The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986-10-14; City Council; 8784; ODMARK/COLLINS CITY OF CARLSBADAB# f7ff.86 TITLE: EIR 86-4, GPA/LU 86-10, ZC-348, MP-1 (C) , CT 85-23/CP-32Q(A), SDP 86-1C a $ 4J F: 'a Lo4 h MTG. ODW/COLLINS) GPA/LU 86-11, zc-350, PLN CITY OF CARLSBAD E =1 22 DEPT. a,a,rnh aamo DEPT. CITY E CITY I c p m.rlu -4 cd .rl aJa c au E aa 2 2 Z8"UIO a mu0 mcu a C a, E*rl c+ u O E a $E2 0 a" cu G &I acmoa, rl? a,u os uc a,Pcpm a - crlc c\o a0 a, E cd p.rl 0 u 0 cou 0 &I4 c u u .rlac M a5 '$5 z fl 2 uo 3 9JW oc amc a, 0m.rl 0 u 0uCdaJ-d NE^ w Gaga 05 0 ua,c mw 0 a, cd u a,P uaJm 0 ad aa, c 0s OaJO u p a, rl -rl TI E s G-rl u L1 c .rl C, w (d &I TI05 ma c a wUMe =t Cd o L)a,CMW a, m .rl a.rl .rl &I@ a, MO fi aMcuo L) .rl 0 H Udd Frlo M-ti c4.d *-GS cd h a, M a, WaJOC duca * CcPucd~ u cd-rl-4dl 17PIWh el Ti bl 0 o.!JaJ\ --vi c m Lclu .rl rcI uu a u NO G-rl suu a, 0 a, a-rluu OWL) a5 cd dU*ma,UM cd a5 aJ .rl.rl 0w &I 0 u 0.d u a, M c-rl 3-d aa, &PC E cd U 0 ow*rls E 05 mZ cd .. \o 03 \ .. z 2 I- 0 4 d 0 z 5 0 0 4m P4e 4- I+ \ O 4 i - ~ d <,' >,( i " CI~OF CARLSBAD - AGEN~BILL / RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Attorney Office prepare documents CERTIFYING EIR 86-4 and DENYING GPA/LU 86-10 & 86-11, ZC-348 & 350, MP-l(C), CT 8=-320(P SDP 86-10. ITEM EXPLANATION A residential development proposal for 216 units on parcel E c Xosp Grove Master Plan was heard earlier this year by the Citj Council. At that time the City Council felt that the negativc declaration issued for the project was insufficient and direct staff to prepare an EIR and also look at alternative land uses the undeveloped areas within the master plan. The EIR and thc master plan review have been completed. While the EIR was bej the property owners, the developers and surrounding neighbors regarding various land use proposals for the undeveloped portj meetings and have been analyzed in the EIR. The purchase of 1 ballot. The applicant's proposals below are only effective ii prepared the City Manager and Attorney's Office were meeting t of Hosp Grove. The proposals requested below are a result of undeveloped areas by the City has been placed on the November ballot measure fails. The applicant is making the following requests: (please see attached location map for site reference EIR - Request for Certification Parcel D - (16 ac) - A tentative map and condominium per1 for li)8 units Parcel E - (25.5 ac) - A General Plan Amendment (east poi from RMH (15-23 du's/ac) to (C) Commercial st OS (Open Spi a General Plan Amendment (west portion) from RMH to 0 (0: and OS (Open Space); a corresponding zone change from P-( C-2-Q & OS (east) and P-C to 0-Q and OS (west); a Master Amendment reflecting the changes in land use and zoning 4 and a site development plan for 7.3 acres of commercial ( east side and 3.5 acres of Office on the west side of Mol Parcel F - (9 ac) - A General Plan Amendment, zone changc master plan amendment to change this parcel from R-1 to ( Space. This is a City initiated application with the ow concurrence. 0 0 Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. y7ffl In summary, the applicant's proposal would intensify developme certain areas and allow greater open space and tree preservati other areas. Specifically, it would permit 108 condominium un on Parcel D; the north end of Parcel E would permit office and commercial use with the south end of Parcel E retained in open space. Parcel F would remain as open space. The Planning Commission denied the development applications had a number of concerns regarding the project as discussed in attached memorandum to the City Manager dated September 24, 19 For further information please see the attached staff report t the Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT At the request of the City Council an EIR was prepared for thi project and has been recommended for certification by the Plan Commission on September 17, 1986. FISCAL IMPACT The City would be responsible for purchase of Parcel F and cer street improvements along Monroe and Jefferson. These costs b ultimately be offset by the revenue generated by the proposed commercial development. EXHIBITS 1. Location Map 2. Memorandum to the City Manager dated September 24, 1986 3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos: 2614; 2616; 2620; 2617 4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated September 17 5. Memorandums to Planning Commission w/additional conditions 2621; 2618; 2619 st 2615 1986 w/attachments L ZC-350 HOSP GROVE 0 Q SEPTEMBER 24, 1986 TO: FRANK ALESHIRE, CITY MANAGER FROM; Assistant Planning Director VIA: Community Development Director PLANNING COMMISSION ISSUES - HOSP GROVE The Planning Commission, in denying the Hosp Grove project at their hearing on September 17, 1986 discussed a number of issues regarding the projects proposed for the undeveloped portions of the grove. The first issue was adequacy of the EIR. The Planning Commission felt that the EIR adequately addressed all environmental issues and recommended certification of the EIR. The second major issue was the land use trade-off of allowing more intensive development in certain areas of the grove in trade for greater tree preservation and increased buffers for existing residential use. The Planning Commission did not appear to have more specifically on the projects. They felt that the original project proposed was superior to the commercial office project now located on Parcel E and that the driveway on Marron Road should be eliminated. They felt that the residential project on Parcel D was too tight". In an effort to preserve as much of the grove as possible, the Planning Commission felt the 108 condominium units were squeezed too tightly into their respective locations (too much development for the site size). Other specific concerns included driveway width and structure distance from existing residences on Parcel D. Based on the above concerns the Planning Commission denied all of the proposed development proposal. Since the Planning Commission meeting the developer has been willing to work with staff to resolve the concerns of the Planning Commission. The plans on Parcel D have been modified to units). additional distance has been provided between the existing residential units and proposed structures. The developer of Parcel E has been willing to add an additional condition requiring heavier landscaping and the use of more specimen" size trees and plants to enhance the project. If the City Council decides to approve the project, staff would propose that the following conditions be added to help satisfy the concerns of the Planning Commission: a problem with the trade-off itself but focused their concerns 11 open up the project. This includes the loss of one building (4 The driveways have also been widened on Parcel D and I1 e 0 To: SDP 86-10 The landscaping plan for both the office and commercia site shall include a large percentage of specimen tree and plants to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. u TO: CT 85-23 (A) /Cp-320 (A) The 4 unit building located closest to the recreation area shall be eliminated as shown on the revised site plan which shall reduce the unit total to 104 units. The distance between the existing property line to the south where existing homes are located and any structu in this development shall be a minimum of 60 feet as shown on the revised site plan. Driveway widths for driveways coming off the main entr shall be increased to 30 feet as shown on the revised site plan. 0 u 0 CHARLES D. GRIMM CDG/arb -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 e e PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.2614 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C1 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION PROJECT GENERALLY INCLUDING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMEh CHANGE, MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE MAP/CONT PERMIT AND A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. APPLICANT: ODMARK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CASE NO: EIR 86-4 (HOSP GROVE) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, EIR 86-4 (HOSP GROVk WHEREAS, on the 17th day of September, 1986, the Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held public hearing on pursuant to the provisions of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Mun code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered t comments and documents of all those persons testifying at public heating; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has received EIR according to the requirements of Title 19 of the Carlsbad h Code; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Con 17 I.6 l8 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 i 1 \of the City of Carlsbad as follows: ! 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. ~ * 2. That the Environmental Impact Report ELR 86-4 will be a to include the comments and documents of those testifyi the public hearing and responses thereto hereby found t good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the mi said public hearings into the report. 3, That the Planning Commission finds and determines that Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-4 has been completed conformance with the California Environmental Quality Ac state guidelines implementing said Act, and the provisit ~itie 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal code and that the PI. Commission has reviewed, considered and evaluated the i tion contained in the report e i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 e 0 That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-4 as so amen and evaluated, is recommended €or acceptance and certifi Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate i provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including project . That each and every significant environmental impact id€ in the Environmental Impact Report would be overruled 01 counterbalanced by changes or alteration in the project would mitigate against said adverse impacts or, in certi circumstances, that mitigation of such adverse impacts Y not be feasible under the circumstances and under the ec and social needs objectives and concerns in providing tf improvements if the project were to be approved, would 1 included as conditions of approval of the project. 