HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-09-18; City Council; 5988; SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 79-030 *
c
CITY OF CARLSBAD .-
-1 Initial AGENDA BILL NO: 3-97?r - Dept. Hd.q# c-
Cty. cty* Mgr. ntty :3 DATE : September 18, 1979
DEPARTMENT : Planning - ..
.. - SUBJECT: SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 79-3; APPELLANT COUNCILMAN SKOTNICKI
Statement of the Matter
The Site Development Plan is for a 3,600 square foot office compl-ex
be located at Las Flores and Pi0 Pic0 Avenue. The Planning Commissi
approved the Site Development,Plan on August 22, 1979. In their app
the Planning Commission made'the finding that the project was consis
with the Public Facilities Element because "In the absence of contra
dictory evidence, the Planning Commission finds that all other neces
public facilities will be available C or will be provided concurrent w
need. "
Councilman Skotnicki feels that this is not a valid finding and ther
has appealed the Planning Commission action. As you know, subsequen the Planning Commission action the City Council did adopt a policy
requiring fees to cover public facilities. Therefore a Site Develoy . Plan approva1,after . the date of the policy adoption would require tY
The City Council could on this appeal include a conditioh requiring
Public Facilities fee and make a finding that public facilities will
guaranteed because of the payment of fees.
Attachments Appeal letter to City €ouncil dated 9/4/70
Memo to City Manager dated 9/5/79
Planning Commission Resolution 1543 f
* Staff Report dated August 8, 1979
-
. Recommendation
If the City Council concurs, it is recommended that you direct the ( Attorney to prepare the necessary documents approving SDP 79-3 as pi
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1543 with the exceptions noted o
attached memo to the City Manager dated 9/5/79.
Council Acti.on:
9-18-79 Council directed the City Attorney to prepare necessary do( approving SDP 79-3 as per Planning .Commission Resolution id( With the exceptions noted im the .C.i ty. .Manager's Memorandurn
September 5, 1979.
4
0 9
1200 ELM AVENUE TELI
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (714)
Citp of QCarl$Zlab
September 4, 1979
City Clerk
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Re: Appeal of Planning Comnission Action Site Development
Plan 79-3, Breitbarth
As a member of Carlsbad's City Council I wish to appeal
the Planning Commission decision approving Site Develop-
ment Plan 79-3. This Site Development Plan is for a
3,600 square foot medical, dental and general office
complex at the southwest corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and
Las Flores Drive.
I am appealing the Planning Commission decision because I
feel that evidence ~7as not submitted ensuring necessary
public facilities as required by the City's Public Facili- ties Element of the General Plan.
f, ,, Sincerely, ,
/ , ,/ I I/ ,
ANTHONY SKOTNICKI
Councilman
BP :AS : j d
e e
MEMO - FUXN DUM
DATE : September 5, 1979
TO : Paul Bussey, City Manager
FROM: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director
SUBJECT : PUBLIC FACILITIES FINDING AND CONDITIOPJ
On August 29, 1979, the City Council adopted a revised policy
requiring discretionary projects to pay a public facilities
fee. Prior to that, on August 22, 1979, the Planning Commis-
sion approved a site development plan (SDP 79-3) for a projec The Planning Commission chose not to include the public facil
ties finding and condition that the City Council had been
using because of the lack of any written City policy.
In order to make the Planning Commission approval (Resolutior
No. 1543) consistent with the new Public Facilities Policy
(Policy No. 17), the following changes must be made:
1. Finding 2.F. on page 2 of Planninq Commission Resolutiox
No. 1543 should be revised to read as follows:
"At this time, the City Council is not prepared
to find that all other public facilities necessary
to serve this project will be available concurrent
with need. The City Council has, by inclusion of an appropriate condition, required that the project
contribute to the costs of such facilities. Since the development will pay its proportionate share of
the public facilities which it will require, the
City Council is satisfied that the requirements of
the public facilities element of the general plan
have been satisfied."
2. A condition-of-approval should. be added as follows:
"11. Prior to the issuance of building permits,
the applicant shall pay a public facility fee as
established in City Council Policy No. 17."
MZ : JCH: jd
-I: 9-
3
2'
3
4
5
61
7II
8
10 9l
11
l2
14 1
12,
1 5
16
I' o e- 'i
p LAqlb, -. T 7- -* - L+<~~vG CO?i'i_TSSION _WSGLUTIC?Lil NO. 1.543
-----I ----I__.___-------.__I-
RESO1;U'J.l13N OF TljZ y. :QIP;TG ;IO:v~v~~SSION OF THE CITY
OF CAELSEAD r C-ALIFG?P?I,?L~ t':I?PJ.?OVj;i\:6 PHASE I rJF 11
SXTE I3EVTLOF~4Z3T ?LAW FOR iz 3600 SQUAKZ FOOT
AL AXD GENERAL OFFICE COIW1,EX AT TI1E
SOUTKl>GESY.' CGP,?.?z;I? (>p PI0 PICQ DRIt7E AED LAS FLopzS
DRIVE .)
CASE NO. : SDP 79-3 'I
A:?l~L1CPA7,iT: B~~LJ-'~-sv LL-aL th
-----------.-_ -.-
WHEmAS, a. verifisd application has been filed with 'i
of CarLsbzd, an3. ref erred to the Planninq Coznmissiori; and
WIIEREAS I said verified application consti "Lutes a reqi
as provided hy Title 21 of the C~?~sha?. Municipal. Code; ax
V7IiEEAS I pursuant to the provisions of the 1.lunic:i.pl
the Plannhg C.olm.ission 6i.3 f on the 8th day of August, 19:
consider said a-pnlicztion on property iiescr:i.bd as :
1
A pc?rti.sn of Lot 4 ir? section. 33- ,- township 1.1. South, City of Cii?.rl.sbr:.fi:, a.ccordj..nq to U, S . Gcnexal Survey
apprcve5 Decer:hZr 27 I lt:70.
