HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-10-20; City Council; 9192; Appeal of Planning Commission Approval\ t *t s 3 uul
vi c
oc ah Mal c) rlc (do GO 0 .rl u uc) .rc al a 'r) a0 (dh a
.rl JZ 34J
dLi a P *rc
Od !-la au a(d ad a
-4 e 0 mm
arc I2
3 -74
L
5,
L
E -74
v g% -ri
da C
F4h 3
UQ 0
JZd aJP al am (d
rlcu ITJ -d g?:
CLh (dhC
m M ca rcc
(dm l-la
alu sm
a. daJ(d
'Ea -as
OaJ UUh s ma Ud a *rl ads aoc) .74 u
a caw am0
4s arc u u d
3(dU os )-I v4J a
aJaJ
c)aJ
$20 m
I.. 03 I 0 hl
2 0
0 a
F I 0
I+
6 Z 3 0 0
OF CARLSBAD =- AG T*
DEPT.
MTG. 10/20/87 APPROVAL OF A 48-UNIT MOTEL CITY 1
CITY I
AB# 919% Tu= APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION
SDP 87-4 - LIN D E PT. ---
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that thc Council DENY the appeal and UPHOLD the Planning Comm: APPROVAL of SDP 87-4 as conditioned and the accompanying Ne5
Declaration.
ITEM EXPLANATION
This is an appeal of a Planning Commissj-on decision to appi
Avenue and Pi0 Pic0 Drive. The appeal was based on the heL the buildings and the second1 driveway which is locat Magnolia.
The motel was first heard by thle Planning Commission in Ap this year. Staff had recommended denial and the P1 Commission continued the project for redesign. Design cc included the close proximity of buildings to the single homes to the east, the massive nature of the buildings and of relief in the architecture.
The applicant worked with staff to redesign the site plan a
buildings so that they were moved as far away from the
family structures as possible. To accomplish this j necessary for the applicant to concentrate a three structure at the northwest corner of the property. In add the applicant was required to further buffer the project fr
Single family homes by building a 6 to 8 foot block wall
eastern property line and heavily planting an adjacent lar area with 24 inch box specimen trees. Also, the project h; conditioned to prohibit clear visibility from third story i on the east side, and to plant large trees in front of
windows.
The project has driveways located on both Pi0 Pic0 and Mal
The appeal is contesting the need for the driveway on Ma It has been determined by staff that the number of generated by this project and the length of the parki necessitates two driveways. Lot frontage on Pi0 Pic0 sufficient to permit more than one driveway, so the driveway had to be provided on Magnolia.
Both the Planning Commission and staff feel the proj conditioned will be compatible with the surrounding neighb
For further information please see the attached staff re the Planning Commission.
48-unit motel on ,74 acres at the southeast corner of Mal
1 t e 0
Page Two of Agenda Bill No. o/ / 7 a
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project wil.
have any significant environmental impacts and, therefon issued a Negative Declaration on August 5, 1987 whic
approved by the Planning Commission on September 2, 1987. of the environmental documents is on file in the P1
Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
The increased need for city capital facilities resultin? this development will be offset by the payment of the facilities fee. Any capital facilities related directly t
development will be constructed and paid for by the develog
Increased operating expenses related to this development w
offset to some extent from increased tax or fee revenue ger
by the development. No detailed economic impact analysis c development has been conducted at this time so predictions
revenue created as a result of this project cannot be made.
GROWTH MANAGEMFST
The project is located in Zone 1 of the Growth Management Zone 1 was approved by the City Council on September 1, This project meets all the applicable requirements and mit
approved as part of Zone 1.
EXHIBITS
1) Location Map
2) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2679
3) Staff Report, dated September 16, 1987
4) Planning Commission Minutes of September 16, 1987
5) Appeal Letter
portion of operating expenses covered by additional ope
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
P-C PLCPXED COMMLSIlY ZOSE
R.A RESIDE\lX<L \C(;RICLLTLRU LOSE R-E R- I O\E-F.<\iILY WIDESTL4L ZOSE R 2 TUO-FCVIL'I RESIDE>TLU ZONE R-3
RL LOU DEWTY (0- I 5 1 RLM I.OU-~lEDIl \I UENSIl3'(0.+)
RMlf VEI)Il1 IIIGH DENSITY(8.l%) RL RU RESIDESrLU ESTtrE ZOKE RV 'IEDII \t DE>SITY(i-.Yj
Vl LTlPLE FC%ILj RF.SIDESTlAL ZOW
RD H RESIDE\TL<L DElrSIPIHItitt ZO>E
R-P RESlDESllU PROFEWONAL ZONE RT WIDEYrLUTOl RlST ZO>E RW WIDESTLU U.4TERWAY ZO>E
RVHP WIDEhlXU VOBILE HOME P.UU( ZOhT
COMMERCIAL 0 OFTICEZOSE C-l 3EICHBORHOOD COMMERC LU ZOKE C 2 GENERU COM,MERCIAL ZOUE C.T CO.W.MERCLAL TOLNST ZONE
G (X)\.ERU\IENT F.4CILITIES i Pl BLlC l TlLlTlES RC RECRE4TlOh CO.W.WERCIA1
C.H HL4bY CO.W.\~ERCLU.LLVIlTD L\DLSTRLU ZOhE E ELEVEST4RY .W L\TILSTRLU ZO3€ J jl SIOR HltiH D WiDVSTFUAL ZOSE 3 HI(;H 5CHOOL
P PRI\.\TE ' O\€RlAY ZONE
CIS OPEN SP4CE
URR YO5 RESIDENTIAL RESERVE
I 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
lo
11
I.2
l3
14
15
16
17
l8
l9
2o
21
22i
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2679
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE
HOTEL ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PI0 PIC0 DRIVE AMD MAGNOLIA
AVENUE.
APPLICANT: TENG SHU LIN
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 87-4, TO ALLOW A 48 UNIT
CASE NO: SDP 87-4
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed wj
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; i
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a 1
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; ant
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municip
the Planning Cornmission did, on the 16th day of September,
consider said request on property described as:
That portion of Tract No. 236 of "Thum Lands", acc
to Map No. 168 in the City of Carlsbad, County of
D iego.
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and consi.de
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring tc
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to S
I Development Plan No. 87-4. ! NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plann
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
(A) That the foregoing recitations .are true and correct. I 231 I
24 1
25
26
27
28
(8) That based on the evidence presented at the public hea
the Commission APPROVES SDP 87-4, based on the followi
findings and subject to the following conditions:
' Findings:
1. The site development plan will promote orderly, attrac
and harmonious development and promote the general we1
by providing service occupations and a place to stay f
iiii
1 I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
0 0
commercial travelers and tourists. The structure will
provide noise attenuation from the interstate highway
adjoining residential area without significantly impai
solar access or the on-shore breeze.
2. The site development plan is consistent with the RC{O
Plan designation and meets the development standards (
CT Zone.