4- as the final Environmental Impact Report and that the fi 5- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting t Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he: the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to i AYES: NOES: chairman Sddehuber. ABSENT: me. ABSTAIN: me. Cansnissicmers: me, Marcus, madden, Smm, Ho1ITEs & Hall. I? I* 19 L& i CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chairm CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIO i i 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 * 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2616 , A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE c CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO TH LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENEKAL PLAN FROM RMH (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH) 8-15 DU/AC TO C (COMMERCIAL), 0 (OFFICE), AND OS (OPEN SPACE) ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST AND EA SIDES OF MONROE STREET, SOUTH OF WON ROAD ON E OF THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN APPLICANT: COLLINS DEVELOPMENT CASE NO.: GPA/LU 86-10 (MP-l(C)) WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment General Plan designation for certain property located, as Exhibit(s) herein, has been filed with the Planning Commi and WEKEAS, said verified application constitutes i for aqendment as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Mur Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17t September, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pi by law to consider said request; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing a1 ' /considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all 1 19 '* 22 21 I idesiring to be heard, said Commission considered all fact IrehLing to the General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Pli 1 23 25 24 26 27 28 . Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public 1 the Commission recommends hereby DENIES GPA/LU 86-1( on the following findings: 1: llil //// ' 1 I, 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 w W Findings : 1) The Office and Commercial designations as proposed are compatible. with existing and future development in the 2) The amount of Office and Commercial designations propos not sensitive to the existing topography. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting o Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he1 the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Commissioners: McBane, Marcus, McFadden, Schramm, Holmes and Hall. ' NOES: Chairman Schlehuber. ABSENT : None. ABSTAIN : None. CLARENCE 1 SCHLEH ER, Chairn CAKLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIC I TTEST : 18 I.7 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [! 16 /o& bICllAEL 3. HOLZMILLER e PLANNING DIKECTOK I I 1 I I I IC RES0 NO. 2616 -2- . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 W m PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2620 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, OENYING APPROVAL OF AN AMEND MEhT 'fb THE; LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENEKAL PLAN Fl RMH (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH) 8-15 DU/AC TO OS (OP SPACE) GENEKALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTLQN JEFEEKSOLV STREET AND WON ROAD (PARCEL F) APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: GPA/LU 86-11 WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment t General Plan designation for certain property located, as SI Exhibit "l", dated September 10, 1986, attached and incorpo herein, has been filed with the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a rl for amendment as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Munic Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17th September, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pres by law to consider said request; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all per: ' 19 ldesiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factor, \relating to the General Plan Amendment. ,I 26 27 28 /I// /I// + 1 2 3 0 a Findings : 1) This general Plan amendment was part of a larger proje which was denied. appropriate on its own. The addition of this area as open space would necessit As a result this project would not 2) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 changges in land use for the adjacent parcel E. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Commissioners: McBane, Marcus, McFadden, Schramm, Holmes and Hall. Chairanan Schlehuber. NOES : ABSENT : None. ABSTAIN : None. & :: 16 CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chair 1 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIl TTEST: 2o 21 22 23 24 I I -2- b 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 l3 W m PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2617 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CAKLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A ZONE CHANGE FROM PC (PLANNED COMUNITY TO 0-Q (OFFICE - 3.5 AC.) and C-2-Q (COMMERCIAL - 7.3 AC.) AND OS (OPEN SPACE - 14.7 A.C) GENEKALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST AND EAST SIDES OF MONROE STREET, SOUTH OF WON ROAD ON PAKCEL E OF THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN. APPLICANT: COLLINS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CASE NO: ZC-348 WHEREAS , a verified application for certain proper wit: , Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, Canon Street of Eucalyptus Street in Hosp Eucalypt Forest Company's Tract No. 1, in the City of Carfs County of San Diego, State of California, accordin; Map thereof No. 1136, filed in the Office of the CI Recorder of San Diego County, June 8, 1908. has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to ti 15 I* 18 19 20 t: lanning Commission; and WHEKEAS , said application constitutes a request as rovided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Elunicipal Code; and WHEKEAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th d eptember, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pres( I 1 I by law, to consider said request; and il 1 21 23 25 24 26 27 28 22 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and ~ I Fonsidering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all per2 esiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factorc elating to the Zone Change; and I d NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planni ommission as follows: ) That the above recitations are true and correct. 1 I I I//// ~ t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 e 0 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hear Commission recommends hereby DENIES ZC-348, based on th following findings: Findings: 1) The Office and Commercial zones as proposed are not compatible with existing and future development. 2) The zoning as proposed is not sensitive to existing topography in the Hosp Grove area. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Commissioner: McBane, Marcus, McFadden, Schramm, Holmes & Hall. NOES : Chairman Schlehuber. ABSENT : None. ABSTAIN : None. &--&a CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chair l7 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSII I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 '27 28 P +TICHAEL J. HOL~ILLER FLANNINC; DIKECTOK I -2- I P' C RESO NO. 2617 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 l6 18 19 e m PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2621 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT CM-LSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY) TO OS (OPEN SPACE) GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF JEFFERSON STKEET AND WON ROAD ON PARCEL F OF TH HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN, APPLICANT: CITY OF CAKLSBAD CASE NO: zc-350 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain proper wit: Those portions of Lots 19, 20, 21, and 33 and of Eucalyptus Street in Hosp Eucalyptus Forest Compan Tract No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad, County of Sa Diego, State of California, according to Map there 1136, filed in the Office of the County Recorder c Diego County June 8, 1908, has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to t Pianning Commission; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th d September, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pres I y law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and 1 I/ 22 23 24 25 relating to the Zone Change; and NdW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plann Commission as follows: ) That the above recitations are true and correct. 26 27 28 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hear Commission DENIED ZC-350, based on the following findin A //// I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 27 I -2 - C RES0 NO. 2621 I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 15 l4 17 18 l6 19 20 21 I 22 23 25 24 26 27 28 8 a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2618 A RESOLUTXON OF THE PLANNING COMMZSSION OF THE CIT CAKLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A MAS PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF JEFFERSON STRE MkRRON ROAD ON BOTH SIDES OF MONROE STREET. CASE NO; MP-1 (C) WHEREAS, a verified application for certain proper PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN (MP-1 APPLICANT : ODMARK DEVELOPMENT wit: Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 33, Canon Street and of Eucalyptus in Hosp Eucalyptus Forest Company's Tract No. 1, il City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1136, fill the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego Cou June 8, 1908, has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to tl lanning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a r4 rovided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17th t eptember, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as presc y law, to consider said request; and I k WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and I onsidering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all pers esiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors elating to the Master Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planni ommission as follows: the Commission recommends DENIAL of MP-l(C), based on th That based on the evidence presented at the public hear I j r (A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. i (B) 1 following findings: I//// I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 8 e Findings: 1) The Master Plan Amendment as proposed is not compatibh existing and future development in the area. The Master Plan Amendment could allow development whicl not sensitive to the existing topography of the site. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting I Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he’ the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: 2) AYES : NOES : Chairman Schlehuber, ABSENT : None. