HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP 141; Vanderburg Property; Specific Plan (SP)STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CASE NO:
APPLICANT:
APRIL 13, 1977
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CUP-136/SP-146(C)
RON ROBERTS (AGENT)
REQUEST:
a) Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a
McDonald's fast-food restaurant, subject to
Specific Plan approval.
b) Approval of an amendment to an existing Specific
Plan to incorporate site plan modifications and
the fast-food restaurant.
c) Approval of architectural elevations for the
McDonalds restaurant.
SECTION I. RECOMMENDATION;
a) Conditional Use Permit
Staff recommends that CUP-136 be DENIED based on the following
findings:
1) The requested use not necessary or desirable for the development
of the community, is not in harmony with the various elements
and objectives of the general plan, and is detrimental to
existing uses or to uses specif icaj:ly_p_ermj1tted^ in the zone in
which the proposed use is
a) The increased traff/ac and parking congestion j^erTer a ted by
the amendment conflicts with theCJ-rcuiatron Element guide-
line of coordinating^Ehe diSTTFTEution, character and inten-
sity of all land uses with the Land Use Element to preclude
the increased levels of traffic which would be generated
beyond the capacity of the existing or planned street system
until such time as adequate facilities can be provided".
b) The increased traffic and parking congestion generated by
the amendment conflicts with the Land Use Element Utility
and Public Service Development guideline of ensuring "the
capacity of major street linkage to provide for the needs
of the proposed development without substantially altering
existing traffic patterns or overloading the existing street
system...."
2) The site for the intended use is not adequate in size and
shape to accommodate the use, because:
a) _The location of the «Ht-g in rp.l^tion to the
^gervice station, center main entrance and parking lot
traffic lane creates negative traffic impacts that
cannot be mitigated.
b) The shape of the site, incorporating the proposed design,
creates numerous traffic conflict points that cannot be
mitigated. -
c) The size of site, incorporating the size of proposed
restaurant, dictates parking and circulation design that
will negatively impact the existing circulation facilities
and the visual character of the area.
3) The street system serving the proposed use is not adequate
to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use,
because;
a) Traffic generated by the proposed use will compound the
traffic congestion now experienced on El Camino Real; and
b) The traffic generated by the proposed uses when combined
with traffic generated by. the expansion of the Plaza Camino
Real Center, the remainder of the Carlsbad Plaza Center,
and the Center to be constructed on the south side of Marron
. Road, will create excessive congestion on El Camino Real in
the area.
b) Specific Plan Amendment
It is recommended that SP-146(C), be DENIED based on the
following findings :
1) The requested amendment is detrimental to the existing Specific
Plan because:
a) The location of the site in relation to the adjacent
service station, center main entrance and parking lot
traffic lane creates negative traffic impacts that cannot
be mitigated.
b) The shape of the site, incorporating the proposed design
creates numerous traffic conflict points that cannot be
mitigated.
c) The size of site, in£Q*pora~r£ihg the size~~rr§^proposed
restaurant, Hi^^a^^Tj-^r-ving^and circulationJdesign that
will negatively impaxL Lhe exibLirrg circulation facilities
and the visual character of the
2) The street system serving the proposed center'is inadequate to
properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed center ..
" ' because:
a) Traffic generated by the proposed restaurant will compound
the traffic congestion now experienced on El Camino Real;
and
b) The traffic generated by the proposed use when combined
with traffic generated by the expansion of the Plaza Camino
Real Center, the remainder of the Carlsbad Plaza Center, and
the Center to be constructed on the ojflth^side of Marron
Road, will create excessive congestion on El Camino Real
in the future, despite improvements to the street system in
the area.
3) The requested amendment does not conform to the City's adopted
General Plan because:
a) The increased traffic and parking congestion generated by
the amendment conflicts with the Circulation Element guide-
line of coordinating "the distribution, character and in-
tensity of all land uses with the Land Use Element to pre-
clude the increased levels of traffic which would be gener-
ated beyond the capacity of the existing or planned street
system until such time as adequate facilities can be provided1.1
b) The increased traffic and parking congestions generated by
the amendment conflicts with the Land Use Element Utility
and Public Service Development Guideline fo ensuring "the
capacity of major street linkage to provide for the needs
of the proposed development without substantially altering
existing traffic patterns or overloading the existing street
. system..."
c. Architectural Elevations
It is recommended that the Architectural Elevations for the
fast-food restaurant as proposed be DENIED, since it has been
recommended that the Conditional Use Permit be denied.
SECTION II. BACKGROUND
Location and Description of Property;
The fast-food restaurant site (approximately 21000 Sq.Ft.)
northwest corner of the Carlsbad Shopping Center North,
adjacent to El Camino Real (across from the Plaza Camino Real).
The main entrance to the Carlsbad Shopping Center is located
directly to the south of the proposed site.
The main tennants of the center have, for the most part been
constructed i.e., Vons, Payless, Security Pacific Bank, Gibraltar
Savings, Home Federal Savings and Bank of America. The parking
lot and access roads have been constructed. There are three major
access points to the center; Haymar Drive, the access south of
the proposed McDonalds site and Marron Road. Marron Road is a
signalized intersection at El Camino Real.
