Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-07-21; City Council; 6658-1; Carlsbad Research Center - Koll CompanyCITY OF CARLSBAD AGENDA BILL NO. 6658-Supplement 1 DATE : July 21 , 1981 DEPARTMENT; City Attorney Initial: Dept.Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. Subject: CARLSBAD RESEARCH CENTER—ROLL COMPANY - 559 ACRE INDUSTRIAL PROJECT AT EL CAMINO REAL, NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT RD. CASE NO; SP-180(A)/ZC-236/CT 81-10 Statement of the Matter The City Council, at your meeting of July 7, 1981, directed the City Attorney to prepare the necessary documents approving a zone change, a revised specific plan and a tentative subdivision map for the above-referenced project. In taking that action the Council requested additional information on an access problem. In addition, the Council directed that changes be made in the doduments to include the recommended conditions necessary to deal with vernal pools, airport noise, mini-parks and acquisition of the Wastewater Reclamation Plant/Reservoir site. A memorandum explaining how.our office and the city staff have responded to those directions is attached. Ordinances rezoning the property and adopting a revised specific plan, and the tentative map resolution, are attached. Because of the number of changes the Council should review the memorandum and the documents to ensure that we have correctly carried forth your intentions in the matter. Exhibits City Attorney's memorandum to City Council dated July 14, 1981. Ordinance No. /5~J3 granting ZC-236. Ordinance No. Resolution No. _approving revised SP-180(A). approving CT 81-10. Recommendation If the City Council is satisfied and concurs, your action is to introduce Ordinances No. ?S~*3an^ No. ?5~J^'and to adopt Resolution No. COUNCIL ACTION: 7-21-81 Council introduced Ordinance No. 9593 and Ordinance No. 9594; Council adopted Resolution No. 6619, as corrected, and directed the City Clerk to make the appropriate changes on the specific plan. APPBOVED MEMORANDUM DATE: July 14, 1981 TO: City Council FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: ROLL COMPANY DOCUMENTS At your July 7, 1981 meeting the City Council considered three actions necessary to approve the Roll Company Industrial Park: a zone change, a revised specific plan, and a tentative subdivision map. The developer raised some concerns with the recommended conditions of approval and the City Council disposed of those concerns by making a series of policy judgments. We have attempted to incorporate the Council's intentions in the matter into the documents we have prepared for your July 21, 1981 meeting. This memorandum is to discussed the actions we have taken in response to the Council's direction regarding the various policy issues. VERNAL POOLS; The EIR as certified by the City Council identifies some vernal pools within the project site which will be eliminated by the development. That constitutes a potentially adverse environmental effect. When an EIR points up such an effect, the law requires the City Council to either mitigate it or make findings of overriding considerations which justify proceeding with the project notwithstanding the adverse effect. The City Council was satisfied that the evidence did not require preservation of the pools. We, therefore, have attempted to draft the indicated finding of overriding considerations. The suggested finding has been included in the ordinance adopting the revised specific plan. Your introduction and adoption of that ordinance will indicate that you are satisfied the facts of the matter support the suggested finding and that the finding justifies the conclusion to approve the project. Because of the Council's action on the pools, it was also necessary to rewrite Section 12, on Page 26, of the specific plan, and that has been accomplished by the Planning Department. AIRPORT NOISE; Portions of the project area are subject to potentially adverse impacts from Palomar Airport noise. The Council determined that while an easement for Airport operations over the project was City Council -2- July 14, 1981 not required, that certain steps should be taken to put people on notice of the problem and require certain mitigation in the construction of buildings within the noise sensitive areas. The specific plan, Item No. 20, on Page 28, has been revised to deal with this problem, as has Condition No. 12 on the tentative map resolution. Requirements for the easement have been deleted. The documents now require that the CC&R'S and a note on the map reflect the potentially adverse noise impact from the Airport and that the City will not be responsible for the noise problem. At the suggestion of the Planning Department we have also included a provision that sound attenuation measures must be incorporated in the construction of buildings located within the 65 CNEL range and the CC&R'S for the project will so require. MINI-PARKS; The Council voted that the four mini-parks required for the project shall remain. This action did not require any changes to the documents. The specific plan, on Page 44, and Condition No. 10 of the tentative map resolution both already so provide. WASTEWATER RECLAMATION/RESERVOIR; The Council directed that provisions be made for acquisition of the proposed Palomar Airport Wastewater Reclamation Plant and Reservoir site in the event the City Council determines in the future to proceed with that project. The City Manager has reached an agreement