S) OF BLUEPRINTS • SET(S) OF SPECS • COPIES OF COST OPINIONS • SUBMITTAL/SHOP DRAWING • AS NOTED VIA: • MAIL • HAND CARRIED COURIER [] SEPARATE COVER • COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION / REMARKS 1 01/03/13 Title Report 1 01/07/13 Preliminary Hydrology Study 1 01/07/13 Storm Water Management Plan Geoff, Here are copies for your reference of the updated Reports provided to Benson and Bohl for the 1^TPM/CUP Submittal. COPY THESE ARE TRANSMITTED FOR YOUR: INFORMATION USE ACTION AS REQUESTED REVIEW/COMMENT AS NOTED APPROVAL COPIES TO: ENCLOSURES With Without Kristopher W. Eckert, RCE STEVENS CRESTO ENGINEERING, INC. nty cf Carlsbad Faraaay "Center Faraday Cashiei-ing 001 •\yyyy 03/14/2013 32 " Mar 14, 2013 08:42 AM Receipt Ref Hbr: R1307301-1/0005 PERMITS - PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr; 130730101 0005 0005 Trans/Rcpt#: TOOO118068 SET #; S000003612 Arnount: 1 @ $33,581.30 Item "ubiotal: $33,561.30 Iter; otal: $33,581,30 1 ITEM(3) TOTAL; $33,581.30 Check (Chk# 001157) $33,188.75 Credit Card (Auth# 014942) $392.55 Total Received; $33,581.30 Have a nice day! **************CUSTOHER COPY************* City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 llllilllllllllll Applicant : EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER LLC Set Id: S000003612 / Tmp set/Initialized Projects Description Amount CUP13003 3,243.75 MS130001 3,670.00 PUD13002 2,908.00 SDP13003 10,930.00 SDP7803D 9,463.55 SUP13001 3,366.00 Total: 33,581.30 Receipt Number: R0094033 Transaction ID: T000118068 Transaction Date: 03/14/2013 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 33,581.30 Transaction Amount-:' 33, 581.30 '\. state'at'Caiifor'nia—Natural Resources Agency CALIFORNIADEPARTMENTOF FISH AND WILDLIFE 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE. TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY RECEIPT* SD2014 0326 STATE CLEARING HOUSE #(ifapplicable) LEADAGENCY CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION DATE 03/23/2014 COUNTY/STATEAGENCY OF FILING SAN DIEGO DOCUMENTNUMBER *20140065* PROJECTTPIE LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJECTAPPLICANT NAIVIE EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC PHONENUMBER (858) 649-6047 PROJECTAPPLICANT ADDRESS 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DRIVE, STE. 300 CITY SAN DIEGO STATE CA ZIPCODE 92128 PROJECT APPLICANT (Checl< appropriate box): • Local PublicAgency Q School District • Other Special District • State Agency ^ Private Entity 1 4 0 0 6 5 CHECKAPPLICABLE FEES: Q Environmental Impact Report (EIR) El Negative Declaration (ND)(MND) • Application Fee Water Diversion (Sfafe Water Resources Control Board Only) Q Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs (CRP) El County Administrative Fee • Project that is exempt from fees • Notice of Exemption • CDFW No Effect Determination (Form Attached) • Other PAYMENT METHOD: • Cash • Credit 21 Check • Other 001493/001494 $3,029.75 $ $2,181.25 $ $850.00 $ $1,030.25 $ $50.00 $ TOTALRECEIVED $ $2,181.25 $50.00 $2,231.25 SIGNATURE G. Meza TTTLE Deputy City of Carlsbad MAY 2 8 2014 Planning Division lllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllllll ORIGINAL - PROJECT APPLICANT COPY-CDFW/ASB COPY-LEAD AGENCY COPY-COUNTY CLERK FG753.5a (Rev 11/12) Notice of Determination From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue D [L d © Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dronenburg. .lr. Recorder Count) Clerk (760) 602-4600 To: n Office of Planning and Research PO Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 3 SD County Clerk Attn: James Scott 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 PO Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92101 Project No: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. La Costa Towne Center 14 0 0 6 5 APR 23 2014 BY G. Meza DEPUTY Project Title n/a Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner (760) 602-4621 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17, Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Location (include County) Name of Applicant: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Applicant's Address: 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Ste. 300, San Diego, CA 92128 Applicant's Telephone Number: (858) 649-6047 Project Description: The demolition of two (2) commercial buildings, (including Vons located at 7710 El Camino Real and 7740 El Camino Real), totaling 45.830 square feet within an existing 123.822 square foot shopping center (La Costa Towne Center) and the construction of a single-storv parking structure and two (2) mixed-use buildings consisting of 60 multiple-familv residential rental units and 48.908 square feet of new retail on a previouslv developed 15.24-acre site generallv located along the east side of El Camino Real and south of La Costa Avenue. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on April 16, 2014, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Q An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IXI A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. I I This project was reviewed previously and a(n) EIR/Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to (h^General P?Ublic at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 05/13 ^- Meza Ei^st J. Dronenburg, Jr( COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ASSESSOR/RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK ASSESSOR'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 103 San Diego, CA 92101-2480 Tel. (619) 236-3771 * Fax (619) 557-4056 www.sdarcccom RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 P.O. Box 121750 * San Diego, CA 92112-1750 Tel. (619)237-0502 • Fax (619)557-4155 Transaction #: 317341520140423 . Deputy: GMEZAl City of Carlsbad Location: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 23-Apr-2014 16:12 APR 2 8 Z014 Planning Division 50.00 Qty ofl Fee Notice ofExemption for Ref# 2014 0325 50.00 TOTAL DUE PAYMENTS: 50.00 Check FEES: 50.00 TENDERED SERVICES AVAILABLE AT OFFICE LOCATIONS Tax Bill Address Changes Records and Certified Copies: Birth/ Marriage/ Death/ Real Estate Fictitious Business Names (DBAs) Marriage Licenses and Ceremonies Assessor Parcel Maps Property Ownership Property Records Property Values s.^ Document Recordings APPROVED BY: Taxable -fSies Tax On Invoice (If no, sand in.:»to Rnance) SERVICES AVAILABLE ON-LINE AT www.sdarcc.com Forms and Applications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Grantor/ Grantee Index Fictitious Business Names Index (DBAs) Property Sales On-Line Purchases Assessor Parcel Maps Property Characteristics Recorded Documents Notice of Determination From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue I? D H H (D Carlsbad, CA 92008 •' • Recorder Countj Clerk (760) 602-4600 14 0 0 6 5 APR 23 2014 BY G. Meza To: Q Office of Planning and Research PO Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 ^ SD County Clerk Attn: James Scott 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 PO Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92101 Project No: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. La Costa Towne Center Project Title n/a DEPUTY Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner (760) 602-4621 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17, Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Location (include County) Name of Applicant: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Applicant's Address: 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Ste. 300. San Diego, CA 92128 Applicant's Telephone Number: (858) 649-6047 Project Description: The demolition of two (2) commercial buildings, (including Vons located at 7710 El Camino Real and 7740 El Camino Real), totaling 45.830 square feet within an existing 123.822 square foot shopping center (La Costa Towne Center) and the construction of a single-stor/ parking structure and two (2) mixed-use buildings consisting of 60 multiple-familv residential rental units and 48.908 square feet of new retail on a previouslv developed 15.24-acre site generally located along the east side of El Camino Real and south of La Costa Avenue. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on April 16, 2014, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. \W\ An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 1X1 A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. I I This project was reviewed previously and a(n) EIR/Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to (h^General Piiblic at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 05/13 t FILED IN THE OFFiCE OF THE COUW CLERK Returned to agency on " ' —" — OepLty___Gjgg^ State of-California—Natural Resources Agency CALIFORNIADEPARTMENTOF FISH AND^LDLIFE 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE. TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY RECE1PT# SD2014 0326 STATE CLEARING HOUSE #(ifapplicable) LEADAGENCY CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION DATH 03/23/2014 COUNTY/STATEAGENCY OF FILING SAN DIEGO DOCUMENTNUMBER *20140065* PROJECTTm.E LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJECTAPPLICANT NAME EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC PHONENUMBER (858) 649-6047 PROJECTAPPLICANT ADDRESS 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DRIVE, STE. 300 CITY SAN DIEGO STATE CA ZIPCODE 92128 PROJECT APPLICANT (Checl< appropriate box): [3 Local PublicAgency Q School District • Other Special District • State Agency ^ Private Entity 1400 6 5 CHECKAPPLICABLE FEES: Q Environmental Impact Reporl (EIR) El Negative Declaration (ND)(MND) • Application Fee Water Diversion (Sfafe Water Resources Control Board Only) Q Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs (CRP) IZI County Administrative Fee Q Project that is exempt from fees Q Notice of Exemption • CDFW No Effect Determination (Forni Attached) • Other PAYMENT METHOD: • Cash • Credit • Check • Other 001493/001494 $3,029.75 $ $2,181.25 $ $850.00 $ $1,030.25 $ $50.00 $ TOTALRECEIVED $ $2,181.25 $50.00 $2,231.25 SIGNATURE G. Meza TITLE X Deputy City of Carlsbad APR 2 8 2014 Planning Division illlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllll ORIGINAL - PROJECT APPLICANT COPY-CDFW/ASB COPY-LEAD AGENCY COPY - COUNTY CLERK FG 753.5a (Re« 11/12) VCARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION April 17, 2014 Geoff Sherman Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Ste. 300 San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER At the April 16, 2014 Planning Commission meeting, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 to approve your request. The decision of the Planning Commission is final on the date of adoption unless a written appeal to the City Council is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) calendar days in accordance with the provisions of Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21.54.150. The written appeal must specify the reason or reasons for the appeal. Ifyou have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please contact your project planner Shannon Werneke at (760) 602-4621 or shannon.werneke(g)carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, DON NEU, AlCP City Planner DN:SW:bd c: Data Entry File Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 5*" Avenue, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92103 enc: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 7044 and 7045 Planning Division 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 Notice of Detdihiination To: n Office of Planning and Research PO Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4600 SD County Clerk Attn: James Scott 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 PO Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92101 Project No: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. La Costa Towne Center Project Title n/a Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner (760) 602-4621 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17, Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Location (include County) Name of Applicant: Excel GIV La Costa Owner. LLC Applicant's Address: 17140 Bernardo Center Drive. Ste. 300. San Diego. CA 92128 Applicant's Telephone Number: (858) 649-6047 Project Description: The demolition of two (2) commercial buildings, (including Vons located at 7710 El Camino Real and 7740 El Camino Real), totaling 45.830 square feet within an existing 123.822 square foot shopping center (La Costa Towne Center) and the construction of a single-storv parking structure and two (2) mixed-use, buildings consisting of 60 multiple-familv residential rental units and 48,908 square feet of new retail on a previouslv developed 15.24-acre site generallv located along the east side of El Camino Real and south of La Costa Avenue. This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on April 16, 2014, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. • An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IXI A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. n This project was reviewed previously and a(n) EIR/Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition ofthe approval ofthe project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to (h^General PMhWc at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 05/13 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.Ci%>f Carlsbad PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC.HEARING STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego APR 0 8 2014 Planning Division 3N0TICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you^Huse your in-Iterest may be affected, that the Plai^^HCommisston ' of the City of Carlsbad will hold a pubnMeoring at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Vllloge Drive, Carlsbod, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April U, 2014, to consider the foi lowing: TTli; 1) CUP M^ll -S TOOL ATHLETICS - Request for a Conditlonol Use Permit to allow 5 Tool Athletics to operate a baseball train-ing facilitv In a vacant 10,572 square foot suite located within an existing office/industrial building on property located at 2245 Ca-mino Vidd Roble. In fhe P-M Zone and m Locol Facilities Atan-agement Zone 5. The City Planner has determined that this proiect is exempt from the requirements of the California Envi-ronmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15301, "Existing Focillties." of the State CEQA Guidelines and will not hove any adverse signlficont impact on the environment. A Notice of Ex-erription shall be filed with the County Clerk upon approval of thisproiect. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of UT - North County Formerly known as the North County Times and which newspaper has been adjudicated as a ne^wspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the City of Oceanside and the City of Escondido, Court Decree numbers 171349 & 172171, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type.hot smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: April 04* 2014 I certify (or declare) under.penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Oo On Thi ide, California ' April 2014 Jane Allshouse NORTH'COUNTY TIMES Legal^ Advertising 2) CUP 13-08 - ALGA HILLS SPRINT SD54XCn0 - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation, operation, and maintenance of on unmanned Wireless Commu-nication t=acilltv (WCF) consisting of nine (») panel antennos with associated equipment mounted to an existing SOG&E lat-tice transmission tower and a 143 square foot above ground equipment shelter upon properfy owned by the Alga Hills Home Owners Association. The proiect site is generally located north of Altisma Way, south of Via Viliegas, and east of Alicante Road within an SDG&E utility easement and in Local Facilities Man-agement Zone 6. The City Planner has determined that the proi-ect belongs to a class of protects that the State Secretary for Re-sources has found do not have a Significant impact on the envi-ronment, and it is therefore categorically e)(empt from the re-quirement for the preparation of environmental documents pur-suant to Sections 15303 (Construction and installation of small new equipment facilities or structures) of the state CEQA Guidelines. 3) SDP 78m3(D)/SDP ms/SUP 13.41/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER - Request fbr approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum; and a request for opproval of a Site Development Plan Amendment, Site Oevelopment Plan, Special Use Permit. Nonresidential Planned Development Permit and a Minor Subdivision to: 1) allow for the demolition of two (2) com-mercial buildings, (including Vons located at 7710 El Camlno Real and 7740 ET Camino Real), totaling 45,S30 squore feet wlth-Irran existing 123,822 square foot shopping center (La Costa Towne Center); and 2) allow for the construction of a single-story parking structure and two (2) mixed-use buildings consist-ing of 60 multiple-family residential rentol units and 48,908 square feet of new retail on a previously developed !S.24-ocre site generally located along the east side of El Camino Real and south of 1^ Costa Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 6. The City Planner has determined that through the Im-plementation of tlie proposed Mitigated Negotive Declaration and associated Mitigation, Monitoring ond Reporting Program and Addendum, the proposed proiect avoids the effects or miti-gates the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and there is no substantial evi-dence in light of the whole record before the City thot the proiect "as revised" may have a Isignif leant effect on the environment. 4) GPA 14-01/ZCA 14-01/PDP 00-02(F)/SP 144(0) - CECP AMENDMENT - Request for recommendations of approvol to adopt (1) a General Plan Amendment to modify the description of the Public utilities (U) land use designation to support the amended Carlsbad Energy Center. Proiect (CECP) L. (2) a Zone Code Amendment to the Public Utilitv (P-U) Zone to repeal Or-dinance CS-158 and revoke ZCA 11-05; (3) an amendment to the Encina Power Stofion Precise Development Plan as necessory to be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and (4) a Specific Plan amendment to repeal the Encina Specif-ic Plan. The City Planner has determined the proiect is exempt from the California Environmentol Quality Act (CEQA) pur-suant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) and Corlsbad Municipal Code Section 19.04.070 A.1.c.(1). If you challenge these proiects in court, you may be limited to raising onlv those issues you or someone else raised at the pub-lic heoring described in this tiotice or in writlen correspondence delivered to the Citv of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hear-ing. Copies of the environmentol documents ore ovoilable at tiie Planning Division at 1635 Faraday Avenue during regular busi-ness hours from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Thursday and 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Friday. Those persons wishing to speak on these proposals ore cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff reports will ho nvniinhiA online ot httD://carlsbad.granicus.com/ViewPu Bpstal Service TM #FIEi Ifj^lLrM RECEIPT e^fip.:,l^^il §p^ly, /ifl Insurance Coverage Provic jltlfornpttpfj yiflijDur website at www.usps.com® Floatage C'^rtified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postage & Fees • $ fa SerM To California Coastal Commission POBOX 7575 Metropolitan Dr., Suite 103 aiy'.'staie. San Diego, California 92108-4402 PS Form 3800, August 2006 See Reverse for Instructions Certified IVIail Provides: • Am^^^receipt • A Linrejle identifier for your mailpiece • A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years Important Reminders: • Certified Mail may ONLY be combined witii First-Class Mail® or Priority Mail®. • Certified Mail is nof available for any class of international mail. • NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. For valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail. • For an additional fee, a Return f?ece/pf may be requested to provide proof of delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Return Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the fee. Endorse mailpiece "Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for a duplicate return receipt, a USPSo postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is required. • For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mailpiece with the endorsement "Restricted Delivery". • If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is desired, please present the arti-cle at the post office for postmarking. If a postmark on the (Certified Mail receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail. IIVIPORTANT: Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry. PS Form 3800, August 2006 (Reverse) PSN 7530-02-000-9047 SENDER: COMPLETE THIS ^'=CTION Complete itema -l, 2, and S^ftso complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to; California Coastal Commission 7575 IVIetropolitan Dr., Suite 103 I San Diego, California 92108-4402 COMPttTfc- THIS SECTION ON DEUVERY A. X • Agent • Addressee B^^^^^v^^^rinted^^rig) C. Date of Delivety If YES, enter delivery address below: • No Service Type • Certified MaiP • Registered • Insured Mail • Priority Mail Express" • Retum Receipt for Merchandise • Collect on Delivery 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) • Ves Wiola Number Ipansfer irom service feit»e5 7D12 34b0 DDDD 30^4 UNITED ST> ff First-Class Mail Postage & Fees Paid USPS Permit No. G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address and ZIP+4® in this box* Cilty of Carlsbad APR 0 3 2014 CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Divislo/f^LANNING DEPARTMENT 635 FARADAYAVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008-7314 i!.i.i)iiiiii|.H,.rj|.|,ii,.,)l|jiiliipj„iir|=^ <^--cn-, 0, • • nFILE ^ CARLSBAD L-J r i Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 16, 2014, to consider a request for the following: CASE NAME: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PUBLISH DATE: April 4, 2014 DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and -Reporting Program and Addendum; and a request for approval of a Site Development Plan Amendment, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit, Nonresidential Planned Development Permit and a Minor Subdivision to: 1) allow for the demolition of two (2) commercial buildings, (including Vons located at 7710 El Camino Real and 7740 El Camino Real), totaling 45,830 square feet within an existing 123,822 square foot shopping center (La Costa Towne Center); and 2) allow for the construction of a single-story parking structure and two (2) mixed-use buildings consisting of 60 multiple-family residential rental units and 48,908 square feet of new retail on a previously developed 15.24-acre site generally located along the east side of El Camino Real and south of La Costa Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 6. The City Planner has determined that through the implementation of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum, the proposed project avoids the effects or mitigates the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. Copies of the staff report will be available online at http://carlsbad.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php7view id=6 on or after the Friday prior to the hearing date. If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to —5:00 p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. APPEALS The time within which you may judicially challenge these projects, if approved, is established by State law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. • Appeals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council, appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the Planning Commission. CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax SITE MAP NOT TO SCALE La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D/SDP 13-03/ SUP 13-01 / PUD 13-02 / MS 13-01 Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160®/8160T»« Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge™ AVERY® 6240™ EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92128 VONS 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92128 STATE OF CALIFORNIA PO BOX 911 MARYSVILLE CA 95901 U S BANK 2800 E LAKE ST MINNEAPOLIS MN 55406 LEUCADIA WATER DISTRICT 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REALTY CO P O BOX 400 FALLBROOK CA 92088 STELLA OLVERA 13132 BLODGETTAVE DOWNEY CA 90242 BCE DEVELOPMENT CORP 999 S HASTINGS ST VANCOUVER BC, V6C 2W7, CANADA MONARCH VILLAS HOMEOWNERS ASSN 6256 GREENWICH DR #520 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 MAHIN KAHNAMOUI-ATASSI 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 HOWARD W & LINDA A BRITTON 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 PAUL S HARDY 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GARRY E BELLO 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #103 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAMES D & STEFANIE H LASLEY 120 6TH ST PHILLIPSBURG KS 67661 HERNANDEZ FAMILY TRUST 08- 31-05 29101 LOTUSGARDEN DR CANYON COUNTRY CA 91387 ROBERT & RUTH HILLIARD 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #106 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAYANT S & ROHINEE J DAMLE 18 ANTHEM CREEK CIR HENDERSON NV 89052 CAROLE V KATAYAMA P O BOX 1497 TUSTIN CA 92781 HORST KRUPP 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 HORST KRUPP 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KUGEL FAMILY TRUST 11-08-99 19108 DERWENTPL NORTHRIDGE CA 91326 DUNCAN FAMILY 2005 TRUST 05- 16-05 530 ORCHID LN DEL MAR CA 92014 LINDA HOLMES 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 TODD & AMY C FELTZ 101 S 108TH AVE OMAHA NE 68154 SHALIN LIU 32 GALENA IRVINE CA 92602 ALAN J & ANN WELCH 208 CIRCULO NUEVO ROHNERT PARK CA 94928 TIPPLE FAMILY TRUST B 12-22-8! 1161 COLUMBUS WAY VISTA CA 92081 KENNETH D & LESLIE R SMITH 1194 QUAIL GARDENS CT ENCINITAS CA 92024 WOLF FAMILY TRUST 04-30-04 2117 BUNKER VIEWWAY OCEANSIDE CA 92056 GEORGE B & HELEN J NIEDER 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes faciles a peler ; I l«;iico7 la naharit AVFRV® >;i(;n®/R1fin'^ ! A Sens de Repiiez k la hachure afin de j r^ir^lar ta rahnrH Pnrv.iin''^ , vvww,^very.coni 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160®/8160""«' Bend along line to j expose Pop-up Edge™ i AVERY® 6240™ SATOSHI ENDUE 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 STEPHEN L & JANICE I PENN 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOACHIM & JAGIR RITU LATZER 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KATRIN Z ABRAHAMIAN 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARI OKADA 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 PAUL M KAPSCH 1204 WHITE SANDS DR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 LUKENS FAMILY TRUST 09-15-05 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #104 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SERLET-ROMERO 2002 TRUST 10-09-02 2230 VISTA LA NISA CARLSBAD CA 92009 JILL ENRIGHT 4376 MT HELIX HIGHLANDS DR LA MESA CA 91941 NANCY B BOWMAN 1152 MONTURARD SAN MARCOS CA 92078 D B J FAMILY TRUST P O BOX 232637 ENCINITAS CA 92023 BONNIE E GUEVARA 1636 BURGUNDY RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 JAMES M & NANCY WILKES 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MEGAN R BELLWOOD 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOAN L CLARK 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA CARLSBAD CA 92009 #100 ARTHUR E & HELEN D SCHAUERMANN 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAREN THOMPSON 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MATTHEW J & JENNIFER K KEYES 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #103 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAURA E BASILE 4405 88THAVENW GIG HARBOR WA 98335 EVE E EISENHAUER 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CORNWELL FAMILY TRUST 11- 01-99 7035 ELFIN OAKS RD ESCONDIDO CA 92029 NORLING FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 7230 SANTA BARBARA ST CARLSBADCA 92011 JULIEN & STEPHANIE BONTRON 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #108 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DANIEL A OSMAN 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GAIL A WILLIS 1713 DEERFIELDRD ENCINITAS CA 92024 NORMAN B KENNEY 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MUZIBUL & CHUMKI CHAMAN KHAN 14778 CAMINITO PUNTA ARENAS DEL MARCA 92014 DARRYL J & PEGGY K HATHEWAY 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAMES & RUTH PARYLAK 31 LAMPHERERD WATERFORD CT 6385 SHARON M HURLEY 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #103 CARLSBAD CA 92009 §tiquettf!s faciles a peler | Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160®/8160'^ ! Sens de Repiiez a la hachure afin de | reveler le rebord POD-UD"' I vtfvvw.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160®/8160™ kFeed Paper Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge''^ AVERY® 6240™ I ROBERT S & LILO BACA 11081 E MANZANITA TRL DEWEY AZ 86327 BU JAS TRUST 12-21-01 279 1/2 HILLCREST DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 TONY C FINN 7031 FERN PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 JAMES E KOWALSKl 931 GALLOWAY ST PACIFIC PALISADES CA 90272 BEDILLION FAMILY TRUST 11-12- 10 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #108 CARLSBAD CA 92009 PATRICK C WITT 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARCY GAFFNEY 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHRISTOPHER L & ALDRIDGE MARTHA E LICHTENBERG 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SILBERG FAMILY TRUST 10-03-9( 1825 SIENNA CANYON DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 PATRICK J SEBRECHTS 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JESSICA S LEVINE 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GOMBOS FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 07-25-97 78440 LINKS DR PALM DESERT CA 92211 GLENN A STOCKMAN 7404 SAN RAMON DR MILTON FL 32583 FRANCK & MARYLINE HOUDIN 552 CERRO ST ENCINITAS CA 92024 ROBERT M & SHERYL L RHOADES 1132 CALLE LAGUNITAS CARPINTERIA CA 93013 GRAVITT FAMILY TRUST 06-20-03 7410 ESFERA ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 LETITIA M KOEBKE 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA #108 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DEBRA ZIROLLA 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MERILEE MILLER-DECKER 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 STINE JOSEPH L PROPERTY TRUST 01-24-05 2381 AVENIDA HELECHO CARLSBAD CA 92009 DIMACCIO REVOCABLE TRUST 04-07-08 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRENDAN P WOOD 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MILAN MALETIC 14259 MARIANA DR POWAY CA 92064 JOSEPH & MILLIE MESSINA 1021 PEBBLE BEACH DR CLAYTON CA 94517 NORMA R METTLING 7222 LINDEN TER CARLSBADCA 92011 ROSEMARY C W BRINIG 12939 SEABREEZE FARMS DR SAN DIEGO CA 92130 CHARLES M & WADLEIGH MARLIS E SWINDEN 302 BROOK RD EVERGREEN CO 80439 SEDDIG TRUST 10-21-11 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #107 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SHERON A M/KXWELL POBOX 131552 CARLSBADCA 92013 ZOIAANGUELOVA 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettfjs faciles a peler Utilisez ie gabarit AVERY® 5160®/8160'^ Sens de rharni>m(>nt Repiiez a ta hachure afin de j rev61er le rebord Pop-up"^ I www.avery.com 1-800-6O-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160®/8160™ Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge™ AVERY® 6240™ I WILLIAM J & C MARYANN MENTER 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT J BATES 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARTER FAMILY TRUST 07-17-06 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MULLER F MAXINE 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALEJANDRA MOLINARI 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JESSICA F MCDONALD 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #103 CARLSBAD CA 92009 COLE KNIGHT 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #104 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LANGE FAMILY TRUST 11-13-98 51 MISTY ACRES RD ROLLING HILLS EST CA 90274 JOHN & SANDRA NABORS 6965 ELCAMINOREAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 WENDY J ALLEN 6924 FAIRF/^ DR #222 ARLINGTON VA 22213 THOMAS P CALDER 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #108 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JEANETTE C HERRAS 7088 SITIO FRONTERA CARLSBAD CA 92009 KLAUS P MEINHARD 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JEFFREY B & SUSAN K MANGAN 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA #111D CARLSBAD CA 92009 KERSTEN FAMILY TRUST 10-29- 93 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 MICHAEL E & CLAUDIA M MONGE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #3- 101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BLAIR A & LYNDA J NICHOLAS 7704 CAMINITO LEON #G101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAURAL R SOLON 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #103 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANDREA J GRAYSON 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #104 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DOLORES VALDES 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ADAM J STONE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #106 CARLSBAD CA 92009 DANIEL T BURKE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #3- 107 CARLSBAD CA 92009 WOLFGANG M & DOMINGA PRILL 3071 PADDINGTONRD GLENDALE CA 91206 DEBORAH A BLUNDELL 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANDREW WEIS 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOSEPH & JESSICA FREEMAN 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROSINE L FITZPATRICK 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #100 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANTHONY & MARTHA URBINO 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #101 CARLSBAD CA 92009 NANCY ULRICH 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #102 CARLSBAD CA 92009 KOERNER FAMILY TRUST 08-25- 87 3563 LOMAS SERENAS DR ESCONDIDO CA 92029 Etiquettfis faciles h peler [ Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160®/8160« ! Sens de Repiiez d la hachure afin de' r^v^lcsr l(> rebnrd POD-UD www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Av^ry® Template 5160®/8160™ Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge^' AVERY® 6240™ 1 k JEFFREY & KIRSTEEN J QUADE 3106 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHN D CASE 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LORI A NELSON 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #106 CARLSBAD CA 92009 EUGENIE IRELAND 6820 LUCIERNAGA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 JAMES H WALDRUFF 202 S PACIFIC ST OCEANSIDE CA 92054 GAIL S LEE 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #109 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JANET L DAVIS 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #110 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SATOMI U SCHUPP 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA #111 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ANDREWS FAMILY TRUST 07-14- 08 24495 PARK GRANADA CALABASAS CA 91302 RICHARD & KARIN S BARNES 7623 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MEHRY SADIGHINEJAD 2002 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 KENNETH G KADANSKY 7347 ALMADEN LN CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOSEPH C & THERESA K LEE 2515 VILLA DORO WAY NW ALBUQUERQUE NM 87104 FARNAZ & IRAZ NOOHI 2008 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 SEAN M FEENEY 145 S BENT AVE SAN MARCOS CA 92078 LUCILLE V WOLFE 2012 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 GHER FAMILY TRUST 03-26-98 2014 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 AHRANJANI FAMILY TRUST 03- 17-03 2016 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 HOLT FAMILY CREDIT SHELTER TRUST 1309 SHOREBIRD LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 MACGREGOR FAMILY TRUST 08- 25-11 2020 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM E & ROSEMARY P SUGC 2010 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 THOMAS A & JANICE E KROUSKUP 2012 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT & NANCY DUELL 31901 PASEO CIELO SAN JUAN CAPISTRA CA 92675 DONALD S & FRANCES S DIEHL 2016 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 GIORGIO & SINCLITICO LISA FRONDONI 6320 WOODWAY LN PLANO TX 75093 ELLEN BAKER POBOX 235135 ENCINITAS CA 92023 VANDERHORST FAMILY TRUST 10-18-12 2008 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT W & EDELWINA A RICHARD 2006 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes faciles ci peler { IJtilisPz le aabarit AVERY® 5160®/SieO""^ I JEFFREY P & RENE S WUSTMAN 2004 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 • Sens de Repiiez ci la hachure afin de j r^v^lar IA rohnrri Pon-iin'"' I LILLIAN DZANDZARA 2002 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5^60®I8^60™ Feed Paper Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge™ AVERY® 6240™ j 1 ROBERTA CRUZ 7627 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRENT C SCHAFFER 7629 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 PATRICK S & JULIE L MARSHALL 7631 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JEROME & NECHAMA EILFORT 7633 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARK & PATRICIA PARMELY 7635 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAO-BEEN BRIMNER 7637 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JERRY J & PEGGY L MOFFATT 2011 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 MORGAN FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 06-05-89 2021 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 LARRY N & KENDZIOR-FULLER ALEXANDRA E FULLER 2031 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 RONALD W & HIERS LORI A WILSON 2041 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALEXANDER & ANTOINETTE DJOKICH 2051 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 EDWARD A MEINARDUS 2061 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 TERRY A & KATHLEEN CLIFFORD 2052 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 STEPHEN B LEVY 2150 WHISPER WIND LN ENCINITAS CA 92024 KENICHI MORI 2032 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MICHAEL & SUMMER S POUNTNEY 2022 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 EUGENE & BARBARA KADING 2871 ARNOLDSONAVE SANDIEGO CA 92122 GLORIA RUBENFELD 2002 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MENDOZA 2005 TRUST 2001 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 RYAN M & STACEY A WILLIAMS 2011 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 GARY D & KATHLEEN MCDANIEL 2021 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 LEMON J & GEORGIA A RUSSELL 2031 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 RILLING FAMILY TRUST 11-23-09 2041 LADERA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 KEITH H & SUSAN P SEARS 2001 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD CA 92009 PUNKIN TRUST 03-06-09 2008 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 KATHERINE F TENNY 2604 EL CAMINO #B CARLSBAD CA 92008 KNOX FAMILY TRUST 12-29-93 2002 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DAVID & SUE FIGUEROA 2001 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 SALUD FAMILY TRUST 04-08-02 2003 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLIAM R BELKO 2005 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 Etiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160®/8160"'' • Sens de Repiiez h la hachure afin de j rpu^ler le rebord PoD-un""" I www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels Use Av?ry® Template 5160®/8160TM Feed Paper Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge™ AVERY® 6240™ 1 NICK L & MARY D ANTAL P O BOX 7301 EDMOND OK 73083 JOHN P & KAREN L KLING 2009 PINTORESCOCT CARLSBAD CA 92009 TIMOTHY & MAUREEN KRUPA 2032 CIMACT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MICHAEL D HUGHES 1520 1STST#K303 CORONADO CA 92118 CLIFFORD F & CAROLYN D QUAYLE 2002 CIMACT CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHN B & DIANE F STRAYER 2001 CIMACT CARLSBAD CA 92009 THOMAS P E & ESTRADA- HOLLENBECK MICHELLE HOLLENBECK 2011 CIMACT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERT H & SUE RANDOLPH 2021 CIMACT CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOYCE [RAYMER 2022 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 KENT & DONNA TINDEL 2012 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 KOPION GROUP LLC 1650 N COAST HIGHWAY 101 #B ENCINITAS CA 92024 CHARLES D HAWBAKER 2001 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DAVID L & CORINNE H MORASH 2011 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 REDSUN-COFFIDIS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-25-06 7783 FALDA PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 JULIE D CHILTON 7785 FALDA PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ABS CA-0 LLC P O BOX 990 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440 GRANT TUCKER PROPERTIES P O BOX 7974 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 CHABAD AT LA COSTA 1980 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 L C INVESTMENT 2010 L L C 1601 ELM ST DALLAS TX 75201 California Coastal Commission 7575 Metropolitan Dr., Suite 103 San Diego, California 92108-4402 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES LLC 800 MORNINGSIDE DR FULLERTON CA 92835 County of San Diego Planning & Development Services 5510 Overland Avenue, Suite 110 San Diego, CA 92123-1239 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES LLC 1940 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 A notice has been mailed to all property owners/occupants listed herein. , Date: 6^31 Signature: Etiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le aabarit AVERY® 5160®/8160* Sens de Repiiez a la hachure afin de | r6v6ler le rebord POD-UD""^ I www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY ' ' H City of Aprlsbad ^ CITY OF ^ CARLSBAD FEBOSZOH Community & Economic Development p,anning Division '''^''••"''^^'g' l)'' NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Kmest .1 Dronenburg. .Ir. Recorder Count) Clerk BY. JAN 03 2014 C. Duenas PROJEa NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJEa NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 DEPUTY PROJEa LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17. PROJEa DESCRIPTION: A request to allow for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow forthe construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/planning-notices.aspx. COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration should be directed to Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at the address listed below or via email to Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD December 24, 2013 -Januarv 12. 2014 PUBLISH DATE December 24. 2013 Planning Division ^ * 1635 Faraday Ave. 1 Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8^f^x . JAH03 20H JAN P 3 2m FEB 1)3 2014 <^^5^ CITY OF FILE COPY ^ CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJEa NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJEa NO: SDP 78-03(D>/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 PROJEa LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17. PROJEa DESCRIPTION: A request to allow for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow for the construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/planning-notices.aspx. COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration should be directed to Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at the address listed below or via email to Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 20 days ofthe date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. Ifyou have any questions, please call Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD December 24. 2013 - Januarv 12. 2014 Januarv 21. 2014 PUBLISH DATE December 24. 2013 Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax CITY OF • I iriL.£-. ^CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJEa NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJEa NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 PROJEa LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17. PROJEa DESCRIPTION: A request to allow for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow forthe construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy ofthe Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/planning-notices.aspx. COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration should be directed to Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at the address listed below or via email to Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. Ifyou have any questions, please call Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD December 24. 2013 - Januarv 12. 2014 PUBLISH DATE December 24. 2013 TW'M P'^nninf Division y-WM 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 i 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of tlie United States and a resident of tiie County aforesaid: I am over tiie age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in tlie above-entitled matter. I am tlie principal cleric of the printer of UT - North County Formerly known as the North County Times and which newspaper has been adjudicated as a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of Caiifornia, for the City of Oceanside and the City of Escondido, Court Decree numbers 171349 & 172171, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit; December 24*^ 2013 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Oc^an|ide, California js 2#C5af^i&Tbec 2013 Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TII^IES Legal Advertising This space is fcHfie County Clerl<'s Filing Stamp City of Carlsbad DEC 2 7 2013 Planning Division Proof of Publication of NOTICE OP INTeNT TO APOrC A MITIOATeO NBOATIVE DBCLAKAfiON PROJBCT NiAME: PROIECT MO: tTAT0Wiiii;iiir||R PROJECT LOCATION: East side of El CtfAiino ReaL south of the Intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, ad-dressed as 7710:7770 El Camino Real, APNs216-124-)6,-17.- PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A rMuest to allo^ for the (^moli-tion of two commerciai buildlnM totaling 4&830 soud (SF) located witlrih dn existing m822 SF shopplna cent! icnbwn as Lo Costa Towne Center.; and to allow fOrlKi cQ tion Of two mixed use tiuitdlngs, Meluding tO muttr^Mntl dentiai units, 12 of which ar« Rro^osed lo be deiiwift,,, „ ^ inclusionary housing, Ond a slngle-^ory parkins .<tcuetani. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and flie proposal to add two new mixed use buildlngti. a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail Space Is proposed. , " WCaiifor- Envitfinmentai PROPOSED DETERMINATION: Tfw conducted on Environmentol review ofthe ect pursuant to the Guidelines for Implwlmntai nlo Environmental Quality Act i(CEQAi. flvid ' Protection Ordinance of fhe City oFCarltlSad. review, the Initial itody {^tiffed pMeittl^t' on the environment, wt TO revwons in posais mode by, or aamBa to by, the o posed Mitigated NeiMIIVe l>^l(lration mA tmm Sfudx are re-leased for public revfei«nM>uid avoid the effliiK ar nritu^ the effects to a point where clearly nosignlflaint wect on ml envi-ronment wouid occur, ond (2) there Is nosubsnintial pyMnftck In tight of the whole record before the City mat the proiect ^igs re-vised" may hove-o-SlMifio^reftai:^ the environment* there-fore, a MitiMted Nw^w De^ will be recommended for adoption by the CHy wt:oH^Miff Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy of tlw Initial Study dOcumentihg rea-P'^^l??*f* '^'*'8f^S<( NegiWIVe p^cldrotloin Is SPf}}^ '1 *'!8JS'P""'J??Cvision, idS Farcttiay Aveflue, Carisbad, Cal[fornia_9SM0| and It available online t|t|Jitt|ir' Guidelines, in revievyiing MItigatettCNi sons ond public oodles should f' that the proiect wilt not hove a slflli.. ment. if persons and mmlic agwii:] may have a sisnifleant effect, th# sh6uti cific effect; (2) explain why theyJeMeve tt qnd m explain urtiy tlw believe nw«ffw» vMwId written comments regarina the diPOft Mltl^M _ laration shcMid be directed to Shannon Wemeke, Associate Pionner, ot the ocMrBss iisted beiow or via emali tii> SHnmoii.we rneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be recelved^thlh 20 days ofthe dote of this notice. The proposed proiect and Mitigated Negative Declcvtrtfdft ore subiect to review and approval/adoption by the Claiming Com-mission. Additionat public notices will be isstwd vwien thoSe public hearings ore sOheisuled. if you hove any etu^lorls, please coil Shannon Wernelce in the Pianning Division at <7«0) 402-4621. Pubiic Review Period: I3ecember24,2013-January 12,2014 Pub: December24,2013 .omments ' of the CBC rotfons, per-" 1 findirta environ-it tlie proiect ntify the spe-WOuld occur; stgnlficdnt. ^tOtiVB Dec- ]K. # City of %rlsbad CITY OF ^CARLSBAD JANOS 2014 Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov Planning Division D [L 1 © Kmesi.l Dronenburg. .lr. Recorder Countj Clerk NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION enas PROJEa NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJECT NO: SDP 78-03(D>/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 BY DEPUTY PROJECT LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request to allow/ for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow for the construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.g:ov/planning-notices.aspx. COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration should be directed to Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at the address listed below or via email to Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. Ifyou have any questions, please call Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD December 24. 2013 - Januarv 12. 2014 JAN 03 20U PUBLISH DATE December 24. 2013 ^% Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax C. Duenas Eldest J. Dronenburg, Ji^ COUNTYOFSANDIEGO ASSESSOR/RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK ASSESSOR'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 103 SanDiego, CA 92101-2480 Tel. (619) 236-3771 * Fax (619) 557-4056 www.sdarcc.com RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 P.O. Box 121750 * San Diego, CA 92112-1750 Tel. (619)237-0502 * Fax (619)557-4155 Transaction #: 309969120140103 Deputy: CDUENAS Location: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 03-Jan-2014 10:10 City of Carlsbad JAN 0 8 2014 Planning Division FEES: 50.00 Qty of 1 Fish and Game Filing Fee for Ref# INTENT 50.00 TOTAL DUE PAYMENTS: 50.00 Check 50.00 TENDERED SERVICES AVAILABLE AT OFFICE LOCATIONS Tax Bill Address Changes Records and Certified Copies: Birth/ Marriage/ Death/ Real Estate Fictitious Business Names (DBAs) Marriage Licenses and Ceremonies Assessor Parcel Maps Property Ownership Property Records Property Values Document Recordings SERVICES AVAILABLE ON-LINE AT www.sdarcc.com Forms and Applications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Grantor/ Grantee Index Fictitious Business Names Index (DBAs) Property Sales On-Line Purchases Assessor Parcel Maps Property Characteristics Recorded Documents FILE COPY <# i^h CITY OF VCARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov EARLY PUBLIC NOTICE PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Village PROJECT NUMBER: SDP 78-03(D)/ SDP 13-03/ CUP 13-03/ SUP 13-03/ MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 This early public notice is to let you know that a development application to renovate the existing shopping center and construct two new mixed use (retail and residential) buildings within your neighborhood was submitted to the City of Carlsbad on IVlarch 14, 2013. The project application is undergoing its initial review by the City. LOCATION: 7710-7770 El Camino Real PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to a Site Development Plan, Site Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Special Use Permit, IVIinor Subdivision and a Non-Residential Planned Development Permit for the following development: • Demolition of 45,830 square feet (SF) of retail area, including the Vons building; • Construction of two mixed use buildings (two and three-story building), including 48,908 SF of retail and 60 multi-family units (apartments for rent); 20% of residential units are required to be designated as inclusionary housing; maximum height 55 feet. • Parking structure for the residential and retail components, portions of which are below grade. • New driveway off of El Camino Real; and • Additional parking and fagade remodel to remainder of shopping center. Please keep in mind that this is an early public notice and that the project design could change as a result of further staff and public review. A future public hearing notice will be mailed to you when this project is scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission. CONTACT INFORMATION: If you have questions or comments regarding this proposed project please contact Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner at shannon.werneke@carlsbadca.gov, (760) 602-4621, City of Carlsbad Planning Division, 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. k Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © SITE MAP NOT TO SCALE La Costa Towne Village SDP 78-03(D) / SDP 13-03 /CUP 13-03 SUP 13-03 / MS 13-01 / PUD 13-02 La Costa Towne Center •r ' >i ""ll • ^: • Xi AREA CALCULATIONS UNIT BREAKDOWN PARKING DATA SHEET INDEX PROJECT TEAM OWNEWOtVELOPEfl: CENBUl-CONTRACTOR: 1 *HDSCWE ARCHriEpT; ENVRON3 E-Hlft ••™«IO«''^*™w»™^™ni CIVIL ENOWEBO: BLDC. INFO. I£ EA3EMEKT: .sr? AC «. AREA:(GR0SS1 ORK3IN*!. PARWNG COUNT (PER ALTA OATED MARCH 21. TOTAL U3 SPACES (113.MJ SJ^. - 1J7/1000 S.F.1 NBH PARMNG COUKT ff^R THR 3UBI*TTAL1 PARMHG SPACES tTB SPACES • 27 fUfJON BANK) • 497 SPACES TOTAL <9' SPACES(12e.M0 SJ. • 3.B3ilOOO Sf.) AHEAIHCREASE 3.1M S.T. (ie SPACES REOD) PARKING INCREASE 27 SPACES PROVKIED (470-443) RESIDENTIAL COI*PQNANT: n DWEUJNG UNTSIACRE (>20 UH) TIRESHttI DEMOUllON nAU OVtMUSnt "iAH tUUMK^ MJtn« snt PtAN ENtAKGCO PHT1«. sm PIAN ENLAJIGC3 PABTlfi snr PlAH (MKAO: ilVf.l PIAN GROUMD tEVL. RAN 7710 acoRD r-iijC« Tvia rvM BOW PIAKS 7710 S 771* CXTIRKM EieVATUNS nio tXTtttlOK U£VAIK>N» TTUl EJOTfllOB il. tXTHIIOR EIEVATIONS 77SO-70 TOTAL DEU0U3HED EUSriMQ UMON BANK INAP) LDEMOUStCD i.ll7iSf± VICINITY MAP LEGAL DESCRIPTKWS sr CALFORMA. FUD M TX OFFICE OF THE « CONDTIONS AND RESTRKTONS AMD GRANT OF EASEHENTS* RECORDED MAIER CON^frVATICN VlAH SIIILiG«T}NGPLA'< rnii»icLT PBOPOPStD I'lmCtt MAP tXMW 1 CONCQTUUenADIIfG t UT11IT1CS coMctPTUAi 6IVUMNC £ unimES PROJECT NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PROJECT AODRESS: 7710 thru 7770 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA. SITE AREA: PARCEL B: PARCEL MAP 10283 - 6.55 AC PARCEL D: PMICELMAP 10283 - 8.69 AC EXISTING ZONE-USE: C-l-O, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL W/ QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND VWt AREA 5 OF EL CAMJNO REAL SCENIC CORRIDOR. GENERAL PLAN; UOS. LOCAL SHOPPING CENTERraPEN SPACE PROPOSED C-1 W/ RESOENTIAL LAND USE PERMITS & APPUCATIONS: CUP - CONOmONAL USE PERMIT (RESIDENTIAL) SUP - SPECIAL USE PERMfT SDP AMENDMENT (MAJOR) FOR SHOPPING CENTER SDP - srrE DEVELOPMENT PERMH" FOR HOUSING TS &0 SCOPE GF DBriOUTKM WORK L (EX)SUItFACCLDTTC &n. \4•^^^^^^^^^•-;^\^^rf-l • Jit a. La Costa Town Center - Carlsbad, CA. DEMOLITION PLAN EXCEL LA COSTA LLC La Costa Town Center - Carlsbad, CA SriE PLAN ——^ EXCEL LA COSTA LLC 7710 WEST ELEVATION STAMPED CONCRETE - STONE Fl © © © © © © © © © © ® ® © ® ® ® ® ® ® iCOALLKm (nMng @ DEC0«ATT4?E WALL I @ FABRIC AVWN»«JS COHNiOES 1 MOULDING - EXPO CAFFE LAITE 2S NEW • EXISTING BUUMMGSt SCALE: 1/16"=r-0' La Costa Town Center - Carlsbad, CA. ELEVATIONS EXCEL LA COSTA LLC COLOR t MATERIAL LEQENO SOUTH ELEVATION (s) PAWTHJ CONCRETE ^ DECORATIVE COLUMNS @ STOREFRONT. (M) SALTIOGRn ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ANODIZED ALUM OR WOOO FRAME S-EXPO TUSCAN SUN 1} NEW C EMSTING BULCMG& CORMCES ( UOUIOMOS - FRAZEE 2801 PAVLOVA WAas - FRAZEE t*PSTEH (B)WS 7710 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/18"- I'.O' La Costa Town Center - Carlsbad, CA. ELEVATIONS EXCEL LA COSTA LLC BrXSOX&ISOllL All EXISTING RESIDENTMU. NEIGHBORHOOD 1; • n 5 n 11 - ft 1raf SITE SECTION SCALE: l-sSO'-C La Costa Town Center - Carlsbad, CA. BLNSON & BOIIL SECTIONS EXCEL LA COSTA LLC A17 T i I > I AM3AV-OD-008-1 lU03'Aj8Ae'MAftm I jwdn-dod pjoqai a\ jai^A^j j ap mje ajfiqaeq e| ^ zai\6a^ sp suas T T ®09LS ®A}i3AV IjJeqeB a| zasHj^n ELIZABETH BALL-COUSYN PO BOX 286 S DEERFIELD, MA 01373-0286 JAMES & RUTH PARYLAK 31 LAMPHERE RD WATERFORD, CT 063 85-3446 JAMES D & STEFANIE LASLEY 12700 COURTNEY DR QUANTICO, VA 22134-2082 WENDY J ALLEN 6924 FAIRFAX DR 222 ARLINGTON, VA 22213-1027 PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REALTY CO I 101 N TRYON ST CHARLOTTE, NC 28246-0100 GLENN A STOCKMAN 7404 SAN RAMON DR MILTON, FL 32583-3014 U S BANK 2800 E LAKE ST MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406-1930 ASP REALTY INC PO BOX 990 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440-0990 JAYANT S Sc ROHINEE DAMLE 3802 15TH AVE GRAND FORKS, ND 58201-3727 BATIQUITOS LAND LLC 854 E ALGONQUIN RD 110 SCHAUMBURG, IL 60173-3856 TODD & AMY FELTZ 101 S 108TH AVE OMAHA, NE 68154-2656 NICK L & MARY ANTAL PO BOX 73 01 EDMOND, OK 73083-7301 L C INVESTMENT 2010 INC 1501 ELM ST DALLAS, TX 75201-4701 CHARLES M SWINDEN 302 BROOK RD EVERGREEN, CO 80439-4027 EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER LLC 801 N 500 201 BOUNTIFUL, UT 84010-6853 ROBERT S & LILO BACA 11081 E MANZANITA TRL DEWEY, AZ 86327-5512 JOSEPH C & THERESA LEE 2515 VILLA DORO WAY ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87104-1975 STELLA OLVERA 13132 BLODGETT AVE DOWNEY, CA 90242-5202 JAMES E KOWALSKl 931 GALLOWAY ST PACIFIC PALIS, CA 90272-3850 WOLFGANG M & DOMINGA PRILL 3071 PADDINGTON RD GLENDALE, CA 91206-1334 ANDREWS 24495 PARK GRANADA CALABASAS, CA 91302-1416 KUGEL 19108 DERWENT PL NORTHRIDGE, CA 91326-1014 HERNANDEZ 29101 LOTUSGARDEN DR CANYON COUNTR, CA 91387-1841 NANCY B BOWMAN 2855 CARLSBAD BLVD 142 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-2902 STATE OF EL CAMINO CARLSBAB^'CA 92009 KENNETH G KADANSKY 7347 ALMADEN LN CARLSBAD, CA 92009-6902 LEUCADIA WATER DISTRICT PUBL: 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009-6810 CARLSBAD FUELS CORP 7602 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7901 CHABAD AT LA COSTA 1980 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009-6810 SIOBHAN M PEET 7733 CALLE ANDAR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-9227 9091S ®AU3AV f H^aSpa dn-dod asodxa I 0} auj| 6uo|e puag T i 90915 eiBiduiai ^AIBAV asn siaqei ^laad Aseg AMBAV-OD-OOS-l uibd'AjaAe'AiuMM I 3ndn-dod pjoqaj a| jai^A^j j ap u^e ajnipeii e| 1^ zaiidaii ^uauiaDjeqs ap suas • T ®09LS ®AM3AV »!JBqB6.a| zasmxn I ja|ad f saijse^ sauanbt,).^ JEFFREY & KIRSTEEN QUADE 3106 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8332 PATRICK J Sc. SANDRA GRAVITT 7410 ESFERA ST CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7822 NORMA R METTLING 3110 VISTA MAR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7857 JOSEPH STINE 2381 AVENIDA HELECHO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-9361 MAHIN KAHNAMOUI-ATASSI 7747 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 HOWARD W & LINDA BRITTON 7747 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 PAUL S HARDY 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 GARRY E BELLO 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA 103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8542 ROBERT & RUTH HILLIARD 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA106 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 HORST KRUPP 7747 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 PAUL S HARDY 7747 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 HORST KRUPP 7747 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8538 LINDA HOLMES 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8536 GEORGE B & HELEN NIEDER 7737 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8536 SATOSHI ENOUE 7737 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8537 STEPHEN L & JANICE PENN 7737 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8537 KATRIN Z ABRAHAMIAN 7727 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8533 MARI OKADA 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8533 PAUL M KAPSCH 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8533 LUKENS 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA104 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8533 JILL ENRIGHT 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA106 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8533 BONNIE E GUEVARA 7727 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8534 JAMES M & NANCY WILKES 7727 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8534 GOODWIN 7727 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8534 JOAN CLARK 7768 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 ARTHUR E & HELEN SCHAUERMANN 7768 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 KAREN THOMPSON 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 JENNIFER K & MATTHEW KEYES 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 EVE E EISENHAUER 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA105 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 JULIEN & STEPHANIE BONTRON 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA108 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 9091S ®AUaAV Hia6p3 dn-dod asodxa oiau!|6uo|epuaa ®09I.S aiBiduiai a,AiaAv asn spqei ®|aac| Aseg AM3AV-OD-008-1 iuo3'AjaAe'mmM ] 3„dn.dodpJoqaja|ja|9A9J *"a™!'^' j ap u^e ajntpeii e| 1^ zaiidau Y I ®09I.S ®A)I3AV :t|JBqBB a| zas\\\in I jajad f saipe^ sausnbm NORMAN B KENNEY 7768 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 MCCANN 7767 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8542 DARRYL J & PEGGY HATHEWAY 7767 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8542 SHARON M HURLEY 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8542 BEDILLION 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA108 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8543 PATRICK C WITT 7767 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8543 PETER LOPRESTI 7767 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8543 ANDREW J SHELDON 7767 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8543 PATRICK J SEBRECHTS 7758 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8560 TYLER BOETTCHER 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8560 LETITIA M KOEBKE 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA108 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8541 DEBRA ZIROLLA 7758 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8541 MERILEE MILLER-DECKER 7758 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8541 NANCY DIMACCIO 7757 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 BRENDAN P WOOD 7757 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 SEDDIG 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA107 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 ZOIA ANGUELOVA 7757 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 WILLIAM J & C MENTER 7757 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 ROBERT J BATES 7757 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8539 CARTER 7797 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 F MULLER 7797 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 JESSICA F MCDONALD 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 COLE KNIGHT 7797 CAMINITO MONARCA104 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 EVE E EISENHAUER 7768 CAMINITO MONARCA 105 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8544 KLAUS P MEINHARD 7797 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 JEFFREY B Sc. SUSAN MANGAN 7797 CAMINITO MONARCAlllD CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8551 KERSTEN 7787 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 MICHAEL E & CLAUDIA MONGE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA3-101 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8548 NICOLE A HOLCOMB 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA3102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 LAURAL R SOLON 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA103 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 I 9091S ®AUaAV ® 7 ^a6p3 dn-dOd asodxa I o^auj|6uo|epuaa ®091S a»B|duiai ®AiaAv asn s|9qBl ®|9ad ASB3 AM3AV-O9-008-I. UIOS'AiaAB'AAiMM y indn-dod pjoqaj a| jaifA^j j apuueainipeqeif zaiidau luauiabjeqs apsuas ^ • i T ®091S (g,Atl3AV W-iBqeB, a| zasunn I jaiad ^ sa|j3e| satianbju-p ANDREA GRAYSON 77 87 CAMINITO MONARCA104 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 DOLORES VALDES 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA105 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 ADAM J STONE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA106 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 DANIEL T BURKE 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA3-107 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8548 DEBORAH A BLUNDELL 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8549 ANDREW WEIS 7787 CAMINITO MONARCA3-110 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8550 JOSEPH Sc JESSICA FREEMAN 7787 CAMINITO MONARCAlll CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8550 ROSINE FITZPATRICK 7777 CAMINITO MONARCAIOO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8546 ANTHONY Sc MARTHA URBINO 7777 CAMINITO MONARCAlOl CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8546 NANCY ULRICH 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA102 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8546 JOHN CASE 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA105 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8546 LORI A NELSON 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA106 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8546 EUGENIE IRELAND 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA107 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8547 GAIL S LEE 7777 CAMINITO MONARCA109 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8547 JANET L DAVIS 7777 CAMINITO MONARCAllO CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8547 SATOMI U SCHUPP 7777 CAMINITO M0NARCA4111 CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8547 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES I 1940 LEVANTE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92009-5174 SERLET-ROMERO 2002 2230 VISTA LA NISA CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8711 KARIN S & RICHARD BARNES 7623 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 MEHRY SADIGHINEJAD 2002 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 FARNAZ & IRAZ NOOHI 2008 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 LUCILLE V WOLFE 2012 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 GHER 2014 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 AHRANJANI 2016 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 WILLIAM E & ROSEMARY SUGG 2010 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 THOMAS A Sc JANICE KROUSKUP 2012 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 DONALD S Sc FRANCES DIEHL 2016 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 GIORGIO FRONDONI 2014 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 ROGER VANDERHORST 2008 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 R W RICHARD 2006 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 I o09is®AUaAV T MisBpa dn-dod asodxa I Ol au!| 6uo|e puaa ®091S e»B|duiai ®AjaAV asn si»qB1 ®|3ad Aseg A>l3AV-O9-008-t uios'AjaAe'iMmm I ^ndn-dod pioqaj a| jai^A^j j ap uye ajnqseq e| ^ zayda)! luauiaDjei|3 ap suas T ®09I.S ®A>I3AV (ueqeB a| zasmm J3|ad 9 saipe^ sauanb!).^ J P WUSTMAN 2004 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 LILLIAN DZANDZARA 2002 SALIENTE WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7920 REBECCA W REYNOLDS 7627 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 BRENT C SCHAFFER 7629 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 PATRICK S Sc JULIE MARSHALL 7631 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 JEROME Sc NECHAMA EILFORT 7633 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 MARK & PATRICIA PARMELY 7635 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 KAO-BEEN BRIMNER 7637 RUSTICO DR CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7919 JERRY J Sc PEGGY MOFFATT 2011 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 INGE A MORGAN 2021 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 LARRY N FULLER 2031 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 RONALD W WILSON 2041 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 ALEXANDER & ANTOINETTE DJOKK 2051 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 EDWARD A MEINARDUS 2061 ESCENICO TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7910 TERRY A & KATHLEEN CLIFFORD 2052 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 KENICHI MORI 2032 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 MICHAEL Sc SUMMER POUNTNEY 2022 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 GLORIA Sc CASEY RUBENFELD 2002 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 MENDOZA 2005 2001 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 RYAN M Sc STACEY WILLIAMS 2011 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 GARY D & KATHLEEN MCDANIEL 2021 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 J Sc GEORGIA LEMON 2031 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 RILLING 2041 LADERA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8521 PUNKIN 2008 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 GHER 2014 SUBIDA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7924 WEENINK 2004 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 KNOX *M* 2002 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 DAVID & SUE FIGUEROA 2001 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 SALUD 2003 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 WILLIAM R BELKO 2005 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 ®09is ®AU3AV j wi^Spa dn-dod asodxa I otaui|Buo|epuag T I I ®09I.S a»B|duiai ®AiaAV asn siaqBi ®|a8d Aseg T I Aa3AV-O9-008-l ujo3*Aj8Ae'Mmm y ondn-dod pjoqaj a| jaj^A^j j ap uye ainqseq e| f zayda}! iuauia6jeq3 ap suas T ®091S ®A}i3AV »ueqe6.a| zasyi^n ja|8d f sa|pe}sauanbi]|.-| JOHN P Sc KAREN KLING 2009 PINTORESCO CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-7915 TIMOTHY Sc MAUREEN KRUPA 2032 CIMA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8501 CLIFFORD F & CAROLYN QUA *B* 2002 CIMA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8501 JOHN B Sc DIANE STRAYER 2001 CIMA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8501 THOMAS HOLLENBECK *M* 2011 CIMA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8501 ROBERT H Sc SUE RANDOLPH 2021 CIMA CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8501 JOYCE RAYMER 2022 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8502 KENT Sc DONNA TINDEL 2012 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8502 CHARLES D HAWBAKER 2001 CUMBRE CT CARLSBAD, CA 92009-8502 JEANETTE C HERRAS 7088 SITIO FRONTERA CARLSBAD, CA 92009-2045 NORLING 723 0 SANTA BARBARA ST CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4635 JOHN Sc SANDRA NABORS 7356 MELODIA TER CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4864 TONY C FINN PO BOX 13 0772 CARLSBAD, CA 92013-0772 SHERON A MAXWELL PO BOX 131552 CARLSBAD, CA 92013-1552 LACOSTA TOWER LLC PO BOX 847 CARLSBAD, CA 92018-0847 STEPHEN B LEVY PO BOX 231990 ENCINITAS, CA 92023-1990 ALLISON W EVANS PO BOX 235268 ENCINITAS, CA 92023-5268 B J D PO BOX 232637 ENCINITAS, CA 92023-2637 KOPION GROUP LLC 1650 N COAST HIGHWAY 101 B ENCINITAS, CA 92024-1020 DMG 1846 AMALFI DR ENCINITAS, CA 92024-1286 FRANCK Sc MARYLINE HOUDIN 552 CERRO ST ENCINITAS, CA 92024-4703 BUJAS 279 HILLCREST DR 12 ENCINITAS, CA 92024-1562 KENNETH D & LESLIE SMITH 1194 QUAIL GARDENS CT ENCINITAS, CA 92024-2784 GAIL A WILLIS 1713 DEERFIELD RD ENCINITAS, CA 92024-3014 SILBERG 1825 SIENNA CANYON DR ENCINITAS, CA 92024-5537 KOERNER 3563 LOMAS SERENAS DR ESCONDIDO, CA 92029-7908 CORNWELL 7035 ELFIN OAKS RD ESCONDIDO, CA 92029-5906 WOLF 2117 BUNKER VIEW WAY OCEANSIDE, CA 92056-3221 MILAN MALETIC 14259 MARIANA DR POWAY, CA 92064-2834 ALEJANDRA MOLINARI 524 VIA DE LA VALLE J SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 T 9091S ®AU3AV ^ f Mxa6p3 dn-dOd asodxa I o) aug 6uo|e puaa T 1 ®09I.S aiBiduiai ^AJBAV asn s|sqBi ®|aad Aseg AM3AV-OD-008-I. uioa-AjaAe'/wmM I }wdn-dod pjoqaj a| ja|9A9J j ap ui^ aini|3ei| e| zaydaii luauiatueqa ap suas T T ®09 IS ®AM3AV IHsqeB a| zasji.nn I J8|8d 9 saipej sauanbi^i SEAN M FEENEY 145 S BENT AVE SAN MARCOS, CA 92078-1201 JAMES H WALDRUFF 1810 LODGEPOLE RD SAN MARCOS, CA 92078-5408 TIPPLE 1161 COLUlffiUS WAY VISTA, CA 92081-8941 MICHAEL D HUGHES 1520 1ST ST K303 CORONADO, CA 92118-1529 EUGENE & BARBARA KADING 2871 ARNOLDSON AVE SAN DIEGO, CA 92122-2132 MONARCH VILLAS HOMEOWNERS ASi 6256 GREENWICH DR 520 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122-5971 ROSEMARY BRINIG 12939 SEABREEZE FARMS DR SAN DIEGO, CA 92130-3738 DANIEL A OSMAN *M* 11099 CAMINITO ARCADA SAN DIEGO, CA 92131-3667 GOMBOS FAMILY 78440 LINKS DR PALM DESERT, CA 92211-1613 SHALIN LIU 32 GALENA IRVINE, CA 92602-2442 CAROLE V KATAYAMA 14881 SUMAC AVE IRVINE, CA 92606-2633 GRANT TUCKER PROPERTIES PO BOX 7974 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-7974 ROBERT L Sc NANCY DUELL 31901 PASEO CIELO SAN JUAN CAPI, CA 92675-3410 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES I 800 MORNINGSIDE DR FULLERTON, CA 92835-3597 JOSEPH Sc MILLIE MESSINA *B* 1021 PEBBLE BEACH DR CLAYTON, CA 94517-2224 ALAN J Sc ANN WELCH 208 CIRCULO NUEVO ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928-1920 ROBERT M Sc SHERYL RHOADES 209 BORDEAUX LN SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066-3253 NOLAND 9497 CENTRAL AVE ORANGEVALE, CA 95662-4301 LAURA E BASILE *M* 4405 8STH AVE GIG HARBOR, WA 98335-6112 *** 199 Printed **' A notice has been niniieci to i.n property owner^/occupants !i.,;t8d herein. Dale: S-cpS-^S s:gr;clure:_XTl . 90915 ®A^aAV J wisBpg dn-dod asodxa i oiauii 6uo|epuaa jaded paaj T f I 1 I ®09l.5 ajBiduiai ®AjaAV asn s|8qBl ®|aad Aseg CITY OF ^ CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT NAME: LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER PROJECT NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 PROJECT LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, soutii of tiie intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request to allow for tiie demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located witiiin an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow for tiie construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of wiiicii are proposed to be designated as inclusionary tiousing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including tiie demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. AVAILABILITY: A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/planning-notices.aspx. COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration should be directed to Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at the address listed below or via email to Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 20 days ofthe date ofthis notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. Ifyou have any questions, please call Shannon Werneke in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4621. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD December 24. 2013 - Januarv 12. 2014 PUBLISH DATE December 24. 2013 Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax SITE MAP N NOT TO SCALE La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/ SUP 13-03 / MS 13-01 / PUD 13-02 CITY OF ^ CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carisbadca.gov MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center PROJECT NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 PROJECT LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south ofthe intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request to allow for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow for the construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing, and a single-story parking structure. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows: Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached sheet have been added to the project. I I The proposed project MAY have "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. (Mitigated Negative Declaration applies only to the effects that remained to be addressed). r~l Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required. A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. ADOPTED: ICLICK HERE date! , pursuant to fCLiCK HERE Administrative Approval. PC/CC Resolution No., or CC Ordinance No.] ATTEST: DON NEU City Planner Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8558 fax CITY OF initial Study ^ CARLSBAD 1. PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center 2. PROJECT NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 3. LEADAGENCY: 4. PROJECTAPPUCANT: City of Carlsbad Excel La Costa, LLC 1635 Faraday Avenue William Stone, Geoff Sherman Carlsbad, CA 92008 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 5. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, City of Carlsbad (760) 602-4621, Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov 6. PROJECT LOCATION: East side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16, -17 7. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Local Shopping Center (L) and Open Space (OS) 8. ZONING: Neighborhood Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay (C-l-Q) 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Development Plan Amendment (SDP 78-03(D)), Site Development Plan (SDP 13- 03), Special Use Permit (SUP 13-01), Nonresidential Planned Development Permit (PUD 13-02), and Minor Subdivision (MS 13-01) to allow for the demolition of two commercial buildings totaling 45,830 square feet (SF) located within an existing 123,822 SF shopping center, also known as La Costa Towne Center, and to allow for the construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, a parking structure, and an expansion to the parking lot. The existing shopping center is 15.24 acres (gross) in size and spans two legal parcels (APNs 216- 124-16, -17). APN 216-124-17 has frontage on La Costa Avenue to the north and El Camino Real to the west. APN 216-124-16 has frontage along El Camino Real to the west. Two parcels, which are separately owned and currently developed with office and commercial uses, are located in the shopping center but are not a part of the proposed project (APNs 216-124-15, -25). The La Costa Towne Center shopping center is anchored by a vacant Vons grocery store, as well as five one and two-story multi-tenant retail and office buildings. The properties proposed to be redeveloped are located outside of the boundaries of the coastal zone. The shopping center is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 6, has a zoning designation of Neighborhood Commercial with a Qualified Development Overlay (C-l-Q) and a General Plan Land Use designation of Local Shopping Center (L) and Open Space (OS). The proposed project entails the demolition of the existing Vons building (31,070 SF) and an additional building (14,760 SF), addressed as 7710 and 7740 El Camino Real, respectively. In place of the existing 31,070 SF Vons building, which is located on the northern third ofthe shopping center, a three-story, 95,078 SF mixed use building is proposed to be constructed. The first floor of the new mixed use building, comprising 35,584 SF in area, is proposed to be occupied by retail uses. The 2""* June 2013 -1- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 and 3"^ floors of the mixed use building will be occupied by a total of 48 multi-family units (16, one bedroom units, 6, two bedroom units, and 2, three bedroom units on each floor) ranging in size from 700 to 1,391 SF, as well as a common recreation area on the 2"'' floor. At its closest point, the building is proposed to be setback from El Camino Real approximately 36 feet. Two pedestrian access points are proposed from El Camino Real to the proposed development. Including a proposed architectural tower, the building will have a maximum height of 45 feet. A second, two-story mixed use building is proposed to be constructed southeast ofthe existing Vons building in an area which is currently occupied by surface parking and ornamental landscaping. The building will have an overall floor area of 18,320 SF and a maximum height of approximately 42 feet (including architectural tower). A total of 9,324 SF of retail area will occupy the bottom floor and 8,996 SF will occupy the second floor. A total of 12 multi-family units (8, one bedroom units and 4, two bedroom units) ranging in size from 624 to 1,001 SF are proposed on the second floor. These 12 units are proposed to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement for the mixed use development. An open-air pedestrian bridge is proposed across the main driveway off of La Costa Avenue to link the residential uses and allow the tenants to utilize the common recreation area and access the parking. Overall, including the demolition of the two buildings and the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings, a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed. The proposed density for 60 residential units is 22.2 dwelling units per acre (10.83 net acres x 0.25 = 2.7 acres; 60 units/2.7 acres = 22.2 dwelling units/acre). Parking for the new retail and residential uses is proposed to be provided by a combination of surface parking and a single-level parking structure, a portion of which is subterranean, with open parking on top. Overall, a total of 470 parking spaces currently exist in the shopping center and a total of 608 parking spaces are proposed. Therefore, a net gain of 138 parking spaces is proposed to accommodate the additional retail area and new multi-family residential use. The parking structure is proposed to be located adjacent to, as well as below, the proposed three-story mixed use building. Access to the parking structure will be provided by a new driveway entry proposed off of El Camino Real. In exchange, one driveway, which is located south of the new driveway and adjacent to Building 7740 (to be demolished), will be removed and replaced with parking, pedestrian access to the site from El Camino Real and landscaping. The front yard setback from El Camino Real forthe parking structure and additional parking lot will be 17.5 feet and 14.5 feet, respectively. Grading for the proposed project includes a total of 54,600 cubic yards of cut for the development of the parking garage, a portion of which is below grade. As no fill is required, a total of 54,600 cubic yards is proposed to be exported from the project site. In order to allow separate ownership for the existing and proposed retail area, as well as the new residential area, a three-lot vertical parcel map is proposed. Parcel 1, which will comprise the new retail area, parking structure and surface parking is proposed to be 7.78 acres in size. Parcel 2, 7.44 acres in size, will include the existing retail/office area and surface parking. Parcel 3 is proposed to allow for the new multi-family units to be separately owned. It is proposed as a vertical parcel, above the retail area on Parcel 1, and is 1.37 acres in size. The proposed applications are summarized below. Site Development Plan Amendment. SDP 78-03(D). The existing Site Development Plan for the shopping center, SDP 78-03(C) is proposed to be amended to address the development proposal. A November, 2013 Initial Study 9 La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Site Development Plan is required for projects which are located in the Qualified Development Overlay (Q) zone. Site Development Plan, SDP 13-03. A Site Development Plan is required for the 12 inclusionary housing units proposed on-site (i.e., 20% of residential units provided). Included as a component of the Site Development Plan is a request to exceed the 35-foot-height limitation ofthe C-1 zone and El Camino Real Corridor Standards pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.100. CMC Section 21.85.100 allows modifications to standards for projects which incorporate inclusionary housing. Special Use Permit, SUP 13-01. A Special Use Permit is required for projects which are located adjacent to El Camino Real, which is designated as a scenic corridor. The proposed project is located within Area 5 ofthe El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (ECR Standards). Area 5 ofthe ECR Standards currently allow for a maximum height of 35 feet. As the project proposes a height up to 45 feet, a deviation to the standards is required and will be processed as an offset pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.100. No deviation is needed for the proposed front yard setback from El Camino Real since a 10-foot front yard setback was approved as part ofthe original Site Development Plan. Non-Residential Planned Development Permit. PUD 13-02. A Non-Residential Planned Development Permit is proposed for the mixture of residential and commercial units and to allow for reciprocal access and parking throughout the shopping center. Minor Subdivision. MS 13-01. The shopping center currently spans two legal parcels (APNs 216-124- 16, -17). A Minor Subdivision is proposed to allow for the property to be subdivided into three parcels. Included in this proposal, is a vertical parcel to allow for the multi-family residential uses above the 1^'floor retail uses to be separately managed and owned. 10. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING/SURROUNDING LAND USES: The La Costa Towne Center Shopping Center is characterized as an infill lot located within Local Facilities Management Zone 6, in the southeast quadrant of the city, approximately 2.5 miles from the Pacific Ocean and outside ofthe boundaries ofthe coastal zone. The site is bounded by La Costa Avenue, a secondary arterial road, as well as an office building to the north, two-story multi-family units to the south, one and two-story single-family uses to the east, and El Camino Real, a prime arterial road, to the west. The existing shopping center is located approximately 15-20 feet above the elevation of El Camino Real. While a majority of the developed area is flat, a large uphill perimeter slope is located along the eastern quarter of the property. The slope ranges in elevation from a high point of 180' above mean sea level (AMSL) to 80' AMSL at the base of the slope. Overhead power lines for SDGSiE traverse through a 50-foot-wide easement, which is located midway up the eastern slope. The uphill perimeter slope is primarily landscaped with non-native, ornamental trees. 11. OTHER REQUIRED AGENCY APPROVALS (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): None 12. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: Not applicable November, 2013 -3- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 13. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. • Aesthetics • Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Population & Housing D Agriculture & Forestry Resources Hazards/Hazardous Materials • Public Services • Air Quality • Hydrology/Water Quality • Recreation D Biological Resources • Land Use & Planning G Transportation/Traffic 14. PREPARATION: The Initial Study forthe subject project was prepared by: /Z//t//5 Shanndn Werneke, Associate Planner Date November, 2013 -4-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 15. DETERMINATION: (to be completed by Lead Agency} On the basis ofthis initial evaluation: • I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 13 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described herein have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. • I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. • I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described herein. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. • I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required. 16. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The initial study for this project has been reviewed and the \vironmental determination, indicated above, is hereby approved. environmental aeter DON NEU, City Planner Date 17. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES: This is to certify that I have reviewed the mitigation measures in the Initial Study and concur with the addition ofthese measures to the project. I Signature . _ Date November, 2013 "•->" initial Study Project Name: La Costa Towne Center Project No: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported ifthe referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. -6- Initial Study Project Name: La Costa Towne Center Project No: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Impact with lorated Impact 1. AESTHETICS entially lificant sthan nificant :. Incorp 1 1 Ul c Impact Wouid the project: Pot Sigi Les Mit S .SP o z a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? • • • IEI b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to. trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic • • • highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the • • • site and its surroundings? • • • d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would • • Rl • adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? • • 1^ • a-b) No Impact. The project site is located on the east side of El Camino Real and south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. The site is currently developed with an existing 123,822 SF shopping center which is situated approximately 15-20 feet above the elevation of El Camino Real. Surrounding land uses include a shopping center and bank to the north, multi-family uses to the south, single-family uses to the east, and El Camino Real to the west. As the project is surrounded on all sides by development and is located adjacent to a major transportation corridor as well as transit stops, it is considered to be an infill lot. The proposal to demolish two existing buildings and construct two mixed use buildings as well as a single level parking structure will not have any substantially adverse effects on public scenic vistas or substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway as the project is not located adjacent to a Scenic highway and the developed site does not have any scenic vistas. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. c) Less than Significant Impact. The project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings in that the property is currently developed with a shopping center. Further, as the existing shopping center is currently underutilized and outdated in design, the proposal to add two new mixed use buildings is expected to revitalize the shopping center and improve the visual quality ofthe site. While the proposed project is located adjacent to a designated scenic corridor. El Camino Real, and is therefore subject to the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor development and design standards, the proposed mixed use buildings will not be located any closer to El Camino Real than what was previously permitted (i.e., 10 feet) pursuant to the approved Site Development Plan (SDP 78-03C). In addition, the project will incorporate extensive landscaping in the front yard setback to visually enhance its current degraded appearance. Moreover, the request to exceed the allowable 35-foot height limitation pursuant to CMC Section 21.26.030, can be permitted pursuant to CMC Section 21.53.120(B) if inclusionary housing is incorporated into the project design and findings can be made to support the increase. Given the urban context ofthe surroundings land uses, the request to construct a three-story mixed use building up to 45 feet in height will not cause a significant impact on a scenic vista of the site nor will it degrade the visual quality of the site because of the existing vacant Vons building. With exception to the deviation from the El Camino Real Corridor Standards required for the building height. Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 compliance with the Municipal Code, will reduce the potential impacts to the site's visual character to a less than significant level. Short-term construction-related impacts would consist primarily of grading and building activities, including the presence of construction equipment, truck traffic, construction debris, and temporary safety signage. While views across the project site from surrounding areas as well as from El Camino Real would be disrupted, no valuable aesthetic resources would be destroyed as a result of construction-related activities. These short-term impacts (approximately 12 months) are temporary and would cease upon project completion. Thus, the construction-related impacts to the site's visual character would be less than significant. d) Less than Significant Impact. The primary sources of exterior lighting in an urban setting are typically associated with street lighting, parking lot lighting, building illumination through signage and other lighting, security lighting and landscape lighting. Depending upon the location of the light source and its proximity to adjacent light-sensitive uses, light introduction has the potential to be a nuisance, thus affecting adjacent areas and diminishing the view of the clear night sky. Light spillage is typically defined as unwanted illumination from light fixtures on adjacent properties. Perceived glare is the unwanted and potentially objectionable result from looking directly into a light source of a luminary. Sensitive land uses, such as the proposed multi-family residential uses and the adjacent multi-family and single-family uses to the east and south, could be impacted by the light and glare from the proposed project. Existing lighting conditions at the La Costa Towne shopping center include parking lot, security, landscaping and signage lighting. In addition, street lighting as well as vehicle headlights are present along La Costa Avenue to the north and El Camino Real to the west. The proposal to demolish two existing commercial buildings and construct two mixed use buildings as well as a single level parking structure, will not have a significant impact on light and glare as the shopping center currently exists in a developed, urban context, both on-site and offsite. The proposed parking lots will be illuminated with standard parking lot lighting. While an increase in light will be created by the project, the impacts will be minimal since the parking light fixtures and exterior building light fixtures will be shielded and directed downward to reduce the impacts caused by glare. This will limit any impacts to the adjacent single-family residential uses to the east, which are located approximately 100 feet upslope form the proposed development as well as the new multi-family uses proposed as a component of the mixed use project. Therefore, potential operational light and glare impacts would be less than significant. November, 2013 -8- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 II. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES* Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuantto the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ofthe California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? • • • M b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? • • • c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? • • • m * In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory af forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.) a-c) No Impact. The project site is currently developed with a shopping center, is located in an urbanized area, and is zoned for commercial as well as mixed uses (C-l-Q). The proposed project will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use; does not confiict with existing zoning for agricultural uses or Williamson Act contracts; and there are no agricultural uses within the vicinity of the project site, nor is the project proposing any changes which, due to its location or nature, would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural and forestry resources are anticipated. in. AIR QUALITY* Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? • • • m b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? • • • c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? • • • November, 2013 -9-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 IH. AIR QUALITY* Itially ficant Impact than ficant with ncorporated rhan ficant Impact ts a a. c Would the project: Potei Signil Ussi Signil Mit.l Uss-SignH c o z d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? • • • e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? • • • * Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. a) No Impact. As discussed in the Air Quality Technical Report (Scientific Resources Associated, October, 2013), the project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin, which is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the state standard for PMio, PM2.5,1-Hour and 8-Hour ozone, and the Federal 8- Hour Standard for ozone. The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). The RAQS outlines the APCD's plans and regulatory control measures designed to attain state air quality standards for ozone. The RAQS, which was initially adopted in 1991, is updated on a triennial basis with the most recent update occurring in April 2009. The APCD has also developed the SDAB's input into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) which is required under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) for pollutants that are designated as being in nonattainment of national air quality standards for the air basin. The SIP relies on the same information from SANDAG to develop emission inventories and emission control strategies that are included in the attainment demonstration forthe air basin. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. In addition, the project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed 60 dwelling units will be deducted from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Section 15125(d) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part ofthe RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? November, 2013 -10-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan and will in no way confiict with or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. The TCMs adopted by SANDAG identified job-housing balance, mixed use and transit corridor development as criteria for indirect source control. As part of the job-housing balance, SANDAG indicated that land use policies and programs shall be established to attract appropriate employers to residential areas and to encourage appropriate housing in and near industrial and business areas. Mixed use development should be designed to maximize walking and minimize vehicle use by providing housing, employment, education, shopping recreation and any support facilities within convenient proximity. The La Costa Towne Center project meets the criteria of the RAQS, SIP and SANDAG's Transportation Control Measures as it provides mixed use (i.e., multi-family apartments and commercial uses) along a major transportation corridor with bus stops located in close proximity to the site. The project is designed to maximize walking and minimize vehicle use by providing housing in close proximity to commercial uses in the shopping center as well as on the north side of La Costa Avenue. In addition, bicycle parking as well as designated parking stalls for energy efficient vehicles are provided on site. Accordingly, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable air quality plans and would not result in a significant impact. b) Less than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring stations to the project site are at Camp Pendleton and Escondido (E. Valley Parkway). Data available for these monitoring sites from 2009 through 2011, indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were as follows: the 1- Hour ozone concentration did not exceed the state standard any time during the years 2009 through 2011; the 8-Hour ozone concentration exceeded both the state and federal standard in 2009 and 2010 and the state standard was exceeded twice in 2011; the daily PMio concentration exceeded the state standard in 2009, but not in 2010 or 2011; and the federal standard for PMio and the federal 24-Hour PM2.5 standard was not exceeded during the 2009 through 2011 time period. No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the years 2009 through 2011. Short-term/construction impacts The proposed project includes construction activities associated with demolition, grading, paving, building construction, and architectural coating. The proposed project would be constructed over a time frame of approximately 12 months and is anticipated to begin mid-year in 2014. Construction activities would require the demolition of 45,830 SF and the export of approximately 54,600 cubic yards of soil. Table 4d of the Air Quality Technical Report (Scientific Resources Associated, October, 2013), provides detailed emission estimates associated with the proposed project. Emitted pollutants would include volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxide (SOx) as well as particulate matter (PM) less than 10 and 2.5 microns in diameter. As part ofthe project design features, it was assumed that standard dust control measures, such as watering the site three times daily and using soil stabilizers on unpaved roads, and architectural coating that comply with the SDAPCD, would be utilized during construction. As demonstrated in the table, emissions of criteria pollutants during construction would not only be temporary but would also be less than significant. November, 2013 -11- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would reduce fugitive dust emissions and other criteria pollutant emissions during construction. Long-term/operational impacts Operational impacts associated with the La Costa Towne Center project would include impacts associated with vehicular traffic, as well as sources such as energy use, consumer product use, and architectural coatings for maintenance purposes. Pursuant to the Traffic Impact Analysis for the La Costa Towne Center (Urban Systems Associates, May, 2013), the existing site generates 14,890 average daily trips (ADT). According to the Traffic Impact Analysis, upon build-out, the project will generate 15,682 ADT for a net increase of 791 ADT. Table 5 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Scientific Resources Associated, October, 2013) presents a summary of the emissions calculated for the existing conditions and the proposed project. Because the project involves renovation of an existing site, the project's operations will result in an incremental change in emissions. Based on the estimates of the emissions associated with Project operations, the emissions would decrease from existing levels and would, therefore, have a less than significant impact. Projects involving traffic impacts may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO "hot spots." To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the CO standard, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO "hot spots" was conducted. The Caltrans ITS Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (Caltrans, 1998) were followed to determine whether a CO "hot spot" is likely to form due to project-generated traffic. In accordance with the Protocol, CO "hot spots" are typically evaluated when (a) the level of service (LOS) of an intersection or roadway decreases to a LOS E or worse; (b) signalization and/or channelization is added to an intersection; and (c) sensitive receptors such as residences, commercial developments, schools, hospitals, etc. are located in the vicinity of the affected intersection or roadway segment. The Traffic Impact Analysis evaluated whether or not there would be a decrease in the level of service at the intersections affected by the Project. Based on the analysis, no intersections would experience a degradation in LOS to LOS E or F due to project traffic. Accordingly, the project would not result in CO "hot spots", and no significant impact would result. c) Less than Significant Impact. The San Diego air basin is currently in a state of non-attainment for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent an incremental contribution to a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with nonattainment pollutants would be minimal and below the screening-level thresholds. Given the limited emissions associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project's incremental contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. d) Less than Significant Impact. Any project emitting toxic air contaminants (TAC) which has the potential to directly impact a sensitive receptor located within one mile and results in a cancer risk greater than 10 in one million would be deemed to have a potentially significant impact. Air quality regulators typically define sensitive receptors as schools (preschool through 12"' grade), hospitals, residential care facilities, or day-care centers, or other facilities that may house individuals with health conditions that would be adversely impacted by changes in air quality. Residential land uses may also be considered sensitive receptors. The nearest sensitive receptors to the site are the single-family November, 2013 -12- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 residential uses located to the east and south and approximately 0.1 miles from the project. As discussed above, as well as in the Air Quality Technical Report (Scientific Resources Associated, October, 2013), the proposed project would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or concentrations. In addition, there are no other sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, project impacts would be less than significant. e) Less than Significant Impact. A project that proposes a use which would produce objectionable odors would be deemed to have a significant odor impact if it would affect a considerable number of offsite receptors. The construction of the proposed project will generate exhaust from the operation of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment, which may be considered objectionable to some people. Odors are highest near the source and would quickly dissipate offsite. Such exposure associated with the construction activities for the proposed project would be short-term in nature as well as transient, and would cease upon project completion. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial. Land uses associated with odor complaints typically involve agricultural uses, wastewater treatment facilities, food processing and chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills and fiberglass molding. The proposed mixed use project would not generate objectionable odors during business operations. In addition, the project would comply with city requirements applicable to maintenance of trash areas to minimize potential odors. Therefore, significant impacts related to odors would not occur. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Signiflcant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • • • b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • • • m c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? • • • d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? • • • m November, 2013 -13-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES entially lificant Impact Sthan lificant with . Incorporated sthan lificant Impact Impact Would the project: 5 .SP a. (/) Usi Sigi Mit Ul tlfl o z e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? • • • f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? • • • a-f) No Impact. The project site, currently developed with an existing shopping center, is substantially surrounded by urban land uses. Pursuant to the Biological Technical Report (Alden Environmental, Inc., November, 2012), no candidate, sensitive or special status species are located on the project site. In addition, no potential state or federal jurisdictional features (i.e., wetland or riparian areas) are located on-site. While the project's eastern uphill slope has a General Plan Land Use designation of Open Space (OS), the parcel is not located within an existing Hardline or Standards Areas pursuant to the city's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). In addition, there are no wildlife habitat linkages on the project site. Therefore, the project does not conflict with any ofthe provisions outlined in the HMP. The proposed mixed use project does not conflict with any other local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as CMC Chapter 21.210. Therefore, no impacts to biological resources are anticipated. V. CULTURAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? • • • m b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? • m • • c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? • • • d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? • • • a&d) No Impact. Pursuant to the Phase I Environmental Assessment (ADR Environmental Group, December, 2011), the existing shopping center was developed in 1981. Given the date of construction (i.e., less than 50 years old), no historical resources exist on the property. In addition, no conditions exist which would suggest that human remains are likely to be found on-site since the property has been previously disturbed and is currently developed with a shopping center. Therefore, no impacts are November, 2013 -14-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 anticipated. In the event that human remains are discovered, proper treatment would be required in accordance with the applicable state laws. b) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Based on review of the Map 5.8-2 of the Final EIR for the General Plan Update, (March, 1994), the project site is not located in a known archaeologically-sensitive area. In addition, as the project site has been previously graded for the development of the existing shopping center, the probability that the demolition and construction would impact any undocumented buried archaeological resource is moderately low. Notwithstanding the above, given that excavation is required for the construction of the subterranean parking structure, mitigation measures are proposed to address the potential impact to any archaeological resources that may be discovered during construction. Compliance with mitigation measures CULTURAL-1 and CULTURAL-2 would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: CULTURAL-1 - Priorto the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor ground-disturbing activities. The qualified archaeologist shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the archaeologist and city staff. The City shall verify that the archaeological monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In the event any potential cultural resource is uncovered during the course of the project construction, ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find shall be redirected until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by the archaeological monitor. If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If archaeological resources are encountered during excavation or grading, the archaeological monitor shall direct the contractor to avoid all work in the immediate area for a reasonable period of time to allow the archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and determine an appropriate course of action. The appropriate course of action may include, but not be limited to avoidance, recordation, relocation, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for pursuing the appropriate activities, including salvage of discovered resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 ofthe CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. Recovered artifact materials and data shall be cataloged and analyzed. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards or the collection will be repatriated to the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), as specified in the pre- excavation agreement. If any human remains are discovered, all construction activity in the immediate area ofthe discovery shall cease immediately, and the Archaeological monitor shall notify the County Medical Examiner pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5. Should the Medical Examiner determine the human remains to be Native American; the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Native American Monitor (pursuant to Mitigation Measure CULTURAL-2), in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission, shall inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the City of Carlsbad, and the project contractor, actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated November, 2013 -15" Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 with Native American burials. The project contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains before resuming construction activities. CULTURAL-2 - Prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain the services ofa Native American monitor. The purpose ofthis monitoring will be to allow for tribal observation of trenching excavation including formalized procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. The City shall verify that the Native American monitor has been retained prior to the issuance ofa grading permit. Prior to implementation ofthe monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the appropriate Native American Tribe and the developer. The Native American representative(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. The Native American monitor shall be on- site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the monitor and city staff. c) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Pursuant to the Geotechnical Evaluation (Ninyo & Moore, July, 2012) prepared for the proposed project, the geologic setting on-site consists of Quaternary-aged surficial deposits, underlain by Tertiary (Del Mar Formation) and Cretaceous-age sedimentary rocks. Pursuant to Map 5.8-1 of the Final EIR for the General Plan Update, (March, 1994), the site is located in a potentially significant fossil area. In addition, it is noted that the Del Mar Formation has produced a large number of vertebrate and invertebrate fossils. As the project grading has the potential to disturb undisturbed soils which may contain fossils, a mitigation measure is proposed (PALEO-1) to reduce the potential impacts paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: PALEO-1 A. Prior to any grading of the project site, a paleontologist shall be retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil resources. B. A copy of the paleontologist's report shall be provided to the City Planner prior to issuance of a grading permit. C. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to collect matrix samples for laboratory processing through fine screens. D. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the City Planner during the grading process. E. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area ofan exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage artifacts. F. All fossils collected may be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. G. Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading activities of the project shall be resolved by the City Planner and the City Engineer. November, 2013 -16- Initial StUdy La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS mtialiy ificant Impact than Ificant with Incorporated than ificant Impact mpact Would the project: Pote Sign Uss Sign Mit. Uss Sign o z a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence ofa known fault? Referto Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • • • ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? • • m • iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? • • • iv. Landslides? • • • b) Result in substantial soil erosion orthe loss of topsoil? • • • c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result ofthe project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? • • • d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Section 1802.3.2 ofthe California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? • • • e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? • • • a.i-a.iii) Less than Significant Impact. Pursuant to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the project (Ninyo & Moore, July, 2012), the subject site is not located within any Earthquake Fault Zones as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map, nor are there any known major or active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Because of the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. The main seismic hazard that may affect the site is ground shaking from one ofthe active regional faults, the nearest of which is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located 5 miles west of the site. Due to the relatively dense nature of on-site soils, the risk of seismic-related ground failure or liquefaction is not a significant concern. In addition, the proposed project would be constructed in compliance with the California Building Code which includes specific design measures which are intended to maximize structural stability in the event of an earthquake. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated. a.iv) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Pursuant to the Geotechnical Evaluation, based on a review of geologic maps, there are no mapped landslides underlying the subject site; however, the site is located in an area classified as marginally susceptible to landslides. In addition, as November, 2013 -17-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 noted in the report, a previous evaluation of the site in 1977 indicated that an ancient landslide was present at the site based on the presence of claystone and siltstones with slickensided surfaces indicating shearing. Furthermore, a boring taken for the proposed project in the area proposed to be developed with the two-story mixed use building (i.e., east side of shopping center) encountered possible landslide deposits. To address the potential for slope instability in this area and to stabilize the area proposed to be excavated, a series of tie back anchors are proposed, the details of which are discussed in the Geotechnical Evaluation. In order to reduce the potential impacts associated with the potential for landslides to a less than significant level, mitigation measure GEO-1 is proposed. Mitigation Measure: GEO-1. The project shall incorporate all engineering recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Ninyo & Moore, dated July 13, 2012, during grading, construction and operations to reduce any potential geotechnical hazards at the project site. These recommendations shall be stipulated in the construction contracts and specifications. b) tess than Significant Impact. Grading and earthwork activities associated with the proposed project, which includes the construction of a single-level parking structure, would expose soils to short- term erosion by wind and water. All demolition and construction activities would be subject to compliance with the California Building Code, the city's Excavation and Grading Ordinance, as well as the recommendations of the Preliminary Stormwater Plan (Stevens Cresto Engineering, January, 2013). As discussed in the Preliminary Stormwater Plan, the implementation of and standard city-required erosion control techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would reduce soil erosion impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level In addition, substantial soil erosion or loss of top soil is not expected to occur as a result of long-term operations since a majority ofthe project site will be either be developed with the mixed use buildings or repaved. Any pervious areas that are proposed would be landscaped, which would reduce any potential impacts to a less than significant level. c) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is generally underlain by the Tertiary-age Delmar Formation. Pursuant to the Geotechnical Evaluation, an exploratory boring also encountered fill soils to depths up to 23 feet as well as possible landslide deposits which may extend to depths of more than 36 feet below existing grade. As discussed above, to reduce the potential impacts associated with the potenfial for landslides to a less than significant level, mitigation measure GEO-1 is proposed. Based on the generally dense nature of the formation materials occurring below the groundwater, the potential for liquefaction at the site is not significant. Due to the presence of groundwater at a depth as shallow as 3.5 feet, groundwater seepage is expected to be a constraint during construction ofthe subterranean parking garage. Compliance with mitigation measure GEO-1 will reduce the impact to a less than signiflcant level. d) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Pursuant to the Geotechnical Evaluation, on-site soils have a medium potential for expansion. Accordingly, recommendations for deepened foundations and supplemental recommendations for thickened slabs-on-grade with reinforcing are described in the Geotechnical Evaluation. Compliance with mitigation measure GEO-1 will reduce the impact to a less than significant level. November,2013 -18" Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 e) No Impact. The proposed project does not propose septic tanks and will utilize the public sewer system. Therefore, there will be no impacts involving soils that support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Vll. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? • • m • b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purposes of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? • • • a-b) Less than Significant Impact. The City of Carlsbad has not adopted its own greenhouse (GHG) thresholds of significance and is, therefore, following guidance provided from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) report, CEQA and Climate Change, dated January, 2008, for interim screening criteria to determine when a GHG analysis would be required. Specifically, CAPCOA proposed a 900-metric tons of CO2 e (i.e., equivalent) screening threshold to evaluate whether a project requires further analysis. Projects with emissions above the 900 metric ton threshold are required to evaluate whether emissions can be reduced to below "business as usual" levels. Based on a state-wide goal to reduce GHG emissions and comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 32, a significance threshold of 28.35% below "business as usual" conditions was used in the Global Climate Change Evaluation (Scientific Resources Associated, October, 2012) prepared for the La Costa Towne Center project. "Business as usual" is defined as the emissions that would have occurred in the absence of reductions mandated under AB 32. Based on the latest guidelines and baseline emission calculations for energy efficiency, "business as usual" is considered to be the equivalent of Title 24 as of 2005. Pursuant to the Global Climate Change Evaluation (Evaluation), GHG emissions for the project (existing and proposed) were estimated separately for five (5) categories: construction; energy use, including electricity and natural gas usage; water consumption; solid waste handling; and transportation. Existing Conditions Taking into account the existing traffic counts pursuant to the Traffic Impact Analysis (Urban Systems Associates, 2012), as well as the fact that the existing buildings were constructed prior to the 2005 Title 24 standards. Table 4 of the Evaluation, estimates that the total existing operational CO2 equivalent emissions are 12,506 metric tons per year. Construction GHG Emissions Construction GHG emissions include emissions from heavy construction equipment, truck traffic for the export of material, and worker trips. Emissions were calculated utilizing the CalEEMod Model, which is the newest land use emissions model for completed and proposed construction. Pursuant to Table 5 in the Evaluation, construction CO2 equivalent emissions are estimated to be 1,103 metric tons. Lead agencies, including the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the City of San Diego, and the November, 2013 -19-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 County of San Diego, recommend that construction emissions be amortized over a 30-year period to account for the contribution of constructions emissions over a lifetime of the project. Amortizing emissions from construction of the proposed project over a 30-year period would result in an annual contribution of 37 metric tons of CO2 e. These emissions are added to the operational emissions to account for the contribution of construction to GHG emissions for the lifetime of the project. Operational GHG Emissions The property owner/applicant. Excel La Costa LLC, proposes to renovate and expand the existing shopping center with the addition of two mixed use buildings. Overall, a net gain off 3,078 SF of retail space and 60 multi-family units are proposed. The results ofthe inventory for operational emissions for business as usual for the proposed project are presented in the table below. These include GHG emissions associated with the new buildings (natural gas, purchased electricity), water consumption (energy embodied in potable water), solid waste management (including transport and landfill gas generation), and vehicles. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED OPERATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO Emission Source Annual Emissions (Metric tons/year) Emission Source CO2 CH4 N2O 0026 Operational Emissions Electricity Use 658 0.0274 0.0074 661 Natural Gas Use 44 0.0049 0.0001 44 Water Use 108 0.0045 0.0012 108 Solid Waste Management 49 --49 Vehicle Emissions 11,952 0.20 1.39 12,388 Amortized Construction Emissions 43 --37 Total 12,854 0.24 1.40 13,293 Global Warming Potential Factor 1 21 310 CO2 Equivalent Emissions 12,854 5 434 13,293 TOTAL CO2 Equivalent Emissions 13,293 Existing CO2 Equivalent Emissions 12,506 Net CO2 Equivalent Emissions 787 November, 2013 -20-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 As demonstrated in the table above, the net emissions associated with the La Costa Towne Center Project are below the 900 metric ton screening threshold under business as usual conditions. In addition, pursuant to Table 7 ofthe Global Climate Change Evaluation, with the implementation of GHG reduction measures such as state and/or federally-mandated energy/fuel efficiency and mobile source emission reductions, the proposed project will be more than 28.3% below "business as usual" levels. Therefore, the project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; nor will it confiict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The project will be consistent with the goals of AB 32, and would not result in a cumulatively significant global climate change impact. VIM. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? • • • m b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? • • • c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? • • • d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? • • • m e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • • • f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • • • m g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? • • • m h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? • • • a) No Impact. The proposed mixed use project would not involve the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials; therefore, no impact is anticipated. November, 2013 -21-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 b) tess than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Pursuant to the Phase I Environmental Assessment prepared for the project (ADR Environmental Group, December, 2011), no indications of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mold or lead-based paint were detected. However, during an on-site survey, suspect asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) were identified, including, but not limited to, vinyl sheet flooring and tiles, mastic, gypsum wallboard, joint compound, ceiling tiles, and roofing materials. As a result, a follow-up Asbestos Survey Report was completed (ADR Environmental Group, December, 2012) which confirmed the presence of asbestos-containing materials. While no significant damage to the materials was observed, because two buildings are proposed to be demolished, mitigation is required. Compliance with mitigation measure HAZ-1 will reduce impacts associated with asbestos to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: HAZ-1. Prior to physical disturbance of any ofthe identified asbestos-containing materials, asbestos abatement is required in accordance with applicable federal, state and local regulations. The removal of asbestos-containing materials requires the use of appropriate engineering controls by a contractor licensed by the California State Contractors License Board, and registered with the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). Evidence that this measure has been implemented shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the demolition or grading permit, whichever occurs first. c-f) No Impact. No existing or proposed schools are located within % mile of the project site. In addition, the McClellan-Palomar Airport is located approximately three (3) miles north of the subject shopping center. Pursuant to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Land Use Plan (ALUCP), the project is located outside of the boundaries of the Airport Infiuence Area (AIA). Further, the project site is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip nor is it included on any lists as a hazardous materials site, pursuant to the Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. g) No Impact. The project site is located adjacent to El Camino Real, which is one of five primary arterials designated in the General Plan as an emergency access or emergency evacuation route to move people during emergencies. The City of Carlsbad's Fire Department will provide all basic flre and emergency medical services to the project site. Specifically, the project will be served by Fire Station Nos. 2 and 6. The developed site is within a five minute response time for these flre stations. Additionally, the City of Carlsbad's Fire Department has agreements with other agencies, such as the County of San Diego, to provide additional services, including hazardous materials incident response. In the event of a large scale incident, the City of Carlsbad will activate its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and provide details to residents. The proposed mixed use project will not impact the ability to provide emergency services to the project site, nor will it physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. h) tess than Significant Impact. The subject parcel is located in a developed area and the project is considered as infill development. A west-facing manufactured slope, ranging in elevation from 45' to 180' MSL and primarily vegetated with eucalyptus trees, is located along the eastern boundary of the site. The at-grade porches proposed in association with two-story mixed use building are located approximately 10 feet from the base of the slope. While the City is considered a medium fire hazard area (Public Safety Element, General Plan), given the sparse vegetation located on the slope, the Fire November, 2013 -22- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Department has indicated that a Fire Protection/Suppression Plan will not be required forthe project. However, flre sprinklers will be required. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? • •HQ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering ofthe local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? • • • la c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration ofthe course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? • • s • d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration ofthe course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? • • s • e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? • • s • f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? • • H • g) Place housing within a lOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? • • • s h) Place within lOO-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? • • • s i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or dam? • • • E j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? • • • El a) tess than Significant Impact. The project is required by law to comply with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act, California Administrative Code Title 23, specific basin plan objectives identifled in the "Water Quality Control Plan for San Diego Basin" (WQCP), and the city's Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP). The WQCP contains specific objectives for the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, which includes the requirement to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). November, 2013 -23-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Construction activities as well as post-development activities for this project are covered under state- wide construction permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ issued by the State Water Resource Control Board Permit and regional Order No. R9-2013-0001 issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's San Diego region. As the project qualifies as a Priority Development Project, a Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan (Stevens Cresto Engineering, January, 2013) has been prepared for the project which addresses what treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be constructed to treat the post-development runoff from the project. The Plan addresses how pollutants from this project will be reduced, captured, filtered, and/or treated prior to discharge from the project site. In addition, as a standard condifion for this project, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required to control the quality of storm water runoff, erosion, and sediment during construction. Through the implementation of the recommendations of the above-noted reports, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Any impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements are therefore considered to be less than significant. b) No Impact. This project does not propose to directly draw any groundwater. The project will be served via existing public water distribution lines adjacent to the site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. c-f) Less than Significant Impact. Pursuant to the Preliminary Drainage Study (Stevens Cresto Engineering, January, 2013) prepared for the project, storm water runoff generated by the existing shopping center is collected within an existing storm drain located on-site and is conveyed to one of three public 24" RCP pipes crossing El Camino Real. As part ofthe proposed project, a new storm drain will be constructed to support the improvements. All three existing pipes discharge, within approximately 750 feet of each other, into Encinas Creek, located west of El Camino Real. Encinas Creek crosses La Costa Avenue to the north and ultimately fiows into Batiquitos Lagoon, which is approximately 2,000 feet northwest of the project site. Construction of the new storm drain will necessitate a minor redistribution of area between the localized basins. Per the Preliminary Drainage Study, this is not considered a diversion of runoff since all project outfalls discharge to the same location. As a Priority Project, and per Carlsbad's SUSWMP, the project is subject to hydromodification criteria as detailed in the San Diego County's Hydromodification Plan, dated March 25, 2011. As a result, the project will be designed to match pre-project runoff flow rates for storms up to a 10-year design storm. Since the La Costa Towne Center project proposes to redevelop a portion ofthe existing shopping center which is already paved, the net impact to the total impervious surface at the project will be negligible. Per the pre-project and post-project runoff calculations identifled in the Preliminary Drainage Study, the average runoff coefficient will not change. Total peak runoff will increase, however, due to the inclusion of a new storm drain within the project site, and the corresponding decrease in time of concentration. With the incorporation of Low Impact Development (LIDs) features and hydromodiflcation BMPs, the increase in runoff will reduce the impacts to a less than signiflcant level. In addition, pursuant to the Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan, the incorporation of bioretention basins, higher rate filters, and underground detention, will not only treat the water but will also reduce the rate of runoff leaving the site. Through these efforts, the project will not violate any water quality standards, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality; will not substantially alter existing drainage patterns causing November, 2013 -24- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding; and will not signiflcantly impact the capacity of storm water drainage systems. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than signiflcant. g-j) No Impact. The project site is not located within the lOO-year fiood hazard area. In addition, pursuant to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analvsis and Mapping Studv. Catastrophic Dam Failure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps (September 1992), based on the distance between the site and large, open bodies of water, as well as the elevation ofthe site with respect to the sea level (45-60 feet above mean sea level), the possibility of tsunami or mudflow is considered to be low. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? • • • El b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? • • • c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? • • • El a) Wo Impact. The proposal to renovate an existing shopping center, including the demolition of two existing commercial/retail buildings and the construction of two mixed use buildings, would be compatible with the surrounding commercial and residential land uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community; no impact is anticipated. b) tess than Significant Impact. The subject 15.24-acre property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial with a Qualified Development Overlay (C-l-Q) and has a General Plan Land Use designation of Local Shopping Center (L) and Open Space (OS). The property is also located adjacent to El Camino Real, which is identified as a scenic corridor. The proposal to renovate the shopping center, including the demolition of two commercial buildings and the construction of two mixed use buildings, is consistent with the goals and policies ofthe Housing Element (Programs 2.1 and 2.3) ofthe General Plan in that mixed use is highly encouraged in shopping centers. In addition, the proposed density for 60 residential units is 22.2 dwelling units per acre (10.83 net acres x 0.25 = 2.7 acres; 60 units/2.7 acres = 22.2 dwelling units/acre), which meets the minimum standard of 20 units per acre set forth in the Housing Element. The proposed uses are also consistent with the C-1 zone in that the residential component ofa mixed use project as well as retail uses are permitted by right in the C-1 zone. The McClellan-Palomar Airport is located approximately three (3) miles north of the subject shopping center. Pursuant to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Land Use Plan (ALUCP), the project is located outside of the boundaries of the Airport Infiuence Area (AIA). Therefore, the proposed project is not subject to the ALUCP. November, 2013 -25-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Entitlements required for the proposed project include the following: Site Development Plan Amendment, SDP 78-03(D). A Site Development Plan is required for projects which are located in the Qualified Development Overlay (Q) zone. The existing Site Development Plan for the shopping center, SDP 78-03(C), is proposed to be amended to address the development proposal. Including the architectural projections, the maximum height proposed for the three-story mixed use building is 45 feet. Parking for the new retail and residential uses is proposed to be provided by a combination of surface parking and a single-level parking structure with open parking on top. Overall, a total of 470 parking spaces currently exist in the shopping center and a total of 608 parking spaces are proposed. Therefore, a net gain of 138 parking spaces is proposed to accommodate the additional retail area and new multi-family residential use. Site Development Plan. SDP 13-03. A Site Development Plan is required for the proposed inclusionary housing units. Included as a component of the Site Development Plan for inclusionary housing, is a request to exceed the 35-foot-height limitation pursuant to the C-1 zone and the El Camino Real Corridor Standards, as well as encroach within the required front yard setback. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.100, modifications to the height and setbacks can be permitted to offset the cost of affordable housing. Special Use Permit. SUP 13-01. The proposed project is located within Area 5 ofthe El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (ECR Standards). Area 5 of the ECR Development Standards currently allow for a maximum height of 35 feet and front yard setback of 40 feet. As the project proposes a height up to 45 feet and front yard setback as close as 14.5 feet, a deviation to the standards is required. The original Site Development Plan for the shopping center established a 10- foot-wide front yard setback. As discussed above, because inclusionary housing is being provided on-site, modifications to the developments standards can be permitted as an offset. Non-Residential Planned Development Permit. PUD 13-02. A Non-Residential Planned Development Permit is proposed for the mixture of residential and commercial units and to allow for reciprocal access and parking throughout the shopping center. Minor Subdivision. MS 13-01. The shopping center currently spans two legal parcels (APNs 216-124- 16, -17) totaling 15.24 acres (gross). In order to allow separate ownership for the existing and proposed retail area as well as the new residential area, a three-lot vertical parcel map is proposed. Parcel 1, which will comprise the new retail area, parking structure and surface parking is proposed to be 7.78 acres in size. Parcel 2, 7.44 acres in size, will include the existing retail/office area and surface parking. Parcel 3 is proposed to allow for the new multi-family units to be separately managed and owned. It is proposed as a vertical parcel, above the retail area on Parcel 1, and is 1.37 acres in size. Pursuant to the C-1 zone, there are no minimum standards with respect to lot size or width. In addition to the above-noted permits, an allocation from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank (EDUB) is being requested forthe proposed 60 multi-family residential units. In orderto receive an allocation, the project must be consistent with City Council Policy No. 43 and the following findings must be made: (1) the project location and density shall be compatible with the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods and/or nearby existing or planned uses; (2) the project location and density shall be in accordance the applicable provisions ofthe General Plan and any other applicable planning document; November, 2013 -26- Initial StUdy La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 and (3) the project complies with the findings stated in the General Plan Land Use Element for projects that exceed the growth management control point for the applicable density range. The proposed mixed use project meets these findings; therefore, an allocation from the EDUB can be supported. In summary, with the approval of deviations to the ECR Development Standards and a modification to the height and setbacks as allowed for an affordable housing project, the proposed mixed use project is consistent with the goals and policies ofthe General Plan and the standards ofthe C-1 zone and the El Camino Real Corridor. c) No Impact. As discussed in Section IV above. Biological Resources, the project does not confiict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact is assessed. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? • • • H b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? • • • El a-b) No Impact. Carlsbad is devoid of non-renewable energy resources. Mineral resources within the City are no longer being utilized and extracted as exploitable natural resources. Therefore, no mineral resource impacts will occur as a result of any project (MEIR 93-01, page 5.13-1). Xll. NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? • la • • b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? • • S • c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? • • • El d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? • • S • November, 2013 -27-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Xll. NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? • • • El f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? • • • El a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located adjacent to El Camino Real as well as La Costa Avenue, two heavily-traveled corridors in the city. To analyze the proposed project's compatibility with the City's Noise Guidelines Manual (2013), an Exterior Noise Analysis Report (Report) was prepared by dBF Associates, Inc. (June, 2013). Pursuant to the Noise Guidelines Manual, the following thresholds shall be applied to assess impacts: Interior Noise Residential: 45 dBA Leq Commercial: 55 dBA Leq Exterior Noise: Residential (If outdoor recreation/amenities required): 60 dBA Commercial: 65-70 dBA Leq Existing/Baseline Condition Pursuant to the Report, the ambient noise at the project site is dominated by vehicular traffic on El Camino Real and, secondarily, from traffic on La Costa Avenue. Existing on-site activity consists of occasional low-speed vehicular traffic to and from the onsite businesses. Gathering or other activity at outdoor areas is very limited. Short-term sound measurements were conducted at the afternoon peak period to quantify the existing on-site acoustical baseline due to vehicle traffic and to calibrate the noise model. The measurement results are summarized in Table 2 of the Report. A review of the table indicates that measured sound level ranges from approximately 54 dBA Leq (upper parking lot/location of two-story mixed use building) to 71 dBA Leq (El Camino Real). Construction/Short-Term Impacts Construction of the project would generate a temporary increase in noise in the project area. The increase in noise level would be primarily experienced closest to the noise source. The magnitude ofthe impact would depend on the type of construction activity, noise level generated by various pieces of construction equipment, duration ofthe construction phase, and distance between the noise source and receiver. Construction activity and delivery of construction materials and equipment would be limited to non- holidays, between 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. This project would utilize conventional construction techniques and equipment. Standard November, 2013 -28-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 equipment such as scrapers, graders, backhoes, rollers, loaders, tractors, cranes, and miscellaneous trucks would be used for construction of a majority of the project facilities. Sound levels of typical construction equipment range from approximately 65 dBA to 95 dBA at 50 feet from the source (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA] 1971). Acoustical calculations were performed to estimate noise from construction activity. Noise sources associated with grading, the loudest of the construction activities, are shown in Table 4. The closest residence is located approximately 175 feet east of construction activity on the project site. It was assumed that one bulldozer, one scraper, one backhoe, one water truck, and one roller would operate continuously throughout the site. A combined point source level of 91 dBA at 50 feet would attenuate to approximately 80 dBA at the closest residence. The average sound levels (CNEL) would be expected to be less than estimated because of downtime that typically occurs during construction. Construction activity would occur during allowable times, in compliance with Section 8.48.010 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code. As noise impacts associated with construction are temporary in nature, no potentially significant noise impact related to construction would occur. Future Condition- Traffic and Project-Generated Noise The future noise environment will be driven by the amount of vehicular traffic on El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. Table 3 ofthe Report, summarizes the SANDAG forecasts forthe future ADTs (Years 2030 and 2050). Incorporating the project traffic counts into the Traffic Noise Model (TNM), as well as other features, such as topography, buildings onsite as well as offsite, and roadway alignments, calculations show that future exterior traffic noise levels at the proposed outdoor usable spaces and building fagades (Figure 3 of the Report) would range from below 60 dBA CNEL (east elevation of Building 7714) to approximately 74 dBA CNEL (west elevation of Building 7710). The following outdoor use areas would be exposed to unmitigated future traffic noise levels over 60 dBA CNEL: the proposed private balconies on the west side of Building 7710, on the second and third floors directly facing El Camino Real; and the common pafios on the second and third floors of the north side of Building 7710. However, because these areas are considered amenities and are not required to be provided on-site, no mitigation is required. All other proposed outdoor common and private usable areas would be exposed to future traffic noise levels under 60 dBA CNEL without mitigation. Project-generated noise sources include loading activity at the dock on the northeast corner of Building 7710, HVAC units on the rooftop of Building 7710 and Building 7714, and the cooling tower between Building 7710 and Building 7714. Loading dock activity would primarily consist of tractor-trailer and smaller box trucks. The project is expected to generate an average volume of no more than five hourly trucks during daytime hours (7 AM - 7 PM), two hourly trucks during evening hours (7 PM - 10 PM), and one hourly truck during nighttime hours (10 PM - 7 AM). Sound level measurements of delivery trucks, including tractor-trailers and smaller box trucks, have been conducted at existing similar commercial facilities. A typical maximum delivery hour, which includes one 18-wheeler, two bread trucks, and two refrigerated trucks with the compressors running, generates an average noise level of approximately 66 dBA at 25 feet over a one-hour duration. Building 7710 would have 26 HVAC units in the eastern roof well, 26 units in the western roof well, and 6 units in the central roof well. Building 7714 would have 6 units in the northeastern roof well and 6 units in the southeastern roof well. The units are projected to produce a sound power level of approximately 72 dBA. One cooling tower would be located in a mechanical plant area built into the hillside between Building 7710 and Building 7714. The mechanical plant area is surrounded by a retaining wall approximately 16 feet in height to the east, down-sloping retaining walls on the north and November, 2013 -29- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 south, and a 12-foot-high barrier to the west. The cooling tower would produce a sound power level of approximately 94 dBA at 100% fan speed. At 80% fan speed, which is common during off-peak hours such as nighttime, the sound power level is approximately 91 dBA. Excluding the ambient noise (i.e., existing traffic), the operation of the project-generated noise sources would produce noise levels up to approximately 45 dBA CNEL at the eastern project property line, near the center ofthe western property line ofthe single-family residence at 7623 Rustico Drive, as shown in Table 5 of the Report. Because this measurement is less than 60 dBA and the exisfing ambient noise exceeds the project-generated noise, no impact is anticipated to the adjacent residential properties to the east. The project-generated noise sources would also produce noise levels at various points on the project site ranging from below 60 dBA CNEL to approximately 65 dBA CNEL at the third fioor of Building 7710. The implementation of the project with respect to noise is not expected to appreciably alter the use of the outdoor areas on the project site. As discussed above, because the communal outdoor space proposed in conjunction with the residential component is not required, no mitigafion is required. However, because future traffic noise levels would exceed 60 dBA CNEL at some of the residential building facades and 65 dBA CNEL at some of the commercial building fagades , an interior noise analysis evaluating proposed exterior wall construction, windows, and doors would be required once building plans are finalized to ensure that the interior noise levels meet the California Code of Regulations, Title 24: Noise Insulation Standard, as well as the city's Noise Guidelines Manual requirement, which requires a noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less for residential land uses and 55 dBA CNEL or less for commercial land uses. Compliance with mitigation measure NOISE-1 will reduce impacts associated with interior noise to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: NOISE-1. Prior to issuance of the building permit, an acoustical analysis consistent with City standards shall be prepared by a registered professional to demonstrate that the proposed building design will limit interior noise for the residential land uses to 45 dBA and commercial land uses to 55 dBA. The building plans shall incorporate the recommendations in the report to satisfy the requirements. b&d) Less than Significant Impact. The anticipated grading operations associated with the proposed project will result in a temporary and minor increase in groundbourne vibration and ambient noise levels. Following the completion of demolition, grading, and construction activities, ambient noise level and vibrations are expected to return to pre-existing levels. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. c) No Impact. e-f) No Impact. The McClellan-Palomar Airport is located approximately three (3) miles north of the subject shopping center. Pursuant to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Land Use Plan (ALUCP), the project is located outside ofthe boundaries ofthe Airport Infiuence Area (AIA). Further, the project site is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. November, 2013 -30- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Xlll. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Ussthan Significant with Mit. Incorporated Ussthan Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? • • El • b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? • • • K c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? • • • la a) Less than Significant Impact. The 15.24-acre infill site, currently developed with a shopping center and substantially surrounded by urban uses, is located within the boundaries of Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) Zone 6. The project proposes to replace two existing commercial buildings with two new mixed use buildings. In addition to 60 multi-family units (i.e., apartments), a net gain of 3,078 SF of retail space is proposed to be added to the shopping center. Based upon the SANDAG's average of 2.76 people per household, the residential component of the project is expected to provide housing for approximately 166 people. The Zone 6 LFMP was prepared pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program, as outlined in Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Based on the underlying Zoning and General Plan Land Use designations, the Zone 6 LFMP anticipated that the project site would be developed with neighborhood commercial uses. While mixed use projects with a residential component are permitted by right in the C-1 zone, because there are no residential units currently allocated to be developed at the site, an allocafion from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank (EDUB) is required. As of October 31, 2013, the current city-wide balance of available residential units is 2,144. In order to receive an allocation from the EDUB, the project must be consistent with City Council Policy No. 43 and the following findings must be made: (1) the project location and density shall be compatible with the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods and/or nearby existing or planned uses; (2) the project location and density shall be in accordance the applicable provisions of the General Plan and any other applicable planning document; and (3) the project complies with the findings stated in the General Plan Land Use Element for projects that exceed the growth management control point for the applicable density range. The proposed mixed use project meets these findings; therefore, an allocation from the EDUB can be supported. As discussed in Section XIV below (Public Services), implementation of the project would not adversely impact planned or current levels of service for public facilities such as sewer, water, open space, parks, libraries, fire, and police. In addition, no road extensions are proposed in association with the project that may induce the potential for induce growth. Furthermore, because the neighborhood that the infill site is located within is already developed with existing uses, it is unlikely that the project will induce substantial growth. As a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to population or growth patterns in the area. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated. November, 2013 -31-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 b-c) No Impact. The subject site is currently developed with a shopping center. No residential uses are located on-site. Thus, implementation of the proposed mixed use project would not displace housing nor substantial numbers of people. Therefore, no impact is assessed. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in orderto maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any ofthe public services: i. Fire protection? • • • m ii. Police protection? • • • m iii. Schools? • • • m iv. Parks? • • • m v. Other public facilities? • • • a.i-a.v) No Impact. The La Costa Towne Center project is proposed on a property which is currently developed with a shopping center. While the public service demands for the proposed 60 residential units and minor increase in commercial square footage (3,078 SF) will increase, it will not significantly affect the provision and/or availability of public services (i.e., fire protecfion, police protection, schools, parks, etc.). Furthermore, the proposed project shall be subject to the conditions and facility service level requirements within the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. As a result, no impact is assessed to public services. Impact with orated Impact XV. RECREATION ntially ificant than ricant Incorp than Ificant ti « a. E Pote 5igni Uss Signi Mit. Uss Ciani digni o Z a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial • • • physical deterioration ofthe facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the • • • November, 2013 -32-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 XV. RECREATION 1 a £ •3 8 n tx. (/I ra ^ I = I I X S 2 £ IS S 3 as construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a-b) No Impact. The project site is located within Park District No. 4, which is within the Southeast Quadrant of the city. As part of the City's Growth Management Program (GMP), a performance standard for parks was adopted. Specifically, the performance standard requires that three acres of Community Park and Special Use Area be provided per 1,000 people within each district. Consequently, all development (i.e., commercial and residential) within the Zone 6 LFMP is conditioned to pay a park- in-lieu fee to satisfy the performance standard established by the GMP. Furthermore, other than the possibility of a small private gym for the residents of the mulfi-family component, the project does not include any public recreational facilities, nor does it require the construction or expansion of existing recreational facilifies, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, no impact is assessed. XVl.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impaa No Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance ofthe circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? • • • b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? • • • El c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? • • • El d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? • • • m e) Result in inadequate emergency access? • • • El f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the • • • El November, 2013 -33-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 XVl.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impaa No Impaa performance or safety of such facilities? a) Less than Significant Impact. Pursuant to the city's Growth Management Program (GMP) circulation standards, no road segment or intersection in the zone or any road segment or intersection outside ofthe zone which is impacted by development within the zone, shall be projected to exceed a level of service (LOS) "D" during peak hours. To analyze the proposed project's compatibility with the GMP threshold, a rro///c Impact Analysis (Analysis) was prepared by Urban Systems Associates (May, 2013). The proposed project has frontage on El Camino Real to the west and La Costa Avenue to the north. A total ofthree driveways within the shopping center are located off of El Camino Real and one driveway is located off of La Costa Avenue. Pursuant to the Analysis, the proposed mixed use project will generate 791 Average Daily Trips (ADT) and 46 AM and 75 PM peak hour trips. Existing Condition As summarized in the Analysis, all affected street segments and intersections are currently operating acceptably at LOS "D" or better during the AM and PM peak hours. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS As summarized in the Analysis (Tables 5-1 and 5-2), all affected street segments and intersections incorporating the traffic generated by the proposed project will operate acceptably at LOS "D" or better. Project impacts are considered less than significant. No affected street segment or intersection mitigation is needed in Year 2013. NEAR TERM WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS As summarized in the Analysis (Tables 6-1 through 6-4), all affected street segments and intersections incorporating the traffic generated by the proposed project will operate acceptably at LOS "D" or better. Project impacts are considered less than significant. No street segment or intersection mitigation is needed. YEAR 2030 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS As summarized in the Analysis (Tables 7-1 through 7-4), the study area street segments and intersections are expected to operate at LOS "D" or better with project traffic added in Year 2030. Project impacts are considered less than significant. No street segment or intersection mitigation will be needed. In summary, while the increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad. As substantiated in the Traffic Impact Analysis, the proposed project would not cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Therefore, the impacts from the proposed project with respect to traffic are less than significant. No mitigation is required. November, 2013 -34-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 b) No Impact. In 2009, the congestion management agency (SANDAG) employed an "opt out" option defined in Assembly Bill (AB) 2419. The congestion management program is no longer relevant to development in the City of Carlsbad. c) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. In addition, the project site is located outside of the Airport Influence Area of the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Therefore, it would not result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. No impact is assessed. d) No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed in compliance with City standards and, therefore, would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City's general plan and zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. No impact is assessed. f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 250 feet south of the signalized intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. Existing bike lanes as well as public transportation routes (North County Transit District) located on the east side of El Camino Real will not be affected by the proposed project. In addition, bike racks as well as parking stalls for hybrid vehicles have been incorporated into the project design. The proposed project would also provide multi-family housing and employment opportunities in a location proximate to alternate transit options. Therefore, no impact is assessed. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impaa Uss than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Uss than Significant Impaa No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ofthe applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? • • • El b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? • • • S c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? • • • El d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? • • • H e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the • • • El November, 2013 -35-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS entially lificant Impact sthan lificant with . Incorporated sthan lificant Impaa Impact Would the project: Pot Sigi Lesi Siei Mit Lesi Sigi o z provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? • • • g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? • • • a-g) No Impact. The subject properties are located within the boundaries of Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) Zone 6. The proposed mixed use project is also located with the service boundaries ofthe Olivenhain Municipal Water District and the Leucadia Wastewater District. Adequate capacity exists to serve the proposed project, including the proposed residential units, which will be required to be withdrawn from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. In addition, the proposed project will be required to comply with all Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements. One new private storm drain is proposed in association with the mixed use project. No new water or wastewater treatment facilities are proposed or required. All proposed public facilities, including water, wastewater, and drainage facilities, have been designed to accommodate the proposed project. In addition, the proposed project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs and the project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, no impact is assessed. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impaa a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? • El • • b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) • • S • c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? November, 2013 -36-Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 a) tess than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed mixed use project is located within an existing shopping center. As such, the project site does not contain any sensitive fish or wildlife species and is not identified by any habitat conservation plan as containing a protected, rare or endangered plant or animal species. Therefore, the project will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species and will not threaten to eliminate or reduce the number of endangered plant and animal species. In addition, the two buildings proposed to be demolished are not considered to be important examples of California history. However, given the potential for cultural or paleontological resources to be discovered during grading operations, mitigation measures have been included to reduce any potential impacts to pre-historical resources to a less than significant level. b) tess than Significant Impact. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional growth for the greater San Diego area, and local General Plan Land Use policies are incorporated into SANDAG projections. Based upon those projections, region-wide standards, including storm water quality control, air quality standards, habitat conservation, congestion management standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. All of the City's development standards and regulations are consistent with the region wide standards. The City's standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and drainage standards, traffic standards, habitat and cultural resource protection regulafions, and public facility standards, ensure that development within the City will not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact. There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively considerable impact on. Those issues are air quality and regional circulation. As described above, the project would contribute to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. However, the air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the development is implemented. In addition, while the incremental increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic in the short-term as well as build-out in the City of Carlsbad. Further, the project is consistent with the City's growth projections in that the proposed 60 dwelling units are available and will be withdrawn from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank; therefore, the cumulative impacts from the project to the regional circulation system are less than significant. With regard to any other potential impacts associated with the project. City standards and regulations will ensure that development of the site will not result in any significant cumulatively considerable impacts. c) tess than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As outlined in the Geology/Soils, Hazards/Hazardous Materials, and Noise sections ofthis document, mitigation measures are required to reduce environmental impacts which may cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, to a less than significant level. In addition to the mitigation measures, the project will be designed to comply with all applicable Federal, State, Regional and City regulations, which will ensure that development of the site will not result in adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly. November, 2013 -37- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 XVIX. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Secfion 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mifigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions forthe project. EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis ofthis project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Division located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), City of Carlsbad Planning Division, March, 1994. 2. Carlsbad General Plan, City of Carlsbad Planning Division, March, 1994, as updated. 3. City of Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC), Title 21 Zoning, City of Carlsbad Planning Division, as updated. 4. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (HMP), City of Carlsbad Planning Division, November, 2004. 5. San Diego Regional Airport Authority/San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission. McClellan- Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), amended December 1, 2011. 6. City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual, July, 2013. 7. City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, Catastrophic Dam Failure Inundation, Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps, September, 1992. 8. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Urban Systems Associates, May 17, 2013 9. Exterior Noise Analysis Report, prepared by dBF Associates, Inc., June 3, 2013 10. Global Climate Change Evaluation, prepared by Scientific Resources Associated, October 10, 2012 -38- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 11. Biological Technical Report, prepared by Alden Environmental, Inc., November 28, 2012 12. Asbestos Survey Report, prepared by ADR Environmental Group, December 28, 2012 13. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by ADR Environmental Group, December 19, 2011 14. Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan, prepared by Stevens Cresto Engineering, Inc., January 7, 2013 15. Preliminary Drainage Study, prepared by Stevens Cresto Engineering, Inc., January 7, 2013 16. Air Quality Technical Report, prepared by Scientific Resources Associated, October 10, 2012 17. Geotechnical Evaluation, prepared by Ninyo & Moore, July 13, 2012. -39- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES CULTURAL-1. Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor ground-disturbing activities. The qualified archaeologist shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the archaeologist and city staff. The City shall verify that the archaeological monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In the event any potential cultural resource is uncovered during the course ofthe project construction, ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity ofthe find shall be redirected until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by the archaeological monitor. If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If archaeological resources are encountered during excavation or grading, the archaeological monitor shall direct the contractor to avoid all work in the immediate area for a reasonable period of time to allow the archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and determine an appropriate course of action. The appropriate course of action may include, but not be limited to avoidance, recordation, relocation, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for pursuing the appropriate activities, including salvage of discovered resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 ofthe CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. Recovered artifact materials and data shall be cataloged and analyzed. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards or the collection will be repatriated to the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), as specified in the pre-excavation agreement. If any human remains are discovered, all construction activity in the immediate area ofthe discovery shall cease immediately, and the Archaeological monitor shall notify the County Medical Examiner pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5. Should the Medical Examiner determine the human remains to be Native American; the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Native American Monitor (pursuant to Mitigation Measure CULTURAL-2), in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission, shall inspect the site ofthe discovery ofthe Native American remains and may recommend to the City of Carlsbad, and the project contractor, actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. The project contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains before resuming construction activities. CULTURAL-2. Prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain the services of a Native American monitor. The purpose of this monitoring will be to allow for tribal observation of trenching excavation including formalized procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. The City shall verify that the Native American monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the appropriate Native American Tribe and the developer. The Native American representative(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. The Native American monitor shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the monitor and city staff. -40- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 PALEO-1 A. Prior to any grading of the project site, a paleontologist shall be retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil resources. B. A copy of the paleontologist's report shall be provided to the City Planner prior to issuance of a grading permit. C. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to collect matrix samples for laboratory processing through fine screens. D. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the City Planner during the grading process. E. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an exposed fossil in orderto facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage artifacts. F. All fossils collected may be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. G. Any confiicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading activities of the project shall be resolved by the City Planner and the City Engineer. GEO-1. The project shall incorporate all engineering recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Ninyo & Moore, dated July 13, 2012, during grading, construction and operations to reduce any potential geotechnical hazards at the project site. These recommendations shall be stipulated in the construction contracts and specifications. HAZ-1. Prior to physical disturbance of any of the identified asbestos-containing materials, asbestos abatement is required in accordance with applicable federal, state and local regulations. The removal of asbestos-containing materials requires the use of appropriate engineering controls by a contractor licensed by the California State Contractors License Board, and registered with the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). Evidence that this measure has been implemented shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the demolition or grading permit, whichever occurs first. NOISE-1. Prior to issuance of the building permit, an acoustical analysis consistent with City standards shall be prepared by a registered professional to demonstrate that the proposed building design will limit interior noise for the residential land uses to 45 dBA and commercial land uses to 55 dBA. The building plans shall incorporate the recommendations in the report to satisfy the requirements. -41- Initial Study La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature -42- Initial Study ^ CARLSBAD Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CITY OF PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center PROJECT NO: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 APPROVAL DATE/RESOLUTION NUMBER(S): The following environmental mitigafion measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). MITIGATION MEASURE o II 1 s. Is c o c ^ E c Ji X a 5 1 n E a te. CULTURAL- 1 Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor ground- disturbing activities. The qualified archaeologist shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the archaeologist and city staff. The City shall verify that the archaeological monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In the event any potential cultural resource is uncovered during the course of the project construction, ground- disturbing activities in the vicinity ofthe find shall be redirected until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by the archaeological monitor. If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If archaeological resources are encountered during excavation or grading, the archaeological monitor shall direct the contractor to avoid all work in the immediate area for a reasonable period of time to allow the archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and determine an appropriate course of action. The appropriate course of action may include, but not be limited to avoidance, recordation, relocation, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate Project/on-going during grading operations PLN Yes- note req. on grading plans Explanation of Headings Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information. Ueend PLN Planning Division ENG Land Development Engineering Division BLDG Building Division Page 1 of 4 PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center PROJECT NUMBER: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 MITIGATION MEASURE M s c o S a. c o c i o o •5 S c ^ I measures. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for pursuing the appropriate activities, including salvage of discovered resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. Recovered artifact materials and data shall be cataloged and analyzed. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results ofthe monitoring and data recovery program. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards or the collection will be repatriated to the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), as specified in the pre-excavation agreement. If any human remains are discovered, all construction activity in the immediate area of the discovery shall cease immediately, and the Archaeological monitor shall notify the County Medical Examiner pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5. Should the Medical Examiner determine the human remains to be Native American; the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Native American Monitor (pursuant to Mitigation Measure CULTURAL-2), in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission, shall inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the City of Carlsbad, and the project contractor, actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. The project contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains before resuming construction activities. CULTURAL- 2 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain the services of a Native American monitor. The purpose of this monitoring will be to allow for tribal observation of trenching excavation including formalized procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural Project/on-going duringgrading operations PLN Yes- note req. on grading plans Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 2 of 4 PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center PROJECT NUMBER; SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 MITIGATION MEASURE 0> a. o S 11 Is c o S « E w O. 5 I E a ce. items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. The City shall verify that the Native American monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the appropriate Native American Tribe and the developer. The Native American representative(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. The Native American monitor shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the monitor and city staff. PALEO-1 A. Prior to any grading of the project site, a paleontologist shall be retained to perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the grading plans to determine ifthe proposed grading will impact fossil resources. B. A copy of the paleontologist's report shall be provided to the City Planner prior to issuance of a grading permit. C. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of the site and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to collect matrix samples for laboratory processing through fine screens. D. The paleontologist shall make periodic reports to the City Planner during the grading process. E. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage artifacts. F. All fossils collected may be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. G. Any confiicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading activities ofthe project shall be resolved by the City Planner and the City Engineer. Project/on-going during grading operations PLN Yes- note req. on grading plans Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 3 of 4 PROJECT NAME: La Costa Towne Center PROJECT NUMBER: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks GEO-1 The project shall incorporate all engineering recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Evaluafion prepared by Ninyo & Moore, dated July 13, 2012, during grading, construction and operations to reduce any potential geotechnical hazards at the project site. These recommendations shall be stipulated in the construction contracts and specifications. Project/on-going during grading/ construction operations ENG Yes HAZ-1 Prior to physical disturbance of any ofthe identified asbestos-containing materials, asbestos abatement is required in accordance with applicable federal, state and local regulations. The removal of asbestos-containing materials requires the use of appropriate engineering controls by a contractor licensed by the California State Contractors License Board, and registered with the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). Evidence that this measure has been implemented shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the demolition or grading permit, whichever occurs first. Project/on-going during demolition PLN BLDG No NOISE-1 Prior to issuance ofthe building permit, an acoustical analysis consistent with City standards shall be prepared by a registered professional to demonstrate that the proposed building design will limit interior noise for the residential land uses to 45 dBA and commercial land uses to 55 dBA. The building plans shall incorporate the recommendations in the report to satisfy the requirements. Project PLN BLDG Yes Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 4 of 4 STORM WATER Development Services Land Deveiopment Engineering STANDARDS Development Services Land Deveiopment Engineering CITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE 163S Faraday Avenue CARLSBAD E-34 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the City requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Stomn Water Best Management Practices (BMP's) into the project design per the City's Standard Udban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP). To view the SUSMP, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 4, Chapter 2) at www.carisbadca.aov/standards. Initially this questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or constmction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to 'Standard Stormwater Requirements' or be subject to additional criteria called 'Priority Development Project Requirements'. Many aspects of project site design are dependent upon the storm water standards applied to a project. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff detennines that the questionnaire was inconrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the City. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A separate completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted for each new development application submission. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. In addition to this questionnaire, you must also complete, sign and submit a Project Threat Assessment Form with constmction permits for the project. Please start by completing Section 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. Do«s your project meet one or more of the following criteria: YES NO 1. Houslna subdMalons ot 10 or more dwolHna units. Examoles: sinale familv homes, multi-familv homes, condominium and apartments y 2. CommercM- areater than 1-acre. Anv develooment other than heaw industrv or residential. Examoles: hosoitais: laboratories and other medical facilities; educational Institutions; recreational facilities; municipal facilities: commercial nurseries; multi-apartment buildings; car wash facilities; mini-malls and other business complexes; shopping malls; hotels; office buildings; public warehouses; automotive dealerships; airfields; and other light industrial facilities. / 3. Heaw Industrial / Industry- areater than 1 acre. Examples; manufacturlna plants, food orocessina olants. metal woricing facilities, printing plants, and fleet storage areas (bus, trucic, etc.). 4. Automotive reoalr shoo. A facilitv cateoorized in anv one of Standard Industrial Classification fSIC) codes 5013. 5014, 5541. 7532-7534, and 7536-7539 5. Restaurants. Anv facilitv that sells oreoared foods and drinks for consumption, includinq stationarv lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (SIC code 5812), where the land area for development is greater than 5,000 square feeL Restaurants where land development Is less than 5,000 square feet shall meet all SUSMP requirements except for structural treatment BMP and numeric sizing criteria requirements and hydromodification requirements. E-34 Page 1 of 3 REV 1/14/11 STORM WATER Development Services Land Development Engineering STANDARDS Development Services Land Development Engineering ^ CITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE 1635 Faraday Avenue CARLSBAD E-34 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov 6. Hillside develooment Anv develooment that creates more than S.OOO sauare feet of imoervious surface and is located In an area with known erosive soil conditions, where the development will grade on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent (25%) or greater. y 7. Environmentallv Sensitive Area (ESA}\ All develooment located within or directiv adiacent^ to or discharaina direcUy to an f SA (where discharges from the development or redevelopment will enter receiving waters within the ESA), which either creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface on a proposed project site or increases the area of imperviousness of a proposed proiect site 10% or more of its naturally occuning condition. 8. Parkina lot Area of 5.000 sauare feet or more, or with 15 or more parkina soaces. and ootentialiv exoosed to urban runoff / 9. Streets, roads, hiahwavs. and freewavs. Anv oaved surface that is 5.000 sauare feet or areater used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles 10. Retail Gasoline Outlets. Servina more than 100 vehicles oer day and qreater lhan 5.000 sauare feet 11. Coastal Develooment Zone. Anv oroiect located within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and H) creates more than 2500 square feet of impervious surface or (2) increases impervious surface on property by more than 10%. t/ 12. More than 1-acre of disturbance. Proiect results in the disturbance of 1-acre or more of land and is considered a Pollutant-generating Development Project*. 1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas includa but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Seclion 303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Resources Conlrol Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Dlego Basin (1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the Stale Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Conlrol Plan for the San Oiego Basin (1994) and amendments): areas designaied as preserves or their equivalent under the Multi Species Conservation Program within the Cities and Couniy of San Dlego; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which tiave been Idenllfied by Ihe Copermittees. 2 'Directly adjacent' means situated wilhin 200 feel of the Environmentally Sensilive Area. 3 'Discharging direcUy to' means outflow from a drainage conveyance sysiem lhal is composed entirely ol flows from the sutiject developmenl or redeveiopmenl sile, and not commingled with flow from adjacent lands. 4 Pollutant-generating Oevelopment Projects are those prxjjects lhat generate pollutants al levels greater than background levels. In general, these include all projects that contribute to an exceedance to an impaired water tiody or which create new impervious surfaces greater than 5000 square feet and/or introduce new landscaping areas that require routine use of fertilizers and pesticides. In most cases linear pathway projects that are for infrequent vehicle use, such as emergency or maintenance access, or for pedestrian or bicycle use, ar« not considered Pollutant-generating Development Projects if they are built with pervious surfaces or if Ihey sheet flow to sun-ounding pervious surfaces. INSTRUCTIONS: Sectloni Results: If you answered YES to ANY of the questions above, your project is subject to Priority Development Project requirements. Skip Section 2 and piease proceed to Section 3. Check the "meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT requirements" box in Section 3. Additional storni water requirements will apply per the SUSMP. If you answered NO to ALL of the questions above, then please proceed to Section 2 and follow the instructions. E-34 Page 2 of 3 REV 1/14/11 f CITY CARLSBAD O F STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-502-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov INSTRUCTIONS: Complete the questions below regarding your project 1. Prqject results In the disturbance of 1-acre or more of land and is considered a Pollutant-generating Development Project *? INSTRUCTIONS: If you answered NO, please proceed to question 2. If you answered YES, then you ARE a significant redevelopment and you ARE subject to PRIORITY DEVELOPl requirements. Please check the "meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT requirements" box in SecMj 2. Is the prqject redeveloping an existing priority project type? (Priority projects are defined in Section INSTRUCTIONS: If you answered YES, please proceed to question 3 If you answered NO, then you ARE NOT a sianlflcant redevelopment) REQUIREMENTS. Please check the "does m meet Pty requin 3. Is the work limited to trenching and pari<ing lots and existing roadways; pavement such as pothole repair? Resui during construction. tto STANDARD STORMWATER esurfacing and reconfiguring surface routine maintenance of damaged ork does not expose underiying soil INSTRUCTIONS: If you answered If you answered YES, then you ARCFNOT a signlfRant rei REQUIREMENTS. Please check the "does nol meet Pl Iralopment aiB your project Is subject to STANDARD STORMWATER ^requirements" box in Section 3 below. 4. Will your redevelopment prqject create^pplace, or add at least 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces on existing developed property or will your projectjM0l(Kated within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and (1) create 2500 square feet or more of impervious surface or (2U|ffreases Impervious surface on the property by more than 10%? Replacement of existing impervious surfaces incjip^any activity that is not part of routine maintenance where impervious material(s) are removed, exposing underlvtoi^oil during construction. INSTRUCTIONS: IfvM^swered YES, you ARE a significant redevelopment, and you ARE subject to PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT requirp^lnts. Please check the "meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT requirements" box in Section 3 below. Review SUSMP to fimj^mTlf SUSMP requirements apply to your project envelope or the entire project site. If youjiliwered NO, then you ARE NOT a significant redevelopment and your project is subject to STANDARD STORMWATER IREMENTS. Please check the "does not meet POP requirements" box in Section 3 below. *for definition see Footnote 4 on page 2 a My project meets PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) requirements and must comply with additional stormwater criteria per the SUSMP and I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Management Plan for submittal at time of application. I understand flow control (hydromodification) requirements may apply to my project. Refer to SUSMP for details. My project does not meet PDP requirements and must only comply with STANOARD STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS per the SUSMP. As part of these requirements, I will incorporate low impact development strategies throughout my project. Applicant Information and Signature Box Thh Bo* lor Clly Ust Only Address: 77/^ 77Z0- 77?o £C cAf'*>OiU Assessor's Parcel Number(s): Applicanttjame: Applicant Title: i ^ Date: / / Nf^^«^^^^^^y ^ E-34 / Page 3 of 3 City Concurrence: By: YES NO Dala: Projact ID: REV 1/14/11 January 6, 2014 TO: Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 4* Review La Costa Towne Village, SDP 78-03(D), SDP 13-03, PUD 13-02, SUP 13-01 El Camino Real @ La Costa Avenue MELA file: 483 - La Costa Towne Village - Con4 Landscape Architect: Environs, Phone: (619) 232-7007 Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Numbers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area of the comment concem. REPEAT COMMENTS 1. Completed. 2. Completed. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 2"^* Review: The applicant has responded: "This area is a fiiture phase and spa area is located on the rooftop - not part of our water use calculations." As a part of the project, the spa is to be included in the water use calculations. Plans need to address all phases as shown on architectural and civil plans. Please address. 3'^'' Review: Revised water use calculations were not received. Review: The applicant has responded: "Completed - See Sheet L-2 for all Water Use Calculations including the SLA for the proposed spa on the roof. " The spa does not qualify as a special landscape Area (SLA). Please remove from the SLA portion of the MAWA and re-calculate. The MA WA total square footage does not match the ETWU total square footage. Please explain. Adjust calculations as appropriate depending on the final fire requirements for the landscape area around 7714. 4-9 Completed. 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shrubs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference concept note #8." Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 3'^'' Review: Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 4^ Review: Please relocate the tree outside of the easement. 11. Completed. 12. Completed. 13. Please provide a copy ofthe latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 2"*^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural La Costa Towne Village January 6, 2014 Conceptual Plan Review Page 2 plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 3"^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 4"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Completed - The Civil + Architectural plans will be re-submitted with the landscape submittal. All plans have been coordinated with current site backgrounds. " Civil and architectural plans do not show the planters on the east side of buildings 7760 and 7770. Civil plans are different from architectural and landscape architectural plans for the walk and planters to the north of 7750 and south of Parcel C. See other locations that are not coordinated on the red line plans. Please coordinate all plans. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shrubs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screen/soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides ofbuilding 7710; north, east and west sides ofbuilding 7720; and the north and east sides ofbuilding 7750 to soften and enhance these building elevations. Please address. 2^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This docs not address thc comment. Please address. 3*^ Review: The applicant has responded: "7710—The landscape on thc cast side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with thc 20' scale plans. The south is on structure and is thc circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters will be investigated to address in addition to other creative options. Those will be reviewed when submitted. 7720—The north is an existing planting area and is included on the plan—sec photos. New sidewalk + landscape is proposed for this area. The south + west sides also have existing landscape areas and arc indicated on the plans see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. Sec plans. The east has no room available for landscape due to the existing fire access roadway and sidewalk to facilitate thc rear / ser\ice doors for thc lease spaces. No landscape opportunity exists. The City is asking that something bc done to improve tho aesthetics on the east side. Excel is to investigate potential architectural solutions. No irrigated landscape is going to be considered due to the Geo technical constraints that exist on site. 7750—The north side is being addressed by the elimination of the driveway and thc new parking + landscape being proposed. The cast has existing vine pockets at the base of each column and are indicated on the plans—see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or bc removed and replaced with new material. See plans." Please address the south side of 7710. Address thc east and west sides of 7720. No photos were received and existing landscaping needs to bc shown and labeled on thc plans for the west side for review; Please address architectural solutions for thc cast side. 7750—Please show and label the existing plantings so that it is clear where the plantings are and what plants are to bc replaced. La Costa Towne Village January 6, 2014 Conceptual Plan Review Page 3 Review: Regarding 7710, the applicant has responded: "The landscape on the east side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with the 20' scale plans. The south facing portion of the building is on structure and is the circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters and trellises will be added to address the landscape in addition to the landscape on the residential deck. " Minimal landscaping is provided along the south side of 7710 and enhancement/softening ofthis elevation with landscaping has not been adequately addressed. Please address. 15. Completed. 16. Completed. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 2"^* Review: The applicant has responded: "Existing slope landscape to remain - no additional planting is being proposed." Landscaping may be required depending on fire suppression requirements. Please address comment #36 and provide landscaping as appropriate. 3'^'* Review: The applicant has responded: "Excel will need to have a meeting / conversation with the Fire Marshall to address this item. See our notes on plans for the proposed treatment of the embankment in a non-irrigated manner." Please provide final plans for review after meeting with the Fire Marshall. Review: The applicant has responded: "Completed Fire Management Report has been prepared + submitted to the Fire Marshall for review approval as prepared by Aon Consulting. Pending. " Final comments are reserved pending results of the Fire Marshall's review. 18-22 Completed. 23. Deleted per Shannon Werneke. 24-26 Completed. 27. Deleted per Shannon Werneke. 28-33 Completed. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constructed to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 2"^ Review: A note has been added to the plans; however water use calculations indicate the use of spray heads only. Drip or other appropriate irrigation will be required where located adjacent to paving that does not drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please resolve. Review: The water use calculations were not received, f'^ Review: Plan notes and symbols specify spray head irrigation next to paving which does not meet this requirement Please resolve. 35. Completed. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations b) Rear yard setbacks La Costa Towne Village January 6, 2014 Conceptual Plan Review Page 4 c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 of the Landscape Manual d) Emergency/maintenance access e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards g) Street widths dimensioned 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Initially discussed with Michael and agreed that a Fire Suppression Plan was not needed." The fiill scope of the project was not provided to the city at the time of preliminary discussions. A fire suppression plan is required unless specifically directed otherwise by the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshal. Please address. 3'^'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Excel will request a meeting with the Fire Marshall to review and discuss the project." Please address. Review: The applicant has responded: "Completed - Fire Management Report has been prepared + submitted to the Fire Marshall for review approval as prepared by Aon Consulting. Pending. " Final comments are reserved pending results of the Fire Marshall's review. 37 RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. lA. Jute mesh is not allowed by the Engineering Division. Please revise. 3'^''Review: The applicant has responded: "Need to discuss with Engineering staff to get this allowed." Please address. 4"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Environs has contacted Steve Bobbett at Carlsbad Engineering. He investigated and determined that it was City Inspections who decided that jute would not be allowed due to the use of kerosene being applied to the material during the manufacturing process. The owner is going to investigate other methods and product to address any erosion control issues that require attention. " Please advise of final resolution. 2 A-3 A Completed. 1B-4B Completed NEW COMMENTS IC. Previous notes addressing lower slope area erosion control have been deleted. Please address what is to occur in these areas. 2C. Per Shannon Werneke e-mail of 11/20/13, please clarify how the entry off of La Costa Avenue will be enhanced/embellished. Show and label proposed landscaping. 4 November 8,2013 TO: Shannon Wemeke, Associate Plarmer Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 3'^'' Review La Costa Towne Village, SDP 78-03(D), SDP 13-03, PUD 13-02, SUP 13-01 El Camino Real @ La Costa Avenue MELA file: 483 - La Costa Towne Village - Con3 Landscape Architect: Environs, Phone: (619) 232-7007 Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Nimibers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area ofthe comment concem. REPEAT COMMENTS 1. Completed. 2. Please address all landscape areas and include the area in the water use calculations. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "All landscape areas have been included in the water use calculations." Please address landscaping of the second floor residential plaza area and include in the water use calculations. All landscape areas are to be addressed, i'^^ Review: These areas have not been addressed. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "This area is a future phase and spa area is located on the rooftop - not part of our water use calculations." As a part of the project, the spa is to be included in the water use calculations. Plans need to address all phases as shown on architectural and civil plans. Please address. 3'^'' Review: Revised water use calculations were not received. 4. Please show and label the following on the landscape plans: a) Existing conditions (property lines, easements, right-of-ways, drainage elements, utilities, etc.). b) Potable and reclaimed service locations and lines. c) All existing and proposed easements (labeled). Insure no trees are located within public utility easements. d) AU vehicular sight lines, including intersection site distance corridors (see Figures 3-A and 3-B of the Landscape Manual) and CalTrans sight distance standards (i.e.: stopping sight distance). Coordinate with the civil engineer to show and label this information on the conceptual landscape plans. See comment #19 below. 2"*^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference civil and landscape plans for all documentation." Please show and label all of the above information on the landscape La Costa Towne Village November 8, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 2 plans as required by the Landscape Manual. 3'''^ Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed. 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2% grade in planting areas) away from stmctures and terminating in an approved drainage system. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable - due to existing site conditions." There are new conditions and site grading proposed on portions of the project. Please address. 3'"'^ Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed. 6. Completed. 7. Generally identify all existing woody plant material to be removed or retained. Trees over 12" in caliper diameter shall be identified on the plan individually as to caliper size and type and labeled to be retained or removed. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference existing tree survey." This survey was not received. Please provide. 3'^'^ Review: Please indicate on the tree survey plans which trees are to remain and which are proposed to be removed. 8. Completed. 9. Invasive species shall not be added to a landscaped area. Please review all proposed plantings and insure no invasive species are added. 2"'' Review: Invasive species are listed on the constmction drawing sheets submitted. See comment #1. Please resolve. 3'^'^ Review: Echium is listed as an invasive species and Nassella tenuissima is nominated as an invasive species. Please provide substitutes. 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shmbs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 2"*^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference concept note #8." Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans, i''*' Review: Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 11. Completed. 12. Completed. 13. Please provide a copy of the latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 2"^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. J'^^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shmbs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screeiv'soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides ofbuilding 7710; north, east and west sides ofbuilding 7720; and the north and east sides ofbuilding 7750 to soften and enhance these building elevations. Please address. 2"*^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3'''^ Review: The applicant has responded: "7710-The landscape on the east side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with the 20' scale plans. The south is on structure and is the circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters will be investigated to address in addition to other creative options. Those will be reviewed when submitted. 7720 - The north is an existing planting area La Costa Towne Village November 8,2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 3 and is included on the plan - see photos. New sidewalk + landscape is proposed for this area. The south + west sides also have existing landscape areas and are indicated on the plans - see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See plans. The east has no room available for landscape due to the existing fire access roadway and sidewalk to facilitate the rear / service doors for the lease spaces. No landscape opportunity exists. The City is asking that something be done to improve the aesthetics on the east side. Excel is to investigate potential architectural solutions. No irrigated landscape is going to be considered due to the Geo- technical constraints that exist on site. 7750 - The north side is being addressed by the elimination of the driveway and the new parking + landscape being proposed. The east has existing vine pockets at the base of each column and are indicated on the plans - see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See plans." Please address the south side of 7710. Address the east and west sides of 7720. No photos were received and existing landscaping needs to be shown and labeled on the plans for the west side for review. Please address architectural solutions for the east side. 7750 - Please show and label the existing plantings so that it is clear where the plantings are and what plants are to be replaced. 15. Completed. 16. Completed. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Existing slope landscape to remain - no additional planting is being proposed." Landscaping may be required depending on fire suppression requirements. Please address comment #36 and provide landscaping as appropriate. 3^'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Excel will need to have a meeting / conversation with the Fire Marshall to address this item. See our notes on plans for the proposed treatment of the embankment in a non-irrigated manner. " Please provide final plans for review after meeting with the Fire Marshall. 18. Evergreen plants shall be used to screen unsightly elements and shall be spaced to provide 100% screening within two (2) years of installation. Please screen the trash areas. Check all areas. 2"'' Review: A plan note has been added; however plan graphics do not show that the note is to be addressed. Please show screen plantings on the plans. Check all areas. 3^^^ Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed, 19. Please address the following vehicular sight line requirements: a) The plan shall demonstrate that plants, when installed and at maturity, will be positioned to avoid obstmcting motorists' views of pedestrian crossings, driveways, roadways and other vehicular travel ways. b) On collector streets and larger, landscape elements over 30 inches in height (including planting measured at maturity) as measured from adjacent street grade are not permitted at street comers within a triangular zone drawn from two points, 25 feet outward from the begirming of curves. La Costa Towne Village November 8, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 4 c) At medium to high use driveways, the 30 inch height limitation applies at driveways 25 feet from the edge of the apron outward along the curb, then 45 degrees in toward the property. d) Ensure that landscape elements at interior private driveway intersections do not obstmct sight lines, so that circulation and pedestrian safety can be maintained. e) Landscape features (shmbs, trees, fencing, etc.) shall be selected to ensure that no visual impairments or obstmctions are located within the CalTrans sight distance lines. 2nd Review: Please show and label the vehicular sight lines on the landscape plans per comment #4d and insure the above requirements are met. 3'''^ Review: Please show and label the sight lines on the plans. 20. Completed. 21. Please provide street trees along El Camino Real per Appendix D of the Landscape Manual. Street trees shall be located: a) A minimum of seven (7) feet from any sewer line. b) In areas that do not conflict with public utilities. c) Outside of sight distance areas. d) A minimum of three (3) feet outside the public right of way, unless approved otherwise by the City as noted below. 2"*^ Review: Appendix D specifies Lophostemon confertus as the theme tree with Eucalyptus, Pinus canariensis, Eriobotria deflexa and Lophostemon as support trees. Please revise to meet landscape Manual requirements. 3'''^ Review: The Landscape Manual requires street trees for prime and major arterial roadways at the following percentages: 50% theme trees, 30% support trees, and 20% project identity/accent trees. Lophostemon is the theme tree and support trees are listed above. The minimum total number of street trees is to be calculated based on 1 tree per 40' of street frontage. Please provide correct trees and percentages per appendix D of the Landscape Manual. 22. Completed. 23. Trees shall be provided at the minimum rate of one per every four parking stalls. Trees pertaining to this requirement shall be located within the parking area, exclusive of parking lot setbacks. The trees shall be located in close proximity to the spaces they are to shade. 2"^* Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3'''^ Review: Please address areas as shown on the red line plans. 24. Completed. 25. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent property or streets through the use of planting or any combination of planting, mounding, and decorative walls. Screening elements shall have a total height of at least three (3) feet. 2"** Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 5'^^ Review: Please address areas as shown on the red line plans. 26. A minimum of 3% of the parking area shall be landscaped. The "parking area" includes all parking spaces and drive aisles. The plantings shall be contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4' and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6" in height. The plantings shall be located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. Please provide a calculation proving the percentage of landscape area provided in the parking area. 2"^* Review: The La Costa Towne Village November 8, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 5 applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 5'^^ Review: Calculations were not received. 27. Long rows of parking should be broken up with landscaped islands. Landscaped islands should be provided at intervals of one island for approximately every 12 to 15 parking spaces. Please address. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3'^'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "The specific areas where this condition occurs were identified and redesigned to be compliant. " Plans do not appear to address this comment. 28. Please coordinate notes. Domestic and recycled water are both called for on the plans. Irrigation systems for all projects, except for service to a single-family residence or front yard irrigation on individually metered condos, shall be designed to use non-potable, treated recycled water, unless an exemption is approved by the City Utilities Department. Please note that this site is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Please coordinate with OMWD to determine the availability of recycled water and their requirements for use. Provide documentation of final OMWD direction for cross checking. Please note that Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) plans include a fiiture recycled water mainline in El Camino Real mtming south to La Costa Avenue and then going west on La Costa Avenue. It may be possible to tie into this line depending on OMWD approval and coordination. 2"*^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Domestic water supply only." Please provide documentation from OMWD indicating that they do not plan to provide recycled water to this site, i'"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Environs contacted Karen Ogawa at OMWD. She is going to prepare a correspondence stating that OMWD does not provide recycled water to this project site. Nick Onkka with OMWD will be providing a correspondence to that effect. " Please provide the information. 29. Completed. 30. Please sign the statement. 31. Please revise the Eto to 47. 5'^^ Review: The water use calculations were not received. 32. Completed. 33. Please use .55 for the irrigation efficiency (IE) or provide documentation that the spray type sprinklers to be used have an IE of .7. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Based on the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance .71 is the minimum IE used for spray head irrigation." Please use the City of Carlsbad Ordinance and Landscape Manual worksheets versus the State Model. The City of Carlsbad has modified the State Model. 3'^'' Review: The water use calculations were not received. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constmcted to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 2"'' Review: A note has been added to the plans; however water use calculations indicate the use of spray heads only. Drip or other appropriate irrigation will be required where located adjacent to paving that does not drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please resolve. 3^'^ Review: The water use calculations were not received. 35. Completed. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the La Costa Towne Village November 8, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 6 Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations b) Rear yard setbacks c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 of the Landscape Manual d) Emergency/maintenance access e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards g) Street widths dimensioned 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Initially discussed with Michael and agreed that a Fire Suppression Plan was not needed." The full scope of the project was not provided to the city at the time of preliminary discussions. A fire suppression plan is required unless specifically directed otherwise by the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshal. Please address, i'"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Excel will request a meeting with the Fire Marshall to review and discuss the project. " Please address. 37. RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. IA. Jute mesh is not allowed by the Engineering Division. Please revise. 3'^''Review: The applicant has responded: "Need to discuss with Engineering staff to get this allowed. " Please address. 2A. Detailed concept plans, sheets L-7 - L-l2 (constmction document sheets) specify river rock in parking lot planters where sheet Ll indicates shrubs. Please coordinate plans. Check all areas. 3'''^ Review: The applicant has responded: "The 20' scale plans allow for the detailing of the planting areas and the river cobble is a component of the landscape palette and image. The 50' scale plan has a note added to address this item. " I do not see this addressed on the plans. Please address. 3A. Completed. NEW COMMENTS IB. Additional trees are needed as were shown on previous concept plans along the west side of the parking garage to soften this elevation from El Camino Real. Please address. 2B. Please provide as a part of the conceptual review a conceptual sketch of the overhead trellis for review. 3B. Additional landscaping to include large trees is needed along the west side ofbuilding 7714 to soften and enhance this elevation. Additional trees were previously shown. 4B. Please coordinate the legend river rock symbol with the plan symbol. CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Discretionary Review Checklist PROJECT NUMBER: MS 13-01 / SDP 78-03(D) / SDP 13-03 / PUD 13-02 / SUP 13-01 BUILDING ADDRESS: 7710 - 7770 EL CAMINO REAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Re-development and modernization of existing commercial/retail center ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 216-124-16 & 17-00 FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore, any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. By: G. Ryan Date: 8.12.2013 DENIAL Please see the attached report of deficiencies marked with [El. Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By: By: By: Date: Date: Date: ATTACHMENTS FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSON NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4665 COMMENTS CITY OF • CARLSBAD Fire Department www.carlsbadca.gov April 25, 2013 Mr. Garner Palenske, P.E. Vice President US Western Region AON Fire Protection Engineering 11770 Bernardo Plaza Court, Suite 116 San Diego CA 92128 Mr. Palenske, I am in receipt of your letter dated April 23, 2013 regarding a proposal to upgrade the fire sprinkler design ofthe proposed La Costa Towne Center Village project in lieu ofthe required fire department access. After a consultation with the newly appointed Fire Code Official last week, it has been decided to grant your request based on the discussion held in our office on February 14, 2013. And to ensure that the agreed upon proposal ensures the safety ofthe occupants first and addresses and fire code requirements second, I will paraphrase our understanding ofthe proposal and agreement. In lieu ofthe fire department access requirements for the north residential and retail buildings (Buildings 7710 and 7714 respectively), the Carlsbad Fire Department has agreed that the sprinkler systems be upgraded. The La Costa Town Center Village project includes four existing buildings (7720, 7750, 7760, and 7770) that consist of retail (Group M) and office space (Group B) and will include the construction of two new buildings (7710 and 7714) and a new parking structure. Building 7710 will be a three-story building of approximately 39,400 square feet of retail space (Group M) on the first floor, 57,250 square feet of apartments (Group R-2) on the second and third floor, and 39,400 square feet of parking garage (Group S-2) on the basement level. The basement and first story will be of Type I-A construction and floors two and three will be of Type V-B construction. Building 7714 will be a two-story building with 9,800 square feet of retail space (Group M) on the first floor and 9,800 square feet of apartments (Group R-2) on the second floor. The building will be constructed of Type V-B construction. As part ofthis project, a parking structure will be built adjacent to Buildings 7710 and 7714. The parking structure will include a ground level and basement level. The basement level ofthe parking structure will connect to the basement level of Building 7710. The lower level of the parking structure adjacent to Building 7710 will be approximately 52,000 square feet. The City of Carlsbad Fire Department has agreed in lieu of the required fire department access around all structures, that the design ofthe fire sprinkler systems for Buildings 7710 and 7714 and the underground parking structure be increased one hazard classification level. ^A,.. Fire Prevention <^i^- ^ ^ ^ 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4665 F 760-602-8561 © Use Residential Parking Garage Retail Required NFPA 13 Hazard Classification 0.1 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Light Hazard) 0.15 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 1) 0.2 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) Proposed Upgraded Hazard Classification 0.15 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) 0.2 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) 0.25 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft.* The increase of one classification level for Ordinary Hazard Group 2 results in a significant increase to Extra Hazard Group 1 (0.30 gpm/sq. ft. over 2,500 sq. ft.) and a reduction in sprinkler spacing to 100 sq. ft. Aon FPE proposes an increase in design density of 0.05 gpm/sq. ft. to 0.25 gpm/sq. ft., which is equivalent to the upgrades to the sprinkler design criteria for the residential and parking garage occupancies. Carlsbad Fire Department- Fire Code Authority agrees that the upgrades listed provide an equivalent alternate solution to the fire department access issues. Gregory L\ Ryan Deputy Fire Marshal Carlsbad Fire Department For: Michael Davis, Division Chief/Fire Marshal (I) Cc: City of Carlsbad Building Official File (Permanent) Board of Directors Lawrence A. Watt, President Christy Guerin, Vice President Edmund K. Sprague, Treasurer Gerald E. Varty, Secretary Robert F. Topolovac, Director OLIN^jHAlN^ Municipal Water District General Manager Kimberly A. Thorner, Esq. General Counsel Alfred Smith, Esq. CnVOFCABlSBADi AUG 15 2013 August 13, 2013 Planning Department City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 Dear Planning and Tracking Desk: The Olivenhain Municipal Water District has received plans for the above-referenced project for review and would like to comment. This project has been presented to the District as a high level conceptual project by the project proponent. The TPM and architectural plans submitted in your July 22, 2013 package are not adequate for the District to provide comment as to the proposed improvements. The TPM does reflect multiple occurrences ofthe District's pipeline being relocated, shows a proposed wall over a portion ofthe District facilities, and other encroachments into the District's easements which have not been approved by the District. Ifthe fire flows required for the hydrants and fire systems have been calculated and approved by the City, please forward this information to us for the District's review. Ifyou have any questions regarding these comments or require additional information please contact me at 760-753-6466 or kogawa@olivenhain.com. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this project. OLIVENHAN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Karen Ogawa Engineering Project Supervisor 1966 Olivenhain Road • Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone (760) 753-6466 • Fax (760) 753-1578 • www.olivenhain.com A Public Agency Providing Water Wastewater Services Recycled Water Hydroelectriclty Elfin Forest Recreational Reserve July 26, 2013 TO: Sharmon Wemeke, Associate Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Plarmer Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 2"'' Review La Costa Towne Village, SDP 78-03(D), SDP 13-03, PUD 13-02, SUP 13-01 El Camino Real @ La Costa Avenue MELA file: 483 - La Costa Towne Village - Con2 Landscape Architect: Environs, Phone: (619) 232-7007 Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Numbers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area of the comment concem. REPEAT COMMENTS 1. Plans are too conceptual to provide an appropriate review. One symbol is used for all shmbs and ground covers which may be very different in size and character. Please provide a separate symbol for each type of shmb (i.e. large evergreen shmb, medium size shmb, small flowering accent shmb, etc.) and ground covers. A larger scale plan may be necessary to show appropriate information. Final comments are reserved pending receipt of more complete plans. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has submitted a portion of the construction drawing planting plans to address this comment. Please include these plans as a part ofthe conceptual review package with sequential sheet numbers. These sheets will need to become a part of the formal conceptual plan submittal so that they can be documented as a part ofthe conceptual review approval process. The construction drawing sheets provided do not address all areas. Please provide additional detailed information to address all proposed landscape areas. 2. Please address all landscape areas and include the area in the water use calculations. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "All landscape areas have been included in the water use calculations. " Please address landscaping of the second floor residential plaza area and include in the water use calculations. All landscape areas are to be addressed. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "This area is a future phase and spa area is located on the rooftop - not part of our water use calculations. " As a part of the project, the spa is to be included in the water use calculations. Plans need to address all phases as shown on architectural and civil plans. Please address. 4. Please show and label the following on the landscape plans: a) Existing conditions (property lines, easements, right-of-ways, drainage elements, utilities, etc.). b) Potable and reclaimed service locations and lines. La Costa Towne Village July 26,2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 2 c) All existing and proposed easements (labeled). Insure no trees are located within public utility easements. d) All vehicular sight lines, including intersection site distance corridors (see Figures 3-A and 3-B of the Landscape Manual) and CalTrans sight distance standards (i.e.: stopping sight distance). Coordinate with the civil engineer to show and label this informafion on the conceptual landscape plans. See comment #19 below. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference civil and landscape plans for all documentation. " Please show and label all of the above information on the landscape plans as required by the Landscape Manual. 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2% grade in planting areas) away from stmctures and terminating in an approved drainage system. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable - due to existing site conditions. " There are new conditions and site grading proposed on portions of the project. Please address. 6. The planting palette shall include: a) Tree types and quantities. b) Shmb types and spacing with general layout. c) Ground cover types and spacing. d) Proposed plant sizes (either by number or percentage (%) of total quantity). 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference planting construction documents for more detailed planting specifics. " The construction drawing sheets do not address all areas. Please address the above for all areas. 7. Generally identify all existing woody plant material to be removed or retained. Trees over 12" in caliper diameter shall be identified on the plan individually as to caliper size and type and labeled to be retained or removed. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference existing tree survey. " This survey was not received. Please provide. 8. Completed. 9. Invasive species shall not be added to a landscaped area. Please review all proposed plantings and insure no invasive species are added. 2"'^ Review: Invasive species are listed on the construction drawing sheets submitted. See comment #1. Please resolve. 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shmbs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference concept note #8. " Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 11. Completed. 12. Completed. 13. Please provide a copy of the latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 2"'^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shmbs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screen/soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides ofbuilding 7710; north, east and west sides ofbuilding 7720; and the north and east sides ofbuilding 7750 to soften and La Costa Towne Village July 26,2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 3 enhance these building elevations. Please address. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 15. 50% of the shmbs (except on slopes 3:1 or steeper) shall be a minimum 5 gallon size. Please address. 2" Review: The note appears to address only plantings along El Camino Real. Please delete the red lined portion of the note as indicated to clarify that this applies to all areas. 16. Completed. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Existing slope landscape to remain - no additional planting is being proposed. " Landscaping may be required depending on fire suppression requirements. Please address comment #36 and provide landscaping as appropriate. 18. Evergreen plants shall be used to screen unsightly elements and shall be spaced to provide 100% screening within two (2) years of installation. Please screen the trash areas. Check all areas. 2"'^ Review: A plan note has been added; however plan graphics do not show that the note is to be addressed. Please show screen plantings on the plans. Check all areas. 19. Please address the following vehicular sight line requirements: a) The plan shall demonstrate that plants, when installed and at maturity, will be positioned to avoid obstructing motorists' views of pedestrian crossings, driveways, roadways and other vehicular travel ways. b) On collector streets and larger, landscape elements over 30 inches in height (including planting measured at maturity) as measured from adjacent street grade are not permitted at street comers within a triangular zone drawn from two points, 25 feet outward from the beginning of curves. c) At medium to high use driveways, the 30 inch height limitation applies at driveways 25 feet from the edge of the apron outward along the curb, then 45 degrees in toward the property. d) Ensure that landscape elements at interior private driveway intersections do not obstmct sight lines, so that circulation and pedestrian safety can be maintained. e) Landscape features (shrubs, trees, fencing, etc.) shall be selected to ensure that no visual impairments or obstmctions are located within the CalTrans sight distance lines. 2nd Review: Please show and label the vehicular sight lines on the landscape plans per comment #4d and insure the above requirements are met. 20. Completed. 21. Please provide street trees along El Camino Real per Appendix D of the Landscape Manual. Street trees shall be located: a) A minimum of seven (7) feet from any sewer line. b) In areas that do not conflict with public utilities. c) Outside of sight distance areas. d) A minimum of three (3) feet outside the public right of way, unless approved otherwise by the City as noted below. La Costa Towne Village July 26, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 4 2"'^ Review: Appendix D specifies Lophostemon confertus as the theme tree with Eucalyptus, Pinus canariensis, Eriobotria deflexa and Lophostemon as support trees. Please revise to meet landscape Manual requirements. 22. Completed. 23. Trees shall be provided at the minimum rate of one per every four parking stalls. Trees pertaining to this requirement shall be located within the parking area, exclusive of parking lot setbacks. The trees shall be located in close proximity to the spaces they are to shade. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 24. If a landscaped strip is provided perpendicular to rows of parking spaces, the planting area shall be designed to provide a minimum of four (4) feet of landscaping clear of vehicle overhangs. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 25. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent property or streets through the use of planting or any combination of planting, mounding, and decorative walls. Screening elements shall have a total height of at least three (3) feet. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 26. A minimum of 3% of the parking area shall be landscaped. The "parking area" includes all parking spaces and drive aisles. The plantings shall be contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4' and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6" in height. The plantings shall be located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. Please provide a calculation proving the percentage of landscape area provided in the parking area. 2""^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 27. Long rows of parking should be broken up with landscaped islands. Landscaped islands should be provided at intervals of one island for approximately every 12 to 15 parking spaces. Please address. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions. " This does not address the comment. Please address. 28. Please coordinate notes. Domestic and recycled water are both called for on the plans. Irrigation systems for all projects, except for service to a single-family residence or front yard irrigation on individually metered condos, shall be designed to use non-potable, treated recycled water, unless an exemption is approved by the City Utilities Department. Please note that this site is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Please coordinate with OMWD to determine the availability of recycled water and their requirements for use. Provide documentation of final OMWD direction for cross checking. Please note that Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) plans include a ftiture recycled water mainline in El Camino Real running south to La Costa Avenue and then going west on La Costa Avenue. It may be possible to tie into this line depending on OMWD approval and coordination. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Domestic water supply only. " Please provide documentation from OMWD indicating that they do not plan to provide recycled water to this site. 29. Completed. 30. Please sign the statement. 31. Please revise the Eto to 47. 32. Completed. La Costa Towne Village July 26, 2013 Conceptual Plan Review Page 5 33. Please use .55 for the irrigation efficiency (IE) or provide documentation that the spray type sprinklers to be used have an IE of .7. 2"^^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Based on the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance . 71 is the minimum IE used for spray head irrigation. " Please use the City of Carlsbad Ordinance and Landscape Manual worksheets versus the State Model. The City of Carlsbad has modified the State Model. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constmcted to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 2"^ Review: A note has been added to the plans; however water use calculations indicate the use of spray heads only. Drip or other appropriate irrigation will be required where located adjacent to paving that does not drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please resolve. 35. Completed. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations b) Rear yard setbacks c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 of the Landscape Manual d) Emergency/maintenance access e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards g) Street widths dimensioned 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Initially discussed with Michael and agreed that a Fire Suppression Plan was not needed. " The full scope of the project was not provided to the city at the time of preliminary discussions. A fire suppression plan is required unless specifically directed otherwise by the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshal. Please address. 37. RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. NEW COMMENTS lA. Jute mesh is not allowed by the Engineering Division. Please revise. 2A. Detailed concept plans, sheets L-7 - L-l2 (construction document sheets) specify river rock in parking lot planters where sheet Ll indicates shrubs. Please coordinate plans. Check all areas. 3A. Please revise to a 3" depth mulch layer over the erosion control mat. CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO FIE copy DATE: JULY 22. 2013 PROJECT NO(S): SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 REVIEW NO: 2 PROJECTTITLE: LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE APPLICANT: EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER, LLC TO: • Land Development Engineering - Steve Bobbett Police Department-J. Sasway Fire Department - Greg Ryan • • • • • • • Public Works (Storm Drain) - Clayton Dobbs Public Works (Wastewater) - Don Wasko Public Works (Water) - Jase Warner Leucadia Water/Sewer District Olivenhain Municipal Water/Sewer District Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA School District North County Transit District - Planning Dept. Sempra Energy-Land IVIanagement Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 1 I Building Division - Will Foss r~l Parks & Recreation (Parks/Trails) - Liz Ketabian r~] Parks & Recreation (Trees & Medians) - Mike Bliss r~| Public Works Department (Streets) - Nick Roque r~| Public Works Department (Traffic) - John Kim [~1 Public Works Department (Design) - Bill Plummer *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DIVISION Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Division at 1635 FaradayAvenue, bv 8/13/13. Ifyou have "No Comments," please so state. If vou determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the application "complete" for processing, please immediatelv contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-maill to let them know. Thank you COMMENTS: Signature Date PU\NS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/13 SW City of Carlsbad SHIPPING REQUEST DATE: Julv 24.2013 STAFF CONTACT: Shannon Werneke LOCATION OF ITEM TO BE SHIPPED: Mailroom (Mailroom, IT area, etc.) SHIPPING PREFERENCE: None (Fed Ex, UPS, Eagle Freight, etc) TYPE OF SERVICE: No Preference (Priority Ovemight, Ovemight, 2 day, 3 day, etc) PACKAGING: Anv (Envelope, Letter Pak, our packaging, etc.) IF OTHER THAN ENVELOPE OR LETTER PAK PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: WEIGHT: DIMENSIONS: H L W SHIP TO: CONTACT NAME: COMPANY NAME: Olivenhain Water District ADDRESS: 1966 Olivenhain Road. Encinitas. CA 92024 PHONE: PAYMENT INFORMATION: lEl CED/Planning • VENDOR {Department & Account No.) ACCOUNT #: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: SDP 78-03(D) - La Costa Towne Village http://cityweb/uploadedFiles/Purchasing/ShippingRequestForm.doc Rev. 07/24/2013 1635 FAFIADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Inquiry Transactions Found CITY OF CARLSBAD 7/25/2013 G2 Licensed to: CITY OF CARLSBAD Page: 1 Package /D:116 Address; Attn: /Address*; 573 Trk#: 1Z76Y36Y0300013966 OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT /Address*; 573 Pickup Rec#: 4465972814 1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD ENCINITAS CA 92024 US-UNITED STATES /Accoun<#; 15 A/ame; Planning Date/Time Operator MacAi/ne# Cam'er Cla^.-i ZIP/Zone Lb/Oz Pes Base Rt Total SPC SVC Total Oth Chas Total Total Chas PerPc Base Rt PerPc SDC Svc PerPc Oth Cha p5/2013 1:07:18 PIVI Graham Jorda 210171 UPS UPS Ground 92024/ 2 4/ 2.2 1 5.79 5.79 .00 .00 Oth Cha 5.79 Total Charges: 5.79 G2 Version 9.00.06 7/25/2013 1:09:14PM Land Development Engineering Request for Project Review^ RETURN to Cecelia Fernandez, Senior Office Specialist (SOS), Land Dev Eng bv: 5-5-13 To: ^Transportation-Traffic Brvan Jones From: Steve Bobbett , Project Engineer (PE), ext: 2747 Attached: • Improvement Plans Date: Aprils. 2013 • Grading Plans • Final/Parcel Map [pother: tentative parcel map Project ID: MS 13-01 DWG No.: Review No.:j; Project Name: La Costa Towne Villaae Engineer of Work fEOW): Andres Schlaefli EOW Ph: (858)560-4911 EOW Firm: Urban Svstem Asociates- Planchecker fPCE): Discretionarv review INSTRUCTIONS Recipient - Please review attached plans and complete "Department Comments" section below (attach additional pages if necessary). Please return bv date above even if no comments. LDE SOS-T Log date received from recipient and initial below. Fonward all documents to PE. When received from PE, notify EOW (copy notification to PE and PCE) and enter date below. If comments are written on plans, fonward plans to counter for EOW. Distabute-fnFaaa^ndicated below. PE - Review comments. Initial and date below. R^hjrfTto^OS. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS (see.instructions above) / PjComments on plans^^No comments d(V^cit:5 c\\\ Lob Rev\&(!§ts Printed Name Initials Telephone Date PE: Comments reviewed "^/^S ^"/^ SOS: Logged EOW Notified imaal date . Initial date Distribution: Original to file, copy to PCE, copy to EOW DocER-99-32 • 02/08/2011 ^ •^|> CITY OF CARLSBAD * 4 Memorandum April 8, 2013 To: Shannon Werneke, Project Planner From: Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Via: Glen Van Peski, Engineering Manager Re: MS 13-01 / SDP 78-03(D) / SDP 13-03 / PUD 13-02 / SUP 13-01; LA COSTA VILLAGE SQUARE COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW Land Development Engineering staff has completed a review ofthe above-referenced project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are currently inconnplete due to the following inconrtplete items: 1. Please submit a completed Stormwater Standard Questionnaire. The form can be printed from http://www.carlsbadca.gov/business/building/Documents/E-34.pdf. 2. Please indicate that all existing and proposed driveways will be reconstructed as needed to meet current ADA requirements. 3. The traffic impact anaylsis submitted April 4, 2013 is still being reviewed. Additional comments may result when the review is completed. 4. Comments regarding the proposed site access on El Camino Real will be addressed after the review ofthe traffic impact analysis is completed. 5. Redline comments can be found on the enclosed check print of the tentative map. 6. Please re-submit three copies ofthe revised tentative map. If you or the applicant has any questions, please either see or contact me at extension 2747. Steve Bobbett, P.E. Associate Engineer Land Development Engineering j^p^ Community & Economic Development 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 I 760-602-8560 fax I www.carlsbadca.gov 4 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Discretionary Review Checklist PROJECT NUMBER: MS 13-01 / SDP 78-03(D) / SDP 13-03 / PUD 13-02 / SUP 13-01 BUILDING ADDRESS: 7710 - 7770 EL CAMINO REAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Re-development and modernization of existing commercial/retail center ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 216-124-16 & 17-00 FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, information and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore, any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed oy this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as faiiure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. By: Date: DENIAL Please see the attached report of deficiencies marked with [El. Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By: G. Ryan By: By: Date: 3.18.2013 Date: Date: ATTACHMENTS FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSON NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4665 COMMENTS REVIEW CHECKLIST SITE PLAN • • • 1. Access: • Fire Department access. After consultation with the Operations Division of the Carlsbad, Encinitas and San Marcos Fire Departments, a request has been made to provide fire vehicle through travel across the deck ofthe parking structure to eliminate the need to back-up and off the previously discussed access pad. CMC 17.04.010. This access shall provide an unobstructed width of 24 feet, and a unobstructed vertical clearance or "clear-to-sky. • Fire Access Road surface. The surface of all fire department access routes shall be' of an impervious "all-weather" surface mo^arial, designed to carry a minimum load of 75,000 pounds axel weight. • Fire Lanes. The proposed Fire Department accesii route shall be designated as "Fire Lanes" and shall become the responsibility of the developer to have said access restrictions recorded, that the owner is responsible to provide and maintain to identify and ensure enforcement of those designated access. WATER IMPROVEMENT .|STE 2^°®I • • • 1. Hydrants Additional on-site public water mains and fire hydrants are required. • Provide,additional fire hydrants at intervals of 300 .feet along public streets and/or private driveways. Hydrants should be located within 90 L. Ft. of any Fire Department connection. • The private main shall have two separate points of connection to the public main. Each shall be capable of supplying the most demanding system independently. FIRE PROTECTION (Notes to be added) .|ST|!l 3RD1!) • • • 1. An automatic fire sprinkler systems: • Parcel 3 structures shall be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler systems designed to Ordinary Group 2 and be provided with Glass 1 standpipe system in accordance with NFPA 14. • Parcel 1: Parking structure shall be designed to Ordinary Group 2 and be provided with Glass 1 standpipe system in accordance with NFPA 14. • • • 2. Provide notes on all plans submitted for review that indicate that fire sprinklers and standpipes are required and add note that each system is a deferred submittal. • • • 3. Fire Alarm: A fully addressable manual fire alarm system shall be required in the non- residential portion of Parcel 3 buildings. The parking structure shall be provided with a fully addressable fire alarm system to the extent required by CFC 907 as amended with notification devices throughout. Plans for said syste-^is shall be a 'deferred' submittal item and submitted to the Fire Department for review. CITY OF CARLSBAD Police Department www.carlsbadca.gov Date: March 22, 2013 To: Planning Tracking Desk- Planning Department From: J. Sasway, Carlsbad Police Department Subject: MS 13-01/SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/PUD 13-02/ SUP 13-01-La Costa Towne Village Plan Review Recommendations Carlsbad Police Department's Crime Prevention Unit has provided the following optimal security recommendations. The purpose ofthis document is to safeguard property and public welfare by regulating and reviewing the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures. The standards used in this document represent model international standards. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design The proper design and effective use ofthe built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life. The proper design influences this by positively affecting human behavior. The design includes the physical environment, the planned behavior of people, the productive use of space and an effective crime/loss prevention program. Natural Surveillance 1. Place and design physical features to maximize visibility. This will include building orientation, windows, entrances, walkways, landscape trees and shrubs, fences and any other physical obstruction. 2. Design the placement of persons, common areas or activities to maximize surveillance possibilities. 3. Design lighting that provides for appropriate nighttime illumination of walkways, entrances and driveways. Natural Access Control 1. Use walkways, pavement, lighting and landscaping to clearly guide guests to and from selected entrances. 2. Use real or symbolic barriers like fences or landscaping to prevent and or discourage access to or from dark and or unmonitored areas. 3. Used managed access on residential garage entrances, common doors and elevators. Provisions for territorial reinforcement 1. Use pavement treatments, landscaping and fences to define and outline ownership or property. 2. Show clean transitions between public, semi-public and private (residential) space. Residential Lighting 1. Illuminate all vehicular drive surfaces with a minimum maintained 1 foot-candle of light at ground level during the hours of darkness. 2. Illuminate all exterior common area pedestrian walkways and recreation areas with a minimum ^ 2560Orion Way Carlsbad, CA 92010-7240 T 760-931-2100 F 760-931-8473 © ^u3 maintained 0.25 foot-candle of light at ground level during the hours of darkness. 3. Illuminate cluster mailboxes and trash enclosures located on the exterior with a minimum maintained 1 foot-candle of light, measured within a five-foot radius at ground level, during the hours of darkness. 4. Illuminate recessed areas of building or fences, which have a minimum depth of two feet, a minimum height of five feet, and do not exceed 6 feet in width and are capable of human concealment with a minimum maintained 0.25 foot-candles of light at ground level during the hours of darkness. This requirement applies to defined recessed areas that are within 6 feet of the edge of designated walking surface with an unobstructed pathway to it, not hindered by walls or hedgerow landscaping a minimum of two feet in height. 5. Protect accessible luminaries with vandal resistant light fixtures when they are not less than three feet in height from the walking surface when used to illuminate walkways and a minimum of 78 inches in height above the driving surface when illuminating surfaces associated with vehicles. Light fixtures shall be deemed accessible if mounted within 15 feet vertically or 6 feet horizontally from any accessible surface or any adjoining roof, balcony, landing, stair tread platform or similar structure. Landscaping 1. Plan a landscaping design that enhanced surveillance and security. 2. Tree canopies should be no lower than six (6) feet and should not allow access to roofs or balconies. 3. Ensure landscaping plan does not deter from lighting and addressing. 4. Plant only low profile shrubs that can be maintained below two (2) feet. 5. Use security plants where necessary to prevent entering and tampering. 6. Install walls and fences that are see-through and enhance surveillance. 7. Install gates that allow surveillance. 8. Keep entranceways clear of clutter. Addressing 1. Locate numerals where they are clearly visible from the front street. 2. Contrast the numeral's color to the background on which it is affixed. 3. Numerals shall be no less than four (4) inches in height and illuminated during the hours of darkness. 4. There should be positioned at each entrance of a multiple family dwelling complex with more than four buildings, an illuminated diagrammatic representation of the complex, which depicts the location of the viewer and the unit designations within the complex. It should be lighted during the hours of darkness. Elevators 1. Elevator cabs with interiors that are not completely visible when the door is open from a point centered on and 36 inches away from the door, shall have shatter resistant mirrors or other equally reflective material so placed as to make visible the entire elevator cab from this point. 2. Illuminate the elevator cab at all times with a minimum maintained two foot-candles of light at floor level. 3. Used managed access on elevator doors. Stairways 1. Interior doors should have glazing panels a minimum of five inches wide and 20 inches in height and meet requirements ofthe Uniform Building Code. 2. Areas beneath stairways at or below ground level shall be fully enclosed or access to them restricted. 3. Stair towers and elevators have been the highest risk for personal injury as they are typically enclosed. Stairways should be designed to be completely visible from either the interior or exterior or both, unless mandated by the Uniform Building Code to be enclosed. 4. Fully enclosed interior or exterior stairways with solid walls, when required, should have shatter resistant mirrors or other equally reflective material at each level and landing and be designed or placed in such a manner as to provide visibility around corners. Doors 1. Do not use of glass within 42 inches of a locking device. 2. Install wooden doors of solid core construction with a minimum thickness of one and three-fourths (1-3/4) inches. This includes the garage pedestrian door to the outside and the door from the garage into the residence. 3. Equip all doors with a single cylinder dead-bolt lock using a 5-pin tumbler. Connect the deadbolt to the inner portion of the lock by connecting screws. Ensure the lock has a one-inch throw that can withstand a cutting tool attack. Choose a deadbolt that embeds at least three-fourths of an inch into the strike plate. 4. Storage door should be solid wood construction. They should have a deadbolt lock, a re-enforced strike plate and re-enforced walls around the door. 5. Consider a window in the storage door. 6. Common doors should have managed access. Strike Plates 1. Reinforce all deadbolt strike plates. Choose strike plates constructed of a minimum 16 U.S. gauge steel, bronze, or brass and secure it to the jamb by a minimum of two screws, which should penetrate at least two (2) inches into the solid backing beyond the surface to which the strike is attached. 2. Reinforcement of the door area around the lock is also recommended. Viewer 1. Arrange entrance doors so that the occupant has a view of the area immediately outside the door without opening the door. Except doors requiring a fire protection rating that prohibits them, such a view may be provided by a door viewer having a field of view of not less than 190 degrees. Mounting height should not exceed fifty-four (54) inches from the floor. Window and sliding glass doors 1. All exterior sliding glass doors and windows should be equipped with locking devices which will keep the sliding panel of the door or window from being opened from the outside horizontally or vertically lifted. Keying 1. Upon occupancy by the owner, each single unit in a tract constructed under the same general plan, should have locks using combinations that are interchange free from locks used in all other separate dwellings. IVIait Boxes 1. Locate mailboxes in highly visible areas adjacent to common areas. Commercial Lighting All types of exterior doors should be illuminated during the hours of darkness, with a minimum maintained one (1) foot-candle of light, measured within a five-foot radius on each side of the door at ground level. Recessed areas of buildings or fences, which have a minimum depth of two feet, a minimum height of five feet, and do not exceed six (6) feet in width and are capable of human concealment, should be illuminated with a minimum maintained 0.25 foot-candles of light at ground level during the hours of darkness. This recommendation applies to defined recessed areas, which are within six feet ofthe edge ofa designated walking surface with an unobstructed pathway to it, not hindered by walls or hedgerow landscaping a minimum of two (2) feet in height. 3. All exterior pedestrian walkways, interior common corridors, and open parking lots should be illuminated with a minimum maintained one (1) foot-candle of light on the walking or driving surface during the hours of darkness. 4. Overhead light poles should not be placed in an area planted with shade trees or other canopy producing species. Only basic ground cover, including but not limited to hedges and shrubs, should be used. 5. The parking and drive surface lighting should have a rated average bulb life of not less than 10,000 hours. 6. Accessible luminaries should have vandal resistant light fixtures and be not less than three feet in height from ground level when used to illuminate walkways and a minimum of eight feet in height from ground level when illuminating surfaces associated with vehicles. Light fixtures should be deemed accessible if mounted within fifteen feet vertically or six feet horizontally from any accessible surface or any adjoining roof, balcony, landing, treads, platform or similar structure. Landscaping 1. The basic landscaping theme should consist of low ground cover with a maximum height of 2 feet and canopy trees with a minimum lower canopy of 6 feet. 2. Overhead light poles should not be placed in an area planted with shade trees or other canopy producing species. Only basic ground cover, including but not limited to hedges and shrubs, should be used. 3. Use security landscaping in areas to deter loitering or entrance where pedestrians are not wanted. Addressing 1. Numerals should be located where they are clearly visible from the street on which they are addressed. They should be of a color contrasting to the background to which they are affixed. 2. Numerals should be no less than six inches in height, if located less than 100 feet from the centeriine of the addressed street or 12 inches in height if placed further than 100 feet from the centeriine ofthe addressed street. 3. The numerals should be illuminated during the hours of darkness. 4. The rear doors of all building should have address numbers not less than six inches in height and be of a color contrasting to the background to which they are affixed. 5. Buildings with a total square footage of at least 10,000 square feet should have rooftop numbers placed parallel to the addressed street, screened from public view and only visible from the air. The numerals are to be white, block lettered, constructed of weather resistant material, and placed against a black background. Address numbers are to be a minimum of four feet in height and 18 inches wide Doors 1. Use hollow steel doors that are a minimum sixteen (16) U.S. gauge and have sufficient reinforcement to maintain the designed thickness of the door when any locking device is installed. 2. Use only glass doors with fully tempered glass or rated burglary resistant glazing. Protect all exterior doors with security hardware. 3. Equip all doors with a latch cover constructed of steel. Ensure the latch cover is a minimum of .125 inch thick. Attach the latch cover to the outside by welding or with non-removable bolts spaced apart on not more than ten-inch centers. 4. Construct the jamb of all aluminum frame-swinging doors to withstand 1600 pounds of pressure in both a vertical distance ofthree inches and horizontal distance of one inch each side ofthe strike, to prevent violation of the strike. 5. Equip rear doors used for shipping and receiving and employee entrances with a viewer. 6. Equip a single or double door with a double cylinder deadbolt with a bolt projection exceeding one inch or a hook-shaped or expanding deadbolt that engages the strike sufficiently to prevent spreading. The deadbolt lock shall have a minimum of five-pin tumblers and a cylinder guard. Windows 1. Equip movable windows with security hardware and burglar resistant glazing. 2. Cover other vulnerable non-movable windows with burglar resistant glazing. Windows of commercial buildings are vulnerable to breakage during the hours of darkness when the business is non-operational especially windows within 40 inches of any door locking mechanism 3. Glaze should be constructed of either two part laminated glazing with a 0.60 inch inner layer or burglary resistant glazing Stairways 5. Interior doors should have glazing panels a minimum of five inches wide and 20 inches in height and meet requirements ofthe Uniform Building Code. 6. Areas beneath stairways at or below ground level shall be fully enclosed or access to them restricted. 7. Stair towers and elevators have been the highest risk for personal injury as they are typically enclosed. Stairways should be designed to be completely visible from either the interior or exterior or both, unless mandated by the Uniform Building Code to be enclosed. 8. Fully enclosed interior or exterior stairways with solid walls, when required, should have shatter resistant mirrors or other equally reflective material at each level and landing and be designed or placed in such a manner as to provide visibility around corners. Elevators 1. Elevator cabs with interiors that are not completely visible when the door is open from a point centered on and 36 inches away from the door, shall have shatter resistant mirrors or other equally reflective material so placed as to make visible the entire elevator cab from this point. 2. The elevator cab should be illuminated at all times with a minimum maintained two foot-candles of light at floor level. Roofs 1. All skylights on the roof of any building should be provided with rated burglary resistant glazing material securely fastened with bolts that are non-removable from the exterior. 2. All hatchway openings on the roof of any building should be secured as follows: a. If the hatchway cover is of wooded material, it should be covered on the inside with at least sixteen (16) gauge steel metal or its equivalent and attached with screws. 3. All air duct or air vent opening exceeding ninety-six (96) square inches on the roof, exterior doors, or exterior walls of any building should be secured by covering the same with the following: a. Iron bars of a least number four (4) steel or equivalent, spaced no more than five (5) inches apart on center, at each direction, welded at all point of intersection, or one by one-fourth (1X %) inch flat steel or equivalent, spaced no more the five (5) inches apart on center, welded at all points of intersection. Alarm Systems 1. When considering an alarm system, the police department recommends a "verified system" in an effort to eliminate false alarm activations and increase breach detection. A verified system is verified through audio or visual components. 2. If considering electronic assess as a security feature, consider managed electronic access. Parking Garages Area of concern: The walkway that leads from the parking garage to the sidewalk on El Camino Real. This sidewalk will direct pedestrians from the public walkway into the semi-public parking garage and further into the private parking garage as opposed to a walkway that directs pedestrians from the shopping area into the semi-public parking garage. The users in the shopping area have need of the walkway for parking but there are few positive reasons people walking along El Camino Real need access. 1. Lighting a. Ensure lighting is uniform. Illuminate the edges of parking stalls, storage units and drive surface. b. Use 2 foot-candles as the minimum illuminance in any one point. c. Position lights over vehicles or near beams rather than in drive aisles to reduce glare. Or choose fixtures with built in shields to reduce glare. 2. Natural Surveillance a. Maximize flat parking areas and minimize ramps. Long-span construction and high ceilings create openness and aid lighting. b. Maximize openness of the fa?ade. c. Minimize pedestrian paths. Concentrate more people on fewer paths which will increase surveillance. d. Avoid dead-end parking, nooks and crannies. e. Define parking spaces at 90 degrees instead of 45 degrees. 3. Parking Stairways a. Use interior door glazing panels that are a minimum of five inches wide and 20 inches in height and meet requirements ofthe Uniform Building Code. b. Enclose areas beneath stairways at or below ground level or restrict access to them restricted. c. Design stairways to be completely visible from either the interior or exterior or both, unless mandated by the Uniform Building Code to be enclosed d. Light with a 2 foot-candle minimum illuminance in any one point. 4. Elevators a. Elevator cabs with interiors that are not completely visible when the door is open from a point centered on and 35 inches away from the door, shall have shatter resistant mirrors or other equally reflective material so placed as to make visible the entire elevator cab from this point. b. Illuminate the elevator cab at all times with a minimum maintained two foot-candles of light at floor level. 5. Access Control a. Use managed access for the residential gate, common entrances, elevator and doors. 6. Storage areas a. Create storage areas designed with deadbolt locks and reinforced strike plates. b. Reinforce the wall area around the door c. Use hinge pins or another deterrent on the hinges of out swinging doors. This information is a representation of information gathered on a national level. The purpose is to provide emnllvl'l'' "T"'"''' '"f?^"^^*'""' "ke additional assistance concerning building securitv or employee security issues, please contact the Crime Prevention Unit at (760) 931-2105 By, Jodeene R. Sasway Crime Prevention Specialist Carlsbad Police Department (760) 931-2195 DELANO & DELANO VIA E-MAIL & U.S MAIL Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 February 23, 2015 City of Carlsbad FEB 24 2015 Planning Division Re: 02/MS 13-01 Dear Ms. Wemeke: Per your instructions, this letter is to confirm North County Advocates hereby withdraws its appeal of the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") in light the fact that the applicant has withdrawn the project. North County Advocates does so without waiving any rights to participate in and/or appeal any future attempts to develop the site and/or any attempt tt,- renew the prior project applications. Please promptly issue a refund oi the appeal fee. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, iverett DeLano I a. < m m H ^ m l> § O I" <? > a" ^ ® > i 2 s- o & B a. lyi to o ^ ON 0^ O O Ul Ul Ul o w v\ w . n 1; L A N O A N 13 D r L A N C). c o 111 AG-CP LA COSTA OWNER, L.P. c/o Centennial Real Estate Management, LLC 1640 Sth Street, Suite 101 Santa Monica, California 90401 February 10, 2015 FtB 1 7 2015 Don Neu City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92006 Subject: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- Request to Withdraw Applications Project: La Costa Towne Center Dear Mr. Neu: This letter is to formally request the withdrawal ofthe applications for La Costa Towne Center (SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-13/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01). We have decided not to pursue this development proposal. We will be exploring other development options for the property. Please issue a refund of any unused fees to my office. We look forward to working with you and your staff in the future. Sincerely, AG-CP LA COSTA OWNER, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership By: Centennial Real Estate Management, LLC, its property manager By: Scott Schonfeld Vice President cc: Shannon Werneke, City of Carlsbad Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning and Engineering E\CEL ^TRUST July 7, 2014 Mr. Steve Sarkozy City Manager CityofCarlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92000 Re: City Council Hearing - Agenda Item # 7 (AB #21,674, Resolution 2014-169) Dear Mr. Sarkozy, I apologize for making this request so late, but Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC the Owners of La Costa Towne Center need to request a postponed ofthe appeal scheduled for tomorrow evening. The ownership has been exploring some changes to the project that would affect the entitlements for the project and potentially affect the appeal. The ownership thought that all the investigation would be completed by this time, but things have been delayed and more study time is needed. Would you please move the appeal hearing until next month. Nathan Hilbig, our head of Asset Management, will be attending the hearing for the partnership tomorrow evening. Thanking you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, Spencer Plumb President Excel Trust S. Wemeke G.Sherman R. Benson S. Benos 17140 Bemardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego. CA 92128 (858) 613-1800 • Fax (858) 487-9890 Jane Mobaldi From: Everett DeLano <everett@delanoanddelano.com> Sent: Monday July 07, 2014 9:36 AM To: Jane Mobaldi Cc: Celia Brewer; Don Neu; 'Dare Delano' Subject: RE: La Costa Town Center Thanks for the clarification. I see no objection to a continuance. Please keep us apprised ofthe project's status. I would also ask to be provided copies of any resubmittals, etc. Thank you, Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 (760) 510-1562 (760) 510-1565 (fax) I DELANO & DELANO www.delanoanddelano.com From: Jane Mobaldi [mailto;Jane.Mobaldi@carlsbadca.gov] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 9:25 AM To: Everett DeLano Cc: Celia Brewer; Don Neu Subject: RE: La Costa Town Center The appeal fee would be refunded if and when the appeal becomes no longer relevant. The matter will go back through Planning Commission if a new application is filed or if an amendment is necessary. It will depend on the magnitude of the revisions if any. From: Everett DeLano [mailto:everett@delanoanddelano.com1 Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 8:18 AM To: Jane Mobaldi Cc: Flora Waite; 'Dare DeLano' Subject: RE: La Costa Town Center I can check with my clients, but have a couple questions. Will my clients be reimbursed the appeal fee? Will the matter go back through the Planning Commission or come straight to City Council? Thanks, Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, Ch 92025 (760) 510-1562 (760) 510-1565 (fax) DELANO & DELANO www.delanoanddelano.com From: Jane Mobaldi |"mailto:3ane.Mobaldi@carlsbadca.qov] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 7:58 AM To: Everett DeLano (everett(a)delanoanddelano.com) Cc: Flora Waite Subject: La Costa Town Center The Applicant is requesting a continuance for two months to consider redesign of the project. Please let me know me know if you have any objection. Jane Mobaldi No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3485 / Virus Database: 3955/7809 - Release Date: 07/07/14 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3485 / Virus Database: 3955/7812 - Release Date: 07/07/14 DELANO & DELANO July 4,2014 VIA E-MAIL & U.S MAIL City Council CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Citv Council Julv 8,2014 meeting: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78- 03(DVSDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Dear Honorable Members ofthe Carlsbad City Council: i-I I B-& 3 a. o 3 u m t— > z o II This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the appeal of the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). L The City Must Meet the Parks and Open Space Performance Standards The requirements of the Carlsbad Growth Management Plan ("GMP") stem from a 1986 local initiative (Proposition E) and are codified both in the City's General Plan and its zoning ordinance. Among other things, the GMP sets "performance standards" for public facilities, including parks and open space within the City of Carlsbad. The GMP requires: "Three acres of community park or special use park per 1,000 population within the Park District, must be scheduled for construction within a five year period." Res. No. 8796, Att. A; Proposition E, a copy of which is attached hereto. Regarding open space, it requires: "Fifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exciusive of environmentally constrained non-developable land must be set aside for open space and must be available concurrent with development." Id. For each zone, a Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) was developed. The LFMP for Zone 6 requires that all deveiopment within the zone compfy with the Citywide FaciHties and Improvements Plan as adopted by City Council Resolution 8797 on September 23, 1987. I > 3 z s- O a 9 3 O Ul Ul Ul o o U> Ul a^ Ov Ul KJ Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 4,2014 Page 2 of 7 A. Parks The Project site is located within Park District Nimiber 4, which is the Southeast Quadrant of the city. La Costa Town Center Initial Study, p. 33. The Initial Study correctly repeats the applicable perfonnance standard for parks: three acres per 1,000 people within each district. However, it then states that all development within Zone 6 is "conditioned to pay a park-in-lieu fee to satisfy the performance standard established by the GMP." Initial Study, p. 33. The staff report asserts that the proposed project is in compliance with the performance standard for parks. Staff Report, Table 5. During the Planning Commission hearing, staff asserted the Project was in compliance with the performance standards for parks. The City's Response to Comments, Mitigated Negative Declaration, La Costa Towne Center, also reference a "park-in-lieu" fee, and state: "pursuant to the Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report for July 1,2012-Jime 30, 2013..., the city is currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant." Response to Comments, p. 4. The conclusion that the southeast quadrant is in compliance with the standards for parks is incorrect. 1. There is a Shortfall of Park Acreage in the Southeast Quadrant a. Current Shortfall The City of Carlsbad Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report (GMP Monitoring Report) states that 115.7 acres of park land is required in the southeast quadrant to meet the performance standards, but that only 114.9 park acres exist in the quadrant. GMP Monitoring Report, p. 15, a copy of which is attached hereto. Thus, there is a shortfall of 0.8 acres according to that report. However, the nimibers in the GMP Monitoring Report are flawed, and the true shortfall is even greater. According to the City of Carlsbad Development Monitoring Report dated May 2014 (a copy of which is attached hereto), there are currently 16,151 dwelling units in the southeast quadrant, which translates to a population of 39,247. Thus, 117.74 acres of park land would be required in order to meet the performance standard in this quadrant. The City's Draft General Plan lists only 114.9 acres of park land in the southeast quadrant. However, acreage for La Costa Canyon Park (14.7 acres), and for half of Leo Carillo Historic Park (13.7 acres) should not be counted towards the performance standards because the City counts those acres as hardline Habitat Management Plan (HMP) land. Commimity parks are those areas designed to serve the recreational needs of several neighborhoods, and contain facilities such as group picnic areas, turfed open space areas for free play, tot lot areas, multipurpose playfields, and other structures. City of Carlsbad General Plan, Parks and Recreation Element, p. 3. Those types of uses are prohibited within HMP open space areas. Muni. Code Chapter 21.33.045. When the areas designated as HMP open space are subtracted, the southeast quadrant is left with a shortfall of 31.24 acres of park space. This is depicted in the table below: Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 3,2014 Page 3 of 7 Quadrant Population Park Acres Required Existing Park Acres Shortfall South East (SE) 39,247 117.74 86.5 Community parks: 74.3 Special use areas: 12.2 31.24 acres b. Future Shortfall The City estimates the future population of the southeast quadrant at 41,785, which would require 125 .4 acres of open space in order to be compliant with the perfonnance standards.' However there are no additional park acres plaimed within the southeast quadrant. The present shortfall of 31.24 acres will increase to a future shortfall of 38.9 acres. In its recent citywide analysis of future park acreage, the City has counted Veteran's Memorial Park as a "citywide" park, and proceeded to divide the 90 acre park between the four quadrants, adding 22.5 acres of "future park areas" to each quadrant. City of Carlsbad Draft General Plan. With those additional acres, the City concludes that each of the quadrants will be compliant with the park standards at "buildout." Draft General Plan, Table 4-7. However, this reasoning is flawed and the conclusion is incorrect. Veteran's Memorial Park is in the Northwest quadrant of the City. There is nothing in the voter approved Growth Management Plan that allows for a park to be counted in the acreage of a different quadrant. The City does have the authority to change the standards put in place by an initiative approved by the voters. The Califomia Constitution defines an initiative as "the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them." Marble head v. City of San Clemente (1991) 226 Cal.App.3d 1504,1509 (citing Cal. Const., Art. II, §8). Voters have the authority of the local legislative body. Legislature of the Sfa/e of California v. Deukmejian (1983) 34 Cal.3d 658,675. The Califomia Supreme Court has explained: "The initiative and referendum are not rights 'granted the people, but... power[s] reserved by them.... If doubts can reasonably be resolved in favor of the use of this reserve power, courts will preserve it.'" Rossi v. Brown (1995) 9 Cal.4* 688,695 (citations omitted). 2. The City's "Threshold'' is Inconsistent with Proposition E The GMP Monitoring Report, and its conclusion that the City is currently meeting the performance standards for parks, contains a flawed analysis. It states that, despite the current shortfall of park acreage, the southeast quadrant is "not out of compliance with the performance standard because neither the time firame nor dwelling unit thresholds have been reached." GMP Monitoring Report, p. 15. The report goes on to state that the This population estimate appears in the City's Draft General Plan at Table 4-7. Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 4,2014 Page 4 of 7 have been reached." GMP Monitoring Report, p. 15. The report goes on to state that the "threshold" for triggering constmction of a new park is either five years or "before the cumulative constmction of 1,562 dwelling units, whichever occurs later." GMP Monitoring Report, p. 15 at fh2. It also states that "scheduled for constmction" means that "the improvements have been designed, a park site has been selected, and a financing plan for constmction of the facility has been approved." Id. This arbitrary "threshold" set by the City is inconsistent with the standards mandated by the voters in Proposition E. A threshold of 1,562 dwelling units completely annihilates the time frame requirement contained in the voter-approved GMP. Under that standard, park districts, or quadrants, could be failing to meet the requisite 3 acres of park per 1,000 people for years, or even decades, until that arbitrary threshold of dwelling units has been built. Furthermore, the City's definition of "scheduled for constmction" provides no assurance of when the park would actually be constmcted; it requires only an approval of design and financing. A shortfall of park acreage could continue for years under such a definition. This is not consistent with either the letter or the spirit of Proposition E. B. Open Space 1. The City Must Analyze Open Space Acreage City staff asserted at the hearing that the open space standard does not apply to Zone 6. The Staff Report lists the impacts of the Project on the open space stancterd as non-applicable. StaffReport, Table 5. At the Planning Commission hearing. City staff Don Neu pointed out that when the initial LFMP was created for Zone 6, it was determined to be complaint with the performance standards for open space. He asserted that therefore there was no need for City staff to analyze open space compliance at this time. This assertion, as well as the reasoning behind it, is incorrect and unsupported. Zone 6 is obligated to comply with the performance standards for open space just as all the other Zones are, and the City has failed to analyze whether the project is in conformance with those standards. Pursuant to the 1986 Growth Management Plan ("GMP"), a Local Facilities Management Plan ("LFMP") was prepared for Zone 6.^ The LFMP states: "Existing open space meets the adopted performance standard." However it also noted: "An ^ Proposition E (and Ordinance 9824 which implemented Prop E), provides: "The City Council or the Planning Commission shall not find that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the Public Facilities Element and the City's 1986 growth management plan unless the provision of such facilities is guaranteed." Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 4,2014 Page 5 of 7 ongoing work program will assure the open space performance standard is maintained through build out." The LFMP also lists three Special Conditions for Zone 6 Open Space. The third Special Condition includes the following requirement: "Prior to approval of a proposed development in Zone 6, the approving authority shall be required to find that the development contributes to meeting the open space facility performance standard at build out and that the development does not preclude the provision of performance standard open space at the build out of Zone 6." 2. 2k>ne 6 Does Not Meet the Performance Standards The applicable performance standards require fifteen percent of the total land area in the zone, exclusive of environmentally constrained non-developable land, to be set aside for open space. The LFMP for Zone 6 states that the total acreage for the zone is 2,674.1. Thus tihe amount of non-constrained open space required to meet the Performance Standard is 401.1 acres. The City's GIS data reveals that the total amount of open space in the category of "Open Space for the Preservation of Natural Resources" is 454.59 acres. A copy of an extraction of the City's GIS data related to Zone 6 is attached hereto. The GIS data also shows that there are 269.8 acres of environmentally constrained land within Zone 6. Subtracting the constrained land from the open space total reveals that there is a shortfall of 131,3 acres of open space in Zone 6. This is shown on the table below: Total Acres in Zone 6 15% (required to meet Open Space Performance Standards) Total Open Space in Zone^ Constrained Open Space in Zone Amount of Open Space Shortfall 2,674.1 401.11 454.59 269.78 131J3 IL The Project Should Not Be Approved Unless the Performance Standards for Parks and Open Space Have Been Met Proposition E, passed by the City's voters in 1986"* stated: NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE APPROVED by the City of Carlsbad unless it is guaranteed that concurrent with need all necessary public facilities be provided as required by [the 1986 growth management plan] ^ This is the total for Category 1 open space, which is the category of "Open Space for the Preservation of Natural Resources." The total amoimt of open space listed in the City's GIS data for all four categories is 917.46 acres. ^ On December 2,1986, the City certified the passage of Proposition E at the November 4,1986 election, and adopted and ratified the proposition as Ordinance No. 9824. Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 3,2014 Page 6 of 7 with emphasis on ensuring good traffic circulation, schools, parks, libraries, open space and recreational amenities; It also stated: The City Council or the Planning Commission shall not find that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the Pubiic Facilities Element and the City's 1986 growth management plan unless the provision of such facilities is guaranteed. Thus Proposition E cemented the requirement that the Public Facilities Standards laid out in the City's 1986 Growth Management Plan must be guaranteed before development can be approved.'* The Carlsbad Municipal Code codifies this requirement, stating: "no development permit shall be approved unless the approving authority finds that the permit is consistent with the city-wide facilities and improvements plan and the applicable local facilities management plan." Muni. Code Chapter 21.90.040. The Code further provides that if at any time the performance standards established by a LFMP are not met, "then no development permits or building permits shall be issued within the local zone until the performance standard is met..." Muni. Code Chapter 21.90.080. The 1986 Guidelines for Preparation of Local Facility Management Plans states that if there is a shortfall in park space, the plan for parks shall either "provide a plan for eliminating the shortfall, or indicate the intent to suspend development in the zone for a period of time, until the necessary facilities are constmcted."' The LFMP for Zone 6 specifically provides that, if the City Council determines that a non-conformance exists, then "no future building or development permits shall be issued until those facilities are brought into conformance with the adopted performance standard." Condition 7 of the LFMP states: "no building permits will be allowed unless the performance standards are complied with." ^ The Growth Management Plan was adopted in a series of Resolutions: Resolution No. 8796, establishing the clarified Performance Standards for the Growth Management Program; Resolution No. 8797, approving the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan; Resolution No. 8798, establishing the guidelines for the preparation of the Local Faciiity Management Plans; Resolution No. 8799, establishing a Local Facility Management Plan Processing Fee. ' On April 14, 1987, the City provided policy direction to staff by confirming the residential performance standards of the Growth Management Plan only affect residential development, and not other types of development such as commercial and industrial. Thus for parks, if the standaid is not met then only residential development is stayed, for open space, all development is stayed. Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND, Parks and Open Space July 4,2014 Page 7 of7 Because the City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for park facilities in the Southeast Quadrant, no residential development can be allowed. Because the City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for open space in Zone 6, no development can be allowed. To approve the Project would violate Proposition E, the City's Municipal Code, and the LFMP for Zone 6. Accordingly, North County Advocates respectfully requests you reject the Project and MND. Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Sincerely, Everett DeLano Enclosures: City of Carlsbad Proposition E Resolution No. 8796 City of Carlsbad Growth Management Program Development Monitoring Report, May 2014 City of Carlsbad Fiscal Year 2012-13 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report, July 1,2012 tiirough June 30,2013 Spreadsheet extracted firom GIS data showing open space in Zone 6 Spreadsheet extracted fi'om GIS data showing environmentally constrained lands in Zone 6 CD containing data extractions firom City's GIS files re open space cc: Shannon Wemeke, Associate Planner I CITY OF CARLSBAD Proposition E - j j {TNtpropoaWonwlcpp«arontti«baltotinth«toao«vingtoim.) i I'^litl '• fTfif Wi'wfiftlliiifKft'f^^ efcWMiwi.^ - ^ ' • qpii»ri|iiii-'aiiitliafl>ii.-iiiMi«i^ -'•nd 2) th* Oty CouiKl «htl not appioM raMMW dMtlopmMt wMcti would lnci»w»i»nuit*iro(rtiiwilna unto b<yi)nd tht Imit In saitf ordbuuio* wmKXrr AN AFFmMATn/e OP THE CITIZENS. TIM Cily may •dd addHMMl puMe tecMw. Tht CKy alMi not raduoo pubic taoWM without • ooffwpondbig reduction In th« raaidtntel dwwing uni bnH PROPOSEO ORDINANCE Th* PMpi* of th« Cily ol CarlBiMd do ordain M loitowK A. That lha Cariabad ganaral plan sha* ba amandnd by tha amandmant of the Pubfic FadHaa and Land Uaa Bamanli to add tha (olowhyj: Tha CKy of CaiWMd in Implatnanting Ka pubfic (adfifiaa aiamani and growth managamam plan haa mada an aKImaH of tha numbar of Awaing unRa that w* ba buUt aa a raauR ol tha appfieafien ol lha danaky rangaa in tha Land Uaa Bamant 10 Indhriduai prolaeiB. Tha Ciq<a Capttai ImpravamaM BudgiM. gioMih tnanagamant plan, and pubHc taeWaa plana are al baaad en thia aatknaM. m ordar to anaura thai al neoaimy publte ficlKleatii<iba e»aleblaconcutiant»»lBinaadtoaarwenawdawalopi»ienlKla naoaaaary to Imit tha mjmbar of laridaniatdwalbig unitl wMeh ean baconakiielad in tha Ca^ to that aafimaie. For that puqMaa tha Oty haa baan dMdad into tour quadrantaitong Q Camlno Raal and PalowMrAiipcit Road. Tha maximum numbar o« raaWanttal dwaMngunte to be oonakuotod or ipptewad In tha CKy afler Novambar 4, iflts la aa ift)lo«w: Morthwast QuadnM IU44: Nodhaaat Quadram 6.160; Southwatt Quadrant 10,687; Southeast Quadrant IOJOI. Tha CKy ahal not approve any General Plan amendment, aona change, tentathra aubdMaloft map or olhar dtooMtomay approval tor a deMtopmenl which oould raauK in davalopmant abova ifia Imll In any quadrant In order to annm that davatepmant doas not aiteaad the imft tha folowing grovMh managament control poMo ara astabfishad <or th* Land Uaa Eiamani dantKy rangaa. ALLOWED DWELUNG UNITS PER ACRE \ I Ganaral Plan Growth Managemant I RL 0 - 1.8 1.0 j RLM 0 - 4.0 3.2 RM 4 - e.O 6.0 ; RMH 6 - 15.0 11.5 \ RH .15 - 23.0 19.0 j 1 (ConHnuadonnaMpaga) j 't The C!ty ahal not approve any caaidenlial davalopmant at a dantity that •xo**ds th* growth management conttol point for the applcabto denstty.range wfthout making the loHowbig flmftiga: 1. That tha project provide auffidam addHtonal pubfiefadmia* forth* d*n«ity In axcasa of the control point to eneure that the adequacy of tha Ctly^ pubfic fadniaa plana wfll not ba adveraely impeeied. • 2. That thara haiva baen auffident davaiopmenta approvad in tha quadrant at densiltoe betow the control poM to cover tte unRa In the project abova the controi point so the appiovai wM not raaiA in Moaedbig tha quadrant ImR. Tha Ctty Manager ahal monRoraiapprovato and report to the Planning Commisston and City Cound on an annual baito to enaura that tha oonavuelton ot raaldandal unte wilhin each quadrant, on a cim«ilaavebaito,wa beat or below the growth managament control potole and that the ovaral quadrant ImKa ata being maintainad.' If the annual report indtoatoe in aiv way that H to My thai Vtoimft may baemaeded. the Cound shaR take ^ppropriaia actton by ravtotog tha growth managament plan and me Oi/a zoning coda to anaure that tha oeinge wl ba maintainad. Tha CKy Cetmdl or tha and the Ciye 1866 flpowth guarantoadL« . ^_ anauting good nUc amenRiea.- PtMto puMto faoMlac wUmul iniMng rCopimtoaien ahal nat find that al naoeaaaiy public •^--^ *~1j)yihaPuMte FeeiMee etoment I provialon ol aueh tacWaa ia Ypmrntlhal be given to I raoucauiia anaawaHaw oanM**. Nothing In thto aaetton ahal be construad aa changing tha raqtAanrant that any spaciAe lasidanlial danaMy abova tha minlnwm alowad by tha Land Uae Etoment dwisity range* and tha applcabto aoning attal b* jusMtod according to ttw raqi*«m*na of the appropriato Ganaral Plan and zontoig proviatons. (Continued on next page) «is-st B. The aontog map of tha CKy of Cariabad ahal be amended to provide that bulding panrltotaaued or approved tor reahtotMdwaang unlto to tha O^afM 1866 to lha ffliplnihto iadton. Tha numbere on the mito •hai iwt OMoaad ttit Inih ahtf not ba bwtaaead wttwut an iMmiMtoa veto of ttw paepia. j a The CKy Counel ahal adept amendwaato to Chapter ai JO of toa Cwlsbad ihwWpal Cotio gwwih ManagemMiQ aeMMaaanr to h^tomM* ttw Qanani Pton amendmenl of Sedon A and ttw Map ol Seislon B. 0. TMl OfdKwnup to InoomMMtt vMh and inlendad ae an aNemelve to any inWattva ordfcwnoa wWch weuM^ptooa an annual nunwrtoil InMtoii on ttw rata of realdanfal oofliKiieloii. If ttito ordtoanea and any aueh toMattwa ardbwnoa aia Iwih paaea'« lw a mmpnqf voang aNraon awn vw one am aw moei vowa anea pravaa. M-oei.3 4tS-40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RB8OL0TZOH MO. 8796 A RBSOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OF THf CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING MINOR REVISIONS T^ THE POBLIC FACILITY AND 8BRVICB PBRFORNANCB STANDARDS TO BB OSBD IN IMPLBNBMTING THB GRONTH NANA6BNBMT PROGRAM AS RBQOIRBD BY ORDINAHCB BO. 9808 (GROWTH MABAGBMBBT QRDINAMCB). WHBRBAS, oa July 1, 1986, tb« City Council adopted Ordiiianoa No. 9808 whieh established a Growth Msnageasnt Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad} and WBBRBAS, one of the primary purposes of Ordinance No. 9808 was to prevent 9rowth unless adequate public facilities and services to serve the growth is provided when they are needed in a phased and logical way; and WHBRBAS, on July 8, 1986, the City Couiicil adopted the Public Facility and Serviee Perforwaace Standards to be used in preparing the Citywide Facilities aad laproveaenta Plan as part of the Growth Management Programi and WBBRBAS, these standards are being redefined or rephased to clarify the specific aeaning aad purpose of eachi and WBBRBA8, the intent of the original standards will renain Intact and that the clarified standards are needed to be able to adequately deterwine the tiwing for public facilities and services tad to assess whether they are beiag provided in a phased and Logical wayi aad WHBRBAS, standards are needed to providie a nechanisa to sontinoally monitor the adequacy of publio facilities and services as growth occursi and WHBRBAB, Section 21.90.080 of Ordinance No. 9808 requires bhe adoption by City Council Resolution ef Performance Standards; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MOW, THBRBFORB, BB IT RB80LVBD by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, that the Public Facility and Servi«,. Perforaance Standards as contained on attached Bxhibit "A" are hereby adopted and shall be used in the inpleaeintatioa of Ordinance No. 9808 - The Carlsbad Growth Manageinent Ordinance. PAS8BD, APPROVBD AMD AOOPTBO at a regu3.ar meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 23rd day of September , 1986 by the following vote, to witi AYBSt Council Meiabers Casler, Lewis, Kulchin» Chick and Fatcina NOBS: None ABSBNTt Nona MART H.^CASLBlt, Mayor UTTBST t liLBTRA L. RAaTBNKRANZ, City Clkrk (SBAD -2- BCHIBIT "A" RBSOLtmON NO. 8796 POBLIC FACILITY AMD SBRWCB PBRfORMAMCB STANDARDS Facility/Service City Administrative Facilities Library Wastewater Treatment Capacity Parks Drainage Circulation Fire Open space Standerd 1500 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. 800 square feet per 1,000 population laust be scheduled fbr oonstruction within a five year period. Sewer plant capacity is adequate for at least a five year period. Three acres of coaaunity park or i^ecial use park per 1,000 population within the Park District, aust be scheduled for cmstruetioti within a five year period. Drainage facilities must bs provided as requi^red by the City ooooorrmt with devailopment. No road segment ot interseotiM in the sone oor any road segment or iaterseotion out of the sone «hidi is iiqpacted by develoment in the sone shall be projected to emceed a servlcei level. C during off- peak hours, nor servioe level p daring peak hours. Impacted means where 20« or ibre of the traffic gen«rat:ed by the local facility managsswnt zone will use the road segment or intersection. No more than 1,500 dwelling units outside of a five minute response time. Schools Sewer Collection systsm Water Distribution System Fifteen percent of the total land area ia the aone ejcclttsive of environmentally oonstralned non- developabie land must be set jaside for permanent open spaoe and most bs «vallai>le ootMorrent with development. School oapeolty to awet projected enrollment within the aone as determined by the: appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected occupancy. Trunk line oepadty to meet demand as determined by the sppcoprlate sewer dletttict iust be provided conourreat with development. Line capacity to meet rtsmand ee determined by the appi^late mter district muit be provided oon- ourr«Bt with development. A ain tana 10 average day storage oepaoity must be provided on&ourrent with dsvei^ment. DELANO & DELANO July 3,2014 VIA E-MAIL & US .MAIL City Council City of Carisbad 1635 Faraday Ave. CaHsbad. CA 92008 Re: City Council Julv 8. 2014 meeting: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78- 03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Dear Honorable Members of the Carlsbad City Council: I I m < §5 & s a. I O This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the appeal of the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). At the hearing before the Planning Commission. Deputy City Attorney Jane Mobaldi disagreed with the contention that there is inadequate evidence to support deviations from the Municipal Code and El Camino Real Corridor Standards, claiming the court's decision in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, LP. v. City of Ios Angeles (2009) 175 Cal.App.4''' 1396, precluded the City from requiring compliance with these requirements. But the Palmer decision is inapplicable to the Project. The Palmer court determined the city's requirement ("to provide 60 affordable housing units at regulated rent levels that must be preserved for the life ofthe dwelling units or 30 years, whichever is greater") was "hostile or inimical to [Costa-Hawkins Act] section 1954.53 by denying Palmer the right to establish initial rent rates for the affordable housing units ... and by preserving their regulated rent levels 175 Cal.App.4"* at 1410. Here, there is no restriction on rents or any other condition that would implicate the Costa-Hawkins Act. Accordingly, as prior comments noted, the evidence does not support deviations from applicable requirements, and the Palmer decision is inapplicable to the Council's consideration ofthe Project. Additionally, during the Planning Commission hearing. City staff and the applicant's consultant asserted that the traffic analysis for the Project was sufficient. However, as the attached comments observe, the traffic study for the Project is insufficient. Si. rn 3 s- a § % 3 p O. p n > K> O NJ Ln o 3 3 O. > < n 3 c o o ov ov Ul IsJ 2^ o n Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND July 3,2014 Page 2 of2 Accordingly, North County Advocates respectfully requests you reject the Project and MND. Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Sincerely. ^^^^ Everett DeLano cc: Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner limSjiM^ ti.inspoit.UKin |>l.iniiing • tr.niic ('ii;,;iru'<'iluj; <icotis(ic.il engineering • [i.irking sturlies Julys, 2014 Mr. Everett DeLano DELANO & DELANO 220 West Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 Subject: La Costa Town Centre Traffic Stuciy Review, City of Carlsbad Dear Mr. DeLano: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to submit this preliminary review of the traffic impact study for the proposed La Costa Town Centre project in the City of Carlsbad. RK has reviewed the Traffic Study and has the following initial comments; 1. Page 3-2. La Costa Avenue is mentioned as having been modified as part of a road diet to reduce the number of through lanes. The study should consider the affect of this improvement on the saturation flow rate of the single westbound lane. The roadway segment analysis assumes 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane for all study area segments. Due to the traffic calming nature a road diet can have on flow patterns, a lesser saturation flow rate may be more appropriate. 2. Table 3-1. The street segment analysis is based on peak hour traffic volume, as opposed to the daily traffic volume, which is more typically analyzed. 3. Page 3-2. Intersection traffic volumes for two (2) study area intersections, including La Costa Avenue at El Camino Real, were taken in 2011. These counts are over two years old at the time the study was published. Typically traffic counts that are over one year old are not used for analysis, or if they are used, an adjustment factor is applied to the existing traffic volume to account for recent growth. The traffic study should have obtained new counts for the analysis or considered an appropriate adjustment factor. 4. Table 3-2. The intersection Level of Service (LOS) analysis is based on Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. This methodology is inconsistent with SANDAG standards which require the latest version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. HCM analysis methodology uses a much more in-depth method for calculating LOS, including pedestrian and bicycle crossings. ICU tends to under estimate LOS when compared to HCM. 4000 westerly pl.K o, siiilp nevv|)orl boiirh, calitornia 92660 tt'l *)4').474.0809 tax 949.474.0'KU httpy/wvvw. ricengi r»eer. com Mr. Everett Delano DELANO AND DELANO July 3, 2014 Page 2 of 2 5. Page 4-1/Table 4-1. Project trip generation should be based on net new trips resulting from the proposed project, as compared to existing uses that were in operation when the existing traffic counts were taken. Assuming that all currently vacant uses within site would one day again be occupied, should the proposed project not be completed, inaccurately estimates potential impacts. Existing trip credits should not be taken for uses that were not generating traffic when the existing counts were taken. The traffic study should be revised to show the potential impacts resulting from the project based on the actual net new trip increase. To provide an even more accurate analysis of project impacts, existing driveway counts could be taken to measure the shopping center's trip generation. 6. Section 6.0. For the near term without project analysis, the traffic study shows no change in traffic volume along El Camino Real, south of La Costa Avenue, and along Levante Street, east of El Camino Real. This does not seem realistic when compared to the growth expected along other roadways within the study area. It appears the SANDAG Combined North County Transportation Model accounts for growth along these segments, as indicated in the Year 2030 Without Project analysis, so it would seem reasonable to see some growth in near term projections. It would be helpful if further explanation is given as to how near-term traffic volumes were calculated. 7. General comment. The traffic study does not address any site specific traffic issues such as; shared parking, internal circulation, unsignalized project driveway analysis, and sight distance. 8. General comment. The study does not address how the proposed project will comply with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan Circulation Element. Specifically, the City of Carlsbad wants to promote, encourage and accommodate a variety of transportation modes as alternatives to the automobile. The traffic study should provide recommendations as to how this project can help achieve the City's goals and promote alternative modes of transportation, such as by providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and improved access to public transit. If you have any questions regarding this review, please call our office at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Bryan Estrada Senior Transportation Planner RK:dt/RK10488.chc JN:2390-2014-01 A.,,.., • • FILE COP VCARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov February 26, 2014 Mr. Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 SUBJECT: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER Dear Mr. DeLano, Thank you for your comment letter dated January 21, 2014, submitted on behalf of North County Advocates, responding to the Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the La Costa Towne Center project. The following provides a list of your comments (In /to//c) and staffs response to the assertions made in your letter. 1. Comment: Tbe California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq., requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a "fair argument" that significant environmental impacts may occur. Pub. Res. Code § 21080(d); No Oil. Inc. v. Citv of Los Anaeles (1975) 13 Cal.3d. 68. If there is "substantial evidence that the project might have [a significant impact on the environment], but the agency failed to secure preparation of the required EIR, the agency's action is to be set aside because the agency abused its discretion by failing to proceed in a "manner required by law." Friends of "B" Street v. Citv of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1002. Here, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several significant impacts. Response: The Initial Study prepared for the proposed project identified potentially significant impacts on the environment. However, the proposed mitigation measures, which were agreed to by the applicant prior to the release of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for public review, would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where no significant impact would occur [CEQA § 21080(C)(2)]. With the implementation of the mitigation measures, the project will have no significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is not required. 2. Comment: The MND adopts an incorrect baseline for much of its discussion, reasoning that the "existing" environment includes occupancy of the vacant Vons store. See Traffic Report at 4-1. However, CEQA specifically provides that an agency must consider the existing conditions. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Qualitv Manaaement Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4"' 310, 322 (describing analysis that used the maximum permitted operational levels as a Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © jffs-Ol/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONsft) SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUF13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONSETO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 Page 2 baseline as "illusory" comparisons that 'can only mislead the public as to the reality of the impacts and subvert the full consideration ofthe actual environmental impacts,' a result at direct odds with CEQA's intent"). As the MND acknowledges, the Von's store is vacant. See MND at 1. As such, the existing on-the-ground conditions do not Include the use of the store. This assumption invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. Response; As noted in the comment, the "Von's store" was vacant at the time existing counts were conducted for the traffic analysis (TIA). No artificial adjustment was made to the existing condition as studied in the TIA. The comment incorrectly refers to page 4-1 ofthe traffic study and implies that an adjustment was made to the existing conditions of the TIA to include the vacant Vons store. Page 4-1 ofthe TIA discusses the project trip generation and is used for "with project" conditions and not for establishment of the existing condition. Contrary to what the comment implies, the existing baseline condition was indeed based on the existing counts as discussed on page 3-1 of the TIA. This is consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15125, "Environmental Setting" which states that "an EIR must include a description ofthe physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as they existed at the time of the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced." For the La Costa Towne Center traffic study and associated environmental analysis, existing traffic counts were obtained consistent with CEQA Guidelines and formed the basis for the environmental setting in the MND. This is typical for all projects in the San Diego region. As stated in the SANTEC/ITE publication. Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) on the San Diego Region, the existing condition should be established in the following manner: "document existing traffic volumes and peak-hour levels of service in the study area. The existing deficiencies and potential mitigation should be identified." The TIA did precisely this. The use of existing traffic counts for traffic studies and CEQA analysis is well established and is a correct method for establishing baseline conditions. Typically, existing traffic counts are taken mid- week both over a 24-hour period and during peak hour conditions in the AM and PM time frames. This is done to establish "average" conditions as used in the term "average daily traffic" which is utilized in the TIA. The existing baseline is intended to represent the typical condition experienced by the community. As such, a certain amount of vacancy would be expected and likely. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) statistics show that a shopping center can have rather extreme hourly, daily and monthly variations in traffic with January through April showing lower than normal traffic compared to the monthly average and December showing a much higher than normal amount of traffic compared to the monthly average. With these statistics in mind, the month of August and the day of the week of Wednesday were selected to conduct existing counts. Counts were taken during non-holiday weeks representing normal conditions with no precipitation. According to ITE statistics, both the month and day of the week used are the most representative of "average" conditions for a shopping center. Although the Von's store was closed at the time of the counts, the potential difference in traffic is well within the average 41% monthly and 34.6% daily variation for a shopping center. Therefore, existing counts appropriately represented the typical condition at the time the NOP was prepared and environmental analysis commenced consistent with CEQA. Thus, the baseline utilized for the subject MND is correct; therefore, the conclusions reached with respect to the traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emission and noise analyses are valid. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUI^3-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONSrTO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECURATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 Page 3 3. Comment; The project will lead to significant impacts to community character, aesthetics, and land use. Response; As detailed in the staff responses below, as well as in the MND, there are no significant impacts associated with community character, aesthetics or land use. o. Comment; The Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The project violates applicable standards for building height and street setback. See MND at 26. Response; As discussed on page 26 ofthe MND, the shopping center was developed through a Site Development Plan wherein a 10-foot-wide front yard setback was established. Pursuant to Section VI ofthe Development Standards, Exceptions, "The standards established here shall also not effect areas with building permits or valid site plan approvals from the City." Thus, the originally-approved Site Development Plan, which allowed for a 10-foot-wide setback, supersedes the El Camino Real Corridor Standards. The proposed project does not encroach any closer than that which was originally permitted. In addition, as further discussed on page 26 of the MND, pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.100, modification to standards such as height can be permitted to offset the cost of affordable housing. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.140, such modifications are subject to approval by the City Council through an affordable housing agreement. The requirement for an affordable housing agreement will be included as a standard condition for the Site Development Plan for the request to construct 12 inclusionary rental units on-site. b. Comment; There is insufficient evidence to support a deviation from the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. Response; Pursuant to CMC Section 21.53.120(B), a site development plan for affordable housing projects may allow less restrictive development standards than specified in the underlining zone or elsewhere provided that the project is in conformity with the general plan and adopted policies and goals of the city. As discussed in the MND (pages 25-27), the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and adopted policies and goals of the city. In addition, any modifications to the standards requested through the Site Development Plan for the inclusionary housing project may supersede the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. Therefore, a deviation to the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards can be supported. c. Comment; Additionally, deviations are not supported by the Municipal Code. Section 21.85.100 requires an affordable housing agreement, yet there is no indication of such agreement. Section 21.85.120 requires the Project to be in conformity with the "adopted goals of the city," yet the project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. Response; Pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.140(A), the approval and execution of an affordable housing agreement shall take place prior to final map approval and shall be recorded upon final map recordation. Further, the affordable housing agreement shall stipulate any approved offsets by the city. In addition, pursuant to CMC Section 21.53.120(B), a site development plan for affordable housing projects may allow less restrictive development standards than specified in the underlining zone or elsewhere SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUl^3-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONS^O COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 Page 4 provided that the project is in conformity with the general plan and adopted policies and goals ofthe city. As discussed in the MND (pages 25-27), the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and adopted policies and goals of the city. The requirement for an affordable housing agreement will be included as a standard condition for the Site Development Plan for the request to construct 12 inclusionary rental units on-site. d. Comment; The MND discusses "modifications...to offset the cost of affordable housing," yet there is no evidence such modifications are necessary or what costs need to be offset. See Pacific Corp. v. Citv of Camarillo (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 168,178. Response; As discussed in the MND, the current height limit in the C-1 zone and El Camino Real Corridor Standards is 35 feet. A modification to the height standards is necessary as the project proposes a height up to 45 feet to accommodate the mixed use project. The applicant has indicated that the construction of the affordable housing will cost approximately $1,299,720 (20 subterranean parking stalls, $84/SF) Due to the parking and minimum density (20 du/ac) requirements, as well as the existing site layout ofthe shopping center, an increase in height (i.e., to accommodate a 2"" and 3"* floor residential above ground floor retail use) is required to justify the cost of constructing 12 inclusionary units, which will be rent-restricted. As mixed use is an encouraged use and the proposed increase in height will offset the cost ofthe inclusionary housing, staff is supportive ofthe request. As indicated above, the offset will be required to be specified in the affordable housing agreement which is subject to approval by the City Council. e. Comment; The MND fails to analyze applicable standards for park and recreation facilities. The Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plans and the General Plan Parks and Recreation Element each contain standards, yet, as the MND acknowledges, "the project does not include any public recreation facilities." MND at 33. The City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant. As such, the addition of the Project's population will only increase the burden on already failing park and recreation facilities. Response; The proposed project is not required to provide public recreation facilities on-site. As stated on page 32 of the MND, the proposed project will be subject to the conditions and facility service level requirements within the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. As such, a standard condition will be applied to the project which requires the payment of park-in-lieu fees as required pursuant to CMC Chapter 20.44. The fee will be collected prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, pursuant to the Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report for July 1, 2012- June 30, 2013 (please see link below), the city is currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/departments/planning/Documents/GMMonitoringReport.pdf Therefore, as concluded in the MND (page 32), no impact is assessed with respect to public services. U^3-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONS^C SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP^3-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONSFTO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 ' Page 5 4. Comment; The project will lead to significant impacts to air quality. The MND attempts to separate air emissions into four phases. MND at 23. However, it fails to account for the fact that such phases can, indeed are likely to, overlap, thereby increasing amounts of emissions at any given time. Response; The potential impacts to air quality are discussed on pages 10-13 ofthe MND. Pursuant to the Air Quality Technical Report prepared by Scientific Resources Associated (October, 2013), the analysis of construction emissions conducted for the project was based on the schedule of construction for the proposed project. The phasing information that was provided by the project applicant indicated that development would occur sequentially; no overlap of construction phases would occur because existing leases would require that construction be conducted sequentially. The construction for each phase provides for access and new improvements for the tenants. The work on each phase must be complete for each segment priorto commencing the next phase. The analysis of construction impacts was conducted using the CalEEMod Model, which is the current air quality tool for land use projects. The CalEEMod Model calculates maximum daily emissions for each phase, which is presented in the Air Quality Technical Report. Thus the CalEEMod Model calculates the effect of combining construction activities such as building construction, paving, and architectural coatings to estimate maximum daily construction for each construction phase. The CalEEMod Model does envision a maximum daily construction scenario where both demolition and grading, which have the most use of construction equipment and therefore the highest emissions, would occur simultaneously. Therefore, the analysis presented in the Air Quality Technical Report provides a conservative estimate of maximum daily emissions during construction. As identified in the MND, impacts to air quality are less than significant. 5. Comment; The project will lead to significant impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. The MND averages construction emissions over the life of the project. MND at 20. Such emissions should be calculated as they will actually occur, not averaged over a longer period of time. See Taxpayers for Accountable School Bond Spending v. San Dieao Unified School Dist. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4'^ 1013, 1049. Response: Table 5 of the Global Climate Change Evaluation prepared by Scientific Resources Associated (SRA, October, 2012) presents a summary of the total greenhouse gas emissions anticipated from construction of the project. These emissions are calculated "as they will actually occur." Pursuant to SRA, it is standard and accepted practice throughout the state of California to amortize construction emissions over the lifetime of the project. As stated in the Evaluation, amortizing construction emissions over the lifetime of the project takes into account their contribution to annualized greenhouse gas emissions. The significance threshold is based on annualized emissions over the lifetime of the project. Furthermore, as stated in the Evaluation on Page 23, amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year period is standard practice based on written guidance from the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the City of San Diego, and the County of San Diego. As identified in the MND, impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions are less than significant. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SU^3-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONsffo COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 Page 6 6. Comment; The project will lead to significant impacts to noise. a. Comment: The analysis discusses potential impacts to nearby residences but fails to address the fact that the applicable noise standards apply to the property line. See Noise Report at 17. While the MND and Noise Report discuss construction noise, they fail to account for the fact that grading will occur within feet of the property line. The Project's Demolition Plan, for example, notes construction noise as close as 8.8 feet from the property line, a location that includes a public sidewalk. The Noise Report acknowledges sound levels of "typical construction equipment" can be as high as 95 dBA at 50 feet from the source." Noise Report at 13. Obviously, since the equipment will be considerably closer, the noise will by considerably greater. Response; The city does not limit construction noise levels at property lines, residences, or public property as the impacts are temporary in nature (see page 29 of MND). The proposed demolition and new construction are located a minimum linear distance of 175 feet as well as 85 feet downslope from the adjacent residential properties to the east (i.e., homes are located at an elevation of 165' above mean sea level and proposed building 7714 is located at 80' above mean sea level). As discussed on pages 28-29 of the MND, the project will be required to adhere to the standard construction hours pursuant to Section 8.48.010 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Specifically, construction activity and delivery of construction materials and equipment would be limited to non-holidays, between 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. In addition, should any issues arise, the building official, city engineer, or other official designated by the city manager may shorten the hours of construction. Further, pursuant to CMC Section 8.48.030, signs are required to be posted at the jobsite entrance indicating the hours of work as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Therefore, as concluded in the MND, the impacts with respect to temporary noise are not significant. b. Comment; Furthermore, noise mitigation is insufficient. See Citizens for Responsible and Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal.App.4*'' 1323, 1341 ("there is no evidence of any measures to be taken that would ensure that the noise standards would be effectively monitored and vigorously enforced"). Response: It is standard and acceptable practice to include mitigation measures with specific performance standards (i.e., compliance with interior noise thresholds). See Save Cuyoma Valley v. County of Santa Barbara (2013) 213 Cal.App4th 1059, Endangered Habitats League V. County of Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App4th, 777, 993, and Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee (2012) 210 Cal.App4th 260. With respect to the proposed project, the following mitigation measure is required to reduce noise impacts to a less than significant level: Prior to issuance of the building permit, an acoustical analysis consistent with City standards shall be prepared by a registered professional to demonstrate that the proposed building design will limit interior noise for the residential land uses to 45 dBA and commercial land uses to 55 dBA. The buiiding plans shall incorporate the recommendations in the report to satisfy the requirements. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER February 26, 2014 Page 7 Specific enforceable performance standards with a timing mechanism are included in the above-noted mitigation measure. As indicated above, staff will be verifying that the building plans incorporate the required materials and details recommended in the noise analysis to attenuate the interior noise to 45 dBA for the residential land uses and 55 dBA for the commercial land uses. Once the building plans are approved and the buildings are constructed, the building inspectors will verify in the field that the construction conforms to the approved building plans. The verification on the building plans as well as the inspection ensures that the mitigation measure is enforced. Therefore, the noise mitigation is sufficient. 7. Comment; Additionally, the MND inappropriately defers mitigation. Sacramento Old City Assn. v. Citv Council (1991) 229 Cal. App. 3d 1011,1029. For example, the MND punts the preparation ofan interior noise analysis. MND at 30. In Communities for a Better Environment v. Citv of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4^^ 70, the court observed: Numerous cases illustrate that reliance on tentative plans for future mitigation after completion of the CEQA process significantly undermines CEQA's goals of full disclosure and informed decision making; and consequently, these mitigation plans have been overturned on judicial review as constituting improper deferral of environmental assessment. Response; Pursuant to Endangered Habitats League v. County of Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App4th, 777, 993, if mitigation is feasible but impractical at the time of initial project approval, it may be sufficient to specify performance criteria and make further approvals contingent on finding a way to meet them. As discussed in No. 6 above, the project specifies performance criteria to be confirmed at the time construction plans are submitted as well as a timing mechanism for enforcement of the mitigation measure, which is prior to the issuance of a building permit. Thank you for providing comments on the La Costa Towne Center project. Should you have any additional questions, please contact the project planner. Shannon Werneke, at (760) 602-4621 or by email at shannon.werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, DON NEU, AlCP City Planner DN:SW:bd c: Mr. Geoff Sherman, Excel La Costa, LLC, 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Ste. 300, San Diego, CA 92128 Mr. Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 Sth Avenue, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney Debbie Fountain, Housing & Neighborhood Services Director Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner File Copy Data Entry Oity of Carlsfcya^. RECEIVED 2 5 2G14 IAD tFICE Office of the Oity Clerk APPEALEQBM I I (We) appeal the decision of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission <^ To the Carlsbad City Council. " ~ Date of Decision you are appealing; April 16,2014 Subiect of /Appeal: BE SPECIFIC Examples: if the action is a City Engineer's Decision, please say so. If a project . has multiple elements, (such as a General Plan Amendment, Negative Declaration, Specific Plan, etc.) please list them all. If you only want to appeal a part ofthe whole action, please state that here. North County Advocates hereby appeals the Planning Commission's decision to Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7044 Approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program and Addendum; and to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7045 approving a Site Development Plan Amendment (SDP 78-03(0)), Site Development Plan (SDP 13-03), Special Use Permit (SUP 13-01), Nonresidental Planned Development Permit (PUD 13-02) and a Minor Subdivision (MS 13-01). Reason(s) for Appeal: • Please Note • Failure to specify a reason may result in denial of the appeal, and you will be limited to the grounds stated here when presenting your appeal. BE SPECIFIC How did the decision maker err? What about the decision is inconsistent with state or local laws, plans, or policy? Please see attacnments. Nortn uounty Advocates reserves tne ngm to submit " additional materials prior to the City Council's consideration ofthe appeal. SIGNATURE Everett DeLano, on behalf of North County Advocates NAME (please print) April 25, 2014 DATE PHONE NO. DeLano & DeLano, 220 W. Grand Ave ADDRESS: Street Name & Number Escondido, California 92025 City, State, Zip Code 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive • Carisbad, California 92008-1989 • (760) 434-2808 Attachment 1; Reasons for Appeal 1. The Project is inconsistent with Growth .Management Plan standards, including standards for open space and parks. 2. The Project is inconsistent with applicable development standards, including standards for height, grading and setbacks required by the Municipal Code and El Camino Real Corridor Standards. 3. The Project is inconsistent with coastal resource protection requirements. 4. There is inadequate basis to support the findings, including findings required hy the Municipal Code and El Camino Real Corridor Standards. 5. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is insufficient and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shoutd be prepared. 6. The MND illegally defers mitigation. 7. The enclosed comment letters (daied 1/21/14 and 4/11/14) provide additional reasons for appeal and are hereby incorporated by reference. Appellant's Protest of .\ppeal Fee The City's appeal fees violate Appellant's rights of due process and equal proieclion, arc an illegal tax. and are inconsistent with CEQA's public participation requirements. DELANO & DELANO January 21,2014 VIA E-MAIL & U.S MAIL Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78-03(DVSDP 13-Q3/SUP 13-01/PUD 13- 02/MS 13-01 Dear City of Carlsbad: This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). The Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq., requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a "fair argument" that significant environmental impacts may occur. Pub. Res. Code § 21080(d); No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1975) 13 Ca].3d 68. If there is "substantial evidence that the project might have [a significant impact on the environment], but the agency failed to sectire preparation of the required EIR, the agency's action is to be set aside because the agency abused its discretion by failing to proceed in a 'manner required by law.'" Friends of "B " Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1002. Here, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several significant impacts. The MND adopts an incorrect baseline for much of its discussion, reasoning that the "existing" environment includes occupancy of the vacant Vons store. See Traffic Report at 4-1. However, CEQA specifically provides that an agency must consider the existing conditions. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist (2010) 48 Cal.4'^ 310, 322 (describing analysis that used the maximum permitted operational levels as a baseline as "'illusory' comparisons that 'can only mislead the public as to the reality- of the impacts and subvert the full consideration of the actual environmental impacts,' a result at direct odds with CEQA's intent"). As the MND acknowledges, the Vons store is vacant. See MND at 1. As such, the existing on-the-ground conditions do not include use of the store. This assumption invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. rt, rr. s- a :a c i I- ft. 5 z s- c a r. o CL O Ul Comments re La Costa i owne Center Project and MND January 21,2014 Page 2 of 3 The Project will lead to significant impacts to community character, aesthetics, and land use. • The Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The Project violates applicable standards for building height and street setback. See MND at 26. • There is insufficient evidence to support a deviation fi"om the El Caraino Real Corridor Development Standards. • Additionally, deviations are not supported by the Municipal Code. Section 21.85.100 requires an affordable housing agreement, yet there is no indication of such agreement. Section 21.85.120 requires the Project to be in conformity with "adopted goals and policies of the city," yet the Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. • The MND discusses "modifications ... to offset the cost of affordable housing," yet there is no evidence such modifications are necessary or what costs need to be offset. See Pacific Corp. v. City of Camarillo (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 168,178. • The MND fails to analyze applicable standards for park and recreation facilities. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and tlie General Plan Parks and Recreation Element each contain standards, yet, as the MND acknowledges, "the project does not include any public recreational facilities." MND at 33. The City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant. As such, the addition of the Project's population vnll only increase the burden on already failing park and recreation facilities. The Project will lead to significant impacts to air quality. • The MND attempts to separate air emissions into four phases. MND at 23. However, it fails to account forthe fact that such phases can, indeed are likely to, overlap, thereby increasing the amounts of emissions at any given time. The Project will lead to significant impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. • The MND averages construction emissions over the life of the Project. MND at 20. Such emissions should be calculated as they will actually occur, not averaged over a longer period of time. See Taxpayers for Accountable School Bond Spending v. San Diego Unified School Dist. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4* 1013, 1049. The Project will lead to significant impacts to noise. • The analysis discusses potential impacts to nearby residences but fails to address the fact that the applicable noise standards apply to the property line. See Noise Report at 17. While the MND and Noise Report discuss Comments re La Costa l owne Center Project and MND January 21, 2014 Page 3 of3 construction noise, they fail to account for the fact that grading will occur within feet of the property line. The Project's Demolition Plan, for example, notes construction as close as 8.8 feet from the property line, a location that includes a public sidewalk. The Noise Report acknowledges sound levels of "typical construction equipment" can be as high as 95 dBA "at 50 feet from the source." Noise Report at 13. Obviously, since the equipment will be considerably closer, the noise will be considerably greater. • Furthermore, noise mitigation is insufficient. See Citizens for Responsible and Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal.App.4'^ 1323, 1341 ("there is no evidence of any measures to be taken that would ensure that the noise standards would be effectively monitored and vigorously enforced"). Additionally, the MND inappropriately defers mitigation. Sacramento Old City Assn. V City Council (1991) 229 Cal. App. 3d 1011,1029. For example, the MND punts the preparation of an interior noise analysis. MND at 30. In Communities for a Better Environment v. City of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4"' 70, the court observed: Numerous cases illustrate that reliance on tentative plans for fiiture mitigation after completion ofthe CEQA process significantly undermines CEQA's goals of full disclosure and informed decisionmaking; and consequently, these mitigation plans have been overturned on judicial review as constituting improper deferral of environmental assessment. Id at 92 (citations omitted). Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Feel fi-ee to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, DeLano I DELANO & DELANO April 11,2014 VLi E-MAIL & US MAIL Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Planning Commission April 16. 2014 meeting, agenda item # 3: La Costa Towne Center proiect: SDP 78-Q3(DVSDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-Q2/MS 13-01 Dear Honorable Members of the Carlsbad Planning Commission: >• m 5- < a m a. -J rn 3 C 5 — <S — S" 61. This letter is submitted on behalf of North Coimty Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). As my January 21,2014 letter explained, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several significant impacts. A February 26, 2014 response fi-om the City to my letter attempts to justify the failure to prepare an EIR, but that response is both insufficient and misleading. For example, the City's response asserts that my January 21*' letter incorrectly "implies that an adjustment was made to the existing conditions of the TIA ['Traffic Impact Analysis'] to include the vacant Vons store." The City's response also claims that "the existing baseline condition -was indeed based on the existing counts as discussed on page 3-1 ofthe TIA." This is simply wrong. Page 3-1 ofthe TIA does discuss "existing conditions" on street segments; it does not, however, discuss existing traffic generated at the La Costa Towne Center site. Rather, page 4-1 of the TIA states that "existing uses are shown in the top portion of Table 4-1." And the top line of Table 4-1, found on page 4-3 ofthe TIA, attributes 3,728 Average Daily Trips ("ADT") to "Retail (7710 Bldg) - 1 story." This building is the vacant Vons store. Accordingly, contrary to the City's response, the TLA incorrectly attributes traffic generation to a vacant building. And because that assumption carries through into other analyses, it invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4* 310,322. My January 21^ letter also noted constniction noise would be generated less than 10 feet fi-om a public sidewalk, which could mean noise louder than the noise of an 1-^ a Z s- c s. rr 1^ V. to O XI ll r, 3 NJ S S Ul tyi O p '.J> K> Comments re La Costa Towne Center Project and MND April 11,2014 Page 2 of2 ambulance siren 100 feet away. Rather than acknowledging the sigmficant noise impact to the pubiic, the City's response claimed that it "does not limit construction noise levels ... as the impacts are temporary in nature." But the temporary nature of a noise impact does not make it insignificant. See Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Comm. v. Board of Port Commissioners (2001)91 Cal.App.4* 1344, 13 80 - 81. And it would be no more appropriate to use the lack of a City standard as a basis to ignore significant effects than it would be to apply "a threshold of significance or regulatory standard 'in a way that forecloses the consideration of any other substantial evidence showing there may be a significant effect.'" Mejia v. Oo^ of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4* 322, 342 (quoting Communities for a Better Environment v. Califorma Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4* 98,114). Also, a table on page 19 of the Planning Report to you claims that the Growth Management Plan Open Space standard is "n/a" and claims the City is meeting the Growth Management Plan Parks standard. These assertions are incorrect. Among other things, Municipal Code Sections 21.90.040 and 21.90.130 require consistency with the applicable Local Facilities Management Plan. These include requirements for both adequate open space and adequate parks. Yet evidence in the record indicates that the City is not complying with either standard in the applicable zone. Additionally, the Project is inconsistent with applicable standards for height, grading and front yard setbacks. Municipal Code Sections 21.06.020 and 21.53.120 require findings of fact, which cannot be supported here. Furthermore, the El Camino Real Corridor Standards require alditional fmdings for any deviation, which also cannot be supported. Indeed, one unsupportable finding is that "compliance with a particular standard is infeasible for a particular project." There is no such evidence of infeasibility. Furthermore, Municipal Code Section 21.203 contains applicable coastal resource protection requirements, which have not been met here. Among these are requirements for drainage, erosion, sedunentation and habitat protections in Municipal Code Section 21.203.040(B)(3), yet no evidence of compliance with these requirements has been provided. Accordingly, North County Advocates requests that you reject the Project and MND. Thank you for your consideration of these concems. k^erett DeLano cc: Shannon Wemeke, Associate Planner 4^ CTV OF (°=| CM p VXARLSBAD LJriLt Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov February 13, 2014 Ms. Meri Lopez-Keifer San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians 1889 Sunset Drive Vista, CA 92081 RE: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER - SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Thank you for your comment letter dated January 21, 2014 responding to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the La Costa Towne Center project. Pursuant to your request, we have revised the proposed Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures, CUL-1 and CUL-2, to address the items of concern in your letter. The changes are reflected below in underlined text. Ultimately, an addendum to the MND will be prepared to reflect this revision and the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program will be accordingly revised. ~ CUL 1- Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor ground-disturbing activities. The qualified archaeologist shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the archaeologist and city staff. The City shall verify that the archaeological monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In tho event any potential cultural resource is uncovered during thc course of the project construction, ground ' disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find shall bc redirected until tho nature and extent of tho find can bo evaluated by tho archaeological monitor. If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist, in consultation with a Native American monitor, shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If archaeological resources are encountered during excavation or grading, the archaeological monitor, in consultation with a Native American monitor, shall direct the contractor to avoid all work in the immediate area for a reasonable period of time to allow the archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and determine an appropriate course of action. The appropriate course of action may include, but not be limited to avoidance, recordation, relocation, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for pursuing the appropriate activities, including salvage of discovered resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. Recovered artifact materials and data shall be cataloged and analyzed. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards or the collection will be repatriated to the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), as specified in the pre-excavation agreement. Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER -^P 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD m)2/MS 13-01 February 13, 2014 Pake 2^ '' // any human remains are discovered, all construction activity in the immediate area of the discovery shall cease immediately, and the Archaeological monitor shall notify the County Medical Examiner pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5. Should the Medical Examiner determine the human remains to be Native American; the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Native American Monitor (pursuant to Mitigation Measure CULTURAL-2), in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission, shall inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the City of Carlsbad, and the project contractor, actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. The project contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains before resuming construction activities. In addition, if Native American remains are discovered, the Native American remains shall be kept in situ, or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found until an analysis is done on-site, in consultation with a Luiseno Native American monitor. CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain the services of a Luiseno Native American monitor. The purpose of this monitoring will be to allow for tribal observation of trenching excavation including formalized procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. The City shall verify that the Native American monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the appropriate Native American Tribe and the developer. The Native American representative(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. The Native American monitor shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground- disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the monitor and city staff. If cultural resources are encountered, the Native American monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect aradina/trenchina while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If the resource cannot be avoided, the Native American tribe shall be consulted regarding the testina. cataloging, drafting and finalization ofthe recovery of anv resources. We thank you for the time to provide us comments on the La Costa Towne Center project and hope that we have addressed all of your concerns. Should you have any additional questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4621 or by email at shannon.wernekePcarlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, SHANNON WERNEKE Associate Planner SW:sm Cc: Mr. Geoff Sherman, Excel La Costa, LLC, 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92128 Mr. Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 s"' Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Chris DeCerbo, Pnncipal Planner File URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC PLANHING & TMmc BWGWEER/NG, MARKETINB & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT E-MEMO ATTN: Doug Bilse, TE City of Carlsbad E-Mail: T FROM: JmtiiifP. ISiMaefB, PE, TE DATE: April 16,2014 SUBJECT: Review of Delano & Delano Letter Dated April 11, 2014 Doug. Bils^^arJsbadea.gpv TOTAL PAGES (including Cover): TIME: 3:11:11 PM JOB NUMBER: 002312 1-i-Attachment Confidnitial Commumeatrons This tranSmittel is ihtaided for the recipient tiamed above. Unless otherwise expriessly indicated, this entire communieatioh is confidenfial and ptivils^ed information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose, copy, distribute or use this information. If you received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, at our expense and destroy the information. April 11.2014 Letter Comments RE: Traffic As we have discussed, I have reviewed the Delano & Delano letter dated April 11,2014 commenting on the La Costa Towne Center MND and trafiic shidy (TLA). It appears that the comments related to ti^fBc continues to argue that the TIA used an incorrect baseline and that the TIA should have used existing conditions without fhe Von's store being occupied. Unfortunately, this comment seems to be based on a misunderstanding of what trip generation is used for vetsus how the existing baseline is established. As clearly discussed in Secfion 3.0 ofthe TIA and in the City of Carlsbad's response letter dated February 26,2014, the existing baseline uses existing traffic counts. This is well supported by regional guidelittes (SANTEC/ITE) and industry practice. These existing traffic counts did not include traffic fiom the Von's store since the Von's store was vacant at the time. Therefore, the existing baseline from a traffic perspective did not include any Von's traffic contrary to what the comment implies. The confiision seems to stem fi-om the label "Existing Uses" contained in fhe trip generation table found in Section 4.0 of the TIA. As discussed in Section 4.1, "Table 4-1 shows the vehicle trip generation expected firom the La Costa Towne Center Project" (emphasis added). Therefore, it should be clear fi-om the plain text ofthe TIA that the trip generation is utilized not to establish the existing baseline (which is instead based on counts) but is instead used to estimate fiiture project traffic. Future project traffic is used to determine the actual project impacts. As such, it is inherently a comparative analysis (i.e. with project vs. without project). In other words, the comparison would be an analysis of conditions with the project versus conditions as they would be if the project were not approved. For a vacant project site, this comp^son is easy. The future project traffic would be compared to a site which generates no traffic. However, for a re-use or revitaUzation of an existing site, the comparison is slightiy more complicated. In such a case, all existing uses must be considered. An existing building on a project site cannot be ignored simply because of a temporary vacancy. In the case of La Costa Towne Center, these existing uses include ftie Von's store because it was actually constructed and generated traffic for over 20 years before being 1 002312-041614-Bmemo-jps_v.2 8451 IVIiralcmi Drive. Suite A • San Diego, CA 92126 -Phone (858) 560-4911 Doug Bilse © Urban Systems Associates, Inc City of Carisbad 4/16/2014 closed more recently. This is supported by the fact that if the proposed project were not approved, the Von's space would simply be re-occupied wifh a different user also generating traffic. Therefore, the trip generation table shown in Table 4-1 is appropriately a comparison of conditions if the proposed prpject were approved versus conditions ifthe project were not approved (including the Von's store). The difference between these conditions reflects the net new traffic which the community would experience with the proposed project versus leaving the existing center as it is currentiy constructed. This is the true effect ofthe project. The question then becomes whether utilizing Sandag trip generation rates was appropriate to analyze the existing uses and future center. An answer was previously provided in the City of Carlsbad's response to Mr, Delano. This response maitions an "average 41% monthly and 34,6% daily variation for a shopping center". These figures were intended to illustrate the fact that trip generation rates are based on actual shopping centers with normal vacancies. As the City's earlier response to comment noted, "a certain amount of vacancy would be expected and likely". It is well documented that Shopping Centers generate less traffic during non-peak periods. For example, the Institute of Transportation Engineers publication. Trip Generation, 9 Edition indicates that trafSc fi-om Shopping Centers is up to 41.8% higher in December than the average month. This is due in significant part to vacancies which Shopping Centers inevitably experience during typical months. Experience will bear this out because vacant storefironts are often occupied during peak shopping season over the holidays. The Manual of Traffic Engineering Studies notes, "Shopping trafiic is, of course, higher at Easter, Thanksgi-ving, Christmas and during special events or sales". Since trip generation studies are not conducted during these abnonnal conditions reflecting peak sales and peak occupancy, some amount of shopping center vacancy is assumed when using trip generation rates to estimate future traffic. Just as the existing Shopping Center was not 100% occupied, the fiiture project -will not be 100% occupied during typical conditions. In-fact, the Sandag publication, 'Traffic Generators" which was used along with the national ITE trip generation statistics to establish local suggested trip generation rates included counts firom shopping centers with vacancy rates of 14% or more. The vacancy of tiie Von's store, is typical for this type of shopping center and is well within the anticipated seasonal variation noted in the publications discussed above. Tiierefore, no adjustment to existing counts or trip generation rates is appropriate or warranted. Requested Analysis A Letter firom North County Advocates dated April 9,2014 was also received. This lettor mentions the vacancy at the Von's building and requests a re-vised analysis be prepared for the April 16,2014 Planning Commission Hearing. Based on this request, our firm has prepared a supplemental analysis -with a ''modified baseline" condition reflecting conditions as if fhe Von's building were ftilly occupied. This analysis is limited to the hitersection of La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real which would experience the highest traffic level and would be the most likely to experience a project impact. As shown m the TIA, all other intersections and street segments operate at LOS "C" or better. This modifled baseline analysis was also carried through the rest of the scenarios presented in the TIA in order to provide a conservative analysis. These results are presented m attachments to this memo. As shown in these attachments, the intersection of La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real would experience an mcrease m ICU of O.Ol but would continue to operate at LOS "D" in the PM peak hour. In fiiture conditions, the opK*ation of this intersection would also change hnperceptibly. In Year 2030 -with the proposed project during the PM peak hour, the anticipated intersection delay would be 54.6 seconds -with an acceptable level of service "D". This would be a change of 0.4 seconds in average control delay versus what is presented in the traffic study. 2 002312-04J614-Ememo-jps_v.2 4540 Keamy Villa Road. Suite 106 • San Diego, CA 92123 • (858) 560-4911 • Fax (858) 560-9734 Doug Bilse © Urban Systems Associates, Inc. CityofCarlsbad 4/16/2014 Based on these results, it is apparent that the vacancy of the Von's store has little effect on the operation of surrounding intersections and street segments. Any artificial adjustment to the existing condition made to reflect occupancy of the Von's store would be improper as discussed above because it would artificially increase baseline traffic conditions above those typically experienced by the community. Such an adjustment would also not significantiy alter the results or conclusions of the TIA or the MND. The additional analysis requested by the North County Advocates support fhe conclusions ofthe earlier TIA. 002312-041614-Ememo-jps_v.2 4540 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 106 • San Diego, CA 92123 • (858) 560-4911 • Fax (858) 560-9734 ATTACHMENT 1 Intersection Levels of Service (With Vons) Modified Existing Number Intersection Control AM Peak Hour PMPeak Hour Number Intersection Control ICU LOS ICU LOS ^^^^^ 3 ILa Costa Avenue / El Camino Real Signalized 0.78 C 0.86 D Modified Existing -f- Project Number Litersection j Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number Litersection j Control ICU LOS ICU LOS 3 La Costa Avenue / El Camino Real Signalized 0.78 C 0.86 D 1 ' . . . ' ' Modified Near Term + Project Number Intersection Control AM Peak How-PMPeak Hour Number Intersection Control Delay LOS Delay LOS 3 La Costa Avenue / EI Camino Real Signalized 47.7 D 53.1 1 D Modified Year 2030 + Project Number Intersection Control AM Peak Hour PMPeak Hour Number Intersection Control Delay LOS Delay LOS 'f:'™---;.,- •>-.v>-cx,rv,^ , - ? ^ '< v s . - ^-^ - t < .'~ 3 La Costa Avenue / El Cammo Real Signalized 52.4 D 54.6 D - Notes: ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = Levd of Service Modified Existing Intersection 3 Analyst: Jacob Swim Intersection: La Costa Ave. / El Camlno Real Future Condition: Modified Existing Date: 4/15/2014 Company: Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Project Number: 002312 intersection Control: Signalized E/W Street Name: La Costa Ave. N/S Street Name: El Camlno Real Tum Existing Existing Vons Vons Modified E Modified B Movement turn (v) AM tum (v) PM tum (v) AM tum (v) PM turn (v) AM tum (v) PM NLT 220 246 6 19 226 265 NTH 719 1,092 9 28 728 1,120 NRT 21 67 3 g 24 76 SLT 119 299 4 9 123 308 STH 1,032 1,270 13 28 1,045 1,298 SRT 724 908 0 0 724 908 ELT 763 836 0 0 763 836 ETH 269 604 4 9 273 613 ERT 299 321 13 28 312 349 WLT 118 107 0 0 118 107 WTH 532 381 6 19 538 400 WRT 208 185 3 9 211 194 AM 724 1,045 123 J i 763 211 273 538 312 118 T r 226 728 24 PM 908 1,298 308 i 836 194 613 400 349 107 t r 265 1,120 76 Delay LOS Delay LOS 0.78 0.86 Project Only Analyst Jacob Swim Intersection: La Costa Ave. / El Camino Real Future Condition: Project Only Date: 4/15/2014 Company: Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Project Number: 002312 Intersection 3 E/W Slreet Name: La Costa Ave. HIS Street Name: El Camlno Real Note: Project traffic manually distributed. Direction of Projecl »/ ADT AM Peak PM Peak »/ ADT # In Out # In Out VOKS. 3728 149 89 60 373 166 186 South Leg: AM 0 13 4 J I 0 3 4 6 13 r 0 t r 6 9 3 PM 0 28 9 J I 0 9 9 19 28 r 0 'I t r 19 28 9 I Turn I Project Only 1 Project Only j Project Only Intersection 3 /^alyst: Jacob Sw/lm Intersection: La Costa Ave. / El Camino Real Future Condition; Project Only Date: 4/15/2014 Company: Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Project Number 002312 E/W Street Name: LaCostaAve. N/S Street Name: El Camlno Real Note: Project traffic manually distributed. Direction of Project ADT AM Peak PMPeak ADT # In Out # In Out 790 46 16 30 75 44 31 Project Only Distribution Percentages ' ^Soulhteg: E^llegi; 30% :.15y.'65os thru 4 5% turn f%ti(. AM 0 2 1 J I. 0 1 1 '^i— 3 2 0 t r 3 4 1 PM 0 7 2 J 4 0 1 2 ><— 3 7 r 0 t r 3 4 1 I Turn I Proj ect Only | Project Only j Modified Existing With Project Intersection 3 Analyst Jacob Swim Intersection: La Costa Ave, / E! Camlno Real Future Condifion: Modified Existing + Project Date: 4/15/2014 Company: Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Project Number: 002312 Intersection Control: Signalized E/W Street Name: N/S Street Name: La Costa Ave. El Camlno Real Tum Modified E Modified E Project Only Proiect Only E + P E + P Movement turn (v) AM turn (v) PM turn (v) AM turn (v) PM turn (v) AM tum M PM NLT 226 265 3 3 229 268 NTH 728 1,120 4 4 732 1,124 NRT 24 76 1 1 25 77 SLT 123 308 1 2 124 310 STH 1.045 1,298 2 7 1,047 1,305 SRT 724 908 0 0 724 908 ELT 763 836 0 0 763 836 ETH 273 613 1 2 274 615 ERT 312 349 2 7 314 356 WLT 116 107 0 0 118 107 WTH 538 400 3 3 541 403 WRT 211 194 1 1 212 195 AM 724 1,047 124 J i 763 212 274 641 314 118 t r 229 732 25 PM 908 1,305 310 J i 836 -J 195 615 403 356 107 t r 268 1.124 77 LOS LOS Modified Near Term + Project Intersection 3 Analyst Jacob S\Mm Intersection: La Costa Ave. / El Camlno Real Future Condition: Modified Near Temfi + Project Date: 4/15/2014 Company: Urban Systems Associates, Ino. Project Number: 002312 Intersection Control: Signalized E/W Street Name: La Costa Ave. N/S Street Name: El Camino Real Tum E+OP E + OP Project Only Project Only E + OP + P E + OP + P Movement tum (v) AM turn (v) PM turn (v) AM tum (v) PM tum (v) AM tum(vlPM NLT 226 265 3 3 229 268 NTH 728 1,120 4 4 732 1,124 NRT 24 76 1 1 25 77 SLT 152 359 1 2 153 361 STH 1,045 1,298 2 7 1.047 1,306 SRT 724 908 0 0 724 908 ELT 763 836 0 0 763 836 ETH 316 690 1 2 317 692 ERT 312 349 2 7 314 356 WLT 118 107 0 0 118 107 WTH 567 478 3 3 570 481 WRT 230 246 1 1 231 247 AM 724 1,047 153 J i 763 _> 231 317 -> S70 314 r 118 t r 229 732 25 PM 908 1,305 361 J \ 836 247 692 • 481 356 r 107 t r 268 1.124 77 Delay LOS Delay LOS 47.7 53.1 Modified Year 2030 + Project Intersection 3 Analyst Jacob Swim Intersection: La Costa Ave. / El Camlno Real Future Condition: Modified Year 2030 + Project Date: 4/15/2014 Company. Urban Systems /Associates, Inc. Project Number 002312 Intersection Control: Signalized E/W Street Name: La Costa Ave. HIS Street Name: El Camino Real Factored Tums Tum Near Tenn + P Near Tenn+ P NT+P BO+P Increase BO+P BO+P Movement tum (v) AM tum (v) PM .ADT ADT % tum (v) AM tum (v) PM NLT 229 268 38,810 40.000 103% 236 276 NTH 732 1,124 52,497 55,000 105% 767 1178 NRT 25 77 21,704 23,000 106% 26 82 SLT 153 361 21.704 23,000 106% 162 383 STH 1,047 1,305 33,562 43,000 128% 1341 1672 SRT 724 908 38,810 40,000 103% 746 936 ELT 763 836 52,497 55,000 105% 799 876 ETH 317 892 21,704 23,000 106% 336 733 ERT 314 356 33.562 43,000 128% 402 456 WLT 118 107 33,562 43,000 128% 151 137 WTH 570 481 38.810 40,000 103% 587 496 WRT 231 247 52,497 55,000 105% 242 259 AM 746 1,341 162 J 799 242 336 4— 587 402 f 151 t r 236 767 26 PM 936 1,672 383 J ir 876 -J 259 733 —>-496 456 r 137 t r 276 1,178 82 Delay LOS Delay LOS •El Caniufto Re.ai at. I^a Costa Avenue Pk, Ht. Tini6 Psafi^d ;• •9^00 AM. Sftiitli A-Pbr (WB) Left- rhhi Riabt .taratipti? Inside dp). Oiat^Me': •Prga-SbW 1 2 4 i f Lelt. Hua Jtiji^t 1 Vfest Appr (EB). Lifi Tiiru RiBbt. Bast Appr (W5) Left nini fil^fc 2. 3. 1 i i 1 1 2 3^65: ^OOO im 3,6,01} 4Pt)'0 1^9 ^0 W.O Canis Settihgs' 3- 3. 0 eaga^it)' 360d dc566- 0 iSrtlbfe .>4i5tdJ/South ptet5B8%rilfr/fj|>?- ff' i;^jf4*^N*'W*st)sJiasi*sfim^y^^ N ^ Sf&Qfeitcy LbsrSactet .fi.fo" H Wi l^9f / HcjurV volume '^isr 21 "1^ 754 7S3 'Sg? 11.? 4ja ^^9^ Adjits£ea:HDftrlyVatura& ^20. 94© 0 i£)52 SO? .?jS3 m m m w. m C;tij&a£/(5fi.Faaor "^CI-OS' "^O.QO •^O.l.T >^0:l8:- -^(Xe? "^047 *^0-O7 "^O-JS- '^.l? IdtfRatiQ- i3;78. / Turning: Movements atlnteneistion of: EICajjifiibReal .a«td. La Cdstti AVettu? e •P F timfliSsQCIAM to S:OOAM Date..: mim\ Oay.! Wednesday 'NlprB.iAppi'piich Ell CaBttiip Real Tgtala 2897 •B.3-1 1875 7^4 1032 .3.5^3 U9 76: 269 Nortfi- 2.20 715 1 i43i 9^ ^411 Sotith Approach •268 53'2 lis •21 total Subtstiia totab Si8 409 LaC'ostn Avenue totals 1267 E a s t A J P IMoie! tett-tuffivolfamssinolmie ii-tums, U^•to^ns in bold.. i5C)y<E.TOR.T;a(iBctloa ujeit far $IifiJs. El CgSnino tlfeal at Costa Avenne ICiae'Coiifigut^ntoii Ibr ltiter$ectloa dapaetty t/ttHzatlon pjs.HArimePsh'adi 5:15 PM to Latie Insjde ponffe - .Ueftj uriitlDtis Outside FUeevfloW SPUthApi>rtNB) Left . Thf-u Rkht 1 1 •2 I 4 •5 IS '1 >?ortbAppttSB) L^ft thru-. Right West Appr (EB) Left thru. Klglit -1 Fage i on East Appr (WB) Ljfl:, Thru Right ht ic£^oii6/^^iisi&^-^i^'^l^- Are tteBiSt/Vi^&tpkeBes..'sp)it't^2' 3^- t^Hetetn^ttist Factor tijtl " //^o (J. •M 2 3: 1 i 2 1 3650 am 4000 i^oj? 3» m -m m m m ^ ^ A*iis»aijout1y-%luttie. 548 1153 Q I'S?!? ffilS *3,^ jfi.a4 3t21 JIQ 3)5^ 1.-85 uSrizationtrattor -^m B^L i).!2^ ^W? O^lf AQ§ "^WQ CnticalFattfirs / KO^ 0.35 Q.^? mo.H LOS Tnmln:g:Movefflenis.at Inteisectionof; EIGamfnb^L^al. .a.iid La Cdfte Avenue « a t A •I •rwn<s-K5:I5TM t(}-§:I?P-M •Npr^Ap&rb'^^h ElCatni#bReal 32?4 Sub.-- ,jfc6tais. 1531 &Q4 321 •4590 2477 t&tai . t 1760 24S. '% •31.135 i4D-5 iSoutfi Approach 1 67 2113 1«^ 367 •0 :total ^ •giibtfltala. S-nbi tatalj . 67i La. Cosl^ A.xen.ve total)? liJ'U E a .s t A t! 'S r •Note; Left-tgra vqlupie? iRclnjtp t)->tun\&. U4urng i't} b.o!<J, 30% JiiirdRteiiaitign used fiif jBl^Ts El Cairitoq Re^ .w, l,a C05ta Avenue LitQ-? Croijfigtiiiition fof Inter<if!cti(5a Cap'SCitJ- ytifization Pk, Hf. Tim6 P.wi6d ;• 8;09AM 1a Lfiii Inside e^itrfig- (iiefl). .faratioris Ootside; •Pres-HbW S()iitriAT)br(i<IB:i Laft Thru Rlgfa \ 1 2 i 4 :6 j tane Settiiip- 3- -3. C5 eapa'ifitj; -3^0(5 6o6il- 0 Aftltei^etiMouthphastsSj)litOf^^^^ H' A»^fii* fid^t/W^st pifiases •split (vStf)'? 5< Not-'Ji Appr fSBI Left, ttim Rigtit 1 Vfest Appr (EB). Left tlTiTi ^tfetit. t Pttge:2pf3 East Appr (WBi Left thrn .Rielit- 1 3^80: sm im um 4Pt)P im m(> TOP IJQO 'lBfriql«ficyLbSt»acttif.+'? .ftfCi r??,? ,t? t^i^ / y 3/l • fSt It) Htftirly volume ^^igC m U m 1«i 724 7^3 m 25^ «.? -SSS. M k^mtt'Eswiymmb m. •9'ffi^ d m 3632 Sd? .753 lis. S.3:? M dtflMtftlaFitter "^Me ^O.ft' ''(5,(j£) '^0.03 ^0,17 ^^0:18: ''pa;! ^M7 ""Pa? /<5-07 "^P.JJ •'l.l? iCURiifloi - 0:78.'"^ LOS- .C' tuming^Mpvemetits atthterse(5tlo.n of-: El Camino Real .fi^^. La'Costa AA'eilue W e s t: .A 1' P l. tim: tiOO AM Date.; CSp/ll ^ay,; "Wednesday •f5atii5; Osfi&T., JUiikirisiji, Shea Morth Appipilch El CaWrnp Real 'Totals. 28.07 Slll!.- totalS 1476 •1.331 763; 26;? .3.553 1875 Subfot'afe Tolul •7;24 103 S20 919 1 145.1 '9^ i411 Soath .A.pprQacli 1032 U9 '2Ci& 532 Us t r Tofal Siibtetals totals S5S •409 •21 La C'pstJtAvenBe total? 1257 E a s t A P Ntitt;.! Left-tum vtJiimfisinQliiclc 6-tums. U-t«ms in bold., yjyif RTOR-reilucSoii used fer SBlU's. ^oMJl ^?,kii^ i pro^^i ?fy\ El Cjiinino JE?:eal at La Costa. Ayenn.E LSfts'CojiJSgufatioa. fb.f Ititejseaio'jl Capaeily I/ttlization Page3.of3 PfcHAritrtsPfih'adj Sbuth Atliir'fNB)! NortbApprfSB) lyest Appr (SB) East Appr (WBl S:LS PM {0 6:1SPM Left. Thfii Rfeht Left Hiru-. Right Left thru ,KiRht Left Thru l^ight Latie Xnsjde J 1 ponftg- .()«{£). -2 1 uritiidis 3- 1 4 1. 5 I 1 OiltSide 7 i t. 1 1 I 1 r 1 I I -1 1 1 1 I L9Me.'§i6!tl3j1(gSS S- S . 2 3: \ •1 2 1 1. I } •A« fKe'.&tiSt/WmiihteS3.OT)tt!fVjl<§3 * S8i-ofea<5f Lost Factor-l-^ Sati " //20 3/ V •2m 5a& ssiS ^4 m il rionjf^-lTciuine- A^osted'BmuSy'ViD'futtie. i48 lisg 0! JS? m,$ 32.1 Iffl 3^5 ilfi5 'l)tili2ation Fabler ^IW ''ti.lSI '^t)\dt. '^TiM 5,SZ. TlSS "llJS •^0.15 p;if %C§ ""^IQ :aif«.// Cri-dcai Faetors P'.Of ,y 0.35 /Q.t3 JW^-tf,// / L.OS' l?uming:Mpvenienta at lotei-st^cfioD of; MGaminttlReal. .imd La CoJfa'Avenue A P •r' T«ne:;5:I^.l*?vI tqftfjpfej x)8tft: mm l>ay tWeSiiMclsy ^ifaijie..: Qs^^lri.I^(j}5fit>,h.e,,r>bel N9riJiApi)rbach EiCainitibReal Sub.-- .tbtals, 1533 [1§S 5Q4. 3^21 2477 -4S90 P m3 •905 12?7E 2E>9 1_. f 185- 3'8i 167 24^ i-5>2 67 iz. 17S0 1405 •31.65 South Approach Total :glibt01gl3, tatals . 6li d 970. La Costa A^ienjie E 3 .s t A P i? r •Note; Left-tyro vplupitS Itioluile tJitimis. U'tl'fns iij Mil. SOyo 5il:dR.ts4a<:tj(>!) uje^ for- 5BRT5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real Modified Near Term -f Project AM 4/15/2014 Lane Configurations ^1 tt f tt f ttii v\ ttt f Volume ^vph) 763 317 314 118 570 231 229 732 25 153 1% Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lo?{ Ume (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 40 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 1.00 \.m :W '"1;00: •015 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1,00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. HQW, (prof) 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 5060 3433 5085 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1,00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.66 0,95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 §afd#o«v'{i)enn} 3433" 3539 ,-15&3 i770 3539 1583' 3433 5060 '•'3433 608B 'lB83 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 AdiFloVTA®)r 354-' ' ^3V T24 etfo 243 241 771 26 161 1102 ' ,762 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 163 0 0 130 0 3 0 0 0 10 Lane <3r6iB|}-i^l5vy fvph) 803 . 334 166 124 600 113 24l 794 0 161 1102 • 752 Turn Type Pi?f^m^^s"' Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Prot pm+ov Turn Type Pi?f^m^^s"' ^'5 -rj 1 6 "5.- -' 3 8 7' • 4 •5 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 AojCafectj^reeh, (a (sj 40.8 54.0 540 14,6 27.7 27,7 12.8 45.1 m 42:7 ,83,5 Effective Green, g (s) 40.8 54.0 54.0 14,5 27.7 27.7 12.8 45.1 10.4 42.7 83.5 Actuated'^C Izatio 0.29 039 0.39 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.32 007 0.31 . 0.60 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 40 4.6 4.0 4.0 Vehicle E^ctension (s) 3.0 3.0:: 3.0 : " 3:0 : -3.0 -3.0 3.0-3.0 3.0 ' 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vph) 1000 1365 611 183 700 313 314 1630 255 1651 989 V/s Rafio >fpt cO.23 0,09" :;o,o7 GO.07 0.16 : 0.05 0.22 cO.22 v/s Ratio Penn 0.11 0.07 0.25 v/cR^tio-0.80 0.24-1 o;28 : '0-36: : 6.77 :0.49 V 0.'63 0.71 o.zq Unifonn Delay, dl 45.9 29.2 29.6 60.5 54.2 48.6 62.1 36.2 62.9 43.2 20.9 grogfession Factor 1.00 1.00?: - 1.00 :L20v :^'.:i..-ia^ ^::'!i6S^ ; 6:S8: 0.98 0.94 1.14 Incremental Delay, d2 4.7 0.1 0.2 8.4 9.0 0.6 io.6 1.0 3.6 2.0 2.5 Delay: (s) 50.6 29.3 29.8 81;3 •70.5: -.•82i1 • 71.7 44.0: 65 0 42.4 26.3 Level of Service D C C F E F E D E D C Approach Delay (s) 41.1 JM-::m 38.2 Approach LOS D E D D HCM Average Control Delay Hfc'M Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intejsec^gp Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (mm) c Critical Lane Group 47.7 0.78 140.0 T7.6% 15 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 12.0 D Baseline %user_name% Synchro 7 • Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real Modified Near Term + Project PM 4/15/2014 Lane Configurations ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^ ^ s^t'^pr'^':'^::;;^?'!^^^ ' 1 ' | Lane Util. Factor ^ 0^97" ' 0^95^^ lio"^' Jl ^ oij '•^^'^ t Flf'^c^cted ' ^ -"f FItPermitted ' 0.95 ^yo'"^''!^^^ 0.95 'l.'oo'^'"''^!^^^^^^^^ 1,00 " 1.6o Peak-hour factor, PHF RTOR Reduction (vph' 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Permitted Phases ^droGreen^s] Clearance Time (s) Lane GrpCap (vph^ v/s Ratio Perm Unifomn Delay, dl " Incremental Delay, d2 Level of Service Approach LOS 246 24.6 13.4 38.3 43.7 54.9 549 13.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1072 1388 621 169 622 278 329 1378 427 1536 J0^18 5^2 "t'i^'^^^^ 15J3'^ 'e.e^ 'iV.s D D E D HCM Average Control Delay 53.1 HCM Level of Service D Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 /^alysis Period (mm) 15 —"«^P5-:J«?<>^:3.?^|fftfMf^^^^^^ Baseline %user name% Synchro 7- Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: La Costa Ave. & El Camino Real Modified Year 2030 + Project AM 4/15/2014 —*" > < ^ t V \ V V \ V Lane Configurations tt f tt f V\ ttl^ 11 ttt 799 336 402 151 587 242 236 767 26 162 1341 74fe Ideal Flovi? (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (sj 4.0 4.0 4.0 40 4.0 4.0 40 4.0 4.0 4.0 .4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1,00 g.85 100 1.00 1.00 %m 0/85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.06 5|t|l;Flc9«fj(en3i^ 3433 3539 . 1683 1770 5639 1583 343'3' 5061 3433 5085 "15^3 FItPermitted 0.95 1,00 1.00 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Slitd.f-lo#fpemi)' 34^3 3639 1683 1770 3539 1583 3433 5061 3433 5085 1533 Peak^hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0,95 0.95 0.95 J41 354 . 4:?3 159. 618 255 248 807 27 171 1412 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 124 0 0 120 0 3 0 0 6 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) ' 841 3d4 2^9 159 618 135 248 831 0' 171 1412 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prof Prot pm-t-ov Turn Type ''• 5 2 ' 1 6 3 8 7 4 Pennitted Phases 2 6 4 ytcfijatfed^rii?,"fe(s) 35.7 50.2 50.2 16.4 29.9 29.9, 12.6 47.2 '11,2 458 61.5 Effecfive Green, g (s) 35.7 50.2 50.2 15.4 29.9 29.9 12.6 47.2 11.2 45.8 81.5 Effecfive Green, g (s) 0:26 0.36 O.'Se 0.11 0.21 0.21-0.09 0.34 008 033 0.68 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 V6hl(^el)^nsio'n (s) .3.d 3.0 -3.0' 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3:1 •3i3 '-3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 875 1269 568 195 756 338 309 1706 275 1664 967 v/ffRaliopip't c0:24 0.10 0.09 cO.17 c0.07 0.16 0.05 c028 ^ S.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 0.09 0.28 v/6 Rafio, 0.96 0.28 - 0.53 0.82 0.82 040 0.80 0.49 0,62 0.85 0.80 Unifomi Delay, dl f>/0^ressipjTT'actor 51.5 32.0 35.5 60.9 52.4 47.3 62.5 36.8 62.3 43.9 22.9 Unifomi Delay, dl f>/0^ressipjTT'actor 1.00 1.00 1.(X) 0.91 1.14 1.56 1.14 1,29 too 0.97 1.08 Incremental Delay, d2 21.4 0.1 0.9 19.7 5.9 0.7 13.6 1.0 3.0 3.9 3,3 D§Wi5)''-. 72.9 32.1 36.4 75.2 66.0 74.6 84,5 48.3 65.0 46,4 28.0 Level of Service E C D E E E F D E D C j^RpffSaph"-Delay Cs) 54.4 69.6 56.6 41.7 /\pproaeh LQS D E E D HCM Average Control Delay H(5M Voturoe to Capaciiy ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Infefslcjioji Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) (T Critical Lane Group 52.4 0.87 140.0 85.0% 15 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 16.0 Baseline %user name% Synchro 7 • Report Page 1 HCM Signalteed Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: La C?(>$is Ave. & El Camino Rea! Modified Year 2030 + Project PiVl 4/15/20.14 Lane Configurations Voltpe(vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) LaneV^dJiJ,. Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) FItPermitted Satd. Flowlperm) VliS:. f:s<:::-.ail tt ff \ tt f V\ ttl* V\ ttt f 876 733 456 137 496 259 276 1178 82 383 1672 936 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 laoo 1900 1900 1900 1900 . 12 12 13 12 12 13 12 12 12 12 ' ..12 13 4.0 4.6 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 40 0.97 *0.98 1.00 1.00 *b.98 1.00 0.97 *0.98 0.97 *0.98 ; -1.09 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 l.OO. 0 95 Loo-too • 0.95 1.00 0 95 1.00 : 100 3433 3651 1636 1770 sest 1636 3433 5423 3433 5476 1636 0,95 1:00 1.00 0.95 ' loo i-.oo--0.-95 ' 1.00-0 95 100 3433 3651 1636 1770 3651 1636 3433 5423 3433 5476 1636 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0 95 0.95 0,95 0.95. 0.95 '105 922 772 480 144 522 273 291 1240 86 403 1760 J85 0 0 170 0 0 166 0 6 b 0 • 0 922 772 310 144 522 107 291 1320 6 403 l760' 976 Prof Perm Prof Perm Prot Prot 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 5 2 '6 ' '4 38.0 46.5 46,5 16.1 24.6 24.6 13.8 41.8 19.6 476 85.6 38.0 46.5 46.5 16.1 24.6 24.6 ' 13.8 41.8 19.6 47,6 85.6 0.27 0.33 0,33 0.12 0,18 0.18 0.10 0.30 0.14 0.34 0.61 4.0 40 4.0 4.6 4.0 4.0 40 .4.0 4.0 40 ,4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 932 1213 643 204 642 287 338 1^19 461 • 1862 '1047 cO.27 6.21 0,08 c0.14 0.08 0,24 c0.12 0.32 cO.25 o;i9 0.07 0,34 0.99 0.64 0.57 0.71 0.81 0.37 0.86 0.82 0.84 0.96 0,93 50.8 39,6 38.5 59.7 55,5 60.9 - 62.2 45.5 68.7 44.9 24.6 1.00 1.00 1,00 0,86 0,97 1.25 1.27 0.91 1.01 1.05 0,92 26.5 1.1 1.5 9.2 6,7 0.7 . 