3. The project is consistent with all City public facilii
policies and ordinances since:
a) The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an
appropriate condition to this project, ensured bui
permits will not be issued for the project unless
Engineer determines that sewer service is availabl
building cannot occur within the project unless SE
service remains available, and the Planning Commi:
satisfied that the requirements of the Public Faci
Element of the General Plan have been met insofar
apply to sewer service for this project.
b) School fees will be paid to ensure the availabilit
school facilities in the Carlsbad School District.
c) All necessary public improvements have been provic
will be required as conditions of approval.
d) The applicant has agreed and is required by the in
of an appropriate condition to pay a public facili fee. Performance of that contract and payment of
will enable this body to find that public faciliti
be available concurrent with need as required by t
General Plan.
4. This project will not cause any significant environmen
impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by
Planning Director on July 10, 1987 and approved by the
Planning Commission on September 2, 1987.
I/
5. This project requires the construction of the improverr
facilities listed in the conditions of approval or the
of fees in lieu of construction. This project creates
direct need for the improvements or facilities for the
stated in the staff report. If the improvements or fa
are not provided the project will create an unmitigate
on existing improvements and facilities, Further, the
improvements and facilities are necessary to provide s I
adequate and appropriate service to future residents o
26,
27
28
i 6. The applicant is by condition, required to pay any inc
public facility fee, or new construction tax, or devel
PC HESO NO. 2679 -2-
1
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
27
28
26:
0 e
fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional requi
established by a development management or public fac
program ultimately adopted by the City of Carlsbad.
ensure continued availability of public facilities arr
mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the projec
7, This project is consistent with the City's Growth Man
Ordinance as it has been conditioned to comply with ai
requirements approved as part of the Local Facilities
Management Plan for Zone 1.
8. The street system serving the proposed use is adequat~
to handle all traffic generated by the oroposed use a
reviewed by both the Barton-Aschman Traffic Study and
Zone 1 Local Facilities Plan Circulation Study.
9. All of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscapin and other features necessary to adjust the requested
existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood
provided and maintained since the building is setback
the nearest residence's property line by over 75 feet,
Specimen palm trees will augment the proposed landscar
the necessary buffer. along with a six-foot split face block wall to help er
10. The requested use is properly related to the site,
surroundings, and environmental setting; since the bu.
location faces the interstate freeway it will serve, 1
design of the structure is more residential than commt
and the specimen trees onsite will be preserved.
Conditions:
1. Approval is granted for SDP 87-4, as shown on Exhibit:
"G", dated July IO, 1987, incorporated by reference ar
file in the Planning Department. Development shall oc
substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in thesc
conditions.
I
2. This project is approved upon the express condition tt
subject property unless the City Engineer determines I
sewer facilities are available at the time of applical such sewer permits and will continue to be available t
time of occupancy.
building permits will not be issued for development 01
3. This project is also approved under the express condit the applicant pay the public facilities fee adopted b)
City Council on July 28, 1987, and any development fee
established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21
the Carlsbad Municipal Code or other ordinance adoptec
implement a growth management system or facilities anc
the public facilities fee dated July 10, 1987, and thc
i I
I improvement plan and to fulfill the owner's agreement ,I
PC RES0 NO. 2679 -3-
I I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
24
26
27
28
e
agreeflent to pay the Gr7wth Management Fee dated July
1987, copies of which are on file with the City Clerk
incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not p
application will not be consistent with the General P1
approval for this project shall be void.
4. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance v
sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applici
ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuar
5. This approval shall become null and void if building I are not issued for this project within one year from 1
of project approval.
6. Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to t
Service agreement between the City of Carlsbad and th
Real Water District, dated May 25, 1983.
7. This project shall comply with all conditions and mit
required by the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management PI
3uly 15, 1987 and on file in the Planning Department,
future amendment to that plan made prior to the issua
building permits.
Planning:
8. The applicant shall prepare a 24" x 36" reproducible
of the final site plan incorporating the conditions c
herein. Said site plan shall be submitted to and app
the Planning Director prior to the issuance of buildi
permits.
9. The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and
tion plan which shall be submitted to and approved b!
Planning Director prior to the issuance of grading 01
show specimen evergreen trees with full foilage sepal
this property with the single family residence to thi
10. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a health:
thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debr
11. Any signs proposed for this development shall be des
conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall
review and approval of the Planning Director prior t
installation of such signs.
permits, whichever occurs first. The landscape plan /I
12. A uniform sign program for this development shall be
to the Planning Director for his review and approval
occupancy of any building.
I
///I
/Ill
PC RES0 NO. 2679 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
4 e
13. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners,
architecturally integrated and concealed from view ai
sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets,
to Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satis
the Directors of Planning and Building.
14. A masonry trash enclosure meeting City Standards and
the architecture of the building shall be located on
the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
15. The motel parking lot shall be fully lighted at nigh
Lights shall be attractive and located so as not to
light on surrounding properties to the satisfaction 4
Planning Director.
16. Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional
architectural details shall be provided to break up
length of the rooflines to the satisfaction of the P
Director.
17. Building identification and/or addresses shall be pl
all new an' existing buildings so as to be plainly v from the street or access road; color of identificat
addresses shall contrast to their background color.
18. If any condition for construction of any public impr
or facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thi
imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this pi
challenged this approval shall be suspended as provic
Government Code Section 65913.5. If any such condit.
the City Council determines that the project without
condition complies with all requirements of law.
19. All hotel rooms shall be designed and rented as sing
determined to be invalid this approval shall he inval
I
19
I At a minimum, the redesign shall eliminate the possil i the three, two-bedroom suites being rented separatel:
redesign shall be to the satisfaction of the Plannini
20
21
22
Director prior to the issuance of any building permi
20. At least four large Palm Trees or other evergreen tr
approved by the Planning Director shall be planted o east side of the building so as to block any views .
adjacent residential uses from the third floor.
23
24
25
27
26
28
I
21. The third floor windows on the east side of the builc
shall not have clear glass. The win nws shall be of
materials satisfactory to the Planning Director.
22. A Coastal Permit is required prior to the issuance 0' I
building permit.
I
I 23. All compact parking spaces shall be marked "COMPACT"
stalls and be delineated by pole signs.
PC RES0 NO. 2679 -5-
1 ,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 e
24. The wall separating the motel with the single family
residence shall be decorative block and seven (7) feet
height as approved by the Planning Director. The wall
be constructed prior to the building.
Engineering:
25. The developer shall obtain a grading permit prior to
commencement of any clearing or grading of the site.
26. The grading for this project is defined as "controlle
ing" by Section 11.06.170(a) of the Carlsbad Municipa
Grading shall be performed under the observation of a
engineer whose responsibility it shall he to coordina
inspection and testing to ensure compliance of the wo
the approved grading plan, submit required reports to
Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter 11.06 of
Carlsbad Municipal Code.
27. A separate grading plan shall be submitted and approv
separate grading permit issued for the borrow or disp
if located within the city limits.