with the developer in that regard. The language which he forwarded to our office has been incorporated on Page 14 of the specific plan and in a new condition (No. 39) to the tentative map resolution. The developer is required to dedicate the reservoir site which also serves a flood control drainage function. In addition, the City would have the option to purchase the Wastewater Plant site subject to the terms and conditions set out in the documents. REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN; The Specific Plan Ordinance prepared for the City Council adopts in total a revised specific plan. Incorporated in that plan are the changes made by the Council to the original plan as contained in Ordinance No. 9561, the changes recommended by the Planning Commission, and the modifications directed by the City Council at your July 7, 1981 meeting. The ordinance we have prepared adopts that new revised plan and repeals Ordinance No. 9561 and the the previous, now superseded, specific plan. City Council -3- July 14, 1981 HIEATT ACCESS The City Council in response to concerns expressed by Mr. Hieatt regarding access to his property, directed our office to prepare a report on that matter. The results of our investigation are attached as a memorandum dated July 14, 1981. We have included as a part of that memorandum a letter received from Mr. Hieatt's attorney and updated information from the Engineering and Planning departments. The departments report that there are several existing and adequately available access routes to the Hieatt property other than across the Koll property. In our opinion, Mr. Hieatt's claim for access rights over the Koll property involves a private legal dispute between private property owners and we have recommended that the City not become involved by taking sides. There is no legal reason why the City should become involved in the dispute at this time. Because of that recommendation, we have not made any changes in the conditions as recommended by the staff and the Planning Commission regarding access to the Hieatt property. If the City Council is satisfied, however, that Planning and Engineering considerations, a proper street pattern and logical development patterns in the area require Koll to provide access, a condition to that effect can be added as an additional condition to the tentative map resolution. Because of the complexity of the project and the number of changes made in response to Council's direction, we would ask that you carefully review the revised specific plan, the ordinance approving the zone change, the ordinance adopting the revised specific plan and the resolution approving the tentative map to ensure that we have correctly interpreted and incorporated your intentions in the matter. VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR. City Attorney VFB/mla Attachments MEMORANDUM DATE: July 14, 1981 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: ACCESS TO HIEATT PROPERTY FROM THE ROLL COMPANY PROJECT At your July 1, 1981 council meeting you requested our office to prepare a report on the issue of access to the Hieatt property from the Koll Company's Carlsbad Research Park Subdivision. The access issue came to our attention during the first Planning Commission public hearing on the Koll subdivision. At that meeting Mr. Hieatt addressed the Commission and indicated that he desired access to his property from the streets within the Koll subdivision. The Planning Commission requested our advice concerning the city's obligation to provide such access. Our office indicated that the city could, but was not obligated to, require the Koll Company to provide access to the Hieatt property as part of the approval of the tentative subdivision map. We indicated that further research on our part was necessary before making any judgment as to the nature of any access easements in the area. Following the first Planning Commission public hearing, our office conducted a limited investigation into the matter. We spoke with Mr. Hieatt by phone and reviewed a title report provided by Koll. We discovered that the Hieatt, the Koll Company, the Signal Landmark and the Palomar Airport properties were all originally part of the Kelly Ranch. All the properties except Hieatt's presently have access to public streets. Whenever land is conveyed from a common grantor that has no access to a public street a way of necessity arises by operation of law. This prevents the conveyance of "land locked" parcels. Mr. Hieatt would be entitled to access in and out of his property at some point across the lands formerly part of the Kelly Ranch. The access does not have to be the best, fastest, most direct or most convenient means. That entitlement runs against the other properties. Fixing a particular route is a private legal matter to be resolved between the property owners. The City has no obligation to provide access or to assist in any resolution of the problem between the property owners. Mayor and City Council -2- July 14, 1981 Mr. Hieatt provided our office with a "brief" consisting of a two page letter from his attorney, Mr. Stalder, regarding ways of necessity. A copy is attached. In our opinion there was nothing in that letter to call the conclusions from our investigation into question. At the second Planning Commission hearing we confirmed our tentative position that there was no legal requirement that the Planning Commission provide access to the Hieatt property. We also mentioned