I
lg ~
7 9-3 will not have 2 significant impact 03 the environmcnt
is j-n fuJ.1- ccmpliance with. the City of Carlsbad Environmer
23
24
25
26
27
28
' 1. The subject site has Seen conmj-tted tG development a
d.evoid Df any signif icat flora r fa.una , or unique en'
mental.. features I
The props& develo&wit would not adversely affect
development in the immediate area; and
WHEREAS r at saic! Planning Cmirnission meeting a staff
was submitted and revi.ewed. At the conclusion of said he
2.
i
7 .L
2
3
4
5
.- after co~is;-ti~.<~-t-iGi> ~72 3.12. ~:~id~;~ce pi-esci-,ted, the Plai~rir'in;
C~~~~iss:ic>i~ ~'O'LZI~C~ the f~Li~\ci.ny f~~c-ir~ acd reasons to exist:
1 I
Findinys
I - -_ ._ _-.
T'he propzed. d~v~lc~pn:~'r,t is coinpat:;ble :q:%lj the {;ei-:nr: The i~dic~l, dmt,~! 5,nd cj~iej:al. o%fj_c;e corri21ex i.s coil.: WiJ& +-he :lpl:,-==nc"<. "L L..d,;i.~~~i~l 7 .-. and Related Co:-m-e~-cial." laid u:
i? e s i.g nn ti on .
le
I
c/ 2.' ylh:' La -. dzve:iop:.ncnt 2s e>ns j.s?-ent ig7i i.-k. tjle Fui!,ij-c Fzci1i4 il
91 7
3.0
31
Element znd policy relating- to the fo1lot:j.n~~ facilitic
A. A septic system has been approved for cse on thi:
by -the i:cui.-ty D?gar-tmen-t cf P~blic !?tc~?~tk zn? thc
Engimer- T.hp sys-eem will allow a 36@0 square r'c office. hul.ldi:-q.
B. This is a ncn--r-es~.dent~nl- 2rojeet an2 t~i1-2. have I
on tile school system.
C. All. n?cessary oii-site street iTDrover.ents, dedic;
15
3.6
17
E e Gas zxd e!-ectr.-Lc: service viil!. be prmi:3.& b:7 ::an
C;a.s i?.c;d Zlecix~c.
E'. In the absence of contradictory evidence, the FLE
Comnission fk?s 'cha'i all ctha necessary publlc
fasllities will be available cr wkll be provi.bcd
18
.I current xith nc&.
FTI ,112 proposd. Gevelopn3nt is compatible with siirrcilndii j ~ 3.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
to the sOiI'.ki* ! B, The fencs and I.andsca.ping vi1.1 emx-e ;-.tiat the 1
does not a-d~er-sely affect nf3iqhbOj:iI~cj residentla:
and will shield the parking arezis frnm the aiijacc
streets.
C, The driveway for Phase I is far enough frcm the
intersection that it will not cause a major haza:
to safety and tzaffic flow. I
.'
//
//
-2-
a./ ETAS i *::FA& I'Lhniliiigd C~~;lir,issric;n by ti-le f01~0v~i115 VO;:~
5
6
7~ Pi
9:
lo
13.
12;
13
411. i SD? 79-3, Phase I? is approved a.s sfiown. 011 Exi?ihit A,
August 5, 1979 and on Exhibit B, dated L~UT-IC~ 27, -1973 r
irr ?-.h.e P1anrzir;q Depzrtnznt. i3.n.y future ~l~ases wi 11 rc "ih~ CI~FTIOV~~ of the Fla1ining COEXT.~_SS~O;I.
2 = Prior to the issua:icc of building permits I lzndscapinc irrigation plazs shall be submitted to ~sYL;LE: Planninq
Depax-t-merit for x e17ie.a~ c7.nd approva 1 ,
The applicant shall install a sidewallc conttguous with
existiny curb z.nd street lights alc'ng the Flo Pic0 frc of the project to City standards afid -the satisfactj.ofi
Ci Ly Enyxneer -
The apjl7f.j.cant sha-ll obtain the permission of the ad.joi propsrty swnc to t5e scuth to discharge ar,y concentra drainage oxto their rrocer ty o
3 -
I
4.
1 - <.
L I-1 bile parking lot drive serving Phase I of this projec,
I X5
16
shall m.&c a concectraksd effort CG ojk3-S.r: an ZCCESS e,
meat fr,m the ad j oi~in9 property ownex h.32 TJJc)zjld pro. through circulation -to and wculd he con s+-ei>t with f-2
developent to ths south. The app:iicailt skz11 keep kl-i
.I 20
21
23,
23
24
25
26
27
28
1979, are not approved by this action. They sz.s 9nl.y : __ for refer'cnce.
Fire hydrants will be imtalled as reqrzired by the Fir< Marshal.l_ o
17. . ..
I
8. The appliCaIi-2 shall povidic at leas? c;ne permanent hik(
capable of adequately szcurir,g 2 mininm of 4 hicycl.es.
A six foct fence shall be placed along the west popert and along the northern boundary of Phase I as shotrrn in
A, dated kucju.st 6, 1979,
Prior to approval of tile final site developnent. plan, t devel.oper shall dedicate a ten (10) foot wide reciproci;-
access cs.sexent to the adjoining property owners along
the southcr.ly and westerly property lines. The easemec
9.
10.
-3-
1 a.l.oiq tk~? sout.berl.y pcperty shall be ‘(;7c3rde?;j in such. E
3l
51
GI
41
i?^LlcJfus-jl. 6, 1S?9,
AYES : I.! r Hecrezx I Rc;rcb.s;-’ci.s r Schick. I 7;ri3y)::p-,
~~~IL‘CUS, Jose, Larsoli
None TIC .IT. P \<.lid 3 :
I
20
21
23 22
. ..
I I
24
25
26
2 7
28
I ‘
I,
I .a 4
3, 1
1 s y?J.:.ryE C,'$ EhL. :cEa or<_';; TZ;
cogp:'1;5.' CjF p,y: D::z:C;O i /I. c, x!ry OF <:>l ILL1 '-7T s j SS
5 Cormissi3n ot thz City c;f Carl.sba2-!, <:zlifarniz, do
6
f
8
rl
I 1 bere5w certify that the fsregoing resolution was dull7
intxcdz..C;ed., ap-x i ov'," ,d and ziloop'ced by "Lhe PlannF~cj ' ~omniscion of tl-t..e city cf '~arlsbad at a regul.er I:-;eeting
10 1
1 1..
by t1-1~ following roll. call voter
.. ..