28. All slopes within this project shall be no steeper th
29. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to an
proposed construction site within this project the de
shall submit to and receive approval from the City Er
for the proposed haul route. The developer shall con
all conditions and requirements the City Engineer ma)
with regards to the hauling operation.
30. Additional drainage easements and drainage structure:
provided or installed as may be required by the City I Engineer.
1 31. The developer shall obtain the City Engineer's appro!
project improvement plans and enter into a secured ar
with the City for completion of said improvements pr 2o I
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
issuance of any building permit within this project.
improvements shall be constructed and accepted for m
by the City Council prior to issuance of a Certifica
Occupancy for any unit within the project. The impr
are:
1) Concrete sidewalk along the project frontage on
Street.
2) One-half width street improvements on Magnolia P
along the project frontage.
3) Wheelchair ramps on the north and south side of
Avenue at Pi0 Pic0 Street.
4) Street improvements fronting the project on Pi0 Street that are damaged or otherwise unacceptabl
PC HESO NO. 2679 -6-
I 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I.8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
32. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the develol
shall execute a lot line consolidation for lots 30 an(
approval by the City Engineer.
33. The six-foot high block wall west of parking space nur
is specifically not approved. The wall height shall
exceed 30 inches.
Building:
34. Prior to occupancy, County Health approval is require
35. Pool fencing is to meet adopted standards.
36. Pool backwash to be into approved receptor into sewer
9- Fire:
37. Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete b
plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire
Department,
38. Additional public and/or onsite fire hydrants shall b
provided if deemed necessary by the Fire Marshal.
39. All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtena
shall be operational prior to combustible building ma
being located on the project site.
40. Fire retardant roofs shall be required on all structu
41. All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishinq
automatic sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to
project shall be submitted to the Fire Department for
prior to construction.
1 42. All roof-top appurtenances shall be architecturally I
into the design of the building and shielding to pre'
issuance of permit.
I
and visual impacts, subject to Fire Department appro
43. Building exceeding 10,000 sq.ft. aggregate floor are
sprinklered or have four-hour fire walls with no ope
therein which shall split the building into 10,000 s
less) areas.
44. Automatic sprinkler systems are required throughout
building.
Costa Real Municipal Water District:
45. The entire water system for subject property is to b
//
~
evaluated in detail to ensure adequate capacity for
landscaping, and fire flow demands.
PC RES0 NO, 2679 -7-
I I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
*
46. The developer and his engineer shall meet with the Di
Engineer and establish a water system layout prior to
water system improvement plans being drawn.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meetinc
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, t
the 16th day of September, 1987, by the following vote, tc
wit:
AYES: Chairman Marcus, Commissioners Hall, Schr<
McBane, and McFadden.
NOES: Commissioner Holmes.
ABSENT: Commissioner Schlehuber.
ABSTAIN: None.
MARY MA US, Chairman 1 CARLSR PLANNING COMMIS!
ATTEST:
MICHAEL 3.
PLANNING DIRECTOR
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I I
PC RES0 NO. 2679 -8-
I,
APPLICA@ T SUBMITTAL DATE
ch
I * JULY 10, 1987
\
/--=-’?
\-,. -..
STAFF REPORT
f I
d 2 ‘I i> DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 1987 \
, /F -_ TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM ! PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SDP 87-4 LIN - Request for: approval of a development plan to allow a motel at the southeast corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue in the
CT-Q Zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declara issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolution No. APPROVING SDP 87-4 based on the findings and subject to
conditions contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The proposed project is located on a .74 acre site at southeast corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue.
subject site is level with both streets. Property to the eas
developed with a single family home. The First Baptist Churc located to the south, with Interstate 5 to the west adjacen
Pi0 Pic0 Drive. A vacant parcel owned by the Travel Inn pl
and single family homes are located to the north across Magr Avenue.
The site is currently vacant, with the exception of ten J palm trees, the applicant having recently demolished dilapidated structures. The project proposes 48 units single rooms, three suites, and one manager’s unit in a tl
story building surrounding a courtyard and pool.
architecture is modern residential with a metal roof, third-:
dormers, wood fascia, and colored stucco walls.
During the fall of 1985, the applicant proposed a motel or property. At that time, the zoning, R-3, allowed this us right. During the informal site plan review process performc
ordinance requiring all hotels/motels to obtain a conditiona permit. After the applicant applied for a conditional
permit, a zone code amendment prohibiting hotels in the R-3
went into effect.
Since the R-3 zoning on the property was not in conformance the RC/O general plan designation, staff recommended a change to CT-Q which was finalized in December 1986.
Planning and Engineering, the City Council passed an ur(
September 2, '". 0
I , SDP 87-4 LIN Paqe 2
project was presented to the Planning Commission on April
1987. At that time staff recommended denial due to the loca.
of the structure and the perception of unrelieved massive b
The Planning Commission continued this item for 90 days to a
architects which prevented him from meeti.ng the deadline.
original application was withdrawn, and om July 10, 1987, a
application was received.
111. ANALYSIS
Planninq Issues
1. Is the proposed project consistent: with the CT-Q
2. Can the four findings required for the approval of a
for redesign. During that time period, the applicant cha
standards?
development plan be made for the hotel? Specifically:
a) That the requested use is property related to the s
surroundings and environmental settings, is consis
with the various elements and objectives of the gen
uses specifically permitted in the area in which
proposed use is to be located, and will not adver impact the site, surroundings, or traffic circulati
plan, will not be detrimental to existing uses o
b) That the site for the intended use is adequate in and shape to accommodate the use.
c) That all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fer landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust
requested use to existing or permitted future use
the neighborhood will be provided and maintained.
d) That the street system serving the proposed us( adequate to properly handle all traffic generate the proposed use.
Is the project consistent with Growth Management Plannir 3.
DISCUSSION
As previously stated, the subject site was re-zoned to Commei Tourist with a Q overlay (CT-Q) on December 22, 1986. A mot6 permitted by right in the CT Zone. The project complies wit1
setback, height, and parking requirements of the CT-Q Zone.
unique circumstance that requires the Q overlay is the prox:
to residentially zoned property and the need for dt
compatibility.
I September 2, 15. 0
8 SDP 87-4 LIN Pase 3
Adjacent residents have expressed the following concerns:
1. That no windows be allowed on the east side of the pro
to protect the privacy of their homes and backyards.
2. That both the entrance and exit for this project be lo
on Pi0 Pic0 for the safety of children and resident
Magnolia.
When the Planning Commission previously reviewed
application, they expressed concerns about the mas
appearance of this project.