Section 20.16.010(12) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, which provides: "Considerations shall be given to insuring proper development of abutting properties in the development of the street plan," This section allows the City to require the Roll Company to provide access to the Hieatt property from within the Roll subdivision if that is justified based on Planning and Engineering considerations. Neither Mr. Hieatt nor his representative appeared at the second Planning Commission hearing on this matter. The Planning Commission determined that it was not justified to require Roll to provide the access. After the City Council hearing the Planning and Engineering departments provided us with an assessment of the access issues from their standpoint. We have also driven out to the property with members of the Planning staff to take a firsthand look at the access possibilities. The Planning Director, in a memorandum dated July 10, 1981, has determined that access is available to Mr. Hieatt across the Signal Landmark property. A copy of the memorandum is attached. The City Engineer, in a memorandum dated July 13, 1981, confirms that such access is available and indicates from a design point of view that the Signal Landmark access is preferable. A copy of his memorandum is also attached. Given the fact that staff, the applicant and the Planning Commission all agree that Planning and Engineering considerations indicate access is not appropriate over the Roll development, it could be difficult to support a conclusion that the Municipal Code Section quoted above can be used to impose that obligation on Roll. To take that action could also constitute the City's "taking sides" in what in our opinion is a private legal dispute between two owners of private property. Mayor and City Council -3-July 14, 1981 We have also had further discussions with Mr. Hieatt's attorney. He claims that Hieatt has always used an existing dirt road across the Roll property to get to his land. However, he also said that each time he has gone to the property with Hieatt, they have gone across the Airport property. The attorney indicates that if access is not provided as a part of the subdivision process on the Roll subdivision, that litigation to establish access will be necessary and that he will file such action, but he concedes that the cause of action is against the Roll Company or Signal Landmark and not against the City of Carlsbad. The Roll title report contains nothing to indicate that any easement, whether expressed, implied by necessity or prescriptive exists to provide access to the Hieatt property. The existence of such an easement is a matter for private resolution between the adjoining property owners. The title company would also probably have to become involved in the litigation. Because there are no easements of record for access to the Hieatt property, and because no prescriptive or implied easements have been perfected by Hieatt, the City is not, in approving the Roll subdivision, destroying or denying any of Hieatt's existing property rights. Since that is the case, in our opinion, the City should not become involved in what is otherwise a not at all unusual legal dispute between private property owners. Based on our investigation, we have made the following conclusions: 1. That the City is not legally obligated to require the Roll Company to provide access to the Hieatt property through the Roll subdivision. 2. That there appears to be adequate existing access to the Hieatt property at several points other than the Roll property. 3. To the extent that Mr. Hieatt has access rights against Roll, they are not of record and are unperfected. 4. Mr. Hieatt probably has a way of necessity at some point across some part of the old Relly Ranch properties. In the absence of agreement between the property owners, litigation between them may be necessary to resolve the matter. Mayor and City Council -4-July 14, 1981 We understand that Mr. Hieatt is attempting to reach a private solution to the problem prior to your meeting of July 21, 1981. If it has not been resolved, it is our recommendation that the City not involve itself in what in our opinion is a private legal dispute by imposing any condition on Roll regarding access to the Hieatt property. However, if the Council finds, as a matter of Planning and Engineering, that proper development of the City's street plan requires the Roll access, a condition to that effect can be added to the resolution approving Roll's tentative map. VINCE ?\BIONDO, JR., City Attorney DAHlfl. S. HENTSCHRE, Assistant City Attorney DSH/mla Attachments ~* * toV> g c < S! ° ° i K Sfc >P gi.8?52 3> h cc.• < < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 9593 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO GRANT A CHANGE OF ZONE (ZC-236) FROM L-C (LIMITED CONTROL) TO C-M (HEAVY COMMERCIAL-LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF EL CAMINO REAL AND NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT. APPLICANT: ROLL COMPANY. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: That Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the amendment of the Zoning Map to grant a change of zone (ZC-236) from L-C (Limited Control) to C-M (Heavy Commercial-Light Industrial) on property as shown on the map marked ZC-236, Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after- its adoption. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 21st day of July , 1981, and thereafter D CDco «° E < « . ° < isfl "•' ' ;rl o UJ 5 M <o <£ •" m S 2 j> P ec o T_JU 2 3 A*« 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . c PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of said City Council held on the 4th day of August , 1981 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council MEnibers Casler, Anear, Lewis and Rulchin NOES : None ABSENT: Council Member Packard / ^n^^^, &. OLju^ RONALD C// PACKARD, Mayor MARY H. CASLER, Vice-Mayor ATTEST : (X&Jd^ $ (?o^Xdkj^^ ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk (SEAL) • . -2- c EXHIBIT A TO CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 9593 CASE NO. ZC236 APPLKANT_J<QLL VICINITY MAP r'/ D CD3 II fcu cc5 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 ORDINANCE NO. 9594 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-180(A)) FOR AN INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH PARK ON APPROXIMATELY 559 ACRES TO BE KNOWN AS CARLSBAD RESEARCH CENTER GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL, NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 9561. APPLICANT; ROLL COMPANY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 11th and 19th days of June, 1980 and the 23rd day of July, 1980 hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider a request by the Roll Company to approve a Specific Plan (SP-180); and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1652 recommending approval of said Specific Plan, which Resolution is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad at its August 5, 1980 meeting did hold a duly noticed public hearing and after said hearing certified EIR 80-3 for this project; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad did hold a duly noticed public hearing on August 5, 1980, and subsquently at its adjourned meeting of August 19, 1980, adopted Resolution No. 6274 approving general plan amendments for the specific plan area, which resolution is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad did hold a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 1980, and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13to _OT CO • tt c>4 d " » - 14ipl 15 «-•; 15 ^80 16 *" m 3 E o 17 O O 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 subsequently an adjourned hearing on September 2, 1980, and after hearing and considering the testimony and arguments if any of all persons desiring to be heard, and after considering the information contained in EIR 80-3, said Council did find that the findings of the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 1652 constitute the findings of the City Council. WHEREAS, The City Council, at their meeting of November 18, 1980 adopted Ordinance No. 9561 approving Specific Plan (SP-180); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did hold a duly noticed public hearing on the 24th day of June, 1981 to consider the request by the Roll Company to approve a revised Specific Plan (SP-180(A)); and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearing the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1808 recommending approval of revised Specific Plan (SP-180(A); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad did hold a duly noticed public hearing on July 7, 1981 and after hearing and considering the testimony and arguments if any of all persons desiring to be heard, made the following finding: 1. That the findings made by the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 1808 constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter, with the addition of the following finding: "In approving the application, the City Council makes the following findings which override the possible adverse environmental impact to the vernal pools identified in the final environmental impact report: 2. . D min g K < en CENT F. BIONDO, JiRNEY • CITY OF C1200 ELM AVENUEBAD, CALIFORNIA2 P <3 > £ tt I S o 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 A. Protection of the 4.6 acres of vernal pools located in the center of a 600 acre industrial park is not practicable and would be undesirable given the high quality of the proposed business park. B. Protection of the vernal pools would significantly and adversely affect the quality of the design and improvement of the project. C. Protection of the vernal pools would be at the expense of meeting economic and social needs, objectives and concerns of importance to the city, including: (1) The loss of approximately 177 jobs. (2) The loss of substantial public facilities fee revenues. (3) The loss of substantial annual property tax revenues. D. Subsequent communications from the Army Corps of Engineers indicate that the vernal pools identified in the EIR are not as significant as others in the San Diego Region and do not justify federal or state involvement in their preservation nor require preservation by the City." NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: That the Specific Plan (SP-180(A)) entitled Carlsbad Research Center Specific Plan, dated Revised: July 21, 1981, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference, is approved subject to the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 1652 which are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: The Revised Specific Plan (SP-180(A)) approved by this ordinance indicate acceptance by the City Council of the general framework for development of the subject 3. ..