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioners: McBane, Marcus, McFadden, Schramm, Holmes & Hall. e$---,cAd :: 16 171’ l8 19 CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chairn 1 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIC TTEST: & 522&!7&-/ ICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER LAWT TAG DIRECTOR I 23 24 25 26 27 28 I C RES0 NO. 2618 -2- I V I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 w 1) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2619 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CI' CARLSBAD, CALIFOKNIA, DENYING A SITE DEVELOPMENT PI NO. 86-10, TO CONSTRUCT A COMMERCIAL CENTER GENEW LOCATED ON THE WEST & EAST SIDES OF MONROE STREET : MARKON KOAD ON PARCEL E OF THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PI APPLICANT: COLLINS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CASE NO: SDP 86-10 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed wil City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; ax WEREAS, said verified application constitutes a rt as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municips the Planning Commission did, on the 17th day of September, 1 l2 l3 14 15 16 3.7 18 19 consider said request on property described as: I Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, Canon Street and of Eucalyptus Street in Hosp Eucal Forest Company's Tract No. 1, in the City of Carlsb County of San Diego, State of California, according Map thereof No. 1136, filed in the Office of the Co Recorder of San Diego County, June 8, 1908. i WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and consider kestimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to ,heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to Si 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NOW, THEKEFOKE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planni I i ommission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: F (A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. (13) i findings : That based on the evidence presented at the public hear the Commission DENIES SDP 86-10, based on the following indin s: w 1) The design of the project is not appropriate for the sit1 1 proposed giving the project a tight crammed-in appearancl I" 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 26 , 1 I ~ I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 8 e PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2615 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A 108 CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED 0 NORTHWEST SIDE OF HOSP WAY, BETWEEN HOSP WAY AND M ROAD ON PARCEL D OF THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN. CASE NO: WHEREAS, a verified application for certain proper APPLICANT : ODMARK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CT 05-23 (A) /CP-32O (A) wit: Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and Hosp Eucalyptus Forest Company's Tract No. 1, in t of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califor according to Map thereof No. 1136, filed in the Of the County Recorder of San Diego County, June 8, 1908, has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to t Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a r as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and VHEKEAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17th eptember, 1986, hold a duly noticed public hearing as pres :: l8 19 20 21 23 22 25 24 26 27 28 y law to consider said request; and 1 I f I 1 i Fonsidering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all per j Oesiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factor 1 kelating to the Tentative Tract Nap and Condominium Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plann WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and ommission as follows: ) That the above recitations are true and correct. b) 1 1 the following findings: That based on the evidence presented at the public hear Commission recommends DENIAL of CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A), I/,// 1 ,2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 l6 18 14.1 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I, w e Findings : 1) The praject as proposed is not compatible with surrounl land use as there is not adequate distance between the proposed project and existing projects. The interior circulation system is not adequate and ma safety hazards for future residents, particularly if a should occur in the Hosp Grove area. 2) PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he the 17th day of September, 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Commissioners: McBane, Marcus, McFadden NOES : Chairman Schlehuber. ABSENT : None. ABSTAIN: None. Schramm, Holmes and Hall. da CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chai CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS' ,ATTEST I : ! ICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER LA"1NG DIRECTOR C RESO NO. 2615 -2- w m - I’ STAFF REPORT DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 1986 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: EIR 86-4/CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A)/GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/MP. l(C)/SDP 86-10/GPA/LU 86-11/ZC-350 - HOSP GROVE - Request for approval of: A tentative map and condominium permit for 108 units on Parcel D of Hosp Grove Master Plan; General Plan amendment and zone change from RMH to C, 0 and OS and a site amendment and zone change from RMH to OS on Parcel F; and, revisions to the Hosp Grove Master Plan. Also requested is certification of an Environmental Impact Report on property located south of Marron Road and Jefferson Streets, near the Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center and Buena vista Lagoon. development plan for Commercial Center on Parcel E: General ~1: I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2614 recommending CERTIFICATION OF EIR 86-4 and ADOPT Resolution No: 2615, 2617, 2618, 2619, 2620, 2621 recommending APPROVAL OF CT 350/MP-I (C) based on the findings and subject to conditions contained therein. 11. BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION 85-23(A)/CP-320(A)/GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/SDP 86-10/GPA/LU 86-11/2 The proposed project involves development proposals for and revisions to the remaining undeveloped portions of the Hosp Grc Master Plan, (Parcels D, E, h F). Parcel D (16 acres) is locat on the high bluff on the south side of the Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center, next to Hosp Way. Immediately to the west of Parcel E (25.5 acres) also is across the street from the shoppj center and is bisected by Monroe Street. Further west, frontir on Marron Road and Jefferson Street, next to Buena Vista Lagoor (duck area), lies Parcel F (9 acres). The existing General P1z for these parcels is RMH. The Zoning is PC which required the preparation of the existing Hosp Grove Master Plan (MP-1). Earlier this year, a residential development proposal for 216 units on Parcel E was heard before the Planning Commission and City Council. The City Council directed that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared for the project and the undeveloped areas of the Master Plan, analyzing various projec alternatives for the three parcels. The Master Plan also was t be reviewed and any recommended revisions were to be processed concurrently when the project was reconsidered by the Council. Finally, Council directed staff to explore the possibility Of acquiring Hosp Grove. A Council Committee, working in w * conjunction with the property owners and concerned citizens, negotiated two alternatives that they felt would resolve the issues associated with development in the Grove. The first alternative is a ballot measure for a bond issue to purchase tl approximately 50 acres of undeveloped property. If that measu. is not passed by the voters, a second alternative was agreed u] by the City and the property owners: Parcel D would be develo] with 108 dwelling units; Parcel E would have a commercial development of 96,000 square feet clustered at the corner of Marron and Monroe; and, Parcel F would be purchased by the Cit: for parkland. The second alternative although allowing some development, would yield more overall open space than would th, proposed project or future development under the existing Mast1 Plan. Based on that agreement between the City and the property owne revised plans were submitted to the City for a 96,000 square fc commercial center on Parcel E (versus the 216 unit residential project) and a 108 unit condominium project on Parcel D (versur 128 units as originally proposed). Staff has worked within tht parameters established by the above described negotiations , i.c 96,000 square feet of commercial and 108 dwelling units, in analyzing these projects , with the understanding that the overi benefit to the City will be increased areas of tree preservatic and open space in Hosp Grove. Each of the proposals is descril below -- the planning analysis which follows will be discussed parcel by parcel, concluding with the proposed amendments to tl Master Plan. Parcel D The proposal for Parcel D is a 1 lot/l08-unit tentative tract I and condominium permit, located on 15.6 acres. The General P1, designation for the site is Residential Medium High (RMHI, or I 15 du/acre. The density for Parcel D is 14.2 du/ac; General P designated open space (7.3 acres) and 40% slope areas ( .7 acre: are not included when figuring density. The project will consist of four, eight and twelve unit buildings, two and three stories in height. Carport and open parking will be provided, as will a central recreation area wit a pool, spa, barbeque area, and restrooms. The units are all two-bedroom and range in size from 966 to 985 square feet. Access will be taken from Hosp Way. As can be seen on the sitf plan and tentative map, the proposed development is clustered i closely as possible in the top, flatter portions of the site, northern slopes will remain as open space. A walking trail anc outlook point will be provided on the north slope. covering approximately seven acres, The steep western and -2- 0 Surrounding land uses include patio homes to the south, three- story apartment buildings to the east, undeveloped open space the west, and Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center to the north. noted earlier, this is one of the three remaining parcels of t Hosp Grove Master Plan and together with Parcels E and F, it comprises the last vestiges of the Hosp eucalyptus forest, whi has been an aesthetic landmark in Carlsbad for many years. Th to be built on Parcel D. Parcel E The proposal for Parcel E is a change of land use on the Gener Plan, from residential (RMH) to Office (01, Commercial (C) and Open Space (OS). The discretionary actions include general pl and Master Plan amendments, a zone change, and a site developm plan. The proposed project is a 96,000 square foot specialty commercial center and office complex, located on 10.8 acres at the intersection of Monroe Street and Marron Road. Office use would be located entirely on the west side of Monroe (33,850 square feet), with retail commercial and some office on the ea side (62,150 square feet). Up to three restaurants could loca within the center east of Monroe; however, there would be no f food or drive-thrus. Specialty commercial uses would be small retail establishments, not grocery or drug stores. Most of the center will be