Existing Zoning;
Subject Property: C-2
North: L-C
South: C-2-Q
East: R-l-10000
West: C-2
Existing Land Use;
Subject Property: Carlsbad Shopping Center
North: Buena Vista Creek & Hwy 78
South: Vacant (current SDP'S CUP request)
East: Vacant
West: Plaza Camino Real
Past History and Related Cases:
A Specific Plan for a shopping center (SP-146) on the subject
property was approved by the City Council on December 18, 1973
(City Council Resolution 3304). SP-146(A), approved by Council
on March 4, 1975 (Ordinance 9419), separated the project into
five phases.
The Planning Director approved minor changes to the site plan on
February 6, 1976, modifying building sites at the north end of the
site. He subsequently approved minor deviations to allow a drive-
thru bank. The Planning Commission approved building elevations
for the Shopping Center on February 26, 1976 and June 23, 1976.
On August 25, 1976 the Planning Commission agenda contained a
request for a CUP Sepecific Plan Amendment and approval of arch-
itectural elevations to accommodate a McDonalds drive-thru rest-
aurant on the subject site. On August 20, 1976 the applicant
requested the items to be withdrawn from consideration. At a
previous meeting the requests had been continued to provide add-
itional time for applicant and staff to work out problems. Staffs
recommendation at both meetings was denial.
Environmental Impact Information:
The Planning Director had determined that the project had complied
with the City's Environmental Protection Ordinance through Prior
Compliance (Section 19.04.153). An Environmental Impact Report (Nos,
219 and 220) was approved for the Shopping Center and certified in
connection with the original Specific Plan.
General Plan Information;
The project site is designated for Community Commercial Land Use.
The proposed amendment is in conformance with this designation. As
pointed out in the recommended findings, the present proposal does
not conform with guidelines of the Land Use and Circulation Elements,
.4
Public Facilities ''
At this time, all necessary public facilities, including
sewer service, are available to serve the subject project
as proposed. However, sewer facilities may not be available
when applications are made for building permits. If sewer
facilities are not available at the time of building permit
application, building permits will not be issued until
arrangements satisfactory to the City Council can be made
to guarantee that all necessary sewer facilities will be
available prior to occupancy.
Major Planning Considerations;
Is the proposed use appropriate for the site and the surrounding
specific plan area?
Will the proposed use cause adverse impacts on the adjacent streets?
SECTION III. DISCUSSION
Staff does not feel that the proposed location is appropriate for
an extremely high volume use such as a fast food restaurant. The
size and shape of the parcel and its relationship to other existing
or planned uses create an undesirable location for a high volume
use of the design proposed. The approved Specific Plan designates
the site for commercial use. Many commercial uses do not have the
high traffic volume characteristics that characterize a fast .food
restaurant.
Staf£_4ia-s--CT3ncern anouL LHd.uy **s^cts__of the proposed restaurant
>ee Exhibit C) . They generally f a TTTrTTrr-1 hrcc categories ;
1) VoMrcnliivr rjrmla^ion on site and of f-siteZl^Jpedestrian
circulation on site,
entrance
landscaping adequacy alone
.5
1) Major Impact:
Vehicular Circulation On-Site/Off-Site
a) Staff feels that the access easement through the service
station will be frequently used for ingress and egress to
the site and the shopping center. It essentially, provides
another entrance and exit for the restaurant and center.
This is not necessarily a positive result because of the
high traffic volume on El Camino Real. The number of con-
flict points (areas where turning, stopping, backing, etc.,
take place) should be minimized along a high volume street,
particularly in this location on El Camino Real. For example,
if a patron entered the easement from El Camino Real, then
waited for someone to vacate a parking space in the western
parking area, stacking would result on El Camino Real.
b) The relationship of the centers main entrance/exit to the
east McDonalds entrance/exit will create many problems.
The immediate area around the center access incorporates
extensive manuvering activities. It is a decision point for
motorists entering the center and a "funnel" for those
exiting the center. Because of the high traffic volumes
generated by the McDonalds, staff feels that the entrance/
exit as shown on Exhibit C, is too close to the center
entrance/ exit, eg; if two cars were stacked to the north
of the center exit, they would block the McDonalds access.
The more difficult the McDonalds access/center access are
to use, the more patrons will be inclined to use the service
station easement, which has its own inherent problems.
c) The site Plan Exhibit C, shows a walkway along the east side
of the restaurant. This walkway encroaches approximately
6 feet into a traffic lane. The walkway affords a motorist
the opportunity to stop and drop off pasengers. Staff feels
that in addition to the walkway encroachment, a parked
vehicle would significantly impare traffic movement.
2) Secondary Impact;
Pedestrian Circulation on Site
a) The parking areas are designed with no wheel stops. This
is to eliminate the maintenance/clean up problems created
in the "dead" areas between the curb and wheel stop. Under
the proposed design, automobiles are able to park with
wheel stopped at the curb. This eliminates the maintenance/
clean up problems, however, it effectively eliminates
between 2.5 and 3 feet of walkway (from automobile overhang).
The walkways, as shown on Exhibit C, are about 8 feet wide
which, in effect, provides a 5 foot walkway. Staff suggests
a wider walkway for a high volume restaurant.
b) Staff is concerned about the possibility of McDonalds
patrons parking in the service station easement. Walkways
are shown along this easement. The combination of service
station uses, pedestrian activity, through vehicle access
and possible parked cars would result in many conflicts.