--. o m _v> °° ' CC p^CC < o>:. BIONDO. J• CITY OF C,.M AVENUEALIFORNIAVINCENT FVTTORNEY1200 ElVRLSBAD, Cfc °o 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 property and of the development standards contained in said plans. Said plans are subject to future amendment by the City as part of the City's ongoing planning process. SECTION 3: Development plans for specific sites within the specific plan boundaries shall be subject to the requirements and standards established by the Revised Specific Plan approved by this ordinance and shall be further evaluated in accord with municipal ordinances in force at the time the plans are before the City Council or other City decision-making body for final approval. Approval of Revised Specific Plan- 180 (A) does not constitute a guarantee that individual developments within the area covered by the plan will be approved or that the availability of public facilities and services will necessarily coincide with the developer's timetable for construction of the phasing plan contained in t-he approved and certified Specific Plan. Availability of public facilities for projects subject to the approved Specific Plan will be evaluated on a project-by- project basis. - SECTION 4: Ordinance No. 9561 adopting the original, and now superseded, Specific Plan is hereby repealed. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after x> its adoption. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 21st day of July _ , 1981, 4. CDC/)_1C o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 13 | 14 § 15 id 16UJo <£5 5 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 and thereafter PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of said City Council held on the 4th day of August , 1981 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Casler, Anear, Lewis and Kulchin NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Packard ATTEST: RONALD C/PACKARD, Mayor MARY H. CASLER, Vice-Mayor / 0 , Vn^i^iniiiiB^r irr j~~^^y— * * \ V*"' • --r-> —. — •*- - —iALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk (SEAL) CDto K < a "•° <O LL ^ ~°° li §> > o" t < tC VINCENT F. BTTORNEY -1200 ELMRLSBAD, CAi- O 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 RESOLUTION NO.6619 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (CT 81-10) FOR A 115- UNIT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT ON APPROXIMATELY 559.4 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF EL CAMINO REAL AND NORTH OP PALOMAR AIRPORT. APPLICANT: ROLL COMPANY. WHEREAS, on June 24,. 1981 the Carlsbad Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1810 recommending to the City Council that Tentative Subdivision Map (CT 81-10) be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad did on July 7, 1981 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission and to receive all recommendations and hear all persons interested in or opposed to Tentative Subdivision Map (CT 81-10); and WHEREAS, said Tentative Subdivision Map has been declared to have a nonsignificant impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared and filed in compliance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1980; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows: A. That the above recitations are true and correct. B. That the findings of the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 1810 constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter. C. That said Tentative Subdivision Map, together with the provisions for its design and improvement and subject to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 O<CO _ " g t£ < en da. \" | °° ii > "* Oi *~ < "-m 0 5 -I 2 "i 8 QUJ £ N <O "- tt> O 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 '22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the conditions of this resolution, is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans of the City of Carlsbad. D. That Tentative Subdivision Map (CT 81-10) is hereby approved subject to all applicable requirements of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and to the satisfaction of the conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 1810, dated June 24, 1981, marked Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, with the exception of Condition No. 12 which has been revised to read as follows: "(12) Portions of the subject property are located within the airport noise impact area for Palomar Airport as defined by the SANDAG Land Use Plan or updates thereto. The CC&R'S shall strongly recommend sound attenuation measures be incorporated in the construction of buildings to be located within the 65 CNEL range. The City is not responsible for airport related noise impacts. A note containing the terms of this condition shall be placed on the final map." and subject to the following additional Condition No. 39: "(39) The developer will offer for dedication the thirty acre reservoir/site shown as Lot 28. The 12.1 acre water reclamation plant site shown as Lots 29 and 30 shall be reserved. Until complete release of bond for dedicated improvements adjacent to Lots 29 and 30, but in any event no longer than July 1, 1991, City will have option to purchase said site at developer's cost, plus twenty percent. Developer's cost will be determined as follows: A. Base land cost is set at $20,082.00 acre. B. Carrying cost equal to developer's actual interest on the land shall be prorated from July 1, 1980. C. Actual improvement costs shall be added to the base land cost. D. Developer's profit of twenty percentshall be added. 