one-story buildings, except for one building on the east side which will have a second level of offices. A rural ranch architectural theme is proposed. The larger buildings will be located against the rising slopes of eucalyptus trees, with smaller buildings and parking areas located next to the streets. The primary entrance will be off Monroe Street, 600-feet south of Marron Road. Another right- turn-in only entrance is further north on the west side of Monroe, and a right-turn-in, right-turn-out driveway in on Mar. Road. , The commercial proposal allows more open space area to remain than would the 21 6-unit residential project. Essentially, the agreement was that the development was not allowed to encroach any further south than the primary entrance location (600' sou of Marron). About six acres more of the grove will be preserv with this proposal versus the original residential project, fo. total of almost fifteen acres to remain as open space. Parcel F This nine acre parcel is presently designated 8-15 du/ac on thc General Plan and Local Coastal Program, and is allowed 180 unii by the old Master Plan. The proposed project would redesignatt .and rezone Parcel F to Open space and would allow the City to purchase the property in conjunciton with the approval of commercial use on Parcel E and 108 dwelling units on Parcel D. Master Plan, approved in the early 1970'~~ would allow 130 uni -3- w * ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 86-4 Certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is requested. The EIR addresses the environmental impacts associated with the Hosp Grove Master Plan in terms of two former development proposals for Parcels D & E and also alternatives that included the currently proposed pojects on D E, and F. Major areas of possible environmental concerns are discussed below: 1. Traffic Circulation Development under the existing Master Plan would generated 4401 Average Daily Trips (ADT). The proposed alternative, i.e. a combination of commercial, residential, and open space, would generate 7854 trips, or an additional 3646 trips. The analysir showed that the level of Service (LOS) for 8 road segments in the vicinity remained the same with the alternative project as with the existing Master Plan: 5 segments did not exceed LOS IC”, 3 did, for reasons stated in the EIR, but neither short nl long term significant impacts are expected. Intersection LOS also was analyzed for the Master Plan which tf alternative can be compared to -- with the exception of the intersection of Marron Road and Jefferson Street, the LOS will remain at ‘C” or above. An explanation for the Marron/Jeffersc intersection is given later in this report under the zone than< discussion for the commercial site. Short and long term impac? are not expected to be significant overall. However, because ( increase in trips is obvious, mitigation is proposed in the form of public improvements and has been incorporated into the conditions of approval, as deemed applicable by City Staff. Short term truck impacts caused by the export of dirt from Parcel E can also be mitigated so that disruption of the Marrion/Monroe intersection is minimized. 2. Topography and Visual Aesthetics Significant impacts were identified for all three parcels if development occurred in accordance with the Master Plan. development an the edge of the high north facing slope and providing a buffer of trees. The 108 unit project has accommodated this mitigation. Parcel E, as a residential project, mitigated impact to an acceptable level by landscapin? and site design measures. As an alternative, the commercial project was considered environmentally preferable to the residential because of the larger overall area of trees that would be retained which would help more so to maintain the existing aesthetic character of the grove. Parcel F could only mitigate impacts by a change in land use and the Open space proposal will obviously acheive that. Mitigation for Parcel D included not cutting into or putting -4- e 0 3. Archaeology Redevelopment of Parcels D C E will impact several identified archaeology sites. Further studies are required to mitigate these impacts. Parcel F will not have significant impacts if remains in Open Space. 4. Biological Resources Although no direct impacts will occur to biological resources with development of any of the parcels, the proximity to Buena Vista Lagoon requires sedimentation and grading measures to be incorporated into the proposed plans for Parcels D and E. Parcel F, as Open Space, would not result in any impacts to tht 1 agoon. 5. Public Services Police protection and library services will be incrementally impacted by the increase in papulation: additional police equipment and future additions to the library will mitigate these concerns. The school district will charge a developers fee to ptovide future school facilities. 6. Hydrology and Water Quality The greatest increase in erosion and sedimentation will occur during grading and construction of Parcels D and E. In addition, if upstream erosion is not adequately controlled by the time the desiltation basin is removed, significant impacts could occur to the lagoon. Measures will be included in the conditions of approval to assure no significant impacts occur the lagoon. 7. Geology and Soils Development of Parcels D and E could result in impacts relatins dewatering if adequate measures are not taken to assure that proper geologic conditions exist before grading or constructior begins. The conditions of approval reflect the concerns identified by the report which will mitigate potential hazards 8. Air Quality Any increase in air pollutant emissions are considered significant in the San Diego Air Basin. The commercial land US will increase the number of vehicle trips above what is anticipated in the Master Plan, and thus, in the Regional Air Quality Strategies. Mitigation measures that encourage public transportation and minimize dust and air pollution during construction are incorporated into the conditions of approval. to groundwater, settlement, landslides, liquifaction, or -5- * m Staff feels that EIR 86-4 was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and has adequately identif i,ed and discussed the environmental impacts. For these reasons, staff is recommending certification of EIR 86 4. 111. AN ALY S I S Planning Issues PARCEL D - CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A) (Applicant: Odmark Developmen Company 1 1) Is the proposed project in conformance with the General ~1 designation? 2) Does the proposed project conform to the development standards of the Planned Development Ordinance? 3) Does the project conform to the design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance? 4) Does the project address the environmental sensitivities f the site? General Plan/Master Plan The project complies with the General Plan and Master Plan designation for the site, which is 8-15 du/ac. The proposed density is 14.2 du/ac -- general plan open space and 40% slope! are not included. The project is at the high end of the densi. range for Parcel D. In determining justification for density, however, the entire alternative (Parcels D, E and F1 must be considered. Because overall, more open space is being provide staff feels that justification can be made for the density of residential portion of the alternative OR Parcel D. Parcel F will be preserved as open space (9 acres) and Parcel E will dedicate approximately 14.7 acres of open space to the City. That open space totaling almost 24 acres, in addition to the almost 9 acres on Parcel D, will retain about 33 acres, or 2/3 the remaining area of Hosp Grove, in its present form. That concerned citizens and the city when agreeing upon the propose alternative uses for the Master Plan. There are no changes tc the General Plan, Master Plan or Zoning proposed for Parcel D. Development Standards and Design Criteria For approval of the condominium permit, the standards of the Planned Development Ordinance must be met, including parking requirements, building setbacks from open parking areas, screening of parking areas, streets t usable recreational spac storage space, and refuse areas. As proposed, the project wi meet these standards. scale of preservation appears to have been the goal of the -6- e a The project is required to provide 216 resident parking spaces and 30 guest spaces, totaling 246 spaces. One covered carport space will be provided per unit. Guest parking has been distributed equitably throughout the development. Building setbacks from the parking areas are a minimum of ten feet (five feet required) and typically more than that. Open parking area will be screened by landscaping. Private streets will be utilized, with 26 feet minimum street widths. As shown on the site plan, two cul-de-sacs provide access to the units from the driveway entrance on Hosp Way. Adequate turnarounds at the end of the cul-de-sacs in the form of a hammerhead configuration, will allow large vehicles to easily maneuver. The proposed project exceeds the minimum requirements for usabl recreational space. Every unit has a patio or balcony; there o major recreation area with a pool, spa, and barbeque area; and trail and lookout point on the north side. Each unit would be provided with adequate storage space to meet minimum code requirements, The design criteria used to formulate the site plan included several constraints -- preservation of the existing landform above Marron Road, retention of a tree buffer along that same ridge top, and provision of and adequate setback from the sing1 family patio homes to the south. The intent of the plan is to cluster the development in the interior of the site and thus maintain an appearance of 'the grove" from offsite, especially the north. As shown on the site plan and tentative map, the basic criteria have been met. The height of the north facing essentially slope will be retained. The areas of trees to be preserved plus eucalyptus tree landscaping on the existing slopes, and the location of parking -versus buildings on the northern edge will provide opportunities to create another eucalyptus grove to shield the development. Finally, the clost distance between the buildings on Parcel D and the home to the south is 60 feet, and more commonly 115-150 feet. Working within the parameters established by City negotiations (108 units) has caused two somewhat negative aspects of the project: The development has been pushed out to the west, caus: large fill slopes (up to 70 feet) and the subsequent removal 0: some trees in the open space corridor; and, the site plan is crowded with little openness and three-story buildings within developed area. These concerns cannot be resolved without a reduction in the number of units, however, these aspects of thl project allow for increased open space in Parcels E and F. It is acknowledged that while 8.5 acres were buildable, accordini to the Master Plan, the proposed plan only has developed seven