Secondary Impact.;
3) Landscaping Adequacy
a) In the previous discussion staff explained, the parking
design eliminating wheel stops. Along the main entrance
to the center, vehicle overhang will eliminate approximately
2.5 to 3 feet of landscaping as shown. The landscaping
shown on Exhibit C is approximately 6 feet wide. A 3 foot
automobile overhang into the landscaped area would not
leave a space wide enough to accommodate the trees,, shown
on the plan. A 3 foot space would not sufficiently accom-
modate any substantial landscaping. Staff is concerned
about the visual impacts of the McDonald's parking lot on
the main center entrance with little or no landscape buffer.
Attachments;
Location Map
Exhibit A, dated 2/9/77
Exhibit B, dated 2/9/77
Exhibit C, dated 3/23/77
TH: ar
4/6/77
. •••
• /
#0.05
Rec'd:DCCDate:PC Date
Description of Request:cF \ C.C>P Tn Pegk\\"t
Address or Location of Request: •g:
Applicant:
Encjr. or Arch.
Brief Legal:
. RnfiS'ZTS >> .& .'\>.'
Assessor Book: Kol /\C^ Page:
General Plan Land Use Rescription:/
Existing Zone:
Acres:
Parcel :
No. of Lots:
School District:
Proposed Zone:
DU's
Water Sanitation District:
Within Coast Plan Area:
DU/Acre
. Coast 1'c.nint Area:
CITY OF CARLSBADPLA;;?!!;;Q DEPARTMENTSTAFF REPORT
January 28, 1975
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
REPORT ON: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN -146
CONSIDERATION OF PARCEL SPLIT i22Q
APPLICANT: AZALEA, INC., by John W. Bartman
450 N. Roxbury Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
I. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of:
A) An amendment to SP-146 (for the Kelly-Kurlander-
Vanderberg shopping center) to allow the project
to be constructed in five phases;
3) A parcel nap creating 2 lots over a 22..6 acre site;
The subject property is located on the east side of El Camino
Real betwesrs Haynar Drive and Marron Road.
II. RECOMMENDATIONS:
A) . Arr.end.~ent to SP-146: Staff recommends approval of the
proposed anendmant to SP-146 based on- the following
justification:
1) The proposed phasing meets all policy and ordinance
requirements of the City of Carlsbad.
2) The proposed phasing will not adversely affect the
approved specific plan.
B) Parcel Split 230: Staff recommends approval of PS-230 based
on the follov;; ,-v justification:
1 )• The parcel. .-,;- meets all City ordinances and policy
requi rement:. • •
2) The parcel map meets all Subdivision Map Act require-
ments. , •
III. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:'
A) Conditions for Amendment to SP-145:
, 1) Phasing of SP-145 shall be according to those
phases numbered A through E -as shown on the plot •
plan labelled Exhibit D, dated 1-21-74.
2) The public improvements for SP-146 shall be provided
with the respective phases as follows:
PHASE A:
a) Initiate and consummate street vacation of
Osuna Drive right of way to allow vacation
before expiration of temporary encroachment
permit.
b) Construct complete storm drain from Marron
Road to downstream connection to existing drain,
subject to approval of City Engineer, and
. dedicate easements from same.
c) Construct complete public improvements,
(including curb, gutter, sidewalk, any
additional fire hydrants, and mission bell
street lights) along entire El Camino Real
frontage.
d) Extend all utilities, including sewer and water,
required for ultimate development and dedicate
easements for same, through .Phase A.
e) Construct public improvements at Marron Road
entrance.
f) Waiver direct access rights to El Camino Real
and Marron Road except at entrances shown.
PHASE B:
a) Construct complete public iTorovements along
entire Marron Road and Hayrr.ir Drive frontage.
Access to Haymar Drive from El Camino Real shall
be right turn in and right turn out only.
b) Construct all water and sewer lines and dedicate
.easements for same.
-2-
c) Redesign and revise existing intersection
improvements across fr:?n Phase .3' access to
El Camino Real to integrate traffic movements
across and on to El Casino Real. Such work shall
include rechannelization, restriping, signal and
utility relocation as'approved by tne Ciuy Engineer'
d) Convert Phase A access -to El Cami no Real to right
turn in and out only.
PHASE C, D AND E:
a) Construct additional fire hy-drants as required by
the.Fi re Marshall.
B) Conditions for PS-230: .
1} The final map shall be substantially in conformance
with the tentative known as Exhibit B, dated 1-21-74.
2) The final map shall indicate existing lot lines.
3) Prior to approval of Final Map, the applicant shall:
a) Provide improvement security to construct
complete public frontage improvements, including
curb, gutter, sidewalk, any additional fire
hydrants and mission bel-1 street lights along
El Camino Real frontage.
b) Provide improvement, security to construct (or
enter into a future agreement with the City to
construct) complete public frontage improvements
along Haymar Drive.
c) Waiver Direct access rights from El Camino Real
and Hayrnar Drive,, except at access points approved
with the specific plan, shown on the Parcel Map-
as abutting thereon.
d) Provide improvement plans for storm drains,
water and sewer. Construct storm drains, water
and se'wer systems and dedicate easements for
same within limi-ts of first phase of development.