2. D CO „co g • cc SNCC <f C7>"-°1U<O u. ^ =9 ° i i 0> > £ * U s rf . UJ O U] Z CN <o £ - coZ O CO o 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10J.W 11 12 13 T A 15•1. V 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 City shall have the right to examine books and accounts of developer to determine actual costs as described herein. The costs as described herein shall not exceed the fair market value of the property at such time as city exercises its option." PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the 21st day of July , 1981 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Packard, Casler, Anear, Lewis and Kulchin NOES : None ABSENT: None /-""""> /""~> ^^^4^C^^^' RONALD C. PACKARD, Mayor ATTEST: fltf.XL. ii ^asrtkdLALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk"!) (SEAL) 3. •:4* 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 v EXHIBIT A TO C*ITY COUNCl IUNC RESOLUTION NO. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION JNO. 1810 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 115 UNIT INDUSTRIAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ON 559.4 ACRES'GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF EL CAKING REAL AND NORTH "OF PALO- MAR AIRPORT. APPLICANTS ROLL COMPANY CASE NOs CT 81-10 6619 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain propertyf to wits • Lots WFM arid "Gn of Rancho Agua Hedionda according to Kap 823 filed November 16r 1896 in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, has been.filed with the City of Carlsbadr and referred to the- Planning Commission; and • "-WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as • » provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code? and WHEREAS^, the Planning Commission didf on the 27th day of Mayr 1981, hold a duly noticed public hearing and a continued public hearing on June 24r 1981, as prescribed by law, to consider said. request? and WHEREAS, at said public hearingp upo.n hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Tentative Tract Map. . • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by" the Planning Commis- sion as followss • . (A) That the foregoing recitations'are true and correct. (B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission recommends APPROVAL of CT-81-10, to the City Council, based' on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: * •1.f •• X 2 5 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 '** *1* i1 Findings 1) The the to a stil nanc 2) The cies a) I i ii b) c) 3) The uses 4) This imp'a Plan Co mm 5) The eral for 6) The not thro //// //// PC RESO The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate industrial and commercial development and still meet all of the requirements of the Subdivision Ordi- nance,, The project is consistent v/ith all city public facility poli- cies and ordinances sincer. ....__ _ The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an cippro™ priate condition to this-tentative subdivision map, in- sured that the final map will not be approved unless the City Council finds that sewer service is available to serve the project. In addition, the Planning Commission has added a condition that a note shall be placed on the final map that building permits may not be issued for the project unless the City Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and. building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service remains availablet the Planning Commission is satisfied that the requirements of the public facilities element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this tentative map approval* All necessary public improvements have been provided or will be required as conditions of approval^ The applicant has agreed, and is required by the inclu- sion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facili.- ties fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that public facil- ities will be available concurrent with need as required by the General Plan. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding land uses for the reasons stated in the staff report.. This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts, and a Negative Declaration has'been issued by the Planning Director on May If 1981 and approved by the Planning Commission on June 4r 1981. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the city's Gen- eral Plan and with the Specific Plan approved on this site for the reasons stated in the staff report* • * The design of the subdivision and type of improvements will not conflict with easements for public use or public access through the subject property. '•»«<*" 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 General Cond itions 1} Approval is granted for CT 81-10f as shown on Exhibit A, dated May 6, 1981, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department. Development shall occur substanti- ally as.shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions« . 2) This project is approved upon the express condition that the final map shall not be approved unless the City Council finds as of the time of such approval that sewer service is avail- able to serve the subdivision. 