3.4: 1 is I a.
ABSTAIN : iiJf-JR5
AESENT: Larson .I
19
20
21
22
23
24
SDP 7 9-3
-5-
'i i
27 I 28
I,
0 ,' 0
~~~q1:1' ;:EpG;rr - _---_ .----
DATE T Augxsl: 8,, 1979
TO: F I. a-iTI j. n 2 C omrn i s s i. 3 11
F RON : P 1 aim i 11 2 0 e p z r t rn en t
SDP 79-3 n , til?,:
R F. P L I CAN T :
REQUEST : APPROVIZL OF PHASE I OF A SITE DE7I'ELOf'MI:N'I' ?LfiX
3r e it b ai- t h
F3R A 3600 SQUARF FOOT :.?EDICAL-DENTAT; Ab:D
GZNERAi OFFTI~E COI\IPZ,E>: ,.2'I' THE SOUTl-II:'EST CORKE,K
OF 1'10 PICC DRI'VE AND LAS FLORES DRIYE
B A c IT c: RO Li I\! D
Location and Eescriptlon of Proljertj' I
he subject yi-operty is a .53 acre parcel located GII the south we^
corner of Las Flores Drive and Pic Pic0 Drive. The lot sl.~pcs downward to the .west. There is c~rrerit1.y a single fan;-i.ly Tesidenc on the north portisn of the lot.
Ex i c- t i.n 2 2. on in g
Subj ec'i Pioperty-: 11--P--Q
- 1-.- .--
.-I ----___I_-
____.-~ -__.
Nojrth. : So3t.h :
R - 1 - 7 5 9 0 I? - P - Q
West: R--P-Q
East: 0-S
Exi5t.i.n~ Lmd Use
Sub.j ect Froperty : Single Family Residence North; Single Family Residence
East: Elementary Sc.hooi ' *' We s t : Single Family Residence
-I--- ---I
South: Office: pi-o~~sed- office ccmpiex
En v i >-on me 11 t a 1 I iy7 a c t I n f o r 111 9 t i 0 71
This pro! ect has been processed through ecvironmental Ye=,?iew
and. a negative declaration iias been issued for the following rea!
. 1. The subject site iias be?n committed to deve1opmer;t anc! is
-.I._I_- ~-I
devoid of any significant flora, fauna, or unique environn!ei
features.
2. The proposed develo?ment wodld not adversely aifect any developnenr in Zhz iininediate ayes.
General. 1'1 an Tnfoi-niztion
Thc Land IJse P12z Map of the General Plan designates this prcper as Professionnl an6 iicl~tcd Coniincrcic'll. A mcdj.ca1.-6~:llt31 2nd ge officc COII~~~~CX fits this classificcltion.
CIC-----U.C-^----.-L.I.-.
jjGl,'t:ic 1:acj I j-j-ie S 0 e "
_-..- ____-._I_
This deve:I.(;pii:ent .i s conslste-i-it ~~itli the Psbiic Faci li.~ies eieli?.ent and. p0ii.c-y ~e:zCi.ng t~) thc foilo?~:iiig facj.1 ities :
1.- A septic system has been a~p~o;jed fcr use c;ii this p~o;ie~Zy b) t,he County DepzTtment of l~'uK!!?.c I-iealth ar,d the. City Engiilcel,,
The sy~te!il. >.TiiL a! lLai,c a 36f~Ci sc~~iai-',: foot c;fii~ce iiiii:.difig- ...<
2. This :Is 3 non-r52sidectial ~iroject xid will h3ve DO effect on
the school- systex.
s : All ::cc:assary c:i- site 5. treet ir.!~rov-em.-nts ;i dei?i.catio:;s f -0:-
liens will be reqiiiyed as cond;.tians of appro1:al.
'4. jqatei 14i1.1 be supplied by tile Carlsbad ?lurii.cipsj. ~ater ifi.str:
dr K Gn.s and. electrjc service will be prsvided by Sail Ciego Gas ai
Electric.
ilt: this tirile, ?iowsv.er, the City Council has def;ern:.ried t!IZat tihey I not p~cpx~sd to fi.1i.d thzt all other public facilities necessnry ti this proj ect itill be available concurrent 1;~it.h need. il-ie Pianni.n
deveiopmez t plan, require ti-Lat the proj ect contrj 5ii'ie to the ccjst
such iSac-~.~i-i-.;.es u Since the dz-celopment would pay i t.s approp;\;.i-z,te
o,f tiic piLb1.i~ facil.ities ~hich i'c would reo,uire 9 -the Pi3ill?-!lo ? Cox
could be assured tkizt the reqL1.irexents 01' the I?t:blic Fzc.i.1.itl 5s E
o-f the Geiieral Flan have been satisfied,
"7 -
. . Commission :p.aj;, by inclusion of an appropriate conuitiox :o this
.". .
Past. HtstarjT ~fid X,::Izted Cases __
----1_ _---.-.--.- --
_I__ SGP 78-11,, - .- T<ubota., -._I._ Y.anning Co!iilnissii,n F,esolutj.on KO. Xi5, On !\la 9, 1979 9 tlie !'j.annin,o Comiissi.on aFprovec1 a site develo;)!!iznt
plan -Tor Phasc I of ai? office ccrnlilex j~st south of the Zreitbart
property. property. The Co~nIii.ssion appli<?d conditions relatirig to access, 1andscc:pjng and pub1.i~ improvements.
SDP 79-1, Hunt, Resol.ution ?<oc - 1.G94. -.-- On February 2S, 1979, the
story professional office bui.1ciirig , locatsd on .45 acres at the norrtheast corneT o-? Pi.0 Pica Drive and St.rst!:ord Lane, just :NO
blocks from the sulij ect pro1)crty. ille Commissior: f~~nd. t3,e devcl ment consistent wi-;;li the Genei-al Plan and comFa.t,j.b:c !citii the sur residential neighborhood. Condltion.~ of approval pc1-tzI.ned to la
and screening, vehicular access, pi-ovisiorL of pliblic improvements
consolldztion of t!ie existiag lots.