Construct (or enter into future agreement with the
City for installation) the complete storm drain,
water and sewer systems for the entire specific
plan and dedication of the remainder when the
next phase of development occurs.
e) Arrange to provide fire hydrants as required by
the Fi re Marshal 1.
-3-
IV. 'BACKGROUND: . • _
A) Location: East side of El Camino Real between Haymar Drive
and Harron Road.
BI Legal Description: Parcels 1 and' 2 of Parcel Map No. 487
'as shown on map recorded at Page 437 of Parcel Maps, Records
of San Diego County, State of California. Also, a portion of
Lot 4, fraction Section 32, township 11 S, Range 4 W, San
Bernardino Meridian, and further described in the files of
-the Planning Department.
C) Site Description: The site is vacant and unimproved except
for an existing temporary Bank of America facility. The
property slopes up to the east and is covered with sparse
scrub vegetation.
D) Project Description: The project consists of two separate
actions. The first of these invloves the amending of
SP-146 to allow the Kelly-Kurlander-Vandenburg Shopping
Center to be constructed in five phases. Phase A would
include two structures (presumably financial institutions)
at El Camino Real and Marron Road. Phase B would include
the site's 2 major tenants plus 2 .other buildings for
unspecified commercial uses. The bulk -of the shopping
center's parking will be provided with Phase B. Phase C,
D, and E will consist of the addition of shops at the
project's northern and- southern boundaries.
The proposed p-arcel map would divide an existing 21.91
acre parcel into two lots comprised of 10.7.6 and 11.80
acres. A small triangular lot at Osuna Drive and El Camino
Real is being added to. Lot 1.
E) Zoning:
Subject Property: C-2' (S.P.)
North: R-l-10,000
South: R-l-10,000 and P-C
East: R-l-10,000 and P-C
West: C-2 and C-l
F) Surroundino'Land Use: An existing temporary savings and
loan is locauro south of the subject property, an existing
service station is at the northwest corner of the site and
the Plaza Camino Rial is directly west of the site. The
Tiburon Development is Icc^ted southeast of the site.
G) General Plan Recommendation: The General Plan Land Use
Element shows the subject property as Community Commercial.
The proposed parcel map conforms with this designation.
•-4-
H) E n. v i ro r.-~~ = •" t~ 1 I"'c?.ct P. rrcu ir~~' vn t s : An Envi ror.~~ n ta 1 •
Impact Report was certified by the City Council concurrent
with a zone chance and specific plan approving a shopping
center on the subject property. The Planning Director
has determined that the subject.proposal meets the require-
ments of CE.QA and the Carlsbad Environmental Protection
'Ordinance for reason of prior compliance because it
Involves no changes in either the' project or the circum-
stances under which it is to be developed. A copy of the
certified EIR will be made available to the Planning
- Commission and City Council.
I) Discussion: At the time Specific Plan 146 for the subject
shopping center wa:> approved by the Planning Commission, '
the applicant indicated' an October, 1974 target date for
start of construction. 'This schedule, of course, has not
been met and the applicant now proposes to build the
center in phases.
One immediate constraint faced by the applicant is that
the existing temporary Bank of America and Home Federal
Savings and Loan facilities are approaching expiration
of their Conditional Use Permits. In order to keep their
Federal Charters active, these facilities will need to
be moved into permanent facilities within the year. Phase
A would presumably be built as soon as possible in order
to meet deadlines for these two facilities.
The applicant has no new timetable for the start of Phase
B (the major portion of the center). Obtaining financing
has been the major obstacle to the start of construction.
The applicant is cautiously optimistic that money may
become available within the next six months to begin
construction on Phase B.
ATTACHMENTS:
Plat of existing property
Plot plan for PS-230, Exhibit B, dated 1-21-75
Ph.asing plan for SP-l'46, Exhibit D, d:ated 1-21-75
City Council Resolution 3304 approving SP-141 and 146.
SDH/vb
1-22-75
-5-
OCEANS [DE
CARLSBAD
:'• '•' Or,'I ML A
i - i 0 J
r i I "' "•• ' V. If. •
.^fi^^%*N, ^o, /? ' •§A*-'e..K^ ^^K>.^" ,^'
DF.TAR. B
I'ifOO
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT FOR
NOVEMBER 2?, 1973
CASE NOS:
APPLICANTSi
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION.
REPORT ON: - CONSIDERATION OF EIR
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE OF ZONES
CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN
EIR-219 & 220
ZC-131
ZC-132
SP-141
SP-146
R. LADWIG FOR
KELLY-KURLANDER, et al &'0. E. VANDERBURG .
509 Elm Avenue
• . Carlsbad, California
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Request; These cases cover a total parcel containing approximately
29.28 acres located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Marron
Road and El Camino Real. Due to the multiplicity of ownerships, separate
cases were submitted and are broken down as follows:
ZC-131 and SP-141 deal with a 2.83 acre parcel that is located at the
southeast corner of the intersection of Osuna Drive and El Camino Real.
Zfr-132 and SP—146' deal with a 26.45 acre parcel located at the northeast '-'
corner of the intersection of Osuna Drive andEl Camino Real.