acres. The landscape plan will help to maintain the unique character the site by using a eucalyptus (or otherwise Australian) tree theme for landscaping. Landscape features will include specia -7- w e planting treatment for the recreation area, the entry to the project, entries to the building, outlook point and the perimeti of the site. Crib walls will be used for retaining walls. The project has been conditioned to plant the north facing slopes a the ungraded areas on the ridge top, with eucalyptus trees with five months after approval of the tentative map. The architecture of the buildings is appropriately basic for th purpose of blending into the grove. The buildings will use stucco and wood and will be painted muted colors, i.e. beige, brown and gray. Architectural features such as mouton windows, varying roof lines, and balcony railings add interest to the elevations. The three-story buildings are designed so that the second story is basically level with the interior street, has a catwalk going across, and looks like a two-story building from 10 are two-story. Environmental Considerations The proposed design addresses the environmental sensitivity of the site as much as possible with the1 08-unit development. Aesthetics and grading were identified as environmental issues. In response to these issues, the project has been designed to retain the existing north facing slope and a 50-foot buffer of trees along the top. The tentative map shows five areas that have significant clusters of trees -- identified in addition to these areas, most of the remainder of the top of the slope will not be disturbed, allowing for an intensive planting program to occur. PARCEL E - GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/SDP 86-10 (Applicant: Collins Development company) 1. Does the proposed commercial and office designation meet t standards for that type of development as delineated in th Land Use Element of the General Plan? one side. On the site plan, buildings numbered 3, 6, 7, 9 and 2. would a commercial and office land use designation and zor be compatible with surrounding land uses? 3. Is the property suitable in size and shape to accommodate development permitted in the proposed zone? 4. Is the street system serving the project adequate to hand1 any increase in traffic generated by the zone change and General Plan amendment? 5. Has the site development plan met the requirements of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance and will the development standai ensure a high quality commercial development? -8- (. ., General Plan/Zoning/Master Plan The applicant has proposed a joint designation of Commercial/ Office (C/O) and corresponding zoning (C2-0-Q) for the propert] As shown on the site plan, office uses are proposed for the we: side of Monroe and commercial uses on the east side. Parking ratios also reflect those uses. The office uses envisioned fol the second story of the east side commercial center will be afforded appropriate choices from the diverse uses allowed in 1 C-2 and C-1 zones. Staff therefore feels that there should not and commercial (C) on the east side. This recommendation is shown on Exhibit "1". The Master Plan would also be amended tc reflect these changes. On the west side of Monroe Street 3.5 acres is shown as an off: (0) General Plan designation with a corresponding 0-Q zone. 01 the east side, 7.3 acres are shown as Community Commercial (c), with C2-Q zoning, (nQn requires a site development plan,) Tht remaining area, about 14.5 acres will be designated Open Space (OS) . The proposed Community Commercial and Office designations and zones comply with the criteria established in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed site development pli includes specialty retail, office, financial and restaurant US< all of which are considered appropriate and compatible within i commercial and office categories. The site is located at the intersection of two secondary arterials, i.e. Marron and Manrot Streets, and is across the street from a regional shopping mal: Easy access to nearby freeways (1-5 and Hwy-78) is provided, ai many residential areas are located within a ? 1/2 mile radius. Finally, ten acres is within the typical area required for sucl center in accordance with the Land Use Element. Land use compatibility As stated earlier, the proposed Commercial Center is compatibl! located across the street from a regional shopping center, Pla: Camino Real. The proposed project will provide more services q shopping facilities to nearby residents as well as those regioi mall shoppers. The development would be clustered at the cornc of two secondary arterial streets. The designation and zone would be placed only on 10.8 acres of Parcel E. The remainder the land would be designated Open Space, which would provide a large buffer between residential development located to the ea: south, and west, Elevation changes ;.e. steep slopes, would further enhance the buffer between the commercial and resident land uses. Thus, the proposed designation and zone change at this location would be compatible with other uses in the vicinity. be a joint designation, but rather office (0) on the west side -9- W e Physical Characteristics of Site As with Parcel D, design parameters were agreed upon between th City and the property owners. Not more than approximately 10.8 acres of gross site area (includes graded slopes) and 8.8 acres of net site area (buildings, etc.. .I were to be disturbed, and that area could not extend further south than about 600 feet fr located. Slightly less than 96,000 square feet was the agreed upon amount of commercial floor space allowed. The area to be developed on the west side of Monroe Street is relatively level. The proposed building locations would encroa slightly into the east-facing slopes; the encroachment is minimized by retaining walls that raise from 3.5 to 10 feet hig The topography is quite different on the east side of Monroe. The land slopes gently upward toward the east and includes a 90 foot high knoll which drops off sharply into a 40% slope. This knoll and small ridgeline will be cut down 60 feet to accommoda the commercial development. Also necessary are a cut slope of about 40 feet behind the eastern buildings and a retaining wall up to 13.5 feet high. These design features typically indicate that too much development is proposed on a constrained site. A reduction in square footage could have pulled the development away from the slopes. Thus, with high cut slopes, retaining accommodate the proposed use. The positive aspect of this, however is the increased amount of undisturbed open space the City and neighbors are obtaining in other parcels. Street System The EIR analyzed the traffic impacts created by a commercial development in this location and concluded that the levels of service (LOS) at six intersections in the vicinity would not change significantly in comparison with residential development under the Master Plan. The LOS at three of the intersections remained the same; the other three dropped but not lower than "C'. The intersection at Marron and Jefferson will operate at LOS "D" with either residential or commercial development on Parcel E. However, the EIR points out that a conservative approach was used in analyzing that intersection by assuming t? all additional traffic going to the new Hughes Commercial Cent€ would use the intersection of Marron and Jefferson, when in reality traffic will use some of the other available entrances, In computing the trip generation, the EIR assumed a separate generation rate for each proposed use. That approach is conservative in that some trips made to a specialty commercial center would be combined, i.e. shopping and banking, banking ax eating, etc... Thus, the trips generated are higher than what would occur realistically. In summary, the street system is adequate to handle the additional traffic generated by the proposed commercial development. the MonrOe/MarrOn intersection, where proposed Street A is walls and elimination of the existing knoll, the site is able t -1 0- (. e Site Development Plan Issues examined in .reviewing the site plan included driveway architecture and fire safety. The primary entrance is located Monroe Street 600 feet south of the Marron intersection; this location meets intersection spacing policies for secondary arterials. Two other entrances provide access to the center -- on the west side of Monroe, about 280 feet from the intersectio is right-turn-in only driveway and on Marron a right-turn-in, right-turn-out is located 360 feet from the intersection. Because deceleration and acceleration lanes will be provided, throats are long enough to get cars quickly and safely inside t center before decisions have to be made by drivers as to where park. Internal circulation is facilitated by several aisles with parking bays in-between, which is a basic and functional design. Parking requirements were computed based on the two separate li commercial on the east side, which is 1:200. The spaces needec are 447 and that is exactly the number provided. Setbacks were important at the corner of Marron and Monroe to retain a feeling of visual openness. Therefore, the two freestanding buildings are set back 40 feet from Monroe and 30 feet from Marron. In this way, there will be adequate space fc a special landscape entry statement. The landscape plan, whick is conceptual at this point, proposes a basic eucalyptus tree theme with accent trees that compliment the eucalyptus. Bouldc groupings and split rail fences will add interest to the landscaping around the perimeter. A bermed, or undulating law1 will soften the appearance of the slopes along Monrore and Marron. The graded slopes behind the center will be replanted with eucalyptus trees in accordance with standards in the City' landscape manual and with input from the Fire Department. As mentioned earlier, the architecture for the proposed projecl is "rural ranch". As seen on the elevations, the effect is qui pleasing and blends well with the back drop of the eucalyptus grove. Building materials will be wood or wood-like with the design utilizing varying rooflines, open railways and wooden columns and clerestary windows. The Fire Department had several concerns which have been incorporated into the site plan. A five-foot separation betwef the buildings and the slope bank behind them was important, as well as breaks in the buildings to allow convenient access beh. the buildings. Specially marked service spaces for deliveries the stores also are shown on the site plan (these spaces are ii locations, internal circulation, parking, setbacks, landscaping these entrances were considered workable and safe, The drivewa uses -- office on the west side of .Monroe, i,e, lt250 and -11- w m addition to the required parking). Finally, a wood shingle roo will not be allowed -- only Class A materials (for fire prevention) will be permitted; the project has been conditioned accordingly. In