ZC-1.82, Fre6 Jones iIa1.1 f C:i.ty Council Resolution No. 4041. On
~oveinhcr IO, 1976, the City Council adoytrd a resolutio~~ :~PC
a zone changc from I!-1-7500 to R-1)-Q for jiroperty at the south:~~_c corner of Las Florcs Erive and. l'io Pic0 Dri.ve. This zone change
included all of the subject property. T2;e "Q" Overlay was i>equc
by staff to control. acccss to Las Fiores Drive 2nd cncouragc deVc
ment of the area j.13 a comprcheiisive manner,
This prt;perty extends sou-th and west of the subj ec:
___l_______-_l ___ i-'iannj ng Comniissiion zl:p~o-ve:d a site development plan far 3 t
r-
---.-..-----.---
-2-
:>izjor ~-~~.::~:jii~::: one?: j.03 0 '. F _-__--- ...-I..I.-- sL-.- -1-- --I
1. 1s .?.he circlrlt;:i-lon z.~ld p c?-r 3: i 2-1 g de s i gi: a. c. c. c2p t ab 1 e and s a !-e ?
2. Is this yjroj t3c.t consj.c:-i;ent wi.th a.11. thc goals and policies of tKe G:iierai in?
3, lYiI.1 thi 5 prclj cc't adversely affect th? su1sroLl.ilding residcnti areas 03' the resideace v2ithiii t5c prsj ect site?
IS 'tIliS i'iQVclopT!it>Pt cojllpat<bIe wi.i.11 .ihe already approved off 4, ccjrn~lex to the south [SW 7.8.-4)?
5. Xhzt cond-i.:ion shouZii be ayi'lied to cns.gr.le that ,Chis project
i s compatible> with future developmen-!: uli adj a.ccnt properties
Discussion
This applicatj.cn is a request for ~pp~~vnl of a 5600 square foot
medical-der~tal a.n.3 general office complex. Approval 3f a site developinent plan is required by -the Qual.ifi.ed !)eve:o~;ment Overlay
Zone (0). The Q Overlzy was pj-aced on this prc;peri;y t~ ensure
that the property i.s developed !.n conformance with ths Ge~ieral Pli
and is consistent with existing and proposed developicent in the 2:
Through the review and appro-cal process 9 special corlditinns or re( ments inay be attached. to develcp;nent j-11 the 0 Overl,?y zone. Thesc
conditions \$/ill regiula'ie landsc~.ping, fences, buildings ~ open spat
---
and ci.rcula.tio;i o
'The proposed proj ec:t I.nr_lzdes Phzse 1 cf a txo phase c!e~,-l!.op:i!e;;";
Only the firs1 phase is belFg considered at this tiiiie since there no sexer ser.vi.ce ava3.lahie ani! the proposed septi.c syst.em will all
only 3600 sqi.Ia1-e feet of office zxea. fIoiicver ~ bot]: phases shoi~li
be coEsidered wLen revie!\7izg this ~roposal . Approval. of Phase 'i g
a sort of "ai)pi*oval-in-concept" c~f Phase 11, since tiley aye bstli inter- related. Phase X shov.ld r,ot be approve6 vmless +'lie concept of desi.gn and circulation In Phase I1 are acceptable for futui-e
development. The specifics of The Phase I1 development ncec! ?Lot 1-
corisi dered at this time since the phzse will be considered separat
when server beccines available.
The Planning Commission Is required to nialte a finding of Cen(3ral
Plan. consistency. 'This proj ect is consistcnt with the Land Use
Element designation of "P;.ofessional and Reiat-ed Cemnerci all', Eowcver, it is not consistent \ii.th the Public .Facilities Eiement, This element Tequi.1-w that all necessary public facilities be availzble to serve a project ar t.lie time of developvcnt. rille City
Counci.1 has determined thzt there are some City su~~i~licd l2-cilitie
ishich cannot he assiired at this time, includinp, poiice, fire: admi
istration, major public works improvements, and maintenance fzicili
The Planning Commission nayt by inclusion of an appropriate c0ndi.t to this site development plan, reqi-iire that the proj ect cantribute
to the costs of such facilities. Since thc- developr!lcr;t wil.1 pay i propcrtionate share of the public facilities whicl-i tt will rcqiiirc the Planning Coniinissioii ccu1.d hc assured that the requirements of Public 1:aciIities. El.cment of the General ?la1 havc been satisfied.
-3-
T~IC: ci.r.~ul r:? i c:fi on: i’1-y.j~~ l~.):.:~~:t :;::ouJ d be *wcL: .“I? a conip~.ct?
.i 7 St’G c.?’c’‘-I L, A. a. t i 3n The p~ pattern shovs a pai.kir1~ lot c;n the nortb scr-ving Ph:ise I? and. a
-1ct ail tke 5;o~lth scrvilig l’i:a.se I ~ with tlie officc bui ?cii:1g in tlic
center. Thfz d-sigi-1 vj.l.1 aliox the applicant to keep the hot::;@
and concrtru.zt Plia,.;e I . I-Ioin:cver, the parking 1 ot ari-anoenien-t Cor Phase I \liil.I requl.iy motorists to back a~t onto ?:io Pica ~Tjhe iS palking Is not avaiia1;i.e in the 7~9-L- This is rtot a .iryy des:!-r-.abl(
sitG.ation f p.‘:rticiilai-1.y- since traffic on Pi0 Picc is e::;!~at-.tod to
increase. IT the buildin6 yg~g ~<~~~,~~~ 21 tli.2 ~igr~t.~~~ cn$jicr of ~~\l*~
10-2, one ?ar!ring lot aJ.ImJir1g through traffic cou.ld be prcvlded.