3} This project -is approved upon the express condition that building permits x*ill not be issued for development of the subject property unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application .for such sewer permits and will continue to be avail'able until time of- occupancyo 4} This project is approved upon the express condition that the applicant shall pay a public facilities fee as required by City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29r 1979, on file with'the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference,* and according to the agreement executed by the applicant for pay- ment of said fee a copy of that agreement dated June 25f1980r is on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. ' If said fee is not paid as promised.,, this ap- plication will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project shall be void* 5) Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance'with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable city ordinances in effect at time of building permit issu- ance. • . » 6) The applicant shall establish an owner's association and cor- responding covenants, conditions and restrictions or a maintenance district if approved by the City Council„ Said association or maintenance district shall be responsible for maintenance of all private common areas. Said CC&R's shall be submitted to arid approved by the Planning Director prior to final map approval of Phase Ie Piann ing Department * 7} The applicant shall submit a street name list consistent with the city's street name policy subject to the Planning Direc- tor's approval prior to final map approval. PC RESO #1810 -3- . >) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2.7 28 8} The project shall provide bus stop facilities at locations subject to the satisfaction of the North County Transit Dis- trict., Said facilities shall at a minimum include a benchrfree from advertising and a pole for the bus stop sign* The bench and pole shall be designed in a manner so as to not detract from the basic architectural theme of the project and said design shall be subject, to the approval of the Planning Director and North County Transit District. 9} Approval of Tentative Tract No,, CT 81-10 -is granted subject to approval of Zone Change 236. 10) The developer shall submit a detailed map showing proposed locations for.the mini-parks required pursuant to the ap- proved Specific Plan on the property. Said locations shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to final map ap- proval of Phase I. 11) The street alignment of that street located between Lots t,4 and 5, 6 of Phase 4 shall be redesigned to allow more conven- ient access to the adjacent property to the east. Plans for said realignment shall be submitted to and approved by the - City Engineer prior to final map approval of Phase 4. 12) The applicant shall grant an appropriate easement to the sat- isfaction of the Planning Director, and approved by the City Attorneyj. for those portions of the subject property located within an airport noise impact area' as defined by the SANDAG Land Use Elan for Palomar Airport or updates thereto ensuring that the city will not be held responsible for airport rela- ted noise impacts. A note identifying the noise impacts shall be placed on the final map. 13) The approval of this map shall expire eighteen months from the date of City Council approval. The applicant may request an extension and such extension may be approved or denied at the discretion of the City Council,, In approving an exten- sion r the City Council may impose new conditions and may re- vise existing conditions,, Engineering Department 14) The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to the commencement of any clearing or grading of the site. PC PESO # 1810 -4- • *• 1 . 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ! 15) The grading for this project is defined as "controlled grad- ing" by Section 11.06.170(a) of the Carlsbad, Municipal Code. Grading shall be performed under the observation of &. civil engineer whose responsibility it shall be to coordinate site inspection and testing to insure compliance of the work with the approved 'grading plan, submit required reports to the . City Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter 11.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, 16) Upon completion of gradingf the developer shall insure that an "as-graded" geologic plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on a con- tour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. This plan shall be"signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist. The plan shall be.prepared on a mylar or similar drafting film and shall become a permanent re- cord.- • •' . ' i 17) No Grading shall occur outside the limits of the subdivision unless a letter of permission is obtained from the owners of the affected properties. 18) Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shall be provided or installed as may be required by the County Department of Sanitation and. Flood Control or the City Engi- neer. 19) The developer shall pay the current local drainage cs.rea fee prior to approval of the final map or shall construct drain- age systems in conformance with the Master Drainage Plan and City of Carlsbad Standards as required by the City Engineer,, 20) Land for all public streets and easements shown on the tent.a- tive map shall be dedicated on the final map and shall be granted to city free and clear of all liens urid encumber- ances, 21) Direct access rights for all lots abutting El Camino Real and College Boulevard'(Street A) shall be waived on the final map. • 22) Except as stated below, all public streets within a phase shall be improved