conclusion, the site plan meets the requirements of the applicable ordinances and has complied with the design paramete originally agreed upon. With further refinement of the landsca plan, architectural elevations , and sign program (see conditions), the result should be high quality commercial center. PARCEL F - GPA/LU 86-11/ZC-350 (Applicant: City of Carlsbad) Planning Issues 1) Are the proposed land use designations and zone appropriate for the site? 2) Is the proposed land use compatible with surrounding land uses? Discussion As part of the proposed alternative which would allow residential and commercial development to take place on Parcels D and E, Parcel E' would be acquired by the City of Carlsbad fo~ permanent open space. The location, adjacent to Buena Vista Lagoon, is ideal for open space property. The site is used by people who park their cars to visit the duck feeding area. Thc ducks apparently sleep on Parcel F in the evenings. The proposed land use would enhance the interface of the propel with the passive human acitivities associated with the Lagoon ( also the wildlife activities. All adverse and potentially adverse environmental impacts that would occur with residentia: development under the Master Plan or General Plan would be eliminated, i.e. traffic, aesthetics, erosion/sedimentation, 1i use, grading, archaeology and noise. Again, this proposal wou: only occur if the current proposals for Parcels D and E are approved. HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN - MP-I(C) AMENDMENT (Applicant: Collins Development Company and City of Carlsbad) As shown on Exhibit "3" and discussed throughout this report, Hosp Grove Master Plan would be amended for Parcels E and F. ' Master Plan originally intended for residential development to occur in these areas. However, in reviewing the plan based on the current proposals , commercial use is appropriate across frc the Master Plan area can be preserved as open space. Staff supports this amendment. the reyional mall and in exchange for that type of use, more o -12- 8 e In conclusion, because the proposed alternative will allow more aesthetic character that is enjoyed locally and sub-regionally, staff recommends approval of CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A), GPA/LU 86- 10, zc-348, SDP 86-10 GPA/LU 86-11, ZC-350, MP-l(C) and certification of EIR 86-4. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolutions Nos. 2614, 2615, 2616, 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheets (3) 4. Disclosure Forms (2) 5. Exhibits "A" - "G", dated September 10, 1986 Exhibits "A" - "E", dated September 10, 1986 Exhibits "1" and "2", dated September 10, 1986 of Hosp Grove to be preserved as Open Space and thus maintain tk 2617, 2618, 2619, 2620, and 2621 6. EIR 86-4 -13- EXHIBIT "X" a m SEPTEMBER 17, 19 The following items constitute the Planning Commission's environmental findings for this project. The mitigation meas listed below describe the project changes which reduce these impacts to insignficant levels. A. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION Impact: An increase in trips will result from the prop alternative because commercial use typically h higher generation rate than residential. Mitigation: The additional trips can be accommodated with (1) construction of Monroe Street as a seconda arterial with additional deceleration/accelera lanes serving the commercial center, (2) upgra of the sivnal light at MarronIMonroe intersect (3) bond and prepare plans for a traffic siqnc Street "A" of the commercial center entrance i Monroe Street for when a future signal is warranted. Impact: Hosp Way, and Jefferson Street west of Marron will have a level of Service F with the trips generated by the proposed project. Mitigation: These two roadway segments are classified as residential streets with a maximum of 500 ADT which is already exceeded by existing ADT. TI streets can be reclassified as Collector stret to accommodate existing and future ADT. Impact: The grading operation for Parcel E will requi export of 124,000 cubic yards of dirt which CI have a short-term impact on surrounding stree ! I Mitigation: The use of cutoffs and flagmen will help to I I i minimize impacts at the Marron/Monroe intersection. Such condition will be part of final grading plan approval. B. TOPOGRAPHY AND VISUAL AESTHETICS Impact: Parcel D -- Adverse impacts would occur in th the existing slope above Marron Road would be down 30 feet, no buffer of trees would be retained, and three-story buildings were with feet of the edge of the slope. e .. Mitigation: The project was redesigned to maintain the existing landform, provide a 50-foot tree buffe plus tree planting on the slopes, and has locat buildings in the interior of the site. Impact: Parcel E -- The landform will be significantly altered -- an existing 90 foot high knoll and associated 40% slope will be cut down; and regraded slopes up to 40 feet in height will be created to accommodate flat pads necessary for commercial development. Mitigation; The proposed project allows preservation of 14. acres of Hosp Grove. A vigorous landscape pro$ will be required to replant the graded slopes behind the buildings and a compatible landscape theme will be used in the commercial center. - architecture and building materials will be compatible with the surrounding grove. Impact: Parcel F -- Residential development according the Master Plan will result in significant impacts due to the site's visible location and its proximity to the lagoon. Mitigation: The proposed open space use will mitigate all visual impacts. C, ARCHAEOLOGY Impact: Archaeological sites are located on all three parcels and will be affected by development on Parcels D and E. Mitigation: Appropriate conditions have been placed on the project to satisfy state requirements for archaeological mitigation, i.e. a data recover program. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact: As an indirect impact to the habitats in Buenz Vista Lagoon, runoff and sedimentation could potentially impact the lagoon. Mitigation: Appropriate erosion-control and grading procedures have been conditioned on the projec -2- e a E. PUBLIC SERVICES Impact: sehod facilities are at or near capacity. Mitigation: Only one of the three parcels will be developec residentially; school impact fees will be required to be paid to allow the school ~istric to provide temporary facilities for overcrowdi~ Impact: Police services will be incrementally impacted, Mitigation: Additional personnel and equipment will offset the increase in population and new areas of patrolling. Impact: The City Library is currently at book capacity Mitigation: Additional Library facilities will be provided part of the City's future Capital Improvement P rogr am. F. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact: Potential increases in erosion and sediment production will occur during grading and construction. Mitigation: Erosion control measures must be shown on fina grading plans and approved by the City. Drain and sediment control facilities will be instal prior to grading. Landscape conditions includ 5 year bond to ensure that tree plantings and other landscape elements are growing successfu Also, the city's street sweeping program will include the project area after it develops. Impact: Removal of the existing desiltation basin cou! cause sedimentation impacts to the lagoon if upstream problems are not controlled when it removed. Mitigation: A temporary desiltation basin will be built ii the southern portion of Parcel E to control existing offsite erosion problems. It will remain in place until erosion of the adjacent property is controlled satisfactorily to the City. I -3- 0 Q G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impact: Portions of the property are encumbered by geological constraints, including settlement, slope instability, groundwater, dewatering, and seismic shaking. Mitigation: As part of the grading plan approval, the recommendations of the geotechnical study will implemented. The study will be updated as necessary to reflect the proposed commercial development instead of the former residential project. Additional subsurface investigation l engineering analysis also is required as part I the final design. H. AIR QUALITY Impact: Development of Parcels D and E will contribute air pollutant emissions to the San Diego Air Basin. Mitigation: Public transit facilities, i.e. a bus stop wil provided. Sidewalk improvements will allow pedestrian access to the commercial center fro nearby residential areas. The Grading Ordinan construction. requires dust control measures to be used duri -4- m a BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE No: CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A) APPLICANT: ODMARK DEVELOPMENT CO. REQUEST AND LOCATION: A proposed tentative map & condominimum permit for 108 dwelling units on Parcel D of the Hosp Grove Master Plan MP-l(C). LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 in Hosp Eucalyptus Forest Company's Tract No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1136, filed i the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, June 8, 1908. APN: 156-08 -15 Acres 15.6 Proposed No. of Lotsnnits 1 /lo8 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RMH/OS Density Allowed 8-15 du/ac Density Proposed 14.2 Existing Zone P-c Proposed zone P-c Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site P-C Vacant North P-C Comer c i a1 South RD-M/Q & R-A-IO East P-C Apartments West P-C Open Space Single Family PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's 108 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated July 14, 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued X E.I.R. Certified, dated September 17, 1986 Other t 0 0 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/SDP 86-1O/MP-l(C) APPLICANT: COLLINS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY REQUEST AND LOCATION: A General Plan amendment & zone change from residential land use to commercial/office/open space land uses, and a site development pl for a comercia1 center and revision to Master Plan for Parcel E of the Hosp Grove Master Plan. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Portions of Lots 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, Canon Street and of Eucalyptus street in Hosp Eucalpytus Forest company's Tre No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1136, filed in the Office of the County Recordei of San Diego County, June 8, 1908. APN: 156-080-1 8,19 Acres 25.5 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING c/os Existing Land Use Designation RMK/OS Proposed Land Use Designation O/OS Density Allowed 8-15 du/ac Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone P-c Proposed zone O-Q, C2-Q Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site P-C Vacant North C2-Q/C-2 Shopping Center South P-C Single Family East P-C Vacant/Open Space West P-C Single Family PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU'S N/A Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated July 14/ 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL IhPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued X E.I.R. Certified, dated September 17, 1986 Other , r-uu P e a BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: GPA/LU 86-1 1 /ZC-35O/Mp-l (C) APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD REQUEST AND LOCATION: A General Plan amendment and zone change from residenti, land use to open space land use for Parcel F of the Hosp Grove Master plan. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Those portions of Lots 19, 20, 21, and 33 and of Eucalyptu: Street in Hosp Eucalyptus Forest Company's Tract No. 1, in the City of Carlsb< County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1136, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County June 8, 1908. APN: 154-140-30 and 156-301-04 Acres 9 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Existing Land Use Designation RMFI Proposed Land Use Designation OS Density Allowed 8-15 du/ac Density Proposed 0 Existing Zone R- 1 Proposed Zone 0-s Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site R-1 Vacant North 0-S Buena Vista Lagoon South R-1 Single Family East C-2-Q Commercial West 0-S Single Family PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's 0 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated July 14, 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT - Negative Declaration, issued X E.I.R. Certified, dated September 17, 1986 - Other , 0 0 DISCLOSURE FORH COLLINS DEVELOPMENT CO b 11750 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 209 APPLICANP: ~ame (individual, prtnership, joint venture, corporation, syndicat Business Fddress 6191276-3380 Telephone Nmkr SGPA Planning & Architecture AGENT: Name 1565 Hotel Circle S. San Diego, CA 92108 Business Address Wi&$ZnZ7&&2 - mm: Robert A. Stine, President Name (individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Collins Development Co. 11750 Sorrento Valley Road San Diego, CA 92121 Business Mdress Home Mdress (619) 276-3380 Telephone Numhr Telephone N&r Name Hcane Mdress Bill Tribolet, Vice President 11753 Sorrento Valley Roa2 Suite 209, Sa? Dkgo, CA 9 Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number 619-276-3380 (Attach mre sheets Ff necessary) The applicant is required to apply for Coastal Conmission Approva if located in the Coastal Zone, I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this disclosure is true and correct and that it will rdn true and correct and l~li relied upon as being true and correct until aanerded. Collins evelopment Co. BY d. e Vice-president rf =ftar the infamati0 that fuEther infoatio io required, you Will be so a 0 ed, ‘OU have SuPmltta US Peen Lr e*-, LZ. Lb aetxmu THE ODMARK DEVELOPMENT CO. APPLICANT : Nme (individual, partnership, joint venture, corpration, synd 1747 Hancock Street, Suite B, San Diego, Ca. 92101 -- Business Address (619) 291-7300 Telephone Number AGENT : THE WILLIAM N. HOFMAN COMPANY Name 25213; Sa. Vista Way, Suite 122, Carlsbad, Ca. 9200 Business Address (619) 727-4534 Telephone Numbar MEblB&2s: Ted P. Odmark 3100 D Front Street,S d Name ,(individualr partner, joint Xome Address venture, coqoration, syndication) 1747 Hancock Street, Suite B, San Diego, Ca. 92101 B-asiness Address (619) 291-7300 (619- 295-2950 Telephone N-r Telephone Sumber Wanda K. Quinn 6083 Cumulus, San Dieq I.SkS Eome kitdress 1747 Hancock Street, Suite B, San Diego, Ca. 92101 3:siness Adress (619) 692-3335 Teieg’nor.a Nder Telep’none ?;umber (619) 291-7300 Rosalind E. Odmark 3100 D Front Street San Diego, Ca. 92103 (619) 295-2950 - (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We d4clzze uzder pezalty Of perjury that the infomation contained in th relied upon as 5siag true and coKECt until mended. ciosuze is trcte 2nd carrect and that it will remain true and correct and nt THE ODMARK DEVELOPMENT COMPI Aps 1 ica n t BY U/@L.LZ- Anent - C?-,:ner - partner ai A city of Carlsbad ZC-3L , City of c~p~~b~d zc-350 0 0 September 15, 1986 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Assistant City Engineer Qce.ti- Hasp GROVE COMMERCIAL, SDP 86-30 REQUEST FOR STANDARD VARIANCE The Collins Development Company, developer of Site Developme Plan 86-10 requested a variance from City Design Standards. accordance with Section 18 of the Street Design Criteria of t City Standards, the Planning Commission shall have the authori as an administrative act to grant variances to the City Standar provided the following findings can be met: 1. That there are extraordinary or unusual circumstances conditions applicable to the situation of surround. property necessitating a variance of the Standards. 2. That the granting of such variance will not cai substantial drainage problems. 3. That the granting of such variance will not conflict w existing or future traffic and parking demands or pedestr or bicycle use. 4. That the granting of such variance will not be detrimen to the public welfare or injurious to the property 1mprOVements in the vicinity in which She variance granted. 5. That the granting of such variance will not adversely aff the comprehensive general plan. City staff has reviewed the variance request and is making recommendation that follows in this memorandum. 1. Location: A. West side of Monroe Street +300 f south of its intersectFon )r Marron Road. 5. Marron Road east of its intersec' with Monroe Street. Request: A. Applicant requests access from I roe Street to the west side of project through a skewed driv (entrance only) and a decelera lane. * 0 0 September 15, 1986 Hosp Grove Commercial - SDP 86-10 Page 2 B. Applicant requests Marron Rc improvements to include a concrc raised mediano deceleration/accr eration lanes and a reduction of 1 parkway width to six (6') fc behind the curb (IO' standard) order to accommodate the additior street improvements east of Mon Street. Reason: A. The skewed driveway in combinat with the deceleration lane permit secondary access point to the p ject site providing relief to main entrance driveway. B. The raised median effectively se rates opposing traffic and preclu left turns into and out of project site. Staff Recommendat ion: Approval Explanation: The approval of the variances w provide effective means of control1 undesirable traffic movements, elimin ing potentially hazardous situations frequent interruptions to the str vehicular t r af f ic . DAVID A. HAUSER Assistant City Engineer DAH:CK: lch e 0 MEMORANDUM DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 1986 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: EIR 86-4/CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A)/GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/MI l(C)/SDP 86-10/GPA/LU 86-11/ZC-350 - HOSP'GROVE - Request for approval of: A tentative map and condominium permit for 108 units on Parcel D of Hosp Grove Master Plan; General Plan amendment and zone change from RMH to C, 0 and OS and a site development plan for Commercial Center on Parcel E; General P1 amendment and zone change from RMH to OS on Parcel F; and, certification of an Environmental Impact Report on property located south of Marron Road and Jefferson Streets, near the Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center and Buena vista Lagoon. revisions to the Hosp Grove Master Plan. Also requested is Staff is recommending that the following changes be made to sc of the conditions pertaining to the Hosp Grove project: Resolution No. 2615 The wording in the resolution itself has been modified to include approval of a tentative tract map as well as a condo permit: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TEE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 108 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OP HOSP WAY, BET'WE HOSP WAY AND MARRON ROAD ON PARCEL D OF THE HOSP GROVE MASTER PLAN. Findings: 4c) Delete finding (Master Plan requires dedication of park land. Conditions: 4) Delete * 0 e 16) Change as follows: The applicant shall be required to construct temporary fencing, or similar materials approved by the Planning Director, around those individual or groups of trees wl have been identified to be preserved on the eucalyptus Tree Plan map, prior to the issuance of a grading perm and subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Prior to any grading, the applicant shall agree to full implement this condition by agreement which shall also include a provision prohibiting the destruction of any eucalyptus trees identified on the Tree Plan during grading operations due to carelessness, machine operatc neligence or otherwise. The agreement shall contain a liquidated damages clause requiring the applicant to pi the sum.of $500.00 for each tree destroyed within tho fenced tree are& The amount will be paid to the Carl! Parks and Recreation Department for replanting programs The agreement shall be secured in the amount of $50,00( subject to the approval of the City Attorney. 52) Add b) as follows: b) Marron Road to half of a Collector Street standard along the project frontage. Resolution No. 2619 conditions: 9) All parking lot trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons size. One tree per five parking stalls shall be requii in the parking areas unless otherwise apDroved by the Plannins Director. In addition, in the parking areas c the west side of Monroe Street, any row of parking spac with more than 15 spaces shall have a landscaped island the middle of the row to break up the long row of parking. 24) Prior to commencement of grading activity, the areas nc to be graded and/or areas of tree preservation shall be fenced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Planning Director. The applicant shall agree to fully implement this condition by agreement which shall also include a provision prohibiting the destruction of any eucalyptus trees identified on the Tree Plan during grading operations due to carelessness, machine operato negligence or otherwise. The agreement shall contain a the sum of $500.00 €or each tree destroyed within the fenced are%. The amount will be paid to the Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Department for replanting programs The agreement shall be secured in the amount of $50,00Q subject to the approval of the City Attorney. liquidated damages clause requiring the applicant to pa -22 e e 28) ~ll proposed retaining walls shall be crib walls unless Landscapi otherwise approved by the Planning Director. and maintenance plans for the crib walls shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of grading permits. All crib walls shall be planted and maintained in a thriving condition by the developer. 32) Employee eating areas shall be provided per the requirements of the Office (0) zone. A site plan showi ,the location, landscaping and facilities required shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval pric to issuance of building permits. 