Thi.s proj ect must pro17ide adeqL.zte circu! ation. for bo.r.h phases an.d should he able to either sta.nd alone or s11aul.d. be comI:rc?iersli develop;,.d with ne:.ghborixg propert%es. ‘i‘hc Phase 1L al~-.-ei-:iati.-\ies :
as .short.n on Exhib-t A, dated Arrgust, 6, 1979, show two ;->ossibl-?
access whiC.h. has not been T;lanned and zpproved. by t,he adjacent property ownc;rs. ‘The other alterriative would pTo-(lide acce~s
completely on t.he sub j ect pl-operty, allQwing the project. to stan4 alone and be considci-ed independen-t of the development of a3j acen?.
properties LI Since the Cj.ty Engineel: has deterrs-ised thzt no clccess
wiill be allo:i~icc? onto Pi.0 Pic0 Drive within 100 feet of the inter-
way drive off of Las Flores. This would require a reai-r’anoement o
This type of arrangement woulc! leave both lots wit:I~ou.‘i through atcc recjuiririg ?lotGriStS to back out onto the public szreets.
Only one phzse of development will occGr at this time xrrd the
appl.ican-C is proposing to keep the existlng res-dence. Since thc building wi%:l. continue to be use6 as a residence, scr2ei2lIig will b provi.ded betxcen the offices axd the residence. A six !loot wood
fence wil 1. be required betv.:een the two buildi-ngs . In cjddition 9
a six focit waorl fence vi11 be required aiong the westerly sj.de of
Phase I. Both fences will be tenl.porary and ih:ilI be rc5:lcved whe2
Phase II of the subject project and the property to the vest are
developed, Tiie fcnce is necessary to provide separatio;i bet-weeii v:
is now i: vacant lot to the rear of the residence to the wzst and t
proposed parking area aild buildliig . The fcnce shall extend froin
the west property line to the six foot fence around the .pool at a point to the ~orth OE the proposed lczch. trench.
One of the pui-poses of the Q Overlay is to ensure tli;tt the propasc( development is compatible .i\rith adjacent existing mid p;-oposcd
projects m The architectu-ral design is quite sirriilar to tlic app:-ovc
office complex to the south, SE? 78-4. The appiicant will be rcqu to submit complete landscape and irrigation pLaiis ~.:hicli show land- sca.ping compatible wi.th that of SD? 78-4.
t7
3 1- .? t. c: 111 i ~-1,- .-.. .1 7 Ld i ci ..i nj< m t)L .ezi 1’112 s c I ciiiti li, _>
e
0
-arrangements fcx l’hase :I. Tl .ne first alternative shows a joint
section, the access to this lot ~ould have to be provided as a t~
t’
’ tXc; parking layout and nay reduce the number of spaces av-ailable.
. Phase I will be approximate1.y 75% medical dental. office space.
The reina.ining 850 sqluare feet will be second story gciieral offices
This project meets all reo,iiirenients and standarcis of the zcne,
- 4. -
, .!.E ,- ~111&.~]~ \,I_ .* .1 T;?"y;;jq* e" .I ii.cLrC:!11 2;: 7 kI1.d '!C~I<~J!. [iJ ' Oc:; clii: p21iclng ._
r.parr.e j s re5-d: rccI .. ~lre.1-7,- l[;C) >;quarz feel: cj I .~OS.S fi.oor ar'ct..
G e .rl t: y 3 1 0 f f -i. c' i: f; y i: ' ;.re oiie spazc: $9~ every 4CS squ:::~~: Xee'c.
TllcrefoYc, 3 tzt;;I 3f I6 syaces ar.2 Teqlliretl 2nd havs. bee71 yl"3Yii
for. in I1La.:;c 1. Ir, additjon, it is anticipated that on-street
pa.rI~iiig .will coi~.tln~~.~ to bc alloised on Pi0 Pi co Crive.
~~~,~ [:-g?jtag,? nlcng ?lo ?i co Drj.?,rc c;rrrer;tly -h:.is a CUI'\, and ~CttkI
but no sidewalk GI- s-treci lights. The applicant wi.11 be requirec
to instr;I.I a siLe:.:al.!c snd street Sights.
Iic c onin !; is d a t 5 311
Staff Yecorr:ine;ni!s ap?Tovai of SDP 79-3 based on the f01~l.owi~g fin(
and silbj ect to the fol.lo\i.ing conditions :
----_-----I-
__- -.-
F i;-i ?!.E. g s
____I_._
1 . The proposed deve1cynen-t is compatiblz ij7i.t.h the Cencral P1.ai
'The medical f dental and general office ccjmplex is consi-sten-
hri th the "Professional ;r,d 9.elated Commercial" i.ai2d use cl e s i gn ii t j. on .
2 * This project has beer1 processed through the envi.ronmental revier?: procedures and a negative declaration, Ssg No. 555, has becn issued for. the fol.1oii~ing reasons:
A. The subject site hss been committed to developm2nt and 7
devoid or' any signi.ficant flora; fa.u:-ia., 01' ulii que enviro:
mei-ital features.
B. The progoscd developsent would not ad.verse1.y affect any
devel.opm~nt in tI-12 ixxeiliate area.
3" ?'his dsvelopment is consistent with the Public Pacj lities E
arid policy relating to the following facili.ties :
,4. A septic system has been approved for use on thj..s yropcr
by the County Department of Public IIealth and the City Engineer. The system will allow a 360C square foat offi buil.d.ing e
B. This is a non-residential project and will have no eff-c
oil the school system.
C. All necessary on -site street i.rnprovements. deClcations,
OT licns will be required as coiiditions of approvctl.
D. Water will be supplied by the Carlsbad Municipal Nater District.
E. Gas and electric.service will be provided by San nicgo Gas and Electric.
F. At this tine the City Council is not prcparcd to find th
3.11. other pi~b1 Fc facilixics necesssi-y tc scr~c: this proj wil! bc avaij 1.ablc concurrerit 117i th nczc!. Thc 1'1.~i~~1iI~g Commission has, by inclusion of :in 3ppropriute condition this site dcvelopmcnt plan, required that the pra;j cct
-5-
0 0
cont::j.bi:te 'io t,he costs c F such facj.1i-t j es . Si ~c.e the
. c'ieve1~opr:icnt wi.j.1 pay its 1)ro;iortIonatc shaye oii the p~b3 ic. facil it:j-es i,Arlii<:]i it .\Gill rei?,uirc p the PI annicj; Uornr,issi.~~i sa?i.;-fiecl. tliat the requireme;:ts of thc Fubl ic Facilitie s El(~l~e~~t of t;).e Sencra.1 P].an have been salis fied,
4. The proposed development is cornpat-ibie w:'r.th surl-ntlriCj.ng land
uses an.4 pro;iosed 1,rej ects.