The applicant's architect has worked with. staff to address I concerns. A number of revisions have been made to bi existing residences on Magnolia Street from this project.
proposed building has been moved to the west. It is setback
75 feet from the easterly property line. A six foot block and a heavy landscape strip including 24 inch box specimen c4 trees along the easterly property line will serve as a v buffer. The project has been redesigned to focus inward aroi central courtyard. This redesign has eliminated the need fc exterior walkway along the easterly edge of the builc Windows along the easterly side of the building have been kel break up the appearance of the building. If the windows eliminated, the easterly elevation would resemble a large di
in screen. One of the conditions of approval requires that
of the large, mature palm trees on this site be replante front of these windows. This will serve to block view existing residences from these windows as well as breaking ui appearance of the building.
Another concern expressed was the proposed driveway on Magi
two driveways on Pi0 Pico. In addition, the location of
building as far from the residential uses as possible make
impossible to provide a second driveway on Pi0 Pico. To cc with City standards for adequate onsite circulation, a comme:
project of this size requires two driveways. The safest wi
get traffic from the Magnolia Avenue entrance/exit to the
Pic0 intersection is to provide the greatest possible dis.
between the turning and stacking maneuvers of each, the1
reducing conflicting movements. This necessitates placing driveway near the eastern boundary of the property.
Traffic from this driveway should have a relatively minor ix
on Magnolia Avenue. There are no tourist oriented service
attractions that would cause traffic from this site to go ea:
Magnolia Avenue through the residential area. In addition, project will improve the Magnolia Avenue frontage with (
gutter, and sidewalk which will increase pedestrian safety.
Street. Unfortunately, this site has inadequate frontage to
roadways in this area have been shown to be adequate to hi
0 September 2, le
Pase 4
the projected traffic by both the Barton-Aschman Traffic 2
and the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan.
One of the conditions of approval requires that the suite eliminated and replaced with single family rooms. As propc
this project just meets the parking requirements for a motel.
there was no demand for these suites and they were converted four single rooms, this project would not comply with the Ci
parking standards.
The applicant I s architect has worked with staff to improve
r SDP 87-4 LIN
appearance of this project. The project has been reduce1
scale. The applicant was originally proposing 29 single I and 16 suites, a potential of 61 individual units. The cur submittal is proposing 44 single rooms and three suites. project has been conditioned to provide only 47 single rc The architecture is a significant improvement over the previc proposed architecture. Cornices over the windows will he1
break up the appearance of the project. Architectural feat have been added to help break up the roofline. Staff feels more variation is needed, however, and has added a conditio further break up the roofline.
The proposed project is located within Zone 1, for which a I
Facilities Management Plan has been approved by the Plan
Commission. project is allowed to be processed because it is a commei project requiring no subdivision of an existing parcel. project applicants are required to pay their proportional E of any facilities fee and comply with the conditions resul
from the Zone 1 plan. For these reasons, the project comx
with the Growth Management Program.
In conclusion, the Q overlay was placed on this site due tc
close proximity to an established residential neighborhood. is difficult to develop commercial uses in proximity residential areas without having some impact on the resider area. The proposed project complies with all requirements 01
CT-Q Zone and has been designed to have as little impac
possible on the adjacent residences. Theref ore, staf 1 recommending approval of this project.
Under the City's Growth Management Ordinance,
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project will
have a significant impact on the environment and,
issued a Negative Declaration on August 5, 1987.
therefore,
September 2, lo 0 , SDP 87-4 LIN
Pase 5
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2679
3. Background Data Sheet
4. Disclosure Form
5. Environmental Document
6. Staff Report dated April 1, 1987, with attachments
7. Exhibits "At1 - l1Gl1, dated July 10, 19137
BH:dm
8/4/87
2, Location Map
0 0
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: SDP 87-4
APPLICANT: Teng Shu LIN
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Three-story motel and manager's apartment, total of
48 units at southeast corner of Magnolia and Pi0 Pico.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Tract No. 236 of Thum Lands, according to
Map No. 168, City of Carlsbad. APN: 205-270-30,39
Acres .74 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation RC/O
Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/ A
Existing Zone CT- Q Proposed Zone CT- Q
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning Land Use
Site CT-Q vacant
North R-3 & R-I
South R-3 church
East R-I single family home
West T- C freeway
vacant & single family
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water Sewer EDU' s
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated 3uly IO, 1987
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
X Negative Declaration, issued 3uly IO, 1987
E.I.R. Certified, dated
Other,
a 0
v DISCLOSURE FORM
APPLICANT: Teng-Shu and Yueh-Ju Lin
Naab (irdividudl, prtnership, joint venture, corporation, ~yn
Busimss Pddress
5005 Maynard Street, San Diego, CA 92122
~iw57-3~
Telephone Nmber
Am: C. W. KIM, AIA, Architects & Planners, Inc.
Name
401 West "A" St., Ste. 215, San Diego, CA 92101
Business Address a
619f234-0555
Telephone Nunber
MExBERs: Yu-Tong and Kuo Wan-Mei Lin 8975 Montrose Way, San Dj
Name (individual, prtner, joint venture , co rpor at i'cNicat ion )
Business Pddress
Hane Pddress
6191'450-9199
Telephone Nunber Telephone Ndr
Name w Pddress Alan T.S. and Shy 3ei-Tzu Wu 4724 Cather Avenue, San Di
Business Pddress
619 /450-9716
Telephone Nunber Telephone Ndr
(Attach mre sheets if necessary)
The applicant i8 required to apply for Coastal Commission Appr
if located in the Coastal Zone,
I/we declare under pdty of perjury that the information contained ~n th disclosure is true and correct and that it will rmin true and correct ar~
relied upon as being true and correct mtil anerrded. . /
/
/ -A,,?
t< - - AFPLIrn
BY I- 'I F
1- ,
Aserit,,Owner, - P __-
' 2075 LAS PALMAS
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNII
0
PLANNING DE PAR TM EN T (619) 438-116'
&itp of GuMu~b
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Southeast corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and
Magnolia Avenue.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Forty-eight unit hotel (45 single rooms, 2
suites, and one manager's unit) with 58 parking spaces, pool and
laundry room.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental
Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad.
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not
have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the
subject project. 3ustification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on
file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palrnas Drive, Carlsbad, CA.,
92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments
in writing to the Planning Department within ten (IO) days of date of
issuance.
As a result of said
DATED: August 5, 1987 wfxQ@&k?& MICHAEL 3. HOTZMILLW
CASE NO: SDP 87-4 Planning Director
APPLICANT: Teng Shu Lin
PUBLISH- DATE! August 5, 1987
N D4
11/85
, t
$%O
Commissioner Hall inquired if the Commission would be
discussing Mr. Ryan's request for a zone boundary adjustment.
Motion was duly made, seconded and carried to adopt Hall xx Resolution No. 2670 approving Local Facilities Management Holmes X
Plan for Zone 6, based on the City of Carlsbad's General Marcus X
Plan on property generally located in the developed portions McBane X
of the La Costa area. McFadden X
Schramm X
Motion was duly made and seconded for a minor zone boundary
adjustment to include the Mision Estancia loop.