1. On EIR-219 & 220; That the Planning Commission recommend to the City
Council that a final EIR be accepted on the total property.
2. On ZC-131 & SP-141: That the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council a change of zone from R-l-10 (single family - 10,000 sq.ft. lots
man.) to C-2 (General Commercial) and approve a specific plan for development
of a portion of a shopping center on a portion of Lot 4» Section 32, Township
11 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, City of Carlsbad.
3. On ZC-132 & SP-146; That the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council a change of zone from R-l-10 (single family - 10,000 sq.ft. lots
man.) and a specific plan for development of a major portion of a shopping
center on a portion of Lots 4 & 5t Section 32, Township 11 South, Range 4 West,
San Bernardino Meridian, City of Carlsbad.
B. Background; The subject property, containing a total of 29.28 acres,
easterly of and adjacent to El Camino Real between Marron Road .and Haymar
Drive except for two service station sites located at the intersections.
Said property extends easterly to the approximate intersection of Avenida De
Anita (entrance road to the Tanglewood Project) and Marron Road.
The two service station sites that are.exluded from this development are
zoned C-2 & C-l with specific plans. The site at the intersection of Haymar
Drive and El Camino Real does include a temporary bank facility.
C. Zoning and General Plan; . • • • •
1. Zoning; Existing: R-l-10
Proposed: C-2 (S.P.)
Adjacent: North - R-l-10
East - R-l-10 & P-C
South - P-C & R-l-10
West - C-2 & C-l
2. General Plan; The land element of the General Plan does"not
really provide for a land 'use designation for property north of Marron Road
in this area. This may have resulted from the fact that in the middle 60's
this area was in dispute as to whether it would fall into the jurisdiction
of Oceanside or Carlsbad. In addition, this area is within the Buena Vista
Creek Flood Plain and perhaps the feeling was that development would not occur.
Since no designation is shown, any ultimate approval would not be in conflict
with the General Plan and such approval would in-essence become the General
Plan commitment for the area.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 219-20
A. Summary; The draft Environmental Impact Report was written for both
the Kurlander-Kelly and Vanderburg properties.
<,
Staff has determined that the most important potential impacts of the
proposed development are:
1. Traffic and congestion
2. Land use compatability
3. Aesthetics, and
4« Econonu.es/marketing. .
B. Acceptability of Draft Report; The Draft Environmental Report for
the Kelly-Kurlander and Vanderburg Commercial Site, prepared by Rick Engineering,
was accepted by the Planning Director as' a preliminary E.I.R. This report was
forwarded to the following agencies for comments: •
— 2 -
1. Division of Highways
2. Regional Water Quality Control Board
3« Comprehensive Planning Organization .
4. Department of Public Health
5. San Diego County Sanitation and Flood Control
6. San Diego Regional Coastal Commission
9. School District •
10» City Engineer
11. Intergovernmental Clearing House
C. Final Environmental Impact Report; The final Environmental Impact
Record vail. include the draft EIR and staff comments below. Rather than
repeating information contained in the draft EIR, staff will comment only
on those areas which are deficient or need correction.
1. Economic Analysis; Staff feels that an environmental impact
report on a project of this nature should necessarily include an economic/
market analysis. Unfortunately, the analysis provided by the applicant is
somewhat misleading and . incomplete. •
The report estimates generation of 395 new jobs as a result of the
project. However, their projection.is based on employees/square feet floor
area for regional shopping centers. Staff feels that the comparison of a
community shopping facility with a market and drugstore as its major tenants
with regional facilities with major department stores is not a valid one.
The proposed complex is definitely within the size range (235,000
sq. ft. floor area'; 29.30 acres) of a Community Facility but its tenancy
tends more toward the neighborhood center.
A potential incongruency is the proposed hotel and motel complex.
In addition to being somewhat inconsistent with a supermarket/drugstore
complex, there is some doubt as to the market feasibility of a hotel and
motel at the proposed site. Site selection for hotel/motel facilities is
generally made on one or more of these following criteria:
1. Immediate proximity to a heavily traveled interstate route;
2. Proximity to business, governmental centers;
3« Proximity to recreational facilities and tourist oriented
amenities.
The proposed site does not fit these criteria.
Finally, there is some question as to the support population needed
for such a complex. Generally speaking, supermarkets are convenience
oriented facilities. Consumers tend to grocery shop at facilities which
are near their homes and easily accessible. In this instance, accessibility
does not appear to be a problem. However, a shopping complex of these
dimensions would necessarily have to serve a maricet population the size of
the population of Carlsbad and Vista combined. Staff feels that proximity
to El Camino Real Plaza will not have a significant effect on increasing
usage oi' the proposed complex, since the consumer does not, as a general rule,
combine shopping activities associated with a regional plaza,, with activities
associated with more frequent grocery/convenience shopping.
- 3 -
2. Alternatives; One alternative not suggested by the applicant
would be to scale down the development so that it would serve a more localized
market. Such an alternative might eliminate the hotel/motel and reduce total
floor space and acreage.
3. Sewer Capability; The draft E.I.R. fails to express the sewer
situation in this area. The area is presently served by the main trans-
mission sewer trunk that comes from the City o'f Vista down the Buena Vista
Creek. The City of Carlsbad did purchase some 1% of the capacity of this
trunk line from the City of Vista for the purpose of serving this area.