A. Thc pi'uj ect is carnl>ztibie with the proposed offri.ce complex
to the scuth.
B. Ths fences and landscaping wi.11 ensu:re that the pi-ojsct
dc e s no t 2 c've r s e 1 y a f f e ct ze i g hb r_, r j.xE re s i dent 1!. a i. cs i> s and will shisld the parking ayeas from the ad.j ac.zn-t . streets.
C. The driveway for Phase I is far enougl? from the ?n.tersect that it will not cause a najor hazard 110 safc-~y and -trLfE flow *
'\
Condi-iii oils
1, SDP 73-3, i)hase I, is approved as shown 011 Ex1iibj.t A, da-tcd
:?,ny future ,]I asc5 '~\'~.1.1 requj-re
---/---.--.
August 6, 1979 an.d OII Exhibit B, dated Ju e 27, 1979, on fil.
in the PIgnning Dep2.rtm.cnt (. approval 0.:' the Plailnl.ng Conxission.
2. PT~~oY. to the j-ssuance of building perinits I landscz;Jiag and irrigation p1,zns shall be subxi'ited to the P1annir;g 2epartx.: for review a.nd a7proval D
3. Thc apBlicant shall install 3 sidewalk contigEoiis with the
Gxisting curb and street lights along the Pi0 Pic0 fiponKz,ge
of the project to Cit.y s-candards and the satisPaction of t.h: Ci.ty 13igi.nce;n.
property owner ta the south to discharge any conceji-crated drainage oiito their pi-operty .
4. The applicant shall obtain the permission of The adjoining
5. 'The parking lot drive ser-\:ing Phase I of this project sha.11 extended to the westerly iiroperty boundary. '!'he appii cant
make a concentrated efioi-t to obtain s~n zccess e:1r;cmci1i. fro
adj oixing prcpcrty O;:'IieT that wov.ld provj.cle throc~gil clrcula to and izrould be c.onsis"ient with fature development to the r.
The applicant shall ?<ecp the Planning I1cpartmen.Z: apprised c
progress made in this matter.
6. The Plisse IT Alternati7zes shown on Exhibit A, dated August
1979, are not I_ tl-,provcd by this action, They are only showi
7. Fjre hyd~arts will be instal!.ed as required by the Fire $!ai ( . for rcference.
I
i i -6-
I
I
* 9
8 ' *'rhe ap~~~~-c;~;l;t si:,.,! :L pr31~i;~ ;;-; 1 east, ~:%c jj<J:<Kk%TjC?1It 1).?kt: rack '.
+ c2i1,a]j1 (: & adcaLi.:zLte].;v. sccu:i;lg 2 i~~il~i~~~fi: 01 4 bicycles.
A six $?OT:. Sence shsll be ~;a:'-"d p13yl(r _I the west propert'y Llnil and :?long the? r;oi't.kie;::l II~LYI(~;?~J{ of t'jiase I 2s shcjiqn in Z~i-~iki A , d at G (1 Au .-. k u s t. 6 , 3.9 7 9 .
.,- 9.
10. PY!I.OT to LSSUZI~C,C .. pf: ljEt1<:iIi;; pc.vri-cs i_r - I the deve'io:;;~~ si1:il.l p:
3 puill:ic. facll.l-;,jc:s fFje as it II13)T be adsptcd by -the cij:y C o 1111 c, i 1 a 1.' I- is o I' t c ;I isi) 7. (3 ':I ;* 1 o the final site de-!~:!o
J 1. ljl311 (;r.::acgenents s:ltlsfactD-:y to tI?e (:j.t? M?n;;on.r h ~ __
~i~tiile gua~31fteei11g si-Ic1-i :;.~~IT~zII~ c
s h2.1. 3. be
7 6 1: ib, L, / 11 z 8/6/79
-7-
, a.
. @ q
INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY
DATE : July 16, 1979
TO : James Hagaman, Planning Director
FROM : Brian Milich, Assistant Planner w
SUBJECT: EIA NO. 556; SDP 79-3 BREITBARTH
DISCUSSION
The proposed project involves the construction of a dental,
medical and office complex, and parking area, on a .53
acre parcel. The subject property is located on the south-
west corner of Las Flores and Pi0 Pic0 Drive, east of 1-5.
The property slopes slightly to the west, and is void of
any significant flora, fauna or unique environmental feature
The proposed complex would consist of two 3600 square foot
buildings, with development occuring in two phases.
Approximately 1400 cubic yards of grading is necessary to
prepare the site for the buildings and parking area.
addition, an existing single family residence on the site
is proposed for demolition as part of the Phase I1 develop-
In
ment -
Single family residences border the site to the west, south,
and north, across Las Flores DriveBwhile to the east, acrosz
Pi0 Pic0 Drive, is an elementary school. No significant
adverse impacts to the surrounding development is anticipate
RECObWENDATI ON
Tt is recommended that a declaration of negative environment impact be made with regard to the proposed project.
JUSTIFICATION
1) The subject site has been committed to development, and
currently void of any significant flora, fauna, and
unique environmental features. Thus, no adverse
environmental impacts are anticipated.
The proposed development would not adversely affect any development in the immediate area. 2)
BM/ar
lo a
1200 ELM AVENUE TELE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (7141 .
Citp Of (6arkbab
NUTICE OF DETERkIINATION
55c
7
TO: COUNTY CLERK SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES LOG NO.
County of San Diego 220 West Broadway Room 1311 San Diego, CA 92101 Sacramento, CA 95814
1416 Ninth Street
PRDJEer TITLE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP 79-3)
PRQTE~ ADDRESS: South west comer of intersection of Pi0
Pic0 Drive and Las Flores Drive. '
PEWIT APPLICANT: LARRYW. BREITBARTH
* - ENVIFONblENTAL DIPACT OF THE PROJECT
D
D
STATUS OF PROJTCT
d APPROVED
El DENIED
ENVIRONMENTAL DPAh REPORT
WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
WILL/MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFETCT
NONE COWLETED PURSUANT TO CEQA a U COMPLETED PURSUANT TO CEQA
A copy of the 0 Negative Declaration n EIR with supporting
documents is available for public review at: the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008.