17.3 4.0 9.8 9;5 12.0 77,3 40.7 40.0 60.3 60.3 64.4 96.4 45.7 69.1 56.6 34.6 E D D E E E F D E E C 56,1 61.5 54.8 51.3 E, E D D Adj. Flow (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph> ProtectedPhases ?ef[i|ieafhases Actuated Green, G (s) 5ffecfiye$r^l^''gj[s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) v/s Rafio Prot v/sftafioPel'fn v/c Rafio Unlfbrrn t)ela,y,"dl Progression Factor Incren^p Delgy, d2 Delay (sf Levefof Service Approach Delay (s) HCM Average CoritrorDday HCM Volume to Capaciiy ratio /^ciu^6| Pyde Length (s) Intersecfion Capacity Ufilization /\nal^^^ Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 54.6 0.89 140.0 92 2% 15 HCM Level of Service Su m of lost fime (s) ICU Level of Service 8.0 F Baseline %user_narae% Synchro? - Reporl Page 1 3. INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT COUNTS Intersection turn movement counts were collected In Summer 2013 at forty-nine (49) major intersections around the City. The locations of the intersections Included in the 2013 Traffic IVlonitoring Program (TMP) Report are shown graphically in Figure 3-1. The turn movement counts were conducted during the AM peak period (6:30 to 9:30 AM) and the PM peak period (3:30 to 6:30 PM). The data from each three-hour period was divided into Hfteen-minute periods to accurately identify the peak hour that occurs within the AM and PM peak periods. The counts were collected mid-week on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. The intersection turning movement count data is provided in Appendix B following this report. During the count period, RBF staff monitored traffic conditions and noted locations where capacity or signal timing resulted in queues or operational deficiencies that may not be readily obvious using the ICU methodology. Field observations of peak period traffic conditions are described in detail later in this chapter. The forty-nine (49) intersections were analyzed using the ICU methodology using calculation worksheets developed in an Excel spreadsheet. The count data was provided in Excel fomiat, and imported directly into the ICU calculation worksheets. The peak hour volumes, peak hour factors, and ICU calculations are included in the worksheets for the forty-nine (49) intersections evaluated in the 2013 Report. The ICU calculations performed assumed the following lane group capacities: Lane Group Capacity Thru Lanes 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane Turn Lanes 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane Dual Turn Lanes 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane The ICU methodology reports level of sen/Ice (LOS) based on volume-to-capaclty ratios ranging from 0.0 to 1.0: Ratio LOS 0.0-0.60 A 0.61-0.70 B 0.71-0.80 0 0.81-0.90 D 0.91-1.00 E Greater than 1.00 F One of the iimitations of the ICU methodology is that it does not account for closely spaced signalized Intersections where traffic volumes are heavy and queues spill back to adjacent intersections. The ICU methodology assumes that each intersection operates in isolation of other Intersections; therefore, signal coordination, progression of through traffic, and queue spillback are not accounted for in the analysis. Using the ICU methodology at closely spaced intersections with heavy peak hour traffic may result in calculated levels of service that are better than what actually occurs at these intersections during the peak hours. April 11,2014 City of Carlsbaci APR 1 4 2014 Planning Division DELANO & DEIANO VIA E-MAIL & U.S. MAIL Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Plarming Commission April 16.2014 meeting, agenda item # 3: La Costa Towne Cenier proieci: SDP 78-03t DVSDP "i3-03/aUF l3-0i/PUD 15-02/MS 13-01 Dear Honorable Members of the Carlsbad Planning Commission: I I sx. f t-rl < m m H H s i o tn > Z o This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). ,\s my January 21, 2014 letter explained, the Ciiy should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several signi ticant im.pacts. A February 26, 2014 response from the City to my letter •aUcmpts to justify the failure to prepare an EIR, but that response is both insufficient and mi.sleading. For example, the City's response asserts that my January 21''^ letter incorrectly "implies that an adjustment was made to the existing conditions of the TIA ['Traffic Impact Analysis'] to include the vacant Vons store." The City's response also claims that "the existing baseline condition was indeed based on the existing counts as discussed on page 3-1 ofthe TIA." This is simply wrong. Page 3-1 of the TIA does discuss "existing conditions" on street segments; it does not, however, discuss existing traffic generated at the La Costa Towne Center site. Rather, page 4-1 of the TIA states that "existing uses are showu in the top poriion of Tabic 4-i." /vnd the top line of Tabie 4-i, found on page 4-3 ofthe TIA, attributes 3,728 Average Daily Trips ("ADT") to "Retail (7710 Bldg) - 1 story." This building is the vacant Vons store. Accordingly, contrary to the City's response, the TIA incorrectly attributes traffic generation to a vacant building. And because that assumption carries through into other analyses, it invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise impacts. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4* 310, 322. My January 21^' letter also noted construction noise would be generated less than 10 feet from a public sidewalk, which could mean noise louder than the noise of an In ?5 "1^ 5- 3 a. 5. o ON a\ o o 0 o 1 I ON ON Ul to Tl O n m WWW. IM; I A NOAN DDI LA NO.com Comments re La Cost^^wne Center Project and MND April 11,2014 Page 2 of 2 ambulance siren 100 feet away. Rather than acknowledging the significant noise impact to the public, the City's response claimed that it "does not limit construction noise levels ... as the impacts are temporary in nature." But the temporary nature of a noise impact does not make it insignificant. See Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Comm. v. Board of Port Commissioners (2001) 91 Cal.App.4* 1344,1380 - 81. And it would be no more appropriate to use the lack of a City standard as a basis to ignore significant effects than it would be to apply "a threshold of significance or regulatory standard 'in a way that forecloses the consideration of any other substantial evidence showing there may be a significant effect.'" Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4* 322, 342 (quoting Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4* 98, 114). Also, a table on page 19 of the Planning Report to you claims that the Growth Management Plan Open Space standard is "n/a" and claims the City is meeting the Growth Management Plan Parks standard. These assertions are incorrect. Among other things. Municipal Code Sections 21.90.040 and 21.90.130 require consistency with the applicable Local Facilities Management Plan. These include requirements for both adequate open space and adequate parks. Yet evidence in the record indicates that the City is not complying with either standard in the applicable zone. Additionally, the Project is inconsistent with applicable standards for height, grading and front yard setbacks. Municipal Code Sections 21.06.020 and 21.53.120 require findings of fact, which cannot be supported here. Furthermore, the El Camino Real Corridor Standards require additional findings for any deviation, which also cannot be supported. Indeed, one unsupportable finding is that "compliance with a particular standard is infeasible for a particular project." There is no such evidence of infeasibility. Furthermore, Municipal Code Section 21.203 contains applicable coastal resource protection requirements, which have not been met here. Among these are requirements for drainage, erosion, sedimentation and habitat protections in Municipal Code Section 21.203.040(B)(3), yet no evidence of compliance with these requirements has been provided. Accordingly, North County Advocates requests that you reject the Project and MND. Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Sincerel iferett DeLano cc: Shaimon Wemeke, Associate Planner 0.North County Advocated 7668 El Camino Real, Suite 104-258, Carlsbad CA 92009 April 9, 2014 Dear Shannon Wemeke, Carlsbad Planning Dept. Re: La Costa Town Square proposed project - your traffic report Dear Ms. Wemeke, I would like to bring to your attention Table 4-1 of your traffic report which specifically assigns ADT (Average Daily Trips) to "Retail (7710 Bldg) - 1 story." That is the Von's building and it has been closed for about five years and has been VACANT all that time. You need to revise your report to make it accurate. Please make sure this information is presented at the April 16, 2014 Planning Commission hearing. Thank you. Note attached digital pictures showing the vacant Vons building. Patricia C. Bleha, Carlsbad resident and president. North County Advocates North County Advocates is a non-profit 501© 3 public benefit corporation. TIN 27-3158348. www.northcountvadvocates.com A ^ • FilECOh 4.'3^ CITV OF VXARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov March 25, 2014 Geoff Sherman Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Ste. 300 San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be sent to you via email on Wednesday, April 2, 2014. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on April 7, 2014. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 10:00 a.m. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring the following required information with you to this meeting or provide it to your planner prior to the meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission: 1. Unmounted colored exhibit(s) of your site plan and elevations. For residential projects of 2 or more homes a typical street scene of the elevations shall be provided. The corresponding rear elevations for the homes shown for the typical street scene shaii also be provided; and 2. A PDF of your colored site plan and elevations. The colored exhibits must be submitted at this time to ensure review by the Planning Commission at their briefings. If the colored exhibits are not available for their review, vour proiect could be rescheduled to a later time. The PDF of your colored site plan and elevations will be used in the presentation to the Planning Commission and the public at the Planning Commission Hearing. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) and the PDF here by the scheduled time above. Should you wish to use visual materials in your presentation to the Planning Commission, they should be submitted to the Planning Division no later than 12:00 p.m. on the day of a Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Digital materials will be placed on a computer in Council Chambers for public presentations. Please label all materials with the agenda item number you are representing. Items submitted for viewing, including presentations/digital materials, will be included in the time limit maximum for speakers. All materials exhibited to the Planning Commission during the meeting (slides, maps, photos, etc.) are part of the public record and must be kept by the Planning Division for at least 60 days after final action on the matter. Your materials will be returned upon written request. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Shannon Werneke at (760) 602-4621 or at shannon.werneke@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, DON NEU, AlCP City Planner DN:SW:bd c: File Copy Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Data Entry Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 5'^ Avenue, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Planning Division 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 E\CEL TRUST Affidavit for Application for Excess Dwelling Units APPLICANT: Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC PROJECT NO./NAME : LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER, SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/ MS 13-01 1^ t as the authorized re presentative of Applicant /Developer for, , do swear or affirm: 1. That I am the authonzed representative of Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC, which is the Applicant/Developer for the La Costa Towne Center project, located at 7710-7770 El Camlno Real. Carlsbad, CA ("Project"). 2. That said Project will consist of 60 multi-familv rental dwelling units, including 12 inclusionary rental dwelling units. 3. That pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43, Applicant/Developer is requesting that the Planning Commission approve an allocation of excess dwelling units from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank which wiil trigger an inclusionary housing requirement for the Project. 4. That Applicant/Developer acknowledges the allocation of excess dwelling units is an "incentive" as defined in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.86,020 A.12 and Government Code Section 65915(k). 5. That Applicant/Developer understands and agrees that any rental inclusionary units proposed by the applicant to comply with Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 21.85, will not be subject to Civil Code Section 1954.S2(a) nor any other provision of the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act (Civil Code Sections 1954.51 et seq.) inconsistent with controls on rents, because, pursuant to Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2), the Developer will enter into an affordable housing contractual agreement with the City of Carlsbad agreeing to the limitations on rents. I SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING RESPRESENTATIONS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Date:_AlQ:JH Date: Signature: Y- ^> "^r—Signature:. Printed Name: Printed Name: Title: VP Title: For (Entitv): &/<c.\ (PH <^e<A<v CU)>Ncr LVL- For (Entity):, (Proper notarial affiant statement by Applicant/Developer must be attached.) 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 (858) 613-1800 • Fax (858) 487-9890 ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of San Diego ) On \\(irrl I9r before me, Sharon Filbig (insert name and title ofthe officer) personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactq/y evidence to be the person(*f whose namejjs) \slarQ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/stre/tpey executed the same in his/>€f7ttteTr authorized capacityfies), and that by his/j^er/Tljefl- signaturej^-on the instrument the personi8f, or the entity upon behalf of which the personj^s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. ' SHASOW FILBIG 1 ^^^m COMM. #2041711 z N°^'y ''"^''(^' California g WITNESS my hand and official seal. ^N^^K^.,. « San Diego Coun^ - 1 Mi^fflB''^ My coiniti. Expires Sep. 17, zoi/r Signatiir»-~-,^^j^<2W4/^ (Seal) CI'TY OF V (CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov February 13, 2014 Ms. Meri Lopez-Keifer San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians 1889 Sunset Drive Vista, CA 92081 RE: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER - SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 Thank you for your comment letter dated January 21, 2014 responding to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the La Costa Towne Center project. Pursuant to your request, we have revised the proposed Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures, CUL-1 and CUL-2, to address the items of concern in your letter. The changes are reflected below in underlined text. Ultimately, an addendum to the MND will be prepared to reflect this revision and the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program will be accordingly revised. CUL 1- Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor ground-disturbing activities. The qualified archaeologist shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the archaeologist and dty staff The City shall verify that the archaeological monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit In the event any potential cultural resource is uncovered during tho course ofthe project construction, ground • disturbing activities in tho vicinity of thc find shall bc redirected until thc nature and extent of thc find can bc evaluated by the archaeological monitor. If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist, in consultation with a Native American monitor, shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If archaeological resources are encountered during excavation or grading, the archaeological monitor, in consultation with a Native American monitor shall direct the contractor to avoid all work in the immediate area for a reasonable period of time to allow the archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and determine an appropriate course of action. The appropriate course of action may include, but not be limited to avoidance, recordation, relocation, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for pursuing the appropriate activities, including salvage of discovered resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. Recovered artifact materials and data shall be cataloged and analyzed. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards or the collection will be repatriated to the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), as specified in the pre-excavation agreement. Planning Division *^ 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER - SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 February 13, 2014 Page 2 // any human remains are discovered, all construction activity in the immediate area of the discovery shall cease immediately, and the Archaeological monitor shall notify the County (Medical Examiner pursuant to CaUfornia Health and Safety Section 7050.5. Should the Medtcai Examiner determine the human remains to be Native American; the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Native American Monitor (pursuant to Mitigation Measure CULTURAL-2}, in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission, shall inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the City of Carlsbad, and the project contractor, actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. The project contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains before resuming construction activities. In addition, if Native American remains are discovered, the Native American remains shall be kept in situ, or in a secure location in close proximity to where thev were found until an analvsis Is done on-site, in consultation with a Luiseno Native American monitor. CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbing activities, the project developer shall retain the services of a Luiseno Native American monitor. The purpose of this monitoring will be to allow for tribal observation of trenching excavation including formalized procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. The City shall verify that the Native American monitor has been retained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the appropriate Native American Tribe and the developer. The Native American representative(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. The Native American monitor shall be on-site during all grading, trenching, and other ground- disturbing activities unless otherwise agreed upon by the monitor and city staff. If cultural resources are encountered, the Native American monitor shall have the authoritv to temporarily halt or redirect qradinq/trenchina while the cultural resources are documented and assessed. If the resource cannot be avoided, the Native American tribe shall be consulted regarding the testina. cataloging, drafting and finalization of the recovery of anv resources. We thank you for the time to provide us comments on the La Costa Towne Center project and hope that we have addressed all of your concerns. Should you have any additional questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4621 or by email at shannon.werneke@carlsbadca.eov. Sincerely, SHANNON WERNEKE Associate Planner SW:sm Cc: Mr. Geoff Sherman, Excel La Costa, LLC, 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300, San Dlego, CA 92128 Mr. Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 s'** Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner File SAN LUIS REY BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 1889 Sunset Drive • Vista, California 92081 760-724-8505 • FAX 760-724-2172 www.slrmissionindians. org January 21, 2014 Shannon Wemeke City Planner VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Planning Division Shannon.wemeke@carlsbadca.gov City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 RE: COMMENTS ON THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER (SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-01/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01) Dear Ms. Werneke: We, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians ("Tribe"), have received and reviewed the City of Carlsbad's ("City's") Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") and all of its supporting documentation as it pertains specifically to the protection and preservation of Native American cultural resources that may be located within the parameters of the La Costa Towne Center Project's ("Project's") property boundaries. After our review, the Tribe believes that with the incorporation of additional measures of mitigation for cultural resources as proposed in this comment letter, the Project should be allowed to proceed as proposed. As you are aware, we are a San Diego County Tribe whose traditional territory includes the current cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Vista, San Marcos and Escondido, as well as the unincorporated communities of northem San Diego County, such as, but not limited to, Fallbrook and Bonsall. The Tribe is resolute in the preservation and protection of cultural, archaeological and historical sites within all these jurisdictions. It is the Tribe's understanding that the Project will consist of the demolition and excavation of two (2) existing structures established within the Project's boundaries and allow for the consiruction of two (2) mixed used buildings, including 60 multi-family residential units, 12 of which are proposed to be designated as inclusionary housing and a single-story parking structure, which is partially subterranean. The Tribe further understands that the Project is located on the east side of El Camino Real, south of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, addressed as 7710-7770 El Camino Real, APNs 216-124-16-17 ("Project Site"). As the City is aware through previous government-to-government consultations, this area is of significant SLR Comments Regarding the La Costa Towne Center, Carlsbad, CA Page 1 cultural importance to the Tribe and the Luiseiio people due to its close proximity to known cultural resource sites and/or sacred places. As stated earlier, the Tribe has reviewed the associated environmental documents for this Project, including but not limited to the MND Initial Study Checklist for Cultural Resources (Section V) and Mitigation Measures Cultural-1 and Cultural-2. Although the majority of the Tribe's concems are addressed within the MND, several concems still remain for the Tribe that the Tribe would like the City to address. I. THE PRESENCE OF A LUISENO NATIVE AMERICAN MONITOR DURING ALL EARTH DISTURBING ACTIVITIES IS JUSTIFIED, AND AS SUCH, LUISENO NATIVE AMERICAN MONITORS SHOULD BE CONTRACTED WITH DURING THIS PROJECT. As discussed in our previous communications, the Tribe is in agreement with the City that Luiseno Native American monitors should be utilized during ground and/or earth disturbing activities for this Project. As stated earlier, the Tribe has reviewed the MND for this Project, as well as conducted our own research of the Tribe's Sacred Land Files, and has spoken with our Tribal Elders regarding the significance of the Project Site. Several significant and sacred Native American sites are known to be within a mile radius of this Project Site, therefore it is possible that during excavation activities subsurface resources may be discovered at the Project Site. Hence, the Tribe supports the MND's Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures Cultural ("CUL- 2") in requiring the presence of a Luiseno Native American monitor. In addition, the Tribe respectfully requests that the following language of CUL-1 and 2 be modified and/or amended prior to the adoption of this MND. Currently, the CUL-1 states, "If cultural resources are encountered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading/trenching while the cultural resources are documented and assessed." The Tribe suggests that the sentence and/or mitigation measure in CUL-1 be clarified, and/or restated in CUL-2, that both the archaeological monitor and/or the Native American monitor may halt ground disturbing activities if a cultural resource and/or archaeological artifact deposit or cultural feature is discovered..." It is imperative that Native American monitors share in the responsibility of temporarily halting ground disturbing activities when a cultural resource or archaeological resource are discovered in order for the resource to be properly identified and not destroyed by heavy machinery. Therefore, the Tribe respectfully requests that the language authorizing the temporary halting of ground disturbing activities be modified as herein stated. II. SLR STRONGLY RECOMMENDS AND REQUESTS THAT ADDITIONAL MEASURES OF MITIGATION BE ADOPTED BY THE CITY IN ORDER TO LESSEN ANY ADDITIONAL NEGATIVE IMPACT TO OUR KNOWN NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL RESOURCES. Furthermore, the Tribe strongly recommends and requests that additional measures of mitigation be adopted by the City in order to lessen any additional negative impact to our known Native American cultural resources. SLR Comments Regarding the La Costa Towne Center, Carlsbad, CA Page 2 A. The Tribe Must Be Consulted If A Significant Cultural Resource And/or Unique Archaeological Resource Is Discovered During Ground Disturbing Activities. If a significant cultural resource and/or unique archaeological resource are unearthed during ground disturbing activities for this Project, the Tribe respectfully requests that they be notified and consulted with in regards to the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. The Tribe's preference will always be for avoidance and that the resource be protected and preserved in perpetuity. If however, relocation and/or a data recovery plan is authorized by the City as the Lead Agency, the Tribe respectfully requests that as a condition of any authorization, the Tribe be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery. These resources are evidence of our ancestors' lost history and, as such, we must have a voice and be a part of how those resources are treated and preserved for future generations. Moreover, when cultural resources are discovered during the Project, if the archaeologist collects such resources, a Luiseno Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those resources. Additionally, if the archaeologist does not collect the cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseiio Native American monitor, may in their discretion, collect said resources and provide them to the Tribe for respectful and dignified treatment in accordance with the Tribe's cultural and spiritual traditions. Currently the MND is silent in regards to "what" is to happen to those items not collected, yet documented by the project archaeologist for SCIC purposes. Therefore, it is the Tribe's recommendation that these items be given to the Tribe so that they may be repatriated at the site on a later date. B. When Suspected Native American Remains Are Unearthed. Those Remains Should Remain In Situ And Protected Until The Most Likely Descendant Can Be Determined By The Native American Heritage Commission. CUL-1 (second paragraph) addresses the possibility of the discovery of Native American Human Remains. If Native American remains and/or associated burial goods are unearthed during the Project, and prior to a Most Likely Descendant being determined by the Native American Heritage Commission, it is the Tribe's request that the ancestral remains be kept in situ (in place), or in a secure location in close proximity to their discovery and that a forensic anthropologist perform their analysis of the remains on-site in the presence of a Luiseiio Native American monitor. Any transportation of the ancestral remains would be considered by the Tribe as disrespectful and undignified treatment. Therefore, the Tribe requests that in addition to the strict adherence to the protocol stated in the Califomia Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Califomia Public Resource Code Section 5097.98, the Final MND reflect that if Native American remains are discovered, the Native American remains shall be kept in situ, or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, and that the analysis of the remains occur only on-site in the presence of a Luiseno Native American monitor. C. Onlv "Clean FiU" Should Be Utihzed During This Proiect SLR Comments Regarding the La Costa Towne Center, Carlsbad, CA Page 3 Lastly, the Tribe is opposed to any undocumented fill being used during the proposed development. We are aware that the MND stated that no fill will be imported to the site and that the soils from the site, would instead, be exported. However, in the event the "fill" will be imported into the Project area, the Tribe requests that any proposed use of fill be clean of cultural resources and documented as such. It has been a practice of many in the constmction profession to utilize fill materials that contained cultural resources from other "unknown" areas thereby contaminating the potential cultural landscape of the area being filled. This type of fill material is unacceptable. Moreover, if the fill material is to be utilized from areas within the Project boundaries, then we ask that that fill be analyzed and confirmed by an archeologist and/or Luiseiio Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain cultural resources. Lastly, if any of the soils are to be exported to the site, we ask that those soils be free of any cultural resources, as to avoid any cross-contamination of resources at a different site. Therefore, a requirement that fill material be absent of any and all cultural resources should be included as an additional mitigation measure of the Final MND. The Tribe is aware that the Project Site contains varying levels of in-fill soil; however, the vertical depth of the fill soil is unknown and the native soil may still be intact below the fill soil. Therefore, regardless if "fill" soil had been previously utilized at the Project Site, Native American monitors must still be present during ground disturbing activities in those locations if it is determined that native soils may still be penetrated. III. CONCLUSION The San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians appreciates this opportunity to provide the City of Carlsbad with our comments and recommendations on the La Costa Towne Center Project. The Tribe hopes the City will adopt the mitigation measures for Cultural Resources as herein requested and that they will appear in the Final MND. As always, we look forward to working with the City to guarantee that the requirements of the CEQA are rigorously applied to this Project and all projects. We thank you for your continuing assistance in protecting our invaluable Luiseno cultural resources. Sincerely, Merri Lopez-Keifer Tribal Legal Counsel cc: Melvin Vemon, Tribal Captain Carmen Mojado, Secretary of Govemment Relations and President of Saving Sacred Sites SLR Comments Regarding the La Costa Towne Center, Carlsbad, CA Page 4 DELANO & DELANO City of Carlsbad February 3,2014 FEB 0 4 2014 Planning Division VIA E-MAIL & U.S. MAIL City Clerk CityofCarlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Public Records Act request Dear City of Carlsbad: Pursiiant to Califomia Govemment Code §§ 6250-6268, please provide prompt access to records relating to use ofthe La Costa Towne Center shopping center property ("Center"), mcluding APNs 216-124-15, -16, -17, and -25, between the year 2000 and the present time. This request, made on behalf of North County Advocates, seeks the following categories of records: 1. All permit and license records, including records relating to any City permit or license for any businesses within the Center. 2. All inspection records, including records relating to City building, fire, and code enforcement inspections of any businesses within the Center. 3. All tax records, including records relating to City tax invoices and receipts fi-om any businesses within the Center. 4. All service records, including records relating to City services for water and sewer to any businesses within the Center. This request seeks all correspondence and computer-generated records (including databases and electronic mail). This request seeks all draft and final versions of records. This request seeks all intemal and extemal communications. Pursuant to the Public Records Act, please respond promptly. Please let me know when we can come to review the requested records. Depending upon the volume and types of records produced, we may or may not request to receive copies. D 3 m IS a. H i-i » O I a. -0 a m f ^ i 2 s- O a Si. . to PS o o 0 o 1 I 51 o ai o CityofCarlsbad February 3,2014 Page 2 of2 This request seeks records within the possession of the City. If there are other individuals or departments within the City that have records responsive to this request, please ensure they are provided a copy of this request. Thank you for your prompt attention to this request, Ifyou have a question about this request, please call our office. Sincerely, DELANO & DELANO Januarv 21, 2014 VIA E-MAIL & U.S MAIL Sharmon Wemeke Associate Planner CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 City of Carlsbad JAN 2 2 2014 Planning Division Re: La Costa Tovvuc Center jroiect: SDP 78-03(DVSDP 13-03'SUP n-Ol/rUD 13- 02/MS 13-01 Dear City of Carlsbad: This letter is submitted on behalf of North Coimty Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Projecf) and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). The Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq., requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a "fair argument" that significant environmental impacts may occur. Pub. Res. Code § 21080(d); iVo Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1975) 13 Cal.3d 68. If there is "substantial evidence that the project might have [a significant impact on the environment], but the agency failed to secure preparation of the required EIR, the agency's action is to be set aside because the agency abused its discretion by failing to proceed in a 'manner required by law.'" Friends of "B" Street v. City of Hayward (mO) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1002. Here, the City should prepare an EIR before proceeding; the Project is likely to lead to several sigmficant impacts. Xhp A.^^JD ^.ci'^^t'^ ^r»co^cct bpis^^li*-^^ f*^*" *n'j^^' of its d^scii*^'-^^on, re:iso^in'^ that the "existing" environment includes occupancy ofthe vacant Vons store. See Traffic Report at 4-1. However, CEQA specifically provides that an agency must consider the existing conditions. See Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4"' 310, 322 (describing analysis that used the maximum permitted operational levels as a baseline as "'illusory' comparisons that 'can only mislead the public as to the reality of the impacts and subvert the full consideration of the actual environmental impacts,' a result at direct odds with CEQA's intent"). As the MND acknowledges, the Vons store is vacant. See MND at 1. As such, the existing on-the-ground conditions do not include use ofthe store. This assumption invalidates the MND's analysis of traffic, air qualhy. greenhouse gas emis.sions and noise impacts. 3 m I's (ft rn a. H s- H I a m i o a. ^ ? = 5" I a. ^ a m > Z o s- a a- 3- § 53 a. o n > to o to O S! c a\ ON o o o cp U\ Ul ON 0\ Ul K) X 3 o (Tl HL LANGAN DDL LANO.com Comments re La Costa lowne Center Project and MND January 21, 2014 Page 2 of 3 The Project will lead to significant impacts to community character, aesthetics, and land use. • The Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The Project violates applicable standards for building height and street setback. See MND at 26. • There is insufficient evidence to support a deviation from the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. • Additionally, deviations are not supported by the Municipal Code. Section 21.85.100 requires an affordable housing agreement, yet there is no indication of such agreement. Section 21.85.120 requires the Project to be in conformity with "adopted goals and policies of the city," yet the Project is inconsistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Siandaids. • The MND discusses "modifications ... to offset the cost of affordable housing," yet there is no evidence such modifications are necessary or what costs need to be offset. See Pacific Corp. v. City of Camarillo (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 168, 178. • The MND fails to analyze applicable standards for park and recreation facilities. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and the General Plan Parks and Recreation Element each contain standards, yet, as the MND acknowledges, "the project does not include any public recreational facilities." MND at 33. The City is not currently meeting the applicable standards for park and recreation facilities in the Southeast Quadrant. As such, the addition of the Project's population will only increase the burden on already failing park and recreation facilities. The Project will lead to significant impacts to air quality. • The MND attempts to separate air emissions into four phases. MND at 23. However, it fails to account for the fact that such phases can, indeed are likely to, overlap, thereby increasing the amounts of emissions at any given time. The Project will lead to significant impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. • The MND averages construction emissions over the life of the Project. MND at 20. Such emissions should be calculated as they will actually occur, not averaged over a longer period of time. See Taxpayers for Accountable School Bond Spending V. SanDiego Unified School Dist. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4* 1013, 1049. The Project will lead to significant impacts to noise. • The analysis discusses potential impacts to nearby residences but fails to address the fact that the applicable noise standards apply to the property line. See Noise Report at 17. While the MND and Noise Report discuss Comments re La Costa i owne Center Project and MND January 21, 2014 Page 3 of 3 constmction noise, they fail to account for the fact that grading will occur within feet of the property line. The Project's Demolition Plan, for example, notes constmction as close as 8.8 feet from the property line, a location that includes a public sidewalk. The Noise Report acknowledges sound levels of "typical constmction equipment" can be as high as 95 dBA "at 50 feet from the source." Noise Report at 13. Obviously, since the equipment will be considerably closer, the noise will be considerably greater. • Furthermore, noise mitigation is insufficient. See Citizens for Responsible and Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal.App.4* 1323, 1341 ("there is no evidence of any measures to be taken that would ensure that the noise standards would be effectively monitored and vigorously enforced"). Additionally, the MND inappropriately defers mitigation. Sacramento Old City Assn. V City Council (1991) 229 Cal. App. 3d 1011, 1029. For example, the MND pimts the preparation of an interior noise analysis. MND at 30. In Communities for a Better Environment v. City of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4* 70, the court observed: Numerous cases illustrate that reliance on tentative plans for future mitigation after completion of the CEQA process significantly undermines CEQA's goals of full disclosure and informed decisionmaking; and consequently, these mitigation plans have been overturned on judicial review as constituting improper deferral of environmental assessment. Id. at 92 (citations omitted). Thank you for your consideration of these concems. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, DELANO & DELANO City of Carlsbad January 9, 2014 JAN 1 3 ZOH Planning Division VIA E-MAIL AND U.S MAIL Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner CityofCarlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: La Costa Tu'vvnc -ciiicr proicci. 3Dr 7c-C'3{ij' ;/Si->-'P i3-(i5/SuF i3-Gl/FUij' 13- 02/MS 13-01 Dear City of Carlsbad: This letter is submitted on behalf of North County Advocates in connection with the proposed La Costa Towne Center project ("Project") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"). The Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("ClvQA") is premised in part on "a belief that citizens can make important conlributioDS tc environmental protection and .. . notions of democratic decision-making ..." Concerned Citizens of Costa Mesa, Inc. v. 32"'' Agricultural Assoc. (1986) 42 Cai.3d 929, 9..>o. "Environmental review derives its vitality from public participation." Ocean View Estates Homeowners Assn. v. Montecito Water Dist. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4* 396, 400. On Christmas Eve, the City posted the MND for a brief 20-day comment period. Public review was supposed to occur during the holidays. Additionally, the MND identifies 17 supporting documents. Ten different reports and studies were specifically prepared for the ProjecL yet none of them are posted on the City's website. Accordingly, North County Advocates requests the City extend the comment period at least an additional thirty (30) days. Thank you for your consideration ofthis request. If you have questions, please contact me. iverett DeLano a. a. < m m H H ^ o 5" m 3 & a a. s I- a" a rn > Z O s- a a. o O > vo KJ o Ul 3 Cl. rt s c ON ON o o 0 o 1 I Ul Ul ON ON Ul IO o w w w . 1) 1 1 A N C) A N n D E 1. A N O . c () m Shannon Werneke From: Shannon Werneke Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:24 AM To: 'Everett DeLano' Subject: RE: La Costa project Everett, I want to clarify that the comment period will end on TUESDAY, January 21, 2014. I noted the incorrect day of the week, but the date remains the same. Shannon ^ CITY D f CARLSBAD Planning Division Shannon Werneke Associate Planner 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov P: 760-602-4621 Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov From: Everett DeLano rmailto:everett@delanoanddelano.com1 Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:16 AM To: Shannon Werneke Subject: RE: La Costa project Thank you. Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 (760)510-1562 (760) 510-1565 (fax) DELANO &. DELANO www.delanoanddelano.com From: Shannon Werneke |"mailto:Shannon.Werneke(3)carlsbadca.gov] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:10 AM Shannon Werneke From: Sent: To: Subject: Everett DeLano <everett@delanoanddelano.com> Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:16 AM Shannon Werneke RE: La Costa project Thank you. Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 (760)510-1562 (760) 510-1565 (fax) DELANO & DELANO www.delanoanddelano.com From: Shannon Werneke [mallto:Shannon.Werneke(g)carlsbadca.qov] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:10 AM To: Everett DeLano Subject: RE: La Costa project Everett, Based on your request and the timing ofthe issuance ofthe MND over the holidays, we will extend the comment period for the La Costa Towne Center project until Wednesday, January 21, 2014. I will work with our administrative staff to update the MND Notice online to reflect the revised date for the end of the review/comment period. Shannon A CITt Of CARLSBAD Planning Division Shannon Werneke Associate Planner 1635 FaradayAvenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov P: 760-602-4621 Shannon.Werneke@carlsbadca.gov From: Everett DeLano rmailto:everett(g)delanoanddelano.coml Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 9:26 AM To: Shannon Werneke Subject: La Costa project Shannon: Please see attached letter. Thank you, Everett DeLano DeLano & DeLano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 (760) 510-1562 (760) 510-1565 (fax) DELANO & DELANO www.delanoanddelano.com No vims foimd in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3658/6989 - Release Date: 01/09/14 ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE INC. PLAN REVIEW RESPONSE: DATE: 12.19.2013 PROJECT: La Costa Town Center CITY REVIEWER: Michael Elliott Good Afternoon All: ENVIRONS jOB#: REVIEW CYCLE: 12.021 4th submittal Thank you Mike for your time to talk with you on the phone and to review and discuss the La Costa Towne Centre project Landscape Plans and each of your specific comments from the latest review cycle. The following item by item review specifically identifies what ENV did to address the comments and where to find the corrections / revisions. We are returning the red line set of plans with brief narratives in 'blue' ink adjacent to your red numeric comment indicator. With all items addressed, we hope to bring this process to completion with this submittal. Please contact me if you have any questions or issues. Item I. 2. 3. A) B) C) D) 5. Completed + signed off by City Address all areas in the landscape calculations Completed - See Sheet L-2 for all Water Use Calculations including the SLA for the proposed spa on the roof. Include Spa area in the water use calculations Completed - See Sheet L-2 for all Water Use Calculations including the SLA for the proposed spa on the roof. Show + label the existing conditions and utilities / items listed on the review comments Done - we revised the plans and discussed what utility easements there are on site - SDG + E and OMWD easements and the property line. They are located and labeled - see Sheet L-1 Potable water is in the OMWD easement - see Sheet L-1 All existing easements are labeled. No new easements are proposed. All trees have been adjusted out of the existing easements. One (I) existing Sycamore in the OMWD easement is proposed to stay and Mike indicated that that was acceptable. All vehicular site lines visibility triangles are included on the plans at the project entry driveways - see Sheet L-1 Indicate positive surface drainage (2%) away from buildings. Completed - see note #9 under Concept Notes on Sheet L-l i RLA 3010 1909 State Street San Diego. CA 92101 voice 619 . 232 • 7007 fax 619 . 232 • 7008 www.envlrons.us LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 12/20/2013 PAGE 2 6. Completed + signed off by City 7. Existing Tree Survey - What is to stay or be removed Completed - see Sheet L-3 for a comprehensive survey of all trees on site and what are identified to remain or be removed. 8. Completed + signed off by City 9. Invasive species Completed - See plant legends on Sheets L-l + L -10. Washingtonia revised to Washingtonia filifera, Echium fastuosum to Leymus 'Canyon Prince' and Nasella tenuissima to Nasella pulchra 10. Trees in easements As per our previous meeting and review - (I) existing Sycamore is in the water easement and (I) proposed tree was in the water easement. We deleted the proposed tree and Mike identified the existing tree as to be allowed to remain. See Sheet L-1 + L-8. 11. Completed + signed off by City 12. Completed + signed off by City 13. Civil / Grading + Architectural Plans to be submitted. Completed - The Civil + Architectural plans will be re-submitted with the landscape submittal. All plans have been coordinated with current site backgrounds. 14. Additional landscape around buildings 7710 Building - south + east sides - New Landscape The landscape on the east side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with the 20' scale plans The south facing portion of the building is on structure and is the circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters and trellises will be added to address the landscape in addition to the landscape on the residential deck. 7720 Building - north, east + west sides - Existing + Renovated Landscape Completed - the north side is an existing planting area and is included on the plan. New sidewalk + landscape is proposed for this area. The south -i- west sides also have existing landscape areas and are indicated on the plans. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See Sheet L-l + L- 7. The east has no room available for landscape due to the existing fire access roadway and sidewalk to facilitate the rear / service doors for the lease spaces. No landscape opportunity exists. The City is asking that something be done to improve the aesthetics on the east side. Excel is to investigate potential architectural solutions. No irrigated landscape is going to be considered due the Geo-technical constraints that exist on site. Owner to discuss / review with the City. 7750 - north + east sides - Existing + Renovated Landscape The north side is being addressed by the elimination of the driveway and the new parking + landscape being proposed - see Sheet L-l + L-8 ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 12/20/2013 PAGE 3 The east has existing vine pockets at the base of each column and are indicated on the plans. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See Sheet L-1 + L-8. 15. 50% of shrubs to be 5 gallon size Completed - Revised note on Sheet L-l. Item is addressed and completed. 16. Completed + signed off by City 17. Plants in transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) Completed -Fire Management Report has been prepared + submitted to the Fire Marshall for review + approval. Pending 18. Evergreen plants to screen trash enclosures Completed - The one trash enclosure in question is inserted in grade and has a trellis over. See Architecture Plans. 19. Vehicular sight line requirements Completed - the sight line overlay has been added to Sheet L-1. All landscape in compliance - see sheets. 20. Completed + signed off by City 21. Street Trees along El Camino Real Completed - The quantity of street trees required was already in compliance (42 trees required - 56 trees both counting both existing + proposed are provided. Mike is requiring that 50% of the 42 minimum requirement be Tristania to comply with the El Camino Real design requirements. We have revised all proposed Eucalyptus polyanthemos to Tristania to meet the (21) tree requirement stipulated. Also added trees at the north end per direction from the City. 22. Completed + signed off by City 23. Trees to be provided at (I) per (4) parking stalls The site plan and landscape as designed is in compliance with the exception ofthe 7714 building. 24. Completed + signed off by City 25. Screening of Parking Area from El Camino Real Completed - the plans as previously submitted had proposed hedges in place on the planting plans meeting the screening requirement(s). See Sheets L-l, L-6. L-7 + L-9. 26. 3% of the parking area to be landscaped. Completed - See landscape area calculations for compliance. Over 9% landscape provided in the parking areas. See spread Sheet with take-offs + quantities. 27. Long rows of parking to be broken up with landscape islands 28. Water type for irrigation Completed - Environs contacted Karen Ogawa at OMWD. She is going to prepare a correspondence stating that OMWD does not provide recycled water to this project site. Nick Onkka with OMWD sent a correspondence to Shannon Werneke documenting this. ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 12/20/2013 PAGE 4 29. Completed + signed off by City 30. Sign the statement Completed - See Sheet L-1 31. Revise Eto to 47 Completed - See the Water Calculations on Sheet L-2 32. Completed + signed off by City 33. Lise .55 for Irrigation Efficiency Completed - See the Water Calculations on Sheet L-2 34. Low volume - subsurface irrigation in narrow landscape areas within 24" of pavement. Completed - See the Water Calculations on Sheet L-2 35. Completed + signed off by City 36. Fire Hazardous Plant Materials / Fire Suppression Plan Completed -Fire Management Report has been prepared + submitted to the Fire Marshall for review + approval. Pending 37. Resubmittal This correspondence and the associated (2) sets of plans, last redlined set of plans from the City and support materials to be provided for a completed submittal package. New Items I A. Jute mesh not allowed by Engineering Environs has contacted Steve Bobbett at Carlsbad Engineering. He investigated and determined that it was City Inspections who decided that jute would not be allowed due to the use of kerosene being applied to the material during the manufacturing process. We have sourced jute made from Coconut husks that have no chemical additives. We have submitted product information to Excel for their review + acceptance as a non-toxic product and then to be submitted to the City for their review and approval. 2A. River Rock in parking areas The 20' scale plans allow for the detailing of the planting areas and the river cobble is a component of the landscape palette and image. The 50' scale plan has a note added to address this item. Completed - see Plan + Legend on Sheets L-1, L-6, L-7 + L-10. 3A. 3" layer of Mulch Completed - Note added on Sheets L-l + L-10 IB. Additional Trees along El Camino Real at the north end of the project frontage ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 12/20/2013 PAGE 5 As noted in review item #21, the minimum street tree requirement has been exceeded - 42 required and 56 existing + proposed trees included for an excess of 14 trees. Our understanding is that the City will allow the trees to be distributed as indicated on the plans to allow for sight lines to the proposed signage at the location in question. We added additional trees in front of the proposed parking structure as per directive from Benson + Bohl post meeting with City. 2B. Overhead Trellis Sketch Completed - see attached sketch for reference 3B. Additional Trees at 7714 Building Sight line conflicts with the proposed building signage - Vine pockets added as per Benson + Bohl communication from City meeting. 4B. River Rock Symbol on Plans Completed - see Legend on Sheets L-l + L-10 This should address all items outstanding from the last City review comment sheet. Regards Martin Schmidt ASIA Principal ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE BENSON & BOHL ARCHITECTS RECEIVED December 12,2012 L ... . i 0 ^^'J CITY OF CARLSBAD Ci^yffS^b^ing Division PLANNING DIVISION 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: La Costa Towne Center 3"* Review for SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 The following is our response to the remaining planning issues of concem (Items 1-6) identified in your letter of November 20, 2013. The landscape issues identified (Items 1-37 and 1A-4B) are addressed in a separate response from Environs Landscape. 1. The trash for the residential units will be dropped in chutes in trash rooms on each residential floor and collected in a trash room located in the garage basement. The owner will provide a cart and management personnel to tow the trash to an on grade location (adjacent to the easternmost drive and bridge) to be picked up by Coast Waste Management. The "jitney" cart is parked in a designated space next to the trash room in the basement as indicated on the drawings. Excel has been in conversation with Waste Management and a letter from Geoff Sherman confirming the acceptability of the service is attached. 2. The 2 compact stalls designated in the basement have been modified on the drawings to indicate them correctly as standard stalls. 3. The basement calculations on A5 have been modified to exclude the commercial parking. Per our discussion, the alternate calculation which includes the entire basement garage is indicated on A6. 4. The reference to setbacks on the cover sheet has been removed. 5. The SDGE easement was incorrectly indicated as being west of Bldg. 7714 on the landscape drawings and has been corrected. 6. The lighting plans (Sheets Ll and L2) are not included on this submittal. Please contact me ifyou have and further questions. Richard Benson AIA, LEED AP (619) 858-4040 A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 (619) 858-4040 E\CEL TRUST December 16, 2013 RECEIVED DEC 2 5'm CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION Shannon Werneke Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: La Costa Towne Center, Trash & Recycling for 7710 & 7714 El Camino Real Dear Shannon, This letter is being provided at your request to provide assurances that Waste Management Company and the Owner of the property will provide for proper management and removal of all trash and recyclables for the property. Please see attached e-mail dated 12/3/13. This is to also confirm that the Owner ofthe property will ensure a motorized cart will be available onsite for the movement ofthe trash containers/bins to adequately support the daily operations and Waste Management and their trash removal requirements. Ifyou have any questions or need additional information, please call me. Sincerely fey Sherman Excel La Costa GIV Owner LLC Cc William Stone, Excel Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 (858) 613-1800 • Fax (858) 487-9890 Geoff Sherman From: Stalter, Thomas <tstalter@wm.com> Sent Monday December 02,2013 2:01 PM To: Geoff Sherman Subject: RE: ** HOT HOT ** Site Check - 7710 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92009 16' is perfect, we need 14'3". Tom S From: Geoff Sherman rmailto:Qsherman(ia)exceltrust.com1 Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 2:04 PM To: Stalter, Thomas Subject: RE: ** HOT HOT ** Site Check - 7710 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92009 You will have as much clearance as you need. I think right now we're looking at minimum 16' clear. Geoff Excel Trust From: Stalter, Thomas [mailto:tstalter®wm.comi Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 1:58 PM To: Geoff Sherman Subject: RE: ** HOT HOT ** Site Check - 7710 El Camino Real Carisbad, CA 92009 Goeff, On a side note, I see a new pedestrian overpass bridge from 7710 to the East. What is the proposed height clearance on this bridge? Our vehicles currently enter off of La Costa Ave and service North to South in this center. Tom S From: Geoff Sherman rmailto:qsherman(aexceltrust.com1 Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 1:43 PM To: Becker, Taylor; Stalter, Thomas Cc: CM SOCAL Dispatch; Shannon Wemeke; Richard Benson; Ron Sabin; 'Eric Metzger'; 'Ron Miller' Subject: RE: ** HOT HOT ** Site Check - 7710 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92009 Tom, Thank you for your call today. Attached is the site plan showing the proposed new mixed use development. I'm also copying the City Planner Shannon Werneke, She is asking for written verification from your office that you will be able to service the waste and recycling from this property. I believe her concern is that the trash will be received and stored in the lower level garage via trash chutes. On pick up days we will have a cart hook up to the dumpsters and take them to a mutually agreeable location to have your trucks empty them. I noted this could be either on street level on El Camino Real or at the top ofthe ramp in front ofthe new building replacing the existing Von's building. Thanks again for your help TomlH! Geoff Sherman Excel Trust Direct line 858-798-1465 Cell 619-778-4241 From: Becker, Taylor fmailto:tbeckerl@wm.coml Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 11:08 AM To: Stalter, Thomas Cc: CM SOCAL Dispatch; Geoff Sherman Subject: ** HOT HOT ** Site Check - 7710 El Camino Real CaHsbad, CA 92009 Importance: High Customer is needing to have a site check done as city is requesting a proof of service by WM before they can start the process ofbuilding. Name: Geoff Sherman Phone: 8587981465 Cell: 6197784241 Please call to discuss!! Thank you! Taylor Becker Inside Commercial Representative tbecker1@wm.com Waste Management 2625 W. Grandview Road, Suite 160 Phoenix, AZ 85023 Tel: (800) 596-7444 Fax: (866) 522-8040 Recycling is a good thing. Please recycle any printed emails. Municipal Water District December 3, 2013 Shannon Werneke City of Carlsbad, Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: Recycled Water in La Costa Town Center Vicinity Dear Shannon: As I believe you are aware, the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD) provides recycled water service within the general vicinity ofthe La Costa Town Center. While OMWD is embarking on expanding recycled water availability within other portions of our system, there are no current expansion plans within this segment of our service area. In addition there are no current long range plans in place to project when or if service will be extended to this location. I would make the assumption that recycled water would not be extended to this location for 10 or more years, if at all. If you have any questions or comments please call 858.451.7837 or email ionkka(5)olivenhain.com John Onkka Recycled Water Program Supervisor 1966 Olivenhain Road j Encinitas, California 92024 4 Puro Excellence Phone (760) 753-6466 j Fax (760) 753-7610 j www.omwd.com A Public Agency Providing Water Wastewater Services Recycled Water Hydroelectriclty Elfin Forest Recreational Resen/e CITY OF ^ H«,\e<v Ubjl^ VcARLSBAD FILE COPY Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov November 20, 2013 Mr. Geoffrey Sherman Excel La Costa Owner, LLC Suite 300 17140 Bernardo Center Drive San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: 3"" REVIEW FOR SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE Your project was deemed complete on August 20, 2013. There are issues of concern with the project that remain to be resolved. The issues are listed on the attached page(s). All issues will need to be resolved prior to scheduling the project for a public hearing. Please contact me at (760) 602-4621, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, SHANNON WERNEKE Associate Planner SW:fn Enc: Landscape red lines c: Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 5*^ Avenue, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Kris Eckert, Stevens Cresto Engineering, Inc., 9665 Chesapeake Drive, Ste. 320, San Dlego, CA 92123-1352 Don Neu, City Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Gregory Ryan, Fire Prevention File Copy Data Entry Planning Division 1635 FaradayAvenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUI^-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA T(^E VILLAGE November 20^013 IfSOI^JH ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Repeat comment. The response letter included with the resubmittal indicates that the trash located in the parking garage will be picked up by jitney carts and returned to trucks above. Please expand on this proposal as staff is unfamiliar with jitney carts. Who operates the jitney carts? Where will the carts be parked? Where will the waste management truck park? Please provide additional information about how trash will be removed from the parking garage. In addition, please confirm with Waste Management that this is an acceptable form of service for the proposed project. Follow- up comment. Please answer the above-noted questions in writing and note on the plans where the Jitney cart will be parked. 2. New comment. Please change the compact stalls in the residential parking structure to standard stalls as each stall meets the minimum requirements for a standard parking stall. 3. New comment. Please revise the basement exhibit on Sheets AS and A6 to exclude the commercial portion of the parking structure from the calculation. This area should not be included in the calculation. Please call me to discuss prior to finalizing the exhibit. 4. New comment. Please remove reference on the cover page which indicates that the C-1 zone does not have required front yard setback. While this is accurate, the subject site is also located in the El Camino Real Corridor and is subject to the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The standards (i.e., 50 foot front yard setback) contained in this document supersede the C-1 standards. Findings to deviate to this standards will be required as part ofthe proposed project. Please remove reference to the setbacks on the cover page. 5. New comment. Please revise the landscape plans to change the type of easement which runs through the parking area in front of Building 7714 (i.e., not an SDGE easement). 6. New comment. Please remove the lighting plan from the next submittal. It will be required as part of your building plan package. For future reference, staff would like to eliminate the spillover of light onto the adjacent residential property to the south east of the project. Please ensure the final lighting plans eliminate this spillover by incorporating different light fixtures or an added shield. Landscaping: Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements ofthe City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Numbers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area of the comment concern. REPEAT COMMENTS 1. Completed. 2. Please address all landscape areas and include the area in the water use calculations. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "All landscape areas have been included in the water use ' SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Page 3 calculations." Please address landscaping of the second floor residential plaza area and include in the water use calculations. All landscape areas are to be addressed. 3^'' Review: These areas have not been addressed. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: 'This area is a future phase and spa area is located on the rooftop - not part of our water use calculations." As a part of the project, the spa is to be included in the water use calculations. Plans need to address all phases as shown on architectural and civil plans. Please address. 3'^'' Review: Revised water use calculations were not received. 4. Please show and label the following on the landscape plans: a) Existing conditions (property lines, easements, right-of-ways, drainage elements, utilities, etc.). b) Potable and reclaimed service locations and lines. c) All existing and proposed easements (labeled). Insure no trees are located within public utility easements. d) All vehicular sight lines, including intersection site distance corridors (see Figures 3-A and 3-B of the Landscape Manual) and CalTrans sight distance standards (i.e.: stopping sight distance). Coordinate with the civil engineer to show and label this information on the conceptual landscape plans. See comment #19 below. 2""* Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference civil and landscape plans for all documentation." Please show and label all of the above information on the landscape plans as required by the Landscape Manual. 3^'' Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed. 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2% grade in planting areas) away from structures and terminating in an approved drainage system. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable - due to existing site conditions." There are new conditions and site grading proposed on portions of the project. Please address. 3'" Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed. 6. Completed. 7. Generally identify all existing woody plant material to be removed or retained. Trees over 12" in caliper diameter shall be identified on the plan individually as to caliper size and type and labeled to be retained or removed. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference existing tree survey." This survey was not received. Please provide. 3'''' Review: Please indicate on the tree survey plans which trees are to remain and which are proposed to be removed. 8. Completed. 9. Invasive species shall not be added to a landscaped area. Please review all proposed plantings and insure no invasive species are added. 2"'' Review: Invasive species are listed on the construction drawing sheets submitted. See comment #1. Please resolve. 3"" Review: Echium is listed as an invasive species and Nassella tenuissima is nominated as an invasive species. Please provide substitutes. 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shrubs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and P^-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TO^E SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUPl3-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Page 4 other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 2^^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference concept note #8." Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 3^°' Review: Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 11. Completed. 12. Completed. 13. Please provide a copy of the latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 2"'' Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 3^" Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shrubs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screen/soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides of building 7710; north, east and west sides of building 7720; and the north a«d east sides of building 7750 to soften and enhance these building elevations. Please address. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3"* Review: The applicant has responded: "7710 - The landscape on the east side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with the 20' scale plans. The south is on structure and is the circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters will be investigated to address in addition to other creative options. Those will be reviewed when submitted. 7720 - The north is an existing planting area and is included on the plan - see photos. New sidewalk + landscape is proposed for this area. The south + west sides also have existing landscape areas and are indicated on the plans - see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See plans. The east has no room available for landscape due to the existing fire access roadway and sidewalk to facilitate the rear / service doors for the lease spaces. No landscape opportunity exists. The City is asking that something be done to improve the aesthetics on the east side. Excel is to investigate potential architectural solutions. No irrigated landscape is going to be considered due to the Geo-technical constraints that exist on site. 7750 - The north side is being addressed by the elimination of the driveway and the new parking + landscape being proposed. The east has existing vine pockets at the base of each column and are indicated on the plans - see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new materiaL See plans." Please address the south side of 7710. Address the east and west sides of 7720. No photos were received and existing landscaping needs to be shown and labeled on the plans for the west side for review. Please address architectural solutions for the east side. 7750 - Please show and label the existing plantings so that it is clear where the plantings are and what plants are to be replaced. 15. Completed. PI3-SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Page 5 16. Completed. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 2"^* Review: The applicant has responded: "Existing slope landscape to remain - no additional planting is being proposed." Landscaping may be required depending on fire suppression requirements. Please address comment #36 and provide landscaping as appropriate. 3^'' Review: The appUcant has responded: "Excel will need to have a meeting / conversation with the Fire Marshall to address this item. See our notes on plans for the proposed treatment of the embankment in a non-irrigated manner." Please provide final plans for review after meeting with the Fire MarshalL 18. Evergreen plants shall be used to screen unsightly elements and shall be spaced to provide 100% screening within two (2) years of installation. Please screen the trash areas. Check all areas. 2"'' Review: A plan note has been added; however plan graphics do not show that the note is to be addressed. Please show screen plantings on the plans. Check all areas. 3^'' Review: This comment does not appear to have been addressed. 19. Please address the following vehicular sight line requirements: a) The plan shall demonstrate that plants, when installed and at maturity, will be positioned to avoid obstructing motorists' views of pedestrian crossings, driveways, roadways and other vehicular travel ways. b) On collector streets and larger, landscape elements over 30 inches in height (including planting measured at maturity) as measured from adjacent street grade are not permitted at street corners within a triangular zone drawn from two points, 25 feet outward from the beginning of curves. c) At medium to high use driveways, the 30 inch height limitation applies at driveways 25 feet from the edge ofthe apron outward along the curb, then 45 degrees in toward the property. d) Ensure that landscape elements at interior private driveway intersections do not obstruct sight lines, so that circulation and pedestrian safety can be maintained. e) Landscape features (shrubs, trees, fencing, etc.) shall be selected to ensure that no visual impairments or obstructions are located within the CalTrans sight distance lines. 2nd Review: Please show and label the vehicular sight lines on the landscape plans per comment #4d and insure the above requirements are met. 3^'' Review: Please show and label the sight lines on the plans. 20. Completed. 21. Please provide street trees along El Camino Real per Appendix D ofthe Landscape Manual. Street trees shall be located: a) A minimum of seven (7) feet from any sewer line. b) In areas that do not conflict with public utilities. c) Outside of sight distance areas. d) A minimum of three (3) feet outside the public right of way, unless approved otherwise by the City as noted below. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Pages 2"" Review: Appendix D specifies Lophostemon confertus as the theme tree with Eucalyptus, Pinus canariensis, Eriobotria deflexa and Lophostemon as support trees. Please revise to meet landscape Manual requirements. 3'"'* Review: The Landscape Manual requires street trees for prime and major arterial roadways at the following percentages: 50% theme trees, 30% support trees, and 20% project identity/accent trees. Lophostemon is the theme tree and support trees are listed above. The minimum total number of street trees is to be calculated based on 1 tree per 40' of street frontage. Please provide correct trees and percentages per appendix D of the Landscape Manual. 22. Completed. 23. Trees shall be provided at the minimum rate of one per every four parking stalls. Trees pertaining to this requirement shall be located within the parking area, exclusive of parking lot setbacks. The trees shall be located in close proximity to the spaces they are to shade. 2"" Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3^'' Review: Please address areas as shown on the red line plans. 24. Completed. 25. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent property or streets through the use of planting or any combination of planting, mounding, and decorative walls. Screening elements shall have a total height of at least three (3) feet. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3^*^ Review: Please address areas as shown on the red line plans. 26. A minimum of 3% of the parking area shall be landscaped. The "parking area" includes all parking spaces and drive aisles. The plantings shall be contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4' and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6" in height. The plantings shall be located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. Please provide a calculation proving the percentage of landscape area provided in the parking area. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3^'' Review: Calculations were not received. 27. Long rows of parking should be broken up with landscaped islands. Landscaped islands should be provided at intervals of one island for approximately every 12 to 15 parking spaces. Please address. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 3'^'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "The specific areas where this condition occurs were identified and redesigned to be compliant." Plans do not appear to address this comment. 28. Please coordinate notes. Domestic and recycled water are both called for on the plans. Irrigation systems for all projects, except for service to a single-family residence or front yard irrigation on individually metered condos, shall be designed to use non-potable, treated recycled water, unless an exemption is approved by the City Utilities Department. Please note that this site is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Please coordinate with OMWD to determine the availability of recycled water and their requirements for use. Provide documentation of final OMWD direction for cross checking. Please note that Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) plans include a future recycled water mainline in El Camino Real running south to La Costa Avenue and then going west on La Costa Avenue. It may be possible to tie into this line depending on . SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUp'T3-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Page 7 OMWD approval and coordination. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Domestic water supply only." Please provide documentation from OMWD indicating that they do not plan to provide recycled water to this site, f Review: The applicant has responded: "Environs contacted Karen Ogawa at OMWD. She is going to prepare a correspondence stating that OMWD does not provide recycled water to this project site. Nick Onkka with OMWD will be providing a correspondence to that effect." Please provide the information. 29. Completed. 30. Please sign the statement. 31. Please revise the Eto to 47. 3^^ Review: The water use calculations were not received. 32. Completed. 33. Please use .55 for the irrigation efficiency (IE) or provide documentation that the spray type sprinklers to be used have an IE of .7. 2'^'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Based on the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance .71 is the minimum IE used for spray head irrigation." Please use the City of Carlsbad Ordinance and Landscape Manual worksheets versus the State Model. The City of Carlsbad has modifled the State Model. 3^*^ Review: The water use calculations were not received. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constructed to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 2"'' Review: A note has been added to the plans; however water use calculations indicate the use of spray heads only. Drip or other appropriate irrigation will be required where located adjacent to paving that does not drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please resolve. 3^ Review: The water use calculations were not received. 35. Completed. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations b) Rear yard setbacks c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 ofthe Landscape Manual d) Emergency/maintenance access e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards g) Street widths dimensioned 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Initially discussed with Michael and agreed that a Fire Suppression Plan was not needed." The full scope ofthe project was not provided to the city at the time of preliminary discussions. A fire suppression plan is required unless specifically directed otherwise by the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshal. Please address. 3^*^ Review: The applicant has P 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWrSt SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP i3-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWTSE VILLAGE November 20, 2013 Page 8 responded: "Excel will request a meeting with the Fire Marshall to review and discuss the project." Please address. 37. RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. IA. Jute mesh is not allowed by the Engineering Division. Please revise. 3'"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Need to discuss with Engineering staff to get this allowed." Please address. 2A. Detailed concept plans, sheets L-7 - L-12 (construction document sheets) specify river rock in parking lot planters where sheet Ll indicates shrubs. Please coordinate plans. Check all areas. 3^ Review: The applicant has responded: "The 20' scale plans allow for the detailing of the planting areas and the river cobble is a component of the landscape palette and image. The 50' scale plan has a note added to address this item." I do not see this addressed on the plans. Please address. 3A. Completed. NEW COMMENTS IB. Additional trees are needed as were shown on previous concept plans along the west side of the parking garage to soften this elevation from El Camino Real. Please address. 2B. Please provide as a part of the conceptual review a conceptual sketch of the overhead trellis for review. 3B. Additional landscaping to include large trees is needed along the west side of building 7714 to soften and enhance this elevation. Additional trees were previously shown. 4B. Please coordinate the legend river rock symbol with the plan symbol. October 28, 2013 BENSON & BOHL ARCHITECTS !:•, V I 1 CITY OF CARLSBAD Ms. Shannon Wemeke p,, ,^ ^ p. js-j^-^ n!^/f'~"0'i CityofCarlsbad Planning Division LHiWiirnKj blVfO^Wi^ 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: La Costa Towne Center 2" Review Comments for SDP 78-03/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-03/PUD 13-03 Thank you for your review and comments on our 2"'' submittal for Land Use Approval of the proposed remodel of the La Costa Towne Center. We have reviewed your recommendations and requirements for the re-submittal of our application. We offer the following summary of how we wish to address the project issues raised. 1. The Stevens Cresco the project Civil Engineer has addressed the comments fi-om the Olivenhain Municipal Water District regarding the entry closure at El Camino Real. See the attached letter. 2. We have designated 4 parking stalls for hybrid parking on the site plan. 3. Excel has requested a refund of fees for CUP processing trom the City. 4. Reference to CUP 13-3 has been removed from the plans. 5. The parking calculations have been revised to note that 16 (not 15) stalls are required for the added retail. 6. We have noted that the excess commerciai parking shown in the calculations will be applied to satisfy the residential visitor parking requirement. 7. The 7 surplus residential parking spaces in the garage have been omitted for residential storage space. 8. The planting on the garage deck has been revised to reflect discussion with the City's landscape reviewer (see Environs landscape drawings. 9. The basement calculations have been clarified. 10. Dimensions and a scale have been added to the Demolition Plan Dl. 11. The tower height has been added to the cover sheet. 12. The drive aisles have been reduced to 24' wherever possible, but a wider drive is required in front of Building 7714 for fire truck tuming. Civil and Landscape drawings have been changed. 13. The residential trash will be transported by Excel's jitney from the garage to a location at grade for pickup by Coast Waste Management. 14. Smooth trowel stucco will be used on the new buildings oniy. 15. B&B does not recommend adding stamped concrete to the northemmost arch of the garage. 16. We have added doors to the patios behind Bldg.7714, but not additional trellises. 17. We have added windows to the south elevation of Bldg. 7714. 18. We have added a +sign to building relief indicatios on Sheet All. 19. Revised deck planting per discussion is shown on Landscape plans. 20. Building relief on the south elevation of BIdg. 7710 has been revised to reflect change to the storefront to accommodate planters and 3 tenants rather than 2. 21. The design of windows on the east elevation of Building 7710 allows for retailers flexibility (i.e. some plant-on arches with trellis or ironwork.) A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 (619)858-4040 BENSON & BOHL ARCHITECTS 22. An overhead trellis has been added to screen the view of equipment from the bridge. 23. Stone veneer has been added to the northemmost courtyard of Building 7714. 24. The Civil and Landscape drawings reflect the reduction of drive aisles to match the Architectural drawings. We hope the revisions noted above adequately address the Issues of Concem noted in your letter of August 20, 2013. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or need further clarification. Sincerely, Richard Benson AIA, LEED AP 619-858-4040 A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 (619)858-4040 ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE INC. PLAN REVIEW RESPONSE: DATE: 11.1.2013 PROJECT: La Costa Town Center CITY REVIEWER: Michael Elliott Good Afternoon All: ENVIRONS JOB #: REVIEW CYCLE: 12.021 3rd submittal Thank you Shannon + Mike for the opportunity to meet with you to review and discuss the La Costa Towne Centre project Landscape Plans. Our intent is to accurately address the plan check items from the 2"'' review cycle and get all issues addressed for this next submittal for the project to be revievi/ed and approved with this cycle. To that end, the following is a summary of the plan check items and the discussion / determination for each. Item I. 2. 3. 4. The Concept Plan requiring greater detail than I" - 50' scale Environs submitted the Phase I area Planting Plans for review since they were prepared and could be utilized for the specific design review. The City is asking for that same level of detail be provided for the Phase 2 portion of the project. Environs will prepare the 20' scale plans to include on the next submittal Mike did not provide any comments regarding the Phase I area other than to request that the CD. plans be attached and numbered sequentially so as to become part ofthe Landscape Concept set. We discussed ifthe Phase I 20' scale plans and design were accepted or if he was waiting for the Phase 2 component to be submitted and then all of the project would be reviewed at the same time? Mike indicated that he thought the Phase I was fine, but did want to review with the Phase 2 plans also. Address all areas in the landscape calculations Done - we revised the area calculations and reviewed them Include Spa area in the water use calculations Done - we revised the water use calculations and reviewed them Show + label the existing conditions and utilities / items listed on the review comments Done - we revised the plans and discussed what utility easements there are on site - SDG + E and OMWD. They are located and labeled. Need to label the property line - graphically indicated. RECEIVED RLA 3010 11909 State Street San Diego, CA 92101 voice 619-232 • 7007 fax 619 • 232 • 7008 www.environs.us ••-•••) CITY Or CARLSBAD r LAi ""i iMjt -i u t v io i\J>. *i Tw LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 1 1/4/2013 PAGE 2 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2%) away from buildings. Provide a note on plans 6. Plant Palette The Phase 2 plans will address this item for completeness 7. Existing Tree Survey The Tree Survey was prepared and submitted to the City for distribution. We reviewed the Tree Survey and it will be resubmitted to address this item. 8. Completed 9. Invasive species We revised the Washingtonia x filibusta to Washingtonia filifera 10. Trees in easements We reviewed the Tree Survey and the Concept Plan. (I) existing Sycamore is in the water easement and (I) proposed tree was in the water easement. We deleted the proposed tree 11. Completed 12. Completed 13. Civil / Grading Plans to be submitted. The Civil / grading plans will be re-submitted with the landscape submittal. 14. Additional Landscape around buildings 7710 Building - south + east sides The landscape on the east side will be vertical / wall surface plant materials due to the narrow landscape area. This will be better communicated with the 20' scale plans The south is on structure and is the circulation with limited opportunity / space to provide landscape. Planters will be investigated to address in addition to other creative options. Those will be reviewed when submitted. 7720 Building - north, east + west sides The north is an existing planting area and is included on the plan - see photos. New sidewalk + landscape is proposed for this area. The south + west sides also have existing landscape areas and are indicated on the plans - see photos . The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See plans. The east has no room available for landscape due to the existing fire access roadway and sidewalk to facilitate the rear / service doors for the lease spaces. No landscape opportunity exists. The City is asking that something be done to improve the aesthetics on the east side. Excel is to investigate potential archlteaural solutions. No irrigated landscape is going to be considered due the Geo-technical constraints that exist on site. ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 1 1/4/2013 PAGE 3 7750 - north + east sides The north side is being addressed by the elimination ofthe driveway and the new parking + landscape being proposed. The east has existing vine pockets at the base of each column and are indicated on the plans - see photos. The existing landscape is to either remain or be removed and replaced with new material. See plans. 15. 50% of shrubs to be 5 gallon size Revised note on 50' scale concept plan. Item is addressed and done. 16. Completed 17. Plants in transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) We do not have any interface with native vegetation existing on site. Mike is identifying that a Fire Suppression Plan may be required by the Fire Marshall. Excel will need to have a meeting / conversation with the Fire Marshall to address this item. See our notes on plans for the proposed treatment ofthe embankment in a non-irrigated manner. Resolution to be determined. 18. Evergreen plants to screen trash enclosures Add a note to the plans to identify this requirement. 19. Vehicular sight line requirements , Done - the sight line overlay has been added to the Plans. 20. Completed 21. Street Trees along El Camino Real In the 2nd submittal review, Mike is identifying that several other trees need to be included in the El Camino Real streetscape as referenced in Appendix 'D' ofthe City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual - Brisbane Box, Bronze Loquat and Canary Island Pine. The Tristania needs to be incorporated into the streetscape at the percentage identified in Appendix 'D'. Environs will revise the plans to reflect and incorporate. 22. Completed 23. Trees to be provided at (I) per (4) parking stalls The site plan and landscape as designed is in compliance with this requirement. No revisions required for the proposed Parking lot at the current 7740 building. The top of deck to the south of the 7710 building has a design incorporated that Has been seen and reviewed by Shannon + Mike. Initial reaction was that it should be sufficient to meet the landscape Needs of the project for that location. 24. Parking strip at new parking area The 4' width cannot be achieved due to the mandate that the accessible path of travel has to be incorporated at this location. And with parking being deficient, ioss of stalls is not an option. The City needs to Identify if a variance for this specific location will be granted. ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 1 1/4/2013 PAGE 4 25. Screening of Parking Area from El Camino Real We reviewed the locations and conditions where this criteria would be applied. The parking structure stalls are compliant. The proposed parking at the current 7740 building just needs to have continuous planting to screen cars. This will be indicated on the planting plan. 26. 3% of the parking area to be landscaped. Done - See landscape area calculations for compliance 27. Long rows of parking to be broken up with landscape islands The specific areas where this condition occurs were identified and redesigned to be compliant. 28. Water type for irrigation Environs contacted Karen Ogawa at OMWD. She is going to prepare a correspondence stating that OMWD does not provide recycled water to this project site. Nick Onkka with OMWD will be providing a correspondence to that effect 29. Completed 30. Sign the statement Done - See the Landscape Concept Plan 31. Revise Eto to 47 Done - See the Water Calculations on plans 32. Completed 33. Use .55 for Irrigation Efficiency Done - See the Water Calculations on plans 34. Low volume - subsurface irrigation in narrow landscape areas within 24" of pavement. Done - See the Water Calculations on plans 35. Completed 36. Fire Hazardous Plant Materials / Fire Suppression Plan Excel will request a meeting with the Fire Marshall to review and discuss the project. 37. Resubmittal This correspondence and the associated plans and support materials to be provided for a completed submittal package. New Items I A. Jute mesh not allowed by Engineering ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE PLANCHECK RESPONSE 1 1/4/2013 PAGES Need to discuss with Engineering staff to get this allowed 2A. River Rock in parking areas The 20' scale plans allow for the detailing ofthe planting areas and the river cobble is a component of the landscape palette and image. The 50' scale plan has a note added to address this item. Note added - Done 3A. 3" layer of Mulch Note added - Done Please confirm that these notes and documentation has addressed all items of the project discussion. Regards Martin Schmidt ASLA Principal ENVIRONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE STEVENS • CRESTO ENGINEERING, INC. Memo To: Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects From: Kris Eckert, Stevens Cresto Engineering Inc. CC GiTY OF CARLSBAD PLA?4Nir4G DIVISION Date: October 31,2013 Re: 12003.03 - La Costa Towne Center - Reponses to TM Comments PLAN CHECK RESPONSES TO OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT COMMENTS COMMENT L- See attached letter provided by Olivenhain Municipal Water District (0\m/D) RESPONSE 1: As requested by Shannon Wemeke ofthe City of Calsbad, a note is now shovm on tfte drawings ttiat the proposed 8" water line at ttie proposed drivew^ closure locatton shall be removed and replaced as required by Oliv&ihain Municipal Wata-District. Refer to sheet C-4 PLAN CHECK RESPONSES TO LEUCADIA WASTEWATER DISTRICT COMMENTS COMMENT 1: Sheet C-1 RESPONSE 1: The Sewer District Name is now indicated as Leucadia Wastewater District Tfie units for the average sewer generation flow are corrected to GPD. Refer to sheet C-1. COMMENT 2: Sheet C-3 & C-6 RESPONSE 2: The existing s^er through Parcel A is now shown, per the provided as-built dravinng. CML ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • LAND SURVEYORS 9665 CHESAPEAKE DRIVE, SUITE 200 • SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 PHONE 858.694.5660 • FAX 858.694.5661 SCE Projea No. 12003.03 La Costa Towne Center TM Response Memo 10/31/13 Page 1 of 1 LEUCADIA WMTEWATER DI5TRKT ZOm OF DIKECTOM LEADERS IN JUUIVHH, via PRESIOEKT ENVIRONMENTAL *IIAK juiiussfK, OIRKTOR BAVID KULCHIK. OIRUTOfl PKOTECTION DOi!;iiD f. omm, ouicroii HU j. BUSHEE. GEKERAL HAK^GCR August 21,2013 ^' - •' g IJ -"-<^ Mr. Mark Stevens CITY OF CARLSBAD St^ns Cresto Engineering PLANN!MG DIVISION 9665 Chesapeake Dr. SanDiego, CA 92123 Re: Leucadia Wastewater District Comments (Number J) - La Costa Town Center Tentative Parcel Map, Conceptual Grading & Utility Plan Mr. Stevens, This letter is in response to the recent submittal from the City of Carlsbad seeking Leucadia Wastewater District (LWD) comments pertaining to the Tentative Parcel Map for the proposed La Costa Town Center project. Below is a list of items to address and/or consider. • General - For Informational Purposes • Currently 131.14 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU) are assigned to the shopping center; further evaluation of the EDUs will take place during LWD plan checking of the improvement and grading plans. The existing EDUs will remain with the assessor parcel number in which they are assigned, therefore if necessary, additional EDUs beyond the existing 131.14 EDUs must be purchased and will be assigned on an as-needed basis per the LWD Standard Specification and Processing Procedures for Wastewater Facility Projects (Standard Spec). The District assesses a capacity fee of $4,006 pius a first year pro-rated sewer service charge of not more than $258.22 for each Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). Sewer services fees are subject to future increase. A single family house, condominium, or apartment is one EDU and commercial units are evaluated based on proposed use of the facility. Grease interceptors are required for all food establishments, which will be evaluated by LWD during the tenant improvement phase, LWD recommends showing location of grease interceptors and alignment of associated laterals on the improvement plans. All laterals that serve more than one residential or commercial unit will require execution of a Private Sewer Agreement for Multi-Unit Lateral (Appendix R of Standard Spec). Plan checking fees are due at the time of plan submittal to LWD, which are charged on a time and material basis. Based on the sewer facilities proposed in the Tentative Parcel Map an initial deposit of $2,000 is required at the start of review. I960 L^ COSTA AVENUE, CARLSBAD. CA 92009 • PHONE 760.753.0ISS • FAX 760.753.3094 LWWD.ORG •INF0@LVVWD.ORG Mr. Mark Stevens August 21, 2013 La Costa Town Center TM Comments (Number 1) Page 2 of 2 Sheet C-1 • Please update name of Sewer District, sec redlines • Verify units of sewer generation flow rate Sheet C-3 & C-6 • Please show the continuation ofthe existing sewer aligned through Parcel A including all existing manholes, and limits and County Recorder's identification number of existing sewer easement(s). Please call Jeff Meyer @ (760) 479-4140 if you have any questions as the process moves forward, ciddilionally the web address to access the LWD Standard Spec is below. littp:/Avww.hvwd.orG.^piit)li.sh/st:»Klard-.spcc-F4S5e/ Best Regards, Steve Deering, RE LWD District Engineer cc: Frank Reynaga, LWD Customer Services Specialist Jeff Meyer, LWD Development Engineer I960 L\ COSTA AVENUE. CARLSBAD, CA 92009 • PHONE 760753.0155 • FAX 760753.3094 • LWWD.ORG •INFO@LWWD.ORG V^CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov August 20, 2013 Mr. Geoffrey Sherman Excel La Costa Owner, LLC 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: 2^° REVIEW FOR SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13- 01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE The items requested from you earlier to make your Site Development Amendment, Site Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Special Use Permit, Non-Residential Planned Development Permit, and Minor Subdivision, application no. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13- 01 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Division. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date ofthis communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the basic information required forthe application. At this time, the City asks that you provide 5 complete sets ofthe development plans so that the project can continue to be reviewed. The Citv will complete the review of vour resubmittal within 25 davs. In order to expedite the processing of your application, you are strongly encouraged to contact your Staff Planner, Shannon Werneke, at (760) 602-4621, to discuss or to schedule a meeting to discuss your application and to completely understand this letter. You may also contact each commenting department individually as follows: In order to expedite the processing of your application, you are strongly encouraged to contact your Staff Planner, Shannon Werneke, at (760) 602-4621, to discuss or to schedule a meeting to discuss your application and to completely understand this letter. You may also contact each commenting department individually as follows: • Land Development Engineering Division: Steve Bobbett, Associate Engineer, at (760) 602-2747. • Fire Department: Gregory Ryan, Fire Inspections, at (760) 602-4663. Sincerely, CHRIS DeCERBO Principal Planner CD:SW:sm Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © ?8ii)3iDj/SDP 13-03/cft3-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01-fPcOSTA TOWNE VILLAGE Au|uft|0i 2013 Page 2 Enc: Landscape red lines Letter from Olivenhain Municipal Water District, dated August 13, 2013 c: Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 5*" Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Kris Eckert, Stevens Cresto Engineering, Inc., 9665 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 320, San Diego, CA 92123-1352 Karen Ogawa, 1966 Olivenhain Road, Encinitas, CA 92024 Don Neu, City Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Gregory Ryan, Fire Prevention File Copy Data Entry SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 3 ^ , ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Please see the attached letter received from the Olivenhain Municipal Water District. Please revise the plans to address the comments. You may wish to call or meet with the District directly to ensure that the comments have been adequately addressed prior to the resubmittal. In addition, staff has not received comments from the Leucadia Wastewater District. Please contact the District to discuss the proposed project and ensure that there are no major issues of concern. 2. In order to address the project's incremental cumulative effect on greenhouse gases, please revise the site plans to designate four (4) parking stalls for hybrid vehicle parking. Please designate two stalls in close proximity to each ofthe proposed buildings. 3. A zone code amendment was recently certified by the California Coastal Commission which eliminates the need for residential uses to process a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1 zone. Therefore, please submit a request to withdraw the Conditional Use Permit, CUP 13-03. A refund for any unused fees will be processed accordingly. 4. Please revise all project plans to remove reference to CUP 13-03. In addition, as an amendment to SDP 78-03 is proposed, please revise the plans to change SDP 78-03 to SDP 78-03(D). 5. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.44.010(C), when calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Therefore, please revise the parking calculation to note that a total of 16 parking spaces are required for the net increase in retail area (3,078/200 = 15.39 or 16 spaces). 6. By incorporating the change to the retail parking calculation noted above, a surplus of 16 parking spaces remains in the surface commercial parking lot. The plans indicate that the required visitor parking for the apartments (16 spaces) will be encompassed in the commercial parking. Please revise how the parking is calculated to note that the 16 parking stalls currently presented as the surplus will be counted towards satisfying the requirement for residential visitor parking. As a result, no surplus parking spaces will remain. 7. Pursuant to CMC Chapter 21.44, one covered parking stall is required per unit. Please revise the residential parking calculation on the cover page to indicate how many covered parking stalls are required and how many are proposed. Because there are a total of 106 residential parking stalls proposed while only 99 are required, you may wish to designate the surplus (7 stalls) as visitor parking which will create a surplus of parking on the surface lot. If you wish to do this, please revise the plans accordingly (cover sheet and basement plan) to reflect this change. 8. Repeat comment. Please add additional landscape planters throughout the new parking lot, including on the parking structure (see landscape consultant comments). 9. Repeat comment. Please submit a basement exhibit which demonstrates how the project meets the definition of a basement pursuant to CMC Section 21.04.045. Follow-up comment. Please revise the footprint of the building on Sheet A5 to identify how the basement area was calculated :^3-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01-^C SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 4 (Le., 81% or 1,040'-8"). In addition, this calculation should be based on the perimeter of the building and parking structure below it (i.e., portion of parking structure below it). 10. Please revise Sheet Dl so it is drawn to scale. Please identify the existing setbacks for the buildings and parking lot on this sheet. 11. Please revise the height on the cover page to break down the height (maximum; include separate height for the tower) for each of the proposed buildings as well as the parking structure. In addition, please add the front setbacks on the cover page for the parking structure and Building 7710. 12. In order to maximize the width of the landscape planters in the parking lot, please reduce the drive aisle widths to the minimum 24-foot width for two-way circulation. Specifically, please revise the following sheets: a. Sheet A2. Reduce the drive aisle width in front of Building 7714 from 26'-5" to 24'; b. Sheet A2. Reduce the drive aisle widths for the driveways perpendicular to Building 7710 to 24'. This has the potential to create an additional 5' of landscaping; c. Sheet A3: Reduce the width of the drive aisle for the new parking lot (i.e. area where the building is proposed to be demolished) from 27'8 y2"to 24'; and d. Please revise the landscape and civil plans (and any other applicable plans) to reflect this change. 13. The response letter included with the resubmittal indicates that the trash located in the parking garage will be picked up by jitney carts and returned to trucks above. Please expand on this proposal as staff is unfamiliar with jitney carts. Who operates the jitney carts? Where will the carts be parked? Where will the waste management truck park? Please provide additional information about how trash will be removed from the parking garage. In addition, please confirm with Waste Management that this is an acceptable form of service for the proposed project. 14. Smooth trowel stucco will be required for the two new buildings. It is staffs opinion that lace stucco should not be utilized and is not an important feature to tie the existing development and proposed development together. As the proposed project includes shared features such as the color palette and stone facades, the existing and proposed development should still be complimentary. 15. Please add stamped concrete to the north end of the parking structure (i.e., last arch to the north, over the street-level entry). 16. Please revise Sheet A8 to note how the patios are accessed for units on the 2"'' floor of Building 7714 (i.e., identify location of French doors). In addition, please indicate why only two trellises are proposed along the east elevation of this building. A trellis is recommended over each of the patios. 17. Please revise the south elevation of Building 7714 to add architectural relief and fenestration. Please revise Sheets A8 and A13 accordingly. 18. Repeat comment. Sheet All. Please identify the extent of building relief proposed for the parking structure. Follow-up comment. Please identify the extent of relief of the columns of the parking structure by the use of "+". SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/Cl^3-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LACOSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 5 19. Please note that landscape planters will be required along the western side of the parking structure, facing El Camino Real. . Repeat comment. Sheet A12. Indicate the extent of building relief for the columns for Building 7710. A minimum projection of 12 inches is recommended. As an alternative, please consider creating an arcade, similarto what is proposed for Building 7714. 21. If windows are not feasible for the first floor (i.e. retail area) of the east elevation of Building 7710, please remove the decorative wall feature as it detracts from the design. Please explore other options such as adding building relief, landscape planters, trellises, ironwork etc. to soften the first floor of this elevation. 22. Please revise Detail C on Sheet A13 to replace the proposed chain link fence with slats with a stucco wall to screen the equipment building. In addition, the wall should screen the height of the equipment building on all sides so it is fully screened from public view. Further, please explore the feasibility of adding a trellis over this area to screen the views from the top, which will be visible from the second story units and the pedestrian bridge. 23. Please revise Sheet A13 to add a stone veneer to the northern side of the front facade (1'* floor, area of rectilinear features). 24. Please revise the civil plans as follows: a. The dimensions of the driveway aisles do not match what is presented on the architectural plans in a number of areas. Please reconcile the plans accordingly and reduce the driveway widths to the minimum 24 feet so the width ofthe landscape planters can be expanded; and b. In addition to the above, the dimension of the drive aisles is missing in a few areas; please revise the plans to add the width. Landscaping: Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements ofthe City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Numbers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area of the comment concern. REPEAT COMIVIENTS 1. Plans are too conceptual to provide an appropriate review. One symbol is used for all shrubs and ground covers which may be very different in size and character. Please provide a separate symbol for each type of shrub (i.e. large evergreen shrub, medium size shrub, small flowering accent shrub, etc.) and ground covers. A larger scale plan may be necessary to show appropriate information. Final comments are reserved pending receipt of more complete plans. 2"" Review: The appUcant has submitted a portion of the construction drawing planting plans to address this comment. Please include these plans as a part of the conceptual review package with sequential sheet numbers. These sheets will need to become a part of the formal conceptual plan submittal so that they can be documented as a part of the conceptual review approval process. The construction drawing sheets provided do not address all areas. Please provide additional detailed information to address all proposed landscape areas. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/C^13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01-1l!^;OSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 6 2. Please address all landscape areas and include the area in the water use calculations. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "All landscape areas have been included in the water use calculations." Please address landscaping ofthe second floor residential plaza area and include in the water use calculations. All landscape areas are to be addressed. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "This area is a future phase and spa area is located on the rooftop - not part of our water use calculations." As a part of the project, the spa is to be included in the water use calculations. Plans need to address all phases as shown on architectural and civil plans. Please address. 4. Please show and label the following on the landscape plans: a) Existing conditions (property lines, easements, right-of-ways, drainage elements, utilities, etc.). b) Potable and reclaimed service locations and lines. c) All existing and proposed easements (labeled). Insure no trees are located within public utility easements. d) All vehicular sight lines, including intersection site distance corridors (see Figures 3-A and 3-B of the Landscape Manual) and CalTrans sight distance standards (i.e.: stopping sight distance). Coordinate with the civil engineer to show and label this information on the conceptual landscape plans. See comment #19 below. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference civil and landscape plans for all documentation." Please show and label all of the above information on the landscape plans as required by the Landscape Manual. 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2% grade in planting areas) away from structures and terminating in an approved drainage system. 2"'' Review: The appUcant has responded: "Not applicable - due to existing site conditions." There are new conditions and site grading proposed on portions ofthe project. Please address. 6. The planting palette shall include: a) Tree types and quantities. b) Shrub types and spacing with general layout. c) Ground cover types and spacing. d) Proposed plant sizes (either by number or percentage (%) of total quantity). 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference planting construction documents for more detailed planting specifics." The construction drawing sheets do not address all areas. Please address the above for all areas. 7. Generally identify all existing woody plant material to be removed or retained. Trees over 12" in caliper diameter shall be identified on the plan individually as to caliper size and type and labeled to be retained or removed. 2""* Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference existing tree survey." This survey was not received. Please provide. 8. Completed. 9. Invasive species shall not be added to a landscaped area. Please review all proposed plantings and insure no invasive species are added. 2"'' Review: Invasive species are listed on the construction drawing sheets submitted. See comment #1. Please resolve. :i^3-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01-L^t SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 7 . 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shrubs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Reference concept note #8." Trees are shown in easements. Please review all sheets and resolve on the plans. 11. Completed. 12. Completed. 13. Please provide a copy of the latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 2"^ Review: Please coordinate landscape plans with latest civil/architectural plans. Check all areas. Provide an updated copy of civil and architectural plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shrubs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screen/soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides of building 7710; north, east and west sides of building 7720; and the north and east sides of building 7750 to soften and enhance these building elevations. Please address. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 15. 50% of the shrubs (except on slopes 3:1 or steeper) shall be a minimum 5 gallon size. Please address. 2"'' Review: The note appears to address only plantings along El Camino ReaL Please delete the red lined portion ofthe note as indicated to clarify that this applies to all areas. 16. Completed. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Existing slope landscape to remain - no additional planting is being proposed." Landscaping may be required depending on fire suppression requirements. Please address comment #36 and provide landscaping as appropriate. 18. Evergreen plants shall be used to screen unsightly elements and shall be spaced to provide 100% screening within two (2) years of installation. Please screen the trash areas. Check all areas. 2"'' Review: A plan note has been added; however plan graphics do not show that the note is to be addressed. Please show screen plantings on the plans. Check all areas. 19. Please address the following vehicular sight line requirements: a) The plan shall demonstrate that plants, when installed and at maturity, will be positioned to avoid obstructing motorists' views of pedestrian crossings, driveways, roadways and other vehicular travel ways. b) On collector streets and larger, landscape elements over 30 inches in height (including planting measured at maturity) as measured from adjacent street grade are not permitted at street corners within a triangular zone drawn from two points, 25 feet outward from the beginning of curves. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CI^3-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01-ftoSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 8 c) At medium to high use driveways, the 30 inch height limitation applies at driveways 25 feet from the edge ofthe apron outward along the curb, then 45 degrees in toward the property. d) Ensure that landscape elements at interior private driveway intersections do not obstruct sight lines, so that circulation and pedestrian safety can be maintained. e) Landscape features (shrubs, trees, fencing, etc.) shall be selected to ensure that no visual impairments or obstructions are located within the CalTrans sight distance lines. 2nd Review: Please show and label the vehicular sight lines on the landscape plans per comment #4d and insure the above requirements are met. 20. Completed. 21. Please provide street trees along El Camino Real per Appendix D of the Landscape Manual. Street trees shall be located: a) A minimum of seven (7) feet from any sewer line. b) In areas that do not conflict with public utilities. c) Outside of sight distance areas. d) A minimum of three (3) feet outside the public right of way, unless approved otherwise by the City as noted below. 2"'' Review: Appendix D specifies Lophostemon confertus as the theme tree with Eucalyptus, Pinus canariensis, Eriobotria deflexa and Lophostemon as support trees. Please revise to meet landscape Manual requirements. 22. Completed. 23. Trees shall be provided at the minimum rate of one per every four parking stalls. Trees pertaining to this requirement shall be located within the parking area, exclusive of parking lot setbacks. The trees shall be located in close proximity to the spaces they are to shade. 2"'^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 24. If a landscaped strip is provided perpendicular to rows of parking spaces, the planting area shall be designed to provide a minimum of four (4) feet of landscaping clear of vehicle overhangs. 2'"' Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 25. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent property or streets through the use of planting or any combination of planting, mounding, and decorative walls. Screening elements shall have a total height of at least three (3) feet. 2"" Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 26. A minimum of 3% of the parking area shall be landscaped. The "parking area" includes all parking spaces and drive aisles. The plantings shall be contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4' and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6" in height. The plantings shall be located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. Please provide a calculation proving the percentage of landscape area provided in the parking area. 2"^ Review: The applicant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 9 27. Long rows of parking should be broken up with landscaped islands. Landscaped islands should be provided at intervals of one island for approximately every 12 to 15 parking spaces. Please address. 2"'' Review: The appUcant has responded: "Not applicable due to existing site conditions." This does not address the comment. Please address. 28. Please coordinate notes. Domestic and recycled water are both called for on the plans. Irrigation systems for all projects, except for service to a single-family residence or front yard irrigation on individually metered condos, shall be designed to use non-potable, treated recycled water, unless an exemption is approved by the City Utilities Department. Please note that this site is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Please coordinate with OMWD to determine the availability of recycled water and their requirements for use. Provide documentation of final OMWD direction for cross checking. Please note that Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) plans include a future recycled water mainline in El Camino Real running south to La Costa Avenue and then going west on La Costa Avenue. It may be possible to tie into this line depending on OMWD approval and coordination. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Domestic water supply only." Please provide documentation from OMWD indicating that they do not plan to provide recycled water to this site. 29. Completed. 30. Please sign the statement. 31. Please revise the Eto to 47. 32. Completed. 33. Please use .55 for the irrigation efficiency (IE) or provide documentation that the spray type sprinklers to be used have an IE of .7. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Based on the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance .71 is the minimum IE used for spray head irrigation." Please use the City of Carlsbad Ordinance and Landscape Manual worksheets versus the State Mode/. The City of Carlsbad has modified the State Model. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constructed to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 2"** Review: A note has been added to the plans; however water use calculations indicate the use of spray heads only. Drip or other appropriate irrigation will be required where located adjacent to paving that does not drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please resolve. 35. Completed. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations; b) Rear yard setbacks; c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 of the Landscape Manual; d) Emergency/maintenance access; SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/PUD 13-02/MS 13-01- LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE August 20, 2013 Page 10 e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency; f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards; and g) Street widths dimensioned. 2"'' Review: The applicant has responded: "Initially discussed with Michael and agreed that a Fire Suppression Plan was not needed." The full scope ofthe project was not provided to the city at the time of preliminary discussions. A fire suppression plan is required unless specifically directed otherwise by the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshal. Please address. 37. RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. NEW COMMENTS lA. Jute mesh is not allowed by the Engineering Division. Please revise. 2A. Detailed concept plans, sheets L-7 - L-12 (construction document sheets) specify river rock in parking lot planters where sheet Ll indicates shrubs. Please coordinate plans. Check all areas. 3A. Please revise to a 3" depth mulch layer over the erosion control mat. Board of Directors Lawrence A. Watt, President Christy Guerin, Vice President Edmund K. Sprague, Treasurer Gerald E. Varty, Secretary Robert F. Topolovac, Director OLIVENHAIN Municipal Water District General Manager Kimberly A. Thorner, Esq. General Counsel Allred Smith, Esq. CiTY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION Mr. Kris Eckert Stevens-Cresto Engineering 9665 Chesapeake Dr., Suite 320 San Diego, CA 92123-1352 Re: La Costa Towne Center Tentative Parcel Map Dear Mr. Eckert: Per your request, the District has reviewed the Tentative Parcel Map for the proposed La Costa Towne Center project. The District understands that the submittal ofthe TPM is intended to provide the District the project at the conceptual level only, and is not intended for construction. Given that, the District in general agrees with the project's concept, including the proposed relocation of portions of the public water facilities. In several areas the TPM appears to indicate instances where there is either a grade change over the District's pipeline or encroachments are being placed within the District easement. This is an older AC pipeline and the District will require the developer to minimize the impact of the project to the pipeline to mitigate for the proposed addition of a residential component to the center. In particular, this issue must be addressed in the area where the driveway is being closed and the grade is being increased to create a walkway. The proposed walkway either needs to be redesigned to reduce the amount of fill being placed over the pipeline within the District's easement or the pipeline must be relocated to an elevation that is acceptable to the District. The Developer must grant the District additiona! easements over the relocated facilities, as determined by the District. Facilities that encroach into the District's easement will be reviewed by the District when further detail is available. Any approved encroachments must be processed through an Encroachment Permit. The District's Right of Way Guideline is available on the District's website, www.olivenhain.com. The Developer wil! need to submit improvement plans for all new public water lines and replacement/relocated public water facilities to the District for review and approval. District engineering and staff time are charged on a time and materials basis. A request for deposit has been issued and additiona! funds will be requested as required. Should you have any questions please contact me at 760-753-6466. OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Karen Ogawa Engineering Project Supervisor 1966 Olivenhain Road • Encinitas. CA 92024 Phone (760) 753-6466 • Fax (760) 753-1578 • www.olivenhain.com A Public Agency Providing Water Wastewater Services Recycled Water Hydroeleciricity Elfin Forest Recreational Reserve BENSON & BOHL ^ ARCHITECTS ^ RECEIVED Ms. Shannon Wemeke MM « ^ City of Carlsbad Planning Division -^^^ ^ ^ ^^'^ 1635 Faraday Avenue CiTY OF CARLSBAD Carlsbad, CA 92008 PLANNING DIVISION RE: La Costa Towne Center V Review Comments for SDP 78-03/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13- 03/PUD 13-03 Thank you for your review and comments on our submittal for Land Use Approval of the proposed remodel of the La Costa Tovme Center. We have reviewed your recommendations and requirements for the re-submittal of our application. We offer the following summary of how we wish to address the project issues raised. 1. The Traffic and Greenhouse Gas/Air Quality Assessment have been submitted and some review comments received. A recommendation to close the access drive just south of the new garage entry is being implemented. 2. A Noise Analysis has been submitted ^ 3. The attached letter from Geoffrey Sherman documents his position to sign on behalf of Excel GIV La Costa Ovmer, LLC Attached is a completed Disclosure Statement. Attached is a Reciprocal Parking and Access Agreement for LCTC. Net acreage calculations are shovm under "AREA CALCULATIONS" on the TS sheet and are based on CMC 21.53.230, excluding utility easements and slopes in excess of 40%. The civil plans have been corrected to match the architectural plans. /7. No grading or facade improvements are anticipated for the NAP Union Bank parcel. y 8. La Costa Towne Center will be the name. Any other titles will be revised to match. City project numbers are added to the plans. 9. The existing center has a "lace" stucco finish and re-plastering the original buildings was not anticipated. The proposed use of a "lace" finish for the new buildings was for design continuity. The applicant has no problem working with staff to find an appropriate "earth toned" color rather than one that looks yellow. A sample colored elevation is included. Photographic examples of the proposed stamped concrete are provided. Sheet A5 provides the CMC 21.04.045 definition basement and the drawing shows the portion of the perimeter that is below grade, and a note indicating the percentage of the wall (81%) that qualifies the garage as a basement has been added to this sheet. A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 (619)858-4040 //. jx. The 126,900sf of retail did not include Union Bank, but for parking calculations, it is increased by 51 OOsf to 132,000sf. The area of increase is 3,078sf and is corrected, /c. We have changed our reference from "cars" to "parking spaces." d. j Under PARKING DATA, we added the calculation for residential visitor ' parking (.25/unit x 60=15) and added the note that "visitor parking is to be encompassed in commercial parking area" to the PARKING DATA box. It is also located under AREA CALCULATIONS. e. A breakdown of accessible, standard and compact parking stalls has been added. // Our note indicates a residential density of 22 units/acre and notes that it is greater than the 20 unit/acre minimum required. / ^ g.^ Parentheses removed. h./ The proposed height (45') and our proposal to maintain the original and existing setbacks and be exempted from the larger setbacks now required by the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor regulations is noted on the cover sheet. 72. An additional note indicating which buildings are to be demolished is added. J3. Revise Sheet Al as follows: / a. Matchline sheet references appear at the bottom of the sheet. >/ b. The parking noted on Sheet Al includes 106 subterranean residential spaces and is adjusted to 608 (including the 27 spaces in the NAP Union ^ Bank parcel..) c. The retaining wall is noted. The square footage of the existing bank is 51 OOsf. 14. Revised the Enlarged Site Plan A2 as follows: Ja. Dimensions added to driveways/drive aisles. A). Stall dimensions for compacts, standard and accessible spaces added, yc. The stair is proposed. /d. This is off site and appears to be a drainage ditch. /e. Dimensions are added. (fy We are proposing an altemate to the Landscape Manual for the deck parking. We are showing a large landscaped area in the middle of the deck which provides light and space for large scale planting. It also serves as a natural bioswale for parking lot ranoff. We are additionally proposing raised planters at the ends of aisles on the deck which should 7 accommodate 8 trees. 0''^ ^ g. We believe that the locations shovm should be adequate for the anticipated tenants which will be more in line with specialty retailers than bulk retailers and most customers will not require carts. BENSON & BOHL0 ARCHITECTS J h. Enhanced driveway paving at the El Camino Real entries has been added. \[ i. Bike racks have been located / / The sections are referenced to Sheet Al 6. yk. A concept for the patios is now shown 15. Revise Enlarged Partial Site Plan Sheets A3-A4 as follows: J a. All parking spaces are numbered. \/b. Driveway/drive aisle widths are indicated. ^ c. Parking stmcture setback from property line added. d. The property line is clearly indicated. J e. The retaining wall is noted as new. 16. Revise Enlarged Partial Site Plan-Lower Level Sheets A5-A6 as follows: y a. 205 is correct and now revised on the cover sheet. / b. MC indicates motorcycle spaces. y:. Driveway/ drive aisle widths are indicated yd. Parking stalls are dimensioned y e. Gate is indicated on A6 and is added to A5. / See comment 14g. Trash will be picked up by jitney carts and retumed to tracks above. 17. Revise 2"'' Floor Plan Sheets A7-A8 as follows: / a. Trash room and chutes notation added. ^ b. PL represents planter. J c. Amenity package is not yet determined but will probably include a television, kitchen, lounge and table seating. The small space is a restroom. /d. Stacked washer/dryers are located behind bi-fold doors in the hallways within the units. e. The room adjacent to the trash room is an electrical equipment room. s/f. " Courtyard Below" note added. Jg. Landscape planters separate private patios from common courtyard space, /h. A trash enclosure is located to the south of the building and is accessed through the corridor (see site plan.) Ji. 7710 is corrected to 7714. yj. Some seating is located aroimd the fire pit and additional table seating is located on either side of the BBQs. 18. Revise Elevation Sheets A11-A15 as follows: a. "Lace" stucco is proposed to mach existing. /b. Articulation of the columns will be defined as the design progresses. •/ c. Signage relationship to the units above will be considered. ^ d. Landscaping will be added where practical for retail visibility. Vine pockets will be incorporated at columns. / e. Windows will be recessed or detailed to match existing. / Reference to a separate signage permit will be added (a comprehensive sign plan is being prepared.) A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103 (619) 858-4040 g. Heavy timber will be used for the trellises. h. The detail is modified, but please note that the original buildings were designed in the Classical Spanish Colonial Revival style which is by definition "outdated." /. Our intent is to incorporate details from the original buildings into the new buildings and modify overall look with the addition of color, stone, and signage and landscaping. j. Trash enclosures will be designed to match the buildings with stucco and comices. West Elevation Building 7710, Sheet Al 1 a. Trellises will be reviewed and extended as appropriate. b. The fa9ade will be cast in place concrete with appropriate relief. c. Ironwork will be developed as a unique design. d. We will look at cast stone as a possibility for the entry element. North Elevation Building 7710, Sheet Al 1 a. We will look at the additional trellis or other articulation as appropriate. b. Lattice will be studied. South Elevation Building 7710 Sheet A12 a. Stone callout added. b. Detail will be developed per sheet A17. c. The element above the sign is a balcony (which shields the window fi-om the sign below.) d. We will define the relief for the engaged column per Sheet A17. East Elevafion Building 7714, Sheet A13 a. The altemating arch support provides a more open arcade for visibility. b. The balconies are engaged "Juliette" balconies which means in swinging french doors or sliders will be used (to be determined.) c. Please clarify what level of detail is required. La Costa Towne Center Relevant Imaget-y Item 9 Item 18d 18e STEVENS • CRESTO ENGINEERING, INC. Memo To: Shannon Werneke, Project Planner City of Carlsbad REC E IVE D Fronr Kris Eckert Stevens Cresto Engineering Inc. JUL 2 2 2D!3 cc CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION Date: July 12,2013 Re: 12003.03 - La Costa Towne Center - Reponses to TM Comments PLAN CHECK COMMENT ANP RESPONSES FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING STAFF FIRST REVIEW DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING, MEMO TO PLANNING DEPT. DATED 04/19/13 COMMENT 1: Please submit a completed Storm water Questionnaire RESPONSE 1: The completed storm water questionnaire is included witii this submittal. COMMENT 2: Please indicate that all existing and proposed driveways will be reconstructed as needed to meet ADA standards. RESPONSE 2: Per our meeting with the City May 13, 2013, the City clarified that the drawings should indicate which ofthe existing driveways will be reconstructed to current ADA standards. The prqject proposes to reconstruct the site entrance between Ixjildings 7750 and 7760 using a standard cross gutter with accessible ramps, similar to the existing condition. A new driveway is proposed to serve the proposed garage at building 7710. The existing driveways providing northem and southem access to the site shall remain in place. COMMENT 3: Provide circulation plan for the parking structure. RESPONSE 3: Refer to sheets AS andA6 ofthe architectural plans for the garage floorplans. COMMENT 4: Consideration of the proposed right in right out access point on El Camino Real is contingent upon removal ofthe existing access point to the south. RESPONSE 4: Comment noted. The existing access point north of building 7750is now closed. Referto updated sheet C-4. COMMENT 5: Provide a Caltrans sight distance evaluation for the proposed access point. RESPONSE 5: A sight dis^nce evaluation is now provided, referto the erxlosed Sight Distance Exhibit Calti'ans requirements call for 715' of unobstiucted sight distarKC for roadways with a design speed of 65 miles per hour (10 miles per hour above tiie posted speed). The enclosed exhibit indicates that unobstiucted sight distance can be achieved when the point of observation at the proposed access point is 8' from tiK existing face of curb. Note tfiat only right hand tums will be permitted at the SCE Projea No. 12003.03 La Costa Towne Center TM Response Letter Page 1 of 4 CML ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • LAND SURVEYORS 9665 CHESAPEAKE DRIVE, SUrTE 320 • DIEGO, CA 92123 PHONE 858.694.5660 • FAX 858.694.5661 proposed access point; therefore a sight distance evaluation in the northerly direction was not perfbrmed. COMMENT 6: Provide proposed restriping ofthe bike lane and signage to accommodate the proposed access point RESPONSE 6: As discussed in the 5/13 meeting with the City, no change to bike lane or travel lanes is proposed; therefore, re-stiiping is not necessaiy. COMMENT 7: Address Traffic Division comments regarding the TIA dated September 24,2012. RESPONSE 7: Comments shall be addressed by Urban Systems. Please reter to tiie updated report^ included with tiiis submittal. COMMENT 8: Redline comments can be found on the enclosed check print of the tentative map. RESPONSE 8: Noted. Redline comments are now addressed. COMMENT 9: Please re-submit three copies ofthe revised tentative map. RESPONSE 9: Noted. The requested copies oftiie revised plans are provided. DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS LETTER, DATED 04/19/13 COMMENT 19: Please revise civil plans as follows: COMMENT 19a: The gross and net lot area does not match with what is noted on the architectural plans. Please reconcile the plans accordingly. RESPONSE 19a: Gross and net lot areas are now consistent with the architectural plans. Reter to sheet C-1. COMMENT 19b: The area between the patios of Building 7714 and the retaining wall shall be landscaped. Decomposed granite will not be allowed in this area. RESPONSE 19b: Comment noted. Decomposed granite is no longer indicated on sheet C-3. Reter to the architectural plans for the proposed surface t^je. COMMENT 19c: An enhanced material is required for each of the driveways off of El Camino Real. Please revise the plans accordingly. RESPONSE 19c: Stamped asphalt concrete is now shown at tfie site entiance at building 7760. Reter to sheet C-4. COMMENT 19d: Provide an enlarged site plan at 1' = 20' for the area of work (i.e.. Sheet C-3); please do not include the layer for the existing development Please add building setbacks to the plan. RESPONSE 19d: Per our 5/13 meeting with the City, enlarged site plans are not required. Sett)ack dimensions are now indicated on tiie plans for the proposed 7710 and 7714 tyuildings. Refer to stieet C-3. COMMENT 19e: Provide dimensions for all ofthe driveways and drive aisles. RESPONSE 19e:Dimenskjns for all driveways and drive aisles ate now indicated on the plans. COMMENT 19f: Clearly identify which retaining walls are existing and proposed. For all proposed retaining walls, please include three TW/BW measurements, including the highest point SCEPrqeaNo. 12003.03 La Costa Towne Center TM Response Letter Page2of 4 FIRE PROTECTION (Notes to be added) 1. Automatic sprinkler systems: Parcel 3 structures shall be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler systems designed to Ordinary Group 2 and be provided with Class 1 standpipe system in accordance with NFPA 14. RESPONSE: Comment noted. Reter to tiie architectural plans. Parcel 1: Parking structure shall be designed to Ordinary Group 2 and be provided with Class 1 standpipe system in accordance with NFPA 14. RESPONSE: Comment noted. 2. Provide notes on all plans submitted for review that indicate that fire sprinklers and standpipes are required and add note that each system is a deferred submittal. RESPONSE: This note shall be indicated on the architectural plans. 3. Fire Alarm: A ful|y addressable manual fire alarm system shall be required in the non-residential portion of Parcel 3 buildings. The parking structure shall be provided with a fully addressable fire alarm system to the extent required by CFC 907 as amended with notification devices throughout. Plans for said systems shall be a deferred' submittal item and submitted to the Fire Department for review. RESPONSE: Comment noted. DEPARTMENT: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENT LETTER, DATED 04/09/13 Please revise the following issues prior to resubmittal: COMMENT I: Please indicate that all existing and proposed driveways will be reconstructed as needed to meet current ADA requirements RESPONSE 1: Per our meeting with the City on May 13, 2013, tfie City clarified that the drawings shoukl indicate which ofthe existing driveways will be reconstructed to current ADA standards. The project proposes to reconstruct the site entiance between buildings 7750 and 7760 using a standard cross gutter witii accessitile ramps, similar to the existing condition. A new driveway is proposed to serve the proposed garage at building 7710. The existing driveways providing nortiiem and soutiiem access to ttie site shall remain in place. COMMENT 2: The traffic impact analysis submitted April 4, 2013 is still being reviewed. Additional comments may result when the review is completed. RESPONSE 2: Comment noted. COMMENT 3: Comments regarding the proposed site access on El Camino Real will be addressed after the review ofthe traffic impact analysis is completed. RESPONSE 3: Comment noted. COMMENT 4: Redline comments can be found on the enclosed check print of the Tentative Map. RESPONSE 4: Redline comments ate now addressed. Please reter to the revised plans. SCE Project No. 12003.03 La Costa Towne Center TM Response Lener Rage4of 4 RESPONSE 19f: Existing and proposed retaining walls ate now more clearty distinguisfied. A minimum of tiiree wall callouts is now indicated fbr proposed site tetaining walls. COMMENT 19g: Label the location of all compact stalls. RESPONSE 19g: Reter to the architectural plans for the compact parking stalls. DEPARTMENT: FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS LETTER. DATED 03/18/13 SITE PLAN 1. ACCESS COMMENTS: Fire Department access. After consultation with the Operations Division ofthe Carlsbad, Encinitas and San Marcos Fire Departments, a request has been made to provide fire vehicle through travel across the deck of the parking structure to eliminate the need to back-up and off the previously discussed access pad. CMC 17.04.010. This access shall provide an unobstructed width of 24 feet and an unobstruaed width of 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance or "clear-to-sky". RESPONSE: Per the 4/25 letter from the City of Carlsbad, fire truck vehicular access is not required along tiie top deck ofthe parking garage, as additional provisions are proposed for tfie building ffre protection system. A copy oftiie letter is enclosed fbr reterence. Fire Access Road surface. The suriace of all fire department access routes shall be of an impervious 'all- weather" surtace material, designed to carry a minimum load of 75,000 pounds axel weight RESPONSE: Comment noted. The proposed surface types within the fire routes ate asphalt and Portland cement conctete and shall accommodate the axel required weight Fire Lanes. The proposed Fire Department access route shall be designated as "Fire Lanes" and shali become the responsibility of the developer to have said access restrictions recorded, that the owner is responsible to provide and maintain to identify and ensure enforcement of those designated access. RESPONSE: Comment noted. WATER IMPROVEMENT \. HYDRANTS Additional on-site public water mains and fire hydrants are required. RESPONSE: Per our 6/12 meeting with Deputy Fire Marshal Greg Ryan, one additional fire hydrant is requiredjust south ofbuilding 7720. This hydrant is now indicated on the revised plan. Refer to sheet C-4. Provide additional fire hydrants at intervals of 300 feet along public streets and/or private driveways. Hydrants should be located within 90 L Ft of any Fire Department connection. RESPONSE: Per our 6/12 meeting with Deputy Fire Marsfial Greg Ryan, no additional liydrants ate required along public streets. Proposed fite serynce laterals for buildings 7710 and 7714 ate within 90 feet ofa tire hydrant The private main shall have two separate points of connection to the public main. Each shall be capable of supplying the most demanding system independently. RESPONSE: The existing tire main witiiin tiie project site is maintained by Olivenhain Water Distiict A private tite main is not proposed. SCE Project No. 12003.03 La Costa Towne Center TM Response Letter Page3of4 E^J - e I T Y OF CARLSBAD Fire Department www.carlsbadca.gov April 25,2013 Mr. Garner Palenske, P.E. Vice President US Western Region AON Fire Protection Engineering 11770 Bernardo Plaza Court, Suite 116 San Diego CA 92128 Mr. Palenske, I ann in receipt of your letter dated April 23, 2013 regarding a proposal to upgrade the fire sprinkler design of the proposed La Costa Towne Center Village project in lieu of the required fire department access. After a consultation with the newly appointed Fire Code Official last week, it has been decided to grant your request based on the discussion held in our office on February 14, 2013. And to ensure that the agreed upon proposal ensures the safety of the occupants first and addresses and fire code requirements second, I will paraphrase our understanding ofthe proposal and agreement. In lieu ofthe fire department access requirements for the north residential and retail buildings (Buildings 7710 and 7714 respectively), the Carisbad Fire Department has agreed that the sprinkler systems be upgraded. The La Costa Town Center Village project includes four existing buildings (7720, 7750, 7760, and 7770) that consist of retail (Group M) and office space (Group B) and will include the construction of two new buildings (7710 and 7714) and a new parking structure. Building 7710 will be a three-story building of approximately 39,400 square feet of retail space (Group M) on the first floor, 57,250 square feet of apartments (Group R-2) on the second and third floor, and 39,400 square feet of parking garage (Group S-2) on the basement level. The basement and first story will be of Type I-A construction and floors two and three will be of Type V-B construction. Building 7714 will be a two-story building with 9,800 square feet of retail space (Group M) on the first floor and 9,800 square feet of apartments (Group R-2) on the second floor. The building will be constructed of Type V-B construction. As part of this project, a parking structure will be built adjacent to Buildings 7710 and 7714. The parking structure will include a ground level and basement level. The basement level of the parking structure will connea to the basement level of Building 7710. The lower level of the parking structure adjacent to Building 7710 will be approximately 52,000 square feet. The City of Carlsbad Fire Department has agreed in lieu of the required fire department access around all structures, that the design of the fire sprinkler systems for Buildings 7710 and 7714 and the underground parking structure be increased one hazard classification level. Fire Prevention ^ 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4665 F 760-602-8561 ® Use Residential Parking Garage Retail Required NFPA 13 Hazard Classification 0.1 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Light Hazard) 0.15 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 1) 0.2 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) Proposed Upgraded Hazard Classification 0.15 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) 0.2 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft. (Ordinary Hazard Group 2) 0.25 gpm/sq. ft. over 1,500 sq. ft.* The increase of one classification level for Ordinary Hazard Group 2 results in a significant increase to Extra Hazard Group 1 (0.30 gpm/sq. ft. over 2,500 sq. ft.) and a reduction in sprinkler spacing to 100 sq. ft. Aon FPE proposes an increase in design density of 0.05 gpm/sq. ft. to 0.25 gpm/sq. ft., which is equivalent to the upgrades to the sprinkler design criteria for the residential and parking garage occupancies. Carlsbad Flre Department- Fire Code Authority agrees that the upgrades listed provide an equivalent alternate solution to the fire department access issues. Gregory L\ Ryan Deputy Fire Marshal CaHsbad Fire Department For: Michael Davis, Division Chief/Fire Marshal (I) Cc: City of Carlsbad Building Official File (Permanent) ^BENSON & BOHL ARCHITECTS TRANSMITTAL TO: Shannon Wemeke Associate Planner City of Carlsbad Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 DATE: July 7, 2013 VIA: Delivery PROJ: 12013 BY: Richard Benson PROJECT: La Costa Towne Center SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 DESCRIPTION: Transmitted herewith please find. Copy of City list of incomplete items and project issues for response Letters of response from Architect, Landscape Architect and Civil Engineer 7 sets of revised plans 3 copies of revised Traffic Study 2 copies of Exterior Noise Analysis Documentation of Geoffrey Sherman's signatory authority for ovmer Completed Disclosure Statement Representative colored elevation RECEIVED JUL 2 2 22n CiTY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION A Califomia Corporation 3900 5* Ave. Suite 200, SanDiego, Califomia 92103 (619)858-4040 i URBANSYSTEMS^SOCIATES, INC. PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, MARKETING & PROJECT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS TO INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT A TTN: Doug Bilse - City of Carlsbad FROM: Andrew P. Schlaefli DATE: June 3, 2013 Swim E-MEMO RECEIVED JUL 2 2 2013 CITY OF CARLSBAD E-Mail: 1^L/\NM1NG DIVISION dous. bilse(a)jcarlsbadca.sov TOTAL PA GES (Including ^ Cover): TIME: 3:15:32 PM JOB NUMBER: 002312 SUBJECT: Traffic Study Response to Comments - La Costa Towne Center Confidential Communications This transmittal is intended for the recipient named above. Unless otherwise expressly indicated, this entire communication is confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose, copy, distribute or use this information. If you received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, at our expense and destroy the information. We have prepared responses to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) comments by City of Carlsbad Transportation Development staff. The attached Traffic Impact Analysis dated May 17, 2013 has been updated to reflect the City's comments in the Sept. 24, 2012 traffic report (marked-up copy). Enclosed is the reviewer's mark-up of the TIA and plan sheet C-2. In regards to the request for a revised bike lane striping plan, no striping plan has been prepared because no change to the existing striping is required for the proposed access to the garage. With regards to the Caltrans site distance request, refer to the site distance exhibit prepared by Stevens Cresto Engineering. Response to Comments: 1.) On pages 3-1 and 3-2 of the traffic report, the text has been revised as requested. 