Based upon present flows, no additional capacity is available. Therefore,
before any additional development could occur in this area, the City of
Carlsbad would' have to obtain additional capacity rights in the existing
trunk line or provide an alternative. An attached letter from C.R.W.Q.C.B.
speaks of this matter.
III. CONSIDERATION OF ZC-131 '
A. Request; That the Planning Commission recommend 'approval to the
City Council of a change of zone from R-l-10 to C-2 on a 2.83 acre parcel
to permit its development as a "part of a shopping center complex.
IV. CONSIDERATION OF ZC-132
A. Request; That the Planning Commission recommend approval to the
City Council of a.change of zone from R-l-10 to C-2 on a 26.45 acre parcel
to permit its development as a part of a shopping center complex. As a part
of this request, the applicant is indicating the approximate 10.0 acre
easterly'portion of the subject property to be developed for a Motel, Hotel
and Restaurant uses. Due to a proposed terrain change which separates this
area from the proposed commercial center and would be more oriented to the
residential activity to the east and south, staff would recommend that this
area not be considered for commercial zoning. In terms of development, this
10.0 acre parcel would be considered appropriate for residential development
•for the following reasons:<
1. Due to terrain, any development could be effectively buffered
from the influence of the activity on Route 78.
2. The area is of sufficient size and shape to develop for
residential purposes.
3. The resulting approximate 19-28 acre shopping center would be.
of sufficient size to adequately serve the existing and proposed residential
development in the area.
V. CONSIDERATION OF SP-141
A. Request; That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
that Specific Plan be approved to permit the development of an approximate
2.83 acre portion of the shopping center. The applicant indicates that the
approximate 24,OOP cq. it. of groso floor which is to be located in three
small buildings c.ould be utilized for such uses as restaurant, small market,
-4-
liquor storss, shops, offices, etc. The proposed buildings are to be
integrated as to design into the total shopping center and in addition,
the parking layout is also proposed to be integrated into the remainder
of the shopping center.
VI. CONSIDERATION OF SP-146 v -
A. Request: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
that a specific plan be approved to develop the subject approximate 26.45
acres for a shopping center." The applicant indicates that the proposed
three buildings containing approximately 128,600 sq. ft. of gross floor area '
would be utilized'for a drugstore, market, hardware store and associated
shops such as banks, restaurants, etc. In addition, a major restaurant
structure and motel-hotel complex is shown on the easterly approximate
10 acres of the subject property.
To develop the property, the applicant indicates that approximately
300,000 yards of dirt would have to be moved. In addition, there is a major
drainage pipe feeds into the property which, as a part of development, would
have to be extended. Finally, a large portion of the subject property is
subject to flooding and protection will have to be provided to mitigate this
problem. , .
The applicant indicates that a total of approximately 700 parking spaces
are proposed. Compliance to ordinance requirements would be dependent upon
the ultimate uses. However, the proposed parking does exceed the General
Plan recommended ratio of one space for every 400 sq. ft. of gross floor
area.
¥ith regard to the precise design of the proposed development, there
exists several problems with regard to the type and method of access from
the development to El Camino Real. As proposed, the accesses would create
several major traffic conflicts which is not considered appropriate. In
addition, the resolution of what happens to Osuna Drive will have to occur..
'VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS '
A. On the EIR;
1. That the Planning Commission move to recommend to the City
Council that the Final EIR BE ACCEPTED to include:
a. The draft EIR
b. Staff comments contained in this report
c. Any public input received as a part of the public input
held regarding this EIR.
Justification is based on:
1. That the Final EIR does comply with the Environmental Protection
regulation of the State of California and City of Carlsbad.
2. That the Final EIR does adequately express the effects of the
proposed development on the environment.
_ 5 —
E. On ZC-131: That it be moved that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council that a change of zone from R-l-10 to C-2 BE APPROVED on
the subject property.
Justification is based upon:
1. Based upon the study conducted by the city staff and the
General Plan consultant, the subject property is considered appropriate for
a neighborhood shopping center to serve the area.
2. The subject site of approximately 2.8 acres is of sufficient
size and shape to be utilized for ancillary shops and offices.
C. On ZC-132; That it be moved that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council that a change of zone from R-l-10 to C--1 BE APPROVED for
an approximate 16.45 acre portion -of the subject property, adjacent to El Camino
Real and that the remaining easterly approximate 10 acres remain as R-l-10.
Justification is based upon:
1. In conjunction with the property considered under ZC-131, the
resulting property, based upon, a -study conducted by the city staff and the
City's General Plan consultant, would be of sufficient size and shape to
provide a neighborhood commercial facility that would adequately meet the
needs for the existing and proposed residential development in the area.
2. The proposed zoning would be compatible to the existing and
proposed zoning in the area. . .
D. On SP-141 and 146; That it be moved that the Planning Commission
recommend to the City Council that SP-141 and 146 be approved subject to the
conditions outlined below, with the exception that the easterly approximate
10 acres of the subject property be deleted from this consideration.