Commissioner McFadden inquired of the City Attorney if this
boundary adjustment recommendation could be made since it was
not an agenda item. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney,
replied that a zone boundary adjustment required proper
noticing and environmental review before a recommendation
could be made to the City Council.
Motion for a minor zone boundary adjustment for the Mision
Estancia loop was withdrawn on advice of counsel.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:20 p.m. and reconvened
at 7:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Charles Grim, Assistant Planning Director, advised the
Commission that staff would be requesting a continuance to
October 21, 1987 on item 4).
4) SDP 87-3 HANSON - Request for the approval of a site
development plan to complete the construction of a
second single family dwelling unit at 355 Hemlock Avenue
within the Beach Area Overlay Zone.
:Y Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing open and issued
the invitation to speak for any person who would be unable to
attend the meeting on October 21, 1987.
There being no person to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing closed.
Motian was duly made, seconded and carried to continue Hall X
SDP,87-3 HANSON to October 21, 1987. Holmes X Marcus X
McBane X
McFadden xx
Schrm X
2) SDP 87-4 LIN - Request for approval of a site
development plan to allow a motel at the southeast
corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue in the CT-Q
Zone.
Charles Grim, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the
background of the request and stated that the proposed
project is located on a .74 acre site at the southeast corner
of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue.
is developed with single family homes.
Church is located to the south, with Interstate 5 to the west
adjacent to Pi0 Pic0 Drive.
Travel Inn Motel and single family homes are located to the
Property to the east
The First Baptist
A vacant parcel owned by the
I
I
I
,
a 0 MINUTES
September 16, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 COMMISSIONERS \\ “9: % 9A% ps $% % $
north across Magnolia Avenue. The site is currently vacant
with the exception of ten large palm trees, the applicant
having recently demolished two dilapidated structures. The
project proposes 48 units: 4 single rooms, three suites, and
one manager‘s unit in a three-story building surrounding a
courtyard and pool. The architecture is modern residential
with a metal roof, third floor dormers, wood fascia, and
colored stucco walls. A previous design was reviewed by the
Commission and denied due to the massive appearance of the
project. Adjacent residents also expressed concerns about
driveways and windows overlooking their property. The
architect has revised the plan to buffer existing residences
on Magnolia Street from the project. Staff recommends
approval.
Commissioner Hall inquired which condition addresses the roof
line. Mr. Grim replied Condition 1/14 on page 5.
Commissioner McBane inquired why there was no lighting
condition. Mr. Grim stated that one could be added.
Mr. Grim noted the staff memorandum revising Condition 117 to
include compliance of the project with the Local Facilities
Management Plan for Zone 1.
Commissioner Holmes would like a condition added to require
trash receptacles to match the structure.
Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing open and issued
the invitation to speak.
Christopher Rooney, 8030 Caminito de Piza, San Diego,
representing the architectural firm of C. W. Kim and the Lin
family, addressed the Commission and stated that his firm has
worked closely with staff and feels that the revised design
will meet the concerns of the neighbors. He stated that they
changing the roof line to meet the height requirement,
improved the landscaping, and have reduced the density from
the previous scheme. He stated that it was impossible to
remove the windows entirely on the east side of the structure
because the courtyard did not provide sufficient natural
light.
relocating the existing palm trees, he stated that it may be
easier to plant new trees.
Commissioner Hall inquired what the fence surrounding the
project would be made of. Mr. Rooney replied that the site
plan shows a split faced block, rough texture.
Sam Levanuda, 1045 Magnolia, Carlsbad, addressed the
Comission and stated that he has lived in his present home
for 17 years. His property borders the project. He agreed
with the previous Planning Commission decision that a
three-story structure is too high to border R1 zoning. He
requested 1) a 7 ft. fence plus a 1 ft. decorative border
since that would cover his fence at the highest point and
camouflage the motel, 2) that the block wall be built before
construction on the motel begins to eliminate dust, 3) that
deciduous trees be replaced by evergreen trees to eliminate
eliminated for more control to eliminate robberies and other
crime.
have tried to blend the structure to the residential area by
LY
In order to provide privacy to the neighbors by
leaf droppings, and 4) that the driveway on Magnolia be
0 MINUTES y$$? t?? pLJ: .1
Commissioner Schramm inquired if a 7 ft. fence would restrict
air flow. Mr. Levanuda stated that privacy was more
important to him and his wife.
Commissioner McBane commented that third floor windows could
be glazed to provide privacy to surrounding residents.
Barbara Tuck, 1055 Magnolia, Carlsbad, addressed the
driveway on Magnolia because of the small children living in
the area and the adjacent school bus stop.
numerous crimes in the area on Pi0 Pic0 and is very concerned
about the in/out access.
There being no person to address the Commission on this
topic, Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing closed and
opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
Chairman Marcus requested that the record show a letter from
Buffy's Restaurant in favor of the project and five letters
in opposition, including that of Mr. Levanuda and Mrs. Tuck (copies on file in the Planning Department).
Chairman Marcus inquired if staff could comment on the second
driveway. David Hauser, Assistant City Engineer, replied
that the second driveway is needed for emergency vehicles,
trash pickup, and traffic flow.
Chairman Marcus inquired if the the wall height proposed by
the Commission was okay. Yr. Grim replied that he is not
sure if the requested height is allowable.
that a variance could be requested. Chairman Marcus has no
problem with the higher fence.
Commissioner Schramm stated that the property line is very
uneven, as much as two feet below Mr. Levanuda's property.
She inquired if the applicant plans to berm the property
line. She has no problem with the higher fence. Mr. Rooney
stated that the applicant plans to match the property line
but would not be bringing it up higher unless it is required.
They would prefer to build a higher fence than bring in
substantial fill.
Commissioner Holmes inquired when this property was zoned for
multiple use and Mr. Grim replied that he guessed it was at
least ten years, perhaps 15 years. He feels that since this
has been zoned multiple for such a long period, that it
changes the picture. He did note that it would be the only
three-story structure in the area with the exception of the
office building at the corner of Chestnut. He feels the
design is still too massive, lacks beauty and ambiance, is
very plain, and has no warmth. He would prefer something
more attractive and in scale.
Commissioner McBane stated that if the structure were reduced
Commission and stated that she is strongly opposed to a
She also cited
If not, he stated
v
to two-story, it would better fit the area.
Chairman Marcus has no problem with the project.
it is better than the existing motels and that the applicant
has gone to great lengths to move away from the property
line.
Commissioner McBane inquired if the applicant would consider
opaque glass on the third floor windows. Mr. Rooney replied
that he would look into this possibility. With regard to the
She feels
She has no problem with the three-story.
September 16, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 COMMISSIONERS % $% $
two-story issue, he stated that a two-story structure woulcl
require more site space and cause a reduction in landscaping.
Commissioner McFadden stated that she is unclear on the palm
trees located in front of the third floor east windows. Mr.
Grim replied that Commissioners could condition it to be any
kind of tree at 25 ft. high.