2.) As requested on page 3-9, all LOS reported (for all scenarios) in the AM/PM peak hour analysis for intersections along El Camino Real are based on 140 second cycle length in coordination. Tables 3-2 and 5-2 report the ICU and LOS for intersections with the revised cycle length. Tables 6-3, 6-4, 7-3, 7-4 report the peak hour delays and LOS with the revised cycle length of 140 seconds. The appendices for each scenario include the Synchro worksheets for each intersection analyzed. As shown in Table 8-1 and 8-2, all study intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better, so therefore, no significant impacts occur as a result of the proposed project. 3.) As requested on page 3-9, at the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, an overlap phase for the southbound to westbound right turn movement is assumed in each scenario. Appendices B, C, E, and F include the Synchro worksheets illustrating this assumption in the analysis. 1 0023]2-060313-Response to Comments -jds 4540 Kearny Villa Road. Suite 106 • San Diego, CA 92123 • (H58) 560^4911 • Fax f85H) 560-9734 i Doug Silse © Urban Systems Associates, Inc. 'CityofCarlsbad June 3, 20] 3 4.) As requested on page 3-9, the intersection at La Costa Ave. and Shopping Center Driveway has been revised to operate at a 70 second cycle length during the AM and PM peak hour in all scenarios. Appendices B, C, E, and F include the Synchro worksheets illustrating this assumption. 5.) On page 8-1, the text has been revised to reflect the current year of the analysis as requested. Let us know if you have any questions or need additional information. Cc: Brian Jones Shaimon Wemeke Goeff Sherman Richard Benson 0023 ]2-060313-Response to Comments -jds 4540 Keamy Villa Road. Suile 106 • San Diego, CA 92123 • (858) 560-4911 • Fa.x (858) 560-9734 i <^ CITY OF CARLSBAD Housing & Neighborhood S ervi ces www.carlsbadca.gov May 2, 2013 William Stone Sr. Vice-President & Asset Management Excel Trust 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, Ca. 92128 Dear Mr. Stone: Thank you for your proposal dated November 30, 2012 regarding your company's plan to build a 60 unit apartment complex within your mixed use development on property located at the corner of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue, at the site ofthe commercial center originally known as Plaza de la Costa Real. As I previously verbally shared with you, the Housing Policy Staff Team reviewed your request at its meeting on December 17, 2012 to provide 15% low income rent-restricted housing units and 5% moderate income rent-restricted housing units in exchange forapproval of 60 residential units from the excess dwelling unit bank within the proposed mixed use development. This correspondence confirms our previous discussion on this matter, and is provided for the project record for the proposed La Costa Town Village (SDP 78-03C). The Housing Policy Team did review and give serious consideration to your proposal, and then determined that it could support your request and proposal as submitted. The Housing Policy Staff Team is supportive of integrating residential units into the new proposed commercial center, and allocating 60 units from the excess dwelling unit bank, with your agreement to income and rent restrict 15% of the units (9 total) for occupancy by low income households (with rents set at 30% of 70% of the San Diego County Area Median Income), and 5% ofthe units (3 total) for occupancy by moderate income households (with rents set at 30% of 100% ofthe San Diego County Area Median Income). Please note that this approval represents staffs recommendation only to the Planning Commission and City Council. The project must ultimately be approved by the City Council for the excess dwelling units to be assigned to the development, and the overall development to be approved. If you have questions regarding this correspondence or the Housing Policy Team's position, please contact my office at (760) 434-2935. Dshhie Fmrntain ' Debbie FoimtaiTi Housing and Neighborhood Services Director C: Shannon Werneke, Project Planner ^ Housing Policy Staff Team Richard Benson, Benson and Bohl Architects Randall Bohl, Benson and Bohl Architects **CARLSBAD MoAd-l-lB Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov April 9, 2013 Mr. Geoffrey Sherman Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC Suite 300 17140 Bernardo Center Dr San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: 1st REVIEW FOR SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of CaHsbad. The Planning Division has reviewed your Site Development Amendment, Site Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Special Use Permit, Minor Subdivision and Non-Residential Planned Development Permits, applications no. SDP 78-03(D), SDP 13-03, CUP 13-03, SUP 13-03, MS 13-01, and PUD 13-02, as to the completeness for processing. The applications are incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. The second list is project issues of concern to staff. In order to expedite the processing of your application, the "incomplete" items and your response to the project issues of concern to Staff must be submitted directly to your staff planner; therefore, please contact your staff planner directly to schedule a re-submittal appointment. As part of your re-submittal package, please prepare and include with your re-submittal: (1) a copy ofthese lists, (2) a detailed letter summarizing how all identified incomplete items and/or project issues have been addressed; and (3) five (5) sets of revised plans. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. When all required materials are submitted, the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, March 14, 2013, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. In order to expedite the processing of your application, you are strongly encouraged to contact your Staff Planner, Shannon Werneke, at (760) 602-4621, to discuss or to schedule a meeting to discuss your application and to completely understand this letter. You may also contact each commenting department individually as follows: Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, CaHsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUlfto3/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - iJltsTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 2 • Land Development Engineering Division: Steve Bobbett, Associate Engineer, at (760) 602-2747. • Fire Department: Gregory Ryan, Fire Inspections, at (760) 602-4663. Sincerely, CHRIS DeCERBO Principal Planner CD:SW:bd Enc: Engineering red lines Landscape red lines Fire Department comments Disclosure Statement c: Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3900 5*" Avenue, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92103 Kris Eckert, Stevens Cresto Engineering, Inc., 9665 Chesapeake Drive, Ste. 320, San Diego, CA 92123- 1352 Don Neu, City Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Gregory Ryan, Fire Prevention File Copy Data Entry 03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 3 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION Planning: 1. The traffic, greenhouse gas and the air quality assessments were submitted on April 4, 2013. As the studies were not submitted with the application on March 14, 2012, staff will provide comments on the studies subsequent to this letter. 2. In order for staff to adequately assess the potential noise impacts associated with the project, please submit a noise analysis prepared by a registered acoustician. 3. Please submit the appropriate documentation which confirms that Geoffrey Sherman is authorized to sign on behalfofthe owner, Excel GIV La Costa Owner, LLC. 4. Please complete the Disclosure Statement by answering Question #4 of the Statement (to be completed by the owner). 5. Please indicate whether a reciprocal parking and access agreement exists with the owner of APN 216-124-15. If such an agreement exists, please submit a copy ofthe agreement. 6. Please submit an exhibit which demonstrates how the net acreage was calculated. Please see CMC Section 21.53.230 for details on how the net acreage is calculated. In addition, the net acreage on the civil and architectural plans does not match. Please reconcile the plans accordingly. 7. Please submit authorization from the "Not a Part" parcel owner for the grading and any other improvements (including facade remodel?) proposed offsite. 8. Please clarify the name ofthe project. The application indicates "La Costa Towne Village' and the plans indicate "La Costa Towne Center." Please revise the plans accordingly (if necessary). Please also add the project numbers to the plans (civil and architectural). 9. Based on a review of the Sample Color and Materials Board submitted with the application, staff has the following comments: a. All stucco shall have a smooth trowel finish. Please revise the materials board as appropriate; b. Staff has concerns regarding the shade of yellow proposed. In order to adequately assess the project, please submit a sample colored elevation which demonstrates where the color will be incorporated into the design. Ultimately, a more comprehensive set of colored elevations will be required for Planning Commission; and c. Add details for the stamped concrete proposed along the eastern elevation of Building 7710. 10. Please submit a basement exhibit which demonstrates how the project meets the definition of a basement pursuant to CMC Section 21.04.045. 11. Please revise the Cover Page (TS) ofthe architectural plans as follows: a. Under "Parking Data," please clarif/ whether the 126,900 SF of retail area includes the area of Union Bank. If so, please indicate as such; b. Under "Parking Data," the area for the increase in SF (3,160) does not correspond with what is noted in "Area Calculations" (3,078). Please reconcile the plans accordingly; SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUPT3-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LTOSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 4 c. Under "Parking Data," please change the reference for the parking requirement from cars to parking spaces per unit; ^—v d. Under "Parking Data," please add a parking calculation for the guest parkingjl.sipaces per unit, covered or uncovered) and note that the guest parking is proposed to be included in the commercial parking area; e. Under "Parking Data," please breakdown the parking calculation to note the number of accessible, compact and standard parking stalls; f. The density is 22 dwelling units per acre (60 du/2.7 ac). Please revise the current information provided (20 du/ac) under "Unit Breakdown"; g. Remove the parentheses for "Total Retail Added" as this is a gain in square footage; and h. Add the proposed height and setbacks to the cover page. 12. Please revise the Demolition Plan (Sheet Dl) of the architectural plans to identify which buildings are proposed to be demolished (in addition to the symbol), similar to what's been done for the parking lot. 13. Please revise the Site Plan (Sheet Al) of the architectural plans as follows: a. Add page reference to each "Matchline"; b. The total number of parking spaces (residential and commercial) noted on this sheet, 569 spaces, does not correspond with what is noted on the cover page (497 spaces). Please revise the plans accordingly to address the disparity. Please also verify in the field that the resulting parking calculation is accurate; c. Note the location of the existing retaining wall behind Building 7714; and d. Note the square footage of the existing bank. 14. Please revise the Enlarged Partial Site Plan (Sheet A2) ofthe architectural plans as follows: a. Add dimensions for all of the driveways/drive aisles; b. Add dimensions for standard, compact and accessible parking stalls; c. Label whether the stairway along El Camino Real is existing or proposed; d. Label what appears to be a concrete brow ditch (2) on the slope above Building 7714; e. Dimension all setbacks (building, parking structure, etc.) from El Camino Real; f. Revise the site plan to add a number of tree wells, consistent with the requirements of the City's Landscape Manual. In addition, please revise the site plan to address any additional comments the landscape consultant has; g. Add an area to store shopping carts to each driveway with parking stalls (i.e., total of 3) and revise the parking calculation accordingly; h. Incorporate enhanced/decorative materials for each of the driveways off of El Camino Real. Please carry this comment through to all other applicable plans; i. Identify the location of the bicycle racks (required pursuant to Green Building Code). Please carry this comment through to all other applicable plans; j. Change the page reference for the cross sections to Sheet A16; and k. Clarify the extent of "line @ patios above." Is there one large patio which runs the length of Building 7714? Please elaborate on how this area will be defined, used, and finished. Can the patios be accessed from the rear of the building since it is at grade? Decomposed granite will not be allowed in this area as it will be required to be landscaped. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 5 15. Please revise the Enlarged Partial Site Plan (Sheets A3-A4) of the architectural plans as follows: a. Add the number of parking spaces to each block of parking (a few areas have not been covered); b. Note all driveway/drive aisle widths; c. Note the setbacks of the new parking lot from the property line; d. Identify the property line so it is clearly defined; and e. Identify whether the retaining wall adjacent to the new parking lot is existing or proposed. 16. Please revise the Enlarged Partial Site Plan-Lower (Sheets A5-A6) of the architectural plans as follows: a. The total number of parking spaces proposed, 200, does not correspond with what was presented on the cover page (208). Please revise the plans accordingly; b. Identify what the acronym "MC" represents; c. Note all driveway/drive aisle widths; d. Note the parking space dimensions; e. Note the location of any proposed ingress/egress gates on Sheet A5; f. Add two additional areas to store the shopping carts; one storage area per each drive aisle is recommended. It is unlikely that someone who parks in the two drive aisles furthest from the retail lobby will walk the current distance proposed for the storage of the shopping cart; and g. Explain how trash will be picked up for the residential component of the project. Can Waste Management access the parking structure? 17. Please revise the 2"^ floor plan (Sheets A7-A8) of the architectural plans as follows: a. Label the location of the trash chutes; b. Identify what "PL" represents; c. Identify what will the lounge be used for (pool table, television, kitchen?) and label the use for the small room which is attached to the lounge? d. Identify where the washer will be located in each unit; e. Identify the use of the room adjacent to what appears to be the trash chute; f Add "courtyard below" to Sheet A9; g. Identify what is located adjacent to the patios on Sheet A8 (landscape planters?); h. Indicate how residents will dispose of trash on the 2"'' level of Building 7714 (Sheet A8); i. Correct the Building # for the smaller mixed use building (correct number is 7714, Sheet A8); and j. Indicate where the seating areas will be located in the courtyard (in addition to the spa area). 18. Please revise the elevations (Sheets All- AIS) of the architectural plans as follows: General comments: a. Revise plans to note that a smooth trowel finish is required for the stucco; b. Additional articulation is recommended to the columns supporting the trellises; c. Please be advised that because residential units are located above retail, careful consideration will need to be given to any signage on the ground floor; certain signs may not be permitted to be illuminated beyond a certain time; d. Landscape planters shall be incorporated in front of the retail storefronts and in front of the columns (both buildings); e. Provide details on the window trim for the residential units; f. Add a note to the legend and call out on the elevations that a separate permit is required for the signage; g. Revise the legend to note that the trellises will be constructed with heavy timber; SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP^03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - L^^STA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 6 h. Explore alternatives to the "decorative wall feature" (#21 in legend) as this is an outdated feature of the existing shopping center. It is recommended that this feature be modified or replaced as part ofthe overall fafade remodel; and i. Submit elevations for the trash enclosures; landscaping shall be incorporated on all sides. West Elevation. Building 7710 (Sheet All): a. Extend the trellis located at the northwest corner of the building (west elevation) to the top of the stairway; b. Identify the extent of building relief proposed for the parking structure. Additional architectural enhancements are recommended; c. Provide a detail for the ironwork proposed for the parking structure; a different, more decorative design is recommended (one that is not a series of vertical lines); and d. Add manufactured stone veneer, which is proposed throughout the development, to the entry above and adjacent to the parking structure, and above the northern/southern storefront entrances facing El Camino Real (i.e. #13 in legend), North Elevation. Building 7710 (Sheet All): a. Add one more segment to each trellis to further articulate the north elevation; b. Submit a detail for the lattice work for the loading dock; South Elevation. Building 7710 (Sheet A12): a. Call out the stone veneer on the elevations (#7 in legend); b. Provide a detail of the decorative columns; c. Call out the feature above the proposed signage. Is this a residential unit and balcony? d. Indicate the extent of building relief for the columns. A minimum projection of 12 inches is recommended. As an alternative, please consider creating an arcade, similar to what is proposed for Building 7714. East Elevation, Building 7714 (Sheet A13): a. Use one consistent element for the arcade feature; b. Identify the French doors for the residential units (i.e., add reference to #17); and c. Provide details for the mechanical equipment and the trash enclosures. 1'^ Please revise the civil plans as follows: a. The gross and net lot area does not match with what is noted on the architectural plans. Please reconcile the plans accordingly; b. The area between the patios of Building 7714 and the retaining wall shall be landscaped. Decomposed granite will not be allowed in this area; c. An enhanced material is required for each ofthe driveways off of El Camino Real. Please revise the plans accordingly; Provide an enlarged site plan at 1' = 20' for the area of work (i.e.. Sheet C-3); please do not include the layer for the existing development. Please add building setbacks to the plan; e. Provide dimensions for all of the driveways and drive aisles; f. Clearly identify which retaining walls are existing and proposed. For all proposed retaining walls, please include three TW/BW measurements, including the highest point; and g. Label the location of all compact stalls. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 PageT : Engineering: 1. Please submit a completed Stormwater Standard Questionnaire. The form can be printed from http://www.caHsbadca.gov/business/building/Documents/E-34.pdf. Landscaping: Please advise the applicant to make the following revisions to the plans so that they will meet the requirements ofthe City of Carisbad's Landscape Manual. Numbers below are referenced on the red line plans where appropriate for ease in locating the area of the comment concern. 1. Plans are too conceptual to provide an appropriate review. One symbol is used for all shrubs and ground covers which may be very different in size and character. Please provide a separate symbol for each type of shrub (i.e. large evergreen shrub, medium size shrub, small flowering accent shrub, etc.) and ground covers. A larger scale plan may be necessary to show appropriate information. Final comments are reserved pending receipt of more complete plans. 2. Please address all landscape areas and include the area in the water use calculations. 3. Please include the spa surface area in the water use calculations as a high water use hydrozone. 4. Please show and label the following on the landscape plans: a) Existing conditions (property lines, easements, right-of-ways, drainage elements, utilities, etc.). b) Potable and reclaimed service locations and lines. c) All existing and proposed easements (labeled). Insure no trees are located within public utility easements. d) All vehicular sight lines, including intersection site distance corridors (see Figures 3-A and 3-B of the Landscape Manual) and CalTrans sight distance standards (i.e.: stopping sight distance). Coordinate with the civil engineer to show and label this information on the conceptual landscape plans. See comment #19 below. 5. Indicate positive surface drainage (2% grade in planting areas) away from structures and terminating in an approved drainage system. 6. The planting palette shall include: a) Tree types and quantities. b) Shrub types and spacing with general layout. c) Ground cover types and spacing. d) Proposed plant sizes (either by number or percentage (%) of total quantity). 7. Generally identify all existing woody plant material to be removed or retained. Trees over 12" in caliper diameter shall be identified on the plan individually as to caliper size and type and labeled to be retained or removed. 8. Several slopes along El Camino Real are shown to be graded on the civil plans. Please address removal and replacement ofthe landscaping in the notes. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 8 9. Invasive species shall not be added to a landscaped area. Please review all proposed plantings and insure no invasive species are added. 10. Trees shall not be planted within a public utility easement unless otherwise approved by the City. Avoid planting trees and large shrubs above or near sewer laterals, water mains, meter boxes and other utilities. Please coordinate tree locations with utilities. Check all areas. 11. Please revise to "Entire". 12. Please show and label all bio-swales/detention basins or underground drainage collection systems (in or under planting areas that could impact the planting) and provide appropriate landscaping. Please note that these structures are to be in full working order prior to obtaining occupancy. 13. Please provide a copy of the latest civil grading plans with the next submittal for cross checking. 14. The Landscape Manual requires that plans feature ground cover, shrubs, and trees to screen elements of unsightliness and screen/soften new improvements. It also indicates that landscaping shall be used to accentuate and enhance architecture. Landscaping to include trees is needed along the east and south sides of building 7710; north, east and west sides of building 7720; and the north and east sides of building 7750 to soften and enhance these building elevations. Please address. 15. 50% of the shrubs (except on slopes 3:1 or steeper) shall be a minimum 5 gallon size. Please address. 16. Woody shrubs shall be planted over herbaceous ground cover areas to cover 60% of the ground cover area (at mature size). Please address. 17. Plants in a transitional area (adjacent to native vegetation) shall consist of a combination of site adaptive and compatible native and/or non-native species, and shall conform to the requirements in Section 5 - Fire Protection Requirements. See comment #36 below. 18. Evergreen plants shall be used to screen unsightly elements and shall be spaced to provide 100% screening within two (2) years of installation. Please screen the trash areas. Check all areas. 19. Please address the following vehicular sight line requirements: a) The plan shall demonstrate that plants, when installed and at maturity, will be positioned to avoid obstructing motorists' views of pedestrian crossings, driveways, roadways and other vehicular travel ways. b) On collector streets and larger, landscape elements over 30 inches in height (including planting measured at maturity) as measured from adjacent street grade are not permitted at street corners within a triangular zone drawn from two points, 25 feet outward from the beginning of curves. c) At medium to high use driveways, the 30 inch height limitation applies at driveways 25 feet from the edge of the apron outward along the curb, then 45 degrees in toward the property. d) Ensure that landscape elements at interior private driveway intersections do not obstruct sight lines, so that circulation and pedestrian safety can be maintained. e) Landscape features (shrubs, trees, fencing, etc.) shall be selected to ensure that no visual impairments or obstructions are located within the CalTrans sight distance lines. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 9 20. All utilities are to be screened. Please show and label all known utilities and provide appropriate screening. Please also locate all light poles on the landscape plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees. 21. Please provide street trees along El Camino Real per Appendix D of the Landscape Manual. Street trees shall be located: a) A minimum of seven (7) feet from any sewer line. b) In areas that do not conflict with public utilities. c) Outside of sight distance areas. d) A minimum of three (3) feet outside the public right of way, unless approved otherwise by the City as noted below. 22. Please correct the scale. 23. Trees shall be provided at the minimum rate of one per every four parking stalls. Trees pertaining to this requirement shall be located within the parking area, exclusive of parking lot setbacks. The trees shall be located in close proximity to the spaces they are to shade. 24. If a landscaped strip is provided perpendicular to rows of parking spaces, the planting area shall be designed to provide a minimum of four (4) feet of landscaping clear of vehicle overhangs. 25. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent property or streets through the use of planting or any combination of planting, mounding, and decorative walls. Screening elements shall have a total height of at least three (3) feet. 26. A minimum of 3% of the parking area shall be landscaped. The "parking area" includes all parking spaces and drive aisles. The plantings shall be contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4' and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6" in height. The plantings shall be located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. Please provide a calculation proving the percentage of landscape area provided in the parking area. 27. Long rows of parking should be broken up with landscaped islands. Landscaped islands should be provided at intervals of one island for approximately every 12 to 15 parking spaces. Please address. 28. Please coordinate notes. Domestic and recycled water are both called for on the plans. Irrigation systems for all projects, except for service to a single-family residence or front yard irrigation on individually metered condos, shall be designed to use non-potable, treated recycled water, unless an exemption is approved by the City Utilities Department. Please note that this site is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD). Please coordinate with OMWD to determine the availability of recycled water and their requirements for use. Provide documentation of final OMWD direction for cross checking. Please note that CaHsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) plans include a future recycled water mainline in El Camino Real running south to La Costa Avenue and then going west on La Costa Avenue. It may be possible to tie into this line depending on OMWD approval and coordination. 29. Provide a colored or hatched plan clearly showing where recycled water, graywater and potable water are proposed to be used for irrigation. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP 13-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 10 30. Please sign the statement. 31. Please revise the Eto to 47. 32. Please use the following formulas for the MAWA and ETWU calculations. MAWA = (ETo)(0.62)[(0.7 x LA) + (0.3 x SLA)] ETWU = (£ro)(0.62)f ^^^^^ + SLA \ IE J 33. Please use .55 for the irrigation efficiency (IE) or provide documentation that the spray type sprinklers to be used have an IE of .7. 34. The plan shall provide that only low volume or subsurface irrigation shall be used to irrigate any vegetation within twenty-four inches of an impermeable surface unless the adjacent impermeable surfaces are designed and constructed to cause water to drain entirely into a landscaped area. Please address. 35. Please add the following notes to the plans and insure all requirements are met: Slopes 6:1 or steeper requiring erosion control measures as specified herein shall be treated with one or more ofthe following planting standards: a. Standard 1 - Cover Crop/Reinforced Straw Matting: Cover crop shall be a seed mix typically made up of quick germinating and fast covering grasses, clovers, and/or wild flowers. Submit the specific seed mix for City approval prior to application. The cover crop shall be applied at a rate and manner sufficient to provide 90% coverage within thirty (30) days. Type of reinforced straw matting shall be as approved by the city and staked to the slope as recommended by the manufacturer. Reinforced straw matting shall be required when planting occurs between August 15 and April 15. The cover crop and/or reinforced straw mat shall be used the remainder of the year. b. Standard #2 - Ground Cover One hundred (100%) percent of the area shall be planted with a ground cover known to have excellent soil binding characteristics (planted from a minimum size of flatted material and spaced to provide full coverage within one year). c. Standard #3 - Low Shrubs Low spreading woody shrubs (planted from a minimum of 2-3/4 inch liners) shall cover a minimum of seventy (70%) percent ofthe slope face (at mature size). d. Standard #4 - Trees and/or Large Shrubs Trees and/or large shrubs shall be (planted from a minimum of 1 gallon containers) at a minimum rate of one (1) per two hundred (200) square feet. Slopes - 6:1 or steeper and: a. 3' or less in vertical height and are adjacent to public walks or streets require at minimum Standard #1. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CU^-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LA COSTA TOWNE VILLAGE April 9, 2013 Page 11 b. 3' to 8' in vertical height require Standards #1 (erosion control matting shall be installed in lieu of a cover crop), #2 and #3. c. In excess of 8' in vertical height require Standards #1 (erosion control matting shall be installed in lieu of a cover crop), #2, #3, and #4. Areas graded flatter than 6:1 require Standard #1 (cover crop) with temporary irrigation when they have one or more ofthe following conditions: a. Sheet graded pads not scheduled for improvements within 6 months of completion of rough grading. b. A potential erosion problem as determined by the City. c. Identifled by the City as highly visible areas to the public or have special conditions that warrant immediate treatment. 36. The project is bounded by fire hazardous vegetation and therefore will require a fire suppression plan. Please provide a complete fire suppression plan as required per the Landscape Manual. The Fire Suppression Plan shall consist of a written and graphic plan and sections illustrating the following: a) Fire hydrant locations b) Rear yard setbacks c) Fire control planting as outlined in Section 5 ofthe Landscape Manual d) Emergency/maintenance access e) Maintenance responsibility and schedule of frequency f) Any other project modification to protect the development from fire hazards g) Street widths dimensioned 37. RETURN REDLINES and provide 2 copies of all plans (concept, water conservation, fire protection, and colored water use plan) on the next submittal. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Please be advised that the proposal to construct 60 multi-family apartments is subject to City Council Policy No. 43 and requires an allocation from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43, transit-oriented, "smart growth" development projects where increased residential density is being placed in close proximity to major transit facilities, employment opportunities, and commercial support services, qualify for an allocation of excess units. However, please be advised that at this time, a limited number of residential units are available for allocation. These units are available on a first-come, first-serve basis and require approval from the Planning Commission and City Council. Engineering: Please resolve the following issues prior to resubmittal: 1. Please indicate that all existing and proposed driveways will be reconstructed as needed to meet current ADA requirements. SDP 78-03(D)/SDP 13-03/CUP'T5-03/SUP 13-03/MS 13-01/PUD 13-02 - LTOSTA TOWNE VILLAGE ' • ^ April 9, 2013 Page 12 2. The traffic impact analysis submitted April 4, 2013 is still being reviewed. Additional comments may result when the review is completed. 3. Comments regarding the proposed site access on El Camino Real will be addressed after the review ofthe traffic impact analysis is completed. 4. Redline comments can be found on the enclosed check print of the tentative map. Fire: Please see attached comments from the Fire Department. November 30, 2012 Debbie Fountain Housing and Neighborhood Services 2965 Roosevelt St, Suite B CaHsbad, CA 92008 RE: Proposed Redevelopment of La Costa Towne Center Dear Debbie, As requested we are providing this letter to request a set aside of housing units from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit bank to allow the incorporation of 60 residential units (apartments) to La Costa Towne Center project. Project Description The commercial center, originally known as Plaza de la Costa Real, was designed and built in the early 1980's in accordance with City of Carlsbad Site Development Plan SDP-78-3 in a C-1 commercial zone. The center consists of five one and two story multi-tenant retail/office buildings anchored by a 30,800 SF Vons grocery store. The existing center provides approximately 123,000 SF ofbuilding area on a 10 acre net site area and 443 parking spaces are provided overall for a parking ratio of approximately 3.5 cars/1,000. Based on Excel LaCosta LLC's desire to maintain and enhance the center while maintaining the viability ofthe existing tenants, the overall development is being updated and a new mixed use residential component is being added. The overall renovation and expansion ofthe center, will consist of two new mixed-use commercial/residential buildings being added to the project along with a single level of structured parking to provide a revitalized commercial center of approximately 125,77 SF served by 498 parking places (3.75 cars/1,000) and 60 for-rent apartment units provided with 103 secure and segregated parking spaces. We anticipate that the overall project could be completed by the fall of 2014. Development plans for the center consist of two components, the remodel and renovation of the existing shops and office buildings on site, and the construction ofthe new mixed use project. Existing buildings 7720, 7750, 7760 and 7770 are scheduled to be updated over the next few months to accept new tenants. These remodels and new tenant improvements are ongoing. As part ofthe existing center work, the single story 7740 Shops Building is scheduled to be demolished and the existing parking lot expanded out to El Camino Real to improve sightlines into the center and redistribute the parking spaces provided for the existing retail/office tenants. 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 (858)613-1800 | Fax (858) 487-9890 New work proposed includes demolition of the existing Vons building and the constru ction of two new mixed use buildings & structured parking on the northern third ofthe existing property. This new development will include a single level parking garage below grade to provide parking for both commercial and residential uses. Approximately 103 secure residential parking spaces and 105 commercial parking spaces will be included in this new basement level parking garage, with additional commercial parking on the deck above. Above this new garage level, a new three story mixed use building, designated Building 7710, will be constructed which will include a 40,000 SF first floor for commercial tenants and two levels of residential apartments above. Adjacent and to the east of this 7710 Building, a second new two story mixed use building will be constructed , This second building will provide approximately 9,500 SF of retail space on the flrst floor and 12 residential units on a second level above. These twelve units will be designated for below market rate rental units. The residential levels ofthe two buildings will be connected by an open air bridge spanning overthe north entry drive to the center. Discretionary Approvals Required Based on the property's current C-1 zoning and the update ofthe commercial center and incorporation ofthe new for-rent residential units proposed. Excel LaCosta LLC will be requesting the following discretionary approvals from the City of Carlsbad: • Site Development Plan Amendment (Major) to existing SDP 78-03C • Special Use Permit for intensification of use adjacent to the El Camino Real Corridor • Conditional Use Permit, to allow the residential use As part ofthe discretionary approval process required. Excel LaCosta LLC is requesting an allocation of sixty (60) residential units for this project from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. The number of units being requested is based on the General Housing Element requirement for 20 dwelling units per acre, utilizing 25% of the existing shopping centers net acreage. The net acreage excludes land encumbered by the major power transmission line easement and natural slopes with an inclination greater than 40% per CMC 21.53.230. The developable acreage calculated in this manner is 10.81 acres, and sixty (60) residential units are proposed based on a density of 22 DU/Acre for 25% of the developable site, which meets the General Plan Housing Element required minimum of 20 DU/Acre. Our project proposes that twelve (12), or 20% of the sixty (60) units to be constructed, will be made available to low and moderate income households. The mixed use project with the inclusion ofa residential component in an existing retail/office center fulfills the City Council Policy 43 to encourage smart growth development. The site is on existing bus routes and near an existing bust stop on El Camino Real just across La Costa Boulevard. The updated mixed use center also provides new employment opportunities and commercial support services for the residents on site. Minimum Standards Modifications Requested While the SDP Amendment will include project-specific modifications from the CMC for the overall mixed use project, we can identify three modifications specifically related to the residential project at this time: 1. Building Height: Building 7710, the larger ofthe two mixed-use buildings, is proposed as a vertically integrated mixed use project with two floors of residential apartments over a major retail/commercial space at grade, with a secure basement level residential parking garage provided below the retail. The resulting three story building is designed with a varied roofline within 45' of finished grade surrounding the building. The CMC 21.04.065 allows exceptions to measuring the height from the basement level parking garage level at vehicular entrance points. We are requesting that this same exception be applied to our proposed pedestrian entrance/exit from the garage level at the northwest corner of the building. 2. Commercial Parking Count: We are increasing parking. The existing commercial project is parked at a parking ratio of approximately 3.5 cars/1000 SF, which meets the original parking requirements approved forthe Center. All new commercial area over and above the existing GLA will be parked at current City standards. 3. Residential Visitor Parking: While parking required for residential tenants is fully accounted for in the secure garage, we request that the additional required parking for residential visitors be waived, based on the assumption that these residential guests will utilize the public parking spaces provided on-site. 4. El Camino Scenic Corridor Building Setbacks: Because the new mixed use Building 7710 is replacing the original Vons market in approximately the same location on the site, we are requesting that the existing building setbacks along El Camino Real be maintained per the Project's original SDP approval, and that the project be exempted from the larger setbacks now required by the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor ordinance. City/Public Benefits Provided The renovation and remodel ofthe LaCosta Towne Center will provide a much needed update to this aging center and make the project competitive again with its commercial center neighbors and restore it as a viable shopping destination within the CaHsbad trade area. Increase of sales revenues will generate increased sales tax and funds for expanded City services. Generate additional development fees. We believe that this project proposal, with its expanded and enhanced retail space and the incorporation of new residential apartments, truly meets the definition of smart growth by providing needed housing and affordable units on a previously developed shopping center site. We're proposing to provide twenty percent (20%) of the new residential units as low to moderate income units. Providing opportunities for living, working, and shopping within one contiguous site will reduce traffic and help to recapture revenues presently leaking out ofthe CaHsbad trade area. Conclusion With minimum impacts to City services, the new LaCosta Towne Center mixed use project will enhance existing commercial and residential inventories in the LaCosta area, increase parking, create new employment, and generate development fees, real estate and sales tax for the City. Please let us know ifyou have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely William J. Stone Sr. VP Development & Asset Management Cc Gary Barberio Don Neu Shannon Werneke Geoffrey Sherman, Excel Trust Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects Randall Bohl, Benson & Bohl Architects Mark Stevens, Stevens Cresto Engineering CITY OF VCARLSBAD Planning Division www.carlsbadca.gov August 31, 2012 Mr. William Stone 17140 Bernardo Center Drive San Diego, CA 92128 SUBJECT: PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER APN: 216-124-16, -17 Thank you for submitting a preliminary review for the renovation of La Costa Towne Center. Proposed improvements include the demolition of the existing Von's building as well as an additional retail building and the construction of two mixed use buildings, including 60 multi-family apartments and additional ground- floor retail uses. A net gain of 2,780 square feet of retail and 64,490 square feet of multi-family residential is proposed. The project is located on the south side of La Costa Avenue and the east side of El Camino Real. The project site is currently developed with a 121,429 square foot shopping center. In response to your application, the Planning Division has prepared this comment letter. Please note that the purpose of a preliminary review is to provide you with direction and comments on the overall concept of your project. This preliminarv review does not represent an in-depth analvsis of vour proiect. It is intended to give vou feedback on critical issues based upon the information provided in vour submittal. This review is based upon the plans, policies, and standards in effect as of the date of this review. Please be aware that at the time of a formal application submittal, new plans, policies, and standards mav be in effect and additional issues of concern mav be raised through a more specific and detailed review. Planning: General 1. General Plan and zoning designations for the property are as follows: a. General Plan: L/OS, Local Shopping Center/Open Space; b. Zoning: C-l-Q, Neighborhood Commercial with a Qualified Development Overiay; and c. Additional Overiay: The project is located within Area 5 of the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor. 2. The project requires the following permits: a. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the proposal to add residential uses above the ground floor of a multi-story commercial building. A CUP requires approval bythe Planning Commission; b. Special Use Permit (SUP) for an intensiflcation of use adjacent to the El Camino Real corridor. A SUP requires approval by the Planning Commission; c. Site Development Plan (SDP) Amendment (Major) to SDP 78-03(C) for the modifications to the shopping center. A SDP amendment requires approval by the Planning Commission; d. Site Development Plan (Major) for the inclusionary housing component of the project. As more than 50 multi-family units are proposed, the SDP requires approval by the City Council; e. Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. This permit may be required pending the submittal of additional information regarding the proximity of existing native upland habitat 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 2 with respect to the location of the 7714 building as well as a detailed review by the Fire Department (please see additional discussion below); f. Hillside Development Permit. This permit may be required pending the submittal of additional information (please see additional discussion below); and g. A determination regarding the type of CEQA document required will be decided upon within 30 days of deeming the appiication complete for processing. Each of the required studies (discussed below) shall be submitted to make this determination. 3. The following additional permits are recommended (please see No. 4 below): a. General Plan Amendment from Local Shopping Center (L) to General Commercial (GC); and b. Zone Change from Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to General Commercial (C-2). 4. Although a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Land Use designation from Local Shopping Center (L) to General Commercial (GC) and the Zoning designation from Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to General Commerciai (C-2) is not referenced in the application and the project description that was provided with it, please be advised that a change in the zoning and General Plan designation will create more flexibility with respect to the type of anchor tenant and the allowable height (per C-2 standards). The current L designation as well as the C-1 zoning designation will limit the types of anchor tenants that will be able to locate within the center. Specifically, the anchor tenant will be required to serve the daily needs and convenience of the local neighborhood. The most common uses are a supermarket or a drugstore. The GC and C-2 designations would allow a broader range of uses, such as a department store and a chain apparel store. To provide you with more flexibility with prospective tenants, you are therefore encouraged to apply for a change in the General Plan Land Use designation as well as the Zoning designation. 5. Pursuant to the General Plan Housing Element, the City's commercial zones shall be developed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the dwelling unit yield projected for shopping centers is based on only 25 percent of the center's net acreage. The project description provided with the application indicates the property has a net acreage of 12.25 acres. Therefore, the proposed project density is projected to be 19.6 dwelling units per acre. Please demonstrate on the project plans how the net acreage was calculated for the shopping center. Please be advised that the net acreage calculation shall comply with CMC Section 21.53.230. 6. Please be advised that the proposal to construct 60 multi-family apartments is subject to City Council Policy No. 43 and requires an allocation from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43, transit-oriented, "smart growth" development projects where increased residential density is being placed in close proximity to major transit facilities, employment opportunities, and commercial support services, qualify for an allocation of excess units. However, please be advised that at this time, a limited number of residential units (165) are available for allocation. These units are available on a first-come, first-serve basis and require approval from the Planning Commission. 7. Because the project is requesting an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank, a minimum of 20% ofthe proposed residential units (i.e., 60(.20) = 12 units) will be required to be constructed and restricted both as to occupancy and affordability to lower-income households. The exact requirement will be negotiated based on a proposal submitted to Debbie Fountain, Housing and Neighborhood Services Director. If you have any questions or wish to discuss possible alternatives, she can be reached at (760) 434-2935. )^E PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOVTNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 3 8. The subject shopping center was approved in 1979 prior to the adoption of the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (1984). Pursuant to the original Site Development Plan approved for the existing shopping center (SDP 78-3), a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaped setback shall be provided along all street frontages. Pursuant to the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (Area 5), the following setbacks from El Camino Real apply: a. Upslope: minimum of 40 feet from ROW or minimum 15 feet from toe of slope, whichever is greater; b. Downslope: minimum 45 feet from ROW or minimum 15 feet from toe of slope, whichever is greater; or c. At grade: minimum 30 feet. Some method of screening must be incorporated into this setback subject to the approval of City Planner, which can include berms, decorative walls, heavy landscaping, or a combination of the three. In no case can a 6-foot-tall wall or parking area encroach closer than 25 feet of the ROW. Please be advised that although the setbacks for the existing center are legal nonconforming, any new development is required to comply with the current front yard setback (i.e., one of three options listed above). However, pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.120(c), if inclusionary units are provided on-site, the Site Development Plan may allow less restrictive development standards than specified in the underlying zone or elsewhere provided that the project is in conformity with the general plan and adopted policies and goals ofthe city, it would have no detrimental effect on public health, and safety and welfare. 9. To determine whether the project is exempt from the requirement of a Hillside Development Permit, please confirm whether the additional development in the area of Building 7714 (i.e., re-grading, slope alteration, or building encroachment) impacts a manufactured slope with a gradient of 40 percent or greater and an elevation difference (height) of 15 feet or greater which has been previously graded consistent with an authorized grading permit. 10. Notwithstanding the above, please be advised that pursuant to CMC Section 21.95.120(C), development on or into an uphill perimeter manufactured slope shall be limited to a maximum of six (6) feet as measured from the existing grade at the toe of the slope. However, if it is determined that the grading into the uphill manufactured slope is an intervening manufactured slope, the above noted requirement does not apply. 11. The subject site is located adjacent to El Camino Real, a prime arterial road. As such, the site falls within the 70 decibel (dB) future noise contour as identified on the Future Noise Exposure Contour Map. Pursuant to the Noise Guidelines Manual, the interior and exterior noise levels shall be attenuated as follows: Commercial: Exterior: 65 dB(A) CNEL or less Interior: 55 dB(A) CNEL or less Residential: Exterior: 60 dB(A) CNEL or less Interior: 45 dB(A) CNEL or less Since the anticipated future noise levels potentially exceed the exterior noise thresholds, a noise study shall be prepared in conjunction with the submittal. The study shall be prepared by a registered professional and shall provide recommendations, as appropriate, to attenuate the noise. In addition, the study shall address any noise issues associated with the location of the loading dock PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWlNlE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 4 in proximity to the residential units, outdoor eating areas as well as any outdoor recreation proposed in association with the multi-family units. 12. Please submit an Air Quality Assessment and Greenhouse Gas Study with the proposed application. 13. Please indicate the size of the "Not A Part" bank building and where the required parking stalls in association with this use are located. In addition, please clarify whether the 7 parking stalls located adjacent to this building on a separate property have been included in the parking calculation for the shopping center. In addition, please confirm whether the bank relies on using additional parking within the shopping center to comply with its own parking calculation. 14. As access, at a minimum, is shared between the "Not a Part" bank (APN 216-124-15) and the shopping center (i.e. parking may be shared as well), please submit a copy ofthe recorded reciprocal access agreement with the application. 15. Based on the proposed resulting area of the shopping center, 127,496 square feet, a total of 638 parking stalls are required for the commercial and retail components of the project (1 parking space per 200 square feet of shopping center gross floor area). In addition, as the guest parking for the residential units is proposed to be fulfilled within the shopping center parking lot, an additional 15 parking stalls are required (0.25 spaces per unit). Therefore, the total number of parking spaces required is 653 parking spaces. Based on the site plan submitted, a total of 521 parking spaces are proposed. Therefore, there is a shortfall of 132 parking spaces. Please be advised that although staff recommends that you request a 15% common parking facilities reduction pursuant to CMC Section 21.44.090, a maximum reduction of 15% can be granted. Including the 15% parking reduction, a minimum of 556 parking stalls are required and 521 spaces are proposed. Therefore, please reduce the retail area a minimum of 7,000 square feet to satisfy the minimum parking requirements for a 15% common facilities parking reduction. 16. Please submit cross sections taken from the adjacent residential property to the east through the tallest point ofthe project. 17. The maximum permissible height in the C-1 and C-2 zones is 35 feet and three stories, including the protrusions described in CMC Section 21.46.020. Purely architectural features that (1) do not function to provide useable floor area; (2) do not accommodate and/or screen building equipment; (3) do not adversely impact adjacent properties; and (4) are necessary to ensure a building's design excellence, may be permitted up to 45 in the C-1 zone and 55 feet in the C-2 zone by a Site Development Plan. In the C-2 zone (i.e. if General Plan change is requested from C-1 to C-2), please be advised that all required setbacks shall be increased at a ratio of one horizontal foot for every one foot of vertical construction beyond 35 feet. The additional setback area will be required to be landscaped. Additional height may also be considered as a component of the Conditional Use Permit and/or through the Site Development Plan forthe inclusionary housing. 18. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.04.065, "building height" includes all portions of a building exposed above existing or flnished grade, whichever is lower. This includes, but is not limited to, all portions of exterior walls of a basement, underground parking or other subterranean areas that are exposed above existing or finished grade, whichever is lower, and the exposed exterior portion ofa basement located on a downhill or uphill side of a building on a sloping lot, but does not include the exposed portion of "underground parking" structure entrance (defined: CMC Section 21.04.370). In order for PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 5 the garage entry to be excluded from the height calculation, please be advised that the project is required to meet the definition of a basement. Please submit an exhibit which details whether Building 7710 (western mixed use building) complies with the definition of a "basement" pursuant to CMC Section 21.04.045. 19. Based on a review of aerial photographs and the city's Habitat Management Plan, Buiiding 7714 (eastern mixed use building) may be located adjacent to existing sensitive upland habitat to the east. In addition, the area adjacent to the parking lot to the east has a General Plan Land Use designation of Open Space (OS), the closest point of which is immediately adjacent to the driveway to the south of the building. Staff has the following comments relative the potential adjacent sensitive habitat and the OS General Plan Land Use designation: a. Please submit a biological survey analyzing the proposed project impacts. If no sensitive habitat will be impacted, the report can be brief If, however, sensitive habitat will be impacted, the report shall include a detailed analysis of the project's compliance with the city's Habitat Management Plan (HMP); b. A 60-foot-wide fuel modification zone is typically required from upland habitat. Additional consultation will be required with the Fire Department with respect to the required width of the fuel modification zone. Based on the limited information provided with respect to the type of habitat relative to the proposed building, staff is unable to ascertain compliance with these standards; c. Pursuant to the HMP, a minimum 20 foot-wide setback is required from native upland habitat such as coastal sage scrub. Buffer widths shall be measured from the edge of the habitat to the closest point of the development; d. Please be advised that development proposed adjacent to sensitive native habitat is required to comply with the Adjacency Standards outlined in the HMP (pages F-16 to F-22); and e. Pursuant to Implementing Policy and Action Program C.20 of the General Plan Open Space & Conservation Element, land designated as Open Space (OS) shall not be removed or modified unless an area equal to or greater in size and value replaces the lost area. Additional information is needed with respect to the project to determine if there will be an encroachment into the open space area. Based on a review of the location the OS zone in relationship to the property, it appears that the development of Building 7714 comes very close to the OS zone, particularly in the area ofthe driveway entry. 20. Special attention shall be paid to the screening of any rooftop equipment from adjacent residential uses as well as the public streets. Cross sections shall be submitted with the application demonstrating how the equipment will be screened. 21. The loading dock shall be screened to the maximum extent feasible from La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real. A trellis and/or additional architectural enhancements are recommended for the loading dock. 22. Based on the extent and details ofthe proposed buildings and associated fagade remodel, please be advised that upgrades may be recommended to the existing wireless communication facility tower located at the northerly entrance off La Costa Avenue. 23. Any additional lighting shall be shielded from the adjacent residential uses to the east as well as from El Camino Real. 24. Please describe the recreational opportunities (active/passive) that will be providecl for the tenants ofthe apartments. At a minimum, a spa and recreation room is recommended. PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 7 37. If a dedicated northbound right turn lane from El Camino Real to La Costa Avenue is required (please see Engineering comments below), authorization from the owner of APN 216-124-25 will be required as well as details as to how the offsite improvements might affect the property. All necessary application forms, submittal requirements, and fee information are available at the Planning counter located in the Faraday Building at 1635 Faraday Avenue or on line at www.carisbadca.gov. You may also access the General Plan Land Use Element and the Zoning Ordinance online at the website address shown; select Department Listing; select Planning Home Page. Please review all information carefully before submitting. Engineering: Engineering Department staff has completed a preliminary review of the above referenced project. This preliminary review does not constitute a complete review of the proposed project and additional items of concern may be identified upon formal project applicatiorf submittal. Prior to formal application submittal, the following items should be adequately resolved/ addressed: 1. All easements and encumbrances as identified by a current preliminary or title report should be shown on the site plan. The future disposition of any easements and encumbrances must also be identified. 2. Provide a preliminary geotechnical study that identifies feasibility and recommendations for the proposed development as it relates to the site including the proposed building along the easterly portion of the site. 3. When the La Costa Towne Center was developed there was a sewer moratorium in place. The development went forward by using a temporary septic system. Address the current sanitary disposal system and the location ofthe septic tank(s) and leach lines if any remain. 4. As part of the formal application, this project will require a preliminary hydrology/hydraulic analysis to calculate existing and proposed lOO-year storm flows. Provide verification that storm flows are not increased to the maximum extent practicable. Identify existing and proposed storm drain collection and detainment system required to serve the project. 5. Include a typical street section of La Costa Avenue that indicates existing and proposed improvements (pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, centeriine, street lights, fire hydrants, etc.). 6. A traffic impact analysis will be required addressing the proposed right turn in/out along El Camino Real, the potential need for a dedicated northbound right turn lane from El Camino Real to La Costa Avenue as well as the impact ofthe project ADT on surrounding streets and intersections. 7. Show all existing utilities, such as sewer and water facilities, and all their appurtenances (access holes, valves, fire hydrants, blow-offs, air-release valves) to identify if there are confiicts with the proposed project. 8. Submit the project to and obtain approval from Olivenhain Municipal Water district. 9. Submit the project to and obtain approval from Leucadia Wastewater District. 10. Show on the site plan the sewer (edu), potable water (gpm), and reclaimed water (gpm) generated or required by the proposed development. )^E PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOVTNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 6 25. Retaining walls shall be stepped every six feet, with a minimum three-foot-wide landscape planter in between each section of the retaining wall. Please be advised that the retaining wall adjacent to the service/loading dock area and on the property line shared with the adjacent property to the north will need to be redesigned to reduce the height and to incorporate landscaping, including lattices for vines. In addition, the wall supporting the parking structure and stairs along El Camino Real should be stepped as well. 26. The supplemental project description provided with the application and project plans (dated 8/3/12) indicates that a total of 124,921 square feet of retail will be provided. The project plans indicated the resulting square footage as 127,496. Please reconcile the plans/description accordingly and revise the parking calculation as appropriate. 27. All landscaping shall comply with the city's Landscape Manual. Please be advised that additional landscaping will be required for the surface parking stalls over the new parking garage, particularly in the areas where there are two rows of abutting parking stalls. In addition, landscape planters at the base of the columns of each of the proposed arcades and additional tree wells throughout the parking lot are recommended. 28. The undercarriages of all cars facing El Camino Real shall either be screened by landscaping or a wall extending above the finished floor of the roof of the parking garage. In addition, tree wells shall be incorporated into the row of parking stalls facing El Camino Real. 29. Landscaping and/or additional architectural relief shall be incorporated into the design of the west and north elevations of the ground floor retail area for Building 7710 (western mixed use building). A series of lattices or iron details with landscape planters for vines are recommended as well to soften the appearance ofthis elevation. 30. A decorative railing and lighting is recommended for the bridge spanning the driveway to complement the upgraded architecture in the shopping center. 31. Please indicate where the management office will be located for the 60 multi-family units. 32. Decorative pavement is recommended at each of the driveway entries into the shopping center. 33. A total of three parking stalls shall be converted to vehicle turnaround areas at the end of each of the three rows of parking stalls in the underground parking structure for the residential units. 34. Please be advised that there are a number of existing wireless communication facilities located on the south elevation of the bank located on the southeast corner of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue which will be in a direct line of sight with the proposed multi-family units. 35. You are encouraged to contact the property owner of the "Not a Part" parcel (APN 216-124-15) to coordinate the proposed fagade remodel. Ideally, the property owner would be interested in updating their property so a consistent and cohesive architectural theme is achieved throughout the shopping center. 36. Upgraded landscaping is recommended along the El Camino Real frontage to complement the upgrades to the shopping center. PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 7 37. If a dedicated northbound right turn lane from El Camino Real to La Costa Avenue is required (please see Engineenng comments below), authorization from the owner of APN 216-124-25 will be required as well as details as to how the offsite improvements might affect the property. All necessary application forms, submittal requirements, and fee information are available at the Planning counter located in the Faraday Building at 1635 Faraday Avenue or on line at www.carlsbadca.gov. You may also access the General Plan Land Use Element and the Zoning Ordinance online at the website address shown; select Department Listing; select Planning Home Page. Please review all information carefully before submitting. Engineering: Engineering Department staff has completed a preliminary review of the above referenced project. This preliminary review does not constitute a complete review of the proposed project and additional items of concern may be identified upon formal project application submittal. Prior to formal application submittal, the following items should be adequately resolved/ addressed: 1. All easements and encumbrances as identified by a current preliminary or title report should be shown on the site plan. The future disposition of any easements and encumbrances must aiso be identified. 2. Provide a preliminary geotechnical study that identifies feasibility and recommendations for the proposed development as it relates to the site including the proposed building along the easterly portion ofthe site. 3. When the La Costa Towne Center was developed there was a sewer moratorium in place. The development went forward by using a temporary septic system. Address the current sanitary disposal system and the location ofthe septic tank(s) and leach lines if any remain. 4. As part of the formal application, this project will require a preliminary hydrology/hydraulic analysis to calculate existing and proposed lOO-year storm fiows. Provide verification that storm flows are not increased to the maximum extent practicable. Identify existing and proposed storm drain collection and detainment system required to serve the project. 5. Include a typical street section of La Costa Avenue that indicates existing and proposed improvements (pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, centeriine, street lights, fire hydrants, etc.). 6. A traffic impact analysis will be required addressing the proposed right turn in/out along El Camino Real, the potential need for a dedicated northbound right turn lane from El Camino Real to La Costa Avenue as well as the impact ofthe project ADT on surrounding streets and intersections. 7. Show all existing utilities, such as sewer and water facilities, and all their appurtenances (access holes, valves, fire hydrants, blow-offs, air-release valves) to identify if there are conflicts with the proposed project. 8. Submit the project to and obtain approval from Olivenhain Municipal Water district. 9. Submit the project to and obtain approvai from Leucadia Wastewater District. 10. Show on the site plan the sewer (edu), potable water (gpm), and reclaimed water (gpm) generated or required by the proposed development. PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 PageB 11. Show all fire hydrants within 300 feet of the site. 12. Complete a Storm Water Standards Questionnaire. This questionnaire will guide you and the city in determining what type of reports and storm water mitigation must be completed to satisfy state and city storm water quality requirements. The questionnaire is available at the city website: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/engineering/chklstpdf/stormwater-qstnn.pdf 13. Based on our review of the proposed site plan, this project may be considered a priority project and would therefore.be required to submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP shall comply with the City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards, Volume 4, Storm Water Standards Manual, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order No. R9-2007-01. The City's Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) contains standards and requirements to eliminate or reduce to the maximum extent practicable the pollution that enters local streams, creeks, bays and beaches by using storm water best management practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) site design techniques. LID site design techniques attempt to reduce the amount of run-off by mimicking the natural hydrologic function of the site. It focuses on preservation of natural open-spaces and natural drainage channels, minimizing impervious surfaces, promoting infiltration and evaporation of run-off before it leaves the site. The San Diego County LID Handbook dated December 31, 2007 discusses a broad range of LID Integrated Management Practices (IMPs) samples to help developers mimic the site's natural hydrological function. 14. Show on the site plan the calculations for the total ADT generated by the project. 15. Contact and submit correspondence from NCTD regarding their requirements for this project. Show required NCTD facilities, if any. 16. Indicate how a truck (per Caltrans 407-E) with a 42-foot turning radius will circulate throughout the site. Show the inside and outside tire tracks. 17. Indicate how a truck (per Caltrans 407-D) with a 60-foot turning radius will circulate to any proposed loading areas. Building: 1. An accessible pedestrian path of travel to the shopping center is required from public transportation at El Camino Real. 2. The required disabled parking spaces are not shown on the parking layout; therefore, the layout and resulting number of parking stalls may be affected. Fire: 1. Please be advised that any tenant improvements to the existing buildings may trigger the requirement for the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler and fire alarm system. 2. The proposed mixed use building adjacent to the eastern uphill slope is required to provide a 60- foot-wide fire buffer or the eastern wall of the building will be required to have fire-rated construction. 4 PRE 12-21 - LA COSTA TOWNE CENTER August 31, 2012 Page 9 3. Additional fire hydrants may be warranted. If you would like to schedule a meeting to discuss this letter with the commenting departments, please contact Shannon Werneke at the number below. You may also contact each department individually as follows: • Planning Department comments: Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner, at (760) 602-4621. • Engineering Department comments: Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer - Engineering Development Sen/ices, at (760) 602-2747, • Fire Department comments: Greg Ryan, Fire Inspections, at (760) 602-4663. Sincerely, CHRIS DeCERBO Principal Planner CD:SW:bd c: Richard Benson, Benson & Bohl Architects, 3861 Front Street, San Diego, CA 92123 Don Neu, City Planner Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Steve Bobbett, Project Engineer Greg Ryan, Fire Prevention File Copy Data Entry Speaker Slip^ City of Carlsbad Planning Commission Meeting J^SCTwould like to address the Commission regarding an item that 4 4t4 IS on the Agenda. The item number is . ^ The Topic is: ^4 ceg_/> yj-x^^W j^tA^wT • I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS NOT on the Agenda. The Topic is: My Name:. My Address: 1'^'b ^(^Cf'^ Cj- Please place this slip in the clear tray marked Speaker Slips located on the wall next to the Minutes Clerk. Speaker SWp^ City of Carlsbad Planning Commission Meeting D-^l would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS on the Agenda. The item number is ^ The Topic is: /L 3 6ov/^ "T^uj/^<^ roy^Ycy • I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS NOT on the Agenda. The Topic is: MvName: '^xjQ^Cfh ^^j'^l/?.^/^ MvAddress: t'tO />J. (VoV . ^ ^c. ^-^cL-T Please place this slip in the clear tray marked Speaker Slips located on the wall next to the Minutes Clerk. Speaker Slip^ City of Carlsbad Planning Commission Meeting I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS on the Agenda. The item number is The Topic is: • I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS NOT on the Agenda. The Topic is: My Name: I My Address: \jl^4r\C0 ^V\v-e Please place this slip in the clear tray marked Speaker Slips located on the wall next to the Minutes Clerk. w Speaker Sli| City of Carlsbad Planning Commission Meeting • I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that IS on the Agenda. The item num ber is T The Topic is: ^(^^ ^^7^^^ Cj^-xS/^— • I would like to address the Commission regarding an item that <^ IS NOT on the Agenda. The Topic is:_ My Name: >-7 My Address:. J Please place this slip in the clear tray marked Speaker Slips located on the wall next to the Minutes Clerk.