Justification is based upon: • ' f
1. The approximate 19 acre commercial shopping center is considered
to be the optimum size for a neighborhood shopping center._
2. The proposed specific plan does conform to the approved zoning.
3. A substantial terrain break does occur approximately 369 ft.
westerly of the easterly boundary of the subject property which results in
some 10 acres which would be oriented away from the activity adjacent to
El Camino Real. Said property is considered to be. more appropriate for
residential development rather than an expansion of a potential neighborhood
shopping center to a size more in the lines of a community shopping center
which would more adversely affect the adjacent property.
- 6 -
E. _Racommended Conditions for SP-1A1 and 146; Any approval of these
specific plans should be subject to the following conditions:
1. The Specific Plan is granted for the land described in the
application and any attachments thereto, and as shown on the plot plan
submitted labeled Exhibit A. The location of all buildings, fences, signs,
roadways, parking areas, landscaping, and other facilities or features shall
be .located substantially as shown on the plot-plan labeled Exhibit A, except
or unless indicated otherwise herein.
2. Prior to the issuance of any permits, a parcel map outlining
parcels, shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad for consideration and
approval.
3. Prior to the issuance of any permits, abandonment proceedings
shall be completed on Osuna Drive.
4« Prior to the issuance of any permits, a revised specific plan
shall be submitted to the Planning Director for consideration and approval
showing the following:
a. The deletion pf the approximate ten acres located along
the easterly boundary of the subject property.
b. The revision of the egress and ingress from the subject
development to El Camino Real. The major access shall be provided in line
with the main entrance from El Camino Real to the existing Plaza Camino
Real to the west. All other access points to El Camino Real shall be on
.the basis of right turn in and right turn out only. The final circulation
design shall be as approved by the City Engineer.
c. The relocation of any proposed building areas to accom-
modate the final accesses to El Camino Real.
5. Except for approved accesses, all vehicular access rights to
public streets should be dedicated to the City of Carlsbad as a part of the
consideration of any parcel map.
6. The developer shall be required to install in a manner
acceptable to the City Engineer any necessary improvement to provide for
protection from potential flooding.
»
7. Storm drains shall be constructed in a manner acceptable to
the City Engineer in conformance with the City's master drainage plan.
8. Water main shall be extended along. Haymar Drive as required
by the City Engineer.
9. No development shall occur until sewer capacity is available
in the Vista trunk line or other provision acceptable to the City Engineer
is made to provide sewer to the subject property.
10. Upon availability of.sewer capacity, the.developer shall
install a sewer line to serve the subject property which shall be compatible
with the City's master sewer study for the area and does conform to City
Standards.
_ 7 ~
114 Marron Road shall be dedicated and improved to City standards
on the basis of an 84 ft. right of way width for the full frontage of the
subject property.
12. Haymar Drive shall be dedicated and improved to City standards
on the basis of a 64 ft. right of way.
13. The developer shall participate in the construction and/or
revision of the traffic signal system on El Camino Real to accommodate the
subject development.
14. • Unless the construction of the structure or facility is
commenced not later than one year after the date the approval is granted
and is diligently pursued thereafter, this approval will automatically
become null and void.
15. Any minor change may be approved by the Planning Director.
Any substantial change will require the filing of an application for an
amendment to be considered by the Planning Commission.
16. All requirements of any law, ordinance or regulation of the
State of California, City of Carlsbad, and any other governmental entity
shall be complied with.
I?. No signs or advertising of any type whatsoever shall be
erected or installed until plans therefore have been approved by the City
of Carlsbad. Prior to issuance of any permits for signs, a sign program
for the total development shall, be submitted to the Planning Commission
for consideration and approval. Said sign program shall conform to the
City's sign limitations in effect at the time of development. Said develop-
ment for sign purpose shall be considered a single development.
18. All areas shown as parking areas shall be surfaced with
asphaltic concrete and shall be visibly marked outlining individual parking
spaces and traffic flow. Said surfacing and marking shall be completed prior.
to final inspection of the structure or structures by the Building Department.
The surface shall be kept in a reasonably good state of repair at all times.
Parking for the total development shall be provided on the basis of a minute
of one parking space for each 100 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
19. Prior to obtaining a building permit and within 30 days
hereof, the applicant shall file with the Secretary of the Planning Commission
written acceptance of the conditions stated herein.
20. Compliance with and execution of all conditions listed hereon
shall be necessary, unless otherwise specified, prior to obtaining a final
building inspection clearance. Deviation from this requirement shall be
permitted only by written consent of the Planning Director.
- 8 -
21. Any mechanical and/or electrical equipment to be located on
the roof or the .structure shall be screened in a manner acceptable to the
Planning Director. Detailed plans for said screening shall be submitted,
in triplicate, to the Planning Director.
22. The lighting of the sign shall be accomplished in such a
manner that -there shall be no reflection on adjacent properties or streets
which may be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners
or hazardous to motorists. . •
23. An incombustible trash enclosure shall be provided of a size
and location acceptable to the Planning Director, and said area shall be
enclosed with a fence and/or wall of sufficient height to adequately shield
the area. Said fence and/or wall shall include a solid gate.