7
7 -
SIGNED: *",?LC-& " '-z;+=pLf:>L? :> -7 - 3 L' * DATE: I/-
JAMES C.' HAM,
Planning Director
e a
7200 ELM AVkP:dE TELE
C&.7I.SRAI3. CALIFOHP!'" 92009 (714)
EiQj of CasX&nb
KEGATIVE DECLfWiTION
Prn%LT TITLE: SITE DEVELOPiYENT PLAN
PRCJEU: LCKATICX: South west corner of intersection of ?io Pic0
-- Drive an6 Las Flores Drive.
9- I3 u I.
mdical and office coicplex, md parking area, on a .53 acre ?%-zel. The grop
slops slightly to the west, and is void of any signi€icax f:3zzI famz or u
environmntal features. The propsed caqlex yrjould consisc cl z;o 3500 square
buildings I with developrent occnring j-ri two phases - Apprcxiz-ze;Y 1400 cubic
of grading is necessq to prepare the site for the buildiqs z-2 parkirg are
"Lo signif icxt adverse impacts to the surroundhg develop-mrt is -mticisated.
_---
-__.
- -
--I---
__I
--
--
Pf!a;',L. PRQPOLrnT : r..!ARRY x. BPZIrnQrn
~E~J~T/FI~ p;~; SD? 79-3 -- LE LO: 556
c1 im City of Carlsbad bas cm~I~ctei1 m envirmnatd revim oE tb.2 c?'cio p\d.ismi to the Cuiidines for 13 2lE;atation of t5e CZL~EGXTS_~ &-,'x
Act &:id t2e E~viror~~i~t& Prctzztion G-rbance 05 the City 05 Cz-lsba
szf d rc-dim, a dr,aIt 2kgatiw 3zclxatim (Ikc?sratim 05 ?:on-S<~~Lficat &;qa FLermy ssced for the sL!bj ect ;xj ect . Jcstificatim for this actlcn is at tad this GccuTnt,
A cqy c;f the ?!egatPre kcla
inviccc!, dzys of &te of p&licat:iey-
1.
icn wiLh sqportim 3scr~nts Is eL file in the
Pleas2 sdmit CCZZE-:~ L? writing tc CY-? 31xmi~g C~issioii s\j~hi~ i
%j?aTb--Cac, City Hall, 1203 E -k.~nu:?, CFrlsbac!, . Gdxrm~ts ~TCJ;~ the public
_- - >2 21 I 1979 I .- .,
-? ! n,\m: /7-- /I ," - 74' STWg A "* c- -+&&] '\ fL# dl?: JAPES c. flXrY,'AN
PLiGshTK2 EXX m3, cT%y % QJ??7m
I,
e a
x-qTyn= -,,,A 1.- QF E:cL:?-yyT(?s sF --
KOXSIGNIFICKN nxr ~~U~XAL IPTACT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEIY that the City of Carlsbad has issued
Negative Declarations for the following projects:
€G NO. 556, the proposed project invdves the comtruction of a cknLal,
md.iCal and office cmplex, and parkirg area, on a .53 acre parcel. The
property slops slightly tg the wst, and is void of any significant flc
faw or unique envirormetdi features. The proposed complex would cons:
Of ebD 36F)o scri??~e foot hilC?hq~, :.~?th ds7nb'_=rent ccczktg ir_ ~,KI ?ha:
12 C:ZG~-= -i <- _- -d -I-- s _.
LL J:?-rba e-;. -4 ;o a-L.-d j-j:&, of gzdz-3 -2 yL2=:-~~~-, -
for .tk?s Isuilaings and par'khg area.
the surrounding developent is mticipated.
APPLICANT: LARRY W. BFEI=T€I
NO significant a5;erse i.n-gacts to
- - _-
A copy of tlie s& jsct Negative Declarattcns ~ith sqport-=Je
information is availkie for public review at the Plai-atng Departmat City Hall, 1200 Elm Arenue, Carlsbad, invitecl. Please sub-5t coments in writirg to the Plzrming
Comnmts from the pblic are
D?p~&rne?~i within fis? (5) days from the &e of this notice.
Rj-pJJ-SA: JULY 21, -: 1 - -.--
q *- m w I
FEE** *~O.O ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
I Receipt No. EIA NO. i .
Date: c?q $t)c*\*]q
~ame of ~ppl ?cant: Lary -. 2reTtberth
Address: : k2O ?g'acaJaTia, FaI-Yxook, Sal ifarnia 92@
Permi t Appl fed For : ??3 - Site 2eveloment h.D333?0~2l
Case Nos. :
L0cat-i on of Proposed Act: vi ty: Touth-v~st, Corn@r 070 LFtcrsacAion - 07
Fie ?ic~ 3r5ve ad :as ?lor-s IIrtvm
BAC KGRO U ND I N FO RKAT I ON
1. Givc a hrief description of the- proposed activity (attc any prel im-inary development plans). Site ersdina ad cwstmcticq of a t~o-stopy- CC~~C- '33il+iny; to i
3ental, Ys?ica?, and eyal oTfice suites: siytsen w-rkilnq sxce=
?andsca-i.vlo tP: 't)o i o~ iq 'j~13pn r 3,506 3~" >iJi?-jiny ofi the sr
wbr+,irr of ~rcel. ate no:cstr-ctlo? +c i-EclyJe ; .jarnolit<-oF ci
wsi4mtial unit, +,c al'~ .CQr tk- a?Jjtjcr,a? fiftce? qzrkim? sq.cc
:,<On SF, '%tI-?frT (sc ?cc':ranc-I) ~ct*,h I z~e SCA sj ??, +,p \e ~y~~-l~
'"asp 7-T r3n +,Lip rrirc'.l,P PTPtLOY e+- ??3scn?,
natural and manmade characteristics; also provide prec slope analysis when appropriate.