Motion was duly made, seconded and carried to approve Hall X
the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director
and adopt Resolution No. 2679 approving SDP 87-4 based Marcus X
therein, and to include 1) a revised condition 117 noting X
compliance to the Local Facilities Management Plan for Schramm X
Zone 1, 2) that if existing trees cannot be relocated
they be replaced by new trees of equal height, 3) to raise
the wall height, if possible, to 7 ft. with a one ft.
decorative trim on top, 4) that the wall be constructed
prior to commencement of any other construction, 5) that
the trees on the east property line be evergreen rather
than deciduous, 6) that the standard lighting condition
be added to prevent intrusion to neighboring residences,
7) to add a trash enclosure which is architecturally
compatible with the building, and 8) that clear windows
on the third floor facing east be replaced by opaque windows
for privacy.
Holmes
on the findings and subject to the conditions contained McBane xx McFadden
3) CUP-258(A) LA COSTA HOTEL & SPA - Request for a
conditional use permit to allow the construction of a
40 square foot (eight feet by five feet) monument
identification sign along the east side of El Camino
Real, approximately 200 feet north of the existing
La Costa Hotel and Spa sign.
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the
request and stated that the applicant is requesting the
approval for a conditional use permit to allow a 40 square
foot monument identification sign to be placed along the east
side of El Camino Real approximately 200 feet north of the
existing La Costa Hotel and Spa sign. The proposed sign will
face north so as to be visible to southbound traffic.
Because the existing sign faces south and can only be seen by
northbound traffic, there has been an increasing number of
complaints from visitors traveling southbound on El Camino
Real that it is almost impossible to identify the main
entrance, especially at night. The proposed sign facing
north and visible to southbound traffic should alleviate this
problem. Staff recommends approval.
:Y
Commissioner McBane inquired if the sign would be lighted and
Mr. Wayne replied that it would be.
Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing open and issued
the invitation to speak.
Bob Gentle, Rick Engineering, representing La Costa Hotel addressed the Commission and stated that the applicant is
satisfied with the proposed conditions and that they have
always intended to landscape in front of the base of the
sign. They would like clarification on the impact of the
Growth Management Plan to the proposed sign.
There being no one else to address the Commission on this
topic, Chairman Marcus declared the public hearing closed and
opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
9
I
1
I
% 0 R c3 (f K. 0 RAJiL c
* @
lsbad Unified Sc
801 Pine Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 729-9291 "Excellence In I
October 20, 1967
Csrlsbad City Council
City Hall
Carlsbad, California
Dear Counci 1 J
I have been advised that you are considering the apprsval of a new motel
which is referred t.o as the Lin Froject. This enterprise is t.o be
constructed at the corner of Pio Pic0 and Magnolia I am further informed
that a group of citizens has raised concerns abaut the fact that the
driveway for this business will exit onto Magnolia Avenue. If this IS the
case then / would like to express 3 concern I would haw regarding the
safetrJ of Valley Junior High students
Each day we have a group of roi,ighlg t-hirty-five st-uderrts who catch the blis
on Pie Pic0 and walk by the proposed location of the new motel. I would
therefore, request that. as you looK at f.he plans for the Lin Project- you
give due consideration to the fact that. traffic exiting onto Magnolia could
potentiallij be a-safety hazard io these students This would especially be
!tie case rf, indeed, yu B~~~CID:~W ang?hlng ather ?harr B verg ::@I! f:g~ cff
t.raff;r,
Wnrie 1 riaw werg i:tmfigeriw ?nnt t.h Pignr!ir!q fJepar*.ment= ha:' ?BY~~*I it-it.~
cansideratloti ati vtytwr~ :>at-iybips I 'ij~t- *+qi~i:c ~CI L-I~ s!jre t!%jt ipt{ %-e
aware of trii.~ twice (3a!1~ w-ge gf 1t.~rr7ct- nigh age stilben:,: r1ot.e t.hsi. jrpp 1,: fl]@;[t 3 ni.~p~per '.rf ~lp~~~mjjrq ~;'T.IJI)~+:~ vqrI0 tg!tyl IJr;, [IUS
85 weii
I d$<*uia ais[[
Vty~rs t rillij *a 1
GaLd@y Doriaid &, ~e rlqij
FTl ncr p5 I Valley Junior High School (61 9)
* *
PETITION -
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF HAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASOHING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CAR’LSBAD:
PROPOSED THREE (3) STORY HOTEL IS HOT CONlDUSIVE WITH THE RES
TIAL AREA. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS UNNECESSARY WITH ALL OF
HOTELS PRESENTLY AVAILABLE IN THE CARLSBA’D AREA. THE THREE
STRUCTURE WILL BE HASSIVE IN COMPARISON TID RESIDENTIAL HOMES
THE ADDITION OF THIS HOTEL WILL INVITE TRANSIENTS TO THE ARE
SUBJECT HE AS RESIDENTS TO ADDITIONAL CRIlHE AND ROBBERY. TH
AREAS WILL DECREASE THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES.
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL E DANGER OUR CHILDREN YALKINC TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HICII. flIC SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY TRIS D
YAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALl FE3ZZTZiAiiS.
7
..* CONTSHUANCE OF APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL PR0,JECTS IN RESIDENTIA
DA SIGNATURE - PRINT NAHe ADDRESS -
>
7
I
--
I 1
e 0
PETITION
SUBUITTED BY?
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF MOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD:
PROPOSED THREE (3) STORY MOTEL IS NOT CONDUSIVE WITH THE RES1
TIAL AREA. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS UNNECESSARY WITH ALL OF
MOTELS PRESENTLY AVAILABLE IN THE CARLSBAD AREA. THE THREE S
STRUCTURE WILL BE MASSIVE IN COMPARISON TO RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
THE ADDITION OF THIS MOTEL WILL INVITE TRANSIENTS TO THE AREA
SUBJECT WE AS RESIDENTS TO ADDITIONAL CRIME AND ROBBERY. THE
AREAS WILL DECREASE THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES.
7
CONTINUANCE OF APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL PROJECTS IN RESTDEMTIAL
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL EN- DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGH
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS DR
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DATl - SIGNATURE -
/
PRINT NAME ADDRESS
,
0 '7 Q ST &yApi , f< fldSJPiC q72 PfldLycdJ &L&&-9w&L /
I
Ti
/4 In p );I fl d c ///; , il.,., 1 {L/ ic' GL fl?oJ(#/, cis b2; /k'L''-j "f ./ (/ /,p La ;J & Y
-1- I
e 0 ,
PETITION v
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF HAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICOe
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD: -I
THE PROPOSAL OF ON€ OH THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON HAGNOLIA WILL EN DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGH
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS DB
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DAY e SIGNATURE - PRINT NAME ADDRESS -
1,
,.