24. A detailed landscape and sprinkler plan prepared by a landscape
architect, shall be submitted to the Planning Director for consideration and
approval. Said landscaping shall be provided in the following manner:
a. A perimeter planter of a size of 10 ft. wide shall be
provided except for approved openings , adjacent to all
public streets.
b. A minimum of 5% of the total parking access shall be
landscaped. Said areas shall be so located so as to
break up the massive expanse of paved area.
c. The sum of all the landscape areas shall not be less
• -than 15^ of the total net land area.
d. Concrete curbing shall be provided for planters located
in parking areas.
25. Prior to final building inspection clearance, all landscaping
•shall be installed. .Said landscaping shall, at all times, be maintained in £•
a manner acceptable to the Planning Director.
26. All utilities, including electrical, telephone and cable
television, shall be installed underground and/or shall b.e completely
concealed from view.
27. All public improvements shall be made in conformity to the
City of Carlsbad Engineering Design Criteria and Standard. Plans, the Sub- •
division Ordinance and other City Standards to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer without cost to the City of Carlsbad, and free of all liens and
encumbrances. Improvement plans for water and sewer system shall meet the
requirements of the respective service districts.
VIII. Attachments
1. Baskin-Robbins letter of July 16, 1973
2. Letter from San Die-.o Museum of Han, Spencer Rogers dated Oct. 18, 1973
3. California Regional Water Quality Control Board dated November 14, 1973
- 9 -
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT FOR
NOVEMBER 2?, 1973
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION ' - '
REPORT ON: • SPECIAL STUDY AREA - EL CAMINO REAL NORTH OF ELM AVENUE
The present General Plan commitment for that area between Elm Ave.
and Vista Way easterly of El Camino Real is low density residential.
Around June, Staff began to get inquiries regarding the possibility, of
providing a neighborhood commercial facility in this area. The General
Plan shows a neighborhood commercial facility at the northwest corner of
the intersection of Chestnut Avenue and El Camino Real. However, terrain
and limited access do not make this property too feasible for development
commercially. In addition, closer proximity to Vista Way, Elm Avenue, and
Marron Road may be of benefit to the immediate potential access of a
neighborhood commercial facility since the major residential activity seems
to be located further north of the intersection of Chestnut and El Camino
Real. Finally, the location of a neighborhood commercial facility adjacent
to the existing regional facility was thought to be appropriate in terms
of concentrating the traffic activity rather than spreading the traffic,
along El Camino Real between Chestnut and Vista Way. The result of these
inquiries has been three requests for neighborhood commercial facility in
this area.
The adopted General Plan indicates a neighborhood shopping center
as follows:
"These centers are intended to serve the daily or frequent food
and convenience needs of families within their respective service areas
(usually one-half to one mile, but more in low-density, hilly areas). They
normally include a supermarket and small shops, such as a drug store, barber
and beauty shops, laundry and cleaning service, and a small hardware store.
The overall site area should be sufficient to provide for the supportable
commercial facilities as well as off-street parking at a ratio of not less
than four to one-total site area being approximately three to ten acres."
Two of the three requests exceed the area limitations for a
neighborhood facility. When a larger than neighborhood commercial facility
which falls into the category of a community shopping center is proposed,
which is what would result if all three or two of the projects were approved
as requested, staff must evaluate the projects on the basis of their impacts
on the total commercial allocation for the community. Based upon the
proximity of the regional shopping center, the downtown area and the previous
commitment of the General Plan for community shopping centers more centrally
located adjacent to existing and future populations, staff felt that the
area under consideration was not appropriate for a community shopping center.
In order to better evaluate staff's position and to more precisely
study the change of the General Plan commitment in this area, staff
requested that Lampman and Associates make some precise recommendations
regarding this area. Their response is attached. The questions asked to
be answered were as follows:
1. Is a land use change appropriate in this area?
2. If commercial is appropriate, how much and at what location?
To-aid the Planning Commission in evaluating the impact of shopping
centers, the following chart taken from the Community Builder's Handbook is
provided as a reference source.
Indicators for Types and Sizes in Shopping Centers*
v
Neighborhood Community Regional
Leading Tenant
(basis for defi- Supermarket or
nition) Drug Store
Average Gross**
Leasable Area
Ranges in GLA**
Usual Minimum
Site Area
Minimum
Support
50,000 sq. ft.
30-000-100,000
sq.ft.
4 acres
7,500 to 40,000
.people
Variety or Junior
Department
Store
150,000 sq.ft.
100,000-300,000
sq.ft.
10 acres
One or more full-
line Department
Stores
400,000 sq. ft.
300,000 to over
1,000,000 sq.ft.
30 acres
40,000 to 150,000 150,000 or more
people people
*The precise characteristics under these indicators do not hold rigidly. Often
elements change because of the treatment required to make necessary adaptations
or adjustments for the characteristics of the trade area, nature of competition,
and variations in site location.
**These figures represent indicators only for definition purposes. It is not
size, but tenant composition and the characteristics of the leading tenant
that define a shopping center type.
As learned in the operation aspects of shopping centers as they exist and as
reported in the study of income and expenses, The Dollars and Cents of Shopping
Centers: 1966, footnote 49» shopping centers range in size as follows:
Neighborhoods:
Communities:
Regionals:
11,700-130,000 sq. ft. GLA
61,000-370,000 sq. ft. GLA
192,000-1,300,000 sq.ft. GLA
— 2 —
CC: Copies to applicants of ZC-128, ZC-119, ZC-131, ZC-132