2. Describe the activ area, including distinguishing
"i~r*l~> st;3~~ yes;"~n<ial I:--%" -f Tr;ro+ q~~s~y;~'jcy, r+ rpn? r-r-c
rc+2Dm 2~ 3zy2e>[ 4 - 7 in - q->c] "pygc AD Le -&?f;e<
FlSyti_oi 5. C-ITF=~~~ 7: va t- srd el?3PF; ,3Fp?'.3X. Di!7hL feGi
3,- "ico, dia~o*m'-~a 50 a acfnt vowr+,v, ,2t the .:cjfiuh nwC;r;pfi-,r 1
s~+.P ciJ~rm~ly pic CpnCrPte cur': an3 m~t+
c' .
Th.4 .,\. p *>ttni+ eIve = ",r * +, - T af-onn YAP ?"-OVGS 2rrl i-tc ?.'Jo $rives.
3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated int
the design and/or operation of the project.
~nsu~ation aq? inftltr2ticn rwvirev.ents to Feet Stat,?, mitld 2)~
-_ ater a36 waste :"SeF attack-..?. 2%i?it 1' lt
w w
ENV IRONIIIENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM
11. - Environmental Impact Analysis
Answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space.
Yes -
1. Could the project significantly change present land uses in the vicinity of the activ-ily? X
2. Could the activity affect tile use of a recreational
area, or area of important aesthetic value?
3. Could the activity affect the functioning of an
4.
established coinmunity or neighborhood?
Could the activity result in the displacement of c omrnu n i ty res i ci e n t s ?
Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not found in other parts of the
County, State I or nation?
Could the activity significantly affect ;I historical or archaelogical site or its setticg?
5.
6.
. 7. Could the activity significantly affect the patential
use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural res- ource?
Does the activity area serve as a habitat, food source
nesting place, source 07 mter, etc. for rare or endangered wildlife 01; fish species?
Could the activity significantly affect fish, wildlife or plant life?
Are there any rare or endzngered plant species in the activity area?
Could the activity change existing features of any of
Could the activity change existing features of any of
the City's beaches?
Coild the activity result in the erosion or elimination
Could the activity serve to encourage devclopnicnt of
.presently undeveloped areas or intensify developmekt of alrcady developed areas?
8.
9.
IO.
11. the city's lagoons, bays, or tidelands? -
12.
13.
of .agricultural 1 ands? \
14.
X
* * *. . ' Ye! -
I.
15. - Will the activity require a variance from established environmental
,16, Will the activity require certification, authorization or issuance of a permit by any, local, State or Federal environinental control agency ? -
17. Will the. act-ivity require issuance of a variance or conditional
use permit by the C-ity?
18. Will the activity involve the a.pplication, use, or disposal of potentiallj hazardous materials? -
W-ill the activity involve construction of facilities. in a flood
standards (air, water, noise, etc)? -
X
-
19.
. 'plain?
20. Will the activity involve construction of facilities on a slope of
Will the activity involve cons'crtiction of facilities in the area of an active fault?
Could the activit.y result in the generation of significant a!iiounts of noise? .a
Could the activ-ity result in the generation of significant
amounts of dust?
Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials?
25 percent or greater? - --.
21.
22.
23.
..
24.
25. .Could the activity result in a significant changz in the . quality of any portion of the region's air orvater resources? (Should note surface, ground vJater, off-shore).
Will there be 8 significant change to existing land form?
(a)
(b)
x 26.
indicate est-imated grading to be done in cubic yards. 320 Y~'-..
percentage of alteration to the present land form. 15'+/3ilc!kw ,I. .. ?a
2/+;;/~a~ki~ are
Will the activity result in substantial increases in the iise of utilit.
85 3Y ~ pa*:: -
(c) maximum height of F?#% or fill slopes.
sewers, drains or streets? '-
(ht ). f'3:iy fEf=.t
.27.
111. State of No Significant Environniental Effects
If you have answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section I1 but . think the activity will have no significant environnlcntal effects, indicate
reasons below:
'I See attached ?x?IT'~~? - ll?' .
# a
(3XYT3IT ~~7~ )
?art If hvirome3tal Inact 4ralysis
1111--- -.%I__
A. i$snor,se to auestions -1 and =I&: T'rormse3 croject wi?-l chanoe p.rcel
use of (one) single fazvlilv chrelling renki?. and a vacart lot to a corn- bination residential - ProTessional tise and with Fhase TI -to corndete!
nrofessional use. %is chanye rill tend to emouraqe ot5er develomer
of a similar nature which is totally consistent wiC,h the Citv of 2arl:
General "lane The vo,iect and undevelowd wocerties in the vicinity
fall within the *'Q" controlled develomerlt area and will be widd by
City staff and ?lamina Ccm.llission anmovals to assure comnliance vitl
the General "lan.
- 13. ?esoonse to -16: Froject waste treatnlenf, %as been reviewed and ay3rot. -_ 377 the State of CaliFornia, (ater ?ualitp Sontrol ;o~.J,rc?.
C. bsconse to -26: -'base I - Yajor project, erading \as been confind tc
mall auantitv of fifl to establish ar, adequate builclinq cad an3 a EOF
aqount of cyadins to create a2 awrcmiate mrkinq %rea ad naintairl
existina drainaTe wtterns.
3ase 1: - 3raclin3 to cnnzlst, of caavation for reqi:
?a r<im ?,
;-uar.titv: 995 E'L/Siit .
- ercentacre a ~t~rattcn/reiainins northerr!
,ut to 'w \e14 by mssonry retaininq wall:
-
cofiisn =- 5C.
n
-e -. *.
I
I
IV; Cominents or Elaborations to Any of the Questions in Section 11.
(If additional space is needed for answering any questions, attach additio sheets as may be needed.
Si g nature
Date Signed:
Conclusions
nip1 eting report)
77 ,
(To be completed by the Planning Director).
in the appropriate box. Place a check
( )
( )
Further information is required.
It has been determined that the project will not have significant
environmentcial effects. You. must submit a prel iriiinary erivironmet
should make an appoit:i:rtc!:t \t/jth the P1anni::g Director to d-iscuss further processing of yogr project, in accordance with Chapter 19.04 of the Municipal Code.
( ) impact statement by the fo1low-i i2g date- . ( ) You
7 D!!T C REf E I\' ED :
BY ! *-
TTannlngi rector, or.;
'L ~
1
Ilevi sed 7/3/74 . FORM PLANNING 40