by the developer based on the typical sec- tions shown on the tentative map and in conformance with city of Carlsbad Standards prior to occupancy of any buildings within that phase. Street improvements shall include side- walks along all frontages, street lights, street trees, 18- foot median on College Boulevard and a 9-foot- half width med*- ian on El Camino Real. The median islands may be waived if the City Council modifies their policy relating to street improvements. • . PC RESO #1810 1 5 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 '21 ' 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 23) College Boulevard shall be dedicated ~ based on a right-of- way width of 102 feet - from El Camino Real to the southern tract boundary at the time of approval of the final map for Phase II. Fifty-two (52) feet shall be dedicated for College Boulevard f based on an ultimate right-of-way width of 102 feet, from the southern tract boundary .to Palomar Airport Road at the time of approvctl -of the final map for Phase II, The City Engineer may, at his discretionr approve another connection between the project site and. Paloraar Airport Road provided that the other connection provides for adequate cir- culation and also provided that if this other connection is approved r College Boulevard shall be constructed in conjunc- tion with adjacent development. 24) College Boulevard shall be constructed to a minimum width of 32 feet of pavement from El Camino Real to Palornar Airport Road prior to the occupancy of any buildings in Phase II r III or IV, whichever occurs first. 25) The developer shall enter into a traffic signal agreement and post a bond for one~half the cost of a fully actuated traffic signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and Street "B" • . prior to approval of 'the final map for Phase I,. The devel- oper shall install this signal prior to the issuance of building permits for any buildings' in Phase I. The other half of the cost of the signal shall be borne by the city' through appropriate fees and/or agreements, . 26) The developer shall enter into traffic signal agreements and post bonds for fully actuated traffic signals at the inter- sections of Street "B" and College Boulevard (Street "A") prior to approval of the final map . for Phase II and Street . "N" and College Boulevard prior to approval of the final map for Phase III. - ' 27) The developer shall comply with all the rules,, regulations and design requirements of the respective sewer and water agencies regarding services to the project,, 28) All concrete terrace drains shall be maintained by the pro- perty owner's association or the individual property owner. An approximately worded statement clearly identifying this responsibility shall be placed 'in the CC.&R's. 29) Street "B" west of Street "A" shall be connected to another city street (to provide a second exit from the area), subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Fire Chief, prior to the issuance of a building permit for any buildings on lots 18 through 38 of Phase IV. The construction of a waste water treatment facility is specifically excluded from the require- ments of this -condition. PC RESO #1810 --6- 1 2 3 4' 5 6 7 8 9 10 3.1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 '27 28 mFire Department. 30} Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted to the Pire Department for review and approval. 31} The applicant shall submit ttto (2) copies of a site plan showing locations of existing and proposed fire hydrants and on-site roads and drivese 32} An all weather access road shall be maintained throughout construction* 33} Water for fire protection shall be available to the site to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall before combustibles are placed on the building .site,, 34} All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systemsr automatic sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the pro- ject shall be submitted, to the Fire Department for approval prior to construction. 35}"All roof top appurtenances shall be architecturally inte- grated into the design on the building and shielding to pre- vent noise arid visual impactsf subject to approval before issuance of permit., . Parks __Dep_artinent 36) The median islands along. El Camino Real running along the length of this property shall be landscaped per city stan- dards. The median islands may be v?aived if the City Council modifies their policy relating to street improvements* 37} Street trees shall be installed throughout the project pur- suant to city standards. The types and locations of said street trees shall be subject to approval of the Parks and Recreation Department. 38) All graded slopes shall be planted or hydroseeded with a seed mix approved by the Parks and Recreation Department immedi- ately after grading. • Jl 1 O 1 f\ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 IS 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 .24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED 7\ND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of CarlsbadF California, held on the 24th day of June, 1981 by the following vote, to wits AYES* Farrowf Schlehuber^ Josef Friestedt, L'Keureux NOESj None ABSENTS Marcus, Rombotis '' ABSTAIN? Non© JONATHAN Do FRIESTEDT, vTce«-ChaTEnari CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST s JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary CARLSBAD PLANKING COMMISSION PC RESO 11810