33) No parking shall be allowed within the driveway entranc throat of Street "A", as shown on Exhibit "B'. The fii spaces shown on the architectural site plan within that area on the west side of Monroe Street are specificallq not approved. The parking shall be provided immediate1 to the south of the rectangular southernmost buildins c the west side of Monroe Street. 48) Marron Road and Monroe Street shall be dedicated by the developer along the project frontage based on a centerline to right-of-way width of 42 feet plus any additional right-of-way to accommodate the acceleration/deceleration lanes as required by the citl Engineer and in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards prior to issuance of grading permits. 50) Prior to issuance of a building permit the developer shall enter into a secured agreement with the City for the future installation of a traffic signal at the ,intersection of Monroe Street and the most southerly entrance to the project. 71) Eucalyptus trees to be planted along the perimeter of 1 site shall be a minimum of 15 gallons, with 20% being 2 inch box trees, subject to approval of the Parks and ,Recreation Director and the Planning Director. Eucalyptus trees planted on the slope banks adjacent to open space area can be a mixture of sizes, to include: 33% One gallon 33% Five gallon 33% Fifteen gallon 73) Not more than 10-15% of the landscaping shall be turf grass, pnless otherwise approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and Planning Director because such bright green colors are not compatible with the overall character of the existing eucalyptus grove. NER: bn -33 a e MEMORANDUM DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 1986 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: EIR 86-4/CT 85-23(A)/CP-320(A)/GPA/LU 86-10/ZC-348/MP- l(C)/SDP 86-10/GPA/LU 86-11/ZC-350 - HOSP GROVE - Request for approval of: A tentative map and condominium permit for 108 units on Parcel D of Hosp Grove Master Plan; General Plan amendment and zone change from RMH to C, 0 and OS and a site development plan for Commercial Center on Parcel E; General Plan amendment and zone change from RMH to OS on Parcel F; and, revisions to the Hosp Grove Master Plan. Also requested is certification of an Environmental Impact Report on property located south of Marron Road and Jefferson Streets, near the Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center and Buena vista Lagoon. Staff is recommending that the following addition be made to the Engineering conditions pertaining to the Hosp Grove project: "The proposed opening fromthe north parking lot area onto the one-way entrance road on Parcel E (west side of Monroe) shall be closed and the parking lot shall be redesigned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." NER : bn I other creatures that keep the insect in check there. as the stub of a broken branch or on fresh- cut logs. In about two weeks, larvae hatch First, examine all eucalyptus the under-bark feeding galle among what was once a eucalyptus forest. from Long Beach to Sari Diego, inland from Van NuYs to I-hmt. Unconfirmed reports note the beetle in Ventura, and keeps would-be emerging ad At present, no pesticide o method eliminates the beetle from UC Riverside recently I To date, it has been found along the coast Symptoms to watch for inside. 1 In addition to the pests themselves and their telltale holes and channeling, other signs tell of beetle trouble. A healthy eu- along the coast into northern California and into the Central Valley and perhaps Arizona in a few years. (It has been estab- lished in Hawaii since 1965.) wound) by producing a resinous brown sap-like material called kino. It's one of the first symptoms of beetle attack you might see and is believed to be somewhat plan to begin importing the n wasp parasites and beetle F fall; first releases are planr spring. How effective they w I( I' .+ Eggs, elongated like rice grains but much smaller, were laid on underside of bark that had lified Adult lays eggs at night, in two weeks. they hatch into tiny larvae Creamy white larva and about 45 dais old, tunnel below bark to feed on nutrient-carrying sapwood Bark was pulled back to reveal this pair Adult beetle has distinctive marking It hides under bark during the dab. nlght It flies, mates. lays eggs, sometinies feeds on flower pollen ELDON L REtYtS with bark peeled shows meandering channels larvae chewed in sapwood (probablk done by more than a dozen larvae) One hori:ontal channel if long enough, can girdle and kill a [re( At left, tiqpical overall result entire branches dead kith leaces still attached. in San Juan Capiptrano ~__ 0 e 4 HISTORY OF HOSP GROVE APPROVALS - REQUEST AREA/AC . #UNITS APPROVED ENVIRON. (X AC. 1. H. P. Master Plan A-F - Apts. 27.7 C 33 0 60.7 1-111 FUD dm, 1325 3-17-70 ' No - 163 ac. zc-RA,10000 to PC 163 ac. - 3-17-70 I NO 2. CT 72-1 1/SP-32 Unit I 60 'e ' -7 -72 No 1.3 C 15.9 a. 8.8 0 3. CT 72-1 2/SP-33 thits A,B,C 532apt-2 No 10 c , 39.3 ac. r finaled but graded for apts.) (172 units-A built) 4. EIR-115 163 ac. 1282 Certified 60.7 a 5-1 5-73 5. CI' 74-13/SP-160 mits I1 & I11 135 p) Neg. Dec. 12.7 C 130 e EIR-l15(A) Same a 43.2 ac. 9.1 0 6. CT 77-2/PUD-8/SP-l60(A) Units I1 & I11 43.2 ac. above (This superceded CT 74-13/sP160 above) Finaled 4-81 7. CT 79-27/8-44/SP-33(A) Units B & C 294 - Neg. Dec. --- - 29.6 ac. mrket bottaned out - apt. proposals later sub.) 8. CT 83-7*1[A)/PCD-46 Unit B 300 7-5-83 Neg. Dec. --- 9. -58 Unit C 150 6-13-84 w. DX. -- - 15 E. 13 ac. 10. CT 85-23/CP-320 Unit E 216 Neg. Dec. 3.67 25.5 x. 8.6 --* 1- ROLL CALL: Present ;YI r.ii.r,a-m -7. +-~;TPI-T...CIIU.I)~...DIIUU-.L 2- IKVOCATION was offered by Mayor Dunne. 3- PLEDGE: OF ALLEGIANCE was given. 4- APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (a.) Minutes of the regular adjourned meeting held June 14, 1972, were approved as presented. -uoIBLQ- Motion Ayes (b) Minutes of the regular meeting held June 20, 1972, were approved, subject to the addition of Items 7 and 2 being included as submitted by Coucilman Chase in his memorandum of recommendations dated June 20, 1972. 5- CO I! Ti C I L C 0 Lit4 X T T E E R E P ORTS-: . Motion Ayes '' b 7- PUBLIC HEARINGS: at 7:30 P.M; of a Specific Plan and tentative map for Phase I of "Hosp Grove" Master Plan, on property located on the easterly side of Monroe S.treet, Northerly of Elm Ave. Applicant: Karnar Construction Co, The City Clerk presented the Affidavit of Publication and reported no correspondence has been received. A Motion motion was made that the Affidavit of Publication he Mayor Dunne declared the Public iieariogs open I (a) Agenda Bill 8787. To consider the adoption Ayes accepted and ordered filed. Mr. Nick Banche, 3464 Ridgecrest Drive, Carlsbad, Attorney, representing Kamar Construction Company, spoke on behalf of the applicant and requested the. elimination of condition #19 of the Planning Commissior Resolution, which requires an opening to the public street. He stated this was discussed with the staff -_ 's . -.I - - . .-.a& ./b . x- Mr. Banche informed the Council, since Kamar is a long time developer in Carlsbad and wish to be agreeable with the City, they would agree to grade that portion of the proposed ElmAvenue from the easterly end of the deVC?lOpMC!nt down to Valley Street. It was explainec by Mr. Banchc that several years ago when Falcon Hills Unit #4 was constructed, Kamar dedicated land for the then proposed portion of Elm Avenue. In return for the dedication, the City exempted them from the obli- . gation of instaJling iniprovements on Elm Avenue, and it was on thjs basis Karnar felt they should not be required to install iniprovcmerits fclr the Duena Woods development. Mr. Banclic presented a letter to the Council from Mr. Wayne Lill, former City Engineer, dated flovemher 14, 1967 to Ic.amar Construction Company lirrTNIanDLm- *-.a --=*e.-*----* regarding Elm Avenue Extension. The letter was read by Councilman McConias and acknowledgement was given the letter from Kamar to Mr. Lill. Another reason Kamar Construction Co. felt they should be exempt from installing street improvements was the fact the Church . ~ located adjacent to the proposed Elm Avenue extension was not required to install street improvements because they had not requested access to Elm Avenue. Kamar . also has not requested access to Elm Avenue. *'- extension of Elm Avenue betwee to accommodate the fire units i and also to relieve some of th by the staff that the need for i caused by the developer and no was not required to make impro City appears to have made a pr the developer causes some rese far as the improvements on Elm Avenue, a Councilman McComas pointed out, in an statement regarding Hosp Grove that a was proposed as a Regional Park, it w I as such, Councilman Chase stated. his feeling t the Council should not be involved with architect 1 control and requested Items 3 and 4 of Section 3, dinance 9317 be deleted. Mayor Dunne stated it wa is understand- ing architectural controls were a req ement of the P-C Ordinance. The following Resolution was adopted and further reading waived, - : m-, mesolution No, 2035. A RESOLUTION OF OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ANNOUNCING FI REGARDING ADOPTION OF A SPECIFIC PLAN "HOSP GR.OVE" ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON TH ASTERLY SIDE OF MONROE STREET, NORTHERLY OF ELM AV Discussion was held with regard to pr No. 9317, Secti.on 3, Items 19 and 22. that certain wording be changed in-It Item 22 be ddded' to-ttie 'Ordinance. 'T ordinance was Tntroduced for a first only with further reading waived, pas reading July 18, 1972. ,/drdinance No, 9317. AN ORDINANCE OF OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, ADOPTING A S PHASE I OF THE "HOSP GROVE", ON PROPE THE EASTERLY SIDE OF MONROE STREET, N AVENUE, subject to Item 19, to read "An emergency acces . . ., - .. 1 ** .- .z read: "The developer shall- improve standard city residential street along that portion Noes of Elm Avenue that abuts the subject property." Mr. Banche 'requested'th'at the minutes reflect that Councilman Chase was not opposed to the development but to the conditions imposed thereon. SERTION: Page 3, July 5, 7972 councilman ~ewjs also desired the minutes reflect that he was not opposed to the .- development but to the Conditions, in connection with improvements on Elm LI- - >-..--I -*nv. Avenue, - i Hearing was closed at 7:56 P.M. Kamar Construction Company. . PTm approval of the Specific Plan, solution No. 1108. v 1 i Qitp of aarl!5litio -a- Iince no one else wished to speak, Mayor lackard cl.osed the public hearing at 7:39 P.M. ~~ll~~i~~ brief discussion, Council. directed t The City Manager then inquired if Council wa desirious that all developments of this typ 91 with same. -. 1. ... LOULIL ic - Droperty. ious research areas and other amenities. Mr. er additionall provide garages. b had been done. issuance of grading permits. Council reconvened at 9: 02 P .M. DEPARTMENTAL AN MASTER PLAN REVISION. I