,
L
-1-
0 8
PETITION
\
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF PIAISNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD: 7
ESI
TTA. A~PA m.. -OF
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL EN DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGH
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES, THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS DR
DAT SIGNATURE - PRINT NAME ADDRESS _II_c__L
-
/ ,
l
-1-
0 0
PETITION T-
SUBMITTED EYr
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF XOTEL ON CORNER OF HAGNIOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSEIAD: I
THE PROPOSAL OF ON€ OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL EN-
DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGH
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS DRI\
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
- - DATE PRINT NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE
*.,,
-
/
i
I
-1-
9
1 e 0
PETITION v
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARL,SBAD:
P-E (71 WRY wnrEL_;LS-aaT cn- ESI
7
BERY. TH€
ESIDENTIAI
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL El
DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGt
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS Dl
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
i
-1-
e a
PETITION v
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS,
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF HAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD: 7
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON HAGNOLIA WILL El DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGI
SCHOOL AND CHIJRCHES, THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS D
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DA' - ADDRESS - SIGNATURE PRINT NAME
J
-/
-
I ,
1
-1-
0 0
PETITION
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT :
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD:
A
\
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL El DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGI
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS Dl
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DA' - PRINT NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE I____c_L
-i- 6J
-1-
e e
PETITION v
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF MOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD:
I
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL El
DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIG€
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS DI
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DA3 - PRINT NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE P , 7
/ J
\/,I ' li,':
% b/L G 1- -\s \ 1, - I/
c, L x r'. .. ' : ,* I
t -it- 1
_c'
'(, \ '\ _. \ -_ \
-1-
e e
PETITION -i
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF HOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND
PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD:
I
THE PROPOSAL OF ON€ OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL El DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGl
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS,
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BP THIS Dl
DA'
_I
PRINT NAHE ADDRESS SIGNATURE ---...ILIpL
&. i , /:
,-
2"J, <L&A y/j s~-r.cc, /< i* a4,a &7-& ,',? .;p" /+&$ h -
1
* L*d>ltl+ 17. /L2/L,+d &D- bkkLi/L'? JiLn,q 2: 1 & &&w 7h
a
-P--
/, -
1
-1-
e a
PETITION v
SUBMITTED BY:
CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED BUILDING OF MOTEL ON CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AND PI0 PICO.
REASONING OF PETITION BY RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD: -7
THE PROPOSAL OF ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY EXITS ON MAGNOLIA WILL El DANGER OUR CHILDREN WALKING TO ELEMENTARY, JUNIOR HIGH, HIGl
SCHOOL AND CHURCHES. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THIS Dl
WAY WILL BE HAZARDOUS TO ALL PEDESTRIANS.
DA - PRINT NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE P
,-
-
I
r- -
1
-1-
0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL
SDP 87-4
0
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a p
on Tuesday, October 20, 1987, to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission app
of a site development plan to allow a motel on property generally located at the s
corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue, in the CT-Q zone and more particular
described as:
hearing at the City Council Chamber, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:O
That portion of Tract No. 236 of "Thum Lands",
according to Map No. 168, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego.
If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the site development plan in court, you may be limited to raising
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this no
or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office
or prior to the public hearing.
APPELLANT: Barbara Ann Tuck
PUBLISH: October 9, 1987 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
City
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEART '
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chad
1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wedne! September 16, 1987, to consider approval of a site develo]
plan to allow a motel on property generally located at
southeast corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue in thi
Q Zone and more particularly described as:
That portion of Tract No. 236 of "Thum Lands", according to Map No. 168, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cord
invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any quest
please call the Planning Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the site development plan in court, you ml limited to raising only those issues you or someone else r
at the public hearing described in this notice or in wr
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or pril
the public hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 87-4 APPLICANT : LIN
PUBLISH: SEPTEMBER 4, 1987
CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION __ ~ ~ __ ~~
m 0
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989
Office of the City Clerk
&itp of Carls’bab
TO : Bobbie Hoder
FROM : Karen Kundtz
DATE : 9/28/87
E7-Y RE : APPEAL - 87-1 - 4 +Lk +cyL.l W f‘””” -$If- d
The above item has been appealed to the City Council. Please dete
when the item will go to Council and complete the form below and r
it to the City Clerk’s Office. According to the Municipal Code,
appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the da
that the appeal was filed. Please consider this when setting the
date for the hearing.
Thank you.
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City
Council Meeting of t 9c-t 20 ./$k?
1
Signature 44fJ- Date
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR1 0
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the ( of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambt
1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wednesc September 16, 1987, to consider approval of a site develop1 plan to allow a motel on property generally located at southeast corner of Pi0 Pic0 Drive and Magnolia Avenue in the Q Zone and more particularly described as:
That portion of Tract No. 236 of "Thum Lands", according to Map No. 168, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Dieyo.
Those persons wishing to speak on this lroposal are cordii
invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questil please call the Planning Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the site development plan in court, you ma)
limited to raising only those issues you lor someone else ra
at the public hearing described in this notice or in wrii
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prioi
the public hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 87-4 APPLICANT : LIN PUBLISH : SEPTEMBER 4, 1987
CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
City o
SDP 87-4
0 0
OWNERS NAME & MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER
1. VICTOR & MARIA FISCHER
3630 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-210-05
2. JAMES SWAB
P.O. BOX 194
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-210-23
3. ERNEST & GRETA BOND
3676 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-210-35
4. ROBERT & JAN BEYROUTY
3684 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-210-36
5. PETER & TERI MAY
3692 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-210-38
6. JULIAN & ANASTACIA SERNA
3710 DAMS STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-01
7. JAMES & RUTH HERMAN
3720 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-02
8. JAMES & DIANN BOBBITT
3730 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-04
9. AMEDEO & ELIZABETH FIORE
3758 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-05
10. RAYMOND & BILLIES NEFF
3790 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-70
11. STEPHEN & JOANNA TICHENKO
3802 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-280-71
12. VICTORIA YAM00
10701 WELL WORTH AVENUE
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024 205-280-72
13. WILLIAM & BERTHA STONE
1095 PALM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-06
14. ROBERT & MARGARET GARROW
3643 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-07
KklL- 7-AL *
kw4 7 -
444 A
0 -2- a
OWNERS NAME & MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL NUMB1
15. JOSEPH & NELLIE BERTINO JR.
3655 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-08
16. ESTER GASTELUM
929 VIA NIETO STREET
SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA 93110 205-191-14
17. SAME AS 815 205-191-13
18. HARRY & ADRIENNE CHRISTFMN
1040 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-12
19. DAVID & DEBORAH JONES
1030 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-11
20. ROLAND & FRANCES MERCER
1016 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-10
21. RAJENDRA & MAYURI PUJARA
INTERNATIONAL TRADERS
450 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 205-191-09
22. THEODORE & EDITH RHODES
P.O. BOX 1644
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-16
23. TOM & YEE NGON SHENG
TOM & DAISY JUNG
1524 DORCAS STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92110 205-191-15
24. CINNAMON APARTMENT PARTNERSHIP
c/o JAMES WEBER
580 BEECH AVENUE, STE. A
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-01
25. JUNE SNODGRASS
1051 PALM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-02
26. JUNE SMITH
c/o SNODGRASS
4265 HILLSIDE DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-03
27. JUNE SNODGRASS
1065 PALM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-04
28. ROBERT & VIOLET BOWLING
1075 PALM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-191-05
0 -3- 0
4 II 1
4 OWNERS NAME & MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBE
29. NELLIE VOLENTINE
1095 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-27 0- 26
30. DUARD & SHIRLEY HOLLINS
3725 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-27
31. CLARENCE & BETTY BRYAN
3745 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-27 0- 13
32. GEORGE h IRENE FICK
3781 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-12
33. ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO CORPORATE
P.O. BOX 80428
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92138 205-270-09
34. DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO EDUCATION & WELFARE CORP.
SAME AS #33 205-270-44
35. FIRST BAPRIST CHURCH OF CARLSBAD CA.
3780 PI0 PIC0 DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-43
36. NICHOLAS STONE
DAVID STONE
K.C. STONE
1903% YALE AVENUE
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84108 205-270-39
37. NICHOLAS STONE
DAVID STONE
K.C. STONE
P.O. BOX 814
MESA, ARIZONA 85203 205-270-30
38. SAM 61 JANE LAVENUTA
1045 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-21
39. WILLIAM & BARBARA TUCK
1055 XAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 2 05-27 0-2 2
40. ANDREW WHITEMAN
1065 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-23
41. MILDRED SCHIFFERT 1075 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-24
0 -4- 0
* 'L 1
~WNERS NAME 6 MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL N'LTMBE
42. 8ARBARA AVERY
1085 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 205-270-25
43. ARCHIE KOYL
5618 PICKERING AVENUE
WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601 204-292-22
44. SAME AS 843 204-292-21
204-292-20 45.
204-292-19 46.
204-292-18 47.
204-292-17 48.
204-292-14 49.
50. 204-292-13
51. 204-292-12
204-292-11 52.
204-292-10 53.
54. 204-292-02
55. 204-292-01
204-292-16
I1
II
I1
I1
11
11
It
1,
11
11
11
11 56.
57. RICHARD & YOLANDA URIBE
3676 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-10
58. RONALD CHEADLE
3696 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-11
59. ELENA RAMIREZ
MARIA URIBE
1409 SANTA ROSA
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-09
60. ESPERANZA ZAMORA
4161 KIMBERLY LANE
OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92056 204-192-08
61. BEN & MARY CRUZ
3640 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-07
62. ELMER & KATHLEEN NOBLE
3630 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-06
e -5- 0
* ‘J L
~WNERS NAME & MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL NUMB€
63. JACK & JANIE TRAYER
1257 MAGNOLIA AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-05
64. EDWARD & AUDREY MARTIN
3574 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-04
65. SAME AS #64 204-192-03
11 66. 204-192-01
67. JOAN GLYNN
3568 HARDING STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-192-02
68. FREEMAN & MILDRED MITCHELL
P.O. BOX 1061
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-291-17
69. ROBERT & BERTHA GILLINGHAM
2628 WILSON STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 204-291-16
70. SWALLOW & ASSOCIATES INVESTMENT NO. 1
403 OCEANSIDE BLVD.
OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92054 204-291-15
71. ARCHIE KOYL
5618 S. PICKERING AVENUE
WITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601 204-291-14
72. SAME AS 871 204-291-22
II 204-291-21 73.
74. 204-291-20
75.
76. 204-29 1-23
I1 204-291-24 77.
78. II 204-291-24
II
204-291-19 I1
11
* 0 . 'I L
. 1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989
Offlce of the Clty Clerk
ai& af Carls'bab
TO : Bobbie Hoder
FROM : Karen Kundtz
DATE : 9/28/87
RE : APPEAL - 87-1
The above item has been appealed to the City Council. Please dete
when the item will go to Council and complete the form below and r
it to the City Clerk's Office.
appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the da
that the appeal was filed. Please consider this when setting the
date for the hearing.
According to the Municipal Code,
Thank you.
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City
Council Meeting of
Signature Date
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
438-5621
DATE REC’D FROM
RECEIPT NO. TOTAL
a 0-
e'.,
Y 1200 ELM AVENUE TE
*I' - (7 1 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
. . Office of the C/ty Clerk - -. r., -
Citp of Carls'bab
APPEAL FORM
@
I (We) appeal the following decision of the
I
to the City Council:
\-I 7 9 '-1 ' Project name and number (or subject of appeal): a D-1, ,I
1- hz- -< -$ c- T ?, 0 'G 3 : ~~ ,<, e
- -_
- -- /I
(>,,I! -27 Date of decision: 1.i
Reason for appeal: 11 f>, I i - I- ci- AI .J c
L Li-d ,I e/--
/
6:'j &,7" r /( /Id --7-)
.--- " r- +
' I/? ,- 7- 1 -Cf-E i \
7 , f ',
50 fly, Q 7 "Ip 3 ~, I
Date -- - I" 7, ' kl 7
!t + i- ;- 5 ~
\--':- 1, y> ,yt< 4 \- 1.; f: ' , -cl 1.- Name (Please print)
iqress
I. I\> ,-- 5
~ d-c 2 !& 4 c
-j?p7ci - A-b ,-'-I p.-&
c /I ? -
\-e +l 'i ~ ,_ *
*r- /- Te 1 ephone Number
e e
1. *& d Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024
(61 9) 753-6543
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitle
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general c
published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, I
newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general chal
which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription lis.
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular i
the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding onc
preceding the date of publication of
, NOTICE OF PUBLIC larly described as: hereinafter referred to; and that the
which the annexed is a printed copy,
published in each regular and entire is
newspaper and not in any supplement
That portion of Tract No. 236 of “Thum Lands.” according to Map
No. 168, in the City of Carlsbad.
If you have any questions. please
HEARING APPEAL SDP 87-4 County of San Diego.
call the Planning Department at
If you challenge the site develop- ment plan in court, you may be lim- ited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub-
or in written correspondence deli-
Clerk’s omce at or prior to the pub- lic hearing. Appellant: Barbara Ann Tuck
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
thecitycouncil oftheCityofCarls- 438-1161. the following dates, to-wit: bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chamber. 1200Elm Avenue, Carlsbad. California. at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday. October 20.
Planning Commission approval ofa
motel on property generally lo- cated at the southeast corner of Pi0 Pico Drive and Magnolia Avenue, in the CT-Q zone and more particu-
1987. to consider an appeal of the lic hearing described in this notice October 9
site development Plan to allow a vered to the City of Carlsbad City
...............................
................................ CARLPBAD CITY COUNCIL
................................
................................
................................
. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoir
correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Di California on The 9th
day of - 0 cm
Clerk c CJ 4869: October 9,1987 ~.. _. __